mislike But if this proue not so and that the matters refused in the Oath are poyntes appertayning in deed to Religion then I hope that by answering fully this poynt we shall satisfy also the second why it was not needfull for the Pope to set downe any particuler confutation in his Breues but only to say as he doth in generall that The integrity of Catholicke Religion permitteth them not to take such an Oath in which both Cyuill and Ecclesiasticall poynts are couched and conioyned craftily togeather with no small preiudice of the said Catholicke Religion XXII And how theÌ„ shall we cleare this importaÌ„t matter VVhether there be any pointes in this Oath belonging to religion besydes Cyuill Obedience Very easily by foure seuerall and distinct wayes The first wherof shall be taken from the playne expresse wordes sense and drift of the Oath it selfe That besydes the acknowledgment of our Soueraigne to be true King and rightfull Lord ouer all his dominions and that I will be a true loyall Subiect vnto him and other such like clauses wherat no man sticketh or maketh difficulty the said Oath conteyneth further that I must sweare in like manner some poyntes concerning the limitation of the Popes authority to wit what he cannot do towards his Ma. tie or his Successours in any case whatsoeuer Which question being brought from the particuler Hypothesis to the generall Thesis concerning all Kings for the like reason is also in others both in the one the other it toucheth a poynt of doctryne and Catholicke beliefe concerning the sufficiency of Pastorall authority left by our Sauiour in his Church vnto S. Peter and his successours for redressing of all inconuenieÌ„ces that may fall out which I being a Catholicke cannot in my Conscience forâ—weare without perill of euerlasting damnation And this is one way of cleering the question XXIII An other is to looke vpon the Popes wordes in his Breues wherby will appeare what his meaning was of the contents of the Oath Wee haue heard saith he how yow are compelled by most grieuous punishments set before yow to go to the Churches of Heretickes to frequent their Assemblyes to be present at their Sermons c. Wherby we are moued by the Zeale of our Pastorall Office and by the Paternall sollicitude which we haue for the saluatioÌ„ of your soules to warne pray yow in no sorte to go to the said Churches nor to heare their Sermons nor to coÌ„municate with them in any externall rytes least yow do incurre the wrath of God therby For that it is not lawfull for yow to do these things without detriment of Gods seruice and of your owne saluation as also yow may not without most euident and grieuous iniury of Gods honour bynd your selfe with the Oath which in like manner to our great griefe we haue heard to be administred vnto yow of the tenour vnder written c. And then after the whole forme of the Oath set downe he writeth thus VVhich things being so it ought to be cleere vnto yow by the wordes themselues that such an Oath can not be taken without domage to the Catholicke fayth and health of your soules for that it conteâ—eth many things against the said Catholike saith and health of your soules XXIV By these wordes of the Breue we may see playnly that as the matter of going Church Assemblyes and Sermons of those oâ— a contrary Religion are forbidden by him as spirituall matters and acts of a faâ—â— Religion so is the taking of the Oath not in regard of Temporall Cyuilâ— Obedience to his Ma. tie which by a â—ormer Breue his predecessour had permitted and recommended to an Catholicks soone after his Highnes entrance vnto the Crowne but for the admixture of other causes appertayning to some poyntes of Religion as before hath bynâ—â—â—d XXV The third proofe may be taken out of the ensuing â—etter of Card. all Bellarmine who hauing diligently considered with other learned men of the nature of this Oath doth therfore hold it to be vnlawfull for that it is so compounded by artificiall ioyning togeather of Temporall and Spirituall things Cyuill Obedience and forswearing the Popes authority as to vse his wordes No man can professe his Cyailâ— Subiection and detest treason and conspiracy by this Oath but he must be forced also to renounce the Primacy of the Sea Apostolicke And therfore he compareth it to the crafty composition and commixture of Images of the Emperour Iulian of the Paynim Gods so coupled and combined togeather in his Imperiall banner as dutifull Subiects that were ChristiaÌ„s desyred to performe their Temporall duety Cyuill honour to their Soueraigne could not bow downe to his Picture as the fashion was but must seeme also to do the same to the heathen Idols which rather then they would do they were content to suffer cruell death So as in this case such as denyed to obey in that point did it not for lacke of reuerence and loyall affection to their Emperour as odiously it was obiected and amplified against them but by reason of the mixture of things vnlawfull with those that were lawfull And the like plainly is heere in this case where Catholicks are wrongfully accused to deny their acknowledgment of cyuill Obedience conteyned in this Oath for that they refuse to take the same wheras their refusall is not for this but for other clauses pertayning to their Religion XXVI Fourthly then for a more full and fynall cleering of this matter I can thinke of no better nor more forcible meane then to make this reall offer on the behalfe of euery English Catholicke for better satisfaction of his Ma. tie in this poynt so much vrged of their Cyuill Temporall Obedience First that he will sweare and acknowledge most willingly all those partes and clauses of the Oath that do any way appertaine to the Ciuill and Temporall Obedience due to his Ma. tie whome he acknowledgeth for his true and lawfull kyng and Soueraigne ouer all his Dominions and that he will sweare vnto him as much loyalty as euer any Catholicke Subiect of England did vnto their lawfull King in former tymes and ages before the change of king Henry the eyght or that any forraine Subiect oweth or ought to sweare to any Catholicke Prince whatsoeuer at this day XXVII Secondly that for the Pope who by the force of Catholicke Religion is the Supreme Pastour of his soule he hopeth in Gods goodnes that he will neuer attempt any thing in preiudice of his Ma. tie nor will he euer procure of his part that he do but rather will seeke to stay or let the same as much as shall lye in his power praying hartily for them both But for so much as the Question of his Authority what he might do in certayne vrgent cases for the preseruation of any Countrey and for the vniuersall good of Gods Church is a matter belonging to doctrine Religion he cannot with
things or not If it be lawfull as I neuer heard or read it doubted of then why is the Pope so vniust and cruell towards his owne Catholicks as to commaund them to disobey their Soueraignes lawfull commandement If it be vnlawfull why hath he not expressed any one cause or reason therof But this Dilemma is easily dissolued or rather falleth of it self both his pillers being but broken reeds framed out of false suppositions For that the Pope neyther denyeth it to be lawfull to obey the Soueraigne in Cyuill and Temporall things nor doth he command Catholicks to disobey their Prince his lawfull commādements but only where they be vnlawful to be performed as he supposeth them to be in the taking of this Oath Wherof he expresseth sundry causes and reasons I meane so many as the Oath it self cōteyneth points cōcerning Religion to which end he setteth downe the whole Oath as it lyeth with intimation that those points cannot be sworne with integrity of Catholicke Religion good conscience which is sufficient for a Iudge who disputeth not but determineth So as hereupon to make illation of the Popes vniust and cruell dealing towards Catholicks by this his decision as though he sorbad Ciuill Obedience is to buyld vpon a voluntary false ground supposing or rather imposing the Pope to say that which he doth not and then to refute him as though he had said it indeed And is this good dealing LVIII But yet he goeth forward vpon the same false ground to buyld more accusations against the Pope saying That if the foundation of his exhorting Catholicks to beare patiently their tribulations be false as this Apologer auoucheth it