any Doctrines preiudiciall vnto Princes be singular vnto Iesuits that is held by the consent of Iesuits and by Iesuits only why do you not name these opinions what they are Why do you dwell vpon generalyties according to the custome of cosening Companions Dolosus versatur in Generalibus Why but because you know that descending vnto particulars your falshood would presently be displaied Hence you talke in the ayre and in effect thus you discourse I know there be certayne opinions mayntayned singularly by Iesuits agaynst Royall Soueraignety what they are I doe not know For they be written in bookes as inuisible as was our Church before Luther no where to be found but in the Globe of the Moone and are no wayes to be read but by the light therof The opinion for which some Catholicks at whome you glance as appeares by your margent haue taxed Iesuits of singularity is that God hath assured Prescience of thinges contingent not only of which shall in time actually happen but also of what vpon suppositions which neuer were might haue beene For example God knoweth certaynly whether these conditionall propositions be true or false If King Henry the eight had neuer seene Anne Bullen England had been Catholicke at this day If Queene Mary of Scotland had fled into France whē she came into England shee had recouered her Kingdome agaynst the Rebells If the miracles Christ did in Iewry had been done in Tyrus and Sidon those Cityes would haue done pennance This doctrine some Deuines mislike and say the same was first inuented by Iesuits Which if it be true then haue Protestants done Iesuits wronge that relate this very doctrine of Gods conditionall Prescience as the doctrine of their Reformed Gospell Field of the Church l. 3. c. 23. pag. 122. But I pray you what is this to your Scope The doctrine that God knowes the state of things conditionally contingent what makes it agaynst the Soueraignty of Princes Do you not see you are ridiculous Secondly If Iesuits be not singular in their doctrines to the depression of Kings wherefore was Iesuit Suarez his Booke contra sectam Anglicanam condemned at Paris in France and burnt by the hand of the Hang-man Answere I likewise demand of you if Iesuit Suarez his booke be preiudiciall to Princely authority why is the same allowed in all other Catholicke kingdoms so as the King by his sollicitations could not get the same to be condemned Do not other kingdomes know the Catholike Extent of Royall Authority zealously mantaining the Soueraignty therof How can that doctrin be singular of Iesuits vnto which Bishops secular Doctours and Religious of other Orders haue set their names by way of Approbation as is to be seene in the beginning of that Treatise And if your Argument be good Iesuit Suarez his booke was in France burnt by the hand of the Hangman Ergo the Order of the Iesuits holds doctrine to the preiudice of Princes surely this Argument is strong and vnanswerable Minister Paraeus his booke was in London publickly burnt by the hand of the Hangman by Order of the Kinge wherein no Papist had his hand Ergo the Protestant Ministry holds doctrines pernicious vnto the State of Princes The third Argument Wherefore were Iesuits banished out of the Dominions of the Venetians professing the Roman Fayth if they are guilty of no singularity about the matter of Regall and Ciuill Authority Answere Why are Iesuits permitted desired and sought for by all other Catholick Kingdomes and States of the world if they be guilty of singularity agaynst Regall and Ciuil Authority Should one dispute in this sort Wherefore was Chrysostome Socrat. l. 6. c. 26. alij banished out of the Catholicke Citty of Constantinople by the Catholicke Emperour Arcadius at the instance of the Catholicke Empresse in a Councell of Catholicke Bishops but that he was guilty of treason agaynst Royall Authority What would a learned Answerer say He would laugh at the Disputants folly and tell him that Kings and States may be put into displeasure and Passion against the Ministers of Gods holy Word so banish them their Dominions not only for singularity agaynst Ciuill Authority but for other reasons as for their ouer zealous inueighing agaynst vitious life constant crossing of their disordinate humours I could bring many examples of iust holy men banished by Catholicks yea by pious and godly Kings and States vpon mistakings suspitions false informations S. Athanasius that mirrour of sanctity learning vnto whome the Church of God is more beholding then to the whole world which then liued besides was he not for suspitions about temporall Affayres banished by Constantine the Great the first Christian Emperour the patterne of Religious Princes Ruffin l. 1. c. 17. God permits such trialls to fall on his Seruants for the exercise of their Patience vntill time discouer the truth which being sufficiently cleered if men still remayne obdurate his Iustice will not sleepe The fourth Argument Mariana the Iesuits worke de Institutione Principis wherin he maintayneth Regicide is extant in many hands Answere The example of Mariana proueth not that Iesuits hold singular opinions agaynst others but only that Mariana was singular agaynst the rest of his Order which through the ouersight of Reuisors passed to the print A thinge that may sometymes happen which to preuent the Generall of the Iesuits gaue that seuere Order about reuiewing of Bookes in that kind which the Iesuit hath set downe in his Answere That Iesuit Mariana was singular agaynst the rest appeares in that he was confuted by name of some of his own Order for this doctrine euen before the censure of Paris See the letter of Cotton And if you will allow agaynst the common Prouerbe One swallow makes not a Summer that the errour of one be sufficient be condemne a whole Society then the Minister Paraeus his Worke wherein he mantaynes Deposition and Regicide must make all Ministers guilty specially seing not one of them wrote agaynst Paraeus his booke before the same was publickely burnt in London Nor was Mariana his doctrine in the behalfe of the Popes as you oftē ignorantly suppose but of the Commōwealths Power agaynst Tyrants A Doctrine which Iesuits condemne but Protestants commonly follow I could name twenty of their Authours that peremptorily affirme what Mariana did only doubtingly propose yea much more For do not Protestants teach See the booke of Dangerous positions lib. 1. c. 4. l. 2. c. 1. That Iudges ought by the law of God so summon Princes before them for their crimes and to proceed agaynst them as agaynst all other offenders That it is lawfull to kill wicked Kings and Tyrants That God to the people hath giuen the sword from which no person King Queen Emperour is exempt Being an Idolater he must dy the death An hundred the like Theorems of your Gospell and Gospellers could I alleadge to stop your mouth the opinion which Mariana did doubtfully insinuate being farre short of
