Selected quad for the lemma: judgement_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
judgement_n	world_n	writer_n	year_n	56	3	4.5280	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07805	The encounter against M. Parsons, by a revievv of his last sober reckoning, and his exceptions vrged in the treatise of his mitigation. Wherein moreouer is inserted: 1. A confession of some Romanists, both concerning the particular falsifications of principall Romanists, as namely, Bellarmine, Suarez, and others: as also concerning the generall fraude of that curch, in corrupting of authors. 2. A confutation of slaunders, which Bellarmine vrged against Protestants. 3. A performance of the challenge, which Mr. Parsons made, for the examining of sixtie Fathers, cited by Coccius for proofe of Purgatorie ... 4. A censure of a late pamphlet, intituled, The patterne of a Protestant, by one once termed the moderate answerer. 5. An handling of his question of mentall equiuocation (after his boldnesse with the L. Cooke) vpon occasion of the most memorable, and feyned Yorkeshire case of equiuocating; and of his raging against D. Kings sermon. Published by authoritie	Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659.	1610 (1610)	STC 18183; ESTC S112913	342,598	466

exceptions And ignorance of his owne booke § 2. Once againe Carerius ob and answered M. Parsons his open falshood § 3. Victoria ob and answered M. Parsons his grosse slander § 4. The Canon of Gratian Si Papa ob and answered Mr. Parsons his many idle impertinencies His great ignorance § 5. His Obiect against Sir Fr. Hastings about Dominum Deum Papam answered M. Parsons his blinde insolency or persidious hypocrisie § 6. Pope Leo ob concerning the Oath of Alleagiance and answered M. Parsons his cholericke answere therin his promise exacted His ignorance in constructions § 7. Sepulueda touching Equiuocation M. Parsons his wilfull salshood § 8. CAP. 3. The opinion of Setus concerning Mentall Equiuocation falsly and grossely abused by M. Parsons The question there discussed by examples § 1. Cunerus ob and answered M. Parsons his meere cauil § 2. Cassander ob and answered M. Parsons his idle and fond collusion His faithlesse dealing The name of Papist odious and yet glorious among the Romanists § 5. Royard ob and answered M. Parsons his excellent falshood And after that another notorious falsity § 4. Againe Cunerus ob and answered M. Parsons vnconscionably iniurious ibid. Sayr ob and answered M. Parsons snatcheth at wordes and pretermitteth materials § 5. CAP. 4. Cicero obiected in the point of Mental Equiuocation M. Parsons a watie gamster His misconstruction of Tully His excellent peece of craft He preiudiceth his conscience § 1. Barclay and Boucher ob and aunswered M. Parsons fine tricke of fraude His malitious falshood § 2. Againe Barclay ob and answered M. Parsons his shamelesse fraude § 3. CAP. 5. Heapes of vntruthes obiected and aunswered concerning Popes being Heretickes as Popes and therefore Deposed M. Parsons his marueylous peruersnes in reporting the iudgement of his Authors § 1. His notable guile and falshood His cunning A Romish mysterie § 2. CAP. 6. Conteyning a briefe Censure of a Pamphlet intituled The patterne of a Protestant who hath made himselfe a patterne of singular Arrogancy untruth ignorance and malice Adde heereunto his slaunderous vntruths when he plaid the Moderate Answerer cap 7. § 7. CAP. 7. M. Parsons obiecteth the omitting of the defence of some Protestants as of Caluine about Arianisme which is answered the obseruable testimonies which some Romanists giue of Caluine § 1. And of my L. Cooke § 1. and § 6. Omissions of M. Parsons in not defending his Clients Answere to manifolde Slanders § 3. His not defending the Popes Clergy-men subiect to Emperours Constantines Donation § 4. His neglecting the defence of the Moderate Answerer in his notorious Slanders § 5. An answere to his ob of fresh lies Therin his excellent fraude § 7. CAP. 8. His obiected Uaunts answered His Strangers Censure against T. M. requited His Iesuite 〈◊〉 censure iustly contemned § 1 The Challenges made against M. Parsons auouched and performed § 2. CAP. 9. M. Parsons his Appendix confuted His most memorable Yorkeshire-Case for Equiuocating finely malitiously and impudently forged As is manifestly prooued by many vncontrollable conuictions § 1. His fier edge against Doctor King abated by examples of Iesuiticall Equiuocators § 2. CAP. 10. A confutation of Mast. Parsons his defence of Mentall Reseruation from the speeches of Christ recorded in the 8. cap. of Saint John and first distinguishing betweene Verball and Mentall Equiuocation § 1. That in Generall the Scripture alloweth not Romish Reseruation § 2. The eight speeches of Christ taken out of the cap 8. Ioh obiected and satisfied § 3. Scriptures which M. Parsons ob in his Mitigation answered as Ioh. 1. 21. maith 9. 10. Ioh. 6. Esa. 〈◊〉 § 4. An olde ob in the Mitigation out of Ioh. 7. 