A treatise tending to mitigation tovvardes Catholike-subiectes in England VVherin is declared, that it is not impossible for subiects of different religion, (especially Catholikes and Protestantes) to liue togeather in dutifull obedience and subiection, vnder the gouernment of his Maiesty of Great Britany. Against the seditions wrytings of Thomas Morton minister, & some others to the contrary. Whose two false and slaunderous groundes, pretended to be dravvne from Catholike doctrine & practice, concerning rebellion and equiuocation, are ouerthrowne, and cast vpon himselfe. Dedicated to the learned schoole-deuines, cyuill and canon lavvyers of the tvvo vniuersities of England. By P.R. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610. 1607 Approx. 1216 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 301 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2003-11 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A09111 STC 19417 ESTC S114220 99849446 99849446 14593 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A09111) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 14593) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 815:17, 1326:2) A treatise tending to mitigation tovvardes Catholike-subiectes in England VVherin is declared, that it is not impossible for subiects of different religion, (especially Catholikes and Protestantes) to liue togeather in dutifull obedience and subiection, vnder the gouernment of his Maiesty of Great Britany. Against the seditions wrytings of Thomas Morton minister, & some others to the contrary. Whose two false and slaunderous groundes, pretended to be dravvne from Catholike doctrine & practice, concerning rebellion and equiuocation, are ouerthrowne, and cast vpon himselfe. Dedicated to the learned schoole-deuines, cyuill and canon lavvyers of the tvvo vniuersities of England. By P.R. Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610. [28], 556, [14] p. Printed by F. Bellet] Permissu superiorum, [Saint-Omer : 1607. P.R. = Robert Parsons. A reply to "An exact discoverie of Romish doctrine in the case of conspiracie and rebellion, by pregnant observations" and "A full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquitie; hainous rebellion, and more then heathenish æquivocation" by Thomas Morton. Place of publication and printer's name from STC. Quires 3V-end have horizontal chain lines. 3Y4 is cancelled. Includes index. Reproductions of the originals in the Bodleian Library and the Union Theological Seminary (New York, N.Y.). Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659. -- Exact discoverie of Romish doctrine in the case of conspiracie and rebellion, by pregnant observations -- Early works to 1800. Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659. -- Full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquitie; hainous rebellion, and more then heathenish æquivocation -- Early works to 1800. Catholics -- England -- Early works to 1800. 2000-00 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2001-09 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2002-07 John Latta Sampled and proofread 2002-07 John Latta Text and markup reviewed and edited 2002-08 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A TREATISE TENDING TO MITIGATION tovvardes Catholicke-Subiectes in England . VVHERIN IS DECLARED , That it is not impossible for Subiects of different Religion , ( especially Catholickes and Protestantes ) to liue togeather in dutifull obedience and subiection , vnder the gouernment of his Maiesty of Great Britany . AGAINST The seditious wrytings of THOMAS MORTON Minister , & some others to the contrary . Whose two false and slaunderous groundes , pretended to be dravvne from Catholicke doctrine & practice , concerning REBELLION and EQVIVOCATION , are ouerthrowne , and cast vpon himselfe . Dedicated to the learned Schoole-Deuines , Cyuill and Canon Lavvyers of the tvvo Vniuersities of England . By P. R. Prou. 26. Vers. 20. Susurrone subtracto , iurgia conquiescunt . The make-bate being remoued , brawles do cease . Permissu Superiorum . 1607. THE SVMME OF ALL THAT IS HANDLED IN THIS TREATISE . 1. IN the Preface and first six Chapters , is discussed all that belongeth to the first imputation about Disobedience or Rebellion , either out of the Catholicke or Protestant doctrine , vse , practice , or consequence therof : with what is obiected , or answered on both partes . 2. IN the other 7. Chapters , is treated the Question of Equiuocation , how it began , what origen , causes , vse , or necessity it hath , or may haue ; what circumstances for lawfulnes , what restraintes , or limites : and finally , what practice among all sortes of men in certaine cases , euen with those that most impugne the same . 3. Vpon all which is inferred the principall conclusion ; that these two pretended obstacles do not let , but that Catholicke and Protestant English Subiectes may liue togeather in vnion of dutifull obedience vnder his Maiesty , to his , and their both safety and comfortes , if seditious make-bates be remoued . THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY . To the learned Schole-Deuines and Lawiers of both faculties in the Vniuersities of England . IT was no part of my purpose ( learned Countrey-men ) when I tooke this Treatise first in hand , either to wade so farre therin , as now I haue byn compelled ; or yet to prefix any other Epistle Dedicatory before the same , then the large common Preface it selfe that doth ensue , which may partly appeare by the argument therof , as namely also and principally , by that which we haue set downe in the third Chapter of this Treatise : for that taking in hand , but to point , as it were , at the exorbitant number of some monstrous , and malitious lyes , and slaunders cast abroad this last yeare in a certayne small contemptible , but wicked and hatefull libell , vnder the tytle of A discouery of Romish doctrine in the case of Conspiracy and Rebellion by T. M. I thought it sufficient to that purpose to shew not only the cankred vntruthes of those most false & virulent calumniations ; but the many inōueniences also , and publicke hurtes , which do , and must needes ensue to any Common wealth , that suffereth such venemous tongues to sow hatred , dissention , diffidence , and the seedes of perpetuall emnity and alienation among the Subiects therof . 2. Which point hauing to my iudgment sufficiently performed , I saw a farre greater booke published from the same Author stuffed with Marchandize of like marke , but yet imbracing more matter , to wit , n t only the former argument , or inuectiue of heynous Rebellion ; but ( to vse the writers wordes ) of heathenish , hellish , and execrable Equiuocation , chargin Catholicke people so deeply and desperatly in them both , as t●at in these two respects , they are not only in his censure insociable , & intractable , but also insufferable in any Protestant common wealth : whervpon I was enforced as well to reassume againe that which before I had done and layd aside , vpon certayn causes whi●h afterwards are vttered ; as also to dilate my selfe much further , for defence of equity and truth , and for the repressing somwhat this violent rayling 〈◊〉 and for rendering some euident reasons of Catholickes innocency and integrity in them both . Wherin what I haue performed for their iust and lawfull defence , I leaue it to the Iudgement of yow my learned Countrey-men , after yow shall haue read ouer this our Answere , presuming that your learning and vnderstanding is accōpanyed also with such ingenuity of good nature , and maturity of Iudgement , as yow will not be carryed away with the wynd , and sound of wordes only as others of lesser capacity ; nor yet be much moued with the false outcryes of perfidious Make-bates , who inraged with the imaginations of hate and auersion , do like 〈◊〉 houndes runne-counter vpon euery false sent they apprehend , or frame vnto themselues ; but rather will stand firme , and weigh the substance , and proofes of matters with their due circumstances . Which if yow performe , yow shall fynd all these odious and clamorous accusations , and exaggerations of this fyerie Minister to be nothing els , but euaporations of a hoate distempered brayne with aboundance of hatred and want of Christian charit . 3. And to say a word or two of the reasons that moued me to present this worke to yow the learned of our English Vniuersities in the foresayd sciences of Schoole - Deuinity and Lawe , both Canon & Ciuill , wherof the first is , that the question of Equiuocation ( wherof our chiefe contention is ) being a matter handled in these three facultyes , ( though vpon different occasions ) yow can far better 〈◊〉 therof then others , who apprehending only the name togeather with their owne conceipts therof without true knowledge of the groundes , reasons & circumstances wherby it is made lawfull , doe not so eagerly , as ignorantly , cry out against it , condemning & detesting that which they vnderstand not , as largly is declared in the 7. Chapter of the ensuing Treatise , which is the first concerning that argument . But such as are more conuersant and better studied in the said sciences , and know the true principles wheron the question standeth , are not so rash nor headlong , but goe more reseruedly therin , distinguishing betweene 〈◊〉 and vnlawfull , Amphybologie or Equiuocation , as signing to 〈◊〉 one their tymes , cases , causes , reseruations and limitations , according to the obseruation of Aristotle : Prudentis est distinguere ; It appertayneth to a wise and discreet man to distinguish ; wheras the ignorant and vnlearned doth commonly confound all without distinction . 4. My second reason was , for that forreine Vniuersities , and learned men therof , vnde standing such a booke to haue byn set forth by an English Vniuersity man , and not without direction ( as he saith ) from his Superiors , wherin all vse of Equiuocation or Amphybology in any case whatsoeuer is condemned as vnlawfull , impious execrable , hellish , heathenish , the black-art , and other such tearmes , without respect or regard , that in all other Vniuersityes in Catholicke Coūtreyes throughout the world , in all Courtes and Tribunalls , and in all learned Authors & professors of the foresaid three faculties , for many ages , some vse therof hath byn taught and allowed : diuers learned ( I say ) haue wondred therat and laughed also , especially being aduertised that this doctrine of Equiuocation is ascribed , as a new thing to the Iesuits , wheras many ages before their name was heard of in the world this doctrine was known , taught , and held . Wherfore these strangers are wont to demaund , whether there be any learned men indeed in these three facultyes now in our Vniuersities , and whether any be studyed in Schoole-Deuinity and the Lawes , either Ciuill or Canon ; for if there be , it seemes impossible to them that such a booke should be suffered to come forth so full of ignorance as this is . For ( say they ) if they had read or looked ouer but these heads in the said sciences , to wit , of the nature of truth and lyinge of the lawfullnes of dissimulation in certaine cases both in wordes & works , as namely , in stratagemes of war , of the lawfulnes of couering some truth vpon iust occasion in the Canon law out of S. Augustine , of 〈◊〉 malus and Dolus 〈◊〉 or vtilis in the same law out of S. Hierome , and other Fathers ; of the cases wherin a man may sweare , or not sweare lawfully , or not be bound to keep his oath ; of the question whether God can deceiue , or any man else by his spirit , of the limitations of an accuser and defendant ; of the obligation of a witnes to vtter , deny or dissemble the truth ; of the office of a Iudge , Aduocate , or Solicitour in accusation or defence of any body ; of the cases wherin secresy is necessarily to be obserued by all lawfull meanes , both in & out of confession , and diuers other such like heades of doctrine , as occurre daylie in all the foresaid three faculties , and in the common vse of mans life ; these learned men affirme , that it is impossible for our Vniuersity-Doctors to haue read and weighed them , but they must confesse the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in diuers cases , and that it may be without lying ( which is lawfull in no case , nor for any cause whatsoeuer . ) Wherof they inferre that either their sciences are not studyed in our Vniuersites , or that the students profit little in them , or that the worst learned of all are suffered to write bookes : which thing for that it appertayneth to the disgrace of your so famous Schooles ; I thought it one sufficiēt cause amongst the rest , to dedicate this Answere vnto yow . 5. My third reason was to moue yow by this occasion , to consider more attentiuely what manner of men they be for the most part , that write in England at this day ; how shallow in the matters they take vpō them to make bookes of ; but especially to wish yow , that when any booke commeth forth , yow would but examine the truth of the citations which are alleadged by them , for this only would be sufficient to informe and satisfie yow where the truth is . And so I desire no more but your attention in this one point , for the decision of the controuersie betweene me and Thomas Morton : for if yow find him to haue dealt sincerly in alleaging his Authors , I am content he haue the victory , though he haue behaued himself otherwise neuer so weakly . For triall of which point , I remit my self to that , which I haue handled afterward more plentifully and perticularly in the 2. 6. and 12. Chapters of purpose . 6. But yet for that since the writing of the ensuing Preface , I haue read and pervsed two Epistles of his last booke intituled , A full satisfaction , the one to the Kings Maiesty , the other to the seduced brethren , as scornfully he calleth the Catholickes , which Epistles haue as much gaule in them as the mans dispitefull stomake could vtter , I shall pray yow to haue patience with me , if I runne ouer briefly certaine notes out of the said Epistles , wherby yow may partly take notice of the mans talent in writing , but especially in raylinge , vntill yow come vnto a more full view therof in the sequele of this our Answere that doth ensue . 7. Thus then he beginneth with his Maiesty within some halfe dosen lines after the entrance of his Epistle . Innocency , ( saith he ) which though naked was neuer ashamed , hath charged me to manifest my self vnto your Highnes , and togeather with my Aduersarye to appeale vnto your incōparable wisdome , which I doe in so constant assurance of an vpright cōscience as that I shal willingly remit that iust aduantage , which the difference of comparison both betweene a legitimate or conformable subiect , and a person suspiciously degenerate , as also betweene a Minister of simple truth , and a professed Equiuocator doth offer vnto me . Heere yow see him vaunt of sundry points ; as first of his naked innocency , which we haue afterwards to his greater shame , so cloathed with the foule ragges of his lying and most deceiptfull dealing , as she may no more be called a naked , but rather a clouted innocency , if innocency at all , and not rather malicious nocencie , intending to wound and iniury the iust , and such as are faultles and innocent in deed . 8 Secondly he appealeth to his Maiestyes incōparable wisdome , as yow see , in the constant assurance of an vpright conscience ; but we haue shewed throughout this whole worke , that nothing is further of from this fellow , then any conscience at all : for that we haue taken him in so many wilfull falsifications and corruptions ( wherin he could not but know that he did lye and falsify ; ) as besides all other examples layd forth in sundry seuerall partes of this Answere , I haue byn forced to make a speciall Chapter therof , which is the sixt of this ensuring worke , where as also in the 4. Paragraph of the 2. Chapter and els where , the Reader shall fynd such store of testimonyes against the vprightnes of this mans conscience , as I dare assure my selfe , he will leese , with indifferent men , the constant assurance of honesty , howsoeuer in his owne opinion he may hold the same assurance for other matters . 9. Thirdly he saith to his Maiesty he doth willingly remit that iust aduantage which the difference of a legitimate and conformable subiect , and a person suspiciously degenerate doth offer vnto him : wherin what he would say I do rather ghesse by discourse , then vnderstand by the sense of his wordes . For I imagine that the Minister would say , that he is ready and prest to conforme himselfe to any thing , that the State or Prince shall appoint him , as well in Religion , as in other matters whatsoeuer , and that therin cōsisteth his vprightnes of conscience , to wit , to be conformable . And for that his aduersary shewing himselfe ( perhaps ) more scrupulous and timerous in certayne pointes concerning his soule or conscience , and not so conformable : therfore he calleth him suspiciously degenerate , and no legitimate , and conformable subiect , which whither it tendeth , and towardes what gate of Atheisme , or Herodianisme , euery man that hath Iudgement and conscience in deed will easily discerne . 10. But of all the rest , the fourth point is the most ridiculous , wherin he intituleth himselfe , A minister of simple truth , and his aduersary A professed Equiuocator , wheras I haue shewed in the 7. and 12. Chapters of this Answere , first , that such as grant the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in some limited cases , are farre more seuere & rigorous against al kynd of lying in the least things that may be ( as appeareth by their knowne , and confessed doctrine by vs set downe , ) then are their aduersaryes in the greatest ; yea highest kind or degree of that sinne , I meane of lying : and in the second , besides the multiplicy of conuictions , wherby I haue made demonstration of this mans falsity euery where , I haue shewed in the foresaid 12. Chapter , that he ( this Minister to wit of simple truth ) as also his fellowes which professe themselues such enemyes of lawfull Equiuocation that may be vsed without lying , do Equiuocate euery where in the worst & most sinfull sort of flat lying that may be imagined , without any reseruation or veile , or substance of truth at all . For proofe wherof I 〈◊〉 me to the said 12. Chapter , and shall returne to follow this fellow somwhat further in the said Epistle to his Maiesty . 11. For not many lynes after the former passage , by occasion of certayne wordes of him that first answered him about a march of apes ; he taketh vpon him to set forth a certayne march of Soldiers cōming against his Maiesty and other Protestant Princes from the 7. hills of Babilon , to wit Rome , saying thus : May it please your sacred Maiesty , to see how exactly they imitate Souldiers in their march ? Parsons , teaching persecution against all Kings and States Protestant , doth propound for his imitation the example of Dauid in his conflict against Goliah : Allen , the example of Eliah in calling , if it were possible , for fyre from heauen to consume the Messengers of Kings : Reynolds the example of Iabel to knock Generaels on the head : Bellarmine the example of Iehoida , and other Priestes for murthering of opposite Queenes : Sanders , the example of Mattathias , who fought against King Antiochus : Simancha the example of Heathenish Scythians , who murthered their naturall King Scyles : Boucher the example of Sampson , to kill , if they can , a thousand of his supposed Philisthians with the iaw bone of an Asse . 12. So he . And doth not the man deserue to haue a iawe-bone of an Asse for his dinner , that hath so laboured to lay togeather these impertinent examples , without head or foote , ground or proofe , purpose or coherence , truth or similitude with the matter in hand ? For where doth he fynd these marchinges against his Maiesty ? why had not he cyted some place or testimony wherby might appeare this to be true that he obiecteth heere to these mē against his Highnes ? Nay if his Maiesty will remember marchinges against him indeed , not imaginations in the ayre as these are , he will consider what manner of men they haue byn , either Protestants or Catholickes that haue marched and machinated against him and his , for more then 40. yeares togeather , while he was in Scotland ; what royall bloud was shed of his neerest and dearest in kynred ; what violence vsed and practised vpon his owne person , and parents ; who were the Authors , incensers , fyre-brands , & bellowes of these enraged flames ; Priests or Ministers ; those that came from the hills of Rome , or such as had their spirite from the valley of Geneua : and then if we would frame a squadron of all those turbulent & lawlesse Protestant people , that vexed and afflicted his Maiesty in Scotland , and marched against him , and his noble Mother , and grand Mother with banners displayed : and that we should place before these againe , a Vanguard of preaching-Scottish-Ministers , as Knox , and all his 〈◊〉 , exhorting , in cyting & sounding out the trumpets of these rebellions ; and a Rereward againe of English-Ministers standing behind them , and clapping their handes to their encouragemēt , writing bookes and sending them all ayde both in words and workes that possibly they could procure ; whilest in the meane space both Catholicke priests & people in England , Rome , and els where , prayed hartely for the good successe of his Maiesties said parents , and for his in theirs : this ( I say ) was a true and reall march in deed , & that other imaginary , which our Minister to make vs odious hath heere deuised . 13. And to speake one word more of this matter , for that it is of much importance , and the truth therof notorious to the world : When vpon the yeare of Christ 1586. fourteene principall and zealous yong gentle-men were most pittifully put to death in London , and diuers others condemned , and their goods confiscated for an imputation , that they would 〈◊〉 deliuered his Maiestyes mother 〈◊〉 of prison , and fauoured her succession to the Crowne ; did not 〈◊〉 raging Ministers then , no lesse fyerie 〈◊〉 MORTON now , raue out of euery pulpit , not so much against them , as againste the cause and obiectes of their calamity , which was the loue they bare both to mother and sonne in that behalfe ? Against 〈◊〉 also they neuer ceased to crye vntill they had gotten the life of the one to be taken away , and the Statute of Association to be made for endangering the other . 14. And when before that againe , vpon the yeare 1581. fourteene learned priests and Iesuites , were arraigned & condemned vpon pretence that their comming into England was for some designement against the State ; was not the greatest , and most odious part of their arraignment ( and most amplyfied by the Attorney Popham at that time ) for that they were deuout to the Queene of Scotland , and her tytle , and prayed for her in their Masses , Letanies , and other prayers ? Yea when some of them came to dye at Tyborne , and prayed at their death for the Queene of England , did not some principall men demaund them publikly from among the people , what Queene they meant , Elizabeth , or Mary ? And was not this an ordinary Equiuocation , which Ministers cryed out that Catholickes then vsed , and especially priests ? And how then doth this fond , and malicious Minister bring in such Marchinges of Catholicke Soldiers against his Maiesty , who euer 〈◊〉 for him ? How doth he talke of such kylling of supposed Philisthines by the iaw-bone of an asse ? The asse in deed we haue found , but the iaw-bone as yet we see not . 15. But let vs heare him go forward in vaunting to his Maiesty of his goodly workes . After the reply is finished ( saith he ) there is presented to your Princely , and most religious iudgement , A confutation of the reasons of two of their more then vnreasonable positiōs ; as namely of haynous Rebellions , and execrable Equiuocations : both which are refelled ( I hope ) sufficiently by the testimonyes of their owne most principall Doctors ; A course which I professe in all disputes ; knowing that by no better wisdome may this new Babylon be confounded , then wherwith God wrought the destruction of the old , euen * The diuision of their tongues . So he . 16. And yow must know , that this diuision of our tongues is nothing els but that he alleageth some tymes different opinions out of some of our Schoole-Doctors ( which our men do for him , he hauing nothing heerin of his owne industry ) in matters that be disputable , and not determined by the 〈◊〉 . And is not this a great point , for so great a Rabbyn to bragge of , as of a course which he 〈◊〉 in all his disputes ? How doth foolish vanity discouer it selfe in all these mens wordes & actions ? And yet let the Reader note attentiuely that notwithstanding this bragge , he hath no one Catholicke Author in all this controuersy about Equiuocation , that absolutly denyeth the thing , or holdeth it for vnlawfull in all pointes as he doth , albeit some do differ in opinion concerning the cases , causes , tymes , meanes , maners , limitations , and circumstances of the same , as after is largely by vs declared . So as heere he hath no diuision of our tongues , but which himselfe maketh , to wit , where somtymes to seeme to finde a difference where none is , he belyeth our Authors flatly , and forceth them to speake one against an other , as in many places we do demonstrate and leaue him with the shame . 17. Wherfore to say as he doth that our execrable Equiuocations are sufficiently refelled by him with the testimonyes of our most principall Doctors is as true , as that he is a Minister of simple truth , and naked innocency , and of constant assurance of an vpright conscience : all which are ridiculous antiphrases in deed , for he hath no one Doctor of ours , either most or least principall with him in his opinion , or that calleth Equiuocations , vsed with due circumstances or limitations , execrable , or vnlawfull , or not necassary in some cases ; nor hath he any one sentence , or testimony of theirs to the contrary , as after is made euident . And consequently this course of Tho. Morton in all his disputes , is a lying course , a vaunting course , a ridiculous course . And as for his disputes , I do shew him after to be so sylly a disputer , as that he knoweth not how to make a true syllogisme , and therfore am forced to send him backe againe to Cambridge to reforme his Logicke , or to learne more : about which point I remit the Reader to that which is handled in the 11. Chapter and els where of this Treatise . 18. Next after this he layeth before his Maiesty a certayne obseruatiō about Popes names , as ful fraught with malice , and deceiptfulnes , as the former with vanity ; and he layeth the obseruation vpon Polydor Virgil , though cyting no place for it . Polydore obserueth ( saith he ) that the Popes a long tyme in their election had their names changed by Antiphrasis , videl . the Elected , if 〈◊〉 were by naturall disposition fearefull , was named Leo , if cruell , Clemēt , if vnciuill , Vrbanus , if wicked , Pius ; if couetous , Bonifacius ; if in all 〈◊〉 intollerable , Innocentius : And with this he thinketh to haue layd downe an obseruation of importance . But why had he not adioyned also , that if he were careles of his flocke , then Gregory must be his name , which importeth a vigilant pastor ? 19. But now let the iudicious Reader obserue the malice , and falshood of this obseruation , and therby iudge , whether the Author therof be a Minister of simple truth or no. Polydore saith only that sometymes Popes , as other Princes in like manner , haue had names , that haue byn different , or rather contrary to their nature & manners , which is an ordinary case if we examine the signification of men and womens names ; but that Popes names were changed of purpose by Antiphrasis , or contrary speach to couer their defectes , as heere is set downe , this is a malicious lye of the Minister , and hath neither simplicyty , nor truth in it , for that all these names heere mentioned of Leo , Clemens , Vrbanus , Pius , Bonifacius , Innocentius , and Gregory , were chosen by the Popes that tooke them for the great reuerence , and estimation they had of certayne excellent men of that name that went before them ; as also for the good abodement of their future gouernment , and to be styrred vp the more by the memory of those names to the vertues signified by them ; but especially for the honor and imitation of the first Popes that bare those names . As for example of S. Leo the first , who how excellent a man he was , both for learning and sanctity , appeareth by the acknowledgment of the Protestants themselues . M. Iewell making this Apostrophe vnto him in his chalenge , O Leo , O 〈◊〉 , O Paul , O Christ ! 20. The like may be said of S. Clement the first and next Pope after S. Peter ; and the same of S. Vrbanus Pope and Martyr , in the second age after the Apostles : and the like of Pius the first Pope and Martyr , in the first age after the said Apostles ; and no lesse of S. Bonifacius the first that liued in the beginning of the fourth age , and a little before him againe in the same age S. Innocentius the first , so highly commended by S. Augustine for a great Saint : and after him againe S. Gregory the Great , and first Pope of that name most admirable both to those of his time and all posterity for many excellent vertues , who though lyuing some ages after all the former ; yet haue there byn 13. Popes after him , that for reuerence of his vertues haue taken his name , and ten of S. Leo , 7. of S. Clement , 6. of S. Vrbanus , 4. of S. Pius , 7. of S. Bonifacius , and 8. of S. Innocentius , wherof none had that name by 〈◊〉 , but all by choise after they were elected Popes , for the causes now touched . Which being so , it is euident what a wicked lost conscience this Minister hath , to auouch vnto a King , and by him to all others , so manifest , and malitious a calumniation . 21. But he goeth further yet in folly to magnify his owne learning and to compare the same with no lesse then Aristotle . 〈◊〉 haue so framed this dispute ( saith he ) that it may seeme , I hope , to be like Aristotles bookes of naturall Philosophy , so published , as not published , &c. And his reason is . For that as he saith , he alwayes putteth downe the clause of ment all reseruation in Latin : which yet is not true , as the Reader wil see by pervsing this booke , he hauing to my remembrance set downe the same in Latyn but once only throughout all his booke , and that in fower words in his second page , the said reseruation being mentioned in English , more perhaps then forty tymes , nor were it of any importance if it were alwayes put downe in Latyn . For that any man lightly whether he vnderstand Latyn , or no , if he see or heare the precedence both of question and answere , will easily ghesse what the reseruation is , if he suspect any to be at all , as if a man doe heare or reade the premisses of a syllogisme in English , he will easely ghesse at the conclusion , though it be in Latin ; yea if he be of any meane capacity , he will gather the inference himselfe by naturall discourse . Wherfore this of Aristotles books was brought in only by the vayne Minister to compare them with his bookes , or , as he calleth them , his disputes , so published ( forsooth ) as not published , for that he imagineth that the common capacity of men cannot reach vnto the depth therof , he wadeth so profoundly in his owne folly . But yow will see afterwardes that he is vnderstood , and so decyphered , as he may be vnderstood , and pitted also by others . And I know no sense wherin he may say , that his workes are so published , as not published , but that they are not worthy indeed the publishing and much lesse the readinge , wherin they doe differ much from those of Aristotle . 22. It followeth in his said Epistle to his Maiesty : For that this doctrine of Equiuocation ( saith he ) acknowledged by your admirable wisdome to be in religion most 〈◊〉 and detestable , in politike State most pernicious and intollerable , and in euery actor most banefull to the soule of man ; it may please your Excellent Maiesty to prouide in this behalse for your faithfull and religious Subiectes , that they neuer be so intoxicated with this Antichristian spirite , as either to deceyue , or be deceyued therby , &c. Would God it might please his Highnes in his admirable wisedome to pervse ouer but two , or three Chapters of this Treatise about Equiuocation , and the reasons of the lawfulnes and necessity therof in some cases , togeather with the grosse , monstrous , sacrilegious , and detestable licence of lying , taken vp , and vied by the impugners of lawfull Equiuocation , and especially Ministers , that most talke , and make profession of simple truth ; I do not doubt , but his Excellent Maiesty out of his Christian piety would prouide in this behalfe , for his faithfull and religious Subiectes that they should not be so much deceyued by 〈◊〉 , as they are , nor intoxicated with their Antichristiā lying spirite , to their eternal perditiō . And this is so much as I haue thought good to reply in this place cōcerning his Epistle to his Maiesty . 23. As for the other which scornfully he directeth to the deceyued brethren , it is so short , fond & ydle a thing , that it deserueth no answere at all , the principall point , whervpon he standeth therin , being this , that Catholicke people are seduced by their priestes , who will be Doctors ( saith he out of S. Paul to Timothy ) and yet vnderstand not what they say , nor vvherof they affirme . But whether this description of fond presumptuous Doctors touched by S. Paul do agree rather to Protestant-Ministers , or to Catholicke priestes , will appeare in great part by reading ouer this booke , especially the 5. 8. and 10. Chapters , if by Thomas Mortons errors and ignorances , a scantling may be taken of the rest . But now let vs 〈◊〉 how he doth go about to proue that our priests are such bad Doctors , as S. Paul speaketh of . 24. His chiefe proofe consisteth in a certayne comparing of them with those Iewish priestes of the old law in Christes tyme , who taught the souldiers that watched at the Sepulcher of our Sauiour , to say , that whilest they were sleeping , his disciples came & stole him away ; Common sense ( saith he ) might haue replyed , how could yow tell , what was done , when yow were all a sleepe ? But myndes enthralled in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood ( which confirmed that 〈◊〉 ) could not possibly but erre with their priestes ; such ( alas ) is the case of all them , &c. Do yow see how substantially he hath proued this matter ? Let vs examine the particulers : 〈◊〉 the story , then the inference . 25. About the story , S. Mathew recounteth in the 28. chapter of his Ghospell , how Christ our Sauiour being raysed miraculously from death to lyse , with a great and dreadfull earthquake , and discent of an Angels , so as the souldiers that kept the sepulcher were astonished , and almost dead for feare , some of them ranne and told the chiefe priests therof , who making a consultation with the Elders , deuised this shift to giue them store of money and to bid them say , that in the night when they were a sleepe his disciples came and stole him away , and so they did . And S. Mathew addeth , that this false brute ranne currant among the Iewes , euen vntill that tyme , wherin he wrote his Ghospell . This is the narration , what hath now Thom. Morton to say to this against vs , for therunto is all his dryfte . First he saith as yow haue heard that this deuise was improbable , and against common sense it selfe . Common sense ( saith he ) might haue replyed ( to the souldiers ) what could yow tell what was done when yow were all a sleepe ? Se heere the sharpenes of Tho. Mortons wit , aboue that of the Priests , Scribes , and Pharisies . But what if one of the souldiers had replyed to him thus : VVe saw it not , when we were a sleepe , but afterward when we were awakened , we perceyued that he was stolne away . What reioynder would our minister make ? As for example if Tho. Morton were walking with a cōmunion-booke vnder his arme through a feild , and wearyed should ly downe to sleepe with his booke by his syde , and at his awaking should see his booke gone , were it against cōmon sense for him to say , that his booke was stolne from him while he was a sleepe ? Or is not this an assertion fit for one of those Doctors wherof S. Paul talketh , that vnderstand not what they say , or wherof they affirme . But this will better yet appeare by the second point which is his inference . Wherfore we must a litle also examine that . 26. But 〈◊〉 ( saith he ) 〈◊〉 in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood ( which confirmed that answere ) could not possibly but erre with their priestes , such ( alas , is the case of all them , &c. The malitious man would deface Christian priesthood by the Iewish priesthood , and our Priests by theirs : but consider how farre he runneth from the marke in both : Myndes enthralled ( saith he ) in the opinion of a neuer-erring priesthood , which confirmed this answere : Did the Priest-hood of Iury confirme this Answere ? Who saith so ? We read that the Priests with the Elders did deuise this answer , and they knew they did euill , and lye therin , and so did the souldiers also that published the same . But this was a matter of fact , not a determination of faith . Neyther among the Iewes nor Christians was there euer opinion that Priests , or Priesthood could not erre in matters of fact , lyfe , or their maners . How then is this to the purpose ? Or doth not this also proue him to be one of those forenamed Doctors , that vnderstand not what they say , or wherof they affirme ? How much more modesty and piety had it byn in Thom. Morton to haue followed the example of Christ and his Apostles , who though persecuted by those Priests ; yet both thought and spake reuerently of the Priesthood . 