Hispan l. 8. c. 10. Marian. de reb Hisp. l. 11. c. 14 15. Mahometans in a battayle with Alphonsus King of Castile surnamed the Noble hauing the better of the day the Christian Army being almost put to flight the Arch-deacon of Toledo full of Christian courage hauing in his hands the Ensigne of the Crosse which he carryed before his Arch-bishop wherein also was the image of the Blessed Virgin went therwith through the thickest of the Enemyes without being hurt though innumerable Lances Darts were cast and Arrowes shot at him By his example the Christian Army encouraged retourning with new fortitude to the Battayne put the Saracens to flight made massacre of them who were so many as the Lances Darts Arrowes left behind theÌ„ in the field could not be consumed with the many mighty fires made two dayes togeather aswell in token of ioy as for other vses More ancient no lesse wonderfull is the Victory gotten agaâ—nst the same Infidells by Raymirus King of Leon and Galicia He Ambros. Moral all other Historians hauing gathered togeather all the forces of his Kingdomes agaynst these Mahometan Vsurpers being defeated was brought to great distresse sadnes As he rested in the night S. Iames appeared vnto him telling him that Christ had peculiarly committed Spayne to his Tuition that he should not feare but trusting in God the next day present the Field to the Infidells for himselfe would be in the fight The King did as the holy Apostle ordayned who according to his promise was seen in the Field vpon a white horse with a Red Crosse on his breast running vpon the Mahometans and putting them to flight Vnto Vide diploma Regis apud Ioan. Marian. in lib. de S. Iacobi in Hispaniam aduentu in fine which Victory not only the King in his Charter with many Bishops Nobles of his Realme as eye-witnesses giue record but euen the Mahometan Historyes make mention thereof If I add vnto these forrayne Historyes our domesticall Victoryes I should be ouer long yet cannot I pretermit to touch one example in euery Line and Nation of our Kings Amongst the Britans none more famous then Prince Arthur nor is any of his Victories more certayne then that recorded by Beda lib. 1. c. 20. histor Henricus Hâ—ntâ—ng Râ—nulph Venerable Bede though without mention of him The Picts and Saxons associating their forces and inuading the Britans with a most dreadfull Army the Priests of the Britans holy S. German Bishop being Prince of the Quire by singing Alleluia other Church-prayers strooke such a dismall fright into the harts of the Infidells that abandoning their weapons and armour they ranne away with all possible hast the miracle of Iosue Iosue c. 6. his victory being renewed when the walls of Iericho fell to the ground at the sound of the Sacerdotall Trumpets whereby also the Catholike Doctrine was authorized that Church-prayers in a language not vulgarly vnderstood may be pleasing and effectuall with God In the Line of our Saxon Kings who for the fighting of many battayles for the obtayning of renowned Victoryes more admired then King Alfrede Which Asser. Meneu in vita Alured Polidor l â— Guâ—â—el Malmes alij Victoryes so many and so great he wonne by his deuotion vnto Saints particularly by the assistance of Saint Cuthbert who appearing to the King encouraged him vnto that famous Battayle whereby the forces of the vsurping Infidells were in a manner wholly extinguished After the Conquest to say nothing of the Conquerour himselfe whose vast and Valiant Enterprize was made fortunate by a Consecrated Standart Ingulph Matt. Westmon alij sent him by Pope Alexander the second I will only name King Henry the fifth the mirrour of Kinges in whome was summed togeather the whole perfection of all Catholike Military and Politike Worthynes On the one side who more renowned for Victoryes theÌ„ this Conquerour of France which in the space of few yeares he broght in a manner wholly vnder his Obedience On the other who more Memorable for his Obedience to the Roman Sea for his Reuerence of Catholike Priesthood for his care and respect of Churches for his zeale agaynst the VVickliffian Heresy for his dayly deuout Inuocation of Saints for his going barefoote in pilgrimage vnto Churches Titus Liuius de vita Henrici Thomas Walsing Enguerant Stow and others Two Monasteryes he built from the foundations opposite the one to the other vpon the bankes of the Thames that tearmed Bethleem for Religious men this Syon for consecrated Virgins which should day and night without intermission pray for the happy Successe of his Warres in France He Nicol. Harpesfield Hist. Eccles. Anglic. saecul 15. cap. 3. spent and commanded his Army to spend the night before the famous Battayle of Agincourt in Prayer in Inuocation of Saints in making their confession vnto Priests in doing pennance for their sinnes and in the morning before the battayle euery one by his order put a piece of Earth to his mouth to testify his desire had there beene oportunity to haue receaued the sacred Communion in one kind as both the token did signify and then was the practise So that the Diuine Prouidence graunting so glorious a Victory vnto so few agaynst Walsingham writes the French were an huÌ„dred forty thousand the English not aboue ten thousand so many made as it were Proclamation vnto the world that these now questioned Roman Deuotions are acceptable vnto him In the Hectoâ— Boethius Histor Scot. fol. 196. Bucan Histor. Scot. fol. 48. Annalls of Scotland we reade that Guthran King of the Danes in Baptisme tearmed Athelstan hauing subdued a good part of England inuaded Scotland His army was so puissant as therewith he inuironed Hungus King of the Picts and Alpinius Prince of Scotland with their forces that came agaynst him denouncing vnto them by one that had a loud and shrill voyce that not one of them should escape aliue The King Hungus after long prayer vnto God and S. Andrew being asleep the sayd Apostle appeared vnto him bad him fight the next day with confidence in God his ayde The battayle was fought Crux decussata Saint Andrewes Crosse appearing ouer the Scottish Army the field wonne against the Danes Athelstan slayne therein S. Andrew confirmed Patron of Scotland his Crosse made their Ensigne a famous Church built in his Honour to the vse whereof and mantaynance of Chanons therin the King applyed the tenth part of DecimaÌ„ Regiorum praediorum partem his Royall Patrimony The Greatest Battayle that Scottishmen euer wonne without doubt is that of Striueling agaynst our Edward the second The Scottish Historyes say this Kings Army did coÌ„sist of an hundred fifty thousand horse and of as many foote And though this may seeme great exaggeration yet our Thomas de la More in vita Edwardi 2. NumquaÌ„ magis spleÌ„didus nobilis superbus Anglorum exercitus visus Stow anno Domini 1313. pag. 333. English Annalls testify that neuer
c. mother who falling into the hands of your Religion you held her so fast you griped her so hard as you droue the breath out of her body made her Sacred bloud run about her Annoynted Shoulders The Roman Religion in opposite hath giuen her by your paynting a Vizard and is made to stand treading vpon Crownes and Scepters to signify that she is by doctrine and practise a Deposer Contemner of Kings This Fancy would indeed be a Truth could you proue that Wickliffe Luther Caluin Beza Knox Buchanam Wittingham Goodman the like (b) See Bancroft Danger Posit VVhit l. 1. c. 4. l. 2. c 1. ProtestaÌ„ts Apolog. â—reface were Roman Catholikes Or could you shew that they were Papists of whom (c) Beza Ep. Theolog. 68. Beza sayth putting himselfe in the number What Churches should we now haue in the world had not this course been held to wit of erecting Churches by force of Armes in despite (*) ProtestaÌ„ts haue murdered fiue Catholik Kings or Princes They haue deposed Nine from their Kingdomes wholly or in part They haue set vp their ReligioÌ„ at the least in fourty towns by force of Armes expelling the Magistrates murthering Priests Religious Persons breaking downe Images and burning Churches They haue byn at the least twenty seueral times in the field against their Catholik Soueraygnes six or seauen times against their soueraygnes that were preseÌ„t in persoÌ„ All which may be proued by the testimony of Protestants if the margeÌ„t did permit Read Bancrofts Dangerous positioÌ„s Osianders Epitom Histor. Centur. 