to be then it can worke no other effect then to make him guylty of the bloud of so many of his sheep whome he doth thus willfully cast away not only to the needles losse of their liues and ruyne of their famylies but euen to the laying on of a perpetuall slander vpon all Papists As it no zealous Papist could be a true Subiect to his Prince and that Religion and the Temporall Obedience to the Cyuill Magistrate were two things incompatible and repugnant in themselues Thus he LIX But who doth not see that these be all iniurious inferences inforced vpon the former false suppositions to witt That Catholicks suffer nothing for their Conscience That there is no persecution at all in England That there is nothing exacted by this last oath but only and meerly Cyuill Obedience and that in this the Pope exhorteth them to disobey the Temporall Prince in Temporall dutyes and thereby giueth iust occasion to the Prince to vse his sword against them and consequently that he is cause of the effusion of their bloud and of the infamy of Catholicke Religion as though no Catholicke by his Religion could be a true Subiect to his Temporall Prince All which suppositions being vtterly mistaken and not true the more often they are repeated the more exorbitant seemeth the ouersight of the wryter And in my opinion the very same might haue bene obiected vnto S. Cyprian and other Fathers of the Primitiue Church that they were guylty of so many Martyrs bloud willfully cast away and of the ruyne of their familyes and other inconueniences by exhorting them not to doe against their Consciences nor to yield to their Temporall Princes Commandements against God and their Religion no not for any torments that might be layd vpon them nor for any losses that might fall vnto them of goods life honour same friendes wife children or the like which were ordinary exhortations in those daies of persecution as by their Bookes yet extant doth appeare LX. Neyther is it sufficient to say that those tymes and ours are different for that the things then demaunded were apparantly vnlawfull but these not for that to vs that are Catholicks these things are as vnlawfull now as those other were then to them for that they are no lesse against our Consciences in matters of Religion For why should it be more damnable then and indispensable to deliuer vp a Byble or new Testament for examples sake when the Emperour commaunded it then now to sweare an Oath against our Conscience and Religion when our Temporall Prince exacteth it For that this perhaps is called the Oath of Allegiance Who knoweth not that the fayrest tytle is put vpon the fowlest matter when it is to be persuaded or exacted And he that shall read the Historyes of that tyme and of those auncient afflictions shall see that Act also to haue beene required as of Obedience and Allegiance and not of Religion being only the deliuery vp of materiall bookes and yet did the whole Church of God condemne them for it that deliuered the same and held for true Martyrs all those that dyed for denying thereof for that they would not doe an Act against their Consciences LXI Well then to draw to an end of this second paragraph about the two Breues of Paulus Quintus two things more writeth this Apologer whereunto I must in like manner say somewhat The first is That Pope Clemens Octauus sent into England two Breues immediatly before the late Queenes death for debarring of his Maiestie our now Soueraigne of the Crowne or any other that eyther would professe or any way tolerate the professours of our Religion contrary saieth he to his manifold vowes and protestations simul eodem tempore and as it were deliuered vno eodem Spiritu to diuers of his Maiestyes Ministers abroade professing all kyndenes and shewing all forwardnes to aduance him to this Crowne c. Wherein still I fynde the same veyne of exaggeration and calumniation continued by the Apologer For hauing procured some knowledge of those two Breues I fynde them not sent into England togeather nor immediatly before the late Queenes death but the one diuers yeares before shee dyed and the other after her death and this to different effects For in the first the Pope being consulted what Catholicks were bound to doe in conscience for admitting a new Prince after the Queene should be dead for so much as some of different Religions were or might be pretenders he determined that a Catholicke was to be preferred not thinking as may be presumed to preiudice therein his Maiesty that now is of whome vpon the relations and earnest asseuerations of those his Maiestyes Ministers abroad who heere are mentioned he had conceaued firme hope that his Highnes was not farre from being a Catholicke or at least wise not altogeather so alienate from that Religion or professours therof as reasonable hope might not be conceaued of his conuersion though in regard of not preiudicing his Tytle in England the said Ministers auouched that it was not thought expedient at that tyme to make declaration therof LXII This was auerred then how truly or falsly I know not But many letters and testifications are extant hereof which were the cause of those demonstrations of Clemens Octauus to fauour
vnity or fellowship of the high name of Rocke of the Church which Christ our Sauiour the chiefe and fundamentall Rocke imparted to none but to S. Peter and consequently that vnity of name of Rocke was indiuisible betwene them which if eyther M. Iewell or M. Reynolds or our Apologer would haue equally considered they needed not to go about to disgrace so ancient a Father with so meere a cauill or at leastwise it being once answered they ought not to haue so oftē repeated it againe without some new matter or reason for the same or impugnation of the former answere LXX But I will not trouble yow with any more at this tyme albeit there ensue in the Apology diuers other poynts that might be stood vpon not for that they conteyne any great substance of matter but for that they seeme to proceed out of no small auersion of mynd acerbity and gall in the writer against all sortes of Catholicke people which CHRIST IESVS amend and mollify and giue him light from heauen to see the truth that he so bitterly impugneth LXXI And as he dealeth with S. Leo so doth he much more in the same kynd with D. or Sanders and Cardinall Bellarmine cyting out of their workes dyuers sentences culled and layd togeather that seeme lesse respectiue to the Authority of temporall Kings and Princes and all this to incite more his Ma. tie against them and those of their Religion and fynally against the Cardinall he concludeth in these wordes That God is no more contrary to Belial light to darknes and heauen to hell then Bellarmines estimation of Kings is to Gods Which is a very passionate Conclusion if yow consider it well for that setting asyde the preheminēce for iudging in matters of Religion which in his Controuersyes he proueth both by Scripture and testimony of all antiquity to appertayne to Bishops and not to Princes so was practised for 300. yeares after Christ when few or no Kings or Emperours were yet Christians in all other poyntes he speaketh so reuerently of them and defendeth their Supreme Authority with as great respect as any Authour perhaps hath euer done before him And to pretermit other places let the Reader but looke ouer the first 16. Chapters of his Booke de Laicis and he shall fynd not only the Authority of Princes proued to be from God by many Scriptures Fathers Councels Reasons and other Authorityes of Saints against Anabaptists Atheists and other miscreants of our tyme but the quality also and excellent power of the said Princely Authority so exalted both for making of lawes iudging condemning waging warre and like actions of supreme power as will easily refute this cauillation LXXII And among other propositions tending to that effect he hath this in the beginning of his eleuenth Chapter which he proueth largely and of purpose throughout the same not only That Temporall Princes are to be obeyed out of Conscience or for Conscience sake but also Quod lex Ciuilis non minùs obligat in Conscientia quà m lex Diuina That the Cyuil law of the Temporall Prince doth no lesse bynd the Subiect in Conscience thē the law that commeth immediatly from God himself And how then is Cardinall Bellarmyne said heere to be no lesse contrary to God