27. S. Iohn the Euangelist setting downe the speach of wicked Cayphas the High-Priest about the death of Christ , to wit , that it was necessary sor one to dye for the people ; addeth presently : that Cayphas spake not this of himselfe , but prophesyed as being High-Priest of that yeare . S. Paul in like manner being apprehended , and brought into a Counsell of the Iewes , and vniustly stroken on the face by the commaundement of wicked Ananias the High-Priest , whome thervpon in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Paynted-wall , as soone as euer he was 〈◊〉 that he was the High-Priest , he excused himselfe , that he knew it not . I did not know brethren ( saith he ) that he was Chiefe-Priest for it is writen , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not speake 〈◊〉 of the Prince of thy 〈◊〉 And when the said Apostle doth afterwards handle in his Epistle to the Hebrewes this Iewish Priesthood , as a figure of that of Christ our Sauiour , and of the new 〈◊〉 he speaketh very honorably therof , saying : That 〈◊〉 Chief-Priest taken out from men , is appointed for men in those things that belong to to God , to offer giftes , and sacrifices for 〈◊〉 , &c. But Christ himselfe most honorably of all other gaue to his disciples , and to the people this aduertisement : Vpon the Chayre of Moyses haue sitten Scribes and Pharisies ; all things therfore whatsoeuer they shall say vnto yow , obserue , and do them , but do not according to their workes . 28. And if vnto the ancient Aaronicall Priest-hood of the old Testament , so much honour , so much credit , so much obedience was to be performed ( which yet was not so sanctifyed by the diuine person of Christ himselfe , nor yet so adorned with the promise of his infallible assistance , as ours of the new Testament is , according to the Order of Melchisedech ) what impiety is this in Thomas Morton to go about to discredit the one by the other ? yea to ascribe the lying of the Iewish souldyers and their talking against common sense ( as he will haue it ) vnto their enthralled opinion of a neuer-erring Priest-hood ? Is not this sensles ? Had these souldyers an opinion perhaps that their Priests could not sinne ? Or did they hold this for 〈◊〉 point of doctrine , determined vnto them out of Moyses chayre ? Or if te y did not , how is this their fact attributed by Thomas Morton vnto that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? 29. But he goeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 all our errors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : for 〈◊〉 wherof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that God in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 lyes and 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 examples the deliuery of 〈◊〉 soule out 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : The donation of Constantine ; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our Lady ; the 〈◊〉 of a 〈◊〉 by S. 〈◊〉 ; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christians amongst the Indians &c. But heere now Thomas 〈◊〉 , if he would shew 〈◊〉 a man of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and iudgment indeed , & to deale really and not by calumniatio , should proue three thinges . First that all these positions are held by vs as he setteth them downe : Secondly that they are all false indeed as we hold them : and thirdly , that therfore we erre in them , for that we belieue our Priest-hood cannot erre ; so as the causality of these errors must fall vpon the enthralled opinion of our neuer-erring Priest-hood . 30. Of which three pointes he proueth neuer a one , nor goeth about to proue it : and we deny them all in the sense that he obiecteth them : For as for Traians soule , no learned Catholicke man doth hold it , either for true or likly : and it is at large refuted by Baronius a Catholicke writer . Constantines donation is a matter of story disputed to and fro by learned men of our religion . The assumption of our B. Lady hath more groundes for it , then either Morton or a thousand Mortous will be able to impugne , for that he can not deny , but that for many ages togeather it hath byn receaued through out all Christendome for an ancient tradition , and from the time of the most learned S. Iohn Damascene , ( that liued in the East Church , almost mine hundred yeares gone , and expresly recordeth the said tradition to be held for ancient in his time ) T. M. must needes graunt the same ; and then how many thousandes of more learned , godly , vigilant , and prudent Christian men then Morton is , haue belieued the same in so many worldes throughout all Christendome , as namely S. Bernard and others , euery man may easily see , as also consider this one reason amongst the rest ; that if the sacred body of that Blessed Virgin , Mother of God , had byn left any where vpon earth , as other Saintes bodyes were , ther would haue remayned at least some memory , some testimony therof , or some deuotion to the place . 31. And for so much as by Gods holy prouidence so great concourse hath byn made euer vnto the bodyes of S. Peter , S. Paul , and other of the Apostles , Martyres and Saintes of God , in different places , though neuer so remote , it is more then probable , that some would haue byn made likewise vnto this sacred body of our Blessed Lady : but the malice of these people is such to the holy memory of this blessed virgin vpon earth , and their precipitation to 〈◊〉 so hasty and inconsiderate , as whatsoeuer they see not with their eyes , they deny as absolutly false . For what certainty can T. M. haue ( thinke yow ) against the bodily 〈◊〉 of our Blessed Lady , his assertion being a bare negatiue ? What certainty against the miracles wrought by God in the Indies ? Is the hand of God shortened ? Is not Christ as powerfull now , as he was in the Primitiue Church , when he extended his hand to miracles , as his Disciples with exultation 〈◊〉 ? Are not these Indians new Christians as the other in Iury were ? Did not Christ euen then when he gaue power to worke miracles , expressly say , that he would be with them ( not for this or that age ) but vnto the end of the world ? How then doth this arrogant-sylly-gras-hopper insult here in fauour of Infidels , and disgrace of Christians , calling them , lying miracles amongst the Indians ? Hath he perchance euer byn there ? Hath he aduentured his life to gaine those soules vnto Christ , that dyed for them , as others haue donne ? Hath he suffered hunger and thirst , could and heates , persecution and affliction with losse of his bloud for gayning of those poore Indian 〈◊〉 , as others haue suffered , and 〈◊〉 dayly ? Noe. He hath done nothing of this , but contrary wise stood a farre of in England , hath attended to good cheare and ease , procured benefices and fauour of the State , and now vpon the suddaine is become an aduocate for the Indian Pagans , to scorne at the Christian miracles wrought by Gods power among them , though testified by neuer so great and graue Authority vnto vs. And is not this a pious man thinke yow . 32. As for S. Francis louse , I neuer heard of that scorne before , and I meruaile in what part of our Theologicall assertions he 〈◊〉 place 〈◊〉 , or how he will deduce the 〈◊〉 of this louse from our enthraled opinion of our neuer-erring Priest-hood . For soe he must , if he talke to the purpose . And when he will or can doe this , euery man seeth . In the meane space , I leaue it to that glorious Saint now in heauen , where no lise be , to answere the contumely , if he thinke good , either vpon earth or else where . Sure I am that I haue reade of strange euentes in some vpon lesse pride and in solency vsed towardes the Seruautes of God then this . The examples most knowne are of Herods lise , that deuoured him ; and if we belieue Doctor Bolsacke the Phisitian of Geneua , Iohn Caluin dyed of the like disease . God defend all good men , and T. M. also from like chastisement , and cure 〈◊〉 rage of his cōtumelious & blasphemous tōgue , whilest he hath time of 〈◊〉 . 33. And now for that this Epistle groweth ouer longe , and we shall haue large occasions afterwàrdes to 〈◊〉 open this mans defects in these behalfes , we shall goe no further in examining of matters heere , but passe to the treatise it self designed to procure ( if it be possible ) some Mitigation of affliction & persecution towards Catholicke Subiects , drawne into publique hatred , exulceration and exceration by such diuellish Sycophancy and odious Calumniations , as this fellow and his like haue cast forth against them , without al groūd , but of malice & hatred , as by his accusations and our answeres , I doubt not , yow wil manifestly perceiue . I beseech Christ Iesus our Sauiour to turne all to his greater glory , & then happy are our suffrings : & so to his holy prouidence & protection I cōmit the whole . Your louing Countreyman , that wisheth your best good . P. R. A TABLE Of the particular Contentes , Chapters , and Paragraphes of the ensuing TREATISE . THE Preface to all true harted Englishmen , that loue the honour ; safety , and best good of their Nation , Prince and Countrey ; of the present diuision and disagreement about matters of religion in England , and of so many importune exasperations vsed by diuers sortes of men , to encrease the same : and namely by this Minister Th. Morton his iniurious libell . Pag. 1. That the maine Proposition insinuated and vrged by T. M. That Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant Common welth in respect of Rebellion and Conspiracies is vntrue , indiscreet , and pernicious ; and falleth rather vpon Protestant-subiects then Catholiks . Chap. I. pag. 31 Ten Reasons or rather Calumniations brought by T. M. for maintenance of 〈◊〉 former Proposition : That Catholike people are intolerable in a Protestant Gouernment , in respect of 〈◊〉 , conspiracies and rebellion , 〈◊〉 , and returned vpon himselfe and his , Chap. II. p. 52. How this Treatise was layed aside by 〈◊〉 of the Author and some other causes : And why it was taken in hand againe vpon the sight of a Cath. Answere , and a new Reply of T. M. 〈◊〉 to his Maiefly ; with the Authors iudgement of them both . Chap. III. pag. 89. VVhat the 〈◊〉 Thomas Morton doth in this Reply and full satisfaction answere , concerning the former point of Charge against Protestants for Rebellion , Conspiracies , and disobedience ; the effect wherof is drawne to three principall Questions . Chap. IIII. pag. 103. The first Question about Heretickes & heresy , § . 1. pag. 105. The second Question about seditious doctrine , para . 2. p. 112. The third Question cōcerning practice of 〈◊〉 . § . 3 p. 122. A briefe Censure is giuen of a new Treatise set forth by T. M. 〈◊〉 ; A Confutation of the Popes 〈◊〉 as supreme head of rebellion , &c. annexed to his former iustification of Protestant-Princes for matters of 〈◊〉 . Chap. V. pag. 139. The second Part of this Chapter conteyning three particular kindes of proofes , alleaged by T. M. against the Popes supremacy to witt : Out of the new and old Testament , & from Reason it selfe . pag. 159. A brief view of certaine notorious ; false and fraudulent dealings vsed by T. M. in this his short seuerall Treatise against the Popes Supremacy : As also sundry examples of the like proceeding in the former part of hisdeceytfull Reply . Chap. VI. pag. 189. The second part of this Chapter representing some of the falsifications which are 〈◊〉 in the former Part of M. Mortons reply ; which came to our hands after our Answere made before in our second Chapter against his ten Reasons . pag. 218. The third Part of this Chapter conteyning a Controuersy , VVhether Caluin fauoured Arianisme , or no ; with diuers 〈◊〉 of . T. Morton about the same . pag. 244. Of the second Generall Point of Calumniation set forth against Catholickes by T. Morton concerning Equiuocation , which is reduced to certaine particular Considerations for better discussion therof , Chap. VII . pag. 273. The substance of the Cause is entred into ; and it is discussed , What 〈◊〉 , what 〈◊〉 , what falsity , and lying is : and some other pointes 〈◊〉 this effect , Chap. VIII . pag. 307. The second Part of this Chapter , VVhether a mixt Proposition partly vttered ; and partly reserued in mynd , may be a true Logicall Proposition and Enunciation , § . 1. pag. 321. The third Part of this Chapter , VVhether the former mixt Proposition , partly vttered , and partly reserued , be 〈◊〉 or noe ? § . 2. pag. 335. The truth before set 〈◊〉 is further debated and proued by the assertions of Schoole-Doctors , Deuines , Lawyers , both Canon and Ciuill , Reasons , Practice of the Aduer saryes , and by the very instinct of nature it 〈◊〉 , Chap. IX . pag. 348. The first Point about Schoole-Deuines , Doctors and Lawyers , § . 1. pag. 349. The second Point touching Scriptures and Fathers ; for 〈◊〉 and reserued Propositions , § . 2. pag. 358. The third Point concerning other Scriptures alleaged , and pretended to be answered by T. Morton ; § . 3. pag. 369 , The fourth and last Point of this Chapter , about Scriptures and Fathers , that defended Equiuocation from the name and nature of deceipt and 〈◊〉 with some other 〈◊〉 out of common Reason . &c. § . 4. pag. 396. Of certaine particular cases , and occasions , wherin it may be lawfull to vse the manner of Equiuocation or Amphibology before set downe , either in speach or 〈◊〉 , with the 〈◊〉 therof , Chap. X. pag. 406. The first case about the Secret of Confession § . 1. pag. 407. The second case about Secretes of the Cōmōwelth § . 2. p. 〈◊〉 . The third case about any Party accused or 〈◊〉 in Question , § . 3. pag. 414. The argumentes and groundes of this Common 〈◊〉 , § . 4. pag. 420. The fourth case about VVitnesses , § . 5. 425. The 〈◊〉 case about 〈◊〉 in swearing , § . 6. pag. 427. Diuers other cases in particular , § . 7. pag. 430. The argumentes and Reasons of T. Mortons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 examined and answered : and his notorious errors , follyes , and falsifications therin discouered , Chap. XI . pag. 439. His first argument 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 definition of aly , § . 1. pag. 442. His second Argument from the 〈◊〉 of Equiuocation , § . 2. pag. 444. His third Argument frō the description of lying , § . 3. p. 447. His fourth Argument is taken ● specie , or from a particular kind of lying , which is periury , § . 4. pag. 449. His fifth Argument , Truth God , lying the Diuell , parag . 5. pag. 453. His six Argument intituled , from examples of dissimulation condemned by Scriptures , Fathers , Pagans , &c. § . 6. pag. 457. His example of Pagan wryters out of Cicero . § . 7. pag. 462. His 〈◊〉 Argument taken from a signe , an Interpreter , a coyne , and Giges-ring , § . 8. pag. 466. Of his second Conclusion and proofes therof , para . 9. p. 468. Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Equiuocation , the one 〈◊〉 and lawfull ; the other 〈◊〉 aud sinfull : And that Catholickes only vse the first in 〈◊〉 cases , and with circumstances and limitations : But T. 〈◊〉 and his followes 〈◊〉 the first , do vse 〈◊〉 the second , which is false and lying 〈◊〉 . Chap. XII . pag. 483. The 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 in some Protestant 〈◊〉 Bishops , § . 1. pag. 490. Six argumentes of M. Iewell Superintendent of 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 in this case . § . 2. pag. 493. Six examples of M. 〈◊〉 particular Equiuocation , § . 3. pag. 504. The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestantes-Ministers , § . 4. pag. 517. The vse of Equiuocation in Laymen & Knightes , § . 5. p. 529. The Conclusion of the whole 〈◊〉 , with a briefe exhortation 〈◊〉 Catholickes not to vse the liberty of Equiuocation , 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 cases , but where some 〈◊〉 occasion induceth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A Table of the particular matters 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . TO ALL TRVE-HARTED ENGLISH-MEN , That loue the honour , safety , and best good of their Nation , Prince , and Countrey . THE PREFACE . OF THE PRESENT DIVISION AND DISAGREEMENT About matters of Religion in England , and of many importune exasperations vsed by diuers sortes of men , to encrease the same : and namely by this Minister T. M. his iniurious Libell . I DOE not see ( deare Countreymen ) why I may not iustly ( our tymes & circumstances therof considered ) begin these my first lynes of Preface with those wordes of Complaint and Admiration of the Poet Lucan , wherby in few verses he comprehended and laid forth the rufull state of the rented Common-welth and Romane Empire by ciuill warres , saying : Bella per * Aemathios plusquam ciuilia campos Iusque datum sceleri * canimus : populumque potētem , In sua victrici conuersum viscera dextra . 2. For if heere we change but Thessalian fieldes into English land , and the Poets singing , into our weeping and wailing , all the rest agreeth most aptly , if our diuision be not more rufull and lamentable then that of the Romanes . For first our wars may truly be said to be plus quam ciuilia , more then ciuill , in that they are not only internall , but domesticall also , in such sorte , as no one Prouince , no one towne , no one village , no one howse or family is lightly to be found , where some parte or other of this warre and dissention vpon difference of Religion taketh not some holde : The Father somewhere accusing or suspecting his children : the children flying or fearing their Father : the Mother entring into 〈◊〉 with her daughter : the daughter not trusting or confiding in her Mother . the brother impugning his brother , and wife complaining of 〈◊〉 husband : the friend breaking with his friend : and the neerest of kyn with those whome lawe of nature , & bandof bloud did most straitly combine & knit togeather . 3. Neither is this warre ended only in wordes , or in bare debate of mindes , iudgements , willes and affections , but it breaketh forth also into workes , and hostile actions , to the sight and admiration of all the worlde , no aduersary Camps or armies standing more watchfull and distrustfull one of an other , or vsing more stratagems of discouery , spiery , preuention or impugnation , the one against the other , then we among our selues ; wherof our continuall searches , priuy intelligences , bloudy and desperate conspiracies , apprehensions , imprisonments , tortures , arraignementes , condemnations and executions are most loath some and lamentable witnesses . 4 And as for Ius datum sceleri , neuer could it be spoken so properly in the Romans misery as in ours , when in deed ( though in some different sense ) that which was ius before , is now scelus , to uvitt , that which was law , right , and equity under Catholicke Religion , is now offensiue and punishable by the lawes of Protestants , that which was then piety , is now iniquity , that which by them was vsed for deuotion , is now scorned for superstition , that which they reuerenced for highest Religion , is now held in contempt and greatest derision ; such as then should haue byn hated and punished for hereticks , are now esteemed for Christian and best reformed Catholicks , and they vvhich in those dayes vvere called Catholicks , as vvell by their enemyes as themselues , and sate in iudgement vpon the rest , are now brought into iudgement vnder them vvhose iudges at that tyme they vvere , in the self same cause , right and lawe being changed vvith the tyme , and equity vvith mens affections , articles of olde faith become crymes of new treason , and finally all so inuerted and turned vpside downe , and the differences so pursued vvith such hostile emnity of exulcerated mindes , as the Poets conclusion falleth vpon vs euidently in the eye of all Christendome , that vve being a potent people , and dreadfull otherwise to all our neighbours , haue turned our victorious hands into our owne bowels , by this disunion in Religion , and therby haue iust cause to feare the euent and inference threatned by our Sauiour ( except his holy hand protect vs ) that ; Euery Kingdome deuided in it selfe shall come to desolation . 5. And that vvhich most encreaseth the feeling of this misery is , that no man endeauoreth to mollify matters , but all to exasperate ; no man applieth lenitiues , but all corrosiues ; no man powreth in vvyne or oyle into the wound , but all salte and vinegar ; no man byndeth vp or fomenteth , but euery one seeketh to crush , bruze , and breake more ; all cry and clap their hands to exulceration , saying with the children of Edom , in the day of Hierusalems affliction : Exinanite , exinanite , vsque ad fundamentum in ea . Pull her downc , pull her downe euen vnto the foundation . 6. And to this effect haue vve heard and seene many speeches and sermons made , sundry Bookes and pamphlets cast abroad or set forth in print , some before the late cruell and hatefull conspiracy ( which might perhaps be some incitation to the designemēt or hastening therof , and some presently therupon , not only to exaggerate that fact ( whose atrocity by it self is such , as scarsely it leaueth any place to exaggeration ) but also to extend and draw out the hatred and participation therof to others of the same Religion most innocent therin , yea vnto the whole multitude , so far as in them lieth , a matter of exorbitant iniustice and intemperate malice . 7. Of the former sorte of bookes and pamphlets we haue seene one set forth the yeare past by Thomas Hamond , intituled : The late Commotion of certeine Papists in Hereford Shire , about the buriall of one Alice VVellington Recusant , after the Popish manner , in the tovvne of Alens-moore , tvvo miles frō Hereford &c. VVhich thing though it were but the fact of a few poore countrey people Catholickly affected ( as most are knowne to be in those partes ) to bury the said Alice , and that in a sorte they were forced therunto , least the dead corps should rot aboue ground ( the Minister of the place most obstinatly refusing to bury the same ) and that some other false companion in like manner is thought to haue byn set a worke to induce them into that trap , as since hath byn vnderstood : yet was the matter so exaggerated euery where , both by bookes , preachings , and publike speeches of Magistrates , as if it had byn a most heinous attempt in deed : and not only these , but by this occasion all Catholicks generally were most odiously traduced , especially in this one point ( that touched them neerest ) to wit , that they would seeme to conceaue any least hope of his Maiesties clemency and mercy towardes them by way of toleration or conniuency for their Religion , or mitigation of their continuall pressures for the same . 8. To which end were brought into this booke and published in print not only the Bishop of London his sermon at Paules Crosse vpon the fifth of August then past , wherein he auowed his Maiesties protestation against Catholickes to the contrary , but the speach also and charge of the L. Chancellour in the Star-chamber vnto the Lordes , Iudges , and communalty there present ready to departe into their countryes , was deliuered as from the Kings owne mouth , all tending to the same end of afflicting , and disgracing the said people , and depriuing them of all hope of any tolerance , yea * scoffing most bitterly and contemptuously at their folly , for conceauing any such vaine hopes , and inioyning the most seuere order for descrying , searching , apprehending , imprisoning , and punishing them , which euer lightly was heard of , as though they had 〈◊〉 the only or most grieuous male factors within the Realme , and this only for their Religion . 9. Soone after vpon the backe of this , came forth S. Edvvard Cooke his Maiestyes Attorneyes Booke , intituled by him : his Fifth Part of Reportes : which though in the entrance , and fore-front it promised more calme and mild proceeding ( and so it performeth in phrase and style of writing ) yet was the drift and ending therof no lesse stinging , then the Scorpions tayle it self , against all sortes of Catholicks and their Religion . And to say somewhat of it in this place , his argument or subiect was new and strange , taking vpon him to proue out of the old and ancient common lawes of England , that the spirituall iurisdiction giuen by Act of Parlament to the late Queene Elizabeth in the first yeare of her raigne , and exercised afterwardes by her in Ecclesiasticall matters , was dew vnto her , not only by vertue of that Statute , but by vigour also of the said ancient common lawes , and so acknowledged and practised by the olde ranke of our foregoing Kinges and Princes : a conclusion no lesse strange and paradoxicall in wise and learned mens eares , then that was of him who diuers ages after the warres of Troy ended , and the true successe therof published by all writers throughout the world , tooke vpon him to teach the contrary , to wit , that not the Grecians , but the Troianes had the victory in that warre , and so to reuerse and contradicte whatsoeuer had byn written , taught , or receaued before . 10. Let the histories of our Christian English Kings euen from the first conuerted Ethelbert , vnto King Henry the eight be examined whether this be so or not , and whether a thousand monuments of theirs ( in almost a thousand yeares ) doe not testify them all to haue byn of contrary iudgment , practice , sense , and beliefe ( in the controuersy proposed ) to that which M. Attorney by a few pieces of lawes distractedly alleadged , woulde haue men to thinke . Or if he delight ( as I take him to be learned ) to haue this argument more discussed ( for it is both ample and important ) let him but procure licence for his Antagonist , to write and print his booke , and I doubt not but that he will quickly be answered by some of his owne profession , among whome I doe imagine that many fingers must needes itch and tickle to be doing in so aduantagious a cause : or if not , yet doe I dare assure him , that some Deuine of our side shall ioine issue with him in that point , for the * confutation of his whole drifte , and narration in those his Reportes , but principally in the ouerthrowing of his iniurious conclusion , wherby he would inferre , that whosoeuer did not belieue and acknowledge the said late Queenes Ecclesiasticall feminine authority , power , and iurisdiction in spirituall matters , was and is a traitor by the iudgment of the ancient common lawes of England , receaued , helde , and practised euen vnder Catholicke Kinges and Princes of former times . 11. Vnto which vntrue and improbable paradox , he addeth another no lesse stinging , nor better founded then the former , which is that for the foremost eleuen yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne , vntill she was excommunicated by Pius Quintus : No sorte of people of vvhat persvvasion soeuer in Religion , refused to goe to the Protestantes Church ( which is euidently false , both in many Puritanes and more Catholicks that refused openly in that time ) and then : That vpon that occasion Catholicks first began to refuse ( which in like manner is false , both for that they refused before , and this occasion was altogeather impertinent to their refusall ) and thirdly most iniuriously of all , he would further seeme to inferre , that such as refuse now , may in like manner be presumed to doe it vpon the same vndutifull minde towardes his Maiesty . All which points doe tend to the exasperation and exulceration which euery one seeth , and comming from a man of his place , roome , and neerenes in office about his Maiesty , could not but make deepe impression , and giue perhaps a great push to the lamentable precipitation of those vnfortunate Gentlemen that soone after ensued . 12. VVhich being hapned , came forth presently this other odious pamphlet of T. M. his deuised discouery ( wherunto now I am forced in particuler to answere ) it being in it self no lesse slaunderous and iniurious , then the fact of the conspirators was wicked and grieuous to all Catholickes . The booke beareth this title : An exact discouery of Romish doctrine in case of Conspiracy and Rebellion : But he that shall weigh it well , shall finde it a more exacte discouery of English Ministeriall malice , in case of sycophancy and calumniation ; the Authour endeauoring to ascribe that to publicke and generall doctrine , which proceeded from priuate and particuler passion , as also to drawe the temerity of a few , to the hatred and condemnation of the whole . Of which iniquity we shall haue occasion to speake more afterward in due place . 13. Soone after this pamphlet appeared many more , tending all for the most part to the same end of exulceration , or driuing rather to plaine desperation , euery one adding affliction to affliction , and heaping hatred and enuy vpon them that detested & bewailed the transgression happened , no lesse , but much more then these insolent insultors themselues . Of this kinde I might name sundry that my self haue seene ( though being out of England I may presume to haue seene the least part of such as haue byn published and set forth 〈◊〉 this fact fell out ) as namely one intituled : A Discourse of the late intended Treason ; wherin the discourser beginneth with this foundation : That all English , both at home and abroad , vvere so fully in possession of contented peace at the time vvhen this treason vvas plotted , as , to vse his owne wordes , no 〈◊〉 grudge , no invvard vvhispering of discōtentment did any vvay appeare . VVhich assertion if you consider it well , and compare it with our domesticall differences in Religion , and variety of punishments laied vpon diuers sortes of men at that time ( euen before this fact fell out ) for the same , will seeme a very great hyperbolicall exaggeration , and ouerlashing : for that the penalties of Recusancy and other like molestations were as rife then as at any other time before , & complaintes of Catholickes in diuers countreys no lesse pittifull . 14. Another like Treatise followed this , intituled : A true reporte of the imprisonment , arraignment , and execution of the late Traitors , imprinted by Geffery Chorlton : VVhich so raileth vpon Catholicks , and Catholicke Religion from the very beginning to the end therof , as if none of them had byn free from the fact attempted , or that their common doctrine had publickly allowed the same ; whereunto this seditious libell of the minister T. M. which now I am to confute endeauoreth to beare false witnes . I will pretermit two other most virulent and spitefull Treatises intituled : Pagano-Papismus , and The picture of a Papist ; in which the Religion wherin all our auncestors both liued and died from the beginning of their Christianity vnto our daies , and so many worthy nations , great Princes , and famous learned men doe professe round about vs at this day , and doe hope to be saued therby , is made worse then Paganisme , vea the horrible sinke of all damnable heresies , which notwithstanding were condemned by the same Religion and Church in former ages , and consequently this censure sauoureth more of fury then of reason . 15. But to leaue of the recitall of any more bookes or pamphlets to this effect , there hath appeared further a matter of far greater importance , which is a Catalogue of new lawes suggested in this Parlament against the said Catholickes , wherin besides the former heape of penall statutes made to this affliction in precedent times , diuers new are proposed for an addition and aggrauation of their Calamities , far more rigorous ( if they * passe ) then the former ; which being considered by forreine people doe make the state of English Catholickes vnder Protestant gouernement to seeme vnto them much more miserable and intolerable , then that of the Ievves vnder any sorte of Christian Princes , or that of the Grecians , or other Christians vnder the Turke , or Persian ; or that of bondsubiectes vnder the Polonians , Svvecians , Moscouians , and other such Nations : so as all this tendeth as yow see ( and as before we haue noted ) to more desperate disunion of mindes and exasperation of hartes . 16. Only I must confesse , that in two mens writings I finde more moderation , then in any of the rest ; who yet being more interessed in the late grieuous designed delict , then any of the other that write therof , had most cause to be prouoked against the delinquents The first is his Maiesties speach both in his Proclamation , and Court of Parlament . In the former he professeth to distinguish betvveene all others , calling themselues Catholicks , & the Authors of detestable treason , and that by good experience he vvas so vvell persuaded of the loyalty of diuers of that 〈◊〉 , as that he assured himselfe that they did as much abhorre that odious 〈◊〉 , as himselfe . And in the second , his Maiesty speaking in Parlament , distinguished betweene different sortes of Catholicks , allowing to the one sort both the opinion of loyalty and possibility of saluation , detesting in that point ( to vse his Highnes wordes ) the cruelty of the Puritanes , and thinking it vvorthy of fier , that vvill admit no saluation to any Papist : VVhich is an argument of his Princely moderate meaning , not to condemne the whole for a part : though in our sense the distinction vsed by his Maiesty in that place of some Catholicks that holde some pointes of our Religion , and of others that holde all , cannot stand . For that we accompt them not for Catholicks at all ( nor may wee ) that holde not all , but a part , for that Catholicum is secundum totum , and not secundum partem , as well S. Augustine noteth , and consequently he that belieueth a part only or any one iote lesse then the whole , cannot be in our sense , nor in that of S. Augustine , a true Catholicke . 17. And surely though his Maiesty in this place , out of the preiudicate persuasions of others , and 〈◊〉 suggested informations , seeme to be persuaded that no Catholicks of this condition that belieue and imbrace the whole , can euer proue either good Christians , or faithfull subiects : yet is our hope and constant praier to almighty God , that he will in time so illustrate that excellent vnderstanding of his Highnes , as the same will see and discerne betweene these absolute and perfect Catholicks that yeeld themselues wholy in obsequium & obedientiam fidei , in all that the vniuer sall Church prescribeth vnto them to be belieued , and others that chuse , take , and leaue what they like or list vpon their owne iudgement : which choice or election ( called otherwise heresy ) if wee belieue the Holy Scriptures and sense of all antiquity in this behalfe , is the most dangerous and pernicious disease ( in respect of both those effects heere mentioned by his Maiesty ) that is vpon earth . And when his Highnes shall further with deliberation and maturity haue pondered , how many ages his noble Auncestors , Catholicke Kings and Queenes of both Realmes haue raigned in peace , honour and safty ouer subiects of the first sorte , and how infinite troubles , turmoiles , violences , dangers , hurtes , and losses his Maiesties owne person , and all his neerest in bloud and kinred , haue suffered in a few yeares of those other new chusers ( to omit their doctrine ) I doubt not but that out of his great prudence and equanimity , he will mollify and mitigate the hard opinion conceaued of the former , notwithstanding this late odious accident fallen out by the temerity of a few , as the world knoweth . 18. The second example of some moderation before mentioned , ( or at least wise meant ) was my L. of Salisburies answere to Certeine scandalous papers , as he called them ; which though being written in the time and occasion they were , the answerer wanteth not his stinges that pearce euen to the quicke : yet supposing the pretended iniury offered by that fond menacing letter , and the condition of men in his place and dignity , not accustomed to beare or dissemble prouocations of that kind , all may be called moderate that is not extreme : though for the letter it self ( if any such were ) I presume so much of his Lordships wisedome and prudence , as he could hardly deeme or suspect any Catholicke to be so mad , as to write such a franticke commination , but rather that it came from the forge of some such other , as togeather with the blowe to be giuen therby to all Catholickes , had furthermore a desire to drawe forth from his L. the answere , therby to see and try his style , and to that end gaue him so vrging an occasion , as by his friendes is thought that in the conueniency of reason and honour , he coulde not well omit to accept therof as he did , and performed the enterprise in such manner , as might be expected at his L. handes ; to wit , as himself writeth of his Maiesties speach in the Parlament , Euery line declaring the vvorkeman . 