8. I will not goe vpyet answered M. Parsons his grosse ignorance touching the state of the question § 5. CAP. 11. Against mentall Equiuocation prouing it to be a lie by the confessions of their owne Doctors by examples from Fathers Heretickes and Pagans § 1. Euidences of the impiety of it by Cases § 2. and by Effects ibid. His foule vntruth ibid. THE ENCOVNTER AGAINST Mr. PARSONS The first Booke CHAP. I. An Introduction to the Reueiw SECT I. 1. THis Encounter consisteth of these two parts the first is a Reueiw of Master Parsons his last Reckoning the second of such points as concerne his Treatise of Mitigation and the issue of them both will be God willing the reasonable performance of my former Challenge 2. And because the first part which is his Reckoning is spent especially about the charge and discharge of Falsifications which haue beene reciprocally obiected on both sides concerning matters of maine Consequence I thought it requisite to Encounter him first in these and in this Introduction and Entrance to repell his maine assault who hath made falsifying to be a substantiall distinctiue note of discerning betweene Protestants and his Catholicke writers and by some particular Instances to take away the fiery edge of his former presumption after that we haue seene that which followeth Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning in the behalfe of all Romish Writers BEcause this is a matter of great importance I mean to stay my self vpon this point and to shew that it is indeede a substantiall signe distinctiue betweene all Sectaries and vs at this time and that in matters of Controuersie our Writers shall neuer be found guiltie of these kinds of false iying and malicious Equiuocations where not only vntruth is vttered but it is willingly also vttered the Writer knowing that he writeth an vntruth which manner of dealing argueth two points the one that such a writer hath no conscience that vttereth that which God seeth to be false and falsly meant in his heart and the other that his cause hath no ground of substantiall truth which cannot be defended without such wilfull lies In this then if it please you insist a while and let Mr. Morton bring foorth in Print any Catholicke Author that wrote against Protestants since these heresies began that hath beene taken in this impietie I meane that hath set downe in Print any such falsitie as cannot be excused either by ignorance ouersight negligence error of Print translation diuersitie of Editions or the like but that it must needs be presumed that he knew the vntruth and yet would set it foorth of this kind I say let him shew me but one example among all Catholicke Writers of our time and I will in my Conscience greatly mistrust and discredite that Author whether it be an other or my selfe but if he shew me two or three in any Writer in this kind I shall be hardly able euer after to beleeue him more And whereas the number and varietie of Catholicke Writers is so great as the world seeth it were no great labour to shew it in some if that spirit doth raigne among them as it doth among Protestant Writers SECT II. The Reuiew yeelding diuers examples of Romish Falsificators euen by the iudgement of their owne Writers faithfully related The

forced as it were to say that which they neuer meant c. Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning THis now whether it be not such a wilfull and witting Lie as before I described for a formall malicious Lie such as the Writer did know to bee a Lie when he wrote it I am content to remit my selfe vnto any iudicious and ciuill Protestant in the world For if our owne Catholicke Doctors doe finde this in their owne iudgement how doe they beleeue Purgatorie to be true Why doe they not change their opinion and become Protestants Can M. Morlon answere any thing vnto this lewde and wilfull absurditie and did he not know that he lied when he writ this The Reuiew 16. What meaneth our Quiet Reckoner to reuell so turbulently Will he needes falsifie his owne title The Assertion which I made and which hee calleth a Formall malicious Lie is put vnto the triall in the next Chapter where it will be auouched to be an obseruable iust and incontrollable trueth The reason which hee opposed I shall now confute in this Section and compell him to repent his loose tearmes by an instance which will manifestly discouer a Romish malladie 17. The Doctrine of Indulgences hath beene of late put into their Romane Creede in their Councell of Trent by the Bull of Pope Paulus the fourth This their Doctors will beleeue albeit they confesse concerning Indulgences that There is not found any expresse sentence either in Scriptures or in the writings of Ancient fathers and that in the beginning of the Primitiuc Church there was no vse of them nor yet did they come in vse vntill the feare of a fierie Purgatorie had brought them out Who while they pleade for Indulgences doe it in this maner viz. Indulgences are not therefore to be contemned because the vse of them seemeth to haue beene but of late in the Church for many things are knowne by posteritie which the ancient writers were ignorant of Which we take to be a kind of cracke in their cause especially seeing that for want of better light of Antiquitie they are glad to collect an Antiquitie of them from the Stations vsed anciently at Rome Now what were these Stations Their Onuphrius doeth tell you The word saith he commeth of Stando standing because the people in their solemne Conuents did stand For the ancient Bishops of Rome vpon some set dayes especially in Lent and Holydayes did goe vnto diuers Churches of Rome where a Sermon was made vnto the people there