wrought by him so myraculously as both the said S. 〈◊〉 and S. Bede after him and all other ancient historiographers as Malmesbury 〈◊〉 and the rest do call him our English Apostle of whose many and great miracles wrought in that worke not only the said Authors but S. Gregory himselfe doth write a speciall narration to Eulogius Archbishop of Alexandria yea 〈◊〉 Fox himselfe in his Acts and Monumentes albeit not a little imbued with M. Iewels spirit against this holy man for that he planted Catholicke Romane Religion in England yet writing the story of the conuersion of Ethelbert our first Christian English King he hath these words at lēgth When the King had well considered the honest conuersation of their life and moued with their miracles wrought through Gods hād by them he heard them more gladly and lastly by their wholsome exhortations and example of Godly life he was by them conuerted and Christened in the yeare of Christ aboue said 596. and the six and thirtith of his Reigne So Fox Whervnto I may add a testimony of much greater credit out of S. Bede that liued neere vnto his time recordeth the very Epitaph remayning in his dayes written vpon S. Augustines tombe in these wordes 34. Heere lyeth Blessed Augustine the first Archbishop of Canterbury who was sent hither by S. Gregory Bishop of Rome and strengthened of God by working of miracles who conuerted King Ethelbert and his Realme from the worshipping of Idolls to the faith of Christ. And thus much of the sanctity of this blessed man out of their testimony that liued with him or not long after him But now what writeth M. Iewell of him and with what truth and conscience He was a man saith he as it was iudged by them that saw him and knew him neither of Apostolicke spirite nor any way worthy to be called a Saint but an Hypocrite a super stitious man cruell bloody and proud aboue measure and for proofe of all this he cyteth only in his margent 〈◊〉 of Monmouth in his history of the Britans which Ieffrey dyed in the dayes of King Henry the 2. very neere 600. yeares after S. Augustine and almost 500. after S. Bede and writeth no such thing at all of S. Augustine as heere is set downe by M. Iewell but rather much in his commendacion with note of the emulous dealing of the British Bishops against him for the hatred they bare to the English nation and their conuersion 35. So as heere now M. Iewels assertion is not only false and impious against so venerable a man as Augustine was but must needs be also against his owne conscience this in diuers pointes For first he knew that there was no Author extant that wrote in his dayes saw him and knew him but only S. Gregory who writeth 〈◊〉 in his commendations as yow haue heard Secondly he knew that S. Bede who liued in the very next age after him and all other English Authors succeeding for the space of eyght or nine hundred yeares till our time did highly cōmend him in their workes and especially the forenamed Malmesbury Huntington that liued with Ieffrey Moumouth And lastly he knew that this only witnes the said Ieffrey had no such thing And what then will yow say to this Equiuocation may not M. Mortons Epithets of hellish heathenish impious and sacrilegious haue place heere 36. The fourth example may be those wordes of M. Iewell in the Apology of England writing against the Pope Let him in Gods name saith he call to mynd let him remember that they be of his owne Canonists which haue taught the people that fornication betwene single folke is not synne as though they had fetched that doctrine from 〈◊〉 in Terence whose words are It is no synne belieue me for a yong man to haunt harlotts And for this he cyteth in his margent Io. de Magistris li. de Temperantia And who would not thinke but that this accusation were sure for so much as it is so opprobriously vrged and insulted vpon But now I pray yow considerthe particulers and therwithal what a conscience this man had 37. First then Io. de Magistris was Martinus de Magistris not a Canonist but a Schoole deuine that wrote a Treatise De Temperantia Luxuria so as it seemeth that he that gaue this charge eyther had not read the Author himselfe which I suppose M. Iewell will not confesse or else meant to dazle the eyes of his Reader by naming Iohn for Martin Secondly this Author in his said Treatise as the fashion of Scholemen is propoundeth this question Vtrum simplex fornicatio sit peccatum mortale whether simple fornication be a mortall synne and according to vse of Schooles saith Arguitur quòd non It is argued or reasoned for the negatiue parte thus and so 〈◊〉 downe some arguments for that syde by way of obiections which afterward he solueth and cometh to conclude absolutly in the affirmatiue parte by six conclusions that simple fornication is not only synne but mortall synne for that it is forbidden by Gods law and excludeth from the Kingdome of heauen as S. Paul affirmeth And now lett any man consider of the conscience of him that auoucheth in print the other slaunder Would Maister Garnet or M. South-well or any other Catholicke man accused for lawfull Equiuocation euer haue made so notorious a lye against their owne consciencies Let our aduersaryes bring forth but two examples 38. The fifth example shall be also out of his wordes in the same Apologie writing against the reading of Saincts lyues in the Church The old Councell of Carthage saith he commaundeth nothing to be read in Christs congregation but the Canonicall Scriptures but these men read such things in their Churches as themselues know to be starke lyes and fond fables So he But now let vs see whether it be more probable that we know to be lyes those thinges which we read in our Churches or that he knew to be a lye that which heere he relateth and printeth in his booke For if he read the Canon it selfe which he mentioned which is the forty and seauenth of the third Councell of Carthage wherin Saint Augustine was present then must he needs know that he lyeth indeed egregiously for that the Canō beginneth thus Item placuit vt praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum sunt autem Canonicae Scripturae Genesis Exodus c. 〈◊〉 ludith Hester Machabaeorum libri duo c. It hath seemed good to this Councell that nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scripture but only such as be Canonicall Scriptures in deed as are Genesis Exodus c. The two bookes of the Machabees Tobias Iudith Esther and the rest Wherby we see that in alleadging these words that nothing be read in the Church but Canonicall Scriptures is guylfully
deceauing and the like will he still defend that there is nothing but lying in Rome and that the Sea Apostolike graunteth out full priuiledge of lying as before yow haue heard him auouch how then if I shew that all this and much more against lying which yow haue heard out of the Schoole-men and ancient Fathers is not only allowed admitted by the Sea of Rome but translated also by the Popes therof into the corps of their Canon law and so not only approued but commended and commaunded also to be obserued Can any thing conuince more our Ministers Calumniation then this Let any man looke then vpon the second Part of Gratian his Decretals throughout the two and twentith Cause for fiue whole questioÌ„s togeather there he shall find not only the substance of all this that heere I haue said but much more cited out of all the ancient Fathers Popes Councels to this effect 43. For there he shall find set downe out of S. Augustine and Canonized the foresaid distinction of eight sortes or degrees of lying with a reprobation of them all where hauing cited those wordes of S. Augustine Non est igitur mentiendum in doctrina pietatis quia magnum scelus est primum genus detestabilis mendacij we must not lye concerning doctrine of piety or marters touching our faith for that it is a heynous sinne and the first kind of detestable lying he passeth downeward by all the rest excluding them one by one and concluding Quòd neque pro 〈◊〉 temporali commodo ac salute veritas corrumpenda est neque ad sempiternam salutem vllus ducendus est opitulante mendacio Neither is truth to be corrupted for any mans temporall commodity nor is any man to be brought to eternall saluation by the helpe of a lye So S. Augustine And so Gratian that alleadgeth him aboue foure hundred yeares gone and so all the Popes that haue Canonized this saying of his determined it for Canonicall law euer since to our dayes And with what impudency then saith this Minister from whence shall a man except priuiledge of lying then from that place where as your owne learned Bishop saith there is nothing but lying which in deed is lying vpon lying for that Espencaeus whome he 〈◊〉 in the margent saith not so there is nothing but lying as in another place shall be shewed and if he did yet the thing it selfe is euidently proued to be false by this that we haue alleadged out of the Popes Canons affirming all sortes of lies whatsoeuer to be indispensable Let any man then belieue these fellowes that will be deceaued 44. But the Popes Canons goe yet further and doe decree determine out of the authority of the same Father S. Augustine and other Fathers sundry pointes of greater perfection against the sinne of lying as this for example Quod non licet alicui humilitatis causa mentiri It is not lawfull for any man to lye out of humility saying lesse of a mans selfe then truth permitteth And againe in another Canon Non licet mentiri vt arroganâ—ia vitetur it is not lawfull to lye that arrogancy therby may be auoided 45. And as for periury which is a lye coÌ„firmed with an oath the said Canons are so seuere as they doe not only detest the same both in him that forsweareth in him that induceth another therunto but doe also appoint greiuous penitentiall punishmentes for the same As for example Qui compulsus à Domino sciens peierat saith one Canon vtrique sunt periuri Dominus miles Dominus quia praecepit miles quia plus Dominum quà m animam dilexit si liber est quadragint a dies in pane aqua paeniteat septem sequentes annos If any man compelled by his Lord shall wâ—ittingly forsweare himselfe both of them are periured as well the Lord as the seruant the Lord for commanding and the seruant for that he hath loued his Lord more then his owne soule let him doe pennance by fasting in bread and water fourty dayes and seauen yeares afterward Et nunquam sit sine paenitentia saith another Canon let him neuer cease to repent and doe some penance for this greiuous sinne so long as he liueth And heere is to be noted that S. Anselme doth cite this punishment out of the penitentiall decrees of our ancient Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury wherby it apperteineth the more to my Lord that now is of that Sea to looke to this his Chaplaine or miles Morton and finding him guilty of lying against his owne often oathes and solemne protestations as we haue discouered him in this our answere to cast some little aspersion at least of penitentiall satisfactions vpon him And if forty dayes in bread water may seeme to much let him fast some fower with contrition and that perhaps may doe him more good then any bookes or writing against him But to retourne to Gratian. He reciteth diuers other Canons out of sundry ancient Councels Fathers and Popes decrees as out of S. Augustine Homicidam vincit qui sciens ad periurium hominem prouocat he passeth a murderer in wickednes that wittingly doth prouoke another man to periury and the reason heerof is added in the Canon for that a murderer killeth but the body this the soule nay two soules both his that forsweareth his owne that prouoketh So that Canon which me thinketh were seriously to be considered by them that force others to sweare against their consciences knowing or presuming probably that the swearers consciences are opposite to that which they are forced to sweare and consequently according to this rule of S. Augustine doe murther eternally both their owne soules and those of them that doe vrge them therunto Neither shall it be needfull to adde any more in this place seing the said Canons are extant to be read and seene by al and allowed authorized and set forth for sacred and authenticall by all Popes whatsoeuer 46. My conclusion therfore vpon this fifth consideration is that for so much as Romish Catholicke doctrine doth teach and prescribe all this rigour and seuerity against lying and periury which in Protestants bookes touching cases of conscience we haue not hitherto seene expressed it may well be inferred that if Equiuocation were held for lying it would in no case be allowed by the same doctrine as lying is not And that if the Sea of Rome did giue out priuiledges for lying and periury she would not authorize such seuere penitentiall Canons against the same and that if nothing but lying were there as Morton saith there is not then were this lying also that she doth acknowledge these Canons which yet is proued by the printed bookes that are extant therof and to these inferences I doe not see what can be answeared or brought to the contrary except only our Minister would say that all our Doctors are deceaued in distinguishing
c. by his letters patentes with the counsell and consent of the Bishops and Counsellours of his nation did giue to the 〈◊〉 of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery a certayne portiō of his land to wit fifteene Mansians in a place called by the country-men Culnam with all profittes and commodityes great and small appertayning thervnto for euerlasting inheritance And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitantes of that place shall not be depressed for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euentes of thinges and controuersyes of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said Monastery so as c. And then doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. and vouched by Stanford as at large appeareth which Charter graunted aboue 850. yeares sithence was after confirmed per Eduinum Britaniae Anglorum Regem Monarcham anno Domini 955. by which appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parliament for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops Senators of his Kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction within his said Abbey which Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of King Henry the eight So he 85. And by this yow may see what an important conclusion he doth inferre of the Kinges supreme iurisdiction in spirituall affayres at that time Whervnto the Deuine comming to answere and supposing that M. Attorney would not falsity or belye his Authors hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. of his his booke that he had cyted truly the very wordes and textes of the lawes resolutions iudgmentes and actes of Parlament all publicke and in print without any inference argument or amplification quoting particularly the bookes yeares leaues Chapters and other such like certayne references as euery man at his pleasure may see and read them c. The answerer I say hearing this formall protestation and supposing besides that the man would haue some respect to his credit and honour in this behalfe granting all as it lay answered the same as yow may see in his booke but now vpon better search it falleth out that this whole 〈◊〉 was falsely alledged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall controuersy in hand about the Kinges spiritual Iurisdiction for that whatsoeuer the Charter did ascribe expresly to the Pope his Authority the Attorney suppressing the true wordes relateth it as proceeding from the King temporall authority of his Crowne For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very wordes of my learned friends letter out of England about this point after view taken of the law-bookes themselues and then let any man say how farre M Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth or speaketh against Catholickes 86. As concerning saith he the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon yow must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other points For the Case standeth thus That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humphrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high 〈◊〉 and tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex after fled to Culnam and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London from thence brought vnto the Kings-bench he pleaded that he was drawne by force out of the said Sanctuary of Culnam and prayed his Counsell to plead that poynt which by all the Iudges of both benches was graunted vnto him And so they pleaded in this manner 87. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit quod Kenulphus Rex Merciorum per litteras suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon ac cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim Mansias in loco qui a ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad 〈◊〉 pertinentibus tam in magnis quà m in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Ruchinus ab omni Regis obstaculo Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut ministrorum suorum Episcopiue aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimerentur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijcerentur 〈◊〉 quod c. And heere ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as yow see in his recitall the wordes that go before ab omni Regis obstaculo c. that the monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King as also these wordes vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deprimantur that the inhabitants be not opprest with any yoke of any King or his ministers wherby is euident that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall royall power but especially the fraude is seen by cutting of the wordes that do ensue which decyde the whole controuersy which are these Et etiam allegauit vltra quod Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et quod Eduinus tunc Britaniae Anglorum Rex Monarchus concessit quod praefatum Monasterium omnis terrenae seruitutis esset liberum quae 〈◊〉 praedecessoribus suis Catholicis videlicet à dicto Sancto Leone Papa dicto Rege Kenulpho c. Et quod virtute litter arum bullarum praedictarum tempore confectionis earundem eadem villa de Culnam fuit Sanctuarium locus priuilegiatus c. Which in English is thus And moreouer the said Humphrey Stafford by his Counsell alledged furthet for himselfe that Pope Leo had graunted vnto the said Abbot the said immunityes and priuiledges that K. Edwin then King monarch ouer all the English in Britany had graunted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude which by his Catholike predecessors to wit the said holy Pope 〈◊〉 the said King Kenulphus was graunted and that at the tyme of the making of the foresaid letters patentes and Bulles the said village or towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary and priuiledged place by vertue of the said patents and Bulles 88. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sāctuary of the Monastery of Abindon as it was pleaded by his learned Counsell in law euen as it is recorded in the reportes of the yeares of King Henry the seauenth as
as of a course which he 〈◊〉 in all his disputes How doth foolish vanity discouer it selfe in all these mens wordes actions And yet let the Reader note attentiuely that notwithstanding this bragge he hath no one Catholicke Author in all this controuersy about Equiuocation that absolutly denyeth the thing or holdeth it for vnlawfull in all pointes as he doth albeit some do differ in opinion concerning the cases causes tymes meanes maners limitations and circumstances of the same as after is largely by vs declared So as heere he hath no diuision of our tongues but which himselfe maketh to wit where somtymes to seeme to finde a difference where none is he belyeth our Authors flatly and forceth them to speake one against an other as in many places we do demonstrate and leaue him with the shame 17. Wherfore to say as he doth that our execrable Equiuocations are sufficiently refelled by him with the testimonyes of our most principall Doctors is as true as that he is a Minister of simple truth and naked innocency and of constant assurance of an vpright conscience all which are ridiculous antiphrases in deed for he hath no one Doctor of ours either most or least principall with him in his opinion or that calleth Equiuocations vsed with due circumstances or limitations execrable or vnlawfull or not necassary in some cases nor hath he any one sentence or testimony of theirs to the contrary as after is made euident And consequently this course of Tho. Morton in all his disputes is a lying course a vaunting course a ridiculous course And as for his disputes I do shew him after to be so sylly a disputer as that he knoweth not how to make a true syllogisme and therfore am forced to send him backe againe to Cambridge to reforme his Logicke or to learne more about which point I remit the Reader to that which is handled in the 11. Chapter and els where of this Treatise 18. Next after this he layeth before his Maiesty a certayne obseruatiō about Popes names as ful fraught with malice and deceiptfulnes as the former with vanity and he layeth the obseruation vpon Polydor Virgil though cyting no place for it Polydore obserueth saith he that the Popes a long tyme in their election had their names changed by Antiphrasis videl the Elected if 〈◊〉 were by naturall disposition fearefull was named Leo if cruell Clemēt if vnciuill Vrbanus if wicked Pius if couetous Bonifacius if in all 〈◊〉 intollerable Innocentius And with this he thinketh to haue layd downe an obseruation of importance But why had he not adioyned also that if he were careles of his flocke then Gregory must be his name which importeth a vigilant pastor 19. But now let the iudicious Reader obserue the malice and falshood of this obseruation and therby iudge whether the Author therof be a Minister of simple truth or no. Polydore saith only that sometymes Popes as other Princes in like manner haue had names that haue byn different or rather contrary to their nature manners which is an ordinary case if we examine the signification of men and womens names but that Popes names were changed of purpose by Antiphrasis or contrary speach to couer their defectes as heere is set downe this is a malicious lye of the Minister and hath neither simplicyty nor truth in it for that all these names heere mentioned of Leo Clemens Vrbanus Pius Bonifacius Innocentius and Gregory were chosen by the Popes that tooke them for the great reuerence and estimation they had of certayne excellent men of that name that went before them as also for the good abodement of their future gouernment and to be styrred vp the more by the memory of those names to the vertues signified by them but especially for the honor and imitation of the first Popes that bare those names As for example of S. Leo the first who how excellent a man he was both for learning and sanctity appeareth by the acknowledgment of the Protestants themselues M. Iewell making this Apostrophe vnto him in his chalenge O Leo O 〈◊〉 O Paul O Christ 20. The like may be said of S. Clement the first and next Pope after S. Peter and the same of S. Vrbanus Pope and Martyr in the second age after the Apostles and the like of Pius the first Pope and Martyr in the first age after the said Apostles and no lesse of S. Bonifacius the first that liued in the beginning of the fourth age and a little before him againe in the same age S. Innocentius the first so highly commended by S. Augustine for a great Saint and after him againe S. Gregory the Great and first Pope of that name most admirable both to those of his time and all posterity for many excellent vertues who though lyuing some ages after all the former yet haue there byn 13. Popes after him that for reuerence of his vertues haue taken his name and ten of S. Leo 7. of S. Clement 6. of S. Vrbanus 4. of S. Pius 7. of S. Bonifacius and 8. of S. Innocentius wherof none had that name by 〈◊〉 but all by choise after they were elected Popes for the causes now touched Which being so it is euident what a wicked lost conscience this Minister hath to auouch vnto a King and by him to all others so manifest and malitious a calumniation 21. But he goeth further yet in folly to magnify his owne learning and to compare the same with no lesse then Aristotle 〈◊〉 haue so framed this dispute saith he that it may seeme I hope to be like Aristotles bookes of naturall Philosophy so published as not published c. And his reason is For that as he saith he alwayes putteth downe the clause of ment all reseruation in Latin which yet is not true as the Reader wil see by pervsing this booke he hauing to my remembrance set downe the same in Latyn but once only throughout all his booke and that in fower words in his second page the said reseruation being mentioned in English more perhaps then forty tymes nor were it of any importance if it were alwayes put downe in Latyn For that any man lightly whether he vnderstand Latyn or no if he see or heare the precedence both of question and answere will easily ghesse what the reseruation is if he suspect any to be at all as if a man doe heare or reade the premisses of a syllogisme in English he will easely ghesse at the conclusion though it be in Latin yea if he be of any meane capacity he will gather the inference himselfe by naturall discourse Wherfore this of Aristotles books was brought in only by the vayne Minister to compare them with his bookes or as he calleth them his disputes so published forsooth as not published for that he imagineth that the common capacity of men cannot reach vnto the depth therof he wadeth so profoundly in his owne folly But yow will see
afterwardes that he is vnderstood and so decyphered as he may be vnderstood and pitted also by others And I know no sense wherin he may say that his workes are so published as not published but that they are not worthy indeed the publishing and much lesse the readinge wherin they doe differ much from those of Aristotle 22. It followeth in his said Epistle to his Maiesty For that this doctrine of Equiuocation saith he acknowledged by your admirable wisdome to be in religion most 〈◊〉 and detestable in politike State most pernicious and intollerable and in euery actor most banefull to the soule of man it may please your Excellent Maiesty to prouide in this behalse for your faithfull and religious Subiectes that they neuer be so intoxicated with this Antichristian spirite as either to deceyue or be deceyued therby c. Would God it might please his Highnes in his admirable wisedome to pervse ouer but two or three Chapters of this Treatise about Equiuocation and the reasons of the lawfulnes and necessity therof in some cases togeather with the grosse monstrous sacrilegious and detestable licence of lying taken vp and vied by the impugners of lawfull Equiuocation and especially Ministers that most talke and make profession of simple truth I do not doubt but his Excellent Maiesty out of his Christian piety would prouide in this behalfe for his faithfull and religious Subiectes that they should not be so much deceyued by 〈◊〉 as they are nor intoxicated with their Antichristiā lying spirite to their eternal perditiō And this is so much as I haue thought good to reply in this place cōcerning his Epistle to his Maiesty 23. As for the other which scornfully he directeth to the deceyued brethren it is so short fond ydle a thing that it deserueth no answere at all the principall point whervpon he standeth therin being this that Catholicke people are seduced by their priestes who will be Doctors saith he out of S. Paul to Timothy and yet vnderstand not what they say nor vvherof they affirme But whether this description of fond presumptuous Doctors touched by S. Paul do agree rather to Protestant-Ministers or to Catholicke priestes will appeare in great part by reading ouer this booke especially the 5. 8. and 10. Chapters if by Thomas Mortons errors and ignorances a scantling may be taken of the rest But now let vs 〈◊〉 how he doth go about to proue that our priests are such bad Doctors as S. Paul speaketh of 24. His chiefe proofe consisteth in a certayne comparing of them with those Iewish priestes of the old law in Christes tyme who taught the souldiers that watched at the Sepulcher of our Sauiour to say that whilest they were sleeping his disciples came stole him away Common sense saith he might haue replyed how could yow tell what was done when yow were all a sleepe But myndes enthralled in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood which confirmed that 〈◊〉 could not possibly but erre with their priestes such alas is the case of all them c. Do yow see how substantially he hath proued this matter Let vs examine the particulers 〈◊〉 the story then the inference 25. About the story S. Mathew recounteth in the 28. chapter of his Ghospell how Christ our Sauiour being raysed miraculously from death to lyse with a great and dreadfull earthquake and discent of an Angels so as the souldiers that kept the sepulcher were astonished and almost dead for feare some of them ranne and told the chiefe priests therof who making a consultation with the Elders deuised this shift to giue them store of money and to bid them say that in the night when they were a sleepe his disciples came and stole him away and so they did And S. Mathew addeth that this false brute ranne currant among the Iewes euen vntill that tyme wherin he wrote his Ghospell This is the narration what hath now Thom. Morton to say to this against vs for therunto is all his dryfte First he saith as yow haue heard that this deuise was improbable and against common sense it selfe Common sense saith he might haue replyed to the souldiers what could yow tell what was done when yow were all a sleepe Se heere the sharpenes of Tho. Mortons wit aboue that of the Priests Scribes and Pharisies But what if one of the souldiers had replyed to him thus VVe saw it not when we were a sleepe but afterward when we were awakened we perceyued that he was stolne away What reioynder would our minister make As for example if Tho. Morton were walking with a cōmunion-booke vnder his arme through a feild and wearyed should ly downe to sleepe with his booke by his syde and at his awaking should see his booke gone were it against cōmon sense for him to say that his booke was stolne from him while he was a sleepe Or is not this an assertion fit for one of those Doctors wherof S. Paul talketh that vnderstand not what they say or wherof they affirme But this will better yet appeare by the second point which is his inference Wherfore we must a litle also examine that 26. But 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood which confirmed that answere could not possibly but erre with their priestes such alas is the case of all them c. The malitious man would deface Christian priesthood by the Iewish priesthood and our Priests by theirs but consider how farre he runneth from the marke in both Myndes enthralled saith he in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood which confirmed this answere Did the Priest-hood of Iury confirme this Answere Who saith so We read that the Priests with the Elders did deuise this answer and they knew they did euill and lye therin and so did the souldiers also that published the same But this was a matter of fact not a determination of faith Neyther among the Iewes nor Christians was there euer opinion that Priests or Priesthood could not erre in matters of fact lyfe or their maners How then is this to the purpose Or doth not this also proue him to be one of those forenamed Doctors that vnderstand not what they say or wherof they affirme How much more modesty and piety had it byn in Thom. Morton to haue followed the example of Christ and his Apostles who though persecuted by those Priests yet both thought and spake reuerently of the Priesthood 27. S. Iohn the Euangelist setting downe the speach of wicked Cayphas the High-Priest about the death of Christ to wit that it was necessary sor one to dye for the people addeth presently that Cayphas spake not this of himselfe but prophesyed as being High-Priest of that yeare S. Paul in like manner being apprehended and brought into a Counsell of the Iewes and vniustly stroken on the face by the commaundement of wicked Ananias the High-Priest whome thervpon in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Paynted-wall as soone as euer