concerning Kings Authority then light to darknes and heauen to hell But especially if yow consider further that when Cardinall Bellarmyne in that booke commeth to treat of the Authority of Temporall Princes in matter of Religion though he set downe this Conclusion That Non pertinet ad eos Iudicium de Religione The authority of iudging of Religion which is true or false belongeth not vnto them but vnto Bishops yet Pertinet ad eos defensio Religionis the defence and protection of Religion appertayneth vnto them as also the cyuill gouernmēt in cyuill matters ouer all persons as well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall which is so much as a Catholicke man can giue to Caesar reseruing to God that which is Gods LXXIII And albeit this might be sufficiēt to shew the tooth that is held against Cardinall Bellarmine and the ardent appetite these Ministers haue to disgrace him in somewhat yet am I inforced to lay forth some few examples more wherby as in a cleere glasse the indifferent Reader will see behold and wonder also at the manner of dealing vsed against him to that end LXXIV And now we haue already seene what general Conclusions haue bene gathered against him That he vseth to contradict himselfe wittingly so often as euer he is pressed with any hard argument by his Aduersary That his common tricke is to tell the sentence of his Authour without his sense That he seeketh euery-where to debase Kingly authority and the like Which generalityes as in truth and reason they may not be inferred but vpon proofe and induction of many particularyties so when it commeth to tryall yow haue seene not so much as any one particuler sufficiently proued Now shall yow heare some more examples of calumnious dealing with him LXXV Pag. 92. the Apologer speaking of S. Gregorie the Great and going about to interpret those wordes of his alleadged by the Cardinall where he calleth the Sea Apostolicke Caput fidei the Head of faith in regard of the direction in matters of Faith that is to be taken from thence as from the Head the Apologer would haue it vnderstood that for so much as in that place he speaketh to the Bishop of Palermo about the vse of the Pall accustomed to be gyuen by the sea Apostolicke to Archbishops S. Gregories meaning is that the Sea Apostolicke of Rome is head only in matters of Cerimonyes and then he inferreth thus VVhich sense saith he if yow will not admit giue me leaue to say that once of one Gregorie which Bellarmyne himselfe saith often of many of the Fathers Minùs cautè locutus est Gregorie spake not so aduisedly And the latin translation hath Quod ille de multis saepe dicit ex omni numero Patrū That Bellarmyne saith it often of many and of all sortes of Fathers to wit that they spake inconsideratly and yet when I went to examyne the two places of Bellarmynes workes cyted by our Apologer in the margent I found a strange abuse to wit no such thing at all spoken of the Fathers but only of one Nicolaus de Lyra made a Christian of a Iew not much aboue two hundred yeares past who seeming by some words of his to hold a certayne extrauagāt opiniō that S. Peter S. Paul were not put to death at Rome but at Hierusalem against the generall consent of all antiquity Cardinal Bellarmyne expoundeth first what his true meaning was to witt nothing in deed differing from the Fathers expositions and namely of S. Hierome and then addeth Quanquam minùs cautè locutus est c Albeit Lyranus in his manner of speach was not so wary as he might haue byn in giuing
THE IVDGMENT OF A CATHOLICKE ENGLISH-MAN LIVING IN BANISHMENT FOR HIS RELIGION VVritten to his priuate friend in England Concerninge A late BOOKE set forth and entituled Triplici nodo triplex cuneus Or An Apologie for the Oath of Allegiance Against two BREVES of Pope PAVLVS V. to the Catholickes of England a Letter of Cardinall BELLARMINE to M. GEORGE BLACKWELL Arch-priest VVherin the said Oath is shewed to be vnlawfull vnto a Catholicke Conscience for so much as it conteyneth sundry clauses repugnant to his Religion S. Hieron Comment in Cap. 4. Hierem. Let an Oath haue these companions Truth Iudgment and Iustice for if these be wanting it shall not be an Oath but Periury ¶ Permissu Superiorum ANNO 1608. THE GENERALL Contentes of this ensuing Letter diuided into three Paragraphes 1. THE first paragraph handleth matters concerning the substance of the Oath which in the Apologie are spoken by way as it were of Preface before the setting downe of the Popes Breues 2. THE second considereth the said two Breues impugnation therof by the Apologer and how sufficiently or insufficiently the same is performed by him 3. THE third discusseth the Answere made to Cardinall Bellarmynes Letter diuers poyntes of moment therin conteyned but weakly impugned by the Apologer as the Authour of this Letter iudgeth To the Reader THIS Letter comming to my hands gentle Reader some dayes past from my learned friend beyond the seas and hauing imparted the same priuately vnto sundry of myne acquaintance who desyred to read somewhat concerning the Argument in haÌ„d they were very earnest with me to yield to the printing therof for eschewing so great labour tyme and expences as would be necessary for the copying it out to so many as desyred the view therof which I intreate thee to take in good part and vse it to thy benefit And so to CHRIST IESVS I committ thee with wish of all felicitie both in this lyfe and the next PARTICVLER chiefe poyntes handled in this Letter In the first Paragraph 1. WHo is thought to be the true Authour of this Triplex cuneus or Apology and vpon what reasons arguments Num. 2. 3. 4. c. 2. The contentes of the Oath and how the lawfulnes of taking it was consulted with learned men both at home and abroad num 14. 15. c. 3. VVhether this Oath do conteyne matters of only meere Ciuill and Temporall Obedience and not any of Religion as is pâ—â—â—â—â—ded num 20. 21. c. 4. VVhat full and perfect Obedience and dutifull Allegiancâ— Catholicke Subiects do acknowledge themselues to owe and offer vnto his Ma. tie in all Temporall affayres as much as euer any English Subiects from the beginning vntill K. Henry the eight his time and as any forrayne Subiect doth to any Catholicke Emperour King or Prince at this day num 25. 26. c. 5. How contradictory it is in it self That Catholicks must sweare to take the Oath freely without coaction notwithstanding the penalty of Premunire if they refuse it num 29. c. 6. Concerning a petition to his Ma. tie for exposition of the said Oath for auoyding of needles vexations num 32. 33. c. 7. That nothing is gayned but much lost to his Ma. tie by ouer-much vrging the said Oath num 34. 35. c. In the Second Paragraph THe summe of the two Breues of Paulus V. and whether1 he had reason to complayne of Catholicks sufferance or no num 1. 2. 3. c. VVhether Q. Elizabeth did persecute Catholicks,2 and whether she were so happie in her life and gouernment as some do make her num 5. 6. 7. c. That it is not height of pryde in Catholicks to desyre lyberty of3 Conscience as the Apologer sayth num 25. 26. 27. c. That clemency is no cause of desperate attempts as this Apologer4 insinuateth but rather the contrary to wit cruelty num 32. 33. c. In what poyntes and why this Oath is held to be vnlawfull for5 Catholicke men to take with the examination of Scriptures Fathers and Councels about the same num 41. 42. c. How the Apologer wittingly mistaking the State of the Question,6 goeth forward impugning only his owne deuises num 61. 62. In the third Paragraph CArdinall Bellarmyne is wrongfully charged to mistake1 the State of the Controuersy and to impugne the Oath of Supremacy insteed of the Oath of Allegiance num 4. 5. c. VVhy the Apologer changeth the old Tytle of Supreme Head2 of the Church established by Statute vnder K. Henry the 8. and K. Edward the 6. vnto Supreme Gouernour num 6. 7. c. 3. The ancient Councels of Toledo how vntruly they are alledged for prescribing this forme of Oath now exacted num 11. 12. 13. c. 4. Clauses of beliefe or not beliefe proued to be in this Oath contrary to the Apologers assertion num 26. 27. c. 5. An eleuen Contradictions obiected out of Cardinall Bellarmynes workes but no one can be verified num 35. 36. 37. c. 6. The Authorityes of sundry Fathers examined whether they make to the purpose for which Bellarmyne doth alledge them in his Epistle num 58. 