19. Only I may not let passe to note by the way , that in two points of 〈◊〉 , touched by him of the Popes authority , concerning Princes and the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in certaine cases , as they are matters not apperteining properly to his faculty , and profession : so must I thinke that his Deuine did somewhat mistake , or misinforme him therin . For of the first , thus he writeth : that he hath byn a long time sory , that some cleere explication of the Papall authority hath not byn made by some publicke and definitiue sentence orthodoxall &c. He addeth further this reason of his desire : That not only those Princes vvhich acknovvledge this Superiority might be secured from feares and iealosies of continuall treasons and bloudy Assassinates against their persons , but those Kings also vvhich doe not approue the same , & yet vvould faine reserue a charitable opinion of their subiectes , might knovv hovv farre to repose themselues in their fidelity in ciuill obedience , hovvsoeuer they see them deuided from them in point of conscience &c. 20. To the former clause touching his L. desire to haue the matter defined and declared , his Deuine might easely haue informed him , that among Catholicke people the matter is cleare , and sufficiently defined , and declared in all pointes wherin there may be any doubt concerning this affaire . As for example in three thinges question may be made : first whether any authority were left by Christ in his Church and Christian common-wealth to restraine or represse , censure or iudge any exorbitant and pernicious excesse of Great men , States or Princes , or that he had left them remediles wholy by any ordinary authority ? In which case as in other common-wealthes that are not Christian , all Philosophers , law-makers , Senatours , Counsellours , Historiographers , and other sortes of soundest wisedome , prudence , and experience , either Iew or Gentile , haue from the beginning of the world concurred in this ; that God and nature hath left some sufficient authority in euery common wealth , for the lawfull , and orderly redressing of those euilles , euen in the highest persons . Nor did euer Philosopher of name , or law-maker hitherto deny this assertion , as founded in the very law of nature , nations , and reason it selfe . 21. So when Christ our Sauiour came to found his common-wealth of Christians in farre more perfection then other states had byn established before , subiecting temporall thinges to spirituall , according to the degree of their natures , endes , and eminencies , and appointing a supreme vniuersall Gouernour in the one , with a generall charge to looke to all his sheepe , without exception of great or small , people or potentates : vpon these suppositions ( I say ) all Catholicke learned men do ground , and 〈◊〉 euer grounded , that in Christian common-wealthes , not only the foresaid ordinary authority is left , which euery other state and Kingdome had by God and nature to preserue and protect themselues in the cases before laid downe ; but further also for more sure , and orderly proceeding therin , that the supreme care , iudgment , direction and censure of this matter was left principally by Christ our Sauiour vnto the said supreme Gouernour , and Pastour of his Church and common-wealth . And in this there is no difference in opinion or beliefe betweene any sorte of Catholickes whatsoeuer ( so they be Catholickes ) though in particular cases , diuersity of persons , time , place , cause , and other circumstances , may moue some diuersity of opinions . And thus much of the first question . 22. The second may be about the manner how this authority , or in what sorte it was giuen by Christ to his said supreme Pastour , whether directly or indirectly , immediatly or by a certaine consequence . As for example , whether Christ , as he gaue the generall charge of his sheepe to S. Peter and his Successours directly and immediatly in spirituall matters , by that commission three times repeated in S. Iohn . Pasce oues meas ; which wordes include , according to Catholicke exposition , not only authority to feed , but to gouerne also , direct , restraine , cure , represse , and correct , when need is , as we see it doth appertaine to a temporall sheepheardes office : so whether with this commission in spirituall affaires , our Sauiour gaue also immediatly and directly , the charge and ouersight of temporalities in like manner , or rather indirectly and by a certaine consequence : that is to say , that when the gouernment of spirituall affaires , to wit , of soules to their eternall blisse and saluation is so letted , or impugned by any temporall gouernours , as the said spirituall commission cannot be executed without redresse or remedy ; in such cases , and not otherwise , the said supreme pastour to haue authority to proceed also against the said temporall Gouernours , for defence and preseruation of his spirituall charge . Of which question the Canonistes doe commonly defend the first part , but Catholicke Deuines for the most part the second : but both partes fully agree , that there is such an Authority lefte by Christ in his Church , for remedy of vrgent cases , for that otherwise he should not haue sufficiently prouided for the necessity therof . So as this difference of the manner maketh no difference at all in the thing it selfe . 23. The third question may be about the causes , for which this authority may be vsed , as also the forme of proceeding to be obserued therin ; wherabout there are so many particularities to be considered , as are ouerlong for this place : only it is sufficient for Catholicke men to know , that this may not be done without iust cause , graue and vrgent motiues , and due forme also of proceeding , by admonition , preuention , intercession , and other like preambles , prescribed by Ecclesiasticall Canons to be obserued , wherby my Lordships doubtes of feares , and ielosies of continuall treasons , and bloudy assassinates may iustly be remoued . For that this authority doth not only not allow any such wicked , or vnlawfull attemptes of priuate men , but doth also expressely and publickly condemne the same and the doctrine therof , as may appeare not only by the condemnation of VVicklifs wicked article , in the Councell of Constance , wherin he affirmed : That it vvas lavvfull for euery priuate man to kill any Prince vvhome he held to be a Tyrant , but also by like condemnation of Caluin , Beza , Ottoman , Bucchanan , Knox , Goodman , and others of that sect , who hold and practice in effect the same doctrine of VVickliffe , concerning Princes , if not worse , as shall more largely and particularly be declared afterward in the first and fourth Chapters of this Treatise . And this I desire may satisfy his Lordship for the present , vntill we come to the foresaid places where better occasion in this kind will be offered . 24. As for the second point touched by his Lordship about the doctrine of Equiuocation , ambiguity of speach , amphibology , or mentall reseruation , in certaine cases lawfull ( which doctrine his Lordship termeth strange , and grosse , and that it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation ) for that I am to handle this matter more largely and particularly in the ensuing Chapters of this booke , especially from the fourth forward ( the whole bulke of our aduersaries calumniations consisting in these two pointes of Rebellion and Equiuocation ) I will heere make answere to his Lordship , as to a man of science and experience , that I maruaile greatly , how he can thinke that doctrine to be strange , which is so ordinary and vsually to be seene in all the bookes of Catholicke Deuines for the space of these three or foure hundred yeares , by confession of his owne writers : how also he can tearme it grosse , that the greatest wittes of Christendome , for so long at least , haue held for learned , and founded not only vpon euident groundes of reason , nature , equity , and iustice in diuers cases ( and for such allowed throughout all tribunales of Christendome , both Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill ) but warranted also by authority of many expresse examples of Holy Scriptures and Fathers , and in some cases so necessary for auoiding the sinne of lying , periury , discouering of secrettes , iniuring our neighbours , and other such inconueniences , as if I should heere set downe the said particular cases , both concerning secrecy or safty of him that is forced to equiuocate ( as afterward I shall doe in conuenient place ) I presume his Lordship as so great a common-vvealthesman would allow therof with due circumstances , as iust and necessary , and recall that part of his censure wherin he saith : That it teareth in sunder all the bandes of humane conuersation , especially if he remember , that we doe except from the licence of Equiuocation , the common conuersation of men in contractes , bargaines , and other like affaires , wherby any dammage or preiudice may grow to another man , and much more in matters appertaining to the cleare and manifest profession of our faith . And thus much for this place , the refidue afterward . 25. And now hauing spoken all this by way of Preface , we shall returne to the particular Treatise of T. M. ( for more of his name we cannot yet find out ) entituled , An exact discouery of 〈◊〉 doctrine in case of conspiracy &c. which we haue taken in hand to answere in this place , and to shew that as his meaning is malicious , and meanes foolish : so is his proposition pernicious , and argumentes vaine , to proue the same , wherin I remit me to that , which afterwardes yow shall see set downe . THAT THE MAYNE PROPOSITION INSINVATED AND VRGED BY T. M. That Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant Common-vvealth in respect of Rebellion and Conspiracies , Is vntrue , indiscreet and pernicious , and falleth rather vpon the Protestant-Subiect , then the Catholicke . CHAP. I. THe whole drift of the Author throughout this malignant inuectiue to be nothing els , but to perswade , that Protestantes and Catholickes cannot liue togeather in one common-wealth , nor vnder one Prince or Gouernour , if he be a Protestant , is cleare and manifest by all his whole discourse , proofes and argumentes , which afterwardes we shall more particularly in due place discusse : yea to the end he may make this diuorce and separation betweene the Kinges Maiesty of Great Britany , and his Catholicke subiectes ( for thither he bendeth all his battery ) the more irreconciliable and remedilesse he placeth the ground of this incompossibility , not in the will , which may be changed , but in the iudgement , and beliefe of Catholickes ; to wit , in their publicke and receiued doctrine , which doctrine well he knoweth not to lye in the handes of particular men , nor of particuler Prouinces , to change or alter at their pleasure ( as Protestantes may , and doe , heere taking a part , and there leauing as they list , ) but they must stand firmely , and vniuersally to the whole , this being truely Catholicum as ancient Fathers define it . And hence it is , that T. M. inferreth thus : It is taken out ( saith he ) of the expresse dogmaticall principles of their Priests and Doctors , and collected from their owne publicke positions &c. which how true or false it is , shall appeare after . Now let vs examine some other circumstances of this proposition . 2. First then , I say and auerre , that this his maine and fundamentall axiome , of the incompossibility of Catholicke and Protestant people togeather , vnder the Gouernement of his Maiesty of Great Britany , is not only false and erroneous in it selfe ( as afterward shal be declared ) but pernicious also to the common-wealth , preiudiciall to his Maiesties both comfort & safety , hurtefull to the state , seditious against peace , scandalous to the hearers , offensiue to forreine nations that liue vnder Princes of different Religion , both Catholicke and Protestant , and hatefull finally to the eares of all moderate , peaceable , and prudent people : and is on the other side no waies profitable , needfull , expedient , or conuenient thus in publique to be proposed . For I would first demaund this famous mak-bate , what gaine or vtility may be expected , either to Prince or people by putting in print this so odious an assertion of extreeme diffidence , and distrust betweene his Maiesty , and so many thousande of his subiects , that admitted him with all ioy & comfort at his first entrance to the Crowne ? Is it ( perhaps ) to preuēt some dāger that may be doubted from such kind of people , and to make his Maiesty more carefull and vigilant for his safty ? If that be so , a priuate aduise had beene more important to himselfe , or his Counsell : for that the publishing and proclayming therof procureth not only diffidēce , but also restles solicitude on both sides , the one to preuēt the other . 3. Secondly I would aske , what he will doe , or haue to be done with so great a multitude of people , as in all his Maiesties Kingdomes doe loue and fauour the Religion , which this masked Minister impugneth , and would put them in despaire of any sufferance or tolerable condition vnder his Maiesties gouernment ? Will he haue them all made away from the face of the Earth ? This were hard , except Noe his floud should : come againe , or some other equiualent inundation , : either of water , fyer , or sword . And for the later , though some thinke he could wish it , yet who knoweth not , but that the bowels of England are so combyned and linked togeather at this day in this point , as hardly can the sword passe the one , but it must : wound also deeply the other . What then ? Will he haue them to liue in perpetuall torment , hatred , suspicions , iealosyes , auersions , detestations , & deadly hostilities , the one with the other ? This is a state more fit for hell , then for any peaceable and Christian common wealth , nor of it selfe is it durable , if we beleeue either reason , or experience of former times . For we know what Cicero , what other wise-men among the very Heathens haue obserued , what they haue written , what they haue counselled to be done , or to be preuented in like occasions : to wit , that multitudes are not to be put in despaire , no nor particuler men into extreame exasperation without hope of remedy : for that despaire is the mother of precipitation , & extreme exasperation is the next dore to fury . No counsaile , no reason , no regard of Religion , nor other respect humaine or deuine holdeth place , when men grow desperate , & all stringes of hope are cut of . We see by experience , that the least and weakest wormes of the earth , which cannot abide the looke of a man , yet when they are extremely pressed , and put in despaire of escape , they turne and leape in mans face it selfe , which otherwise they so 〈◊〉 feare and dread . 4. Wherfore seing this dangerous stickler would put this extreme despaire into so many thousandes of his Maiesties subiectes , yow 〈◊〉 imagine what good seruice he meaneth to do him therby , and what pay he deserueth for his labour . Surely if a great rich man , whose wealth lay in his flocke of sheepe , had neuer so faire and fawning a dog , following neuer so diligently his trencher , and playing neuer so many flattering trickes before him ; yet if togeather with : this , he had that other currish quality also , as to woory his maisters sheepe , disseuer his fold , disperse his flock , and driue them into flight and precipitation ; it is like that his Maister out of his wisedome ( though otherwise he were delighted with his officious fawning ) would rather hange such a dog , then aduenture to suffer so great and important losses by him . And no : Iesse is to be expected of the great equity & prudence of our great Monarch , when he shall well consider of the cause and consequence therof . 5. And thus much of the malice and pernicious sequele of this assertion : let vs see somewhat now also of the folly & falsity therof . To which effect I would first enquire , if it be so that subiectes of different Religions are not comportable togeather , vnder a Prince that is of one of those Religions for so must the question be proposed if we will handle it in generall ) then how doe the Iewes & Christians liue togeather vnder many Christian Princes in Germany and Italy ? vnder the state of Venice ? yea vnder the Pope himselfe ? how doe Christians and Turkes liue togeather vnder the Turkish Emperour of Constantinople , as also vnder the Persian without persecution for their Religion ? how did Catholickes and Arrians liue so many yeares togeather vnder Arrian Kinges and Emperours in old times , both in Spaine and els 〈◊〉 ? how doe Catholickes and Protestantes liue togeather at this day vnder the most Christian King of France ? vnder the great King of Polonia ? and vnder the German Emperour in diuers partes of his dominions ( all Catholicke Princes ) and in the free-cityes of the Empyre ? And in particuler is to be considered that the Hussites haue liued now some hundreds of yeares in Bohemia vnder the Cathòlicke Princes and Emperours Lordes of that Countrey , with such freedome of conuersation with Catholicke subiectes , and vnion of obedience to the said Princes , as at this day in the great Citty of Praga , where the Emperour commonly resideth , and where Catholicks 〈◊〉 wholy gouerne , there is not so much as one 〈◊〉 Church knowne to be in the handes of any Catholicke Pastor of that citty but all are Hussites that haue the ordinary charges of soules ; and Catholickes , for seruice , sermons and Sacraments doe repaire only to monasteries , according : to ancient agreementes and conuentions betweene them , though in number the said Catholickes be many times more then the other , and haue all the gouernment and Commaundry in their handes , as hath byn said . These are demonstratiue proofes ad hominem , and cannot be denied , and consequently doe conuince that this make-bate Ministers proposition is false in generall : That subiects of different religion , may not liue togeather in 〈◊〉 peace , if their gouernours will permit them . Now if he can alleadge any seuerall weighty causes why this generall assertion holdeth not , or may not holde in the particuler case of English Catholiks and Protestants vnder our present King , we shall discusse them also , and see how much they weigh . 6. He pretendeth ten seuerall reasons in his pamphlet , for causes of this incompossibility , and therof doth his whole inuectiue consist . Eight of them appertaine to doctrine and practice of rebellion in vs , as he auoucheth ; and the other two vnto doubtfull speech or Equiuocation . Of which later point , hauing touched somewhat in the precedent Preface & being to haue occasion to doe the same againe more largely afterward wee shall now consider principally of the former , concerning doctrine and practice of quiet or vnquiet , peaceable or dangerous humours & behauiours of subiects both Catholicke & Protestant . 7. And as for Catholickes , the Minister in all his eight reasons bringeth out nothing of nouelty against vs , but only such pointes of doctrine , as himselfe doth consesse , and expresly proue that they were held and recevued in our publique schooles , aboue foure hundred yeares gone : as namely in his first reason , For that we hold Protestants for hereticks so farre forth as they decline and differ obstinately from the receyued doctrine and sense of the Roman Catholicke Church , and consequently that being Hereticks they are not true Christians , nor can haue true faith in any one article of Christian beliefe , and that the punishment determined by the ancient Canon lawes , which are many and grieuous , both spirituall & temporall , do , or may therby light vpon them . And in his second , third and fourth reasons , that wee teach , That the Bishop of Rome , as spirituall head of the vniuersall Church , hath power aboue temporall Princes , and may procure to let the Election and succession of such as are opposite , or enemies to Catholicke Religion , and that in some cases he may dissolue oathes of obediēce , and the like . 8. And further yet in his fifth , sixt , seauenth , and eight reasons , that in certaine occasions , and vpon certaine necessities , for preuenting of greater euils , imminent to any Countrey , Kingdome , or common wealth , especially if they be spirituall and appertaine to the saluation of soules , the same high Pastour may restraine , resist , or punish the enormous excesses of temporall Princes ( if any such fall out ) by Censures , excommunication , depriuation or deposition , though this not but vpon true , iust , and vrgent causes , when other means cannot preuaile , for auoiding those euerlasting euils . 9. All which doctrines ( for this is the summe of all he saith or alleadgeth ) do cōteine , as yow see , no new matter of malice against Protestant Princes , inuented by vs , for that the Minister himselfe , as now we haue said , confesseth , that for these three or foure later hundred yeares , these positions haue byn generally receiued by all the vniuersall Church and face of Christendome ; so as being established so many hundred yeares before Protestants were borne or named in the world , they could not be made or inuented against them in particuler ; but only are drawne vnto them at this time by the malicious application of this Minister , to make the diuorce before mencioned betweene our Prince and vs to seeme remedilesse . For if the doctrine approued and receyued so many ages before this difference of Religion was heard of , shall be laid vnto vs now for matter of vndutifulnes ( with which doctrine notwithstanding our Auncestors liued most peaceably and duetifully for many hundred yeares , as good subiectes vnder his Maiesties 〈◊〉 both in England & Scotland ) what fault can this be in vs now , or what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is it in the Minister to obiect it against vs ; yea to make a criminall accusation therof in this his calumnious libell against all Catholikes of our Countrey whatsoeuer ? 10. If we consider their doctrines and positions , togeather with their practice and exercise concerning this point of quiet obedience and subiection , euen from these later times of Luther , Zuinglius and 〈◊〉 beginninges of innouation , we shall find an other manner of nouelty to contemplate , and another sorte of dangers for Princes to tremble at . For if in steed of Rebellious doctrine of the 〈◊〉 Church ( which is the title of this aduersaries pamphlet ) wee should set downe the positions and practice of the Geneuian Church and Caluinian sect , planted and directed therby , we should easely see what were the difference , as the whole world both may and doth . For that concerning their positions and doctrine that touch this point , they are extant in their owne bookes , not wronge or drawne by strained inferences , as our Ministers Calumniations are against Catholicks in this place , but plainely , cleerely , and Categorically set downe by their owne pen , testified and put in print by their owne writers , and especially by one in England that is now in highest dignity vnder his Maiesty , and another in place of some dignity also by his office , who out of their owne bookes cited particulerly by them , relate these and other like positions : That Princes may be restrained by force ; pursued , iudged , and punished by the people ; excommunicated , depriued , deposed , and cast into hell by the Ministers ; arraigned , condemned and put to death by the inferiour Magistrates , whensoeuer in their opinion he becommeth a 〈◊〉 , or opposite to the ghospell ; which in effect falleth out to be so often as these head-strong new brethren shall mislike of his or her gouernement , & thinke them worthy to be remoued . 11. And if to the testimony of our English Protestant writers in this point any be desirous to haue ad ioined the suffrages in like manner of externe authors of the same Religion , concerning the same article , about the lawfulnes of violent vsage towardes Princes , in cases by them prescribed ; let them read Bezae himselfe in his Apology to the Bishop Claudius de Sainctes in defence and praise of Pultrot that murdered traiterously the famous great Duke of Guise his Maiesties great vncle , and supreme Generall of all the French forces ; as also the discourse of the French famous Minister Suriau otherwise calling himselfe Rosier in his Booke of Reasons why it was lawfull for any of his 〈◊〉 brethren to kill ( as he saith ) Charles the ninth King of France and his mother , if they would not obey the Caluinian Ghospell , as both Launay , Belsorest & other French writers in their Histories do relate . To which effect also was written that notorious and seditious booke intituled 〈◊〉 matin and others by the brethren of the ghospell ; yea aboue others , that most dangerous firebrand by Orsinus Hoto man and the rest of Geneua , allowed also by 〈◊〉 , intitu led Vindiciaecontra Tyrannos : The reuenge vpō Tyrantes conteyning a most shameles publique approbation of all desperate , of all villanous attemptes whatsoeuer made , or to be made by their brethren , against lawfull Princes , vnder the name of Tyrantes , whensoeuer it might seeme to be done in fauour of their ghospell . 12. So as now after all this manifest assertiue doctrine of theirs , knowne and confessed in the world , and practised by them in so many places , for so many yeares , in so notorious manner , as no man can deny it , for this Minister to come peeping forth with certaine poore illations & strained inferences against Catholiks , for that in certaine cases they acknowledge power to remaine in the head of the Church by way of Canonicall lawes and publique iudgment , to restraine exorbitant outragious excesses of Princes , when they shall fall out , is a ridiculous kind of byting at the heele , while the other do strike at the head : and so will it also appeare , if we obserue the euētes themselues , for that heere in this place our Minister ( for example ) 〈◊〉 only foure factes or processes of Popes , to wit , two of Gregories the seauenth and ninth , and other two of Pius and Sixtus the fifth , who in so many ages haue giuen sentence of depriuation against Princes : wheras if we consider but this one age only , which hath passed since Luther began ( and not yet one whole age ) we shall find many more Princes deposed , slaine , molested , or violated by Protestant people , then by all Popes put togeather since the beginning of Pope-dome haue byn troubled or Censured , which is a markeable point , and not lightly to be passed ouer by prudent Princes : for that the reason herof is , that the one side proceedeth by lawe , publique iudgement , and mature deliberation , the other by popular mutiny , rash and temerarious precipitation . And this of doctrine in this place vntill we come to the fourth Chapter , where much more is to be added to this effect . 13. But if we should come now from doctrine to action and examples of the exercise therof in this behalfe , there were no end of the narration , and there is no man or woman lightly of any yeares or vnderstanding in publique affaires , whose mind and memory is not full of them . For who remembreth not what passed in Germany presently almost vpon the beginning of Luthers doctrine ( at the least not aboue 7. or 8. yeares after ) to wit , from the yeare 〈◊〉 . testified aswell by Sleidan and other Protestant Authors , as by those that were Catholicke , how the new brethrē incited by this new doctrine again 〈◊〉 their Princes , both temporall and spirituall , tooke armes and entred into tumult and rebellion with such violence and headlong pertinacy , throughout al that countrey , as in one Prouince only , there were aboue two hundred Monasteries and Castels taken , razed , and spoiled , and aboue an hundred and thirty thousand people slaine , & this was for that beginning : which fire once enkindled , and the humour of sedition once setled in the heades o that Hereticall faction , neuer ceased afterward , but continued more or lesse still against 〈◊〉 Emperour Charles the 〈◊〉 , vnder diuers deuises and pretences of the 〈◊〉 association , and the like , vntill more then twenty yeares after , to wit , vntill the yeare 1546. wherin he was forced to take in hand that great and dangerous warre ( Luther himselfe 〈◊〉 yet aliue ) against the Duke of Saxonie , Marques of 〈◊〉 and other Protestant Princes , whome he subdued therin , but not without great effusion of Christian bloud . 14. And the like I might relate of many other particuler States and principalities of Germany , as namely that of the Princes and Archbishops Electors of Collen , Treuers and Mentz with all the State Palatine of Rhene , the Bishoppricke and Dukedome of Liege , and other partes adioining , where togeather with this new Ghospell ( especially now deuided into different sectes of Lutheranisme , Zuinglianisme , Caluinisme , Anabaptisme new Arrianisme and the like ) entred presently new sedition , Rebellion , and warres , and from thence dispersed it selfe longe and wide , both North and South , East and West . In the North , to Saxony , Denmarke , Norway , Sweueland , Polonia , 〈◊〉 , and other adioining countries ; and on the south to Zwitzerland first , Sauoy , Grisons , and other partes next adhering , where diuers battailes were fought , Zuinglius himselfe being present as the chief stirrer in those of the Cantons of Zwitzerland his countrey , and 〈◊〉 therin , and Caluin Beza , Farellus , and other such Ministers being the principall inciters in the Rebellions of Geneua , and neighbour countries , against the Duke of Sauoy , and other Lordes and Princes therof , as is apparant by their owne , and other mens bookes of the same part and faction . 15. Towardes the East , the same fire of sedition passed with the same new Protestant Ghospell , to Bemeland Austria , Hungary , Siletia , Moldauia and other bordering Prouinces , where more or lesse it hath continued till our time , wherin we see by lamētable experience , that they haue ioined euen with the Turke himselfe against their Soueraigne Lord and Emperour , and against the Christian name and cause , in despite of Catholicke Religion , as Boscaine , the famous Caluinian Rebell , and others of that Religion , or irreligion rather in these partes , for some yeares now haue done ; and finally haue forced the said Emperour for auoiding the fatall ruine of Christendome , to graunt him the Princedome of Transiluania during his life , which God for his so great wickednes hath soone cut of . 16. But to the West partes of the world , to wit , France , and all partes and parcels of that 〈◊〉 Kingdome , the same fire was transported with greatest fury of all , as doe testify their foure generall most bloudy warres , lasting for many yeares togeather , wherof if I should recount but the least particulers set downe by their owne histories , it would rue any Christian hart to heare or read the same . 17. From hence if we draw neere homeward to Flanders , England and Scotland , the effectes of this new Ghospell and Ghospellers are yet more present vnto our eyes . For who can recount the thousandes of people , that vpon this occasion haue lost their liues both temporall and eternall as may be feared , in these long , & bloudy warres of the low countries , begunne first , and continued euer since , vpon the entrance of Protestant Religion in those States ? Who can number the Citties beseiged , taken , rifled and ransacked ? The townes and villages burnt and ouerthrowne ? The countries spoiled ? The people slaine and murdered about this difference ? And if we looke into England , and the state but of one sole Catholicke Princes gouerning , there , but for foure or fiue yeares ouer Protestant subiectes misliking her gouernment for Religion , yow shall find more conspiracies , treasons , and Rebellions practised against her in proportion of so : few yeares , by the said sorte of people ( if we consider what Northumberland , Suffolke , VViat , Courtney , Stafford , Fetherstone , VVilliam Thomas , and others in different conspiracies practiced against her ) then in more then 40. yeares was done against her Protestant sister by her Catholicke subiectes , though neuer so much afflicted , iniured and persecuted by her . 18. But of all other countries , Scotland may be an example and president of Protestant spirites , what they are vnder a Catholike Prince or Princesse , though otherwise neuer so vertuous , or neuer so mild . For who can deny the exceeding great prudence , moderation , benignity , liberality , and other vertues of the Noble Queene Mary Regent of Scotland , Grandmother to our Soueraigne that now raigneth , when those furious and seditious Ministers Knox , Goodman , Mollocke , Douglasse , Meffan , and others began to raise vp her subiectes against her , from the yeare 1557. ( which was the fourth of Queene Maries raigne of England ) and continued the same in most spitefull and barbarous manner , with intolerable insolency , both of wordes and actes , for 3. or 4. yeares togeather , assisted principally by the helpes , aide and encouragement of Queene Elizabeth ( that had succeded in the Crowne of England ) vntill through griefe , sorrow , and affliction , the excellent Princesse gaue vp the Ghost , vpō the yeare 1560. hauing byn 〈◊〉 deposed , and the lye giuen her publickly , and most 〈◊〉 by them . And finally seing herselfe so extreemely 〈◊〉 and inuironed with these rebell forces , and with a puissant army sent from England in their succour , consumed and pyned away with 〈◊〉 of mind as hath byn said : And no Christian could but haue compassion of her case . The particulers are written by Knox and Buchanan themselues , in their histories of Scotland , who were two chiefe firebrandes in that combustion , and by Holinshed an English Protestant Author in his description of Scotland , allowing well , and liking the same , according to the sense of English Protestantes who concurred with them both in good will and cooperation . 19. And thus much of the Queene Regent : but now of her excellent daughter , the Queene regnant , Mother of our Soueraigne , had they any greater respect vnto her notwithstanding all her benignity and benefites towardes them at her new returne out of France , when she pardoned all that was past , and accepted of new oathes and promises of faithfull obedience at their 〈◊〉 ? did all this I say any thing auaile her or procure her safty or quietnes , in gouerning these new Ghospellers ? No truly , so long as she remained Catholicke , that is , to her death , and after her death , they pursued her with the greatest hatred , and most barbarous cruelty , that euer perhaps was read of against Prince or Princesse before , or after her . I shall breifly heere set downe some 〈◊〉 particularities of many , as I find them 〈◊〉 both in English and Scottish Histories themselues , and that by Protestant writers , as hath byn said . 20. This Noble Queene after long deliberation in France , what course to take in those troublesome times , when the spirit of the new Caluinian Ghospell had raised tumultes , conspiracies , warres , and Rebellions throughout the most part of all States , Kingdomes , and Prouinces round about her , determined finally to credit the faire promises of her said Protestant subiectes in Scotland , and to goe thither , which she did , and arriued at Lith the 20. of August , vpon the yeare 1561. But before she departed from France , there being sent to her from the Catholicke party Doctor Iohn Lesley Bishop of Rosse to counsaile her not to trust her bastard-brother Iames Steward Prior of S Andrewes , that had byn the cheife Author of all the former broi les in Scotland , and was now sent vnto her from the Protestant party to flatter and deceiue her with false oathes and 〈◊〉 , she promised that she would not : but he arriuing the next day after the Bishop vnto her at 〈◊〉 in France , made so great promises , oathes , and protestations vnto her , as by little and little gate credit with her ; and so returned into Scotland by England ( where he had his full instructions yow must thinke ) to dispose the mindes of all sortes , to receiue , and obey the said Queene after his and their fashion and agreement ; for which good office she gaue him soone 〈◊〉 her returne the Earledome of Murrey , and committed the cheife Gouernement of the Realme vnto him . But what effectes ensued , we shall now in few wordes declare . 21. When vpon the yeare 1563. which was two yeares after her returne to Scotland , she resolued by consent of her Parlament to marry her knisman the Lord Darley , newly made 〈◊〉 of Rosse and Duke of Albany , this Earle of Murrey made a leagne of his confederates against the same , pretending that it would be in 〈◊〉 of their Religion , and brake into open warres against them both , saith Holinshed , and when they were pressed by the Kinges and Queenes forces , they had alwaies their refuge into England , and their counsaile and direction both thence , and from their Ministers that neuer parted from them , how to prosecute their matters against their Princes : wherof the first point was , to abuse the yong Kinges credulity , and to set him against the Queene : and hence ensued that strange and horrible act of entring her priuy chamber , when she was at supper vpon the fourth of march 1566. in the company of the 〈◊〉 of Murton , the Lordes Ruthen and Lindsey , all Protestantes , and armed , who saluted her first with this greeting , she being great with child : That they would no longer suffer her to haue the gouerning of the Realme , nor to abuse them , as hitherto she had done : And then pulled violently from her , her Secretary Dauid , which stood there present seruing her at table , and for his refuge tooke hold of her gowne , which they cut of , and slew him with many stabbes , to such fright of the afflicted Queene , as it was no lesse then a miracle , that she had not perished therwith or miscaried of her child ( which was his Maiesty that now gouerneth England ) hauing six monethes gone with the same . This was done at a Parlament when all the Protestant confederates met togeather , and tooke ( as yow must thinke ) the ghostly counsaile of their good Ministers for so holy an enterprise . And vpon the 20. of Iune next , was the Prince borne , which thing not pleasing some , that there should remaine any yssue of that family , which they desired to extinguish , the said King his Maiesties Father was most cruelly murthered in Edenbrough on the tenth of February next ensuing . 