standing and saying Prayers they did afterward communicate with the Clergie and people of Rome in the Diuine Sacraments In all which there is no sent of Romish Indulgences 18. Againe we find them obserue that Pope Boniface the eight about the yeere 1300. was the first who extended Indulgences vnto Purgatorie Which is the Indulgence wherevpon we dispute Besides they tell vs that the inuisible spirituall Treasurie of the Merits of Holy men is the Foundation of Indulgences Notwithstanding Maironis and Durand two of your principall Schoolemen euen of later times Doubted of the truth of such a Treasurie And lastly that some whom they call Catholickes iudged no otherwise of these kinde of Indulgences then of Godly deceits Heere we see more then a glimpse of that light which we professe acknowledged by your owne Doctors I must hereupon make bolde to demaund of Mr. Parsons why their Doctors hauing so great an apparance of the noueltie of this Article did notwithstanding still yeelde vnto the practise of their Church When he shall answere this then may he easily satisfie himselfe concerning his last demaund Master PARSONS his Reckoning BEllarmine hath alleaged ten seuerall testimonies out of the Scriptures of the old Testament with the expositions of the auncient Fathers vpon them which are confessed by Procestants to be Canonicall excepting the Maccabees and Toby which were notwithstanding Canonicall in S. Augustines time by the third Councell of Carthage in which himselfe was present And out of the new Testament he alleageth fiue other places with the expositions in like manner of the Fathers vpon them that vnderstood them to meane of Purgatory And will our owne Doctors say that these fifteene places are all tortured and forced against their meaning and all the Fathers expositions violated against their owne iudgement If our Doctors will say so they must be M. Mortons Doctors and not ours The Reuiewe 19. It is a thing superfluous Actum agere This which I say of the principall places of Canonicall Scriptures wherein your Doctors doe most insist I haue proued also from the meere literal Expositions of your owne Doctors to be inforced beyond compasse and want not a supply of like Answers vnto other Scriptures which haue beene omitted But I shall not need to insist vpon places of Scripture the rather because I am not so greatly prouoked by M. Parsons heereunto who hath reserued his maine violence for the tryall of Fathers 20. Yet notwithstanding one confession of Bellarmine may not be so easily let passe which hath not beene mentioned in my Appeale to wit Cùm nusquam in Scripturis fiat mentio ignis vbi apertè de Purgatorio agitur nihil dubium est qum Cyprianus ad hunc locum respexerit That is Seeing that in no place of Scripture where Purgatory is plainely handled any mention is made of fire it is not to be doubted but that S. Cyprian had respect vnto this place of Scripture to wit 1. Cor. 3. where it is written He shall be saued as it were by fire Which is a sufficient confession that there is not in any place of Scripture any mention of fire wherein there is any plaine proofe of Purgatory except in these fore-cyted wordes of 1. Cor. 3. And can he say that this onely place is plaine for Purgatory fire By no meanes for Bellarmine confesseth hereof that ancient Expositors doe not agree in the interpretation of fire in this place Some vnderstand by fire the Tribulations of this life some the eternall torments some the fire of the last day and some the Purgatory fire How shall our aduersaries presume of any plain place of Scripture for proofe of Purgatory-fire seeing that this their onely plaine place is thus obscured and perplexed with foure different Interpretations CHAP. XI The earnest challenge which M Parsons hath made that I should disannull the allegations of the testimonies of those Fathers whom Iodocus Coccius hath cyted for proofe of the Romish Purgatory SECT 1. Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning COccius produceth vpon the point of threescore Authours within the compasse of the first sixe hundred yeares that confirme the common faith of that Church in those dayes to haue held Purgatory and 〈◊〉 for the dead for Catholike doctrine and for the practise also of praying for the soules departed TO WHAT END DO YOU SAY THIS M. PARSONS To the end that T. M may haue somewhat to

c. That is That I may speake it saith he with the fauour of all good men Haec sola nouit as nè dicam haeresis That is This meere noueltie that I say not Heresie was not as yet sprung in the world that the Priests of him who saith vnto the King Apostata and who maketh the Hypocrite to Raigne for the sinnes of the people should teach Subiects that they owe no subiection vnto wicked Kings that albeit they haue taken an Oath of fidelitie vnto such an one yet they are not bound in Alleageance vnto him and that such as should take part against their Kings may not be said to be periured So he Barkley out of Otto Frisingensis defendeth that There is not found any example of deposing an Emperour of his State in any age before Gregorie the seuenth Which made their late Pope Paulus to acknowledge no violence vsed by any Pope vntill A thousand yeeres after Christ. At what time There were not wanting some saith Cardinall Cusanus yea euen among the