aud sinfull And that Catholickes only vse the first in 〈◊〉 cases and with circumstances and limitations But T. 〈◊〉 and his followes 〈◊〉 the first do vse 〈◊〉 the second which is false and lying 〈◊〉 Chap. XII pag. 483. The 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 in some Protestant 〈◊〉 Bishops § 1. pag. 490. Six argumentes of M. Iewell Superintendent of 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 in this case § 2. pag. 493. Six examples of M. 〈◊〉 particular Equiuocation § 3. pag. 504. The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestantes-Ministers § 4. pag. 517. The vse of Equiuocation in Laymen Knightes § 5. p. 529. The Conclusion of the whole 〈◊〉 with a briefe exhortation 〈◊〉 Catholickes not to vse the liberty of Equiuocation 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 cases but where some 〈◊〉 occasion induceth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Table of the particular matters 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TO ALL TRVE-HARTED ENGLISH-MEN That loue the honour safety and best good of their Nation Prince and Countrey THE PREFACE OF THE PRESENT DIVISION AND DISAGREEMENT About matters of Religion in England and of many importune exasperations vsed by diuers sortes of men to encrease the same and namely by this Minister T. M. his iniurious Libell I DOE not see deare Countreymen why I may not iustly our tymes circumstances therof considered begin these my first lynes of Preface with those wordes of Complaint and Admiration of the Poet Lucan wherby in few verses he comprehended and laid forth the rufull state of the rented Common-welth and Romane Empire by ciuill warres saying Bella per Aemathios plusquam ciuilia campos Iusque datum sceleri canimus populumque potētem In sua victrici conuersum viscera dextra 2. For if heere we change but Thessalian fieldes into English land and the Poets singing into our weeping and wailing all the rest agreeth most aptly if our diuision be not more rufull and lamentable then that of the Romanes For first our wars may truly be said to be plus quam ciuilia more then ciuill in that they are not only internall but domesticall also in such sorte as no one Prouince no one towne no one village no one howse or family is lightly to be found where some parte or other of this warre and dissention vpon difference of Religion taketh not some holde The Father somewhere accusing or suspecting his children the children flying or fearing their Father the Mother entring into 〈◊〉 with her daughter the daughter not trusting or confiding in her Mother the brother impugning his brother and wife complaining of 〈◊〉 husband the friend breaking with his friend and the neerest of kyn with those whome lawe of nature bandof bloud did most straitly combine knit togeather 3. Neither is this warre ended only in wordes or in bare debate of mindes iudgements willes and affections but it breaketh forth also into workes and hostile actions to the sight and admiration of all the worlde no aduersary Camps or armies standing more watchfull and distrustfull one of an other or vsing more stratagems of discouery spiery preuention or impugnation the one against the other then we among our selues wherof our continuall searches priuy intelligences bloudy and desperate conspiracies apprehensions imprisonments tortures arraignementes condemnations and executions are most loath some and lamentable witnesses 4 And as for Ius datum sceleri neuer could it be spoken so properly in the Romans misery as in ours when in deed though in some different sense that which was ius before is now scelus to uvitt that which was law right and equity under Catholicke Religion is now offensiue and punishable by the lawes of Protestants that which was then piety is now iniquity that which by them was vsed for deuotion is now scorned for superstition that which they reuerenced for highest Religion is now held in contempt and greatest derision such as then should haue byn hated and punished for hereticks are now esteemed for Christian and best reformed Catholicks and they vvhich in those dayes vvere called Catholicks as vvell by their enemyes as themselues and sate in iudgement vpon the rest are now brought into iudgement vnder them vvhose iudges at that tyme they vvere in the self same cause right and lawe being changed vvith the tyme and equity vvith mens affections articles of olde faith become crymes of new treason and finally all so inuerted and turned vpside downe and the differences so pursued vvith such hostile emnity of exulcerated mindes as the Poets conclusion falleth vpon vs euidently in the eye of all Christendome that vve being a potent people and dreadfull otherwise to all our neighbours haue turned our victorious hands into our owne bowels by this disunion in Religion and therby haue iust cause to feare the euent and inference threatned by our Sauiour except his holy hand protect vs that Euery Kingdome deuided in it selfe shall come to desolation 5. And that vvhich most encreaseth the feeling of this misery is that no man endeauoreth to mollify matters but all to exasperate no man applieth lenitiues but all corrosiues no man powreth in vvyne or oyle into the wound but all salte and vinegar no man byndeth vp or fomenteth but euery one seeketh to crush bruze and breake more all cry and clap their hands to exulceration saying with the children of Edom in the day of Hierusalems affliction Exinanite exinanite vsque ad fundamentum in ea Pull her downc pull her downe euen vnto the foundation 6. And to this effect haue vve heard and seene many speeches and sermons made sundry Bookes and pamphlets cast abroad or set forth in print some before the late cruell and hatefull conspiracy which might perhaps be some incitation to the designemēt or hastening therof and some presently therupon not only to exaggerate that fact whose atrocity by it self is such as scarsely it leaueth any place to exaggeration but also to extend and draw out the hatred and participation therof to others of the same Religion most innocent therin yea vnto the whole multitude so far as in them lieth a matter of exorbitant iniustice and intemperate malice 7. Of the former sorte of bookes and pamphlets we haue seene one set forth the yeare past by Thomas Hamond intituled The late Commotion of certeine Papists in Hereford Shire about the buriall of one Alice VVellington Recusant after the Popish manner in the tovvne of Alens-moore tvvo miles frō Hereford c. VVhich thing though it were but the fact of a few poore countrey people Catholickly affected as most are knowne to be in those partes to bury the said Alice and that in a sorte they were forced therunto least the dead corps should rot aboue ground the Minister of the place most obstinatly refusing to bury the same and that some other false companion in like manner is thought to haue byn set a worke to induce them into that trap as since hath byn vnderstood yet was the matter so exaggerated euery where
great effusion of Christian bloud 14. And the like I might relate of many other particuler States and principalities of Germany as namely that of the Princes and Archbishops Electors of Collen Treuers and Mentz with all the State Palatine of Rhene the Bishoppricke and Dukedome of Liege and other partes adioining where togeather with this new Ghospell especially now deuided into different sectes of Lutheranisme Zuinglianisme Caluinisme Anabaptisme new Arrianisme and the like entred presently new sedition Rebellion and warres and from thence dispersed it selfe longe and wide both North and South East and West In the North to Saxony Denmarke Norway Sweueland Polonia 〈◊〉 and other adioining countries and on the south to Zwitzerland first Sauoy Grisons and other partes next adhering where diuers battailes were fought Zuinglius himselfe being present as the chief stirrer in those of the Cantons of Zwitzerland his countrey and 〈◊〉 therin and Caluin Beza Farellus and other such Ministers being the principall inciters in the Rebellions of Geneua and neighbour countries against the Duke of Sauoy and other Lordes and Princes therof as is apparant by their owne and other mens bookes of the same part and faction 15. Towardes the East the same fire of sedition passed with the same new Protestant Ghospell to Bemeland Austria Hungary Siletia Moldauia and other bordering Prouinces where more or lesse it hath continued till our time wherin we see by lamētable experience that they haue ioined euen with the Turke himselfe against their Soueraigne Lord and Emperour and against the Christian name and cause in despite of Catholicke Religion as Boscaine the famous Caluinian Rebell and others of that Religion or irreligion rather in these partes for some yeares now haue done and finally haue forced the said Emperour for auoiding the fatall ruine of Christendome to graunt him the Princedome of Transiluania during his life which God for his so great wickednes hath soone cut of 16. But to the West partes of the world to wit France and all partes and parcels of that 〈◊〉 Kingdome the same fire was transported with greatest fury of all as doe testify their foure generall most bloudy warres lasting for many yeares togeather wherof if I should recount but the least particulers set downe by their owne histories it would rue any Christian hart to heare or read the same 17. From hence if we draw neere homeward to Flanders England and Scotland the effectes of this new Ghospell and Ghospellers are yet more present vnto our eyes For who can recount the thousandes of people that vpon this occasion haue lost their liues both temporall and eternall as may be feared in these long bloudy warres of the low countries begunne first and continued euer since vpon the entrance of Protestant Religion in those States Who can number the Citties beseiged taken rifled and ransacked The townes and villages burnt and ouerthrowne The countries spoiled The people slaine and murdered about this difference And if we looke into England and the state but of one sole Catholicke Princes gouerning there but for foure or fiue yeares ouer Protestant subiectes misliking her gouernment for Religion yow shall find more conspiracies treasons and Rebellions practised against her in proportion of so few yeares by the said sorte of people if we consider what Northumberland Suffolke VViat Courtney Stafford Fetherstone VVilliam Thomas and others in different conspiracies practiced against her then in more then 40. yeares was done against her Protestant sister by her Catholicke subiectes though neuer so much afflicted iniured and persecuted by her 18. But of all other countries Scotland may be an example and president of Protestant spirites what they are vnder a Catholike Prince or Princesse though otherwise neuer so vertuous or neuer so mild For who can deny the exceeding great prudence moderation benignity liberality and other vertues of the Noble Queene Mary Regent of Scotland Grandmother to our Soueraigne that now raigneth when those furious and seditious Ministers Knox Goodman Mollocke Douglasse Meffan and others began to raise vp her subiectes against her from the yeare 1557. which was the fourth of Queene Maries raigne of England and continued the same in most spitefull and barbarous manner with intolerable insolency both of wordes and actes for 3. or 4. yeares togeather assisted principally by the helpes aide and encouragement of Queene Elizabeth that had succeded in the Crowne of England vntill through griefe sorrow and affliction the excellent Princesse gaue vp the Ghost vpō the yeare 1560. hauing byn 〈◊〉 deposed and the lye giuen her publickly and most 〈◊〉 by them And finally seing herselfe so extreemely 〈◊〉 and inuironed with these rebell forces and with a puissant army sent from England in their succour consumed and pyned away with 〈◊〉 of mind as hath byn said And no Christian could but haue compassion of her case The particulers are written by Knox and Buchanan themselues in their histories of Scotland who were two chiefe firebrandes in that combustion and by Holinshed an English Protestant Author in his description of Scotland allowing well and liking the same according to the sense of English Protestantes who concurred with them both in good will and cooperation 19. And thus much of the Queene Regent but now of her excellent daughter the Queene regnant Mother of our Soueraigne had they any greater respect vnto her notwithstanding all her benignity and benefites towardes them at her new returne out of France when she pardoned all that was past and accepted of new oathes and promises of faithfull obedience at their 〈◊〉 did all this I say any thing auaile her or procure her safty or quietnes in gouerning these new Ghospellers No truly so long as she remained Catholicke that is to her death and after her death they pursued her with the greatest hatred and most barbarous cruelty that euer perhaps was read of against Prince or Princesse before or after her I shall breifly heere set downe some 〈◊〉 particularities of many as I find them 〈◊〉 both in English and Scottish Histories themselues and that by Protestant writers as hath byn said 20. This Noble Queene after long deliberation in France what course to take in those troublesome times when the spirit of the new Caluinian Ghospell had raised tumultes conspiracies warres and Rebellions throughout the most part of all States Kingdomes and Prouinces round about her determined finally to credit the faire promises of her said Protestant subiectes in Scotland and to goe thither which she did and arriued at Lith the 20. of August vpon the yeare 1561. But before she departed from France there being sent to her from the Catholicke party Doctor Iohn Lesley Bishop of Rosse to counsaile her not to trust her bastard-brother Iames Steward Prior of S Andrewes that had byn the cheife Author of all the former broi les in Scotland and was now sent vnto her from the
to Princes concerning the obedience or Rebellion of their subiectes whatsoeuer hath byn obiected by the accusation or calumniation of our Minister in his former discouery against Catholickes hath not byn any direct doctrine teaching or insinuating much lesse inciting subiectes to disobedience or Rebellion as before hath byn declared but only by a certaine consequence or inferēce that for so much as in certaine vrgent and exorbitant cases we ascribe to the Christian Common-wealth and supreme Pastour therof authority to restraine punish supreme Magistrates in such cases that therfore our doctrine is seditious and tending indirectly at least à longè to Rebellion though the visible experience of so many great Kingdomes round about vs lyuing for so many yeares and sometimes ages also in quiet security notwithstāding this doctrine doth conuince this to be a calumniation 14. But our Aduersaries doe not onely teach this That euery Christian Common-wealth vpon mature deliberation and with generall consent hath such anthority but further also that particular men and Common people haue the same and are not only taught but vrged in like manner exhorted to vse it when soeuer they suppose their Prince to offer them iniury or hard measure especially in matters of Religion wherof the moderate Answerer obiecteth many examples and proofes against T. M. taken out of their owne bookes wordes and wrytinges as also by the testimonies of other principall Protestant-writers wherevnto though T. M. would make a shew to answere somewhat now in this his Reply and therupon hath framed a second seuerall part of his booke for iustificatiō of Protestantes in that behalfe yet is it so far of from A full satisfaction the title of his whole worke as in effect he confesseth all that his Aduersary opposeth no lesse then yow haue heard in the former question though somewhat he will seeme sometimes to wrangle and to wype of the hatred of their assertion by Commentes of his owne deuise 15. And indeed what other answere can be framed to most plaine assertions out of their owne wordes and writinges as of Caluin Beza Hottoman and so many other French Caluinistes as I haue mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise Goodman also Gilby VVhittingham Knox Buchanan and others neerer home vnto vs All the forenamed Collections in like manner of him that is now Archbishop of Canterbury of Doctour Sutcliffe and others in the books intituled Dangerous positions Suruey of the pretended Disciplinary Doctrine and the like wherin their positions are most cleerly set downe concerning this matter And albeit