59. 7. Great variety of calumâ—â—ious dealing against the Cardinall for disgracing him num 74. 75. c. 8. How Kings and Princes are truly seruants of their Subiects and how their Authority is mediatly and not immediatly from God num 78. 79. 83. c. THE IVDGMENT OF A CATHOLICKE MAN TO HIS FRIEND in England Concerning the Apology for the new Oath of Allegiance Paragr I. I CANNOT but yeild yow harty thankes my louing friend for the new Booke yow sent me ouer by Gunâ—ar at his last passage For albeit I haue determyned with my selfe in this my banishment to spend my tyme in other studyes more profitable then in contention about Controuersyes yet must I needs accept kyndly of your good will in making me partaker of your newes there And more gladde should I haue beene if yow had aduertised me what your and other mens opinion was of the Booke in your parts then that yow request me to write our mens Iudgement from hence And yet for so much as yow requâ—â—â—t so earnestly at my handes and that the party is to returne presently I shall say somewhat with the greatest breuity that I can Albeit I do not doubt but that the partyes that are principally interessed therin will answere the same much more largely II. First then for the Authour for so much as he setteth not downe his Name it seemeth not so easy to ghâ—sse yet the more generall opinion in these partes is that as that odious Discouery of Roman Doctryne and practises which of late yow haue seene answered was cast forth against the Catholickes vnder the cyrred name of T. M. with direction as he said from Superiours the Authour being in deed but an inferiour Minister so dyuers thinke it to be probable that this other Booke also commeth
this Apologer passeth on to bestow some of his adulation and oleum peccatoris vpon his Ma. tie in like manner that now raigneth telling vs That his kyndnes and benefits bestowed vpon that sort of people haue bene farre greater then those of Q. Elizabeth which may easily be as by that which hath bene touched may appeare Yet do we verily perswade our selues that if his Highnes had byn left to himselfe and to his owne Royall nature and noble disposition in this poynt as Q. Elizabeth was wont to say of her disposition in religion we had tasted indeed much of this his great humanity and so we began for some tyme but being preuented and diuerted by the subtile workings of this and other such Ministers as desyred to draw bloud and to incite his Maiestie against vs we hauing no place to speake for our selues no admittance to be heard no effectuall intercessour to interpose his mediation for vs no maruaile though wee were cast of and do indure the smart XVIII And I do name this Minister T. M. the yonger in the first place among the rest for that it is commonly said that his whole exercise is Sycophancy and calumniation against men of our profession be they strangers or domesticall and that among other deuises he hath this That euery tyme his Ma. tie is to take his repast he is ready eyther with some tale iest scoffe or other bitter lance to wound vs absent and that he hath euer lightly some booke and page therof ready to read to his Highnes somewhat framed by his art to incense or auert his Ma. tie more eyther in iudgement or affection or both and therby to draw from him some hard speaches which being published afterward by himselfe and others do serue to no other end but to gaâ—l and alienate myndes and to afflict them that are not suffered to giue reason for themselues And that is the seruice he doth his Ma. tie in this exercise XIX And as for the places themselues which he vseth to bring forth with his wet finger as is said we are to imagine that they are no better nor more fitly applyed then such as he hath sett forth against vs in this booke perhaps somewhat worse for that he might probably thinke that this booke would be examined comming forth with so great pretence of authority as it doth And therfore if heere yow fynd him to vse calumniation most impertinent citation of Authours and Authorityes eyther wholy making against himselfe or nothing for his purpose or against vs then may yow thinke what liberty he will take to himselfe there in speach where no man is like to contradict him but all applause is expected from the standers by XX. Let vs heare if yow please one exaggeration of his concerning his Ma. ties myldnes vnto vs and our ingratitude in abusing the same to pryde His Ma. ties gouernment saith he ouer them hath so far exceeded that of Q. Elizabeth in mercy and clemency as the Papists themselues grew to that height of pryde in confidence to his myldnes as they did directly expect and assuredly promise to themselues liberty of Conscience and equality with vs in all things that are his best and faithfull Subiects c. Do you see what a height of pride this was And what an abuse of his Maiesties mercie and clemencie to expect libertie of Conscience Why had he not obiected in like manner that they expected the libertie of breathing and vsing the common ayre as well as Protestants For that neither breathing nor the vse of coÌ„mon ayre is more due vnto them or common to all then ought to be libertie of Conscience to Christian men wherby ech one liueth to God and to himselfe and without which he strugleth with the torment of a continuall lingring death XXI And surely I cannot but wonder that this Minister was not ashamed to call this the height of pride which is generally found in all Protestants neuer so humble yea the more humble and vnderlings they are the more earnest are they both in bookes speaches and preachings to proue that liberty of Conscience is most conforme to Gods law and that wresting or forcing of Consciences is the highest Tyranny that can be exercised vpon man And this we may see first in all M. Fox his History especially during the time of the three King Henries 4. 5. and 6. and afterward when those that were called Lollards and VVickcliffians who as M. Fox saith were indeed good Protestants being pressed somewhat about their Religion did continually beate vpon this argumeÌ„t of libertie of Conscience and when they obteyned it not they set vp publicke schedles vpon the Church dores of London and made those famous conspiracyes of killing K. Henry the 5. and all his family which are recounted by VValsingham Stow Fox and other English Historiographers XXII In this our age also the first oppositioÌ„ of Protestant Princes in Germanie against their Emperour Charles the 5. both at Smalcald Austburgh and other meetings as afterwards also the fierce and perillous warrs by the Duke of Saxony Marques of Brandeburge and other Protestant Princes and their people against the same Emperour begunne in the very same yeare that our K. Henry dyed Were they not all for lyberty of Conscience so pretended so printed so published so diuulged to the world The first Supplications Memorialls and declarations in like manner which the Protestants of France set forth in print as also they of Holland Zeland in tyme of the gouernments as well of the Duchesse of Parma Duke of Alua Commendador Mayor and other Gouernours did they not all expresly professe that their principall griefes were about liberty of Conscience restrayned And did not they cyte many places of Scriptures to proue the equity necessity therof And do not all Protestants the like at this day in all places where they are both in Polonia Austria Hungaria Bohemia Styria and els where And how theÌ„ is Iordanis conuersus retrorsum with this Minister How is his voyce contrary to the voyce sense of all the rest How with what reason may he call it the height of pryde in English Catholicks to haue but hope therof which is so ordinary a doctrine practice of all his brethren in forraine nations to witt for vs to expect liberty of Conscience at the first entrance of our new King of so noble and royall a mynd before that tyme as he was neuer knowne to be giuen to cruelty or persecutioÌ„ in his former raigne The Sonne of such a Mother as held her selfe much beholden to English Catholicks And himselfe in his litle Golden Booke to his Sonne the Prince had confessed that he had euer found the Catholicke party most trusty vnto him and therupon had done sundry fauours to diuers of them and gyuen no small hope of greater vnto others XXIII From this King I say whom they so much loued