Cardinals besides a Councell at Rome who defended Henry the Emperour from the Excommunication of Hildebrand 77. I forbeare to vrge the Epistles of the Priests of Leige which M. Parsons calleth a Passionate inuectiue against Pope Paschalis Lest it might driue the old man into passion Albeit whosoeuer shall Reade that Epistle hee shall find the commendation of Espencaeus to be most true who calleth it A complaint full of grauitie c. Hee might further haue added and of Religious pietie But Mr. Parsons hath not yet done with Espencaeus Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning YEt Espencaeus prooueth by sundry examples out of Scriptures Fathers and Councels that in some cases it is lawfull for Priests to vse Temporall Armes also The Reueiwe 78. It is true and amongst others he produceth the example of Dudechine a Priest who went to Warre against the Turke with Conrade the third and of Turpinus Bishop of Rhemes who warred vnder Charles the Great and of Delbodus who tooke Armes against the Sarracens vnder Henry the Emperour All these in their Warres stood with their Emperours none is found to haue caried Armes against their Emperours Therefore this obseruation which M. Parsons vseth seemeth very idle except it be to bewray his owne disposition whom their Priest hath noted to bee of A furious chollericke and passionate humour in desiring like a tall Souldier the vse of a Iacke and a Speare 79. By this Reckoning it appeareth that M. Parsons is become a fower-fold Debter First vnto the State by his Treasonable Doctrine in teaching an eradication of Princes Excommunicate Secondly to himselfe by a wilfull falsifying of the iudgement of Espencaeus Thirdly vnto me by foysting vpon me the related Historian Frisingensis instead of the Relator Tolossanus with a malicious purpose to proue me a falsifier Lastly to the cause it selfe in not acknowledging the noueltie of their new Doctrine of Deposing of Kings and Emperours Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning in censuring of Espencaeus CLaudius Espencaeus was a Parisian Doctor and a Writer of small account whom he calleth a Bishop but I neuer heard of his Bishoppricke The 〈◊〉 shewing the Eclipse of M. Parsons his iudgement in this censure 80. Mr. Parsons is fallen forth with Espencaeus and good reason for he saw right well that Espencaeus doeth in effect call the Doctrine of M. Parsons and his fellows Rebellious and therefore now must he be esteemed A writer but of small account Wherein our Reader may obserue what small account any man is to make of M. Parsons his iudgement who Reading Espencaeus doeth so greatly debase him especially seeing that their owne learned Authors haue affoorded him a better approbation For Espencaeus is called by Medina saith Cumel A most learned man whom Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe vseth to alleadge among your Doctors of account And Espencaeus himselfe can further assure vs with a protestation of trueth that when he was in possibilitie to bee chosen a Cardinall he thanked God that he missed it concluding with this Epiphonema Quid Romae faciam mentirinescio That is What shall I doe at Rome seeing I cannot lie Doe you heare this M. Parsons We know where your dwelling is and your Booke sheweth you in euery Page to bee truely Romish So hard a thing it is for you to tell a perfect trueth The last Charge will require a Chapter of it selfe CHAP. XIII Contayning the last charge of falsitie against M. Parsons about the iudgement of Romish Writers concerning Mentall Equiuocation conteyning a large Discourse hercof from their doctrine SECT I. First in generall 1. MAst Parsons his falsitie was the imputing vnto me an acknowledgement of the Vniuersall use of Mentall Equiuocation in the space of foure hundred yeares Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning FIrst I said no more in my Treatise then that Mr. Morton had manifestly set downe that for these last 400. yeares he graunted the lawfulnes of Equiuocation to haue bin taught in our Schools And consult saith he with the auncient Logicians from the beginning of the world till within the compasse os these last 400. yeares and lesse that euer any Logician did allow your mixt proposition partly mentall and partly verball and I will c. Out of which exception for these last 400 yeares it is euidently deduced that he granteth the vse of such mixt propositions which are properly Equiuocations whereof the one part is vttered the other reserued in mind as before hath beene declated And thereof I inferred further by euident consequence and sequell of reason though he specified not the same that for so much as our Catholicke Schooles were then ouer all Christendome and none publikely knowne or in vse but they for those three hundred or at least these foure it must needs follow that the same doctrine during that time was generally receiued in the said Schooles Vniuersities c. The Reuiew 2. Here is new Logique which Mast. Parsons hath sent vs from Rome ouer the Alpes to wit Mentall Equiuocation was not vsed before the last 400. yeares Ergo In the last 400. yeares it was vsed Uniuersally in all Uniuersities Chaires Schooles by al Diuines Casuists c. This he calleth an cuident deducement he should rather haue said an impotent Seducement for so it is and all one as to reason thus the Moone was not this yeare in the Eclipse before the last moneth Ergo it was in the Eclipse euery week euery day euery houre of the last moneth which is most ridiculous Ex nihilo nihil fit M. Parsons none can euer deduce an affirmatiue conclusion from a negatiue proposition be then ashamed of your Euidence And so may you be likewise of your next shift in telling vs that you did not seeme to perswade your Reader Expresly and by name that I graunted the generall vse of Mentall Aequiuocation in All Schooles Chaires Vniuersities Tribunals and the like for