this Minister T. M. in his Reply doth vse all the art possible to dissemble the same by telling a peece of his Aduersaries allegations in one place and another peece in another altering all order both of Chapters matter and method set downe by the Answerer so as neuer hare when she would sit did vse more turninges and windinges for couering her selfe which the Reader may obserue euen by the places themselues quoted by him out of his aduersaries booke yet are his answerers such where he doth answere for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all as doe easely shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot deny what is obiected And where he seeketh to deny any thing there he intangleth himself more then if flatly he confessed the same Some few examples I shall alledge wherby coniecture may be made of the rest 16. The Answerer alledgeth first the wordes of Goodman in his booke against Queen Mary wherin he writeth expressely that it is lawfull by Godes law and mans to kill both Kinges and Queenes when iust cause is offered and herself in particuler for that she was an enemy to God and that all Magistrates and Princes transgressing Gods lawes might by the people be punished condemned depriued put to death aswel as priuate transgressours and much other such doctrine to this effect cited out of the said Goodman All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely both of this Goodman and many other English Protestantes cheife Doctours of their Primitiue Church residing at that time in Geneua And what doth T. M. reply now to this Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes If I should iustify this Goodman saith he though your examples might excuse him yet my hart shall condemne my self But what doe yow professe to proue all Protestantes teach positions Rebellious Proue it Heere is one Goodman who in his publicke book doth maintaine him I haue no other meanes to auoid these straites which yow obiect by the example of one to conclude all Protestants in England Rebellious then by the example of all the rest to answere there is but one So he 17. And this is his full satisfaction and faithfull Reply as he calleth his booke but how poore satisfaction this giueth and how many pointes there be heere of no faith or credit at all is quickly seene by him that will examine them For first how doe the 〈◊〉 alledged agaist this Goodman by the Moderate Answerer excuse him as heere is said seeing the wordes he alledgeth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable and my Lord of Canterbury alledgeth farre worse As for example that it is most lawfull to kill wicked Kinges when they fall to Tyranny but namely Queenes and thervpon that Queene Mary ought to haue byn put to death as a Tyrant Monster and cruèll beast alledging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of Holy Scripture as that the Subiectes did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnes Athalia and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iesabell and that Elias though no Magistrate killed the Queenes Highnes Chaplaines the Priestes of Baal and that these examples are left for our instruction c. And now tell me how may these examples excuse M. Goodman as our Minister Morton auoucheth 18. Secondly it is both false and fond to affirme that the moderate Answerer tooke vpon him to proue either that all Protestantes in these our dayes doe teach such Rebellious positions or that all Protestantes in England are Rebellious as heere is affirmed for that this were to deale as iniuriously with them as they and he doe with vs by imputing this last Rebellious fact of a few in England to the whole sort of Catholickes and to their doctrine It was sufficient for the Answerers purpose to shew that both Goodman and many others principall pillars of the English new Ghospell in those daies did hold belieue and practice those positions out of the true spirit of the said Ghospell And herevpon thirdly it followeth that it is a notorious impudency to auouch with such resolutiō as this man doth that there is but this one of that opinion and that one dram of drosse as he saith proueth not the whole masse to be no gold For who knoweth not first that VVhittingam afterward Deane of Durham
from Syr Edward Courtney Earle of Deuonshire Syr Nicolas Throckmorton others what to the conspiracy of VVilliam Thomas who hauing determined and plotted the murder of the said Queene and conuicted therof professed saith Stow at his death at Tyburne that he died for his countrey 30. I passe ouer other conspiracies and Rebellions as that of Vdall Throckmorton Iohn Daniel Stanton Cleber the three Lincolnes and after them Thomas Stafford and others that comming out of France with instructions of the brethren of Geneua surprised Scarborough Castle made proclamations against the Queene that she was iustly deposed and other such like attemptes by that sort of people who all professed themselues to be Protestantes and to haue entred into those affaires principally for their Religion And with what face or forhead then doth T. M. say in this place Shew vs what Protestant euer resisted c. 31. But much more impudent is the second part of his assertion about Ministers saying That no Minister of the Ghospell did euer kindle the least spark of sedition against Queene Mary Wheras his aduersary obiecteth many by name as Cranmer Ridley Rogers and Iewel before mentioned who as is euident by Fox his story in his Actes and Monumentes both dealt preached stirred people against her all that lay in their power And as for Cranmer it is euident he was condemned for the same treason in Parlament Ridley preached openly at Paules Crosse against her title Rogers at Clocester and Iewel was appointed to preach in Oxford had he not byn preuented by the sudden and vnexpected proclayming of the said Queene there by Syr Iohn VVilliams others 32. The instances also that we haue alledged of Goodman VVhittingham Gilby Couerdale VVitehead sundry others testified by my Lord of Canterbury to haue taught and practized sedition against the said Queene in those daies doe they not conuince this Minister Thomas Morton of rare singular impudency will any man euer belieue him hereafter what he saith or affirmeth denieth or shifteth of seing him to auouch so manifest vntruthes as these are with so shameles asseueration 33. But yet to conuince him somewhat more I think good to set downe some of the particuler wordes and phrases of two or three of the principall forenamed pillars of the Protestant primitiue Church in our Iland omitted for breuities sake by the moderate Answerer to the end yow may see their spirit iudge of this mans forehead in standing so resolutely in the deniall taken in hand For first Iohn Knox in a booke written printed at Geneua 1558. which was the last of her raigne wherin after he had said That is is not birth only or propinquity of bloud that 〈◊〉 a King lawfull to raigne aboue the people professing Iesus Christ c. He goeth forward saying thus I feare not to affirme that it had byn the duty of the Nobility Iudges Rulers and people of England not only to haue resisted and withstood Mary that Iezabel whome they called their Queene but also to haue punished her to death with all the sort of her Idolatrous Priestes togeather with all such as should haue assisted her c. Doe yow see here his Euangelicall spirit Doe yow see the essence of his doctrine Doe yow heare this new Prophet declare himself cleerly But let vs giue audience to another of like vocation and spirit 34. The second is his deere brother Christophor Goodman who in a booke of his printed also at Geneua the same yeare 1558. the title wherof was How Superiours ought to be obeyed writeth thus I know yow of England will say that the Crowne is not entailed to heire-males but appertaineth aswell to the daughters therfore by the lawes of the Realme ye could doe no otherwise then admit her but if this be true yet miserable is the answere of such as had so long time professed the Ghospell and the liuely word of God For if it had byn done by Pagans and heathens which knew not God by his word it might better haue byn borne with all but among them that beare the name of Godes people with whome his lawes should haue chief authority this answere is not tolerable If she had byn no bastard but the Kinges daughter as lawfully begotten as was her sister that Godly Lady and meeke lambe yet at the death of our lawfull Prince King Edward that should not haue byn your first coūsaile or question who should be your Queene but first and principally who had byn most meet among your Brethren to haue had the gouernment ouer yow For a woman to raigne Godes law forbiddeth whose raigne was neuer accompted lawfull by the word of God c. So he And behold heere now whether these mens worde of God did not serue them to all turnes euen to barre lawfull succession to depose the possessor and whatsoeuer themselues listed 35. The third Doctor of this learning was M. VVhittingham Deane afterwardes for his good merittes of Durham who made a preface to the foresaid booke of Goodman allowing and commending the same highly as a thing consulted examined approued by Caluin and the rest of the most learned Ghospellers of Geneua for thus he writeth M. Christophor Goodman conferred his articles and cheif propositions of his booke with the best learned in these partes who approuing the same he consented to enlarge the said worke and so to print it as a token of his duety and good affection towardes the Church of God and then if it were thought good in the iudgment of the Godly to translate the same into other languages that the profit therof might be more vniuersall So VVhittingham with whom concurred in iudgment VVhithead Couerdale Gilby and others then liuing in Geneua which Gilby wrote also of the like argument a speciall admonition to the Realmes of England and Scotland to call them to repentāce by all likelyhood for that they had admitted tolerated and not put to death Q. Mary of England and not yet deposed as after they did Q. Mary of Scotland both Mother and daughter and the booke was printed the same yeare by the same Crispin in Geneua wherin besides that which he vttereth against this Queene Mary as a Catholicke Princesse or rather no Princesse in his opinion he hath these wordes also of King Henry her Father euen after his fall from Catholicke Religion The boare was busy wrooting digging in the earth with all his pigges that followed him but they sought only for the pleasant fruites that they winded with their long snowtes and for their owne bellies sake c. This monstrous boare for all this must needes be called head of the Church vnder paine of treason displacing Christ our only head who alone ought to haue this title So Gilby And for that all this was spoken written and printed diuers yeares after Q. Mary was proclaimed and installed Queene and all tending euidently to sedition as
some English Kings that seemed not to respect much the Popes authority in some occasions which he hath borrowed out of Syr Edward Cookes Reportes he may see the answere to that booke and so I thinke remaine satisfied Wherefore this shall suffice for the second head of argumentes throughout the new Testament though after also in the examination of some falsifications we shall haue occasion to say more Argumentes from Reason §. 3. 43. VVHerfore to passe no further in the second point of argumentes vnder the new Testament we shall say a word or two only of the third to wit of proofes affirmed to be deduced by vs from force of reason for so he intituleth them to wit Popish Argumentes from reason And to the end you may see his talent therin wee shal examine only the third reason in this place which he declareth in these wordes Except saith the Romish pretence there were a way of deposing Apostata Princes God had not prouided sufficiētly for his Church for this he citeth the Constitution Extrauagant of Pope Bonifacius and saith This obiection is in your Extrauagantes and so it may be called because it rangeth extra that is without the bondes of Godes ordinance c. But as in all his other citations generally he is neuer lightly true and sincere in all points no not thrice I thinke veryly throughout all this lying booke of his so neither heere and it would require a great volume alone to examine only some part of his leaues about this point of his shiftes and corruptions they are so many and thicke and craftily hudled vp togeather As for example heere first this sentence is not in the Popes Extrauagant at all but only in a certaine addition to the ordinary glosse or Commentary of Iohn Picard which addition was made by Petrus Bertrandus a late writer Secondly this Commentary saith nothing of deposing Apostata Princes but only affirming the foresaid opinion of Canonistes to be true that Christ was Lord absolutly in this life ouer all not only in spirituall authority but in temporall also he inferreth therby Christ should not haue sufficiently prouided for the gouernment of his Church Kingdome vpon earth Nisi vnicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset except he had left some such one substitute or Vicar after him as should be able to performe all these thinges to wit as belong both to spirituall and temporall power according as necessity shall require which later clause yow see that T. M. cut of as he added the other about Apostata Princes And thus much for his variety of corruptions in this little sentence now to the thing it selfe 44. The reason if we consider it without passion is strong and weighty and founded vpon the prouidence wisedome and goodnes of almighty God who hauing prouided diligently and admirably for the preseruation of all other thinges and Communities by him created or ordained should leaue the Christian Common-wealth vnfurnished of all remedy for the greatest euill of all others that possibly can fall out which is the corruption of the head that may destroy the whole body wherof he is head if it be not redressed As if for examples sake the Prince would extirpate Christian Religion bring in Mahometisme or other such abhomination ouerthrow all good lawes plant and establish vice dissolution Atheisme or commit some other such exorbitant wickednes as were not tolerable wherunto notwithstanding mans frailty without the helpe of Godes grace is or may be subiect In this case saith the obiection some remedy must haue byn left by Christ or els his diuine wisdome and prouidence had not prouided sufficiently for the preseruation of his Kingdome as by light of nature he left remedy to the body of euery Common-wealth vnder the Gentiles before his cōming which is euident both by Plato Aristotle Cicero others that wrote of Common-wealthes in those dayes and did alwayes presume that the said Common-wealthes had sufficient authority by law of nature to restraine exorbitant Princes when they were perilous to the publicke and the same haue held al other learned men that euer wrote of that argument afterward 45. But as for our Catholicke learned men both Deuines and Lawiers though they affirme as out of T. M. his frequent allegations of them in this his Treatise is euident that all obedience both externall and internall in conscience and workes is by Godes ordinance due vnto them yet that in such publicke perilles of the Church Common-wealth as before are mentioned when they fal out Christ our Sauiour hath not left his Church wholy remedilesse but rather that besides the naturall right which ech Kingdome hath to defend themselues in certaine cases he left also supreame power in his high Priest and immediate substitute to direct and moderate that power and to adde also of his owne whē extraordinary need requireth though with great deliberation consultation weighty motiues lawfull meanes and other like circumstances 46. This I say is Catholicke doctrine but what Protestants doctrine is were hard to set downe for that they speake therin as time and occasion serueth them hauing no rule or Canon at all wherto they are bound For what was both their doctrine and practice when and where they were discontented with their Princes both in England Scotland Flanders Geneua and France is euident by that which before we haue alledged in the first fourth Chapters of this booke now this man telleth vs another tale for the time present but what he would say or doe if he were in the discontented occasion of those his fellow-Authors that wrote so sharpely and violently no man can tell but let vs see now at length how substantially he doth satisfy this obiectiō for he giueth three or foure seuerall solutions therunto you shall heare what ones they are 47. The first is from Godes ordinance saith he for by the word of God as your Cunerus Deuinely reasoneth which is not partiall nor by the self pleasing fancy of sensuall affection must this question be determined though therfore it may seeme to vs a decree of nature for euery one to defend himself and the thinges he doth enioy yet the Law of God doth forbid to doe this by taking armes against the higher powers c. So T. M. out of our Cunerus And it is well that he alloweth this Catholicke writer to reason deuinely so far forth as he may seeme to make for him though in truth in the cōclusion of his discourse he is wholy against him For as first his whole speech in this seauenth Chapter by him cited is expresly against the Hollanders that vnder diuers pretences both of Religion and Scriptures for the same liberty of their countrey and the like tooke armes against their true naturall King which he reproueth and condemneth very piously and learnedly throughout this whole Chapter and in the