22. Nor did the matter cease heere , but rather now ascended to the greatest height of malicious Treason 〈◊〉 euer perhaps hath byn vsed against any crowned Prince in the world , for that these Lordes of the Congregatiō , as they called themselues , that is to say , Religious Rebels , congregated against their sworne Prince , gathering forces togeather , laid violent handes on her Maiesties person first at Carbar-hill by Edenbrough when confidently she presumed , as to her subiectes , to goe vnto them , and treate of peace , and then casting her into prison , depriued her of her Crowne , set vp against her the name of her dearest iewell the yonge Prince , not yet a yeare old , made Regent her greatest enemy the Earle of Murrey her bastard traiterous brother , held Parlamentes , made lawes , debarred her the sight of her sonne for euer : and finally waging open warre against her , and ouerthrowing her forces in the feild , she being present , forced her into England , and there following her also , procured vnto her the greatest disgraces , dishonoured her with the foulest reportes , defamed her with the most spitefull sermons , bookes and printed libelles ; and finally oppressed her with the most notorious open iniuries , that euer were cast vpon a person of her Maiesties quality & dignity . And all this without any scruple , or remorse of conscience at all : nay all was auerred to be done according to the very rule of the Ghospell & for the Ghospell , and this by all the Ministers both of Scotland and England . 23. And thus much of the second Queene Mary of Scotland brought to her ruine by the Euangelicall obedience of these new Ghospellers : but as for the yong Prince her Noble sonne , whome she loued most dearely aboue all earthly creatures , and neuer was permitted so much as to embrace , or see him more afterward , what passed in this time by the same sorte of mē , both during his minority and afterward , what cōtentions , 〈◊〉 warres , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , what murthers , what conspir cies , Rebellions and violences were vsed , were ouerlong to recount in this place : the Histories are full , and the 〈◊〉 made , and set forth in print by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Authour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in his sixt Chapter and 〈◊〉 booke against the 〈◊〉 doth touch many 〈◊〉 pointes of diuers notorious 〈◊〉 , and violences offered by them and their 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 the Kinges person , state , and dignity , as their taking his authority vpon them , his surpriz and restraint at Rutheuen vpon the yeare 1582. the brethrens allowing and authorizing the same afterward expresly against the Kinges declaration to the contrary . 24. The 〈◊〉 also against his person at Striueling vpon the yeare 1584. and many railing speaches , sermons and bookes against him and his gouernment made in England to disgrace him , and namely the seditious preaching of Dauison and other Scottish Ministers against 〈◊〉 in London , in the Church of the Old-Iury and this being in the moneth of May , it followed in Nouember after that these Ministers with their complices returning into Scotland with aide from England ( though this circumstance the Author con ealeth as not making for his purpose ) they gat ten thousand Rebelles togeather , and 〈◊〉 their tentes before the towne of Striueling , whither the King was retired to fortify himselfe in the Castle , making proclamations in their owne names , and there draue at length his Maiesty to yeald his person into their handes , with the liues of his dearest friendes , and was depriued also by them of his old guard , and a 〈◊〉 put vpon him . All which actes were not only defended afterward by the chiefe Ministers of that Realme , but the King himselfe was called in like manner Ieroboam by them , and threatned to be rooted out , as Ieroboams race was , if he continued in the course he held : and many other like 〈◊〉 by them committed , which for breuityes sake I forbeare to recount in this place . 25. Now then to returne againe to our former ponderation set downe in the beginning of this Chapter , let euery sage and prudent Prince consider and weigh with himselfe , which of these two waies which of these two people , which of these two groundes of doctrine , which of these two methodes of practice , which of these two manners of spirit in Protestant & Catholicke subiectes doe best content him , and which of them he may thinke more sure or dangerous vnto him . For if we looke ouer the ancient recordes of our countries for a thousand yeares before , while English men were Catholicke , we shall not find so much violent and barbarous dealing with their 〈◊〉 , as I haue heere recounted in lesse then thirty , within the compasse of one only Kingdome vnder the Protestantes . 26. And if we compare the obiections made heere against vs by T. M. in this his calumnious pamphlet ( as in the sequēt Chapter more particulerly you shall see discussed ) with these , and the like actions of their people ; they are very trifles and streyninges in respect of these other . As for example Doleman is accused to write , that : The common-wealth hath authority to choose to themselues a King ( when they haue none ) and to limit him lawes wherby they would be gouerned . And that of Doctor Stapleton : That the people ( or multitude ) was not made for the Princes sake , but the Prince for the people : That Religion is is to be had in consideration , in choice or admittance 〈◊〉 a King , where choice and admittance is permitted : That the Pope being head of the Catholicke Church may in some cases , and for some causes dispense in oathes : That he may censure Princes vpon iust causes , though not in temporall matters but indirectly only , and vpon such necessity as no other remedy can be found for 〈◊〉 of the spirituall good of his subiectes : That euill 〈◊〉 declyning into Tyranny may be repressed , but not by priuate men , or popular mutiny . 27. All these pointes ( I say ) and diuers others , which this fellow doth so greatly exaggerate and odiously amplify against vs , are so ouerrunne by them both in doctrine and practice , if we compare them , as they scarse admit any comparison at all , especially if we cast our eyes vpon their present practice , which representeth the liuely fruite of their doctrine : as namely , the most dangerous Rebellions of Caluinian and Trinitarian Sectaries , euen now standing on foote in Hungary Austria , and Transiluania against the Emperour : and of like men in Polonia against that mild and most iust King : and of Lutherans in Suetia , of Puritanes , Brownists , Protestantes , and the like in the Low-countries , so many yeares now continued against their true and natural Prince as before hath byn declared ; which maketh another manner of impression and force of consequence , if it be well pondered , then doth the particuler temerarious fact of halfe a score of yong Centlemen put in despaire by apprehension of publique persecution , without demerit of the persecuted , or hope of remedy for the same , though this also be inexcusable ; but the difference of euils , is worthy of consideration , especially with the more graue and prudent sort of people , that are not carried away with passion , or otherwise misled by sinister information . 28. And thus hauing said sufficiently in generall about the first and chiefe ground of our Ministers calumniation , concerning Rebellion and Conspiracies , wherby he would make impossible the 〈◊〉 , and mutuall vnion of Catholicke subiectes with Protestantes , we shall passe on to his second pillar of impugnation , named by him The doctrine of Equiuocation : but yet first we thinke it expedient to examine in a seuerall Chapter the particuler reasons which he hath framed for some shew of proofe to this his seditious assertion . TEN REASONS OR RATHER CALVMNIATIONS BROVGHT BY T. M. For maintenance of his former Proposition : That Catholicke people are intolerable in a Protestant gouernment in respect of disloyalty , conspiracies and Rebellion , Confuted and returned vpon himself and his . CHAP. II. ALbeit that which we haue laid forth before in the precedent Chapter , for the ouerthrow of the slanderous & iniurious imputations of our aduersary , about Rebellion and conspiracies , be sufficient ( I doubt not ) for satisfaction of any indifferent and dispassionate minde , that is not ouerborne with preiudice ; yet haue I thought it expedient to passe somewhat further also , and to enter the list with him for improuing his particuler reasons , on which he would seene to found his calumniations , wherin as nothing is so absurd or false ( according to the Oratours opinion ) but that by speech and smooth discourse it may be made in some eares probable , at leastwise in the conceipt of him that speaketh and indeauoreth to deceaue another : so this Minister T. M. ( for of that trade he is held now to be ) hauing designed to himself an argumēt wherby to make Catholickes odious , and gathered togeather for that end diuers shewes or shadowes for the furniture of his forsaid found assertion , that Catholickes are not tolerable in a Protestant State , he intituleth them : Pregnant obseruations directly prouing Remish schooles to be Seminaries of Rebellion in all Protestantes gouernment : Wheras indeed they are not so much pregnant obseruations , as malignant collections and inforced inferences vpon false groundes . Neither do they at all either directly or indirectly proue that which he pretendeth , as by examination shall presently appeare , if it may please the Reader to hold an equall and indifferent eare in the meane space to the discussing of the controuersy . 2. And first of all to make vp a competent number in forme of a decalogue , he streineth himself much to bring out ten different reasons , and in deed euery man may see that it is a streine , for that all might haue byn vttered in two or three at the most , if not in fewer ; for that all doe concerne in effect the Catholike doctrine , about the Popes authority either in Princes or priuate mens affaires . And herehence is deduced his first reason concerning the censures and punishments determined by Ecclesiasticall Canons against them that by the Church are denounced for Heretickes . The second reason toucheth the said Popes authority spirituall 〈◊〉 secular Princes . The third , the hinderance of their succession by the same lawes . The fourth , the oath and obedience of their subiectes . The fifth , their excommunication and deposition . The sixth the practice of their death by the Popes licence . The 〈◊〉 , the allowance and approbation therof . The eight the Rebellion of Priestes whensoeuer they are able . The ninth the dissoluing and euacuation of oathes by the Popes authority . The last that Romish Priestes by the order of the Pope must professe seditious positions ex officio , that is to say , as he is a Romish Priest. By which enumeration yow may see in deed , that the poore man was more barren then pregnant , and after his streine had partum difficilem , a hard child-birth , as may appeare by that which he hath brought forth , to wit a mouse for a mountaine , and therupon we may iustly say : parturiunt montes &c. We shall giue a short view ouer all his reasons . The first Reason . §. 1. THey who by their slanderous doctrine ( saith he ) doe make all Protestants by their common censure Heretickes , so odious , as vnworthy of any ciuill or naturall society , must necessarily be iudged seditious & intolerable amongst the Protestants : But the Romish Seminaries and Iesuites doe so , ergo . This is his reason and manner of reasoning , and in this sorte goe all the rest , ech thing with his ergo , that yow may know that the learned man hath studied Logicke , or rather sophistry to set downe all in forme of syllogisme . And to proue his propositions or premisses in this first argument he vseth two meanes , first to cite the hard speeches of certaine Catholicke writers against the Caluinian faith , as though it were none at all , but rather infidelity : ( wherin we shall see after what great store of Protestant writers they haue also with them in that point ) the other medium is a certeine odious enumeration of the penalties inflicted by Church-lawes , and Canons of old time vpon heresy and Hereticks in generall ; all which T. M. will needes apply to himself and to English Protestantes at this day , to breake therby all ciuill association with vs that are Catholickes : but both the one and the other are proofes of no validity . Let vs begin with the first . 4. He citeth the wordes of Andreas Iurgiuicius Canon of Cracouia in Polonia , affirming that Protestantes doe holde no one article of the Apostles Creed to wit rightly and entierly . Of M. VVright in his articles , teaching Protestantes to haue no faith , no Religion , no Christ. Of M. Reynoldes , entituling his booke Caluino-Turcismus . Of D. Gifford in the preface to the said booke , auouching the pretented now Ghospel of Caluin , in many things , to be worse and more wicked then the Turkes Alcaron . And finally of Antonius Posseuinus who wrote a booke De Atheismis Protestantium : Of the Atheismes , or pointes of doctrine leading to Atheisme , which are taught by diuers Protestants , especially by Caluin , and his followers . 5. Out of all which speeches T. M. inferreth the generall meaning of vs Catholicks to be : That all humane society with Protestantes must be vtterly dissolued , which is vtterly false and a meere mistaking . For these speeches proue only that there cà be no society 〈◊〉 Catholickes and Protestants in their doctrine & beliefe , but not in life , manners & conuersation , which is the point in question : so as T. M. inferreth here quid pro quo . And if he will heare one of his owne brethren hold this position also ; That there can be no vnion , society , or conformity betweene their & our doctrine pretended by some , let him read VVilliam Perkins epistle to S. VVilliam Bowes in the preface of his reformed or rather deformed Catholicke , where he reprehendeth the new brethren of France , and some also in England , for giuing hope of this vnion . So as in this point we agree , that no agreement can be in Religion , but in conuersatiō there may , as we haue shewed by many examples in the precedent Chapter of people of different Religion that liue togeather at this day in vnion of obedience , and quiet subiection vnder the 〈◊〉 , Turke , and Christian Emperour , as also vnder the great Kings of France , Polonia and other Princes . Fondly then doth T. M. inferre the incompossibility of cohabitation & conuersation out of the insociability of their doctrine and Religion . 6. Now as for the hard and harsh speeches of the Authors alleadged , though vnto many they may seeme somewhat sharpe exaggerations ; yet vnto him that shall consider well the matter in hand , and the accustomed phrases of ancient Fathers in like occasions , it will appeare far otherwise . For first 〈◊〉 his meaning is nothing else , as appeareth by his booke , but that in all and euery article of the Creed , Caluinistes haue innouated and altered somewhat in the true sense therof , and added particuler errours of their owne , as yow shall heare afterward proued , and declared more largely out of the 〈◊〉 and assertions of diuers great Lutheran Protestants , that hold Caluinists to haue peruerted all the articles of the said Creed . Of which point our learned countriman M. VVilliam Reinoldes , that had bvn diuers yeares a Protestant and Preacher of that doctrine , after long study to proue the same by many demonstrations , resolued to write a whole booke , That Caluinistes belieue no one article of the Apostles Creed ; but afterwardes turned the same into that other worke entituled Caluino-Turcismus , which is held by strangers to be one of the most learned , that hath byn written of this kinde of controuersy in our age , and M. Sutcliffe hath made himself ridiculous by attempting to answere the same . 7. Those wordes also of M. VVright ( if he vsed them ) that Hereticks haue no faith , no Religion , no Christ , but are meere infideles , doe conteine an ancient position of Catholicke doctrine , deliuered in schooles and Fathers writings against old Heretickes , many hundred yeares before the name of Protestantes was heard of in the world ; so that this cannot be of malice properly against them . The famous doctor S. Thomas aboue three hundred yeares gone , hath this Question in his Treatise of faith : Whether he that 〈◊〉 obstinatly in one point , or article of his beliefe , doth leese his whole faith in all the rest , and holdeth yea ; alleadging for the same inuincible reasons . And the same Doctor in like manner proposeth another question , to wit , which of three sinnes belonging to infidelity is most grieuous , Iudaisme , Paganisme or Heresy ? & resolueth the question thus : That albeit in some respects the former two may be thought more grieuous in that they deny more points of faith ; yet absolutely in regarde of the malice and obstinacy of an Hereticke , that knew once the Catholicke truth , and now wilfully impugneth the same , against the iudgement of the vniuersall visible Church , his sinne and damnation is much more grieuous ; and hereupon the ancient * Fathers doe euery where aggrauate the heynousnes of this sinne aboue all other sinnes , and in particuler , doe deny them to be Christians , but rather to be Infideles , and worse then Infideles , as now by S. Thomas hath byn said : which is most conforme to the writinges of the Apostles themselues and Apostolicke men , who detested this sinne in the highest degree , as might largely be shewed out of their workes , euen to the horror of the Reader , if this place did beare it . That seuere speach of S. Paul may be sufficient for all the rest , exhorting his disciple Titus to auoide an hereticall man after one or two reprehensions , knowing that such a one is subuerted , and sinneth as damned by his owne iudgment . Which is neuer found written of other sortes of Infideles . 8. No man then ought to be offended with these earnest and sharpe speeches , where heresy or the presumption therof is in question , for that nothing is more dreadfull to Catholicke people then the very name and apprehension of heresy ; howsoeuer in our vnfortunate daies , it be made a matter of dispute only , or table-talke by many now in England , and he that will see store of proofes and reasons laied togeather by the foresaid learned man M. Reynoldes to proue that the heresies of these our times , of such as call themselues Protestants , but especially the followers of Caluin , are farre more perillous and detestable then Paganisme , Iudaisme or Turcisme , let him read not only his foresaid fower bookes De Caluino-Turcismo , but two speciall large Chapters or Treatises of this very matter in his booke De iusta Reipublicae potestate &c. to wit the 4. and 5. and he will rest satisfied . 9. Nor doe Catholicke writers only make these Protestations against Caluin and his doctrine , but many of the most learnedest other Protestants of these daies , as hath byn touched . One most famous preacher and Protestant writer or rather Superintendent in Polonia called Francis Stancarus in an epistle to the King himself saith of him , and to him : Quis Diaboluste , ô Caluine , seduxit , vt contra filium Dei cum Arrio obloquaris ? &c. Cauete , o vos Ministri omnes , a libris Caluini , praesertim in articulis de Trinitate , incarnatione , mediatore , Sacramento Baptismi , & praedestinatione : continent enim doctrinam impiam & blasphemias Arrianas : What deuill hath seduced thee , o Caluin , that thou shouldest speake iniuriously against the sonne of God with Arrius the Hereticke ? &c. Beware , all yee Ministers , of Caluins bookes , especially in the articles of the Bl. Trinity , Incarnation , of the mediator , of the Sacrament of Baptisme , and of predestination : for they conteine impious doctrine , and blasphemies of Arrius . 10. Another brother and Protestant-Preacher no lesse zealous then he in Germany named Conradus Schlusselburge saith of him & his 〈◊〉 that himself hath declared & proued in three large books : Hòs de nullo ferè Christianae doctrinae articulo rectè sentire : That they scarcely belieue aright any one article of Christian beliefe , which is the self same that the forenamed Catholicke writer Iurgiuicius obiected before , which T. M. tooke so impatiently as yow haue heard . And the same brother in one of his said bookes affirmeth : Quod Caluinistae ipsum filium Dei mendacij arguunt , Deum sua omnipotentia spoliant , sunt abiurati hostes & profligatissimi falsatores Testamenti filij Dei : That Caluinists doe charge the Sonne of God with a ly , doe spoile God of his omnipotency , and are foresworne enemies , and most wicked falsifiers of the Testament of the Sonne of God. 11. And another famous Doctor of the same new Ghospell and spirit , saith that this sect of Caluinists & their doctrine , Sentina quaedam est &c. is a certeine sinke into which all other heresies doe flow : it is the last rage of the diuell , which he in his fury doth exercise against Christ and his Church &c. And then further : Qui partes eorum sequitur &c. he that followeth their sect , is a manifest and sworne enemy of God , and hath denied his faith which he promised to Christ in his baptisme : So he . And consider now whether this be not as great detestation of Caluins doctrine , by principal learned Protestants , as T. M. hath picked out of Catholicks wrested wordes before recited ? 12. But yow must not thinke that heere is an end for there would be no end , if I should prosecute all that might be said in this case : Tilmannus Heshusius a Superintendent of the Protestants in the same countrey calleth Caluins doctrine : Blasphemam & Sacrilegam sectam ; a blaspemous and Sacrilegious sect : and writeth a speciall booke of this title : A defence of the Holy Testament of Christ against the blasphemous confession of Caluinists . And AEgidius Hunnius writing a booke De Caluino Iudaizante , of Caluin playing the Iew , after a long confutation saith thus : D●●●●um satis superque iudico &c. we haue detected I suppose sufficiently , and more then sufficiently that Angell of darkenes Iohn Caluin , who comming forth of the pit of hell , hath partly by his detestable wickednes in wresting Scriptures , partly by his impious pen against the Holy Maiesty of Christ , partly by his horrible and monstrous paradoxes about predestination , drawne both himself into hell , & a great number of starres , as the Apocalips speaketh . 13. I pretermit many others , as that of Philippus Nicolaus a Protestant-Minister of Tubinga , who in the yeare 1586. set forth a booke in 4. with this title : A Discouery ( and this I write for our discouerer ) of the fundaments of the Caluinian Sect , and how they agree with old Arrians and Nestorians : Wherby also is demonstrated that no Christian man can take part with them , but that he must defend Arrianisme and Nestorianisme : So he . But the next yeare after there came another booke forth printed in the same Vniuersity with this title : A demonstration out of the Holy Scriptures , that Caluinists and Sacramentaries are not Christians , but rather baptized Iewes and Mahometanes : and a little after that againe came forth the booke of Ioannes Matthias the great Preacher in VVittenberge : De cauendo Caluinistarum fermento , how to auoid the leauen of the Caluinists ; and then another of Albertus Grauerus of like function vpon the yeare 1598. entituled : Bellū Ioannis Caluini & Iesu Christi : The warre betweene Iohn Caluin and Iesus Christ ; and al this written , set forth , and printed by chiefe Protestant brethren : which if the inference of T. M. be true against Catholickes , that in respect of the difference of their doctrine , and for that they holde Caluinists to haue no true faith , they may not liue togeather vnder one Prince : then must it follow also that neither these Lutherans and Caluinian Protestants can liue togeather : and the very same ensueth betweene English Protestants & Puritanes , vpon the difference of their doctrine and belief , which hath no lesse opposition in deed and detestation the one of the other in bitternes of speach , then haue the Lutherane Protestants against them both ; as may easily be demonstrated out of their owne bookes , if we would stand vpon it . And this shall be sufficient for the refutation of his first medium , brought forth to proue that Catholicks and Protestants cannot liue togeather in one common wealth , for that the one side accompteth the other for Hereticks . 14. But the second medium is yet more childish , which is , that for so much as we not only doe hold Protestants to be excommunicate Hereticks , but subiect also to all the punishments & penalties set downe in the Popes Ecclesiasticall Canons , Decrees , & Constitutions for the same , which are many and grieuous , ( as that Hereticks must leese their goods , cannot gather vp tythes , nor recouer debtes , nor institute heires , and other such like , and more sharpe penalties prescribed in old time by the Canon law against ancient Hereticks ) herof he inferreth that we detract all humane society from Protestants , and consequently we are not tolerable in a Protestant common-wealth . 15. But we answere first , that touching the former part to wit the imputation of heresy and excommunication to the Protestant party of England , that followeth the Sacramentary doctrine of Caluin and Zuinglius , yow haue heard now immediately before , how that imputation is laid vpon them , not only by Catholickes , but also by the most renowned Protestant writers that haue byn since that name and profession began . And if we would alleadge much more out of the very Father of Protestancy it self Martin Luther , we might haue store , especially where he pronoūceth this iudiciall sentence of them all : Haereticos seriò censemus & alienos ab Ecclesia Dei Zuinglianos & Sacramentarios omnes , qui negant Christi corpus & sanguinem ore carnali sumi in venerabili Sacramento . We doe vnfeynedly hold for Heretickes , and for aliens from the Church of God all Zuinglians and other Sacramentaries that doe deny Christes body and bloud to be receaued by our bodily mouth in the venerable Sacrament . 16. Behold heere both Heresy and excommunication or separation from the Church of God auerred against both Zuinglians and Caluinists , by him that was their chiefest parent and Patriarch : and in other places of his workes , the same Luther hath many more particulers to this purpose , as namely that men must fly the bookes and doctrine of Zuinglius and his followers , Non secus ac tartarei Daemonis venenum , no otherwise then the poison of the diuell of hell . And yet further that : They are not to be held in the number of Christians , for that they teach no one article of Christian doctrine without corruption , and are seauen times worse then Papists &c. Wherby is euident that this charge of Heresy and excommunication proceedeth not against Caluinists from vs only , but much more eagerly frō their owne brethren , & consequently it is with very little discretion brought in by the Minister T. M. against vs as a singuler fault of ours , wherof we are to treat more afterward in some occasions that will be offered . 17. But now as for the penalties conteyned in the Canon law , against excommunicate Heretickes , as depriuation of dignities , losse of goods , infamy , imprisonment , debarment from Sacraments , and from conuersation , with the like ; the answere is soone made , that those externall punishments are not incurred ordinarily , but after personall denunciation and condemnation by name . For albeit the inward punishmentes that follow Heresy which are sinne and depriuation of grace , excommunication and separation from Gods true Church , and other spirituall losses theron depending , be incurred by the obstinate holding or defending of any cōdemned Heresy whatsoeuer , if the defender know the same to be condemned by the Church , as both Holy Canons doe expressly denounce , and Bulla Caenae Domini euery yeare 〈◊〉 on Maundy-Thursday doth confirme : yet commonly are they not held for subiect to the other externall punishmentes ( and in particuler to be auoided and their company fled ) vntill by a lawfull Iudge he or they be denounced , conuicted , and condemned by name , which we ascribe not to the Protestantes of England , and therfore this charge was maliciously deuised by this Minister against vs , to make vs odious . 18. Nay we goe yet further for pacifying & milding matters betweene vs , that we doe not easily cōdemne or hold all and euery sorte of Protestantes , Puritanes , or the like sortes different at this day in our countrey from the Catholicks , for absolute Heretickes , but excusing them rather wherin we may by any charitable interpretation , doe willingly lay hands where probably we may on that wise , learned , and discreet moderation of the famous doctor S. Augustine , affirming to his friend Honoratus infected with the Manichean Heresy , that there is a great difference betweene an Hereticke , and one that belieueth Hereticks , and is deceaued by them ; yow shall heare his owne wordes to that purpose : Si mihi ( Honorate ) vnum atque idem videretur esse Haereticus & Haereticis credens homo , tam lingua , quàm stylo in haec causa conquiescendum esse arbitrarer : nunc verò cùm inter duo plurimùm in●ersit &c. 19. If it had seemed to me ( friend Honoratus ) that an Hereticke & a man belieuing Hereticks had byn al one thing , I should haue thought it better to hold my peace in this cause betweene vs , rather then to speake or write any thing therin : but now seeing there is such great difference betweene these two , I thought it not good to be silent with yow , for so much as an Hereticke in my opinion is he , that for some temporall respect or commodity , but especially for vaine glory and singularity , doth inuent , or follow false and new opinions : but he which belieueth such people is a man only deluded by a false imagination of truth & piety . So S. Augustine . And hereby openeth to vs a dore to thinke charitably of many Protestants , whome though we hold for deceaued ; yet not properly in S. Augustines meaning for Hereticks . 20. And this doctrine teacheth the same Doctor in other places against the Donatistes , saying , that if a man should beleeue the heresy of Photinus ( for example ) who denied the distinction of three persons in God , and the diuinity of Christ , and should thinke it were the true Catholicke faith : Istum nondum 〈◊〉 dico ( saith S. Augustine ) nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit , & illud quod tenebat elegerit . I doe not thinke this man as yet to be an Hereticke , except when the doctrine of the Catholicke faith ( to wit that which is held generally by all or the most Churches ouer Christendome ) being made cleere and manifest vnto him , he shall resolue to resist the same , and shall make choice of that which before he held : so as now this choice or election with obstinate resolution to hold and defend the same against the publicke authority of the Church , maketh that to be properly heresy , which before was but error ; which error though it might be in it self damnable ; yet nothing so much as when it passeth into the nature of heresy ; both which pointes are seene by that which the said Holy Father hath in another place , to wit in his booke De haeresibus ad Quod-vult-Deum , where hauing recounted eighty and eight Heresies , that had passed before his time vnto the Pelagians , that were the last , he concludeth thus : There may be yet other Heresies besides these that I haue in this our worke recounted , or there may rise vp other herafter , whereof whosoeuer shall holde any one , he shall not be a Christian Catholicke . He doth not say he shall be an Hereticke properly , but no Christian Catholicke , which though it be sufficient to damnation , if ignorance excuse him not ; yet nothing so great as if he were an hereticke , for that as before we haue shewed out of S. Thomas , the damnation of Iewes and Gentiles is much more tolerable then that of Heretickes . 21. And all these limitations and charitable moderations we doe willingly vse to calme and mitigate matters , and to temper that intemperate breaking humour of this make-bate Minister T. M. and his companions that would put all in combustion and desperate conuulsion . And so much of this first reason , the rest we shall passe ouer with greater breuity . To his second and third Reasons . §. 2. HIs second reason why his Maiesties Catholicke and Protestant subiects may not liue togeather in England is , For that all Popish Priestes ( faith he ) doe attribute a double prerogatiue ouer Kings , that is to say , a Democraticall and Monarchicall Soueraigne ciuill power , the first to the people , the second to the Pope : And for proofe of the first , concerning the people , he alleadgeth fower seuerall authorities of Catholicke writers , but so corruptly and perfidiously , as if nothing else did shew his talent of cogging and treacherous dealing , this were sufficient to discouer the same , though afterwardes greater store will occurre : we shall runne ouer briefly all these fower . 23. First he saith that Doleman in his Conference about succession hath these wordes : The Common-wealth hath authority to chuse a King , and to limit him lawes at their pleasure : Which if it were truly alleadged as it lieth in the Author , yet heere is no mention of the people , or of Democraticall state , but only of the Common-wealth , which includeth both nobility and people , and all other states . Secondly Dolemans wordes are not of chusing a King , but of chusing a forme of gouernement be it Democraticall , Aristocraticall or Monarchicall . Let vs heare the Author himself speake : In like manner ( saith he ) it is euident , that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her gouernement ( as hath byn proued : ) so hath it also to limit the same with what lawes and conditions shee pleaseth , wherof ensueth great diuersity of authority and power , which ech one of the former gouernments hath in it self . So he . Where we see that Doleman speaketh of the power which a Common-wealth hath , that is deuoid of any certeine gouernement , to chuse vnto themselues that forme that best liketh them , with the limitations they thinke most expedient : and so we see in England , France , Polonia , Germany , Venice , Genua , and in the Empire it self different formes and manners of gouernement , with different lawes and limitations , according to the choice and liking of ech nation . This place then of Doleman is corrupted by T. M. both in wordes and sense , for he neither speaketh nor meaneth as the false Minister auoucheth him , of giuing Democraticall power to the people ouer Princes established . 24. There followeth the second place taken out of the French Iesuite , as he calleth him : De iusta abdicatione &c. though it be well knowne that D. Bouchier Author of that booke yet liuing in Flanders , and Canon of Tourney was neuer Iesuite in his life ; but all must be ascribed to Iesuits , that may seeme odious : This French Iesuite ( saith he ) sheweth a reason of Dolemans speach , saying : For Maiesty is rather seated in the Kingdome , then in the King. But I would aske the poore man , why he doth alleadge this place ? or of what weight it is , or may be for his purpose ? for so much as D. Bouchier in these wordes denieth not Maiesty to be in the King , but to be more in the Kingdome ; for that the Kingdome giueth Maiesty vnto the King when it chuseth him , and not the King properly vnto the Kingdome . And is not this a great obiection ? or doth this proue that we ascribe Democraticall soueraignity ouer Kings vnto the people ? One of his owne Ghospell-brethren speaketh more roundly and roughly to the matter when he writeth : Populo ius est vt imperium cui velit deferat : The people hath right to bestowe the crowne vpon whome they list : if we had said so , what aduantage would T. M. haue sought thereat ? 25. His third place is out of D. Stapleton , in his booke called Dydimus , where he saith : That the people are not ordeyned for the Prince , but the Prince for the people . His wordes in Latin are : Non populi in Principum gratiam facti , sed Principes in populi commodum creati sunt . Multitudes of people are not made ( by God ) for Princes sakes , but Princes are created for the commodity or good of the people : and what is there in this sentence iustly to be reprehended ? Is not this euident by diuine and humane lawe , and by the very light of nature it self , that Princes were first ordeined by God , for the good of multitudes , and not multitudes for the vtility of Princes ? Will T. M. deny this ? or is not this far more modest and temperate then that of his owne brethren before mentioned , whose wordes are : Populus Rege est praestantior & melior ; the people are better & more excellēt then the King ? what wilfull wrangling is this in a turbulent Minister ? 