viz. IF you haue seene how little able Mr. Morton hath beene to performe his promise before for wilfull falsities committed by any of our Writers hitherto much more shall you see now when leauing the multitude of other Authors he singleth out Cardinall Bellarmine alone to deale withall who as he hath written much so were it not maruell if in so many Bookes he should haue left some things whereupon his Aduersaries might probably wrangle But as for wilfull vntruthes it is so farre from his knowen and confessed integritie as Mr. Morton could neuer haue made choice of an vnfitter match for this point Nor can it be thought that he chose him vpon hope to find any such aduantage in him indeed but onely to honour himselfe by contending with such an Aduersarie and to cast some clouds at least in the minds of the simple sort vpon the shining beames of Cardinall Bellarmines estimation by obiecting the name of wilfull falsities vnto him But as when the said clouds are driuen away from the ayre the force of the Sunne is more sensibly felt So Cardi Bellarmines workes being cleared here from Mr. Mortons calumniations will be more highly esteemed by euery iudicious Reader as not lending any least true aduantage vnto any impugnation of the Aduersary And this is all the hurt that he is like to receiue by this Assault SECT III. The Reuiewe 12. I Shall desire Mr. Parsons to forbeare a while the examination of the exceptions which I haue taken against Cardinall Bellarmine vntill we come to discusse that point when it wil appeare how feeble a Boreas Mr. Parsons is in dispelling of clouds and for the present to haue so much patience as to vnderstand what how foggie a mist of insinceritie some Authors of their owne profession haue spied in the writings of this their Bellarmine whom Mr. Parsons preferreth for sinceritie before all others of his side His three Accusers 13. The first Accuser is Ioh. Marsilius who beginneth his defence against Bellarmine with prayer vnto God and to the blessed Virgine who mentioneth Bellarmine with all reuerend respect by the appellation of Most illustrious Lord who is authorized in this his aunswere vnder the publike approbation of the State of Venice The second is P. Paulus as select a Writer as Marsilius and equally approoued The third is Guil. Barclaius who yeeldeth vnto Bellarmine this dignifying Title of Most famous Cardinall and most learned Diuine in that booke which he Dedicated to Pope Clement 8. The exceptions that they take against Bellarmine are concerning one onely Controuetsie of his which is the defence of the Papall power in censuring of Temporail States Their Accusations 14. For his abuse of the testmonies of Schoolemen hee is thus noted He erreth saith Marsilius speaking of Bellarmine in expounding Thomas contrary to his meaning whose Catholick Doctrine in all matters of Diuinitie I doe professe He erreth in saying that the Author whom Bellarmine impugneth held that Christ was constrained by necessitie to pay tribute but the Author affirmeth the contrary to wit that Christ as the Sonne of God was not bound to pay tribute yet did it for auoyding of scandall He erreth in denying that Sotus did maruell at the Canonist viz. For saying that the Pope is the Lord of the whole world directly in temporall things For Sotus doth expresly name certaine Lawyers or Canonists and calleth their opinion in this point commentitious or fabulous complaining and maruelling that Syluester departed from the iudgement of Thomas yea and the same wordes of Sotus were read in the first Bookes of the Lo. Cardinall himselfe viz. Bellarmine which if he will not acknowledge it skilleth not for we finde in his viz. Bellarmines bookes sixe hundred alterations He erreth in saying that Nauarre writ that The Popes authoritie was not meerely temporall as though he had confessed the Popes authoritie to be temporall and accessorily spirituall but Nauar neuer writ this but held plainely the contrary Hee saith indeed that the Papall power may use naturall thinges which are instituted by Christ for supernatur all ends such as are water in Baptisme and money for Almes but doth he euer speake of I emporall power he neuer so much as dreamed hereof But it is no rare thing as we haue seene for his illustrious Lordship meaning Bellarmine to cite Authors for an opinion whereas they affirme the plaine contrary He erreth in saying absolutely that Sotus and Couarruvias affirmed that which they spake with condition viz. Ordinariè He abuseth the testimonie of Gerson saith the second Accuser noting that to haue bene spoken against the due reuerence vnto the Pope whereas contrarily he spake in fauour of the Pope 15. Let vs passe ouer their Schoole and come vnto the testimonies of Fathers and Councels