16. the â—rotestaÌ„ts Apolog. Preface of Princes and Magistrats So plainly doth he acknowledge your Churches to haue been euery where planted by treading vnder foote the CoÌ„mands Edicts the Swords Gouernments the Crownes and Scepters of Kings The fourth opposition The Protestant Gentlewoman holdeth a pillar vnder her left Arme with a bough of palme in the same hand whereas the Roman hath on her left hand a Camelion sitting Your meaning is that you forsooth are stronge Constant in your Religion but we weake wauering ready to change for feare of persecution Your Constancy indeed is knowne that you are in your doctrines as immutable as the Moone In what point of Religion saith (d) Andraeas Duditius See Epist. Theol. Bezae epist. 1. 3. an emineÌ„t Protestant be they that impugne the Roman Bishop firme and constant They COYNE MONETHLY FAITHS they are carryed away with the wind of euery doctrine What their ReligioÌ„ is to day one may know but what it will be to morrow neyther themselues nor any mortall man can tell And whereas you make this your Gossippe to haue on her left side the pillar of Religion on her right the Crowne could any thing be more fit to expresse your Church of England For in her Religion Kings haue the better vpper hand of God the Apostolicall sentence We must rather obey God theÌ„ men is turned backward her Doctrine is mutable with the Princes pleasure that she may be better resembled by a Weather-cocke theÌ„ by a Pillar For what constaÌ„cy can she haue that preferrs a Temporall Crowne before Christian Truthâ— The fifth Opposition betweene these two Women is in respect of the Tytles that are set ouer their heades yours being tearmed Veritas Vniuoca and ours Mendacium Aequiuocum Veritas vniuoca being in English Verity taught by the professours thereof with one voyce with vniforme consent I thinke the Reader will smile at your good Inuention that you could find no truer Tytle for your Gospell For what more notorious to the world then that your reformed Professours are Vniuocall in the doctrine they preach as diuine truth euen as the builders of Babel were Vniuocall in language after the diuision of their toÌ„gues Vnto the Roman ReligioÌ„ which doth detest lying about any the least thing which coÌ„demnes Equiuocall Ambiguous speach in the affayre of Religion in matters of Bargayne in familiarity of (e) See the Treatise tending to Mitigation Speach why doe you tearme her Mendacium Aequiuocum Vpon no other ground but in regard she teacheth that a Christian to defend his life and goods from the Tyranny of Oppressours may sometymes vse ambiguous and reserued speach A practise expressely allowed in Scripture as (f) Gregor in exposit l. 1. Reg. c. 16. His verbis ostenditur quòd Tyrannorum saeuitia atque versutia quandoque est PIA FRAVDE deludenda sic tamen Tyranni deludendi sunt vt caueatur culpa mendacii Quod tuÌ„c bene perficitur cùm illud quod fit asseritur sed quod fit sic dicitur vt celetur quia ex parte dicitur ex parte reticetur sayth S. Gregory The Scripture sheweth that the crafty cruelty of Tyrants is sometymes to be deluded by PIOVS FRAVD so sauing our selues from their malice that we tell not a Lye which then is well performed wheÌ„ what is done is affirmed yet so affirmed as what is done is also coÌ„cealed the thing being vttered in part and in part not vttered but retayned in mind I hope I haue cleerly discouered the falshood inanity of your Frontispiciall Emblemes and Pageants which occasioned my setting this Picture before the Reioynder the rather also to make your Image perfect and complete in the Entrance of both our â—ookes put togeather that the Reader may behold in the one the Out-side in the other the In-side of your Venerable Selfe If Caluin (g) Caluin lib. de scandalis sayd true of Ministers Praeclarum quidem zelum simulant they can make an excellent fayre shew of Zeale I will not deny but your Paynters curious hand hath elegantly set forth your Out-side For he hath paynted in your Face a fayre shew of Zeale of Modesty of Wisdome of Grauity specially in your demure looke Veluet cap and gray Beard so combed and handsomely composed as your Wife may seeme to haue had her fingar in the trimming thereof aswell as in the setting of your Ruffe But quid si intus excutias What if we looke into the In-side Heere your Paynters Pensill fayled him which defect some body perchance your selfe vndertooke to supply with his Poeticall Quil setting these verses vnder your Picture and the Picture of your Booke wearing a Crowne Wisdome Grace see in that modest looke Truth 's Triumph Errours downfall in this Booke But this is not liuely paynting of your In-side to the eye but only Verball Assertion of your hidden Worth to the eare which if one will reiect as the fabulous coÌ„ceyt of a Poet what can be replyed Or if you be Author of the Verses your selfe some perhaps will attribute these prayses not vnto Truth but vnto your Fawning with ouer-fauourable Fancyes vpon your owne Learning Triumphing before the Victory and vsurping a Crowne without right What then shall I doe how may I set forth the true vndeniable figure of your In-side Your (h) Reply pag. â—74 selfe say
â—f his spirit inwardly mouing the heart of man to â—dhere vnto an infallible externall ground of assurance proposed vnto him God by the helpe of his grace making him apprehend diuinely of the authority thereof This second manner of inward assurance is ordinarily giuen vnto euery ChristiaÌ„ without (r) Triden sess 6. Can. 3. Arausican 2. Can. 6. which no man is able to belieue supernaturally and as he ought vnto Saluation The first manner of assurance is extraordinary and immediate reuelation such as the Prophets had Wherfore Protestants if they callenge this first manner of inward teaching assurance they approue Enthusiasme immediat reuelatioÌ„ which in the Swenkfeldians they seeme to condemne If they challenge only the second manner of inward teaching and assurance then besides inward light they must assigne an externall sufficieÌ„t ground why they belieue these Scriptures to be the Apostles then I aske what ground this is besides Tradition Secondly they wil obiect that though they haue no infallible ground besides the teaching of the Spirit yet they are not taught immediatly in Propheticall maÌ„ner because they are also taught by an external probable motiue to wit the Churches tradition I Answere that except they assigne an externall infallible meanes besides Gods inward teaching they cannot auoyde but they challenge immediate reuelation For whosoeuer knoweth thinges assuredly by the inward teaching of the spirit without an external infallible motiue vnto which he doth adhere is assured prophetically though he haue some externall probable motiues so to thinke S. Peter had some coniecturall signes of Simon Magus his peruersity incorrigible malice yet seing (s) Act. 8.32 In felle amaritudinis obligatione peccati video te esse he knew it assuredly we belieue he knew it by the light of prophesy because besides inward assurance he had no externall infallible ground If one see a man giue publickly almes though he perceaue probable tokeÌ„s signes that he doth it out of a Vayne-glorious intention yet cannot he be sure therof but by the light of immediat reuelation because the other tokens are not grounds sufficient to make him sure For if a man be sure haue no ground of this assurance in any thinge out of his owne hart it is cleere that he is assured immediatly only by Gods inward speaking Wherfore ProtestaÌ„ts if they will disclayme in truth and not in