26. His fourth and last place is out of M. VVilliam Reinoldes in his booke De iusta Reip. auctoritate &c. whome he abuseth egregiously , both in ascribing to him that which is not his , and in deliuering the same corruptedly , and by a little yow may learne much , ex vngue leonem . His wordes he citeth thus : Rex humana creaturae est , quia ab hominibus constituta : and Englisheth in this manner : A King is but a creature of mans creation . where yow see first that in the translation he addeth but , and mans creation of himself , for that the Latin hath no such but , nor creation , but constitution . Secondly these wordes are not the wordes of M. Reinoldes , but only cited by him out of S. Peter ; and thirdly they are alleadged here by T. M. to a quite contrary sense from the whole discourse and meaning of the Author , which was to exalte and magnify the authority of Princes , as descending from God , and not to debase the same , as he is calumniated . For proofe herof whosoeuer will looke vpon the booke and place it self before mentioned , shal find that M. Reinolds purpose therin is to proue , that albeit earthly principality , power and authority be called by the Apostle humana creatura : yet that it is originally from God , & by his commandement to be obeyed . His wordes are these : Hinc enim est &c. hence is it , that albeit the Apostle doe call all earthly principality a humaine creature , for that it is placed in certaine men ( from the beginning ) by suffrages of the people ; yet election of Princes doth flow from the law of nature , which God created ; and from the vse of reason which God powred into man , and which is a little beame of diuine light drawne from that infinite brightnes of almighty God ; therefore doth the Apostle S. Paul pronounce that There is no power but from God , and that he which resisteth this power , resisteth God himselfe . So M. Reinoldes . 27. And now let the indifferent Reader iudge whether M. Reinoldes hath byn calumniated in this allegation or no , & whether this Minister is led by any rule of conscience , and whether these be such pregnant arguments and proofes against vs as he promised at the first entrance of his booke . And for the matter in hand , he promised to proue , as yow haue heard , that we ascribed popular and Democraticall power to the people ouer Kings , which how well he hath performed by these places alleadged yow haue seene . 28. Finally to stand no longer vpon this , whether we or they , Catholicks or Protestantes doe attribute more to popular licence , against Princes ( when they giue not contentment ) may aboundantly be seene in that we haue set downe before , and will ensue afterward , both of their doctrine and practises in like occasions . And so much of this first charge : now will we passe to the second . 29. The second is , that we ascribe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power and souer aignty ouer Kings vnto the Pope : wherin first what he saith of ciuill souer aignty is a meere fiction and calumniation of his owne , if it be out of the Popes owne temporall Dominions . For we ascribe no such vnto him ouer other Princes or their subiects , but that authority or soueraignty only which Catholicke doctrine ascribeth to the Bishop of Rome as Successor to S. Peter Prince of the Apostles , & spirituall head of the vniuersall visible Church of Christ , which is only spirituall , & for spirituall ends , to wit , for the direction and saluation of soules . And if at any time he be forced to passe further then this , and by a certeine consequence to deale in some temporall affaires also ; it must be only indirectly in defence or conseruation of the said spirituall , that is to say , when the said spirituall power apperteining to soules cannot other wise be defended or conserued , as more largely hath byn treated before . 30. This then is the summe and substance of Catholicke doctrine , about this point of the Popes authority , which from the beginning of Christianity hath byn acknowledged in Gods Church , and in no place more then in England , where it hath byn both held & practised from the very first Christened King of our nation Ethelbert vnto K. Henry the 8. for the space of almost a thousand yeares , without interruption , as largely and aboundantly hath byn shewed and laied forth to the view of all men in a late booke written in answere to S. Edward Cookes fifth part of Reportes ; and this with great honor & prosperity of the Princes therof , and vnion of their people vnder their gouernment , and without such odious or turbulent inferences , as now are made therevpon by vnquiet spirittes , that would set at warre euen mens imaginations in the ayer , therby to mainteine disunion , discorde , and diffidence betweene Princes , and namely betweene our present noble Soueraigne and his Catholicke subiects . 31. And first of all let vs heare this turbulent T. M. how vpon the enuy of this authority he frameth and foundeth all his ensuing reasons . VVe demaunde ( saith he ) how farre these pretended powers ( of people & Pope ) may extende , and heervpon we argue . To which I answere , that in imagination they may extend so farre as any fantasticall braine shall list to draw them ; but in the true meaning of Catholicke reall doctrine , they can extend no further then hath byn declared . And as for the popular power of people ouer Princes , we haue now refuted the calumniation , & shewed that it is a mere fiction of his owne , and no position of ours ; and that his Protestant doctrine doth ascribe much more licence to popular tumult , then the Catholicke without comparison : and for that of the Pope , I haue declared how it is to be vnderstood to be of his owne nature in spirituall affaires only , without preiudice of ciuill Princely gouernement at all , and so the practice of the worlde and experience of so many Princes , great States and Monarches liuing quietly & securely vnder the same authority , both in former times and ours most euidently doth proue and confirme . 32. But yet let vs see and consider how falsely and calumniously this Make-bate doth herevpon argue in his third reason , inferring for his assumption or minor proposition thus : But all Popish Priestes vpon this pretended Supremacy and prerogatiue of Pope and people , doe vtterly abolish the title of succession in all Protestant Princes : Ergo. Wherin to shew him a notable liar , it shall be sufficient to name all the Protestant Princes , that haue had title of successiō in our coūtrey ( for therof he speaketh principally ) since the name of Protestant hath byn heard of in the world , being three in number , to wit K. Edward the sixt , Q. Elizabeth , and K. Iames that now raigneth , all which were admitted peaceably to their Crownes , as well by Priestes as Catholicke people , who notwithstanding in some of their admissions wanted not meanes to haue wrought disturbances as the world knoweth : so as if one instance only doth truly ouerthrow any general proposition ; how much more doth this triple instance not able to be denied , ouerthrow and cast to the ground this vniuersal false assertion of T. M. which auerreth : That all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 vtterly abolish the Succession of all Protestant Princes . Will he not be ashamed to see himself cōuinced ofso great and shameles ouerlashing ? 33. And on the other side , one only Catholicke Princesse being to succeed in this time , to wit Q. Mary , we know what resistance the Protestants made both by bookes , sermons , Treatises and open armes ; and how many Rebellions , conspiracies , robberies , priuy slaughters , and other impediments were designed and practised afterward , during the few yeares she raigned : we know also what was executed against the gouernment and liues of the two noble Catholicke Queenes her neerest neighbours , & one of them most straitly conioyned in bloud that raigned at that time in Scotland , to omit others before mētioned , that were debarred from their lawfull succession , or excluded from their rightfull possession for their Religion in Sweueland , Flanders , & other places as cannot be denied . 34. Wherfore it is more then extraordinary impudency in T. M. to charge vs with that which is either peculier or more eminent in themselues , and false in vs : and what or how farre this fellow may be trusted in these his assertions , may be gathered by the last sentence of all his discourse in this matter , where he hath these wordes : F. Persons ( in his Doleman ) doth pronounce sentence , that whosoeuer shall consent to the succession of a Protestant Prince is a most grieuous and damnable 〈◊〉 . And is it so in deed Syr 〈◊〉 ? and will yow stand to it , and leese your credit if this be falsely or calumniously alleadged ? then if yow please let vs heare the Authors owne wordes . 35. And now ( saith he ) to apply all this to our purpose for England , and for the matter we haue in hand , I affirme and hold , that for any man to giue his helpe , consent , or assistance towardes the making of a King , whome he iudgeth or belieueth to be faulty in Religion , and consequently would aduance no Religion , or the wrong , if he were in authority , is a most grieuous & damnable sinne to him that doth it , of what side soeuer the truth be , or how good or bad soeuer the party be , that is preferred . So he . And his reason is , for that he should sinne against his owne conscience in furthering such aKing . And is there heere any word peculiar of a Protestant Prince , or of his succession ? nay doth not the text speake plainly of making a King where none is ? doth it not speake also indifferently of all sortes of Religion , of what side soeuer the truth be ? How then can this malicious cauilling Minister expect to be trusted hereafter , or how may any man thinke that he speaketh or writeth out of conscience , seing him to vse such grosse shiftes and falshoodes in so manifest and important a matter ? It is no marueyle that he set not his name at large to his booke , as not desirous to haue the dew praise of such desert . To the rest of his reasons . §. 3. BVt let vs passe a little further in these his deuises , for much I may not , both in regarde of the breuity which I haue designedvnto my self , & for the loathsomnes I take of such vncharitable railings , as in steed of reasons he casteth forth , with no greater authority , then of his owne assertion , or rather calumniation . 37. As for example in his fourth reason he subsumeth in his minor proposition thus : But all Popish Priests 〈◊〉 dissolue the oath of obedience to all Protestant Gouernours . And in the fifth : But all Popish Priestes defend violent deposing of Kinges and Emperours . And in the sixt : But all Popish Priestes are guylty of intending , designing , or practising murther of Princes . And in the seauenth : But all Popish Priestes doe iustify the actes of treason and 〈◊〉 parricides . And yet further in the eight : But all Popish Priestes professe Rebellion , as soone as they can presume of their strength In the ninth likewise : But all Popish Priestes are guylty of 〈◊〉 , for denying or violating with men of diuerse Religion . And lastly in histenth : But all Romish Priestes ex officio , that is to say , as they are Priestes , must and doe professe such seditious 〈◊〉 , as thereby they are desperate traitors . 〈◊〉 . 38. And is it possible for any tongue ( though borrowed from hell it self , and embrewed with neuer so virulent or serpentine prison ) to vtter more precipitate malice then this ? His propositions yow see are generall in all these assertions , to wit , that al Catholicke Priestes are guilty in all these accusations , and the nature as yow know of a generall proposition is such , as if any one instance may be giuen to the contrary , it ouerthroweth the whole . And is it probable ( thinke yow ) that no one Priest may be found in England or elswhere , deuoide of all these heynons accusations , or of any one of them ? Surely I am of opinion , that there will hardly be found any man so passionate on his owneside , which in this case will not condemne him of passion , precipitation , and conscienceles calumniation . And we on the other side may well vrge to the contrary that no one Priest hath truely hitherto byn conuinced to haue treated or conspired , or giuen consent to the Princes death in all the long raigne of the Queene past , no not Ballard himself who only can be named to haue byn condemned for this pretence , though in deed his crime was , as of all the 14. Gentlemen that died with him , rather to haue deliuered Queene Mary out of prison , then to depriue Q. Elizabeth of her life : and so they protested at their deathes . 39. But leauing this let vs come to examine some of the pointes themselues , that are obiected : they are all ( if yow consider them well ) but little buddes and branches deduced from one , and the selfe same roote of the Popes authority , and consequently but minced-meates made out in different seruices , by the cunning cookery of T. M. to feede the phantasies of such as hunger after variety of calumniations against the Catholicke doctrine . For what great difference is there ( for example sake ) betweene that which is treated in the fourth reason of sreeing subiectes from their obedience to Princes , & the other of the fifth about Deposing Princes , or that of the sixt and seauenth of designing their deathes , and of iustifying treasons against the same : And so in the ninth of oathes euacuated , which was handled before vnder other tearmes in the fourth reason , wherby appeareth , that this mans purpose was ( as before I haue noted ) to straine matters to the vttermost , and to set out as many shewes of inconueniences , dangers and damages to ensue by our doctrine of Papall authority , as either his wit could deuise , or his malice vtter . 40. And yet the seely fellow did not consider one instance vnanswerable , that might be giuen to all these his inuentions , which is the experience of so many ages , both in England , & other Kingdoms round about vs , wherin the Kings and Princes haue raigned prosperously ( and doe at this day ) notwithstanding this doctrine , and vse of the Popes power ; & this not only Catholicke Princes , but diuers Protestant Potentates in like manner , for any thing that Popes haue done , or attempted against them . For what hath any Pope done against the Protestant Kings of Denmarke in this our age ? what against those of Sweueland either Father or Sonne , though the later doth offer open iniury to a Catholicke King the true inheritor ? what against the Dukes of Saxony , the Count Palatines and Protestant Princes of the Empire , notwithstanding the said Electors whole authority in that action was giuen them by the Sea Apostolicke , and consequently doth depend therof ? what against diuers other particular Princes both of the Empire and otherwise , who haue in this our age departed from the obedience of that Sea ? how many hath it molested , censured , deposed , or troubled for the same ? 41. And that which is most of all to our purpose at this time , what manner of proceeding hath the same Sea Apostolicke vsed towardes the Kingdome of Scotland , and his Maiesty ( that now ruleth also the scepter of England ) for the space of 36. yeares , wherin he raigned from an infant , after the iniust deposition of his mother by her Protestant subiects ? did the Sea of Rome or any Bishop therof euer goe about to hurt or preiudice him ? Or is it not well knowne that diuers Popes did endeauour to doe good and friendly actions for the preseruation of his safty , when it was many times put in ieopardy by the Protestant party ? And among other I can well remember that about the yeare 1585. when his Maiesty was besieged by them in his towne and castle of Striueling , and driuen to yeeld vnto them both his owne royall person , and amongst other articles this , as the Protestant History it self doth recount it , was one ; That his Maiesties olde guarde was to be remoued and another placed by them : the Pope then liuing , hearing therof by his Maiesties Embassador in France the Archbishop of Glasco , and others , he was so moued with compassion , as he offered an honorable contribution towards the preseruation of his Maiesties person in that case , and especially for maintenance of a trusty guard about the same : the like good will in other lesse occasions haue other Popes shewed in like manner . So as all is not fire and sworde , excommunication , and anathematization , prodition , deposition , conspiracy , murther , absoluing of subiects , relaxation of oathes , and other such hostile actions , as our seditious aduersary heere laieth togeather to make the Popes office and authority more odious . 42. Only two publicke examples to my remembrance can be alleadged of any Protestant Princes excommunicated , censured , or molested by the Sea Apostolicke since Luther began his breach ( which are now almost an hundred yeares ) notwithstāding there haue byn so many of them , and so exorbitant things committed by them against Catholicke Religion , and the said Sea Apostolicke as is notorious to all men . And these two vpon speciall causes and inducements , to wit , Q. Elizabeth of England , and King Henry then of Nauarre , and now also of France ( for of King Henry of Enggland I make no mention , for that his cause was not Religion at that time : ) the first of the two , in regarde of the publicke violent change of Religion , which shee made in her Realme , with the deposition , depriuation , imprisonment or exile of all Catholicke Bishops , Prelates , Clergy , and others that would not yeeld their consent thereunto , and this ( as is alleadged ) contrary to her publicke promise and oath at her Coronation . 43. The second for feare least he comming to the Crowne of France in that disposition wherein then he was presumed to be , should attempt the like change in that great Kingdome : And to both these actes were the Popes of those times drawen and incited either secretly or openly by some of the chief Nobility of both Realmes , whome most it concerned . And albeit the former hath not had that successe which was hoped , and perhaps suggested ; yet the finall euent of the second hath byn more prosperous , then at that time could be expected , no King lightly in Christendome hauing made more reall demonstratiōs of loue , vnion , and reuerence to the Sea of Rome then his most Christian Maiesty , nor receaued greater enterchange of graces , and fauours from the same Sea , and this in matters of most importance for the setling and establishment of his Imperiall Crowne and royall race . 44. Wherfore al this bitter barking of this Minister T. M. about excommunicating , depriuing , deposing , and murthering Princes , as also about absoluing of subiectes from their oathes and the like , ceaseth ( as yow see ) by a little good correspondence betweene the said Princes and their generall Pastor . And when matters passe at the worst , and are in most exasperation betweene them : yet is it not the tenth part of perill which Protestant doctrine and practice draweth them into , vpon any generall disgust against their gouernments . For if in lue of these two Protestant Princes censured by the Sea Apostolicke , we should recount all the Catholicke Princes that haue byn vexed , molested , iniured , or depriued of their States , or violated in their persons , or brought to confusion in our Northerne parts of the world in this time , to wit , in Sauoy , France , Switzerland , Germany , Bemeland , Austria , Poland , Sweueland , Denmark , Flanders , England and Scotland , and some other places wherof we haue treated more largely in the precedent Chapter ; there would be no comparison at all . Of false dealing and sleights of T. M. §. 4. ANd yet further yow must vnderstand that this malicious calumniator proposing vnto himself for his end to make vs hatefull , doth not only encrease , multiply , and exaggerate matters against vs by all art of sycophancy , as making some things to seeme odious , that of themselues are true and laudable ; and exaggerating others to a farre higher degree , then wherin they were spoken , or are to be vnderstood , inferring also generall propositions vpon some shewes of particuler proofes : but besides all this , he passeth also further , & obiecteth often times against vs the very same things that his owne Authours doe hold ( wherof before we haue laid downe some examples , and shall doe more hereafter ) yea shameth not manifestly to falsify and ly also ; as when he auoucheth with great resolution , that the late K. Henry of France was censured by Pope Xixtus . v. for this only crime , for that himselfe being a Papist , yet fauoured the Protestantes , and especially the Prince of Nauarre : Wheras it is knowne that besides this , he had murthered most miserably two principall peeres & Princes of his Crowne , the Duke , and Cardinall of Guise , neerest in bloud to his Maiesty of England , and therby broken his solemne oath made but a little before in presence of many , when he receaued the Bl. Sacrament to the contrary . And how then was his only crime to haue fauoured the Protestants , as this Minister auerreth ? 46. And againe in the same place or precedent page he hath these wordes : Pope Adrian being guilty of like seditious practice against the Emperour Henry the second , was choked with a fly . And in his quotation citeth Nauclerus for it , Generatione 139. which should be 39. for that Nauclerus hath nothing neere so many Generations in that Part , and in steed of Henry the second , he should haue said Frederick the first of that name , for that Henry the second was before the time of our Conquest , and almost two hundred yeares before Adrian the fourth our English Pope , of whome we now speake who liued in the time of King Stephen and King Henry the second of England , and was a Holy man , and accompted the Apostle of Noruegia for conuerting the same to our Christian faith , before he was Pope , and all Authors doe write honorably of him , & so doth Nauclerus affirme : and therefore though he make mention of such a fable related by Vrspergensis that was a Schismatical writer in those dayes ( who also doth not absolutely auouch it , but with this temperament vt fertur , as the reporte goeth ) yet doth the said Nauclerus reiect the same as false , and confuteth it by the testimonies of al other writers , especially of Italy , that liued with him , and therby knew best both his life and death . And yet all this notwithstanding will this false ladde T. M. needes set downe this History as true , affirming it for such , and neuer so much as giuing his Reader to vnderstand , that any other denied the same , or that the only Author himself of this fiction doubted therof . And is not this perfidious dealing ? or can any man excuse him from falshood and malice in this open treachery ? 47. Another like tricke he plaieth some few pages before this againe , citing out of Doctor Bouchiers booke , De iusta abdicatione these wordes : 〈◊〉 occidere honestum est , quod cuiuis impunè facere permittitur , quod ex communi consensu dico : And then he Englisheth the same thus : Any man may lawfully murder a Tyrant , which I defend ( saith he ) by common consent . But he that shall read the place in the Author himself , shall find , that he holdeth the very contrary , to wit , that a priuate man may not kill a Tyrant , that is not first iudged and declared to be a publicke enemy by the common-wealth ; and he proueth the same at large , first out of Scriptures , & by the decree of the General Councell of Constance , his wordes be these : Neque verò eo iure quod ad Regnum habet , nisi per publicum iudicium , spoliari potest &c. Neither can a Tyrant be depriued of that right , which he hath to a Kingdome , but only by publicke iudgment ; yea further also so long as that right of Kingdome remaineth , his person must be held for sacred , wherof ensueth , that no right remaineth to any priuate man against his life : & albeit any priuate man should bring forth neuer so many priuate iniuries done by the said Tyrāt against him ; as that he had whipped him with yron rods , oppressed him , afflicted him , yet in this case must he haue patience , according to the admonition of S. Peter : That we must be obedient not only vnto good and modest Lordes , but also vnto those that be disorderly , and that this is grace , when a man for Godes cause doth sustaine and beare with patience iniuries vniustly done vnto him &c. 48. And in this sense ( saith he ) is the decree of the Councell of Constance to be vnderstood , when they say : Errorem in fide esse &c. It is errour in faith to hold ( as Iohn VVickcliffe did ) that euery Tyrant may be slaine meritoriously by any Vassall or subiect of his , by free or secret treasons &c. Thus writeth that author , holding as yow see , that no Tyrant whatsoeuer , though he be neuer so great a Tyrant , may be touched by any priuate man , for any priuate iniuries , though neuer so great , nor yet for publicke , though neuer so manifest , except he be first publickly cōdemned by the common-wealth ; which is another manner of moderation , and security for Princes , then the Protestant doctrine before rehearsed : and namely that of Knox , vttered in the name of the whole Protestant Congregation both of Scotland and Geneua : If Princes be Tyrantes against God and his truth , his subiectes are freed from their oathes of obedience . So he . And who shall be Iudge of this ? The people , for that the people ( saith he ) are bound by oath to God to reuenge the iniury done against his Maiesty . Let Princes thinke well of this , and let the Reader consider the malicious falshood of this Minister T. M. who in alleadging that little sentence before mentioned , about killing of a Tyrant , stroke out the wordes of most importance : quem hostem Reipublicae iudicauerit ; whome the common-wealth hath iudged for a publicke enemy ; and adding that other clause , which I say by common consent , which is not there to be found : And with such people we are forced to deale , that haue no conscience at all in cosenage , and yet they cry out of Equiuocation against vs , where it is lawfull to be vsed ; making no scruple at all themselues to ly , which in our doctrine is alwaies vnlawfull for any cause whatsoeuer . 49. But will yow heare a case or two more out of the Canon law , how dexterous Syr Thomas is in corrupting that which he loueth not , nor seemeth well to vnderstand ? yow may read in the fourth page of this his pamphlet an ancient decree ( for so he calleth it ) alledged by him out of Gratian in the glosse , determining that though a man haue sworne to pay money to one that is excommunicated , yet is he not bound to pay the same , and he alledgeth the Latin text thus : Si iuraui me soluturum alicui pecuniam qui excommunicatur , non teneor ei soluere : If I haue sworne to pay money to any man that is excommunicated , I am not bound to pay it , adding this reason : Quia 〈◊〉 possumus , debemus vexare malos vt cessent a malo ; We ought to vex euill men by what meanes foeuer we may , to the end they may cease from doing euill . In the allegation of which little text , a man would hardly belieue how many false trickes there be , to make Catholicke doctrine to seeme odious and absurd . For first these wordes not being found in any text of law or decision of any Pope or Councell , but only in the glosse or commentary , they make not any ancient or moderne decree , as the Minister falsly auoucheth , but rather shew the opinion of him , who writeth the commentary , if his wordes were as heere they are alledged . 50. But the truth is , that the wordes of the glosse conteine only a certain obiection vpon a clause of a Canon , concerning promise to be obserued to one that is excommunicated after the promise was made ; & the obiection or doubt is made in these wordes by the Authour of the glosse or Commentary : Sed quid dices , si iuraui &c. But what will you say , if I haue sworne to pay money to any person , or haue promised the same vnder some forfeiture , and in the meane space , he to whome I made the promise is excommunicated , am I bound to pay the same or not ? This is the question , and then he argueth on both sides : and first for the negatiue , videtur quod non , it seemeth I am not , for that the Canon law saith Causa . 23. q. 6. That we ought to afflicct wicked men by all meanes possible , to the end they ceasse from their wickednes . So he , alledging diuers other argumentes for the same opinion ; but yet afterwardes comming to giue his owne resolution , he saith thus : Verius credo , quòd licèt ille non habeat ius petendi , tamen debet ei solui . I doe belieue the truer opiniō to be , that albeit he that is so excommunicated doe leese his right to demaund his money , yet is the other bound to pay him . And for this he citeth diuers lawes and reasons therin mentioned , as namely , Extrau . de Iu. debitoris , & extr . de sent . excommunicationis , Si verè , & 11. q. 3. Cum excommunicato . 51. So as heere our Minister not of ignorance but of falshood taketh the obiection for the resolution , as Plessy Mornay did in his booke against the masse , where he would proue that Scotus , Durand and other schoole-deuines did doubt of the reall presence and transubstantiation , for that hauing proposed the question , they began to argue for the negatiue part , saying , videtur quod non , though afterwardes they resolued the contrary , & solued the argument . And the very like doth our Minister heere , calling this obiection of videtur quod non , not only a resolution but an ancient Decree . Secondly there is wilfull deceipt in leauing out the first wordes of the Author , Sed quid dices , si iuraui ? But what wil yow say , if I haue sworne ? which doe plainly shew that it is but an obiection . Thirdly that he alledgeth the reason of the obiection Quia qualitercumque possumus &c. for the reason of the resolutiō , which is false : for that the resolution is made against that reason . Fourthly the true resolution of the Commentor is vtterly concealed , and a contrary determination by him impugned set downe , and this not as a priuate opinion , but as an ancient decree of the law & Canon it self . Consider I pray yow how many fraudes and falshoodes there be in one little quotation , and what a volume I should be inforced to make , if I would examine exactly such a multitude of citations as he quoteth against vs , but yet one or two more shall I produce in the same kinde and matter . 52. In the sixt page of his discouery he hath this grieuous accusation out of the Canon law against vs : Haeretici filij vel consanguinei non dicuntur , sed 〈◊〉 legem sit manus tua super eos , vt fundas sanguinem ipsorum , and then he quoteth thus : Apud Grat. gloss . in Decret . li. 5. ex Decret . Gregor . 9. caus . 23. q. 8. cap. Legi . Which distracted kind of quotation , seperating the first and last wordes , that should haue gone togeather , seeme to import that he scarce read the bookes themselues , but cited the same out of some other mans notes ; but that fault were easily pardoned if he vsed no greater fraude in the thing it self . For first he Englisheth the wordes thus : Heretickes may not be termed either children or kindred , but according to the old law thy hand must be against them to spil their bloud : And then in the margent he setteth downe this speciall printed note : The professed bloudy massacre against the Protestantes , without distinction of sex or kinred . And what can be more odiously vrged thē this ? Now then let vs see how many false trickes and shiftes , fit for a Protestant-Minister , doely lurking in this short citation . 53. First of all is to be considered , that this glosse or Commentary of the Canon law , which heere is both vntruly cited and maliciously applied , is vpon a Canon beginning Si quis , which Canon is taken out of the third Councell of Carthage , wherin the famous Doctour and Holy Father S. Augustine was present , as a cheife Bishop , that had voice in that Councell , and the decree of the Canon is ; that if any Bishop should institute Heretickes or pagans for his heires , whether they were consanguinei or extranei , kinsmen or externes , ei Anathema dicatur , atque eius nomen inter Dei sacerdotes nullo modo recitetur : Let him be accursed , & let not his name be remembred any way among the Priestes of God. 54. This is the seuerity of that Canon , for ground wherof another precedent Canon setteth downe out of the same S. Augustine : Quod Haereticus perseuer ans aeternaliter damnatur &c. That an Heretick perseuering in his Heresy is damned eternally , neither can he recieue any profit by baptisme , almes , martyrdome , nor any other good workes . So hath the title of the Canon , but the wordes of S. Augustine are these : Firmissimè tene , & nullatenùs dubites &c. Hold for most certaine and no wayes doubt , but that euery Hereticke or Schismaticke shall be partaker of hel fier euerlastingly , togeather with the diuell and his angelles , except before the end of his life he be restored and incorporated againe into the Catholicke Church ; neither shall baptisme or almes neuer so aboundantly bestowed , no nor death it self suffred for the name of Christ , profit him any thing to saluation . So S. Augustine . 55. Vpon this ground then that Heretickes out of the Church , & so censured as heere yow haue heard , though they be neuer so neere of kin , may not be made heires , especially by Church-men ; the glosse yeelding a reason therof , hath these wordes : Quia isti Haeretici iam non dicuntur filij vel consanguinei , vnde dicitur in lege : si frater tuus , & amicus tuus , & vxor tua aeprauare voluerit veritatem , sit manus tua super illos : For that these Heretickes are not now called childrē or kinsfolke , therfore , as such , they cannot be made Inheritours by Ecclesiasticall men ; wherupon it is said in the law ( of Deuteronomie ) if thy brother and friend or wife will goe about to depraue the truth , let thy hand be vpon them . And presently he citeth to the same effect , the authority of S Hierome , out of another Canon , in another place of the law , as presently we shall see . 56. So as first heere we may behold that T. M. hath not put downe this his quoted glosse as it is found in the true glosse it self , but left out both the beginning : 〈◊〉 isti Haeretici &c. which imported somewhat to the vnderstanding of his meaning ; as also he left out the reason alledged by the glosse out of Gods owne wordes in Deuteronomy , to wit , the wilfull corrupting of his truth . And thirdly he added these wordes : Vt fundas sanguinem ipsorum , which heere ( as yow see ) the glosse hath not , but they are cited out of S. Hierome in another Canon and volume of the law , where 〈◊〉 Holy Father , excusing to his friend Riparius a Priest , his earnest zeale and desire to haue Vigilantius the Hereticke ( against whome he had written ) punished by his Bishop , alledgeth diuers examples of seuerity in like cases out of the Scripture , as of Phinees , Elias , Symon Cananeus , S. Peter , S. Paul , and lastly citeth also the foresaid wordes of Gods ordinance in Deuteronomy : If thy brother , thy wife , thy friend &c. shall goe about to peruert thee from Gods true worship &c. heare him not , nor conceale him , but bring him forth to iudgment , and let thy hand be vpon him first , and then after the hand of all the people &c. which is to be vnderstood according to the forme of law appointed afterward in the 17. Chapter : That he be orderly brought forth to iudgment , and then when sentence is 〈◊〉 against him , he which heard or saw him commit the sinne , and is a witnes against him , must cast the first stone at him , and the rest must follow . And this also doth the ordinary Commentary or glosse of Lyranus and others vpon those textes of Scripture declare . 57. And now let the iudicious Reader consider how many corruptions this crasty Minister hath vsed to bring forth to his purpose , this one little distracted text , for proof of professed bloudy massacres intended by vs against Protestantes . For first he corrupteth the wordes of the glosse apparantly , and that in diuers pointes , leauing out that which the glosse saith , and adding that which the glosse hath not : then he corrupteth the meaning both of glosse and Canon , deprauing that to a wicked sense of bloudy massacring without distinction of sex or kinred ; which the Canon and Councell of Carthage with S. Augustine meant only of ciuill punishment against Heretickes , to wit that they could not be made heires to Ecclesiasticall men . Thirdly he peruerteth in like manner S. Hieromes intent , which was that albeit he wished that Heretickes should be punished also bodily , yet by order and forme of law , and not that any one should kill another , & much lesse by bloudy massacres , as this fellow setteth it downe in his marginall note . And lastly he presumeth to peruert the very wordes of God himself in the law , by translating fundas sanguinem ipsorum , spill their bloud , insteed of shed their bloud , as though God were a bloud-spiller , or comaunded the same to be done vniustly by others : but all is strained by the Minister to make vs odious , wheras himself indeed is therby made ridiculous . And for that I haue byn somewhat longer in this example then I had purposed , as also for that by this one ( if it were but one ) yow may ghesse of al the rest of his proceeding , I wil heere cease , referring the rest of this kinde , to other more fit places and occasions afterwardes . 