wherunto the first Accuser Marsilius proceedeth saying of Bellarmine that He erreth in affirming that Chrysostome expounding that place of Paul Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect vnto the higher powers speaketh of power in generall as though hee did as well imply spirituall power as temporall according as Bellarmine himselfe doth interpret the text whereas S. Chrysostome speaketh plainely of Princes and Magistrates And because he namely Bellarmine bringeth no reason for his Answere it will not be amisse to demonstrate his errour by reasons for that which the Apostle calleth higher power Chrysostome interpreteth to be Princes and Magistrates who make politique lawes and who sustaine the burthen of the Common-wealth vnto whom the Apostle commaundeth men to pay tribute and which doth preoccupate all meanes of euasion Chrysostome sheweth that obedience vnto these powers is commaunded vnto Monkes or Priests yea although he were eyther Apostle Prophet or Euangelist Hee erreth in cyting falsly the place of S. Hierome who saith the plain contrary It grieueth me to see things imputed vnto holy Fathers the contrary whereof they affirme And hee offendeth also in cyting the place of S. Augustine Hee erreth in alleaging the Councell of Colen for that Councell determined nothing thereof but according to the Glosse c. Finally See good Reader saith their P. Paulus the cunning of this Author namely Bellarmine saying that the fift Romane Councell vnder Pope Symmachus did allow as her owne Decree that sentence of Eunodius Aliorum hominum causas c. whereas that sentence shall not be any where found to haue beene specially approued or so much as named in that Councell And Hee hath added of himselfe speaking of a Decree of a Councell of Laterane vnder Pope Alexander the third these wordes Quòd nullus sit in terris Papâ Superior That is Because there is none in earth Superiour vnto the Pope 16. Because a third witness is requisite for the better establishment of any Accusation we may admit the testimony of Barclaius in this cause who albeit he commends Bellarmine for his saithfulnesse in respect of the

times truth of matters set down by him And I doubt not but whosoeuer shall haue read the worke of Onuphrius and of Balbus here cyted in commendation of Platina will greatly preferre the iudgement of the first before the latter in matters of History The Reueiwe 14. Must then Onuphrius be suffered to crowde out Platina who is but a Commentator vpon Platina Or shal Onuphrius be the Historian whom you will acknowledge for authentical and whom you presume to be so Exact that he may not be reiected How is it then that your Baronius and Onuphrius can no better agree If Balbus his commendations of Platina beare no credite with you I will trie how Barklaius may preuaile he speaking of Platina saith Huic ego authori c. I will rather credite this Author Platina herein then any other Historians although they be more auncient because he writ his Historie at the commaund of Sixtus quartus and of other Popes Here Barcklauis preferreth Platina before others because of the Popes authority M. Parsons notwithstanding the Popes authority preferreth Onuphrius not that M. Parsons is lesse Papal but because he is more partial whensoeuer any witnesse doth contradict his conceit CHAP. X. Concerning Card. Bellarmine his false Allegations for proofe of Purgatory in discussing whereof the doctrine of Purgatory is discouered SECT I. The first charge concerning his cytation of Ambrose 1. WHereas hee professeth to bring in Apertissima loca that is Most euident places out of the Fathers for proofe of Purgatory-fire already described hee produceth such testimonies which by his owne consequence do not concerne the questioned Purgatorie as first alleaging Ambrose vppon the Psal. 118. Serm. 20. and yet Ambrose in that Psal. 118. saith All must passe thorow those flames whether Iohn or Peter onely Christ who is iustice it selfe shall auoyde them Of the which place of Ambrose Bellarmine saith Ambrose vnderstandeth not the fire of Purgatory but the fire of Gods iudgement Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning BEllarmine in the first place of Ambrose saying See Ambrose vpon ps 118. Serm. 20. signifieth that that Father hath something more for prouing Purgatory and in his second booke cyting the same Sermon of Ambrose vpon the place of Genesis God hath placed a sword of fire c. saith that it is rather to be vnderstood of the proouing fire of Gods iudgements What contradiction is this May there not be different sentences and senses in the same Sermon The Reuiewe 2. Yes there may but when as in examination of that Sermon of Saint Ambrose your selfe cannot finde any place which speaketh of any fire but that of Gods seuere iudgement which Bellarmine hath said is not the fire of Purgatoric you thereby confirme that which I haue said that Bellarmine cyted Ambrose in a sense different from his meaning SECT II. The second charge concerning his cytation of Hilarie 3. BEllarmine cyted Hilary in Psal 118. vppon these wordes Concupiuit anima c. We saith Hilary must vndergo that indefatigable fire in the which we must passe thorough the grieuous punishments of purging of soules This he Reckoned among his most plaine places for proofe of Purgatory-fire and