more both of the Iewes and Christians that lyued peaceably vnder Infidell Princes in those dayes But lett one example as I said be brought forth wherin they obeyed them in poynts contrarie to their Conscience or Religion and it shall be sufficient We read in the Prophesie of Daniel that those three famous Iewes Sidrach Misach and Abdenago were most trustie vnto King Nabuchodonosor in temporall affayres and so much esteemed by him as he made them his vniuersall Gouernors ouer all the workes of the Region of Babylon saith the Scripture and yet when it came to the poynt that he would haue them for his honour and pleasure and vpon his commandement adore the golden Statua which he had set vp they forsooke him flatly and said to him in the presence o all his Nobility assembled togeather that they were not so much as to answere him in that Commandement nor would they do as he had appoynted them XXXIX The like in effect did the ancienter Iewes do with King Pharao of Egypt for that albeit in temporall affayres they obeyed him euen in that tyme when he oppressed and persecuted them most yet in that he would haue had them stay and sacrifice in Egypt and not follow Moyses their Spirituall Superiour into the desert notwithstanding that the King had some cause perhaps to suspect their temporall Allegiance also by that departure they being a potent multitude of people yet would they not obey him nor do as he would haue them when they persuaded themselues that God would haue the contrary XL. I lett passe how Daniel and his fellowes would not eate the meates of the King of Babylon nor Tobie those of the Asyrians much lesse would he leaue of to bury the dead though it were forbidden by Proclamation vnder payne of death The Machabees in like manner obeyed King Antiochus so long as he commanded nothing against their Law and Conscience but when he went about to force them to sacrifice and to eate swynes-flesh and other things against their Law and Conscience they refused openly to performe that Obedience So as these places of Scriptures alledged by the Apologer do proue nothing for him at all but are rather flatt against him and for vs as yow haue seene XLI And much more do make against him his Authorityes alledged out of the ancient Fathers for that they go about to proue the very same poynt that we heere hold that in temporall cyuill affayres we must obey dutifully our temporall Princes though Infidels or Pagans but not in matters concerning God our Religion or Conscience And his very first example out of S. Augustine is such as I maruaile much that he would cyte the same but that somwhat for shew must be alleadged For it maketh so clearly directly against him as if it had beene written purposely to confute him in this our case But let vs heare what it is Agreable to the Scriptures saith he did the Fathers teach Augustine speaking of Iulian saith thus Iulian was an vnbelieuing Emperour was he not an Apostata an oppressor and an Idolatour ChristiaÌ„ souldiours serued that vnbelieuing Emperour when they came to the cause of Christ they would acknowledge no Lord but him that is in heauen when he would haue them worship Idolls sacrifice they preferred God before him but when he said go forth to fight inuade such a nation they presently obeyed they distinguished their eternall Lord from their temporall and yet were they subiect euen vnto their temporall Lord for his sake that was their eternall Lord and Maister Thus he XLII And can any thing be spoken more cleerly for vs and for our cause then this For euen thus do we offer to our King Soueraigne we will serue him we will obey him we will go to warre with him we will fight for him and we will do all other offices belonging to temporall duty but when the cause of Christ commeth in hand who is Lord of our Consciences or any matter concerning the same or our Religion there we do as S. Augustine heere appoynteth vs preferre our eternall King before our Temporall XLIII And like to these are all the other places of Fathers cyted by him who distinguish expresly betweene the Temporall honour and Allegiance due to the Emperour and the other of our Religion Conscience belonging only to God And to that playne sense are Tertullians words cyted by the Apologer VVe honour the Emperour in such sorte as is lawfull for vs and expedient for him as a man second after God and as hauing receyued from God whatsoeuer he is and only lesse then God And will not the Catholicks of England vse this speach also vnto their King Or will the Apologer himselfe deny that Tertullian heere meant nothing els but in temporall affayres for much as the Emperour at that tyme were Heathen Gentils and consequently were not to be obeyed in any poynt against Christian faith or Religion XLIV The like playne doctrine haue the words of Iustinus Martyr to the Emperour himselfe cyted heere in the third place to witt VVe only adore God and in all other things wee cheerfully performe seruice to yow professing yow to be Emperours and Princes of men And do not all English Catholiks say the same at this day that in all other things that concerne not God his Obedience by rule of Catholicke Religion they offer cheerfully to serue his Ma. tie acknowledging him to be their liege Lord and King inferiour only to god in his Temporall Gouernment And how then are these and such other places brought in for witnesse as though they had somwhat to say against vs XLV The other two senteÌ„ces in like manner cyted out of Optatus and S. Ambrose the first saying That ouer the Emperour there is none but only God that made the Emperour And the other That teares were his weapons against the armes souldiours of the Emperours That he neyther ought or could resist Neyther of them do make any thing against vs or for the Apologer euen as they are heere nakedly cyted without declaration of the circumstances for that in temporall affayres the King or Emperour is Supreme next vnder God And when the Emperour will vse secular â—orces against the Priests of his dominion they being no souldiours must fall to prayers and teares which are Priestly weapons But what Did S. Ambrose by this acknowledge that the Emperour had higher Authority then he in Church-matters Or that if he had offered him an Oath repugnant to his Religion or Conscience in those matters he would haue obeyed or acknowledged his Superiority No truly For in three seuerall occasions that fell out he flatly denyed the same which this Apologer craftily dissembleth and saith not a word therof XLVI The first was when he was cited by Dalmatius the Iribune bringing with him a publicke Notarie to testifie the same in the
thought good to insert heere immediatly the contrary conclusions to all the poynts and Articles wherof this other late Oath doth consist wherby it may appeare what vnreasonable and rebellious poynts he would dryue his Ma. ties Subiects vnto by refusing the whole body of that Oath as it is conceaued For he that shall refuse to take this Oath must of necessity hold these propositions following First that our Soueraignâ— Lord King Iames is not the lawfull King of this Kingdome and of all other his Ma. ties Dominions Secondly that the Pope by his owne authority may depose c. But who doth not see what a simple fallacy this is which the Logicians do call A composito ad diuisa from denying of a compound to inferre the denyall of all the parcels therin conteyned As if some would say that Plato was a man borne in Greece of an excellent wit skilfull in the Greeke language most excellent of all other Philosophers and would require this to be confirmed by an Oath some Platonist perhaps would be coÌ„teÌ„t to sweare it but if some Stoicke or Peripateticke or Professour of some other Sect in Philosophy should refuse the said Oath in respect of the last clause might a man inferre against him in all the other clauses also Ergò he denyeth Plato to be a Man He denyeth him to be borne in Greece he denyeth him to be of an excelleÌ„t wit he denyeth him to be skilfull in the Greeke tongue c. Were not this a bad kynd of arguing X. So in like manner if an Arrian or Pelagian Prince should exact an Oath at his Subiects hands concerning diuers articles of Religion that were belieued by them both and in the end or middle therof should insert some clauses sounding to the fauour of their owne sect for