the same Authors in the same places which this man of purpose omitteth and concealeth doe expresly affirme that for the Crimes of Apostacy or heresy he may and must be deposed or rather is ipso facto depriued of his office and dignity and so may be declared by the Church in that case to wit aswell by Princes and Potentates both Ecclesiasticall and temporall as by all Christian people who in that case are bound to concurre to his expulsion and depriuation And albeit in the other of lesser vices or infirmities of life he haue no humaine Superiour to iudge him yet is that of Christ himselfe so much the more seuere dreadfull and his holy prouidence hath byn euer and wil be such as these personall defectes in his supreame Pastor shall not so much preiudicate his office but that alwaies he shal teach his flocke that which may helpe them to their saluation howsoeuer he liue himselfe And of this he hauing forewarned vs with expresse premonition the performance lieth vpon his charge whose power is omnipotent and fidelity such as in his promises cannot possibly faile And this to the first point 54. Now to the second wherin he saith that one of our Popes placed also in the Calends of our Martyrs doth affirme that though a Pope should carry many people with himselfe to hell no mortall man may presume to say why doe yow so I doe greatly maruaile with what conscience or if not conscience with what forehead at least these men can write and print and reiterate so often in their books thinges that they know or may know to be meerly false and forged Is not this a signe of obstinate wilfulnes and that neither God nor truth is sought for by them but only to maintaine a parte or faction with what sleight or falshood soeuer I find this very obiection set forth in print not many yeares gone by 〈◊〉 Francis Hastings in his VVatch-word and Defence therof and the same auouched stoutly after him for a time by Matthew Sutcliffe the Minister Aduocate Proctor of that defence but afterward I find the same so consuted at large by the VVarn-word and so many lies falshoodes and euident fraudes discouered therin as the said M. Sutcliffe in his Reply intituled A full and round answere thought good roundly to let this passe without any answere at all which I can find in his said booke though I haue vsed some diligence in search therof which I doe adde for that he changeth the whole order of answearing from the method of his Aduersary to the end not to be found so answereth nothing in order or place as it is set downe by him whome he pretendeth to answere but rather taking a new vast and wild discourse to himselfe snatcheth heere a word and there a word to carpe at not as they ly in his aduersaries booke but as it pleaseth him to admit them now from the end of the booke then from the beginning then from the middle and with this substantiall methode he taketh vpon him to answere all bookes that come in his way for so he hath answered of late the booke also of Three Conuersions of England and may doe easely all that is written by Catholickes if carping only and scolding be answering 55. Wherfore to this instance heere resumed by T. M. though I must remit him or rather the Reader for larger satisfaction to the said Catholike Treatise intituled The VVarn-word yet heere breifly I am to tell him first that he erreth grossely in the affirming in this place the Author of this Canon cited by him Si Papa to haue byn a Pope for that the said Canon was gathered by Gratian out of the sayinges of S. Boniface martyr as in the title of the said Canon is expressed which Boniface was neuer Pope but a vertuous learned English man that liued aboue 850. yeares gone and was the first Archbishop of Mentz or Moguntia in Germany of which people and countrey he is called by all ancient writers The Apostle for that he first publickly conuerted that nation erected that Primate sea and suffered glorious martyrdome by the Gentils for the faith of Christ. Wherfore the scoffe of T. M. calling him our Pope placed in the Calendes of our martyrs besides the ignorance tasteth also of much prophane malice and impiety 56. Secondly I say that these wordes of his are corruptly set downe as euer commonly elswhere and that both in Latin and English In Latin for that he leaueth out the beginning of the Canon which sheweth the 〈◊〉 therof whose title is Damnatur Apostolicus qui suae fraternae salutis est negligens The Pope is damned which is negligent in the affaire of his owne saluation and of his brethren and then beginneth the Canon Si Papa suae fraternae salutis negligens c. Shewing that albeit the Pope haue no Superiour Iudge in this world which may by authority checke him vnlesse he fall into heresy yet shall his damnation be greater then of other sinners for that by reason of his high dignity he draweth more after him to perdition then any other Wherby we may perceaue that this Canon was not written to flatter the Pope as Protestantes would haue it seeme but to warne him rather of his perill togeather with his high authority 57. After this the better to couer this pious meaning of S. Boniface T. M. alleadging two lines of the same in Latin he cutteth of presently a third line that immediatly ensueth to wit Cum ipso plagis multis in aeternum vapulatur us that the Pope is to suffer eternall punishmentes and to be scourged with many stripes togeather with the diuell himselfe if by his euill or negligent life he be the cause of others perdition which threat this man hauing cut of he ioineth presently againe with the antecedent wordes these as following immediatly in the Canon Huius culpas redarguere praesumet nemo mortalium this mans faultes to wit the Pope no mortall man shall or may presume to reprehend and there endeth In which short phrase are many fraudes for first he leaueth out istic heere in this life and then for praesumit in the present tense that no man doth presume to checke him in respect of the greatnes of his dignity this man saith praesumet in the future tense that is no man shall presume or as him selfe translateth it may presume to controlle him which is a malitious falshood And lastly he leaueth out all that immediatly followeth conteyning a reason of all that is said Quia cunctos ipse iudicaturus à nemine est iudicandus nisi deprehendatur à fide deuius c. For that wheras he is Iudge of all other men he cannot himselfe be Iudged by any except he be found to swarue from the true faith Heere then is nothing but fraudulent citing and abusing of Authors 58. But now thirdly remaineth the greatest corruption abuse of all
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
Barkley dissenting from Doctor Boucher in this matter about the deposition of this King the one holding that he was deposed the other not but only that as a sicke man was debarred of the administration Doctor Bouchers wordes are these cited by D. Barkley Sic Oziam Azarias de Templo primùm mox etiant de Regno eiecit So Azarias the high Priest did cast out King Ozias first frō the Temple and then from his Kingdome Which the other will not haue to be vnderstood that the title and interest of his Kingdome was taken from him but only the administration which in effect is no great difference of opinions for that Bellarmine also talking of this matter saith Cùm regni administratione priuatus fuerit wheras he was depriued of the administration of the Kingdome which after in other words he expressing saith Regnandi authoritate he was depriued of the authority of actual raigning or exercising that authority wherunto the wordes of the Scripture seene plainly to agree which are these Festinatò expulerunt c. Azarias and the rest of the Priestes did hastily driue him out of the Temple and he himself being terrified with that which he felt to be the punishment of God made hast to goe forth VVherfore this King Ozias remaining a leper vnto the day of his death did dwell in a separate howse and he was full of leprosy for the which he was cast forth of the howse of our Lord so as his sonne Ioathan did gouerne the howse of the King iudge the people of the land 9. Out of which wordes of Scripture as also out of the Booke of Leuiticus where the law saith That whosoeuer shal be spotted with leprosy and is separated at the apointment of the Priest shall dwell alone without the tentes Bellarmine doth gather that this separation of King Ozias was not voluntary but by prescript order of the said high Priest Azarias and that consequently he was depriued also by the same sentence and authority of his gouernment and administration of the Kingdome against which T. M. bringeth in a great tempestuous storme of wordes and warre of the foresaid Doctor Barkley Scottishman against Cardinall Bellarmine as though he had refuted him with some contumely and contempt wheras Doctor Barkley neither nameth nor meaneth Bellarmine but only Boucher vpon his wordes before recited against whome he being according to his custome somewhat vehement in speech the difference in substance being little or nothing as yow haue seene T. M. endeauoreth by his sleightes to increase or aggrauate the same For wheras Doctor Barkley presuming Boucher to vnderstand by those his wordes De regno eiecit that Azarias had taken from K. Ozias the name and right of Kingdome saith vnto him Magna sanè imprudentia vel impudentia est ea scriptis mandare quae manifestis scripturae testimoniis redarguuntur It is truly a great imprudence or impudēcy to cōmit those thinges to writing which are controlled by manifest testimonies of Scripture There our Minister blotteth out in his Latin text the word imprudentia and will haue only to stand impudentia to set them further out then they be which me thinkes was some impudency also in him and againe when the said Barkley writeth immediatly after the former wordes Malo te negligentiae quà m nequitiae reum facere I had rarher accuse you of negligence then of malice these wordes also not without some malice T. M. striketh out and pittifully mangleth the whole discourse putting in and putting out at his pleasure and yet all set downe in his booke as the continuall speech of the Author 10. Heere then yow see how many wilfull corruptions there be first to bring in Doctor Barkley rating of Cardinall Bellarmine with magna sanè impudentia est c. Wheras he talketh not against Bellarmine at all nor indeed is Bellarmines manner of speech contrary to that which Barkley will haue to be the meaning of the History for that Barkley doth not so much stand vpon the thing in controuersy for Priestes authority but vpon the manner of proofe by the examples alledged by D. Boucher of Ieroboam Ozias Athalia and some other Princes in whose punishment God vsed Priestes for meanes and instrumentes Non ignoro saith he Ius esse Ecclesiae in Reges Principes Christianos nec quale ius sit ignoro sed id tam alienis argument is ostendi prorsus ignoro imò non ostendi planè scio I am not ignorant saith Doctor Barkley that the Church hath right ouer Christian Kinges Princes nor am I ignorant what manner of right it is yet doe I not see how the same may be proued by such impertinent argumentes nay I know rather that it cannot be so proued Which wordes going but very few lines before those that T. M. alledgeth he could not but see and yet left them out and then beginneth against vs his English text thus Your owne Doctor calleth this your assertion most false and contrary to the direct History of the Byble to wit that Ozias was deposed of his Kingdome by Azarias the high Priest 11. But now yow haue seene that howsoeuer it may be called either deposition depriuation restraint sequestration or inhibition certaine it is that he was separated from the administration of the gouernment by 〈◊〉 the high Priest and whether his sonne during his life were truly King or only regent or Gouernour vnder his Father or whether he were bound to consult with his said Father in his greatest affaires take his approbation and commission that point which is most important Doctor Barkley proueth not but only that Ozias notwithstanding his separation was called King during his life which letted not but that his sonne might be truly King also during his Fathers dayes for otherwise D. Barkley might aswell say that his Maiesty now of England for example was not King of Scotland whiles his Mother the Queene liued in her exile which yet I thinke he will not say and therfore to vse the wordes impudentia nequitia and falsissimum in a matter so doubtfull might perhaps haue byn omitted but much more ought to haue byn the multiplicity of falsities vsed by T. M. in relating the same namely in bringing in Cardinall Bellarmine with such ardent desire to haue him contradicted disgraced as he not only applieth to him that which was spokē against another but reciting also two lines of his speech besides other manglinges shufleth in falsly two or three words that ouerthrow the whole controuersy to wit separatus extra Regnum that King Ozias was separated by Azarias the Priest forth of the Kingdome wheras Bellarmine hath not these wordes extra Regnum at al but only that he was separated from the Citty extra vrbem in domo solitaria forth of the Citty in a solitary house which thing the Scripture it self before related doth testify wherby yow see what botching there