notwithstanding else-where alleaging the same text saith of the Comment of Hilary that Hilary doth therein insinuate that the blessed Virgine ought to haue passed thorow the same fire adding a little after that He that is Hilary therein by Purgatory vnderstood not the fire of Purgatory Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning WHereunto is answered that both are conteyned in that Discourse of Hilary both the proouing fire of Gods iudgements after death and the purging fire of Gods iustice The Reuiew 4. You should haue answered for the same place of Hilary which was obiected otherwise if you shal labor to prooue that Bellarmine meant that both these fires were vnderstood in that one place where he himselfe confesseth that the fire of Purgatory is not vnderstood this would be as haplesse a worke as if you had sought by contradicting Bellarmine to free Bellarmine from contradiction SECT III. The charge of many false Allegations together 5. YEt againe among his manifest places for Purgatory he alleageth Origen Basil Lactantius Hierome Ambrose all which are acknowledged expresly by Sixtus Senensis from the euidence of the contexts to haue spoken onely of the fire of the day of iudgement and consequently as Bellarmine hath taught vs Not of the fire of Purgatory Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning I Would demaund of M. Morton why we should ascribe more vnto the iudgement of Senensis in censuring these places of the Fathers then vnto other learned that thinke the contrary They are all acknowledged saith M. Morton expresly by Sixtus Senensis from the euidence of their contexts to haue spoken onely of the fire of the day of iudgement and consequently not of Purgatory This is now properly to helpe a Die indeed for that Senensis doth not talke of any such euidence of the contexts but speaketh rather doubtfully and by coniecture saying of Origen that his opinion that both good and bad should be purged by fire is confuted by S. Augustine in his bookes de Ciust Dei but yet for excusing the same from errour he saith Tu vide an Origenis verba interpretari queant de igne vltime conflagrationis Doe thou Reader consider whether the words of Origen may be interpreted of the fire of the last conflagration or not so as he did not expresly acknowledge from the euidence of the contexts as M Mortons shifting and lying words are that these authorities must needes be vnderstood of the last combustion of the world but rather leaueth it as vncertaine to be considered by the Reader The Reuiew 6. I said indeed that Senensis by the euidence of contexts acknowledged the testimonies alleaged to haue spoken of the fire of the day of iudgment and consequently according vnto Bellarmines doctrine not of the fire of Purgatory This you call Shifting Lying and helpint the Die but the perfect Cogger will presently appeare For first I alleaged diuers testimonies which might haue licensed me in a generalitie to say by the euidence of contexts seeing that M. Parsons could take exception but onely to one 7. And the truth is that I cyted Senensis his Biblioth l. 5. Annot. 171. who writeth thus Ambrose seemeth to agree with Origen who saith that all Christ onely excepted must be tried and in a sort burnt in the fire of the conflagration of Gods iudgement Where Senensis expresly affirmeth what his iudgment is concerning the sentence of Origen To confure this M. Parsons setcheth a skip out of Senensis Annot. 171. backeward vnto his Annot. 170. where Senesis saith of Origen Vide an c. O confuter Origen spake of a fire thorow which Apostles Martyrs and euery one Except Christ must passe So that this could not bee the Romish Purgatory-fire for neither

Parsons charge against me about the same matter 61. In the second part I am chargeable to answere Mast. Parsons who asketh that seeing Tolossanus said that Gregory the seuenth was the first who excommunicated and depriued an Emperour of his Regiment why I alleadged the word Depriued onely and left out Excommunicated I readily answered that it was because the question Satisfact 3. c. 11. was onely concerning Emperours and kings who had beene deposed from their gouernements by Popes and not who had been excommunicated And for so answering am called to a new Reckoning Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning YEa Sit thinke you to escape so and yet know that deposition of Princes is an effect of Excommunication and can neuer happen by Ecclesiasticall authoritie but where Excommunication is gone before The Reueiwe 62. Yes Sir I may lawfully answere So. For although Excommunication goe before deposition and Eradication yet was it lawfull for me to intreat of Deposition without mentioning any precedent Excommunication For if being asked how many theeues were hanged at Tiburne the last weeke I had truely answered fiue forthwith some captious Constable should quarrell with me saying Yea Sir dare you say so will you tell vs that any were hanged without mentioning that first they were condemned for condemnation goeth before execution Euen so childishly hath Mast. Parsons cauilled in earnest who still holdeth on his pace Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning AND I would aske M. Morton in good earnest out of his Diuinity when a Christian Prince is lawfully Excommunicated and