wordes only from immediate reuelation and teaching they must eyther grant tradition to be infallible or else assigne some externall infallible ground besides Tradition whereby they are taught what Scriptures the Apostles deliuered Thirdly they will say they know the Scriptures to be from the Apostles by an externall infallible ground besides Tradition to wit by certayne lights lustres euidences of truth which they see to blaze emane from the thinges reuealed in Scripture by which they are sure that the doctrin thereof is heauenly I Answere If they did see such lustres and lights that cleerly not only probably conuince the doctrine of Scripture to be heauenly truth they be not indeed assured by immediate darke reuelation but by an higher degree of heauenly knowledge to wit by the supernaturall light and euidence of the thinge belieued which is a paradox and pretence farre more false and sensibly absurd then is the challenge of immediate reuelation or Enthusiasme as hath beene shewed Wherefore seing that God hath chosen no externall meanes besides Catholicke Tradition to make men know perpetually vntill the consummation of the world what doctrins Scriptures the Apostles published it is cleere vnto euery Christian that this is the meanes by him chosen which he doth assist that it cannot be obnoxious vnto errour so that precedently and independently of Scripture the Catholicke tradition of Christian pastors fathers is proued to be infallible through Diuine speciall assistance and therefore a sufficient ground for Fayths infallible assurance The Fourth Principle proued §. 6. IF we be resolued that sauing truth is that which God reuealed that he reuealed that which the Apostles published the doctrine published by then the Catholicke Christian Tradition our search is ended when we haue found the Christian Catholicke Church Heere the fourth Enemy of true Christian Religion offers himselfe to wit the Willfull Ignorant These kind of men not only hold agaynst Pagans the doctrine of saluation to be that only which was reuealed of God agaynst Iewes the reuealed of God to be only the Apostles but also in wordes they condemne the Heretikes professe that no doctrine is truly Apostolicall but the Catholick yet in resoluing what doctrin is the Catholicke they follow the partiality of their affections These are tearmed by (t) De vtil cred c. 1. S. Augustine Credentes haereticorum Belieuers of Heretikes building vpon the seeming learning and sanctity of some men being therein so willfull as to venture their soules that such doctrine is Catholike not caring nor knowing what they say nor what the word Catholicke put into the Creed by the Apostles doth import Some be so ignorant as to thinke that the word Catholicke doth signify the same as conforme vnto Scripture And so what doctrine is Catholicke they resolue by the light and lustre of the doctrine or by the in ward teaching of the spirit whereby they fall vpon the principle of Heresy and become not so much belieuers of Heretikes as Heretikes Some vnderstand by the word Catholicke Doctrine truly Catholicke that is deliuered froÌ„ the Apostles by Christian worlds of Fathers vnto Christian worlds of children yet are so blind as to giue this Title vnto Sects lately sprung vp which through pretended singular Illuminations gotten by perusing the Scripture haue chosen formes of fayth opposite one agaynst another reformed agaynst the forme to them deliuered by their Ancestors These Sects I say they tearme Catholicke which not to be Catholicke in this sense is as euident as that night is not day Some through willfull ignorance no lesse grossely deuide the name of Catholicke according to the diuision of Countryes naming the Catholicke doctrin of the Church of France of the Church of England c. Which speach hath no more sense then this A fashion euer since Christ vniuersally ouer the world newly begun and proper vnto England Agaynst this Enemy true Religion is resolued in this fourth principle The Catholicke Tradition of doctrine from the Apostles is the Roman By Roman we vnderstand not only the Religion professed within the Citty Diocesse of Rome but ouer the whole world by them that any where acknowledg the primacy of Peter and his successours which now is the Roman Bishop About this principle fayth is assured by a fourth perfection belonging vnto God as he is prime Verity reuealing truth which is that he cannot permit that the knowing of sauing doctrine be impossible Hence I argue God being Prime Verity reuealing cannot permit the meanes of knowing his sauing truth to be hidden nor a false meanes to
the first place For as Protestants acknowledge the particular examination of doctrines is tedious and long not for the capacity of all whereas the finding out of the true Church endeth all controuersyes seeing we may securely follow her directions and rest in her Iudgement Field Epist. dedicat Secondly what more idle and vayne then to appeale from Scripture setting downe matters cleerly vnto Scripture teaching thinges obscurely or not so cleerly what is this but to appeale from light to darkenes or at the least from noone day to twy-light But no particular point of doctrin is in holy Scripture so manifestly set down as is the Church the marks whereby the same may be knowne no matter about which the Scripturs are more copious and cleere then about visibility perpetuity amplitude the Church was to haue so that as S. Augustine sayth Scriptures are more cleere about the Church then euen about Christ. in Psalm 30. concion 2. That Scripture in this poynt is so cleere that by no shift of false interpretation it can be auoyded the impudency of any forhead that will stand agaynst this euidence is confounded de vnit Eccles. c. 5. That it is prodigious blindnes not to see which is the true Church Tract 1. in 1. Epist. Ioan. That the Church is the tabernacle placed in the Sunne that it cannot be hidden vnto any but such as shut their eyes against it l. 2. cont Petilian c. 32. What vanity then is it for Protestants not being able to cleere by Scripture the cleerest of all points to appeale vnto the prouing of their doctrine by more darke or lesse euident places Thirdly if no man can directly know which be the Scriptures the Apostles deliuered but by the Tradition of the Catholike Church then it is vayne before they decide this controuersy to vndertake to proue by Scriptures what doctrine the Apostles taught For how can Scripture make me know what the Apostles taught vnlesse I know aforehand the Scriptures to be the Apostles I may see this or that doctrine deliuered in the Scripture shewed me as the Apostles but I cannot know that doctrin to be the Apostles except I know aforehand the booke to be the Apostles but this cannot be proued but by the Tradition of the Church I omit many other arguments wherby this shift may be conuinced to be but flying from the light of Gods word about the visible Church For as sayth Saint Augustine l. 1. contra Crescon cap. 33. God would haue his Church to be described in Scripture without any ambiguity as cleere as the beames of the Sunne that the controuersy about the true Church being cleerly decided when questions about particular doctrines that are obscure arise we might fly to her and rest in her iudgement that this visibility is a manifest signe wherby euen the rude and ignorant may discerne the true Church from the false Augustine l. 13. cont Faust. c. 13. must eyther be the Roman or the Protestant or some other opposite vnto both Protestants cannot say a Church opposite vnto both for then they should be condemned in their owne Iudgement