of the Church In this then we agree and haue no difference 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere But not in the personall administration of them to wit of spirituall causes this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty and true State of the question which is in whome consisteth the supreame power to treate iudge and determine in spirituall causes which this man flying as not able to resolue telleth vs only that he cannot personally administer the same which yet I would aske him why For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person if he list any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires so if he haue supreame authority spirituall also why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself if he please But of this is sufficiently writteÌ„ of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke where also is shewed that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church to wit To be head therof in as ample manner as euer the Pope was or could be held before him ouer England and to King Edward though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power or spirituall authority then was deriued from him to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England as euer any person had or could exercise before which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose to make it seeme little or nothing but dareth not stand to it if he be called to the triall 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion and require that it may be made good to wit that this is the substance meaning only of the English oath and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation or ad Ecclesiae praesidium as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are and I dare assure him that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath and so for this point there will be an attonement Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed and set forth without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good Yf this be really meant we may easely be accorded if not then will the Reader see what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority c. 26. And for conclusion of all it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes but want of modesty discretion also for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome then doth S. Leo in so much that Iohn Caluin not being able otherwise to answere him saith that he was tooto desirous of glory dominion and so shifteth him of that way and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes 27. But yet in the very next page after he vseth a far greater immodesty or rather perfidy in my opinioÌ„ in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine whome he abuseth notably both in allegation exposition translation application and vaine insultation for thus he citeth in his text out of him Ancient generall Councelles saith the Romish pretence were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours and were made by their consentes for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour that by his authority he would gather Synods but after those times all causes were changed because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 13. § Habemus ergo 28. And hauing alledged this resolutioÌ„ of Bellarmine the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words Who would thinke this man could be a Papist much lesse a Iesuit how much lesse a Cardinal who thus disableth the title of the Pope granting to vs in these wordes after these times that is after six hundred yeares the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours And yet who but a Papist would as it were in despite of antiquity defend the degenerate state saying after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters As if he should haue said Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares and not so only but which as your Barkley witnesseth the vniuersall Christian world imbraced with common consent for a full thousand yeares So he 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes but of a quite different subiect of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine against whome all this tempest is raised 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant saith he non sine Imperatorum sumptibus eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere idâ—irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum At post illa tempora omnes causae
of the Church therin which should be a greater sinne but yet is not necessary for that the perfect nature of Heresy is consummated by knowing that it is against the Church and for that this notice or knowledge belongeth to the vnderstanding therfore Vasquez holdeth that the last perfection or consummation of this sinne is in the vnderstanding and not in the will not meaning to exclude therby obstinacy of the wil as ignorantly T.M. doth when he saith wee may not be ignorant but to shew in what power of the minde the last perfection consummation of this heinous sinne consisteth to wit that a man may be a perfect and consummate Hereticke by holding obstinatly any opinion against the doctrine of the Church after wee once know it to be against the said Churches doctrine though we haue not that further malice also of expresse will and purpose to contradict therby the said Church but only we hold the same for that the opinion pleaseth vs or is profitable or honorable to vs or therby to contradict another or some such like inducement according to those wordes of S. Augustine to Honoratus Haereticus est qui alicuius temporalis commodi maximè gloriae principatusque sui gratia falsas ac nouas opiniones vel gignit vel sequitur An Hereticke is he who in respect of some temporall commodity but especially for his owne glory and preheminence doth beget or follow false and new opinions 45. The same S. Augustine also against the Donatistes proposeth this example Constituamus saith he aliquem sentire de Christo quod Photinus c. Let vs imagine one to thinke of Christ as Photinus the Hereticke did perswading himself that it is the Catholicke faith c. istum nondū Haereticum dico saith he nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit illud quod tenebat elegerit I doe not yet say that this man is an 〈◊〉 vntill after that the doctrine of the Catholicke faith being opened vnto him he shall choose notwithstanding to resist and to hold by choice that which before he held by errour In which wordes S. Augustine doth euidently declare how necessary both knowledge will are vnto Heresy and consequently how absurd and ridiculous the assertion of M. Morton is that Heresy being a vice proper to the vnderstanding may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke without obstinacy of will For 〈◊〉 we grant with all Deuines that Heresy is in the vnderstanding as in her subiect and so is faith also that is her opposite and further that her last perfection and consummation is from the foresaid knowledge in the vnderstanding as Vasquez doth explane it yet doth not Vasquez or any Deuine els exclude the necessity of pertinacity also and election in the will consequently both his wordes and meaning haue byn euidently falsified and calumniated by T. M. and so much of this first charge wherby yow may see what bookes might be made against him if we would follow his steppes in all his fraudulent traces But yet let vs see somewhat more in this very leaf and page 46. For within few lines after he beginneth his third Chapter with these wordes That is only true Religion say your Romish Doctors which is taught in the Romish Church therfore whosoeuer mainteineth any doctrine cōdemned in that Church must be accompted an obstinate Hereticke And in the margent he citeth Cunerus alledging his Latin wordes thus Haec est Religionis sola ratio vt omnes intelligant sic simpliciter esse credendum atque loquendum quemadmodum Romana Ecclesia credendum esse docet ac praedicat Which wordes if they were truly alledged out of the Author yet were they not truly translated for if by only true Religion a corrupt translation of Religionis solaratio be applied to particuler positions and articles of Religion then we grant that such true Religion may be also among Hereticks not only taught in the Roman Church for that as S. Augustine well noteth Heretickes also hold many articles of true Catholicke Religion but heere the corruption and falsification goeth yet further and it is worthy the noting for that Cunerus hauing 〈◊〉 largely against the insurrections and Rebellions of those of Holland and Zeland for cause of Religion and other pretences against their lawfull King taketh vpon him in his thirteenth Chapter to lay downe some meanes how in his opinion those dissentions may be compounded giuing this title to the said Chapter Quae sit vera componendi dissidij 〈◊〉 what is the true way of composing this dissention and then after some discourse setteth downe this conclusion Haec igitur in Religione concordiae sola est ratio vt omnes pio ac simplici animo purè integrè sic sapiant viuant loquantur ac praedicent quemadmodum sancta Catholica Romana Ecclesia quae Dei prouidentia magistra veritatis Orbi praeposita est docet loquitur praedicat This therfore in Religion is the only way of concord that all men with a pious simple minde doe wholy and purely conceaue liue speake preach as the holy Catholicke Roman Church which God by his prouidence hath giuen for a teacher of truth vnto the whole world doth teach speake and preach 47. And now consider yow this dealing that wheras B. Cunerus saith haec est in Religione cocordiae sola ratio this is the only way of concord in Religion this man alledgeth it in his margent haec est Religionis sola ratio this is the only way of Religion as though concord and Religion were al one then by another tricke of crafty translation in his English text that is only true Religion as though true Religion and the way or meanes to come to true Religion were not different and then for all the rest how it is mangled and how many wordes and sentences are put in by this Minister which are none of Cunerus and how many of his altered and put out is easy for the Reader to see by comparing the 〈◊〉 o Latin textes before alleadged and therby to consider how facile a matter it is for this fellow to deuide our tongues A course saith he which I professe in all disputes when he deuideth and separateth the wordes from their Authors and the sense from the wordes and the whole drift from them both a very fine course and fit for a man of his profession But let vs proceed 48. In the very next page he going about to make vs odious by our seuere censuring of Heretickes putteth downe first these wordes of Alphonsus de Castro He that vnderstanding any opinion to be expressely condemned by the Church shall hold the same is to be accompted an obstinate Hereticke Wherupon M. Morton playeth his pageant thus VVhat obstinate It may be some doe but doubtingly defend it what will yow iudge of these wherunto he answereth out of
false manner of proceeding and yet for that there is one example more that remaineth within the compasse of these few Pages by vs examined that draweth a longer sequele after it then is fit to weary the Reader withall without some breathing we shall reserue the same to a third Part of this Chapter which now ensueth THE THIRD PART OF THIS CHAPTER CONTEYNING A CONTROVERSY VVhether Caluin did fauour Arrianisme or no VVith diuers sleightes of Tho. Morton about the same ANd now albeit these examples before rehearsed doe sufficiently declare the mans humour against whome we deale who professing extraordinary sincerity in all pointes performeth the same scarcely in any I professe saith he that simplicity in Christ as neuer either in word or writing to Equiuocate yet for an vpshot of this Chapter I haue thought good to lay forth one example more to proue worse matter then Equiuocation against him as in the former Partes of this Chapter we haue already done to wit plaine falshood and faithles dealing But heere now is a particuler controuersy fallen out by occasion of certaine sleightes vsed by him in defence of Iohn Caluin against the imputation of Arrianisme laid vpō him not only by our doctors but much more by sundry learned Protestāt-writers of Germany alledged in part by the moderate Answerer in this place and shifted of sleightly by T. M. And albeit we haue treated somewhat of this matter before in the second Chapter of this booke yet the thing comming againe in question now by reason of certaine corruptions vsed by T. M. therabout I haue thought it expedient to handle the same more largely as a point of no small importance which by the sequele yow will see 74. First then T. M. taking vpon him to answere the obiection of his Aduersary That Caluin was accused of Arrianisme by the writinges of diuers most learned Protestantes of the Lutheran and other sectes in Germany hauing giuen this feeble answere only which before we haue touched in our said second Chapter and is heere repeated againe That it is not much to be regarded what those Protestant-writers in the spirit of opposition and contention did say of Caluin especially saith he seing as it may seeme by their obiections their iudgment hath beene depraued by your maliguant Doctors 75. After I say this generall but simple euasion for if this kinde of answering may be admitted that thinges are spoken or written out of the spirit of Contradiction what may not be answered he taketh vpon him for some shew of probability in this shift to set downe the iustification following First saith he concerning Arrianisme Caluin as your Iesuits affirme doth plainly teach the same saying That the Father is by a kind of excellency God wheras both the speach sense is most orthodoxall and agreing with the tenure of holy writ as your learned Iesuites confesse for the wordes of our Sauiour are plaine Ioan. 14. My Father is greater then I in the true sense Is say your Iesuites and truly the Father greater not in substance and being but by reason of birth and begetting For their authority they produce an inquest of Fathers to free Caluin in this point who was so farre from Arrianisme that your owne Bellarmine doth acknowledge that Caluin did impugne the doctrine of the Arrians 76. This is his defence wherin yow shall see how many subtilties and shiftes there be vsed to defend Caluin from this impiety who yet as will appeare is not defensible in this respect For first where he saith That our Iesuites doe affirme Iohn Caluin to teach Arrianisme in that he holdeth that the Father is by a kind of excellency God citing for the same among others in the margent both Bellarmine and Gregorius de Valentia his first corruption therin is that he citeth not the wordes of their accusations as they ly in the Authors which in Bellarmine are these Non veretur Valentino concedere nomen Dei KATH ' HYPEROCHEN id est per excellentiam quandam soli Patri attribui Caluin seared not to grant to Valentinus Gentilis the Arrian Hereticke that the name of God was attributed only to the Father by a certaine excellency And the same obiecteth Gregory de Valentia in the same wordes out of which yow see that T. M. leaueth out soli to the Father alone wherin consisteth the chiefest force of the charge against Caluin this then is the first tricke The second is that he would make his Reader belieue that for this only speach of Caluin our Doctors Bellarmine Valentia and others had condemned him of Arrianisme wheras they not only for this but for many other wicked speaches as blasphemous as this doe ascribe that crime vnto him 77. As for example for that he writeth Deum Patrem genuisse quia voluit that God the Father did beget his Sonne for that he would wherof ensueth euidently that if Christes eternall generation was voluntary in respect of his Father then was it not necessary and naturall and consequently he could not be God at all nor equall to his Father of whose will his essence depended and againe That Christ as he is the second person of the Trinity cannot properly be called Creator of heauen and earth and consequently not God nor equall to his Father And yet further Filium Dei subiectum esse Patri etiam ratione diuinitatis that the Sonne of God is subiect to his Father euen according to his diuine nature And yet more impiously That Christ was a mediator betweene God and Angels before the sinne of Adam and before his incarnation and that also according to his diuinity Out of which for that a mediator must needes be inferiour to him to whome he vseth mediation all learned men inferre that Caluin in effect taught the doctrine of Arrius who denied the equality of the Sonne with the Father all this is obiected by our Doctors in the places quoted by T. M. himselfe Wherby it is manifest that he did not of ignorance or forgetfulnes leaue out these other accusations mentioning only the first but of plaine deceipt wilfull falshood for that he thought himselfe to haue a shift for answering the first but not the other 78. Yet Gregory de Valentia goeth some-what further adding moreouer to these assertions of Caluin diuers other as namely that he did seeke to eneruate and make voide togeather with the Arrians certaine excellent places of Scripture which the ancient Catholicke Fathers did vrge against them as that of S. Iohn Ego Pater vnum sumus I and my Father are one which Caluin saith is to be vnderstood of the vnity of consent and agreement not of substance wherupō one George Blandrata a Trinitarian founding himselfe saith Valentia did in a certaine publicke disputation against the Catholickes at Alba Iulia in Transiluania allow and confirme this Arrian interpretation of Caluin saying VVe doe remit our hearers to only