58. And yet truly I cannot wel pretermit , for ending this Chapter , one little note more of rare singularity in this man aboue others , which I scarce euer haue obserued in any one of his fellowes , and this is , that the very first wordes of Scripture alledged by him in the first page of his booke , for the poesy of his pamphlet are falsly alleadged , corrupted and mangled , though they conteine but one only verse of Isay the Prophet ; and then may yow imagine , what liberty he will take to himself afterward throughout his whole discourse . His sentence or poesy is this : Isay. 29. vers . 9. But stay your selues and wonder , they are blinde and make yow blinde , which he would haue to be vnderstood of vs Catholickes : but let any man read the place of Isay it self , and he shall finde no such matter either in wordes or sense , but only the word wonder , to wit obstupescite & admiramini , fluctuate & vacillate , inebriamini , & non a vino , mouemini , & non ab ebrietate : And according to this are the Greek and Hebrew textes also . So as what should moue T. M. to set downe so corruptly the very first sentence of his booke , and cite the Chapter and verse wherin his fraude may be descried I know not , except he obserued not the last clause of the Prophetes precept , mouemini , & non ab ebrietate . And so much for this . HOVV THIS TREATISE VVAS LAIED ASIDE By sicknesse of the Author , and some other causes . And why it was taken in hand againe vpon the sight of a Catholicke Answere , and a new Reply of T. M. dedicated to his Maiesty : with the Authors iudgment of them both . CHAP. III. HAuing written hitherto and passed thus far-forth in examination of the Ministers opprobrious libel of Discouery , I was partly forced by grieuous sicknesse that continued for some moneths , & partly also induced ( for that I vnderstood that another Catholicke man had answered the said libell ) to lay that which I had written a side , as also for that the occasion of time , wherin this Treatise was begun , soone after the detection of the often forenamed powder-treason , seemed in great part to be past , and hauing once laied it out of my handes , had no great will afterward to goe forward theriwth , as an argument of loathsome contention , against most odious imputations and calumniations : but yet after diuers monethes againe , seing the said Catholicke answere to appeare ( which before I had not viewed ) togeather with a large Reply to the same by the Minister that first made and deuised the libell ; and that the said Minister had now resolued vpon instance of the said Answerer to manifest his name , to wit of Thomas Morton , which before went ciphered with the letters only of T. M. that might aswell haue signified Thomas Malmesbury or Montague or Monte-banke , or any such like sur-name : and further that he presumed to dedicate the same vnto the Kinges Maiesty , by a speciall glosing Epistle , full of fond Ministeriall malice against Catholickes , intituling his said Reply : A full satisfaction concerning a double Romish iniquity , heynous Rebellion , and more then heathenish 〈◊〉 . And further that he had encreased his said worke with two or three new Treatises , partly for iustifying of Protestantes in the case of Rebellion , and partly for confuting of a Treatise written in defence of Equiuocation , I was moued aswell of my self , as by others exhortation , to resume the thing into my handes againe , & to adioine by the view of the whole that which was wanting to the full confutation of this Ministers iniquity , in laying such heinous Rebellion & heathenish Equiuocation vnto Catholickes charge , who of all men liuing are most free from iust reprehension in them both : and the Caluinian sect and sectaries conuinced to be most guilty in the one , and consciencelesse in the other , as the iudicious Reader ( I doubt not ) shall see euidently proued and confirmed in that which is to ensue . 2. It moued me also not a little to goe forward somewhat with this confutation ( though in as breiffe manner as might be ) to see that this deuise ( though neuer so fond and false ) of charging Catholicke doctrine with Rebellion & Equiuocation , was applauded not a little by some men of marke in our State ; as namely by his Maiesties late Attorney Generall , aswel in his writing , as pleadinges against Catholicks , borrowing from this Ministers first Treatise diuers large parcelles , and passages of his calumnious imputations , about the forenamed two heades of Rebelliō and Equiuocation , & lending him againe in lue therof for his second Reply sundry obseruations & collections of his owne , concerning diuers Kings of England , that seemed to him not so much to fauour or acknowledge the Bishop of Rome his authority ouer the English Church , which yet now vpon further search , is found to be contrary , and so set downe and demonstrated at large by a late Answere published to the said Attorney his booke of Reportes , as I thinke in hast will not be answered . Wherupon , forsomuch as this new deuised accusation , of Rebellious doctrine and Equiuocation , is taken vp by so many handes of those that be enemies to Catholicke Religion ; I thought it conuenient to cleere somewhat more this 〈◊〉 ; and as I had , before I laid aside this worke , treated sufficiently , as it seemed to me , of the former point , concerning Rebellious doctrine , vpon the sight only of T. M. his first pamphlet ( as in the precedent two Chapters yow haue seen ) yet now vpon the appearance of this Minister Thomas Morton in his proper name and person , & of his new Reply that promiseth full satisfaction in all ; it seemed necessary that I should goe forward to finish my first intent , and to examine the second point or head of his accusation in like manner , apperteining to the doctrine of Equiuocation , made no lesse odious now by continuall clamours of sycophancy , then the other of Rebellion it selfe . 3. One other circumstance also stirred me greatly to proceed in this short worke , which was , that togeather with these bookes sent out of England , aduertisement was giuen , that this Minister Thomas Morton was Chaplain to my Lord of Canterbury , who being head of the spirituall Court of Arches , which is , or ought to be the supreame for matters of cōscience in England , I was in hope to haue some remedy against this his Lordships Chaplaine , if I should demonstrate , that he dealeth against all conscience , obseruing no law , either of truth or modesty towardes Catholick men in this his Reply , nor any regard either to his owne or Maisters honour , he behauing himself so fraudulently against his owne knowledge and conscience , as in this writing he doth . And if I proue not this afterward , by multiplicity of manifest & manifold examples , as in part yow haue seene that I haue done before , let me be thought to haue done him iniury ( which willingly I would not doe vnto the worst man liuing ) in which place I hold not him , though by his pen I must needes iudge him to be bad inough . 4. Now then to the point it self of his Reply , which he calleth , as hath byn said , A full satisfaction ; it seemeth to me as full as pipes and hoggesheades are wont to be heere in these countreys at the time of vintage , when they are full only of winde and aire and nothing els ; and so yow shall see afterwardes , that this his Reply is full of wordes without substance , of florish without truth , of fraude without reall dealing : for that lightly he scarsely alledgeth any text of his Aduersaries wryting , without some fort of sophistication both of wordes and sense , or other like knackes . And further so distracteth and dismembreth his aduersaries threed of speach , citing one branch of it in one part of his Reply , another in another , one sentence first that should haue byn last , and another last that should haue byn first , therby to confound the Readers memory ; one period halfe deuided , the other quartered , the third left out , the fourth disguised : so as it is euident that he sought rather to fly , to couer , shaddow , and hide himself , then really and substantially to come to the combate , as examples ensuing shall make all manifest . 5. But heere perhaps some will say , that this seemeth a meruaile vnto them , for that this man pretendeth to deale more distinctly and exactly then others , for that he setteth downe seuerally , plainly , and cleerly , first the wordes of his former pamphlet of Discouery , then the text of his aduersary ( the moderate answerer ) and thirdly the full satisfaction of his faithfull Reply . And furthermore he draweth euery thing to diuisions and subdiuisions , distinctions & contra-positions , which make a iolly florish in the Readers eye , being set downe in logicall rancke . As for example , in his first reason , for setting Catholickes and Protestantes at debate , he saith he will proue it thus . By a threefold euidence from a Popish . 1. Definition of an Heretick . 2. Explication of a person excommunicate . 3. Application of Romish Censures to them both . And then the last member againe is proued : By Popish . 1. Councelles . 2. Bulles . 3. Doctours . 6. And is not this plaine and cleere saith one ? Yes , to entertaine Children by sound of wordes , or pleasing pictures . But when we come to the substance , & find that neither he alledgeth his Aduersaries speech sincerely , nor answeareth truly to the sense , but either dissembleth the same , or runneth a side , or confirmeth his said aduersaries argument , by his feeble answers , what importeth this ostentation of bare and ydle sillables ? 7. But you will say that he seemeth to haue seene and read much of our moderne Catholicke Authors , and to alledge them more abundantly in his text and margent then commonly other writers of his coat & calling haue hitherto done , for euery where almost he quoteth Vasquez , Suarez , Tolet , Bellarmine , Cunerus , Azor , Alsonsus de Castro , Sayer , Gregorius de Valentia , Bannes , and others , which I graunt , that he hath seene and taken a view of them and others , if they be notes of his owne gathering , but he hath considered of them , as Satan had considered of Iob , and his actions , when God said vnto him : Numquid considerasti seruum meum Iob ? and he signified , yea , but it was to bely and calumniate him ; and so hath this fellow considered of our Catholicke authors , not only to slaunder them what he may , but manifestly to falsify and corrupt them in many places both in wordes , meaning and whole drift of their discourses , as in part yow haue seene already , and shall more largely and particulerly vpon iust occasions afterwardes . 8. Nor hath this whole Reply of his , though bigge in bulke , any substantial point almost handled therin , either about the one or the other two partes of his subiect proposed , to wit , Rebellion , and equiuocation ; wherby he would dissolue all friendly combination , and association betweene Catholick and Protestant people ; for as concerning the first , he hath no more in effect , but that which before hath byn touched in his ten deuised and distended Reasons : That we hold Protestantes for Heretiques excommunicate , and subiect to all the penalties of Ecclesiasticall Canons made by the Church against ancient Heretiques : That we ascribe power to the Bishop of Rome in certaine cases , to censure , to excommunicate , to depriue Princes , wherof is inferred , that such and such daungers may ensue , which finally is nothing els , but may , so as the question being De futuris contingentibus , of thinges contingent to come ( wherof the Philosopher saith there is no science ) all remaineth in vncertainty , but only the suspition & hatred which he would raise against vs : but what the Protestantes doctrine hath done & doth at this day against lawfull Princes in their Realmes , the armies in the low countreys , Hungary , Poland , Suetia and other places , doe testify not only to our ears , as things absent , but as present also to our eyes , & then must I inferre , that where we haue so many examples of so manifest experience and present action , where we see and behold and feele with our senses what passeth , and what hath passed , and what is like to ensue daily by the notorious vnquiet spirits of new Ghospellers , vnder any Prince whatsoeuer that contenteth not their humours . What shall we stand wrangling with this Minister , or any his like , about possibilities or coniecturall probabilities ? What may fall out in time against his Maiesty , for example , of Great Britany , who hath byn a King , a Protestant King , almost forty yeares , and neuer receaued hurt or disquietnes from any Pope , though diuers haue byn in that Sea within the compasse of this time , and many other Kinges and Princes both in Denmark , Sueueland and Germany for more yeares without molestation receaued or offred frō the said Sea , which I dare auouch no Catholicke Prince , King or Emperour can say that he hath passed halfe so many years in quiet gouernmēt ouer Protestant people , vnto whome their doctrine giueth as great power ouer Princes in that case , as we ascribe to Popes and farre greater ; wherin I remit me , to that which hath byn said and demonstrated in the precedent two Chapters . 9. And now to end about this first point of our Ministers Reply , that wheras in his former libell of ten reasons , intituled , A discouery of popish doctrine &c. He set downe in his first reason , for proofe of our insociability with protestantes , that we hold them for excommunicate Hereticks , & subiect to all the penalties belonging to such men , wherof one among the rest is , that we must fly them , and auoid their conuersation ; the answerer of the pamphlet , for better milding and pacifying the distempered humour of this enraged Minister , told him that English Protestantes were not simply held in that accompt with vs , to wit for excommunicate Heretickes , in such degree as they were either to be auoided , or subiect to the penalties apointed by holy Canons for ancient Heretickes ; vnderstanding ( as himself doth sufficiently insinuate ) this to be in regard that they are not , nor any among them to his knowledge , expressely , and by name denounced and condemned for conuict in that behalf , which circumstance of particuler condemnation and denuntiation , by most lawiers and Deuines opinions is necessary , before the said punishmentes , especially externall , can be inflicted , albeit the internall , to wit , the losse of grace , separatiō from the Church , excommunicatiō , & the like be incurred ipso facto , by the holding and professing of any condemned Heresy whatsoeuer , as before in the precedent Chapter more largely we haue declared . 10. But for the externall punishments , as debarring from conuersation and communication with them , losse of goodes , honours , and dignities , depriuation of offices , inhability to inherit , note of infamy , incapacity of Christian buriall , and the like , there being two opinions betweene Catholicke writers , the one more large and mild , that none of these punishments are to be actually incurred , but after particuler denuntiation and sentence giuen by a Iudge against the party , the other more seuere , that in some cases , the notoriousnes of the thing may be so great , as in some part they may therby be incurred without sentence ; the iust & moderate answerer ( for so he intituleth his booke , and in this point sheweth it by effectes ) made choice rather of the more temperate , & mild opinion ; which in like manner is the more vniuersall among both Canonistes and Catholicke Deuines , he thinking it sufficiēt to cite only to that purpose , as in his answere he did , the Councell of Lateran , Cunerus , Nauar and others , but he might haue cited many more : for in truth it is the more common opinion by much , as may be seene by the wordes of these learned men ensuing : Antoninus p. 3. tit . 25. cap. 3. Angelus verbo Excomunicat . 8. n. 3. Sotus . 4. dist . 22. q. 1. art . 1. Victor in summa de Sacram. tract . de excom . Armilla verbo Excomunicat . nu . 50. Rosel . excommunicat . 6. nu . 44. Siluest . verb. Excommunicat . 5. q. 3. Caëtan . in summa . Ledes . 4. dist . q. 23. art . 1. and diuers others . 11. But now this Minister finding that some Catholicke Author did hold the other opinion in like manner , that in certaine cases some of the forenamed punishmentes might be incurred before particular denunciation by an Ecclesiasticall Iudge , triumpheth greatly , as though he had taken the said answerer at great aduantage , and found plausible matter to entertaine cauillation against him , and therupon spendeth diuers Chapters of his Reply in citing some of those Authors to his purpose , without telling his Reader , that it is a matter in dispute or question among Catholicke writers ; but as though all were cleere and resolued on his side , he citeth not only Panormitan , Bannes , and others , but the Iesuite also Gregorie de Valentia , in these wordes : If the guilt of Heresy be so notorious ( saith he ) as that by no euasion it can be concealed , the party doth incurre the penalty , thus far , that his subiectes may deny such a Lord all fealty , yea before the sentence of iudgment . In alledging of which authority , though but short , as you see , he vseth the same fraud which commonly yow shall find in all the rest , or most part of his allegations , to wit , that somewhat is mangled , added , or left out of purpose to make the thing sound against vs , as heere the Latin text hath , Haeresis siuè Apostasiae à fide , of Heresy or Apostasy from the faith , and then paena praedicta incurritur ex parte , the foresaid punishment is in part incurred : and lastly , Non tamen ita , vt teneantur ( subditi ) Domino Haeretico aut Apostatae obsequium negare ; but yet that subiectes are not bound to deny obedience to their Lord that is an Hereticke or Apostata ; all with moderations our Minister cutteth of , and leaueth out , to the effect that yow may imagine . But for that of these trickes we shall haue afterward occasiō to treat more particulerly , I will intermit the same now , & returne to speake a word or two more , of the foresaid moderate Answere made to the Ministers slaunderous discouery , soone after the publication therof in England ; though not come to my handes in many monethes after . 12. And wheras the Answerer both in regard of the exasperation of times then running , and to performe the title of his booke , which is , A iust and moderate Answer , indeauoreth euery where prudently to fly the occasion of more offence and exulceration , and to worke the moderation that he might , without iniury of the truth ( for this seemeth to haue byn his purpose ) especially in affirming , that no Protestantes are held by vs for excommunicate Heretickes ( meaning therby , denounced by name , as before hath byn decsared : ) this other stickler and stirrer of coles will needes take vpon him to proue at large , that Protestantes are esteemed to be truly Hereticks , excommunicate , and subiect to all the Censures of the Church , which any ancient Hereticke was in times past : and to this effect he bringeth in the definition of an Hereticke , set downe by Catholicke writers , the explicatiō of persons excommunicate , and the application of Ecclesiasticall Censures against them both , which he proueth by three meanes , to wit , of Generall Councelles , Popes Decrees , and Doctors iudgmentes ; by all which he proueth Protestantes to be esteemed Heretickes , & held for guilty of all the paines and penalties therof , both internall and externall , spirituall and temporall , in the sight , sense and opinion of all the vniuersall Catholicke Church , for many ages togeather ; And is not he worthy of a good fee thinke yow for pleading for Protestantes in this manner ? 13. But whatsoeuer he may deserue in this ( which I leaue to other mens iudgmentes ) I must needes say , that in two or three other pointes , he hath deserued little of the Protestant cause , and so I thinke will his Lord and Maister say , when he shall make true reflexion vpō the case ; for first he hath brought in a needlesse cōparison betweene the stirring humours of Protestant & Catholicke people , in matter of obedience to their Princes , which must needs fal out to the great disgrace of the Protestant party , as by the afore alledged examples and other proofes may appeare and be seene by the eye . 14. Secondly he taketh vpon him yet more fondly in the second part of this his Reply , to make a publique iustification of all Protestantes for rebelling against their Princes , in any countrey whatsoeuer , but more particulerly and especially in England , & therin doth so iustify Cranmer , Ridley , Syr Tho. VVyat , & others that conspired against Q. Mary in England , Knox , Buchanan , Goodman , and like Ministers in Scotland , turning vpside downe that State against their Soueraignes , the Rebellions raised in Suetia , Polonia , Germany , Switzerland , France , and other countreys , as his iustification is a more plaine condemnation of them , and their spirits and doctrine in that behalfe , then if he had said nothing at all , as partly shall afterwardes appeare , by some instances that we shall alledge therof . 15. Thirdly he doth with as little discretion bring in that accusation before mentioned of hard wordes vsed by some of our Authors against his party that followeth Caluins doctrine : as namely ; That they belieue no one article truly of the Christian Creed ; That they are Heretickes , & therin far worse and in more damnable state thē Turkes , Iewes or Infidelles ; That their doctrine leadeth by consequence to Turcisme and Infidelity &c. for by this occasion both the Author of the moderate Answere hath alledged many cleere authorities of principall Protestantes themselues , that are of the same opinion , and we haue added many more therunto , in the precedēt Chapter of this booke , wherby is made manifest , that the profession of Caluins doctrine is no lesse held for Heresy , Apostasy , and infidelity by all other sortes of Protestantes of our daies , then by Catholicke men themselues ; and much more may be added for iustification of that point which needed not to haue byn brought in , but vpon this occasion , to shew that English Protestantes are held for Hereticks , not only by the Catholick Church whose iudgment most importeth , but by the cheiffe pillars also of the Protestantes profession in other countreys . And when I doe name Heresy and Heretickes , the prudent Reader will remember that I doe name the most heinous and damnable thing that any Christian cogitation can comprehend , no matter of iest or dispute , but of terrour and teares . 16. Fourthly I can as little commend the Ministers wit for drawing into the field againe a new disputation , and speciall Treatise of his , adioined in the end of this his Reply , about Equiuocation or doubtfull speeches , sometimes lawfull to be vsed for good and pious endes , and for auoiding sinne and other hurtes both spirituall & temporall , wherin though the lawfulnes and necessity therof both by law of nature , diuine and humane , haue byn made euident , vpon diuers occasions in England these later yeares , since this calumniation was raised against vertuous and learned mē about the same ; yet one proofe wee shall adde more heere in this place , which before I haue not seen set downe at any length , which is that not only Protestantes themselues doe both vse and abuse the same , as the Answerer declareth ; but that this very Author our Minister that inueigheth so sharpely & ignorantly against the manner of speech , which he calleth Equiuocation , is forced in almost infinite places of his Reply , either to graunt that he doth Equiuocate , or els that he lyeth flatly . And for this also I remit my self to the proofes that after shall ensue . 17. And so to conclude this Chapter , concerning my iudgment about the Answere and Reply to the foresaid Discouery of Rebellion and Equiuocation , I must needes say , that the Answerer hath endeauored to effectuate so much as he promised in the title of his booke , which was , of a iust and moderate Answere , and in performance therof , hath not only borne on matters temperately , as before hath byn shewed , but spared also his Aduersary in many pointes , and namely in passing ouer his allegations without note or check , hauing not perhaps either time or commodity of bookes to examine the same , or perswading himself , that in so small a pamphlet , and palpable matter , a Minister would not aduenture to vse so many falsifications ; but he was deceaued , not knowing so well this generation of men , who finding their cause deuoid of truth , are forced to hold vp the credit therof by sleightes of falshood . In the rest , the Answerer quitteth himself learnedly , and sheweth much reading in particuler , as by the multiplicity of Authors by him alledged doth well appeare . But the Replier is so far of from performing his promise , of a full satufaction concerning double Romish Iniquity , as he hath scarce satisfied fully or meanly any one argument or authority alledged by his aduersary , who though I may presume he will best declare himself by his Reioinder to this Reply , if he thinke him worthy of so much labour ( as in truth I doe not , especially at this time , when so grieuous punishmentes are procured in England by him & his like for such as doe presume to answer their bookes : ) yet meane I also briefly in this Treatise , by some examples to make it manifest , leauing the rest to himself to be treated , and refuted by him more largely & abundantly , when he shall thinke it best conuenient ; my purpose being only to lay forth in general the iniuries which this Minister doth offer vnto all Catholick people , by slaundering them in the foresaid two odious accusations of Rebelliō & Equiuocation , wherof hauing treated sufficiently about the first in the two foregoing Chapters ( and shall doe more in two other that ensue ) we meane by Godes help to passe thence to the other generall head of Equiuocation , & to handle the same with no lesse euidency of truth , equity and piety of Catholicke doctrine therin , then hath byn declared in the other before cōcerning our innocency , wherin I remit me willingly to the indifferent Readers iudgmēt & censure . VVHAT THE MINISTER THOMAS MORTON DOTH IN THIS REPLY and full satisfaction ansvvere CONCERNING The former point of charge against Protestantes , for Rebellion , Conspiracies , and Disobedience ; the effect wherof is drawne to three principall Questions . CHAP. IIII. ANd now after iudgment giuen of this Ministers Reply in generall , it shall be needfull that we descend somewhat to particulars for proofe therof . And wheras he , by so many sleightes and turninges of diuisions and subdiuisions , numbers & members of thinges to be handled , or rather hudled , as also by transmutation from due places , alteration of order , clipping and culling of wordes and sentences , endeauoreth so to entangle the sight and vnderstanding of his Reader ( especially the more vnlearned ) as he may not easily finde where he walketh , nor when he answereth to purpose and when not , when he leaueth out and when he putteth in all , when he dealeth plainly and when fraudulently , and by consequence after much reading , can scarce be able to make any firme conclusion at all about the matter in controuersy : Our course shall be quyte contrary , endeauoring to bring all to breuity , perspicuity , and certainty , so much as in vs lyeth , for so we thinke it necessary for the Readers true satisfaction , after the small satisfaction he can receiue by the full satisfaction promised by this Minister . 2. Wherfore to reduce all that before hath byn said by him , or his Answerer , or my self , concerning the charge of sedition and Rebellion , vnto some perspicuous order and method , three pointes seeme vnto me most important to be considered in this matter , as cōprehending the summe & substance of all that hath byn said , answered , or replied vpon . The first concerning Heresy ; the second , seditious doctrine tending to Rebellion , and the third , the practice and exercise therof : wherin as in all other pointes of argument , & discourse , when the obiection and solution is once heard , and well considered , no great difficulty remaineth for a discreet man to make the conclusion , and to settle his minde therin . The first Question about Heretickes and Heresy . §. 1. FIrst then there hath byn a great contention and is betweene vs , as in the second Chapter of this Treatise you haue heard , about the name , nature , and application of Heresy and Heretickes ; this Minister maketh it a principall ground in the very beginning of his first discouery , why Catholickes and English Protestantes may not liue togeather in one Common-wealth , without continuall feares of treason to be practized from the said Catholicks , for that they held Protestantes to be Heretickes : and hereupon doth he bring in that long list and rablement of losses and penalties , both temporall and spirituall adiudged by ancient Councelles , and Canons Ecclesiasticall , to be incident , and due to all sortes of Heretickes , rising vp against the Church from the beginning : whervnto his moderate Answerer giueth that moderate satisfaction , which in the precedent Chapter we haue signified , to wit , that concerning the execution of those penalties ( especially the externall ) it is not due against any vntill lawfull and iudiciall denuntiation haue passed ; and that forsomuch as apperteined to the imputation of Heresy vnto them that are of Caluins Religion professed in England , not only Catholickes , but diuers sortes also of the most renowned Protestantes did stand therin most resolutly holding them to be true and properly Heretickes . And for this he cited many instances , authorities and examples ; and we haue added more in the said second Chapter that goeth before . 4. Now then it is to be considered maturely without passion or heat of contention , whether this be so or not , and how T. M. doth answere these instances of his first aduersary ( for mine hitherto he hath not seene : ) for if this be true , that indeed they are held for Heretickes by learned and graue men of their owne profession , who are no lesse opposite to vs then they ; then falleth first the ground of his bitter exclamation against vs for reputing them so , & secondly followeth it also , that as great probabilities of treasons and conspiracies may be suspected from those of the other sectes , that hold them for such , ( if that opinion be the cause of treasons ) as Lutherans , Zuinglians , Puritans , and the like . And lastly ensueth a weighty consideration , that if by all sides they be held for Heretickes , how deeply the graue or rather grieuous assertion of S. Augustine before alledged is to be held in memory , & pondered with terrour . Firmissimè tene & nullatenus dubites , omnem Haereticum vel Schismaticum cum Diabolo & Angelis 〈◊〉 aeterni ignis incendio participandum : Hold for most certaine and no way make any doubt , but that euery Heticke or Schismaticke , of what sort soeuer , shall be partaker of the flames of eternall fier , togeather with the diuell and his Angelles ; which is a dreadfull sentence , especially if we remember both his and all other Holy Fathers vniforme definition of an Hereticke , to consist principally in this , that he hold with obstinacy any one article contrary to the beliefe of the vniuersall visible and knowne Church , for that out of these two maior and minor propositions , the conclusion is easily made who is an Hereticke , and therby also in the danger denounced by S. Augustine . 5. The first proofe then which the Answerer alledgeth against the discouery of T. M. in this behalfe , is the authority , censure and iudgment of the Deane & Colledge of the famous Lutheran Vniuersity in Germany , named Tubinga , set downe by the said deane and Comon Reader of that Vniuersity named Philippus Nicolaus in a large booke with this title : Fundamentorum Caluinianae sectae cum veteribus Arrianis & Nestorianis communium detectio : A discouery of the fundamentes of the Caluinian sect , which are common to them with the ancient Arrians & Nestorians : & he proueth through many Chapters togeather , that Caluinists are no lesse Heretickes then the other , and they agree with him at least in seauenteene or eighteene principall articles , alledging also 〈◊〉 authority to the same effect . 6. This is the charge . What doth the Minister now Reply vpon large and mature deliberation in this his full satisfaction ? Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes : That which they did ( saith he ) in the spirit of opposition and contention is not much to be regarded : and this is all he saith to the purpose , for that presently he runneth a side to proue by other meanes , that Caluin did not hold with the Arrians and Nestorians ; but this is to take a new contention in hand with the Vniuersity of Tubinga , whether they censured well or no , and not to answere vs , whether Caluinists be truly Heretickes by the iudgment of that Protestant Vniuersity , which in effect he granteth , when he saith : That it is not much to be regarded what they did in the spirit of opposition & contention ; so as they censure him , and he censured them : wherby is cleer that in their iudgment , both he and his are condemned , which is the point in question . 7. And by this and many other like authorities alledged by me to this purpose in the precedent second Chapter , is euident , that in the iudgment and conscience of all Lutheran Protestantes whatsoeuer , not only in the spirit of opposition and contention , as this man saith , but in their calmest spirit ( if euer they be in calme ) all Caluinistes are held by them for damnable Heretickes , yea , deploratissimi Haeretici , most desperate Heretickes saith Franciscus Stancarus a chief Superintendent in Polonia : Alieni ab Ecclesia Dei , & satanae membra , saith Luther himself : cut of from the Church of God and therby made true members of Satan ; which censure being laied vpon them by men of their owne profession is a very considerable point to be marked by him that feareth the eternall fire before mentioned by S. Augustine . For as if so many learned Phisitians should tell vs that we were in a dangerous consumption , or so many skilfull Lawyers should admonish vs that we were by law in a case of extreme temporall danger of death , we would looke about vs : so much more ought we in this case . 8. I passe ouer the testimony of Conradus before mentioned , who affirmeth Caluinistes to belieue and teach rightly no one article of the Creed : that also of Heshusius , that saith , their association is a most blasphemous & sacrilegious sect : that of Hunnius , it is most damnable and the right way to hell : that of Schutzius , calling it the sinke of all wicked Heresies : that of Modestus , that maketh Caluinists as badd as Iewes and Mahometanes : that of Matthias , Grauerus , and others , that affirme all Protestantes that follow Caluins doctrine prosessed enemies of Iesus Christ : al which being Ministers , and zealous professors of Luthers new Ghospell , cannot be imagined by Protestantes to haue byn so much abandoned by the Holy Ghost , as to giue this deliberate Censure of their brethren in profession , if it were false , or else must we thinke , that they had neuer the true spirit of God in them , wherof which soeuer our Minister granteth , he is in the brakes : And thus much of Lutherane Protestantes . 9. Next to this where the danger without cōparison is farre greater , the Answerer obiecteth to our Minister , the opinion of the Puritanes , to wit , the more zealous part of the Caluinian profession it self , who affirme in the name of all their brethren ( whome they say to be thousands ) that the ordinary Protestantes of England are not only in errour and Heresy , but are plaine Infidelles ; and that it is infidelity to goe to their Churches ; and that it was a damnable sinne in the Parliament , yea more heinous then that of Sodom and Gomorrha to cōfirme such an erroneous Religion . And the same and other like censures of theirs are related in my Lord of Canterbury his booke of Dangerous positions : and the occasion and foundation of this censure and iudgment is set downe of late very cleerly in the preface to the answere to Syr Edward Cookes Reports , where is shewed why ( supposing the groūdes of both Religions and differences , especially in the origen of Ecclesiasticall power which giueth essence to the true Church ) they cannot be but as heathens , publicans and Infidelles the one to the other . 9. Now then how doe yow thinke that T. M. shifteth of this charge ? No otherwise then the former , by granting the matter ; but inueigheth against the men : This writer and you ( saith he ) may ioine fellowship : yow dedicate your booke to the King , he to the Parliament ; he pretendeth the consent of a thousand ; yow of a thousand thousandes ; he for all his consent is not many , and yow ( for ought you will pretend ) but one &c. So he . But what is all this to the purpose ? He granteth the point in question , that English Protestantes are held for Heretickes , in the science & conscience of Puritanes : so as , both by enemies and friendes , they are thought to be in an euill case . And truly this is much plainer dealing in cōfessing a truth ( that they be in deed at such debate amōg themselues in the very substance and essence of their Religion ) then that of Deane Sutcliffe , who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to returne A full and round answere ( for so he intituleth his booke ) to the VVarn-word of N. D. ( euen as now T. M. doth his A full satisfaction ) when he came to the purpose , he was so far from being full & round , as to foure whole Chapters which the other had made of this matter , to shew the dissentiō of Protestants among themselues , & the condemnation of Caluinistes by all other Protestant sectes of our time , he answered not twice foure lines to all the said discourses , testimonies , examples , and demonstrations , but dissembling al , as though no such thing had byn written by his aduersary , at last in the end of a Chapter , brake forth into the deniall of any such different names or sectes at all , saying : Neither doe we acknowledge the names of Lutheranes , Caluinistes , Zuinglians or Puritanes , but only doe call our selues Christians &c. VVe say further , that the Churches of Germany , France and England agree , albeit priuate men hold priuate opinions . 