and bound to conforme themselues to that Church which can be no other but the Grecian a Church holding almost as many if not more doctrines which Protestāts dislike thē doth the Church of Rome as I can demonstrate if need be It is also most manifest vndenyable that Protestants are not such nor part of such a Church since their Reuolt and separation from the Romane seing confessedly they changed their doctrines they once held forsooke the body wherof they were members brake off from the stocke of that tree wherof they were branches Neyther did they depart from the Roman ioyne themselues with any Church professing their particular doctrines dissonant from it Ergo the Roman is the one holy Catholike Apostolicall Church The second Argument THIS also plainly will appeare to any man of vnderstanding that will cast on the Roman Church an vnpartiall eye For she is most euidently Apostolicall hauing most glorious successiō of Bishops Pastours famous in all (x) The Minister p. 116. lin 9. sayth that it is incōsequent to inferre negatiuely from humane history to say historyes are silent therfore no such matter I answere Hēce one may feele euen with his hand what an vnconsequent and absurd Religion theirs is which cannot stand without denying principles euident in common reason receaued by consent of mankind for who doth not feele that to argue from humane history thus negatiuely they are silent Therfore there neuer was any such matter is many times conuincing and strong This some Protestants more iudicious then our Minister acknowledge who thus write It is most playne that euen negatiuely an argument from humane authority may be strong as namely this The Chronicles of England mention no more then only six Kings bearing the name of Edward since the tyme of the last Cōquest therfore it cannot be there should be more It is true men are ignorant many things may escape them they may be deceaued they may conceale truth or vtter vntruth out of malice they may forget what they know Howbeit INFINITE CASES are wherin all these impediments are so MANIFESTLY excluded as there is no shew or colour wherby any such exception may be taken Thus M. Hooker Eccles. Policy pag. 115. 116. Now amongst these cases wherein the negatiue argument from Tradition and history is strong the chiefest is when the matter is famous and illustrious and there is a line and succession of chiefe Bishops Princes Persons notoriously knowne euen to the particularityes of their names actions dayes of their raygne and death Wherfore it is idle what the Minister pag. 230. brings agaynst this that we know not who was the first that eate mans flesh nor when the Assyrian matrons did first prostitute themselues in the temple of Venus For no wonder we know not such things seing we haue not a lineall history of these times as we haue of other times specially since the comming of Christ. For lineall history concerning illustrious matters is both affirmatiuely negatiuely strong yea more strong negatiuely then affirmatiuely The reason is because it is not so impossible that men with full report should vent an vntruth as that they should be by full cōsent silent about a most illustrious truth men being in such cases more prone to report then to conceale For example should one contest that some of our Kings since the Conquest set vp Images in al Churches of England the Country being before that tyme pure Protestant might not such an impudent writer be conuinced of madnes by negatiue history And why But because there is a most notorious line of our Kings since the last Conquest and their names actions dayes of their raygne and deathes most famously knowne In the same manner there being a line of Popes so conspicuously knowne as nothing more from Peter vnto Vrban they eight what
him to the imagination as if he were corporally present be holy and adored for his sake holy Where note that the obligation to take the Arke as an Image of God sitting vpon it is a positiue ordinance the Arke not binding men so to do of his owne nature not being a proper Image of God yet this positiue institution supposed the Law of nature binds men to worship adore the Arke with reference vnto the holy adored person imagined as sitting theron The fourth Argument With this Principle so receiued in nature we must ioyne another nolesse knowne and notorious in Christianity to wit that God full of all honour and glory to whom all adoration worship is due became truely and verily Man as visible and aspectable as any other man and consequently as Imaginable that he may be figured by an Image no lesse truly and distinctly then another man In which Image the hands feete other parts shall truly by Imagination correspond to the feete hands and parts of the prototype and our Imagination from it passe directly and immediatly vnto Christ and his parts proportionable to those we behold in the Image so that when we adore with an humble outward kisse of hands and feete the Image by inward Imagination Conceite and Affection we kisse adore the Imagined true hands and feet of Christ. Neither are these Imaginations false and erroneous seing as Philosophy teacheth no falshood is in meere apprehension or Imagination without iudging the thing to be as we Imagine As in contemplation men represent and imagine themselues as standing before Gods throne in the Court of heauen amidst the quires of Saints and Angels praising honouring him in their society not iudging themselues to be truly and really in heauen that were a falshood dotage but only apprehending in theÌ„selues such a presence and behauing themselues outwardly and inwardly in prayer as if they were present To which kind of Imaginations as pious and goodly the Scriptures and Fathers exhort vs. In this sort beholding the Image of Christ we apprehend (h) The Minister obiects pa. 223. lin 16. one may imagin the sunne or a lambe to be the figure of Christ conceaue them as his Image and yet it is not lawfull by one and the same affection to worship these Creatures with their Creatour I Answere This hath bene refuted already For these creatures be but types and figures of our Sauiour which types and figures haue no right in nature with out positiue institution to bind mens Imaginations to conceaue by them our Sauiour as if he were present nor consequently to Imagine what is done vnto them is done vnto him But the proper Images of our Sauiour haue right in nature to bind mans Imaginations to conceaue our Sauiour in his Image as present in this sort Wherfore he that will not conforme his Imagination to this pious institute of Nature but will thinke he may deface the proper Image of his Lord without iniury to his person doth by that defacing commit impiety towards Christ his Imaginations not hauing that rectitude towards so great a Lord as naturall piety doth exact For piety towardes our Lord requires of man that his Imaginations be respectiue of euery thing that hath by consent of men right of reference towards him him as therin present not iudging the Image to be Christ but imagining and taking it as if it were Christ. That when we outwardly honour the Image by kissing the hands feet therof mentally by imagination and humble affection of reuerence we adore and kisse the most venerable hands and feet of his pretious body The fifth Argument The Historyes of Christian Antiquity are full of holy Men Bishops Kings Queenes and other honourable Personages who haue cast themselues downe on the ground before Beggars Lazars and leapers kissing their feet and their soares out of reuerent affection vnto Christ. In which kind memorable is the charity