is not affraide to hold vp his finger against the interpretations of the Sacred Euangelistes themselues So he 97. But to come to an end I will leaue nineteene or twenty more Prophesies vndiscussed to wit three that remaine of this first point about the comming and natiuity of Christ eight that did foretel his sacred passion and particulers therof foure of his resurrection and foure or fiue more of his miraculous ascension sitting on the right hand of God all which doth Iohn Caluin with metaphoricall and malicious interpretations weaken elude ouerthrow take from vs yea though the Euangelistes Apostles themselues haue expressely expounded them literally to appertaine to Christ which this Doctor Hunnius doth notably substantially proue out of Caluins owne wordes throughout this breif but iudicious booke of his making many exclamations against Caluins impiety therin especially in one place where seeing the mā endeauoreth to take from vs that whole Psalme Deus Deus meus which setteth downe most of the particulers of Christes passion as the percing of his feet and handes deuiding of his garments other such points which the Euangelists and 〈◊〉 themselues doe apply literally to our Sauiour and this man only in a metaphoricall sense to King Dauid yea saying further that the Euangelistes did 〈◊〉 thinges intempestiuè ad praesentem causam out of season to the present cause of Christ Et quòd dum negligunt sensum metaphoricum a natiuo sensu 〈◊〉 And whiles they did neglect Caluins metaphoricall sense they departed from the true naturall sense of the Prophet Doctor Hunnius I say vpon these other like insolences breaketh out into these wordes that he cannot sufficiently detest extremam Caluini impietatem cum intolerabili fastu coniunctam quo se super sanctissimos Dei seruos Euangelistas Apostolos quasi illorum censor effert that extreame impiety of Caluin ioyned with intolerable pride wherby he setteth himself aboue the most holy seruantes of God the Euangelistes and Apostles as their Censurer and therfore after he had demonstrated this pride and impiety in all the rest of the Prophesies by him peruerted drawing towardes the end he concludeth thus Quapropter vt receptui canam detectum satis superque iudico Angelum illum tenebrarum Iohannem Caluinum c. 98. Wherfore that I may now saith he retire my self I doe iudge that Angell of darknes Iohn Caluin to be sufficiently and more then sufficiently discouered who being raised from the pit of hell to the peruerting of mankinde hath partly by his detestable desire of wresting Scriptures and ouerthrowing the Bulwarkes of Christian Religion which it hath against Iewes and Arrians partly also by his impious pen a gainst the holy and sacred Maiesty of Iesus Nazarenus now exalted in heauen partly also by his peruerse doctrine of the Sacrament and horrible monstrous paradoxes of his absolute predestination By all these meanes I say he hath 〈◊〉 in these our later dayes no small part of the light and sunne of Godes truth drawne with him a great number of starres as the Apocalips saith into the bottomeles pit of eternall damnatiō God euerlasting out of his mercy signe his seruantes that they be not corrupted with this pestilent plague of Caluinian seducement and bring back againe vnto Iesus Christ the true Pastour of their soules those that are seduced by them that they perish not in their errour but be saued eternally with all those that faithfully loue God Amen And this I had saith he to admonish the Church of God of the most wicked deceiptes of Iohn Caluin And if Doctor 〈◊〉 will answere any thing to this let him not entertaine himselfe in generall speech only as his people are wont to doe but come to particulers c. So Hunnius 99. And now M. Morton will yow say that all this also which Doctor Hunnius hath brought against Caluin about furthering of Iudaisme and Arrianisme is out of the spirit only of opposition and contradiction as yow shifted of the Deane and Colledge of Tubinga alledged before by your Aduersary Will yow answere in like manner it is not much to be regarded what he saith seeing he bringeth so many great and substantiall proofes for the same out of M. Caluins confessed workes and wrytinges Or will yow say as yow said before that their iudgment hath byn depraued by our malignant Doctors seeing that yow haue heard this your owne Doctor Hunnius speake in his owne language and sense so resolutly and earnestly against Caluin and Caluinistes If you dare not say this again enow then was it but a shift and dissimulation before and if yow should say it againe now yow would be laughed at by all men And though yow doe not yet euery wise man will consider with what truth or ground yow said it before to wit for a meere shift not vnderstanding or thinking as yow speake And conforme to that will they esteem of the rest which yow say or write without further ground of reall substance but only that yow must say somewhat and that it serueth for your purpose to speake it for the present But now shall we returne to the place page of your Reply from whence we went forth in this digressiō about Caluin 100. Yow complaine in the said place as before hath byn shewed of the charge of Arrianisme laid falsly vpon Caluin by our Iesuites as yow say and this for one only speech of his where he saith That the Father is by a kinde of excellency God which yow say both in speech and sense is most orthodoxall and agreeing with the tenour of holy writ and iudgment of all ancient Fathers as our owne learned Iesuites confesse and doe produce say yow for their authority an inquest of Fathers to free Caluin in this point which Fathers vpon those wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell my Father is greate then I doe affirme that the Father is greater not in substance and being but by reason of birth and begetting for which yow alledge Cardinall Tolet Maldonate both Iesuites in their commentaries vpon S. Iohns Ghospell 101. But this Syr by your leaue supposing al were so doth not free Caluin in this point of Arrianisme for that he is otherwise manifoldly conuinced as now yow haue heard And secōdly for this sole point or sentēce heere mentioned albeit the two forenamed Iesuites doe cite diuers ancient Fathers that doe hold those wordes of Christ My Father is greater then I are true not only in respect of his humanity but also in a certaine sort as he is God to wit that betweene those personall relations of Father and Sonne Begetter and Begotten in the blessed Trinity there ariseth a more honourable respect out of the former then of the later yet doth not this make that in the Godhead it self the Father is more excellent then the Sonne or that by excellency he is God or that the name of God
yow know but are very well content to see them so common that as now children may play with them in the streets Thus his face serued him co write then when in the selfe same Defence he by leauing out suppressed the very substance of that booke which he then pretended to answere and when by helpe of his fellow Superintendent and other friends euery corner of the Realme was searched for those bookes when the portes were layd for them Paules Crosse is witnes of burning many of them the Princesse proclamation was procured against them in the Vniuersityes by soueraigne authority Colledges chambers studyes clossets coffers and deskes were ransacked for them when not only children were forbid to play with them but ancient men and students of Deuinity were imprisoned for hauing of them so that all this can be nought els but a plaine example of palpable dissimulation and affected lying 29. So this learned and vertuous man who was so moued by the said dissimulation as it wrought his conuersion and detestation of that doctrine which could not be mainteyned but with such shiftes and cunning lyings as afterward more largely and particulerly yow shall heare him relate of himselfe for that conforme to this generall entrance by singuler hypocrisy and equiuocation as hath beene declared M. Iewell behaued himselfe also in particuler cases that did occurre making no 〈◊〉 to affirme or deny any thing that serued for his purpose though in his conscience he knew it to be neuer so false wherof we shall heare touch some few examples proportionable to the 〈◊〉 of reasons before set downe if not more in which is to be remēbred by the Reader that all the forsaid circumstances must be obserued to witt that the falshood cannot be excused by any probable error mistaking or ouersight of the speaker nor by any default of the Printer edition translation or the like but that it must needs proceed of a 〈◊〉 will to deceyue wittingly as before hath byn said And with this preuention and admonition shall we passe to the examples themselues Six Examples of Maister Ievvells particuler Equiuocation §. 3. 30. THE first example then shall be where M. Iewell going about to prooue in a certain sermon of his that it was no synne to marrie after vowes made of Chastity bringeth in this sentence of S. Augustine out of his booke de 〈◊〉 viduitatis to proue the same in these wordes Quapropter nō possum dicere à proposito meliori 〈◊〉 si nupserint 〈◊〉 adulteria esse non coniugia I cannot say that women which are fallen from a better purpose of continency if they marry that their mariage is adultery and not mariage at all and vpon this authority so alleadged and so plainly seeming to make for the Protestants doctrine of Votaries mariages yow must imagine how M. Iewell would exult and make the Schollers of Oxford thinke that he had said much for his purpose but he that shall read ouer that shorte booke de 〈◊〉 viduitatis of the good that is in wyddowhood written to Iuliana a religious seruant of God as S. Augustine calleth her shall fynd that the whole drifte of this holy Father in that 〈◊〉 is directly against M. Iewell and his fellowes prouing by many arguments that 〈◊〉 marriage in them that haue made a simple vow of Chastity or to vse S. Austines wordes that had a better purpose then mariage be true mariage and not adultery except there come afterward a solemne vow which maketh it no 〈◊〉 yet doth S. Augustine plainly proue that the slyding backe from that good purpose and vow is damnable not for that the mariage doth not hold but for that they haue broken their first faith made to Christ according to the wordes of S. Paul which S. Augustine affirmeth to haue byn meant to this purpose 31. So then heere is great wilfull falsity to alleadge S. Augustine as though he fauoured the marriages of Votaries whereas throughout this whole booke he doth purposely impugne the same yea that which is more in the very next immediate wordes that follow in the same sentence before alleadged by M. Iewell S. Augustines expresse wordes do ouerthrow all that is alleadged for Votaries For wheras he writeth I cannot affirme that women fallen from a better purpose if they marry that their marriages are adultery and not marriage it followeth immediately Sed plane non dubit auerim dicere lapsus ruinas à castitate sanctiori quae vouetur Deo adulteriis esse peiores but I do not doubt at all to affirme saith S. Augustine that the ruynes and fallinges of from holyer chastitie which is vowed to God are worse then adultery which he proueth by many strong reasons and arguments And now let the Reader consider what Equiuocation this might be in M. Iewell and whether it be possible to imagine that he was so occupyed and distracted as he did read the one halfe of the sentence and not the other or that he was so simple as he did not vnderstand what was the whole drifte and argument of S. Augustine in that booke and if he did and yet alledged him to the contrary yow see what ensueth And thus much of this first example 32. The second example is taken out of M. Iewells defence of the Apologie of England pag. 176. where taking againe in hand to proue that priests and Votaryes may marry for he was very frequent and copious in that matter it importing them much in that beginning to draw priests and fryers vnto them by this bayte he alleadgeth an example of a certayne noble man called 〈◊〉 of Caesarea in Cappadocia taken out of Cassiodorus the historiographer in these wordes At that tyme they say that Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesarea dyed in martyrdome hauing marryed a wyfe a little before being as yet in manner a new marryed man c. and he cyteth for this in the margent Cassiodorus in the tripartite historie And in an other place he alledgeth the same example to the same purpose out of Nicephorus but aswell these two authors as Zozomenus are witnesses against him of a notable wilfull falsification in this behalfe for that neither of them do say that Eupsychius was a Bishop or priest but only that he was Patritius Caesareae in Cappadocia that is to say a noble man or Senators sonne of Cesarea in Cappadocia and the falsification is so playne to him that shall read all the foresaid Authors and places by him cyted as no modest man can but blush to see M. Iewell alledge and vrge this forged example twice in one booke of his with such apparant falsitye nor can any of the foresaid circumstances of ignorance error or negligence probably excuse or defend him 33. The third exāple may be that of M Iewels slaunderous speach cōcerning the holy man Augustine sent by S. Gregory to conuert our nation to the Christian faith which Almighty God
that Pope Pius Quintus before he proceeded to any Ecclesiasticall Censure against Q Elizabeth wrote vnto her a letter offering to allow and ratifie the English Seruice Bible and Communion-booke as now it is in vse in that Kingdome if she would accept it as from him which she refusing to do he did excommunicate her by which tale he acquitteth notwithstanding Catholicks if yow marke it from procuring that excommunication for rebelliō which els where he often obiecteth most odiously against them For if vpon this cause she were excommunicated what parte had Ca holicks therin But yet I must needs say that the sictiō is one of the most vnlikely things and the most impossible in morall reason that any man can deuise For that Pope Pius Quintus albeit some man would imagine him to be so good a fellow as to care for no religion who is knowne to haue byn most zealous yet had he aduentured his Popedome by making such an offer for he should haue allowed of diuers points in the Communion-booke which are held by the Catholike Church for heresy and so condemned by the Councell of Trent and other Councels and now yow know it is a ground among vs that a Pope that should be an hereticke or approuer of heresie therby ceaseth to be Pope how improbable then is this of Pius Quintus his offer And why had not this letter in so many yeares byn published to the world for the credit of rhe English seruice and discredit of the Popes And yet the voice is that the Lord Cooke did so earnestly auouch this matter as he pawned therin not only his credit honesty bv expresse termes of protestation but euen his faith also to God and man A great aduenture no doubt And for that I assure my selfe 〈◊〉 the greater parte of the auditory being discreet men did imagine it to be quite false as I and others in effect do know it to be it must needs be a great blemish to my Lordes credit at the beginning of his Iudgeship that in other thinges also he be not belieued 79. But I vnderstand that the booke of this speach or charge now printed is expected shortly togeather with some other appertayning to the same man and then it may be that some body will examine matters more particulerly especially those that appertayne to the iniuring of Catholickes and afterward returne with the aggreuances to the Iudge himselfe seing he is now a Iudge to giue sentence of his owne ouersightes albeit I must confesse that as well my selfe as diuers other men haue lost great hope of his Lordship by this accident for before we did thinke that his ouerlashing in speaches when he was Attorney did proceed in great parte of the liberty of that office and that when he came to be iudge he would reforme his conscience ratione status in regard of his state of life but now it seemeth that he is farre worse though this I say shal be lefte by me to others to be discussed vpon the sight of the foresaid printed bookes 80. My speach at this time shall be only about that which passed in his booke of Reportes while he was Attorney and which hath byn disputed these monethes past betweene him and a Catholicke Deuine of our partie in his answere to the said Reportes which answere is in England And albeit therby may easely be seene the talent which M. Attorney had while he was Attorney in this kynd of worst Equiuocation notwithstanding his often declamations against the other sorte that with due circumstances