10. Thus Deane Sutcliffe : and by this audacity yow may know the Deane , for that no man els I thinke could without blushing haue denied the notice of so notorious names and differences , or so boldly haue affirmed that all the Protestant Churches of Geneua , France and England did agree , notwithstanding that priuate men held priuate opinions ; so as belike Churches may agree without men , to wit , in their walles and windowes : but these are escapes fit for M. Sutcliffe , and so to him I leaue them . 11. But yet the moderate Answerer goeth one step neerer vnto T. M. and telleth him that a great learned man of his owne side , a rare linguist , a long traueller , trained much in Geneua and other Citties of Germany , highly commended by M. VVillet in his printed workes , and admired by others ; to wit , M. Hugh Broughton hauing considered well of our ordinary Protestantes Religion , condemned the same of infinite errours & Heresies , in a certaine aduertisement published in print , vpon the yeare of Christ 1604. giuing grieuous curses of Anathema Maranatha to the same , & to diuers Bishops in particuler , as namely to M. VVhitgift , late Archbishop of Canterbury , and to M. Bilson yet Bishop of VVinchester , affirming further that their Bible , after their translation , and by their corrupt notes thervnto , is made worse and more dangerous then the Turkes Alcaron , and causeth many millions to run to eternall flames : that he hath found the text of the old Testament only , peruerted in eight hundred and eight and forty seuerall places , and other like pointes ; whervnto I finde T. M. to answere nothing in effect touching the matter it self in question , either by deniall of the thing , or otherwise , but only ascribing it to passion and lack of iudgment in him , which the other perhaps will retourne to him againe . But let vs hear our Ministers wordes to his aduersary . 12. VVhat modesty ( saith he ) can this be in you to obiect vnto vs a man whome you know to be sequestred from vs , rather by impotency of passion , then by any difference of Religion : And is not this a very substantiall answere ? Is not this a full satisfaction , according to the title of his booke ? and was not the censure of the Puritanes cast of a little before in regard of like passion ? And all the Lutheran Protestantes of Tubinga before that againe vpon pretence of like passion , as writing in the spirit of contradiction and contention ? What triall , what witnes can haue place if this kind of answering may be admitted ? But it is sufficient to me that by confession of our Minister himselfe their Religion is held for error , Heresy , and infidelity , not only by Catholickes or Papistes , as they call them , but also by Protestantes themselues , both Lutheranes and Puritanes , and some learned also of their owne proper sect , which is a pittifull confession if we consider of it well , and no lesse dishonorable & preiudiciall vnto them , to haue the name of Heretike ascribed & laid vpon them , aswell by friendes as enemies , as it is honourable and comfortable vnto vs to be called Catholickes , according to S. Augustines obseruation , not only by freindes but also by our enemies . And thus much of the first Question . The second Question about seditious Doctrine . §. 2. 13. ALl our contention hitherto in this point hauing byn , whether truly & really the doctrine of Catholickes or Protestantes be more peaceable , or seditious in it self , or more dāgerous or secure to Princes , concerning the obedience or Rebellion of their subiectes , whatsoeuer hath byn obiected by the accusation or calumniation of our Minister , in his former discouery against Catholickes , hath not byn any direct doctrine , teaching or insinuating , much lesse inciting subiectes to disobedience or Rebellion , as before hath byn declared , but only by a certaine consequence or inferēce , that for so much as in certaine vrgent and exorbitant cases , we ascribe to the Christian Common-wealth and supreme Pastour therof , authority to restraine & punish supreme Magistrates in such cases ; that therfore our doctrine is seditious , and tending , indirectly at least & à longè , to Rebellion ; though the visible experience of so many great Kingdomes round about vs , lyuing for so many yeares , and sometimes ages also , in quiet security , notwithstāding this doctrine , doth conuince this to be a calumniation . 14. But our Aduersaries doe not onely teach this , That euery Christian Common-wealth vpon mature deliberation and with generall consent hath such anthority , but further also , that particular men and Common people haue the same , and are not only taught , but vrged in like manner , & exhorted to vse it , when soeuer they suppose their Prince to offer them iniury or hard measure , especially in matters of Religion ; wherof the moderate Answerer obiecteth many examples and proofes against T. M. taken out of their owne bookes , wordes and wrytinges , as also by the testimonies of other principall Protestant-writers , wherevnto though T. M. would make a shew to answere somewhat now in this his Reply , and therupon hath framed a second seuerall part of his booke for iustificatiō of Protestantes in that behalfe : yet is it so far of from A full satisfaction ( the title of his whole worke ) as in effect he confesseth all that his Aduersary opposeth , no lesse then yow haue heard in the former question , though somewhat he will seeme sometimes to wrangle , and to wype of the hatred of their assertion by Commentes of his owne deuise . 15. And indeed what other answere can be framed to most plaine assertions out of their owne wordes and writinges , as of Caluin , Beza , Hottoman , and so many other French Caluinistes , as I haue mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise ? Goodman also , Gilby , VVhittingham , Knox , Buchanan , and others neerer home vnto vs ? All the forenamed Collections in like manner of him that is now Archbishop of Canterbury , of Doctour Sutcliffe and others , in the books intituled , Dangerous positions , Suruey of the pretended Disciplinary Doctrine , and the like , wherin their positions are most cleerly set downe , concerning this matter . And albeit this Minister T. M. in his Reply , doth vse all the art possible to dissemble the same , by telling a peece of his Aduersaries allegations in one place , and another peece in another , altering all order both of Chapters matter and method , set downe by the Answerer , so as neuer hare when she would sit , did vse more turninges and windinges for couering her selfe ( which the Reader may obserue euen by the places themselues quoted by him out of his aduersaries booke : ) yet are his answerers such , where he doth answere ( for to sundry chiefe points he saith nothing at all ) as doe easely shew that in substance he confesseth all and cannot deny what is obiected . And where he seeketh to deny any thing , there he intangleth himself more then if flatly he confessed the same . Some few examples I shall alledge wherby coniecture may be made of the rest . 16. The Answerer alledgeth , first the wordes of Goodman , in his booke against Queen Mary , wherin he writeth expressely , that it is lawfull by Godes law and mans to kill both Kinges and Queenes , when iust cause is offered , and herself in particuler , for that she was an enemy to God , and that all Magistrates and Princes transgressing Gods lawes , might by the people be punished , condemned , depriued & put to death , aswel as priuate transgressours ; and much other such doctrine to this effect , cited out of the said Goodman . All which the Bishop of Canterbury his second booke of Dangerous positions hath much more largely , both of this Goodman and many other English Protestantes , cheife Doctours of their Primitiue Church , residing at that time in Geneua . And what doth T. M. reply now to this ? Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes . If I should iustify this Goodman saith he ( though your examples might excuse him ) yet my hart shall condemne my self : But what doe yow professe to proue , all Protestantes teach positions Rebellious ? Proue it . Heere is one Goodman , who in his publicke book doth maintaine him : I haue no other meanes to auoid these straites which yow obiect , by the example of one , to conclude all Protestants in England Rebellious ; then by the example of all the rest to answere , there is but one . So he . 17. And this is his full satisfaction and faithfull Reply , as he calleth his booke ; but how poore satisfaction this giueth , and how many pointes there be heere of no faith or credit at all , is quickly seene by him that will examine them . For first how doe the 〈◊〉 alledged agaist this Goodman by the Moderate Answerer excuse him , as heere is said , seeing the wordes he alledgeth against him out of his owne booke are intollerable , and my Lord of Canterbury alledgeth farre worse ? As for example , that it is most lawfull to kill wicked Kinges when they fall to Tyranny , but namely Queenes , and thervpon that Queene Mary ought to haue byn put to death as a Tyrant , Monster , and cruèll beast ; alledging for confirmation therof diuers examples out of Holy Scripture , as that the Subiectes did lawfully kill the Queenes Highnes Athalia , and that the worthy Captaine Iehu killed the Queenes Maiesty Iesabell , and that Elias , though no Magistrate , killed the Queenes Highnes Chaplaines , the Priestes of Baal ; and that these examples are left for our instruction &c. And now , tell me , how may these examples excuse M. Goodman , as our Minister Morton auoucheth ? 18. Secondly it is both false and fond to affirme that the moderate Answerer tooke vpon him to proue either that all Protestantes in these our dayes , doe teach such Rebellious positions , or that all Protestantes in England are Rebellious , as heere is affirmed ; for that this were to deale as iniuriously with them , as they and he doe with vs , by imputing this last Rebellious fact of a few in England , to the whole sort of Catholickes and to their doctrine . It was sufficient for the Answerers purpose to shew that both Goodman and many others , principall pillars of the English new Ghospell in those daies , did hold , belieue , and practice those positions out of the true spirit of the said Ghospell . And herevpon thirdly it followeth , that it is a notorious impudency to auouch with such resolutiō , as this man doth , that there is but this one of that opinion , and that one dram of drosse ( as he saith ) proueth not the whole masse to be no gold . For who knoweth not first , that VVhittingam , afterward Deane of Durham , approued and made a preface to Goodmans booke , commending highly the said doctrine ? Gilby also another of that primitiue Geneuian Church , who is thought by some to haue byn the Author of the famous seditious booke , intituled , Of Obedience ( he should haue said Of Rebellion saith my Lord of Canterbury ) which booke approueth and commendeth the same doctrine most highly , as the said Lord testifieth at large , by setting downe their positions , and then addeth as followeth about the consent of others . 19. Goodman ( saith he ) for his conclusion is most earnest with all English subiectes , that they would put his doctrine in practice , assuring them that in so doing , if they be cast into prison with Ioseph , to wilde beastes with Daniel , into the sea with 〈◊〉 , into the dungeon with Ieremy , into the fiery fornace with Sydrach , Mysaach , and Abdenago : yet they shal be comforted . Wheras if they will not , in seeking to saue their liues , they shall loose them ; they shall be cast out of the fauour of God ; their consciences shal be wounded with hell-like tormentes ; they shall despaire and seeke to hang themselues with Iudas ; to murder themselues with Franciscus Spira ; drowne themselues with Iudge Hales ; or els fall madde with Iustice Morgan &c. At Geneua &c. 20. This doctrine , saith VVhittingham , was approued by the best learned in these partes , meaning Caluin & the rest of the Geneuians . The English men of name there at that time besides Goodman and VVhittingham , were ( as I take it ) Antony Gilby , Miles Couerdale , Dauid VVhitehead , and sundry others , who liking the said doctrine also exceedingly , were very earnest to haue the same printed for the benefit , as they said , of their Brethren in England . VVhittingham made a preface to Goodmans booke , wherin he greatly commendeth this doctrine , and writeth thus in the name as it seemeth of all his fellowes there : VVe desire that yow ( meaning all in England and elswhere ) that loue to know the truth and follow it , should be perswaded in this truth ( to wit of deposing Princes that follow not their Ghospell . ) And yet further : Heere thou dost heare the eternall speaking of his Minister &c. quickly giue eare and obey &c. And againe : If thou wish for Christian liberty come and see how it may easely be had &c. From Geneua &c. So he . 21. Wherby may be seene that there was more then one dram of drosse in that golden masse , if euery one of these first Geneuian Ghospellers weighed a dram ; and by this may be seene also , what credit may be giuen to these Ministers asseuerations , that so guilefully doe affirme or deny what maketh for their purposes , without scruple of lying , euen then whē they speake against Equiuocation . For it was impossible , but that T. M. knew this to be so , when he auouched the contrary , that Goodman was alone in this case ; and how then could he write and print it , except either by secret Equiuocation , or manifest lying ? 22. Nor is it much to the purpose , to say , that English Protestants doe not now professe those positions of Goodman and the rest of those ancient daies for that the times and state of thinges be changed and bettered with them ; for they are not vnder Princes that presse them to matters against their willes . But yet we must imagine , that those who had Primitias Spiritus , the very first fruites and greatest feruour of that new Ghospelling-spirit , did speake and write more properly out of the force and instinct of that spirit , according to the nature and essence therof , then these later , who accommodate themselues to the condition of states and times ; and that these now would fall to that also , if they were in their case . 23. For proofe wherof the moderate answerer citeth diuers like Rebellious assertions , set downe by such as esteeme themselues the purer sort of Protestantes , against Queene Elizabeth also , though a Protestant Princesse , when shee pressed them in matters cōcerning their Religion ; in which positions they affirme : That she was worse and lesse tolerable then her sister Queene Mary , and not to be obeied in her procedinges against them ; yea openly they moued diuers Magistrates to take armes against her , and namely in the marches of VVales , as appeareth yet by their supplications to the Gouernour of that countrey . He obiecteth in like manner the publicke positions , and printed doctrine of Buchanan , Knox , and other chiefe Ministers and preachers of Scotland , about the very same times , who publickly and resolutely giue authority to the people , to pull downe , punish , & depriue Princes , aswell of their Crownes , as also of their liues when they think them worthy ; yea , do allow publicke rewardes to be proposed to such as kill euil Princes , no lesse then to them that destroy noisome beastes , as rauenous wolues , beares , and the like . He addeth moreouer out of the very notes of our moderne Protestantes vpon the Bible , euen by the iudgment and interpretation of his Maiesty himself , in the late conference with the Puritanes , that deposing and killing of Princes is allowed , out of their exposition of Scriptures , for lawfull in such cases , as they goe against Religion ; which censure to be conforme to the iudgment and writinges both of Luther , Zuinglius and Caluin , he sheweth by quoting their wordes and works in sundry places , which for breuity I pretermit . 24. And what doth T.M. answere to all this thinke yow ? Yow shall heare part by part according as before the obiections haue byn set downe . To the first about Puritans , I finde no answere at al , so as in this , I see not how his satisfaction may be called full , for somuch as it is quite nothing : To Knox & Bucchanan their assertions , he answereth thus : You might haue added , that there was in Scotland an act of Parliament to call in that Cronicle of Buchanan , censuring all such contemptes and innouations , and then citeth in the margent anno 1584. which was almost thirty yeares after the said doctrine had byn taught , preached , and practised in that Kingdome , by those first Ghospellers . And is not this A full satisfaction trow yow ? What if the Cronicle of Buchanan were called in , that recounted with approbation and insolent triumph the attemptes made vpō their lawfull Princes , by incitation of this doctrine ? Doth this take away the doctrine it self ? Or doth it proue that those first Ghospellers held it not ? What became of the other bookes of Knox , and namely his Cronicle ( for he wrote also a Cronicle of the same matters , and of his owne actes therin , as Caesar did his Commentaries ) were they abolished hereby ? Or doe not the same thinges remaine in Holinshed , Hooker , Harison , Thyn , and other writers aswell English as Scottish ? Or doth all this proue that this was not their doctrine ? See then how full or rather fond this satisfaction is . 25. As for the iudgment and testimony of his Maiesty , about the notes of English Ministers vpon the Bible , allowing it for lawfull in certaine cases to depose and kill Princes , he answereth thus : It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and Religious iudgment of his Maiesty to satisfy for two places related from that conference &c. And then he passeth on to discourse at large of the meaning of those places , and vnder the colour of the foresaid honorable preface , he taketh licence to dissent from his Maiesty , signifying in effect that either the conference was not well related , or his Maiesty mistooke their meaning in those notes ; and yet is the matter cleere by his owne confession , that their said notes vpon the second booke of Cronicles , and 15. Chapter vers . 16. doe not only allow the depofing of the Queene Maacha by her sonne King Asa , for Idolatry , but further doe reprehēd him also sharply for that he had not put her to death by fier , saying thus in their note : That whether she were Mother or Grandmother , yet herin the King shewed that he lacked zeale ; for she ought to haue byn burnt by the couenant , as vers . 13. appeareth , & by the law of God Deuteronomy 13. but he gaue place to foolish pitty , and would also seeme after a sort to satisfy the law . So they in their note . 26. But who will looke vpon the two textes of Scripture by them heere cited , shall finde no mention of burning , but only of putting to death , and in Deut. of stoning only . But how doth he now defend this note of our English Ministers , allowing the deposition and putting to death of Princes ? Yow shall heare his shift ( for he is much troubled with his Maiesties obseruation : ) VVhat shall we say then ? ( saith he ) is the Soueraignty of Kinges disabled ? God forbid ; but it is rather established therby , for the King is made the deposer , yea euen of whosoeuer . Doe yow see his poore flattering shift ? If the Queene Maacha might be deposed according to their note , and that ex Augusto Imperio , from her Imperiall gouernment , as the text of Scripture hath , yea and that she ought according to the law of God to haue byn put to death , as now hath byn said , for her Idolatry , then is it a poore shift to say that Kinges cannot be deposed , for that they must be the deposers , seing that in Deut. where the Commission is giuen , there is no mention of Kinges at all , but Gods speach & commission there is vnto the people : Sitibi voluerit persuadere frater 〈◊〉 &c. If thy brother , or wife , or friend will perswade thee to leaue God let thy hand be vpon him , and after thee the hand of all the people ; which notwithstanding is to be vnderstood as before in the second Chapter we haue noted , both out of the 13. & 17. Chapters of Deut. and the glosse therevpon , according to the order there set downe , to wit , after the cause examined & sentenced by lawfull Iudges . And at this time when this law was ordained , there were no Kinges in Israel , nor in many yeares after , and consequently this commission could not be giuen to Kinges only . 27. So then for so much as English Protestant-Ministers that made these notes , doe authorize by this place of Deut. the deposing and killing of that Imperiall Queene ; his Maiesties censure was iudicious , & true , that therby they allowed that lawfull Princes might be in certaines cases deposed and put to death . And the first shift of T. M. in this place is ridiculous , wherby he would seeme to make secure al Kinges from danger of deposition , for that themselues by Godes word ( which yet he proueth not ) must be the deposers , and then he presumeth they will not depose themselues ; but for Queenes he leaueth them to shift as they may : Which doctrine I suppose he would not haue set forth in print in the late Queenes daies . But their assertions are according to times and places : and so this shall be sufficient for the second Question . The third Question concerning practice of Rebellion . §. 3. 28. ANd now hauing byn lōger in the former two Questions , then in the beginning was purposed , I shall endeauour to be shorter , if it may be , in this last , though the multitude of examples , partly set downe by vs before in the first Chapter of this Treatise , and partly to be read in Histories and obserued by experience of Protestantes continuall tumultuation against Catholicke Princes , would require a larger discussion , then both the other two Questions put togeather : albeit on the other side againe the matters are so cleere as they need no discussion at all , but only narration . For what can our Minister answere in reason or truth , to all that multitude of instances of Protestantes Rebellions , in the foresaid first Chapter set downe , and for the most part obiected before ( as now I perceiue ) by his aduersary , the moderate Answerer ? We shall briefly runne ouer some few examples . 29. To the instances in England of continuall conspiracies and insurrections against Queene Mary , he setteth downe first this bold and shameles prouocation . After the proclamation of her title ( saith he ) shew vs what Protestant euer resisted ? what Minister of the Ghospell in all that fiery triall did kindle the least spark of sedition among her people ? In which wordes is to be obserued , first that he saith , after the Proclamation of her title , to excuse therby the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke , the Marques of Northampton , and others that tooke armes against her , before shee was proclaimed in Londen , though in Norfolke she had proclaimed her self presently vpon the death of her brother King Edward : as also to excuse Cranmer , Ridley , Sandes , Latimer , Rogers , Iewell , and other Ministers that had preached most bitterly against her title . But what , is the residue true , that heere so boldly he auoucheth , that neuer any Protestant resisted , nor Minister kindled the least spark of sedition among her people after her title proclaimed ? Is this true I say ? Is this iustifiable ( for he calleth this Treatise a iustification of Protestantes ? ) Is this any way to be mainteined by any shew or shift whatsoeuer ? What then wil he say to the new conspiracy and iterated Rebellion of the Duke of Suffolke , & of his brother the Lord Iohn Grey , not only after the said Queenes title proclaimed , but after she was in possession , and had pardoned them both of their former Rebellion ? What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Peter Carew , Syr Gawyn Carew , Syr Thomas Denny , & other Protestant Gentlemen , that tooke armes in Deuonshire within six daies ( saith Stow ) after the arraignemēt of the Duke of Northumberland ? What wil he say to the conspiracy of Syr Iames a Croftes & others in VVales , discouered ( saith the same Authour ) about the fiue and twentith day of Ianuary next ensuing ? What will he say to the Rebellion of Syr Thomas VVyat and his confederates in Kent ensuing about the same time ? Were they not Protestantes that were authors therof ? Or was not Queene Maries title yet proclaimed ? Will our Minister face out this ? What will he say to the cōspiracies ensuing after this againe , from Syr Edward Courtney Earle of Deuonshire , Syr Nicolas Throckmorton , & others ? what to the conspiracy of VVilliam Thomas , who hauing determined and plotted the murder of the said Queene , and conuicted therof , professed ( saith Stow ) at his death at Tyburne , that he died for his countrey ? 30. I passe ouer other conspiracies and Rebellions , as that of Vdall Throckmorton , Iohn Daniel , Stanton , Cleber , the three Lincolnes , and after them Thomas Stafford , and others , that comming out of France with instructions of the brethren of Geneua , surprised Scarborough Castle , made proclamations against the Queene , that she was iustly deposed , and other such like attemptes by that sort of people , who all professed themselues to be Protestantes , and to haue entred into those affaires principally for their Religion : And with what face or forhead then doth T. M. say in this place ? Shew vs what Protestant euer resisted ? &c. 31. But much more impudent is the second part of his assertion about Ministers , saying : That no Minister of the Ghospell did euer kindle the least spark of sedition against Queene Mary : Wheras his aduersary obiecteth many by name , as Cranmer , Ridley , Rogers , and Iewel before mentioned , who as is euident by Fox his story in his Actes and Monumentes , both dealt , preached & stirred people against her , all that lay in their power . And as for Cranmer , it is euident he was condemned for the same treason in Parlament : Ridley preached openly at Paules Crosse against her title : Rogers at Clocester : and Iewel was appointed to preach in Oxford , had he not byn preuented by the sudden and vnexpected proclayming of the said Queene there by Syr Iohn VVilliams & others . 32. The instances also that we haue alledged of Goodman , VVhittingham , Gilby , Couerdale , VVitehead , & sundry others testified by my Lord of Canterbury , to haue taught and practized sedition against the said Queene in those daies , doe they not conuince this Minister Thomas Morton of rare & singular impudency ? will any man euer belieue him hereafter what he saith or affirmeth , denieth or shifteth of , seing him to auouch so manifest vntruthes , as these are , with so shameles asseueration ? 33. But yet to conuince him somewhat more , I think good to set downe some of the particuler wordes and phrases of two or three of the principall forenamed pillars of the Protestant primitiue Church in our Iland ( omitted for breuities sake by the moderate Answerer ) to the end yow may see their spirit , & iudge of this mans forehead in standing so resolutely in the deniall taken in hand . For first Iohn Knox , in a booke written & printed at Geneua 1558. which was the last of her raigne ; wherin after he had said , That is is not birth only or propinquity of bloud that 〈◊〉 a King lawfull to raigne aboue the people professing Iesus Christ &c. He goeth forward , saying thus : I feare not to affirme that it had byn the duty of the Nobility , Iudges , Rulers and people of England , not only to haue resisted and withstood Mary that Iezabel , whome they called their Queene ; but also to haue punished her to death , with all the sort of her Idolatrous Priestes , togeather with all such as should haue assisted her &c. Doe yow see here his Euangelicall spirit ? Doe yow see the essence of his doctrine ? Doe yow heare this new Prophet declare himself cleerly ? But let vs giue audience to another of like vocation and spirit . 34. The second is his deere brother Christophor Goodman , who in a booke of his printed also at Geneua the same yeare 1558. the title wherof was , How Superiours ought to be obeyed , writeth thus : I know yow of England will say that the Crowne is not entailed to heire-males , but appertaineth aswell to the daughters , & therfore by the lawes of the Realme ye could doe no otherwise then admit her , but if this be true , yet miserable is the answere of such as had so long time professed the Ghospell , and the liuely word of God. For if it had byn done by Pagans and heathens , which knew not God by his word , it might better haue byn borne with all , but among them that beare the name of Godes people , with whome his lawes should haue chief authority , this answere is not tolerable . If she had byn no bastard but the Kinges daughter , as lawfully begotten , as was her sister , that Godly Lady and meeke lambe ; yet at the death of our lawfull Prince King Edward , that should not haue byn your first coūsaile or question , who should be your Queene , but first and principally who had byn most meet among your Brethren to haue had the gouernment ouer yow . For a woman to raigne Godes law forbiddeth , whose raigne was neuer accompted lawfull by the word of God &c. So he . And behold heere now whether these mens worde of God did not serue them to all turnes , euen to barre lawfull succession , to depose the possessor , and whatsoeuer themselues listed . 35. The third Doctor of this learning was M. VVhittingham , Deane afterwardes ( for his good merittes ) of Durham , who made a preface to the foresaid booke of Goodman , allowing and commending the same highly , as a thing consulted , examined & approued by Caluin , and the rest of the most learned Ghospellers of Geneua , for thus he writeth : M. Christophor Goodman conferred his articles and cheif propositions of his booke with the best learned in these partes , who approuing the same , he consented to enlarge the said worke , and so to print it as a token of his duety and good affection towardes the Church of God : and then if it were thought good in the iudgment of the Godly to translate the same into other languages , that the profit therof might be more vniuersall . So VVhittingham ; with whom concurred in iudgment VVhithead , Couerdale , Gilby , and others then liuing in Geneua , which Gilby wrote also of the like argument a speciall admonition to the Realmes of England and Scotland , to call them to repentāce by all likelyhood , for that they had admitted , tolerated , and not put to death Q. Mary of England , and not yet deposed , as after they did , Q. Mary of Scotland both Mother and daughter ; and the booke was printed the same yeare by the same Crispin in Geneua : wherin besides that which he vttereth against this Queene Mary as a Catholicke Princesse , or rather no Princesse in his opinion , he hath these wordes also of King Henry her Father , euen after his fall from Catholicke Religion : The boare was busy wrooting & digging in the earth with all his pigges that followed him , but they sought only for the pleasant fruites that they winded with their long snowtes , and for their owne bellies sake &c. This monstrous boare for all this , must needes be called head of the Church vnder paine of treason , displacing Christ our only head , who alone ought to haue this title . So Gilby . And for that all this was spoken , written , and printed diuers yeares after Q. Mary was proclaimed , and installed Queene , and all tending euidently to sedition as yow see ; ( besides the flat deniall both of King , and Queenes supremacy ) it conuinceth plainly that which our Minister T. M. before denied . And so with this conuiction in the sight of all his Brethren we leaue him . But yet let vs heare what he saith to some other particulers before by vs obiected . 36. To that then of Syr Thomas VVyat , the Duke of 〈◊〉 , and others he answereth diuersly . First the History relateth ( saith he ) the pretence of VVyat thus : A proclamation against the Queenes marriage desiring all Englishmen to ioine for defence of the Realme &c. then that in Queene Maries oration against VVyat , there is not to be fond ( saith he , ) any scruple concerning the cause of Religion : thirdly that no Minister of the Ghospell was brought in question as a Commotioner in that cause : Lastly , if intent might answere for Protestantes accused in that name ; then is it plaine , that it was not Religion : If for VVyat and his fellowes ; it is plaine it was not against the Queene or State , but for both . So he . In all which different clauses of his answer , consider if any one be in it self true , for as for the first and second , though VVyat pretendeth in his proclamation the said marriage with Spaine to be the chiefe cause ; yet not alone , but that the Queene and Counsell ( saith Fox ) would also by this marriage as he affirmed bring vpon the Realme miserable seruitude , and establishe Popish Religion . 37. And the same Fox relateth Queene Maries wordes in her oration thus : That the matter of the marriage is but a Spanish cloake ( saith shee ) to couer their protensed purpose against our Religion . So as in these two pointes the Minister lieth openly , but more in the last , that VVyats attempt was not against Queene Mary or the state , but for both , for that Queene Mary in the same oration , as both Fox and Holinshead doe iointly relate , affirmed VVyats answere to haue byn to Syr Edward Hastinges , and Syr Thomas Corn-wallis sent from her vnto them , which he also at his arraignment confessed , that he and his would haue the gouernance of her person , the keeping of the Tower , and the placing of her Counsellours . And as for the other point , whether any Ministers were called in question as Commotioners in that attempt , importeth little , for so much as no man can doubt but that the Commotion being so generall and for Religion , as Fox affirmeth , all Ministers hartes and tongues were therin in secret , and their handes in like manner so far forth as they durst ; which being well knowne to Queene Mary & her Counsell , caused them to proceed against the principall soone after in matter of Religion , preferring therin the iniury done to God before the iniuries offered to her self : though Doctor Sanders doe affirme that diuers chiefe of the new Clergy , & amōg them Doctor Cranmer , were conuinced to haue conspired in that Rebellion . And by this we see how well the Minister hath iustified his Protestantes in this point : It is euen as good as their iustification by only faith , which maketh them lesse iustifiable then before . Let vs passe to some other examples and se what he saith to the Rebellion of Protestantes in other countreys . 38. To that which hath byn proposed of Scotland , both by the moderate Answerer and by my self also in my first Chapter of this Treatise , of so great and intolerable insolencies vsed in Scotland by Protestant-Ministers and their Disciples against Grand-mother , Mother , Father and sonne , all lawfull Princes violated by them , he yeeldeth no other answer or satisfaction , but that which before hath byn recited , that in a Parlament vpon the yeare 1584. the Chronicle of Buchanan was called in by the said Parlament ( the Kinges highnes then being about eighteene yeares old . ) But what is this to the purpose ? Did this alter their doctrine or manner of Rebellious proceeding therevpon , which they had vsed both against his Maiesty in the time of his minority and against his Mother and Grand-mother before him , and against him after this Statute published ? No truly , but they were more earnest in their sedition afterward then before , for that the very next yeare after , they caused that notorious surprise to be made vpon his Royall person at Striueling before mentioned in the first Chapter of this Treatise . 39. Iames Gibson also one of the chief Ministers being called before his Maiesty and priuy Counsell vpon the one and twentith of December 1585. vsed intollerable speech vnto his highnes , calling him Persecutour , and comparing him to Ieroboam , threating his rooting out and the like , which his Maiesty can best remember : So as such doctrine , and such practice being held by them & their new Ghospelling Brethren of Scotland in those dayes , it is a simple satisfaction for our Minister to come forth now with a reuocation of Buchanans Chronicle , as though that did remedy the matter , or as though that reuocation had byn made by them ( I meane the Ministers repentant for their former doctrine ) and not rather by the Ciuill Magistrate , impugned and resisted by the other . And this for the present of Scotland . 