of the famous Queene Matildes daughter of Edgar King of Scotland and wife to Henry the first of England whose custome was to wash with her owne hands the feet of poore people amongst whom were Leapers and such as had loathsome diseases not disdaining with great Reuerence on her knees to kisse their feet with her princely lips And when as the Prince of Scotland her brother being then in the Court of England entring into her chaÌ„ber found her imployed in so humble seruice astonished thereat rebuked her saying Sister what do you can you with those your defiled lips kisse the king your husband She answered Know brother that the feet of the King of heauen are more louely and venerable then are the lips of an Earthly king Certainly this Queene with all other addicted to the like deuotion when they kissed the feet of the poore outwardly with their lips did by Imagination full of reuerent affection kisse the feete of Christ Iesus taking the poore as Images of (i) The Minister answereth this argument with a demand pag. 225. lin 26. Where I pray you hath our Sauiour sayd of Images of wood and stone nay of Puppets and pranked Babyes what yee doe to one of these my least ones yee doe vnto me as he sayd of the poore I answere That the images of our Lord stand for our Lord so that what is done by way of honour or dishonour vnto them is to be taken as done vnto him is euident in the light of nature not only to learned men but eueÌ„ to women children and none deny it but such in whome Passion agaynst truth hinders the right vse of common Reason Hence there was no neede that this truth should be expressely set downe in the Scripture though the Scripture in some of her discourses doth intrinseÌ„cally suppose the same for the testimony whereof we haue already spoken Adore the footestoole of his feete because he is holy doth suppose that wâ—at represents God vnto the imagination as if he were visibly present is to be worshipped for his sake On the other side that what is done vnto poore beggars and lazars by way of reliefe and comfort is to be taken as done vnto Christ as he was once poore and needy for our sakes vpon earth is not euident in the light of reason nor can be knowne but by diuine Reuelation Hence it was conuenient that the same should be often and expressely set downe in Scripture for the comfort and encouragement of Christians the more to inflame them vnto Charitable workes Where we may obserue that the Word of God only sayth that what is done to the poore by way of comfort and reliefe is done vnto Christ not what is done by way of honour and yet Christian Charitable people haue not only releeued but also reuerenced these poore people in respect of this their reference vnto Christ. And how this But by grounding themselues vpon this principle euident in the light of nature Whatsoeuer is done by way of honor to the image of
Christ Iesus that is vnto the thing which represents him vnto imagination as if he were visibly present is to be taken as done to his very person Wherefore seing the poore by the ordinance of Gods word stand for our Sauiour and are his images so that when we see them poore and needy we must imagine we see him poore and needy hence it is consequent that what is done vnto them not only by way of releefe but also by way of reuerence is done vnto our Sauiour and so they may be worshipped for his sake As for the title of puppets and pranked Babyes if the Minister thinke it a fine phrase he may keep it to adorne therewith his owne Brats him who said What you do to one of my least ones you do it vnto me Matth. 25. v. 40. Out of this the common Obiection of Protestants to wit that the worship of Christs Image is no where found in Scripture and therfore it is a Will-worship may be answered For as themselues confesse see D. Field l. 4. c. 14. many actions belong to Religion wherof there is no expresse precept nor any practise in Scripture which proue the lawfulnes and necessity therof There is no expresse precept in Scripture to christen Infants nor is it there read that euer any were Christened yet because there be Testimonyes which ioined with reason proue the lawfulnes necessity of this Baptisme we may must vse it In Scripture there is no expresse practise nor precept of worshiping the Image of Christ yet there be principles which the light of nature supposed conuince such Adoration to be lawfull necessary The sixt Argument Christ being true God full of honour to whom all supreme Adoration is due doth and must needes make honourable and adorable any thing that representeth him that is which must be taken by Imagination as if it were his person But supposing God to be truly Man as faith teacheth the light of nature sheweth that his Image truly representeth him that is makes him present to the imagination of the beholders therof and stands for him Ergo Christ Iesus his Image is for his sake Venerable Adorable as a thing standing for him in such sort that the honour done outwardly to it is done and ought to be taken as done by deuout pious imagination to his person Whence further is concluded the necessity of this worship For God Incarnate being most venerable and full of glory requires of a Christian that that which stāds for him represēt◠him be honoured (k) This Argument is grounded vpon this Principle of Scripture that all kind of honour worship is due to the man Christ Iesus which can be due vnto any other man whom we are bound to respect But vnto other persons whom we are bound to respect we owe reuerence in their Images more or lesse according to their dignity And this duty is double the one negatiue neuer to disgrace their Images the other affirmatiue which is actually to exhibite honour vnto their Images whē otherwise the deniall therof will be taken as irreuerence cōtempt towards them Therfore to the Image of Christ we owe this double duty of honor negatiue neuer to disgrace it positiue to reuerence the same outwardly when otherwise the neglect of reuerence to his Image is and ought to be taken as want of due reuerēce to his person adored for his sake The Seauenth Argument If the honour due to a King be so great that the same redoundes from his person to things about him as to his Chayre of state which is honoured with the like bowing and kneeling that is vsed to his person to his Image vnto which whosoeuer offreth iniury is punishable as offring iniury to the king himselfe Shall not the honour due to Christ Iesus infinitely greater so flow out of his person vnto things that belonge and concerne him as to make his (l) The Minister pag. 228. sayth this similitude halteth because the kinges Chayre of state his image whē it is honored or dishonored are conioyned with his person by ciuil ordinance and relation I Answere This is a manifest falshood for what law is in England that euery image of the king is to be taken as his person in respect of honour There is no such law written with pen and inke but only the law of nature written by the fingar of the Creatour in mens harts and obserued vniuersally in all nations by custome that the proper image of a person is in respect of honour dishonour to be taken as the person Image Crosse and such holy Monuments of his Passion and Life Venerable for his sake and to be adored with bowing kneeling and other exteriour honour as would be vsed to his person were he visibly present not so that the worship rest in the Image but be referred by imagination and affection to the person imagined But the Image of Christ being a true representation of God incarnate able to conuey our Imagination directly truely towards him corresponding