shut out from all societie of Christian communion and he persist impenitent how can he be head of a Christian Common-wealth for so much as he is no member nor hath any place or part at all in the whole body the head-ship being the chiefe part of all others A Reuiew discouering the rebellious humour of Mr. Parsons 63. If Mastr Parsons had not asked me in earnest I might haue taken him to haue beene but in iest but now by this his serious demaund our Christian Reader will easily perceiue that he hath cast Diuinity in a new mould for a King by his doctrine cannot be Excommunicated but forthwith hee must as it were be be-headed and remoued from his Kingdom we now haue found out the whole portrayture of M. Parsons body by his finger which writeth and teachethth at A King persisting in Excommunication may bee no more a King among Christians No King or Queene or Prince or Counsellour or Iudge or Magistrate being excommunicate may by Mast. Parsons censure haue any communion among Christians but must be rooted out Behold our Romish Mitigator Behold our Sober Reckoner Doth not this smell strongly of fire and Gun-powder whensoeuer opportunity shal serue for the performance of such their exploits 64. But to answere directly to the question moued by M. Parsons not from his owne doubt but for his Readers delusion because otherwise hee could not be ignorant that their Arch-Priest M. Blackwell had answered that point to the full shewing first out of Soto from Medina that Excommunication is not a priuation of any proper good which the transgresser doth possesse but of the common good which he was to receme from the Church as namely the spirituall communion with them and the participation of Sacraments 65. Secondly he alleadgeth Ludouicus Richeome a Iesuite saying that Excommunication is not thundred against Princes that they should be remoued out of their Dominions or that the raines should be loosed vnto subiects or they be freed from the Oath of fidelity 66. Thirdly he adioyneth the testimony of Aquinas saying Aliud est Excommunicatio aliud Eradicatio Which saith M. Bl. is set down in the Canon law of an Epistle of Pope Vrbane thus Liquidò c. that is It doth plainely appeare that Excommunication is one thing and eradication is another for he which is excommunicate as the Apostle saith to this end is excommunicated that his soule may bee saued in the day of the Lord for Excommunication is a correction and no extirpation 67. Finally the holy Scripture speaking of the Excommunicate saith Let him be vnto thee as a Publicane and an Ethnicke I demand then was there no Magistracy acknowledged in Ethnickes by Christians in the dayes of the Emperour Iulian the Apostata or shall not Christian children or wiues acknowledge naturall duety vnto their Parents and husbands as vnto their Heads if they being excommunicate shall proue contumacious Grace doth not extinguish nature but perfect it And this may briefly serue for an Answere vnto your irrelegious and rebellious demaund which hath beene exactly confuted by your owne Doctors Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning ANd Tolossanus here alleadged by Mr. Morton produceth in another example both of Excommunication and of deposition aboue an hundred yeares before this of Frisingensis saying Anteà quidem Gregorius tertius c. Before this Gregory the third beeing made Pope vpon the yeare 759 did depriue Leo the third Emperour of Constantinople both of his Empire and the communion of Christians for that he had cast holy Images out of the Church and defaced them and held a wicked opinion against the blessed Trinity And that Tolossanus in this saith truth is testified also by Zonaras a Greeke Historiographer in the life of the said Emperour Leo Jsauricus The Reueiwe 68. Tolossanus in another booke reporteth this and Zonaras testifieth this Ergo by Mr. Parsons his consequence it must be True which argueth his owne inconsideration and rashnesse because first the matter is not so true but that their owne Barkley durst iudge it incredible and secondly their witnesse Zonaras seemeth to their Baronius to be so insufficient in reporting the behauiour of this Pope Gregory towards the Emperour Leo that he reiecteth him as a man Ignorant of the affaires of the Latine Church and one who in Malice against the Church of Rome doth obiect that the Pope was the cause of the rent of the Empire in the West Thus farre Card. Baronius which sheweth how little we are to regard M. Parsons his iudgement who respecteth not so much how rightly as how readily hee may shape vs an Answere And that Gregory the seuenth called Hildebrand was the first Pope who set the Emperours at such defiance it will now further appeare SECT XIIII An Inquiry into the iudgement of Espencaeus concerning the case of Pope Hildebrand 69. THE last point which is to be inquired into is whether the Authour Espencaeus did not accord vnto the same iudgement concerning Gregory the seuenth who to yeelde vnto M. Parsons computation was Pope about the yeare 1066. to thinke that he was the first Pope that did depose an Emperour The summe of Mr. PARSONS his Reckoning obiecting fraude vnto his Aduersary ESpencaeus heere is handled iniuriously and fraudulently for that these wordes against the Pope are not the wordes of Espencaeus himselfe but related of him