which the Subiect should refuse the whole body of that Oath as it was conceyued could the other in iustice accuse him for denying all the seuerall articles of his owne Religion also which therin are mencyoned Who seeth not the iniustice of this manner of dealing And yet this is that which our Apologer vseth heere with Catholicks affirming in good earnest that he which refuseth the whole body of this Oath as it is conceyued in respect of some clauses therof that stand against his Conscience about matters of Religion refuseth consequently euery poynt and parcell therof and must of necessity hold in the first place that our Soueraigne Lord King Iames is not the lawfull King of this Kingdome and of all other his Ma. ties Dominions The contrary wherof all Catholicks do both confesse and professe consequently it is a meere calumniation that they deny this But let vs see how he goeth forward in prouing this whole Oath to be lawfull to a Catholicke mans Conscience XI And that the world saith he may yet further see his Ma. ties and whole States setting downe of this Oath did not proceed from any new inuention of theirs but as it is warranted by the word of God So doth it take the example from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand yeares agone which a famons Councell then togeather with diuers other Councels were so farre from condemning as the Pope now hath done this Oath as I haue thought good to set downe their owne wordes heere in that purpose wherby it may appeare that his Ma. tie craueth nothing now of his Subiects in this Oath which was not expresly and carefully commanded them by the Councels to be obeyed without exception of persons Nay not in the very particuler poynt of Equiuocation which his Ma. tie in this Oath is so carefull to haue eschewed but yow shall heere see the said Councels in their Decrees as carefull to prouide for the eschewing of the same so as almost euery poynt of that Action and this if ours shall be found to haue relation and agreeance one with the other saue only in this that those old Councels were carefull and straite in commanding the taking of the same wheras by the contrary he that now vaunteth himselfe to be Head of all Councells is as carefull and strait in the prohibition of all men from the taking of this Oath of Allegiance So he XII And I haue alledged his discourse at large to the end yow may better see his fraudulent manner of proceeding He saith That the example of this Oath is taken from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand yeares agone in the Councels of Toledo but especially the fourth which prouided also for the particuler poynt of Equiuocation But let any man read those Councels which are 13. in number and if he fynd eyther any forme of an Oath prescribed or any mention of Equiuocation but only of flat lying and perfidious dealing let him discredit all the rest that I do write And if he fynd none at all as most certainly he shall not then let him consider of the bad cause of this Apologer that dryueth him to such manner of dealing as to auouch Euery point of that Action to haue agreeance with the offering of this Oath XIII True it is that those Councels of Toledo vpon certayne occasions which presently we shall declare do recommend much to the subiects of Spayne both Gothes and Spaniards that they do obserue their Oath of fidelity made vnto their Kings especially vnto Sisenandus for whose cause principally this matter was first treated in the fourth Councel of Toledo but no speciall forme is prescribed by the said Councell nor is Equiuocation so much as named therin but only as hath bene said Iurare mendaciter to sweare falsely as the wordes of the Councel are Which how far it is from the true nature of Equiuocation hath bene lately and largly demonstrated as yow know XIV The cause of the treatie of this matter in the 4. Councell of Toledo was for that one Sisenandus a Noble man of the bloud of the Gothes and a great Captaine taking opportunitie of the euill life of his King Sâ—intila whome he had serued did by some violence as most of the Spanish Historiographers write though confirmed afterward by the Common-wealth and proued a very good King and as Paulus Aemilius in his French Historie recordeth by helpe of Dagobert King of France put out the said Suintila and fearing lest the same people that had made defection to him might by the same meanes fall from him againe he procured in the third yeare of his raigne this fourth Councell of Toledo to be celebrated of 70. Prelates as some say and as others of 68. hoping by their meanes that his safety in the Crowne should be confirmed Wherupon it is set downe in the Preface of the said Councell that comming into the same accompanyed with many noble and honorable persons of his trayne Coram sacerdotivus Dei humi prostratus cum lachrymis gemitibus pro se interueniedum postulauit He prostrate on the ground before the Priests of God with
this Ma. tie and consequently all that ostentation made by the Minister before That this Oath is no new inuention That it doth take the example from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand yeares gone by a famous Councell That the Councel prouided in particuler for the poynts of Equiuocation That almost euery poynt of that action hath agreeance with this of ours sauing only in this that the Councell was carefull straite in commanding the taking of the same and Pope Paulus carefull and strayt in the prohibition c. XX. All this I say falleth by it selfe to the ground for so much as neyther that Councell commanded the taking of any Oath nor prescribed any forme to Subiects nor Pope Paulus prohibiteth this so farre as it concerneth Temporall and Ciuill Obedience as hath byn declared And whatsoeuer the Apologer cyteth more out of these Councels the meanest Reader by looking vpon it will easely espy that it maketh nothing at all for him or against vs and consequently the entring into the narration of this mater with so great ostentation as That the world may see that it proceeded not of any new inuention but is warranted by the word of God authorized by so auncient a Councell and the like All this I say was needles for so much as nothing is found in this Councell that agreeth with our case but only the naming and recommending of an Oath of fidelity wherin we also fully agree and consent with our Aduersary The second Part of this Paragraph NOw then to come to the particuler Answere of our Apologer to the Card. lls Letter he doth for diuers leaues togeather as it were dally with him picking quarrells here and there vntill he come to the mayne charge of contradiction of himself to himself not only in this Letter but throughout all his workes And albeit I doubt not but that the Card. ll or some other by his appointment will discusse all these matters largly and sufficiently yet for so much as I haue promised to giue you my iudgment of all I shall briefly in like māner lay forth what I haue obserued about these pointe◠XXII Page 57. of his Apology he writeth thus That some of such Priests and Iesuits as were the greatest traytors and fomentors of the greatest conspiracyes against her late Maiesty gaue vp F. Robert Bellarmyne for one of their greatest authorities and Oracles And for proofe he citeth in the margent Campian and Hart See the Conference in the Tower By which I discouer a greater abuse then I could haue imagined would euer haue come from a man carefull of his credit for I haue seene and perused the Conference of M. r D. Iohn Reynolds with M. Iohn Hart in the Tower vpon the yeare 1583. two yeares after the death of F. Campian and there it appeareth indeed that the said M. Hart alleadgeth diuers tymes the opinions and proofes of F. Robert Bellarmyne then publick Reader of Controuersies in Rome but alwayes about matters of Deuinity and Controuersies and neuer about Treasons or Conspiracyes And as for F. Campian he is neuer read to mention him eyther in the one or the other Consider then the deceitfull equiuocation here vsed that for so much as M. Hart alleadged F. Robert Bellarmine sometymes in matters of Controuersie in that conference therefore both he F. Campian alleadged him for an Author and Oracle of Conspiracy against the Queene And how can these things be defended with any shew or probability of truth XXIII Page 60. he frameth a great