very particularly vnto the parts of his sacred person hath a right in reason nature which cannot be taken from it to represent him and to stand in our imagination for him Wherfore the Image of Christ hath a right which without impiety cannot be denyed vnto it to be honoured and outwardly adored for his sake by kneelings bowings imbracings kissings referred in mind by deuout thoughts and affections to his person The eight Argument And this right is a (m) The Minister here is hoat and demands pag. 230. lin 8. Hath a dead picture or worme-eatē statue greater dignity then the liuely Images of Christ to wit the saints that are on earth and excell in vertue I Answere that no yet the Image of Christ hath a dignity which no other dumbe dead and senseles Creature of which the Answerer heere speakes can haue to wit to represent our Sauiour according to his true or proper humaine shape Whēce it hath a right in nature to stand by imagination for our Sauiour and to bind vs that our actions towards it be not respectles dignity which an Image of Christ hath aboue other creatures who though they be referred vnto God as vnto their Authour yet God may not be honoured in them in that manner as Christ is honoured in his Image The reason is because creatures represent God their Authour so rudely remotely darkly imperfectly that onely spirituall men and (n) Note agaynst the Ministers cauilling that God may be two wayes knowne by visible creatures First only abstractiuely to wit that he is and hath many diuine perfectiōs In this māner Heathen Philosophers who were not perfect contemplants did by creatures know God Secondly in a kind of intuitiue and contemplatiue manner which is when presently vpon the sight of a creature we are moued with reuerence towards the Creatour as if we saw him present therin This presence of God perfect
sinne nor to take men out of the power of darkenes nor to iustify soules by infusion of grace nor to purchase for men Crownes of glory nor to rayse men from life to death But only they are auaylable vnto one transitory effect which men might were they feruent obtayne by their owne industry ioyned with diuine grace to wit the Remission of temporall payne which vertue also comes from the meritts of Christ and his most pretious bloud in and by the satisfactions of Saints applyed to worke the aforesayd temporall releasement from which temporall seruitude the Children of God may through his gracious assistance by good works redeeme themselues or by satisfactions of their fellow-Cittyzens Saints be redeemed though this temporary Redemption compared with the redemption of Christ deserues not that tytle THE NINTH POINT The opiniō of deposing Kings giuing avvay their Kingdoms by Papall povver vvhether directly or indirectly THIS Controuersy was not handled by the Iesuite for the Reasons deliuered in the Preface nor is there any new cause giuen to speake in confirmation of our doctrine the Minister not hauing brought agaynst the same any Argumēt His whole drift in this Point is to slaunder Iesuits to cauill sicophantize which being his naturall Talent now ready to conclude he is more sharpe therin as Motion according to Nature is still more vehement towardes the end I will set downe and briefly examine what he saith reducing all to fiue Assaults in which the Reader shall see his Boldnes in vttering and Weakenes in prouing the most odious slaunders that may be vented by splene and malice The Ministers fond Cauill That Iesuites honour not the King as Soueraygne FIRST wheras the Iesuit sayth Regall Papall be two powers instituted of God both soueraygne and supreme ech in his kind both Venerable and Honoured by me in the inmost affections of soule after the triuiall trish-trash of a thousand tymes confuted obiections agaynst the Popes spirituall Supremacy thus you write pag. 570. in fine Your Protestation that you honour Regall and Papall Dignity must be vnderstood Iesuitically with mentall limitation to wit that you honour the Pope as an earthly God yea so farre as that if he lead you to Hell yea are ready to follow him distinct 40. can Si Papa But you honour the King as the Popes Vassall Matth. Paris in Henr. 3. pag. 844. Nonne Rex Anglorum noster est Vassallus This is your first Assault so strong as if bold slaundering and idle arguing may winne the field the day must be yours You lay two crimes to the Iesuits charge First that he is ready to obey and follow the Pope though the Pope lead him to Hell Can any Censure be more vnchristian The Iesuits suffering persecution for his Religion may conuince any reasonable man that he is not so desperate as to runne for any mans pleasure wittingly to Hell nor were he so mad is he such a foole as to goe thither disgraced and persecuted with the Pope Were he so minded he would rather go agaynst his conscience to please the King whereby he might perchance get a Deanery or some rich Benefice and so goe to Hell with Wife Children Seruants worldly Contents merily as you doe But what strong reason haue you to iudge so strangely of the Iesuit Marry The Canon Si Papa d. 40. sayth If the Pope by being of bad life negligent in his office drawe thousands to hell yet let no man presume to correct him to wit iuridically by deposing him except also he do deuiate from the Fayth This is the Canon which supposed your discourse hath this force and forme The Iesuit receaues the Canon Si Papa But the Canon Si Papa sayth the Pope not being an Heretike may not be deposed for scandalous life though he lead by his example thousands to hell Ergo the Iesuit is ready to follow and obey the Pope though he lead him to Hell It is hard to say whether your iudging be more voyd of Charity or your arguing of Reason I perceaue if we feare your censuring we must not mantayne that the King is not to be deposed for scandalous life though he lead thousands to Hell For if we doe you will thence conclude that we are desperate and ready to follow and obey the King though he lead vs to hell So wise a disputant and Censurer you are But let vs heare your second crimination and your proofe thereof The Iesuit sayth I honour Regall Power as in his kind Supreme and Soueraigne that is say you as the Popes Vassall A goodly Comment vpon the Iesuits Text what warrant haue you so to expound Forsooth Matthew Paris writes that Pope Innocent the third sayd of our King Henry the third Is not the King of England our Vassall What is this to the Iesuit Is he bound to belieue euery tale of Matthew Paris his writing Though had you any skil in Histories you might know that the Pope sayd so of that King not because he thought that Kings be by diuine Institution his Vassals in temporall Affayres but because that King had done vnto him voluntary Homage for his Kingdome For this Henry the third was Son of our King Iohn who gaue his Kingdome in vassalladge vnto this Pope Innocent to protect the same from the incursion of the French as he did Hence at his Coronation being thē in his Non-age sayth Matthew Paris fecit homagium Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Innocentio Papae he did homage to the holy Romā Church and vnto Pope Innocent After ward comming to riper age in the 29. yeare of his Raigne he sent an Embassadge of foure Noble men togeather with his Attourney William Powicke to the Councell of Lyons and vnto Pope Innocent the 4. to contradict the sayd donation of his Father alleadging many reasons sayth Walsingam Ypodigm Neust. Anno 1245. that the King could not make his Realme Vassall vnto any without the full consent thereof The Pope answered Rem indigere morosa consideratione so the matter rested Now I pray you consider how fond far fetcht your Discourse is Pope Innocent as Matthew Paris reports foure hundred yeares agoe sayd of a King that had done voluntary homage vnto him He is our Vassall Ergo the Iesuit doth not honour the King as Soueraigne in his kind Or Ergo his saying I honour the King as Soueraigne is to be vnderstood as the Popes Vassall The Minister his fond proofes of his Slaunder that Iesuits hold singular Opinions to the preiudice of Kings YOVR second Assault is to proue that Iesuits hold peculiar opinions preiudiciall vnto Regall authority which no other Catholicks but themselues mantayne This you proue by six Arguments so seely and fond as no man would haue mentioned them to this purpose but only your selfe First Iesuits say you pag. 573. are taxed and censured by many of their owne Part for singularity of opinions This is your Argumēt in so many words I pray you if