we haue proued to be lawfull yet will I heere adioyne one example more but such a one as is worth the noting bearing away And it is this 81. That wheras in answering of dyuers lawes 〈◊〉 and ordinances which the Attorney alledged out of the raignes of sundry ancient Kinges to proue that they did exercise spirituall authority and iurisdiction the Deuine somtymes not hauing the law-bookes by him out of which the said lawes or authorityes were cyted supposing the allegations to be ordinarily true for who would suspect lawyers to be false in their cytations that were wont to be accompted most exact in that point did answere the same with that sincerity of truth and reason as to a man of his profession appertayned though somtymes also he was forced to suspect some fraud and thervpon requested such as had commodity in England to see the bookes that they would pervse the places and take them out verbatim which some haue done and haue found such store of Equiuocations and false dealing in the alleadging therof as neuer could be imagined in a man of his calling I shall only set downe one example and it shall be the first that is cyted by him in the whole booke to wit of the Charter of King Kenulphus of the VVest-Saxons vnto the Abbey of Abindon in Barkeshyre which Charter M. Attorney set downe with this preface To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfie such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes c. these few demonstratiue proofes shall serue 82. And then beginneth he with the said Charter of King Kenulphus before the Conquest meaning to proue therby that the said King did giue vnto the said Abbey of Abindon spirituall Iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall Crowne exempting the same from all Authority of the Bishop which in deed was done by the Pope and so the Charter it selfe doth plainly expresse if it had byn truly related by M. Attorney And for that the Case is not long I shall set it downe verbatim as the Attorney hath it in his booke pag. 9. only putting into English that which is recyted by him in latin and left without any translation to make the matter more obscure and then shall wee lay forth also the true case wherby will be seene how true a dealer M. Attorney is in those his writinges and protestations which after we shall more largely consider of Thus then beginneth the Charter 83 Kenulphus Rex c. per literas suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij c. quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim mansias in loco qui à ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad eandem pertinentibus-tam in magnis quam in modic is rebus in aeternam haereditatem Et quod praedictus Kuchinus c. ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt inhabitatores eius nullius Episcopi aut suorum officialium iugo inde deprimantur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijciantur ita quod c. Thus goeth the Charter as M. Attorney alleageth it which in English is as followeth 84. King Kenulphus
second and third Reasons §. 2. HIs second reason why his Maiesties Catholicke and Protestant subiects may not liue togeather in England is For that all Popish Priestes faith he doe attribute a double prerogatiue ouer Kings that is to say a Democraticall and Monarchicall Soueraigne ciuill power the first to the people the second to the Pope And for proofe of the first concerning the people he alleadgeth fower seuerall authorities of Catholicke writers but so corruptly and perfidiously as if nothing else did shew his talent of cogging and treacherous dealing this were sufficient to discouer the same though afterwardes greater store will occurre we shall runne ouer briefly all these fower 23. First he saith that Doleman in his Conference about succession hath these wordes The Common-wealth hath authority to chuse a King and to limit him lawes at their pleasure Which if it were truly alleadged as it lieth in the Author yet heere is no mention of the people or of Democraticall state but only of the Common-wealth which includeth both nobility and people and all other states Secondly Dolemans wordes are not of chusing a King but of chusing a forme of gouernement be it Democraticall Aristocraticall or Monarchicall Let vs heare the Author himself speake In like manner saith he it is euident that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her gouernement as hath byn proued so hath it also to limit the same with what lawes and conditions shee pleaseth wherof ensueth great diuersity of authority and power which ech one of the former gouernments hath in it self So he Where we see that Doleman speaketh of the power which a Common-wealth hath that is deuoid of any certeine gouernement to chuse vnto themselues that forme that best liketh them with the limitations they thinke most expedient and so we see in England France Polonia Germany Venice Genua and in the Empire it self different formes and manners of gouernement with different lawes and limitations according to the choice and liking of ech nation This place then of Doleman is corrupted by T. M. both in wordes and sense for he neither speaketh nor meaneth as the false Minister auoucheth him of giuing Democraticall power to the people ouer Princes established 24. There followeth the second place taken out of the French Iesuite as he calleth him De iusta abdicatione c. though it be well knowne that D. Bouchier Author of that booke yet liuing in Flanders and Canon of Tourney was neuer Iesuite in his life but all must be ascribed to Iesuits that may seeme odious This French Iesuite saith he sheweth a reason of Dolemans speach saying For Maiesty is rather seated in the Kingdome then in the King But I would aske the poore man why he doth alleadge this place or of what weight it is or may be for his purpose for so much as D. Bouchier in these wordes denieth not Maiesty to be in the King but to be more in the Kingdome for that the Kingdome giueth Maiesty vnto the King when it chuseth him and not the King properly vnto the Kingdome And is not this a great obiection or doth this proue that we ascribe Democraticall soueraignity ouer Kings vnto the people One of his owne Ghospell-brethren speaketh more roundly and roughly to the matter when he writeth Populo ius est vt imperium cui velit deferat The people hath right to bestowe the crowne vpon whome they list if we had said so what aduantage would T. M. haue sought thereat 25. His third place is out of D. Stapleton in his booke called Dydimus where he saith That the people are not ordeyned for the Prince but the Prince for the people His wordes in Latin are Non populi in Principum gratiam facti sed Principes in populi commodum creati sunt Multitudes of people are not made by God for Princes sakes but Princes are created for the commodity or good of the people and what is there in this sentence iustly to be reprehended Is not this euident by diuine and humane lawe and by the very light of nature it self that Princes were first ordeined by God for the good of multitudes and not multitudes for the vtility of Princes Will T. M. deny this or is not this far more modest and temperate then that of his owne brethren before mentioned whose wordes are Populus Rege est praestantior melior the people are better more excellēt then the King what wilfull wrangling is this in a turbulent Minister 26. His fourth and last place is out of M. VVilliam Reinoldes in his booke De iusta Reip. auctoritate c. whome he abuseth egregiously both in ascribing to him that which is not his and in deliuering the same corruptedly and by a little yow may learne much ex vngue leonem His wordes he citeth thus Rex humana creaturae est quia ab hominibus constituta and Englisheth in this manner A King is but a creature of mans creation where yow see first that in the translation he addeth but and mans creation of himself for that the Latin hath no such but nor creation but constitution Secondly these wordes are not the wordes of M. Reinoldes but only cited by him out of S. Peter and thirdly they are alleadged here by T. M. to a quite contrary sense from the whole discourse and meaning of the Author which was to exalte and magnify the authority of Princes as descending from God and not to debase the same as he is calumniated For proofe herof whosoeuer will looke vpon the booke and place it self before mentioned shal find that M. Reinolds purpose therin is to proue that albeit earthly principality power and authority be called by the Apostle humana creatura yet that it is originally from God by his commandement to be obeyed His wordes are these Hinc enim est c. hence is it that albeit the Apostle doe call all earthly principality a humaine creature for that it is placed in certaine men from the beginning by suffrages of the people yet election of Princes doth flow from the law of nature which God created and from the vse of reason which God powred into man and which is a little beame of diuine light drawne from that infinite brightnes of almighty God therefore doth the Apostle S. Paul pronounce that There is no power but from God and that he which resisteth this power resisteth God himselfe So M. Reinoldes 27. And now let the indifferent Reader iudge whether M. Reinoldes hath byn calumniated in this allegation or no whether this Minister is led by any rule of conscience and whether these be such pregnant arguments and proofes against vs as he promised at the first entrance of his booke And for the matter in hand he promised to proue as yow haue heard that we ascribed popular and Democraticall power to the people ouer Kings which how well he hath
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
disputeth Caluin though more cyuilly and cunningly about the same matter saying Non est cur vlla hominum authoritate vel annorum praescriptione c. There is no reason why we should suffer our selues to be drawne a side from the doctrine we teach by any authority of men or prescription of yeares Where yow see that he graunteth both antiquity of time and authority of the ancient Fathers to be against him in that controuersy of the Masse and Sacrifice And as we haue shewed the same in this article so might we in all the rest if time and place did permit but this is sufficient to proue in my opinion that the protestation of M. Iewell before mencyoned which so solemnly he made in the presence of almighty God was feigned and hypocriticall when he saith Not one father not one Doctor c. and then addeth for more asseueration when I say not one I speake not in vehemency of spirite or heate of talke but euen as before God by the way of simplicity and truth For if M. Iewell did know that this his maisters and elders Luther and Caluin were forced to reiect generally all the Fathers or the most parte of them for that they were against him for the sacrifice of the Masse then was it notable cosening Equiuocation to sweare protest before God in simplicity that no one did make for vs either in this or the rest of the articles 26. The fifth reason is for that we see by experience that all other English Protestant writers succeeding M. Iewell and being as it were his schollers and participating of his spirite sense and meaning began presently to reiect and cast of the Fathers vpon euery occasion wherin they were pressed by their authority as by the writings of Doctor Calshill Doctor Humfrey Fulke Charke VVhitakers and others is euident wherof I will alleadge only one example out of the last named in steed of all who being pressed with the consent of Fathers in a 〈◊〉 controuersy against him answered in this wise We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writinges that we take any certain proofe of Religion frō them because we place all our Faith and Religion not in humaine but in diuine Authority If therfore you bring vs what some one Father hath thought or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered the same except it be approued by testimonyes of scriptures auayleth nothing it gayneth nothing it conuinceth nothing For the Fathers are such witnesses as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses If deceyued by error they giue forth their testimony disagreeing from Scriptures albeit they may be pardoned erring for want of wisdome we cannot be pardoned if because they erred we also will erre with them So Doctor VVhitakers Where yow see what accompt he maketh of ancient Fathers and Doctors Patres etiam simul 〈◊〉 to vse his owne wordes yea all Fathers put togeather without proofe of Scripture to Authorize them it 〈◊〉 nothing saith he gayneth nothing it conuinceth nothing So as if M. Iewell had dealt plainly he might only haue called for Scripture at our hands and not so often for Fathers knowing by all probability aswell as his schollers that the Fathers were at least in many controuersyes against him and what Equiuocation then was this to call so often and earnestly for ancient Fathers yea some one place or sentence some two lines for wynning of the field was not this singuler and extraordinary yea hypocrisy and lying Equiuocation in the highest degree 27. The sixt reason is the consideration of his earnest exhorting of Catholickes to answere his Chalenge Now it standeth vpon yow saith he to proue but one affirmatiue against me and so to require my promise of subscribing And againe If yow of your parte would vouchsafe to bring but two lynes the whole matter were concluded And yet further Me thinketh both reason and humanity would that yow should answere somewhat especially being so often and so openly required c. VVhy be yow so loth being so earnestly required to shew forth but one Doctor of your side c. VVhat thinke you there is now iudged of you that being so long tyme required yet cannot be wonne to bring forth one sentence in your defence And yet againe more earnestly I protest before God bring me but one sufficient authority in the matters I haue required and afterward I will gently and quietly conferre with yow further at your pleasure And therfore for as much as it is Gods cause if yow meane simply deale simply betray not your right if yow may saue it with one word the people must needs muse at your silence for thinke not that any wise man will be so much your friend as in so weighty matters he will be satisfied with your said silence c. And not content with this he concludeth in these wordes of earnest exhortation Wherfore heere I leaue putting yow eft-somes gently in remembrance that being so often and so openly desired to shew forth one Doctor c. Yow haue brought nothing and that if yow stand so still it must needs be thought yow do it conscientia imbecillitatis for that there was nothing to be brought And heere once againe I conclude as before putting yow in remembrance that this long tyme I haue desired yow to bring forth some sufficient Authority for proofe of your party Thus farre M. Iewell 28. And would yow not thinke that this desire this intreaty this vrging and prouocation did proceed from a great confidence in his cause Truly if the confidence were not great the crafte and dissimulation was singuler but what ensued M. Doctor Harding and other learned men lying in Flanders being moued by zeale of Religion and prouokd by these insolent eggings began soone after to write bookes in answere of these challenges and to lay open the vntruthes and vanities therof which labours wrought so great effect with diuers of the discreeter sorte both Catholickes Protestants in England as M. Iewell thought it best to procure the publike prohibition of those bookes by the Magistrate for which he had so earnestly called before wherupō there were diligēt searches made to find out the same both in the vniuersities townes cittyes portes of the Realme as one that was then a searcher among others and a Protestant preacher in Oxford but conuerted afterward by these very reasons and by the vntruthes found in M. Iewell bookes doth testifie at large in an answere of his written to M. D. VVhitakers whose wordes I haue thought good to sett downe in this place For hauing refuted a speach of M. VVhitakers who pretended to be very glad that the Rhemes English Testament was abroad in many mens handes M. Reynolds writeth thus With like phrase saith he and character of shamelesse vaunting wrote M. Iewell to Doctor Harding saying VVe neuer suppressed any of your bookes M. Harding as