reprehension against the Card. ll for that in his letter he saith that this Oath is not therfore lawfull for that it is offered as tempered and modified Whereupon the Apologer plyeth and insulteth as though the Card. ll had reprehended the tēperate speech therin vsed adding That in Luther and others of the Protestant writers we mislike their bold free speaking as comming from the diuells instinct And now if we speake saith he moderately and temperately it must be tearmed the diuells craft and therfore we may iustly complaine with Christ That when we mourne they will not lament and when we pype they will not dance And neyther Iohn Baptist his seuerity nor Christ his meeknes can please them who buyld but to their owne Monarchy vpon the ground of their owne Traditions and not to Christ c. Thus he and much more exprobration to this effect that we mislike the temperate style and speach vsed in this Oath of Allegiance But all is quite mistaken and the Apologer hath iust cause to blush at this error if it were error and not wilfull mistaking For that Bellarmyne doth not say that this Oath is temperate in wordes but tempered in matter aliquo modo temperatum modificatum in a certayne sort tempered and modified by the offerers in setting downe some clauses lawfull touching Cyuill Obedience and adioyning others vnlawfull that concerne Conscience and Religion Which meaning of Bellarmyne is euident by the example which he alleadgeth of the Ensignes of the Emperour Iulian out of S. Gregory Nazianzen to wit That the images of Pagan Gods were mingled and combined togeather with the Emperours picture therby so tempered and modified as a man could not adore the one without the other Which being so let the indifferent Reader consider what abuse is offered to Card. all Bellarmyne in charging him to mislike temperate speach in the forme of this Oath which of likely hood he neuer thought on and yet theron to found so great an inference as to accuse him to buyld therby to a Monarchy and not to Christ. Is this a token of want of better matter or no XXIV Page 62. the Apologer hauing said with great vehemency of asseueration That heauen and earth are no further asunder then the profession of a Temporall Obedience to a Temporall King is different from any thing belonging to the Catholicke faith or Supremacy of S. Peter which we graunt also if it be meere Temporall Obedience without mixture of other clauses he proposeth presently two questions for application of this to his purpose First this As for the Catholicke Religion saith he can there be one word found in all this Oath tending to matter of Religion The second thus Doth he that taketh it promise to belieue or not to belieue any article of Religion Wherunto I answere first to the first and then to the second To the first that if it be graunted that power and authority of the Pope and Sea Apostolicke left by Christ for gouerning his Church in all occasions necessityes be any point belonging to Religion among Catholicks thē is there not only some one word but many sentences yea ten or twelue articles or branches therin tending and sounding that way as before hath bene shewed XXV To the second question may make answere euery clause in effect of the Oath it self As for example the very first I A. B. doe truly and sincerely
thing is found in that second booke of Iouius by him here cyted nor elswhere in that History so far as by some diligence vsed I can fynde and it is not likely it should be found in him for so much as he beginneth his History with matters only of our tyme some hundreds of yeares after Alexander the third his death LVI So as the only chiefe accusation that may seeme to haue some ground against any Pope in this catalogue for procuring the death of any Prince is that which he alleadgeth out of Cuspinian that Alexander the sixth tooke two hundred thowsand Crownes of Baiazetes Emperour of the Turkes to cause his brother Gemen to be put to death whome he held captiue at Rome which he performed saith our Apologer by poyson and had his pay this I say hath most apparence for that some other Authors also besides doe relate the same affirming That albeit Prince Gemen the Turke when he dyed eyther at Caieta or Naples or Capua for in this they differ was not the Popes prisoner but in the hands of Charles the 8. King of France who tooke him from Rome with him when he passed that way with his army yet that the common fame or rumour was that Pope Alexander the sixth had part therin or as Cuspinias words are Pontifice non ignorante the Pope not vnwitting therof The reason of which report Guicciardine alleadgeth to be this to wit That the euill nature and condition of Pope Alexander which was hatefull to all men made any iniquity to be belieued of him Onuphrius Panuinus writeth that he dyed in Capua of a bloudy flux without any mention of poyson And Sabellicus before him againe relateth the matter doubtfully saying Fuerunt qui crederent eum veneno sublatum c. There were some that belieued that he was made away by poyson and that Alexander the Pope was not ignorant therof for that he was so alienate in mynde from the French-men that he was loath they should take any good by him Thus we see that the matter is but doubtfully and suspiciously related only and the French-men being angry for his death by whome they hoped great matters might easily brute abroad a false rumour for their owne defence in that behalfe LVII But as for the two hundred thowsand crownes though Iouius doe say that they were offered by Baiazet as also Vestis inconsutilis Christi The garment of our Sauiour without seame yet doth he not say that they were receaued eyther the one or the other So as whatsoeuer euill is mentioned of any Pope our Apologer maketh it certayne and when it is but little he will inlarge it to make it more and when it is spoken doubtfully he will affirme it for a certaynty wherin he discouereth his owne humour against Popes and therby limiteth the Readers faith in belieuing him though we do not take vpon vs to defend the liues and facts of all particuler Popes but their faith and authority being forewarned by our Sauiour that vpon the Chayre of Moyses shall fit Scribes and Pharisyes whome we must obey in that they teach and not follow or imitate in that they doe And this shall serue for this point Card. ll Bellarmyne I doubt not will be more large If a man would go about to discredit Kingly authority by all the misdeeds of particuler Kings that haue byn registred by Historiographers since the tyme that Popes began he should fynde no doubt aboundant matter and such as could not be defended by any probability And yet doth this preiudicate nothing to Princely power or dignity and much lesse in our case where the facts themselues obiected are eyther exaggerated increased wrested or altogeather falsifyed The third Part of this Paragraph THERE remayneth the last part of this impugnation of the Cardinalls letter which consisteth in the examining all the Authorityes and Sentences of ancient Fathers alledged by him in the same As first of all the comparison of the art and deceipt vsed by Iulian the Emperour surnamed Apostata and recounted by S. Gregory Nazianzen in placing and inserting the images of his false Gods into the pictures of the Emperour in his Imperiall banner so as no man could bow downe or reuerence the Emperours picture as then was the custome but that he must adore also the images of the false Gods Which art of temperament the Cardinall doth compare vnto this mixture combination of clauses lawfull and vnlawfull Cyuill and Ecclesiasticall in the Oath proposed so as a man can not sweare the one but he must sweare also the other Which similitude although it do expresse most fitly the matter in hand yet the Apologer being sorely pressed therwith seeketh many euasions to euacuate the same by searching out dissimilitudes and saying That albeit a similitude may be admitted claudicare vno pede to limp or halt on one foote yet this saith he is lame both of feete hands and euery member of the body And then he taketh vpon him to set downe at length the diuersityes that may be picked out As first that Iulian was an Apostata but our Soueraigne is a Christian he changed the Religion which he once professed but our King not he became an Ethnicke or an Atheist our King is not ashamed of his