opinion with Pope Hilbebrand and Boniface the eight with Baronius Bosius Aluarus Pelagius with Augustinus ab Ancona with Panormitan yea and with the Deuill himselfe Answere It is very hard for any sort of men to sticke closer to the Deuill then you of Luthers generation seeing this your Sire sayth of himselfe Noctu Diabolus mihi accubare solet propior etiam quà m mea Catharina The Diuell lyes with me in the night neerer vnto me thē euen my Kate. Colloq de lege Euangel fol. 124. vel 158. Your selues write of him Lutherus à Diabolo doctus institutus Missam abrogauit Luther taught and instructed by the Diuell did abrogate the Masse Hospin Histor. Sacram. part Altera fol. 131. Which History of his conuersion from the Masse by Diuellish Arguments the same Luther hath written Luther Tom. 7. Wittemb An. 1558. de Missa priuata c. fol. 228. euen with his owne Protestant holy hand wherewith also as himselfe doth testify he did eate more then a bushell of salt with this his Familiar Luther Conc. in Domin Reminiscere Wittemberg impress An. 1523. fol. 19. So that it is small discretion in you to scoffe at vs about closing in opinion with the Diuell I adde that the Reader may see your iests to be still as sottish as they are splenefull if it be true as it is most true that Damones credunt contremiscunt Iacob 2.19 Diuels belieue the truth and tremble it is no fault to close in opinion with the Diuell but to close with the Diuell in lying as you doe euen in this place For Gregory the 7. and Boniface the 8. teach not that Popes haue Tēporall dominion or Soueraingty ouer the whole world but only the power of the keyes in which Authority is inuolued to vnloose all earthly bands contrary vnto the Saluation of Soules The Ministers miserable Apology for Protestants YOVR fourth Assault is agaynst the Iesuits saying The Catholicke doctrine is not so preiudicial vnto States as is the Protestant held both by Lutherans and Caluinists expressed in their writings wherof we haue in this age but ouer euident and lamentable examples to the World and your Maiesty not vnknowne Thus you write pag. 577. Is the wit of a Iesuit growne so barren Haue you no other euasion but by recrimination and that impertinent For as concerning your Flim-flam of Protestants both Lutherans and Caluinists I Answere His Maiesty hath obserued by longe experience that it cannot enter into any true Protestants hart vpon any occasion whatsoeuer to lift vp their heads against the Lords Annointed Thus you Where I might say with S. Augustine O stultitia hominis cogitare se dictorem neminem contradictorem O the folly of a man to say what he will neuer thinking he shall be gaynsayd and heare what he would not For did you thinke men would ponder your sayings and gaynsay them finding them false could you speake such palpable vntruths as you doe A true harted Protestāt cannot lift vp his head agaynst the Lords Annoynted vpon any occasion whatsoeuer Marke the CANNOT of the Protestant Impeccability They were wont to teach they could not keepe so much as one of the Diuine Commandements now they are so holy as a thought cannot enter into their hart to lift vp their heads agaynst the Diuine Precept of Honouring the Lords Annoynted In Logicke as a patterne of a ridiculous Answerer they bring this example as if one should say De possibili nego de facto concedo I deny the thing to be possible yet I grant it to haue been done I see no remedy but you must be forced to this Answere For that a true harted Protestant vpon any occasion whatsoeuer lift vp his head agaynst the Lords Annoynted you say is not possible yet I hope you be not so impudent agaynst the knowledge of mankind but you will confesse that they haue often lifted vp their head◠and hands agaynst their Soueraignes the proper miracle of your Gospel to done thinges that cannot be done I pray you they that first planted the Gospell in Scotland the Ministers of England in the dayes of Queen Elizabeth were they not true-harted Protestāts Was not the Kings mother the Lords Annoynted by byrth-right a Soueraigne Princesse Did you not lift vp your heads agaynst her I cry you mercy you did not lift vp you heads against her but your axe agaynst her head hauing first lifted vp your hands your armes your swordes to depriue her of her Crowne to cast her from her Kingdome Looke vpon all Countryes of Europe where Protestants liue vnder Catholicke Princes if you find one Nation or Prouince of them that within these last seauen yeares hath not been in open Rebellion agaynst their Catholicke Soueraignes I will grant you the Question that you Protestants are impeccable that bad thoughts can not enter into your harts But the King hath had long experience that at least the Protestants of England will not lift vp their heads agaynst the Lords Annoynted vpon any occasion whatsoeuer I pray you what experience hath his Maiesty had that in the occasion he should depriue you of your Deaneryes take from you the Church-vsurped Liuings put you in prison set vp a Religion that would not endure wiuing-preachers what experience I say longe or short great or little hath his Maiesty had that in this the like occasions you will not rebell lift vp your heads hands swordes agaynst him yea if you be able lay the axe on his necke as you did on his Mothers When you seemed to haue some little cause of iealousy that his Maiesty might grant some Conniuency vnto Catholickes was not there a Minister found that in pulpit did publickly preach that in Case the King should turne Papist Ministers may depose him But alas A Iesuits wit you say is growne very barren he hath no other euasion but this Flim-flam about the Rebellious Spirit and doctrine of Protestants No other euasion Yea he hath otherwise confuted your false calumniations and cleerly layd open your idle Arguments And the doctrine taught by Protestants that the people hath the sword from which the King is not exempt If he be wicked he must dye the death That Iudges ought to call Kinges to the Barre proceed agaynst them for ordinary Crimes as much as agaynst other malefactours That the people maketh Kings and may agayne vnking them at their pleasure as easely as a man recalls his letters of Proxy These doctrins I say be they Flim-flams nothing pertinent vnto Kings I perceaue you would haue Kinges sleep in security and not feare your attempts that so if they anger you you may do with their Heades as Iahel did with the head of sleeping Sisera Iudic. c. 4. The Ministers Cauill agaynst the Iesuits speciall Vow of Obedience to the Pope YOVR fifth and last Assault is an often repeated Calumniation that Iesuits cannot be Loyall vnto Kings because they are bound by speciall Vow vnto Popes Hence to