profession Iulian dealt against Christians but his Ma. tie dealeth only to make a distinction betweene true subiects and false-harted traytours And so he goeth forward to weary his Reader with many more like diuersityes which must needs be loathsome to euery man of meane iudgment who know that a similitude requireth not parity in all poynts for then it should be idem and not simile but only in the poynt wherin the comparison is made as heere in the compounding and couching togeather of lawfull and vnlawfull things in the Oath as the other did in his banner LIX For if a man would tryfle as our Apologer doth and seeke out differences betweene things that are compared togeather as like in some certayne poynts but vnlike in other we should ouerthrow all similitudes whatsoeuer and consequently we should eneruate many most heauenly speaches of our Sauiour in the Ghospell that stand vpon similitudes As for example Be yow wise as Serpents and simple as Doues What enemy of Christian Religion might not cauill and calumniate this seeking out diuersityes betwixt a serpent and a man and betweene the malicious craft of that malignant creature and the wisedome that ought to be in a prudent man But it is sufficient that the similitude do hold in that particuler poynt wherin Christ made the comparison And so agayne When our Sauiour maketh the comparison betweene the Kingdome of heauen and the litle grayne of mustard-seed who cannot fynd out infinite differences betweene the one and the other making the similitude to halt and limp in many more parts then it can go vpright But it is sufficient that it stand and
safety of his Conscience sweare vnto the Articles and branches of the Oath touching that poynt XXVIII Heere then wee see that all Ciuill Obedience and humble acknowledgment of all Temporall Duety is offered to his Maiestie by his Catholicke Subiects in most ample manner that can be deuised or that is offered to any Christian Catholicke Prince lyuing And if this be not accepted then is it euident that more is required then meere and only Ciuill Obedience as heere is often auouched XXIX And now for so much as it is said heere in like manner That very many of his Ma. ties Subiects that were Popishly affected as well Priests as Laycks did freely take the same Oath which he calleth A blessed successe froÌ„ God of this godly and wyse intent in deuising and proposing the same I shall be forced also to say somwhat of this matter before I passe any further And first of all concerning the freedome wherby it is heere said That priests and Laycks did freely take the same no man I thinke will deny but that the taking of this Oath is proposed by the Statute it selfe vnder paine of the losse of all goods and lands and perpetuall imprisonment to him that shall refuse it which is the very same freedome and no other that a merchant hath in a teÌ„pest eyther to cast out his goodes into the sea for lightening his ship or to be drowned himselfe And though Aristotle in his Ethicks do seeme to hold it to be Simpliciter inuoluntarium simply against the will of the doer and Catholicke Deuynes That it is Inuoluntarium secundum quid in part inuoluntary and simply voluntary for that all circumstances considered he resolueth fynally to be the best to cast out his goods and saue himselfe yet all agree in this that freedome is taken away by this constraint of the passion of feare For that freedome requyreth full liberty to both extreames or obiects that are proposed which is not in our case For that the displeasure of the Prince the losse of goods and liberty the ruyne of his family the terrour and perswasion of his friendes are heauie poyses and do mightily preponderate on the one side and consequently the mention of this freedome might haue beene pretermitted for so much as no constraint of humane will can be greater then this And yet is it said in the Oath that he must do it both willingly and hartily and as he belieueth in Conscience Let the discreete Reader consider what coherence there is in their tale XXX Secondly as for that multitude of Priests Laycks which he sayeth Haue freely taken this Oath as their freedome was that which now I haue mentioned and a principall motiue as may be presumed the desyre they had to giue his Ma. tie satisfaction and deliuer themselues and others so much as lay in them from that inference of disloyall meaning which vpon the denyall therof some do vse to make so I cannot but in charity assure my self that they being Catholicks tooke the said Oath for so much as concerneth the Popes authority in dealing with temporall Princes in some such lawfull sense and interpretation as being by them expressed and accepted by the Magistrate may stand with the integrity and sincerity of true Catholicke doctrine and faith To witt that the Pope hath not Authority without iust cause to proceed against them Quia illud possumus quod iure possumus saith the law Our authority is limited by Iustice. Directly also the Pope may be denyed to haue such authority against Princes but indirectly only in ordine ad spiritualia and when certayne great importaÌ„t vrgent cases concerning Christian religion fall out which we hope will neuer be betweene our Soueraigne and the Sea Apostolicke for so much as they haue past already many yeares though in different Religions in peace and quietnes euen since his Ma. tie began first to raigne XXXI But concerning the generall Question to deny simply and absolutely That the Pope is supreme Pastour of the Catholicke Church hath any authoritie left him by Christ eyther directly or indirectly with cause or without cause in neuer so great a necessity or for neuer so great and publicke an vtility of the Christian Religion to proceed against any Prince whatsoeuer temporally for his restraint or amendment or to permitt other Princes to doe the same this I suppose was neuer their meaning that tooke the Oath for that they should therby contradict the generall consent of all Catholicke Deuines and confesse that Gods prouidence for the conseruation and preseruation of his Church and Kingdome vpon earth had bene defectuous for that he should haue left no lawful remedy for so great and excessiue an euill as that way might fail out XXXII Wherefore for so much as some such moderate meaning must nedes be presumed to haue bene in those that tooke the Oath for safeguard of their Consciences if it might please his Maiesty to like well and allow of this moderation and fauourable interpretation as all â—orreyne Catholicke Kings and Monarchs doe without any prejudice at all of their safety dignity or Imperiall preheminence I doubt not but he should fynd most ready conformity in all his said English Catholicke Subiects to take the said Oath who now haue great scruple repugnance oâ— Conscience therin both for that the chiefest learned men of their Church doe hold the same for vtterly vnlawfull being mixed and compounded as it is and the voyce oâ— their chiefe Pastour to whome by the rules of their Religion they thinke themselues bound to harken in like câ—ses hath vtterly condemned the same and the very tenour of the Oath it self and last lines therof are That euery one shall sweare without any Equiuocation or mentall reseruation at all that is to say hartily willingly truely vpon the true faith of a Christian. Which being so they see not how they may take the said Oath in truth of CoÌ„scieÌ„ce for so much as they find no such willingnes in their harts nor can they induce themselues in a matter so neerly concerning the Confession of their faith to Equiuocate or sweare in any other sense then from his Maiesty is proposed and therefore doe thinke it lesse hurt to deny plainly and sincerely to sweare then by swearing neither to giue satisfaction to God nor to his Maiesty nor to themselues nor to their neighbours And so much of this point XXXIII There followeth an other which is the third about this matter where this Apology saieth That God did blesse this godly deuise and intent of making and vrging this Oath by the admittance thereof by so many Priests Laâ—cks c. Which blessing if it be a blessing must concerne eyther the takers or the exhibitours or both But for the takers what inward blessing of comfort in conscience they may haue receaued thereby I know not But for outward blessing I see small for they remaine either in prisons