40. To the examples of France alledged by the Answerer of infinite rebellions made by the Protestants , for many yeares togeather against sundry Crowned Princes of that Realm , of which attempts many were so barbarous , as without horrour they cannot be vttered : And one French writer affirmeth that within the compasse of one yeare , which was 1562. two and fourty thousand Priestes , Religious , and Ecclesiasticall persons were most desperately murdered , aboue twenty thousand Churches cast on the grounde , and within the compasse of ten yeares by the witnes of a Protestant writer Colignius , two millions of men were slaine , two thousand Monasteries ouerthrowne , nine hundred hospitalles destroyed , & aboue two hundred Citties & Castelles ruined vnder one only K. Henry the third . To all this ( I say ) he answereth that according to the Historicall Collections , which he hath seene of French affaires , the fault of all this , is to be laid vpon the house of Guise , who being strangers , sought to suppresse the natural Princes of the bloud Royal in France , as also to oppresse the Ghospellers : But suppose this were true , which I hold to be most false & slaūderous yet could not this particuler passion of the house of Guise make lawfull the Protestants Rebellion against their naturall & lawfull Kinges , no more then if now in England the Catholikes or Puritanes should rebell against his Maiesty , for that some noble man or men of the Counsell were knowne to be their enemies . 41. To the examples of Caluin and Beza in Geneua , both for doctrine and practize , he answereth first for doctrine , granting Caluins sentence to be : That when a King vsurpeth Gods throne he looseth hu Royalty . And againe : If the King exalt himself to Godes throne and commaundeth any thing contra Deum against God , then to pull him downe . Moreouer he granteth that Caluin vseth this phrase ; That when a King doth so behaue himself , we must spit in his face , which is spoken , saith our Minister , comparatiuely , and not Rebelliously : He expoundeth also those wordes of Caluin ; Abdicant se potestate , that such Kinges are bereaued of authority ; meaning only ( saith he ) in that case of contradiction against God. But let the Minister tell vs , who shall be Iudge of this , who shall determine the case ? To whome shall it belong to giue sentēce , when a King doth contradict God , when he vsurpeth Gods throne , when he commaundeth any thing against God , and consequently , when his face must be spitten on , when he must be pulled downe , & when he must be depriued of all regall authority ? Did Thomas Morton euer finde in any Catholicke writer such wordes , or sense in preiudice of Princes ? And yet the fond Minister , as though he had plaied worthily his Master-prize vaunteth in these wordes : Thus is Caluin iustified concerning his doctrine , and in him also Beza : bycause Beza ( say yow ) his Successour in place succeeded him also both in opinion and practice . True Sir : they are both iustified in your manner of iustification , & they are fit iustified Saints for your Calendar . 42. And hauing said thus , he passeth yet further , adding a second prouocation about practice in these wordes : VVe haue heard of their opinion ( to wit of Caluin and Beza ) haue yow any thing to except against their practice : And this demaund he made , when he knew and had seene his Aduersaries many and most grieuous accusations against them in that kinde , not only for mouing that people of Geneua to open Rebellion against their Lord and Prince the Bishop ; but also the people of France , against their King and Soueraigne , citing good authorities for the same , saying : Caluin and Bezae armed the subiectes against their Prince of Geneua , and ( as Caluin himself , Doctour Sutcliffe , & the Bishop of Canterbury be witnesses ) deposed their Soueraigne from his temporall right , and euer after continued in that state of Rebellion ; They celebrated also a Councell , wherin was concluded that King Francis the second , then King of France , his wife the Queene , his Children , Queene Mother &c. should be destroyed : And his quotations for these thinges are : Beza l. de iure Magistrat ; Sutcliffe answ . to suppl . and Suruey , Caluin in epist. Pet. Far. orat . cont . Sectar . defens . Reg. & Relig. &c. All which being seene by our Minister , he demandeth notwithstanding as yow haue heard with this hypocrisy , haue yow any thing to except against their practice ? As though there were nothing at all , not only not to be accused or reprehended in them , but not so much as to be excepted against : And is not this notable dissimulation in a matter so cleere and euident ? Who can belieue this Minister at his word herafter ? But let vs now see how he will answere the matter it self obiected , and then will yow admire his impudency much more . 43. For better vnderstanding wherof yow must know , that besides al that which is alledged for proofe of this accusation out of Caluin & Farellus their owne Lordes , and my Lord of Canterbury his booke of Dangerous positions , Doctour Sutcliffe doth of purpose , and at large proue the same in two whole Chapters , to wit the second and third of his Suruey against the pretended discipline ; shewing out of diuers authors , and namely Franciscus Boninardus , that wrote the History of Geneua ( as he saith ) by Caluins direction , Symlerus and Bodinus ; that for aboue fiue hundred yeares gone the Bishop of Geneua was not only spirituall , but temporall Lord also of that Citty , and the same confirmed vnto him by the Emperour Frederick the first , vpon the yeare of Christ 1124. and , as Caluin himself confesseth in his writinges to Cardinall Sadoletus , had Ius gladij & alias ciuilis iurisdictionis partes , the power of life and death and other partes of ciuill iurisdiction ; and that this Prince and Bishop was cast out by the people vpon the preachinges and practises of Farellus , Caluin , and other Protestant Ministers : Quo eiecto ( saith Bodinus , ) Geneuates Monarchiam in popularem statum commutârunt : who being cast out , the Geneuians did change their Monarchy into a popular State. 44. And finally after many proofes Doctour Sutcliffe setteth downe his opinion in these wordes : I doubt not but that I may presume , without any mans iust offence , to speake my opinion as touching the deuinity which was pretended by the said Ministers of Geneua against their Bishop ; for indeed I doe dislike it . If such dealinges were simply to be vrged by the word of God , they might reach further then would be conueniēt . I neuer thought it agreable to deuinity , for Ministers to cast of their Rulers at their owne pleasures ; one of them writeth thus : That the light of the Ghospell had restored to the Citty that principality which the Bishop had before ; But all the learned deuines in Germany at their conferences with the Emperour , were of a contrary opinion &c. I am not the man that will either iustify mine owne discretiō , or impugne any thing which may be brought for the ciuil proceeding of that State , or any other , so as they carry no false groundes of deuinity with them , which may proue dāgerous to our owne , such as haue byn since published for the authorizing of subiectes in many cases to depose their Princes . So he . 45. And now by this large discourse , yow see fully his minde , first that the Bishop of Geneua was Lord , and Prince of that Citty for diuers ages , confirmed also by the Emperour : secondly that he was vniustly depriued by the people , vpon the preaching and false groundes of deuinity of Farellus , Caluin , Beza , and other Protestant preachers : thirdly we see the reason why he thinketh thus ; least their doctrine might reach further then would be conuenient , and be dangerous in England : So as he also ( as yow see ) doth accommodate his doctrine and groundes of deuinity , to the commodity of his cause . 46. But now let vs see how this Minister Sutcliffe , and our Minister Morton haue agreed togeather , vpon a farre different manner of answering this matter at this time , and yow will perceiue therby what people they are who change their answeres as time and wether walketh . For after that Morton had read all this in Sutcliffe , & yet made the matter so strāge , as by his former demaund you haue heard , when he said : & haue yow any thing to except against their practice ? Now heere he answereth after another fashion thus : The booke ( saith he ) of Doctour Sutcliffe , I could not finde , and I needed not seeke it , for I haue conferred with the Master , who answered me , that the booke De iure Magistratus he neuer thought to be Beza his worke , and concerning the State of Geneua , and Bishop therof , he was neuer their Prince , but the State of the towne was a free State of it self : and now to make a question whether I should belieue him , or yow , is to doubt whether he that hath byn at Geneua , or he that neuer saw it can better report the state therof , the conclusion will be that yow may rather proue those Bishops to haue byn iniuriously ambitious , then the Citty Rebellious . So he . 47. This is his faithfull reply and full satisfaction , according to the title of his booke . And now consider good Reader what honest men these two Ministers are , that so contradict the one the other , and that vpon conference togeather for thy deceipt and cosenage : for euen now yow heard Doctour Sutcliffe to affirme that the Bishop of Geneua had byn temporall Prince for many hundred yeares , and that vpon the preaching of Farellus , Caluin and others , they chaunged their Monarchy into a popular State , and that himself misliked the same , according to the groundes of deuinity ; and how then doth he say heere to his fellow Minister Morton , that the Bishop of Geneua was neuer there Prince , and that the state of the towne was a free State of it self ? Can these thinges stād togeather ? Morton saith moreouer he could not finde Sutcliffes booke , which truly is a thing very strāge , there being so many thousandes printed of them in England ; but more strange it is , that Deane Sutcliffe should so soone forget his owne booke , and what he wrote therin , & so egregiously cosin his Brother-Minister in their priuate conference , as to make him belieue , and vtter now in print quid pro quo , and chalke for cheese as he doth . But it cannot seeme probable that Morton belieued it himself , but rather would make the simple Reader belieue the same , and so dazell his eyes for his deceipt : & this is their manner of dealing in most matters , where fraude may be vsed . 48. It were ouer long to looke into all other examples obiected by the moderate answerer , how they ar replied vnto by T. M. As for example the known reuoltes and Rebellions of Flanders , and of those States against their lawfull Princes , and so many outrages committed therin for almost now forty yeares , if not more ; the bloudy tumultes in Germany and Switzerland vpon Luther and Zuinglius their doctrine , wherin Zuinglius himself the head stirrer was slaine ; the like in Denmark for expelling Catholicke Religion , and bringing in of Lutheranisme ; the manifest Rebellion , intrusion , and oppression of Duke Charles in Sweueland against his Nephew the King of Polonia , lawfull Inheritour of those States , enduring vnto these daies ; as also the open warres of Boscaine , and his fellowes in Hungary against the Emperour , in fauour of Protestant Religion , and of the Turke himself , whose Confederates they confesse themselues to be . 49. Into these & other examples as I said , time will not permit vs to enter with any length , nor will it be to any purpose ; for that we shall finde them as sleightely answered or shifted of , as the rest before . For vnto the first and last , of Flanders and Hungary , the Minister answereth in effect nothing at all ; and I meruaile not , if he answered this with silence , seing he answered all the tumultes of Scotland for so many yeares continued , by saying only as yow haue heard : That Buchanans Chronicle was recalled by an act of Parlament . 50. To the other of Germany and Luthers seditious proceedinges both in wordes , writinges and deedes , wherin it is obiected among many other thinges that he censured both K. Henry of England , and many other Princes with intolerable , insolent , and vile speaches , affirming them vnworthy of all gouerment ; that Protestantes handes must be imbrued with bloud , & that thervpon ensued most bloudy warres throughout Germany and almost all Christendome besides , Munsters Rebellions also in the same countries , who preached , that Rebellion against Catholicke Princes for Religion was to be called The warre of God , and that he had 〈◊〉 commandement from God to that effect ; whervpon ensued the slaughter of a hundred & thirty thousand men in three monethes &c. To the first of Luther , he answereth very sagely in these wordes : Luthers literall censure of wordes will be partly confessed , but the other of swordes , which drew bloud can neuer be proued . Yow see vpon what pointes of desperate deniall he standeth , and yow may remember how cleerly the matter hath byn proued before , and what is extant in most writers of our time about the same . 51. The other of Munster he reiecteth , as not being of his Religion , & yet no man can deny , but that he was of Luthers schoole , and spronge out of the first seed and spirit of that new Ghospell ; but hard it is to discerne who be brethren , and who be not , when it standeth for their commodity to acknowledge or deny one the other . Heere yow see he denieth Munster , & acknowledgeth Luther to be of their Ghospell and fraternity ; and yet no man doth reiect them more contemptuosly , or condemneth them more seriously for Heretikes then Luther himselfe , as before out of his owne wordes yow haue heard . To the stirres in Switzerland raised by Zuinglius , who was slaine also in the feild , he saith in like manner nothing ; and little more to Denmarke , but that now all is quiet there , and Lutherane Religion in full possession , but he telleth vs not by what styrres and tumultes the same was brought in . 52. To that of Sueueland , and the open Rebellion of those Kingdomes , he findeth only this shift to put of the matter . It was ( saith he ) the demaund of the whole state , for defence of their countrey priuiledges , liberties , and fruition of Religion ; can any Papist call this Rebellion ? No truely Syr in your sense , who doe call the state whatsoeuer multitude of people doth rebell against their Princes , for the liberty of your Ghospel , for so yow called the party Protestant of Scotland ( if yow remember ) the Lordes of the Congregation , and the state of the Realme : and the other party that stood with the Queene , was called a faction , and so likewise in France and Flanders , Germany and Sueueland , those that tooke exceptions first , and then armes against their Princes , are called the State , or States , vnited Prouinces , those of the Religion , and by other like titles of honour : and the other part or rather body it selfe , hath the name of Enemies , Persecutors , Tyrantes , Papistes , and other odious appellations . But I would make this demaund , how came 〈◊〉 particuler men to be States , & to be called the Common-wealth ? were they not first subiectes ? And did they not first withdraw themselues from the obedience of their lawfull Princes , by sleightes , dissimulations , pretence of greiuances , liberty of Ghospell , and the like deuises , vntill at last they fell to open armes ? May not any number of rebells make themselues a state in this sense ? But I will vrge yow no further , for that I well see yow cannot answere , & to driue yow beyond the wall is to small purpose , I haue compassion of yow . A BRIEF CENSVRE IS GIVEN OF A NEVV TREATISE set forth by T.M. INTITVLED , A Confutation of the Popes Supremacy , as supreme head of Rebellion &c. Annexed to his former iustification of Protestant-Princes , for matters of Rebellion . CHAP. V. THis Minister Thomas Morton not content , after the pretended confirmation of his first discouery and reasons therof , to haue added a second Treatise , conteyning ( as he saith ) A Iustification of Protestantes against imputations of disobedience and Rebellion against temporall Princes , either in doctrine or practice ( both which you haue heard now how substātially he hath performed ) he thought good also to ad a third Treatise ( though nothing needfull to the argument in hand ) which he intituleth , A confutation of the principles of Romish doctrine in two pointes , first , concerning the Pope supreame head of Rebellion , and secondly , the impious conceipt of Equiuocation . And forasmuch as of the second point , which is Equiuocation , we are to treat more largly in the ensuing Chapters , and that the first seemed to me impertinent to be treated againe seuerally in this place , the substance therof hauing byn touched sufficiently , forasmuch as belongeth to this affaire , in the former Chapters , especially the second ; I had purposed once to passe it ouer without any answere at all , as indeed not deseruing any , it being only a certaine disorderly hudling togeather of peeces and parcelles of other mens collections about that matter , better handled by themselues : But yet considering afterward the speciall manner of this mans treating the same matters , both in regard of fraude and simplicity , though contrary the one to the other ; I iudged it not amisse to giue the Reader some tast therof in this one Chapter , wherby he may be able to frame a iudgment of the rest , and of the exorbitant veine of this mans writing . 2. First then he beginneth the very first lines of his first Chapter with these wordes : This pretended predominance ( saith he ) of the Pope in temporall causes , whether directly or indirectly considered ( in which diuision of gouerning the Romish schoole is at this day extreamly deuided ) if it be from God , it will sure plead Scriptum est &c. By which sole entrance yow may take a scantling of the mās discretion ; for it cannot be denied I thinke ( except we deny the Ghospell ) but that Scriptum est was pleaded also by the diuell , and not only by God , as in like manner it hath byn by all Hereticks , the diuels cheif Chaplains , since that time ; and consequently it was no good exordium to build all vpon this foundation . 3. Secondly it is not true , that the Romish schole is so extreamly deuided in this diuision of gouerning directly or indirectly , as the Minister would make it : for the question is not at all of gouerning , but how the right to gouerne in temporall causes , was deliuered by Christ to S. Peter and his Successours , whether directly , togeather with the spiritual gouernment ouer soules , or els indirectly and by a certaine consequence , when the said spirituall gouernment is letted and impugned , as before hath byn declared . In which difference of opinions there is no such extremity of diuision among Catholickes , as this man would haue men thinke : for that all doe agree in the substance of the thing it self , that the Pope hath this authority from God Iure diuino , in certaine cases , whether directly or indirectly that little importeth to this our controuersy with the Protestantes , who deny both the one and the other . And so much for that . 4. The next sentence or obiection after the former preface ( which is the very first of his discourse ) is framed by him , but yet in our name , vnder the title of the Romane pretence in these wordes : The high Priestes in the old Testament ( saith he ) were supreame in ciuill causes , ergo they ought to be so also in the new : for which he citeth , one Carerius , a Lawier , that wrote of late in Padua De potestate Romani Pontificis , defending the former opinion of Canonistes for direct dominion , & citeth his wordes in Latin thus : Dico Pontificem in veteri Testamento fuisse Rege maiorem : And Englisheth the same as before yow haue heard , that the high Priest was supreame , in ciuill causes ; which wordes , of ciuill causes , he putteth in of his owne , and if yow marke them , doe marre the whole market : for that Carerius hath them not either in wordes or sense , but teacheth the plaine cōtrary in all his discourse , to wit , that he meaneth in matters appertaining to Religion and Preisthood , and not of temporall principality , which this Author granteth to haue byn greater in the old Testament in dealing with Ecclesiasticall men & matters , then in the new ; & to that effect is he cited presently after by the Minister himself , contrary to that which heere he feigneth him to say . But let vs heare the wordes of Carerius . Tertiò dico ( saith he ) etiam in Testamento veteri fuisse Pontificem Rege maiorem : quod quidem probatur &c. Thirdly I say that the high Priest was greater also in the old Testament then the King , which is proued first out of the 27. Chapter of Numbers , where it is appointed by God , that Iosue and all the people should be directed by the word of the high Priest Eleazar , saying , whē any thing is to be done , let Eleazar the high Priest consult with God , and at his word aswell Iosue , as all the children of Israell , and whole multitude shall goe forth and come in &c. And secondly the same is proued out of the fourth of Leuiticus , where foure kind of Sacrifices being ordained , according to the dignity of the persons , the first two are of a calfe for the high Priest & commonwealth , the third and fourth of a hee and shee-goat for the Prince and priuate persons : Wherby Carerius inferreth a most certaine dignity and preheminence of the Priestes state , aboue the temporall Prince , though he say not in ciuill causes , as this Minister doth bely him . 5. And wheras Carerius had said in two former Answeres , first that in the old Testament , Ecclesiasticall and secular iurisdiction were not so distinct , but that both might be in some cases in the King , and secondly that in the new law , the spirituall power was more eminent then in the old ; he commeth thirdly to say that in the old law the High Priest in some respectes was greater also then the King , which cannot be vnderstood of ciuill power , except the Author will be contrary to himself . And therfore that clause was very falsly and perfidiously thrust in by the Minister , and this with so much the lesse shame , for that in the end of the same Chapter he citeth the same Author to the plaine contrary sense , saying : In veteri lege Regnum erat substantiuum & sacerdotium adiectiuum &c. That in the old law the Kingdome was the substantiue , that stood of it self , and Preisthood was the adiectiue , that leaned theron , but contrary-wise in the new law , Preisthood and spirituall iurisdiction is the substantiue or principall in gouernment , and temporall principality is the adiectiue depending therof , for direction , and assistance , the one both by nature and Godes law being subordinate to the other , to wit the temporall to the spirituall . And thus much concerning this guile by flat falshood . Now to a tricke or two of other sortes of shifting by him vsed for deluding the Reader . 6. It followeth in the same place , as a second Romish pretence : That the old Testament was a figure of the new in Christ , and therfore that in the new , the spirituall power ( as the Popedome , saith he ) must be the chiefe or substantiue &c. Which short sentence he patcheth out of two different Authors , Salmeron and Carerius , part of one , & part of another , and then frameth this graue answere thervnto : In this obiection ( saith he ) there is more childhood then manhood , babish grammer , then sound deuinity . So he . And will you heare his manhood in sound deuinity ? It followeth imediatly . The old Testament indeed ( saith he ) in his earthly elementes was a figure of this spirituall and heauenly ; but of the truly heauenly , the day of that eternall sabboth , and the Celestiall Hierusalem , the Mother-Citty of the Sainctes of God. Behold his manhood in sound deuinity . Let it be so , that the old Testament was in many thinges a figure of the heauenly sabboth and Celestial Hierusalem , but what ( Syr ) will yow conclude of this by your sound deuinity ? Was it not a figure also of many thinges vpon earth , which should be fulfilled in the new Testament ? Were not their Cerimonies and Sacrifices a figure of our Sacramentes & Sacrifice ? their Manna of our Eucharist ? their circumcisions and washinges , figures of our Baptisme ? doth not S. Paul in the ninth and tenth of his first Epistle to the Corinthians set down many examples to this effect ? As that of Deuteronomy : Nō 〈◊〉 os boui trituranti , thou shalt not binde vp the month of the oxe that laboureth , vnto our preachers of the new Testament ? as also the passing of the Red-sea by the Israelites ? their being baptized in the cloude ? their food of the Manna ? their drinking out of the rock , which 〈◊〉 Christ ? and diuers other thinges , wherof he saith : 〈◊〉 autem in figura facta sunt nostri ; these thinges were done in figure of our present State. And againe : Haec autem omnia in figura contingebant illis ; all these thinges did happen to the Iewes in figure , but were to be fulfilled truly and really according to the spirituall meaning in the new Testament ? Is not all this so ? were not these thinges to be fulfilled aswell vpon earth as in heauen ? how thē doth our Minister put that aduersitiue clause : but of the truly heauenly ; as though the old Testament in her earthly Elementes had 〈◊〉 nothing to be fulfilled but only in heauen . Is this sound deuinity ? Is this manhood ? Nay is it not rather babish childhood , that seemeth not to know the very first Elementes of true deuinity ? 7. I let passe the shamelesse corruption which he vseth in translating the very wordes cited by him out of Salmeron , for proofe of his obiection , made in our behalfe , and I call it shamelesse for that euery child which vnderstandeth Latin , may see the Ministers shift therin . The Authors words are these as this man heere recounteth them : Et hoc Regnum terrenum 〈◊〉 tamen suit spiritualis regiminis in Ecclesia Christiana : and yet this earthly Kingdome ( of the Iewes ) was a shaddow of the spirituall gouernment , that was to be in the Christian Church : meaning therby that the most excellent spirituall power and gouernment ouer soules , which Christ was to institute in his Church , at his comming in flesh , to wit , the power of absoluing from sinnes vpon earth , the assistance giuen by the Sacramentes , and the like , were shaddowed in a certaine manner by the earthly Kingdome among the Iewes : And how doth T. M. now translate these wordes , & frame our obiection out of them : The old Testament ( saith he ) was a figure of the new in Christ , therfore in the new the Popedome is the substātiue &c. Heere are two short propositions you see , the antecedent and consequent , & both framed with falshood ; for that the antecedent set downe out of Salmeron , is not that which he affirmeth in his Latin words , as already we haue shewed , though otherwise in it self the propositiō be true ; nor ( will I thinke ) T. M. can deny , but that the old Testament was a figure of the new in Christ. There followeth then the consequent which is no lesse corruptly inferred in our name , then was the antecedent affirmed , for that we doe not inferre , nor yet the Author Carerius in the said second proposition or consequence by him 〈◊〉 , that for somuch as the old Testament is a figure of the new , therfore in the new the Popes spirituall authority is the substantiue &c. for that this were a weake inference , as euery man seeth ; nay Carerius maketh no inference at all in the place by him alledged , but only vseth that similitude , which before yow haue heard of the substantiue and adiectiue : so as this inference is only a fiction of the Minister to make himself and other men merry , and to giue occasion to play vpon his Aduersary , with the reproach of childhood and babish grammer , as now he hath done . But indeed the true consequence that may be made vpon the Catholicke Authors wordes , which hitherto he hath alledged , is only this ; that forasmuch as the Kingdome and gouernment among the Iewes euen in Ecclesiasticall thinges was but earthly , and a figure or shaddow in respect of that which was to be ouer soules in the Christian Church , it followeth that this in respect of spirituality , was to be much more eminent then the other , as the thing figured , then the figure or shaddow it self . And what inconuenience hath this doctrine that it should be called childhood and babish grammer . 8. But now shall yow heare a new strange deuise of his , neuer heard of ( I thinke ) in the world before , & such a manhood in sound deuinity , that sheweth him scarce to be arriued to childhood in true Theology ; for that to exalt temporall principality of a Kingdome and depresse Priesthood , he seeketh to abase the High Priesthood of Christ himself ; for so he vaunteth that he will returne the foresaid argument vpon the Romish . Christ ( saith he ) being King and Priest , was shaddowed by the types of the old Testament ; but in Christ his Kingdome had the preheminence of Priesthood , bycause he is a Priest only for vs , but he is King ouer vs. Secondly as Priest he is suppliant to the Father ; as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with the Father , Ergo , this order inherent in Christ ought to hold as conuenient among Christians . An argument demonstratiue . So he . 9. Wherby yow may see , first how good a Logitian he is , who auoucheth this for an argument demonstratiue , which is indeed a very Elench & Sophisme , and manifest fallacy , for that he changeth his subiect from sense to sense , making one proposition of his argument in the one , and the other in another sense . For when he talketh of Christes Priesthood comparing it with his being a King , he meant ( and so he ought to doe ) as he was man , and inferiour to his Father ; and when he speaketh of the other , of his being a King , he vnderstandeth it , as he was God and equall to his Father ; and so taking the one in one meaning , and the other in the other , his principall meaning is to deceaue his Reader with a sophisticall argument instead of a demonstratiue ; & yet doth the good man so confide in his logicall science , as in one place he triumpheth ouer his Aduersary , that did but once name Logicke in these wordes : Dare yow ( saith he ) appeale to Logicke ? this is the art of all artes , and the high tribunall of reason and truth it self ; which no man in any matter , whether it be case of humanity or deuinity , can iustly refuse : which is so ridiculous a simplicity , as no man can read without laughter . For what high tribunall ( I pray yow ) hath logicke in deuinity ? Or who gaue her this tribunall ? was there no deuinity before Logicke was inuented by the Philosophers ? Logicke is not a science , according to Aristotle , but only modus sciendi , a manner or meane how to come to science , and it ministreth not matter , but forme of argument , as armour to the Logitian , wherby to impugne falshood and ignorance in euery science , euen as the Cutlers shop doth yeeld weapons to souldiers that goe to warre , and yet cannot the Cutlers shop be iustly called the high tribunal of all matters belonging to Chieualry and feates of warfare , and consequently this was a vaine florish & ostentation . 10. But now to returne to the principall point , we haue seene that this argument is so far from being demonstratiue , as it is no argument at all , in regard of the Equiuocation and fallacy therin conteyned . Let vs then consider the same in respect of the matter & substance it self . First I say that it conteyneth a manifest , fond and impious paradox , that Christes Kingdome ( as he was both King and Priest ) had the preheminence of his Priesthood ; and I call it a paradox , for that I thinke no Christian man of learning euer held it before , and much lesse any sound deuine . Secondly I call it fond , in respect of his ridiculous reasons alledged for the same , which presently we shall examine : And thirdly I call it impious , for that it is both against the Scriptures , and preiudiciall to Christes highest dignity of Priesthood vpon earth : Wherby also followeth that this Ministers inference or conclusion ( Ergo this order inherent in Christ ought to be held as conuenient among Christians ) must be censured by the same censures , for that it concludeth a generall preheminence and excellency of Kingly State , before Priesthood , which is the quite opposite assertion to that which all ancient Fathers , and namely S. Chrysostome out of all their common sense , doth maintaine in his bookes De Sacerdotio , affirming , that the office and dignity of a Priest , doth so far exceed that of a King , as gold doth siluer , heauen earth , and the soule the body : Regno Sacerdotium ( saith he ) tanto est excellentius , quantum carnis & Spiritus interuallum esse potest ; Priesthood is somuch more excellent then Kingly authority , as there can be difference imagined betweene flesh and spirit . And in another place the same Father : Sacerdotium est principatus ipso etiam Regno venerabilior & maior : Priesthood is a Princedome more venerable & great then is Kingly authority . And then againe : Ne mihi narras purpuram &c. doe not tell me of purple or diademe , of scepter or golden apparell of Kinges , for these are but shaddowes , and more vaine then May-flowers : Si vis videre discrimen quantum absit Rex a Sacerdote , expende modum potestatis vtrique traditae &c. If yow will see indeed the true difference betweene them , and how much the King is inferiour to a 〈◊〉 , consider the measure of power geuen to them both , & yow shall see the Priestes tribunall much higher then that of the King. So he . Wherunto agreeth that of S. Gregory Nazienzen spoken to the Emperour himself : The law of Christ ( saith he ) hath made yow subiect to my power , and to my tribunall , for wee ( Bishops ) haue an Empire also , and that more excellent and perfect then yours , except yow will say the spirit is inferiour to the flesh , and heauenly thinges to earthly . 11. So he . And much more to this effect , which yow may read cited out of diuers Fathers , in a booke set forth this last yeare , in answere to Syr Edward Cookes Reportes by a Catholicke deuine , who handleth this point more largely and particularly in the second and fourth Chapters of the said answere . And this is sufficient to shew the inference or conclusion of T. M. to be false , touching the power and dignity of Priesthood , and of Kingly principallity among men . Now let vs returne to the consideration therof in Christ himself , which is the principall question , though in effect it be decided by that which now wee haue shewed , for that the dignity and preheminence aboue Kingly dignity , of Priesthood in man , which the foresaid Fathers doe so resolutly affirme , inferreth also the preheminence of Priesthood in Christ , for somuch as from that descendeth this other ; but yet I thinke it not amisse to handle the same somewhat more distinctly , the Ministers paradox therin being so prophane and irreligious as hath byn said . 12. First then as Christ is acknowledged both by them and vs to haue byn both Priest and King , according as he was prefigured in Melchisedech , who had both these dignities in himself , so the one and the other excellency of Priestly and Kingly preheminence , were in him according as he was man , and vnder his Father , which for so much as appertained to his Priesthood is graunted heere by T. M. and the matter is euident in itself ; for that Christ as God could not offer Sacrifice , nor make intercession to his Father for vs ( which are the chief offices of Priesthood ) for that this belōgeth to an inferiour , according to that saying of S. Ambrose : Sacerdos idem & hostia Sacerdotium , tamen humanae conditionis officium est : Christ was both Priest and Sacrifice , yet was his Priesthood the office of humane condition . S. Augustine also talking of both dignities saith : Secundum hominem Christus , & Rex & Sacerdos effectus est : Christ was made both King and Priest according as he was man. And the same is plaine by Scripture , in which euery where is acknowledged that Christes Kingdome was giuen him by his Father : Ego autem constitutus Rex ab eo super Sion montem Sanctum eius , saith Christ in the Psalmes : I am apointed King by him vpon his holy hill of Sion , ergo he was King by gift and appointement of his Father . And in the same Psalme God the Father saith vnto him : Postula à me & dabo tibi gentes haereditatem tuam & possessionem tuam terminos terrae : Aske of me , and I will giue vnto thee the Gentiles for thy inheritance , and the confines of all the earth for thy possession : so as in this Kingdome , God the Father required an acknowledgment . And yet further the Prophet speaking to the said Father of this Kingdome of Christ in flesh said : Constituisti eum super 〈◊〉 manunm tuarum , & omnia subiecisti sub pedibus eius : thou hast appointed him for Lord and King ouer the workes of thy handes , that is to say , ouer all thy creatures , and thou hast subiected all thinges vnder his feet : which point S. Paul doth prosecute most excellently in the first two Chapters of his Epistle to the Hebrewes ; and there can be no doubt in this matter , for Christ himself speaketh most plainly : Data est mihi omnis 〈◊〉 in caelo & in terra : All power is giuen vnto me both in heauen and earth , so as he acknowledgeth it to be giuen , which cannot stand with his diuinity , in that he is God , and equall with his Father : in which regard all was his owne without gift , according to those wordes of S. Paul to the Philippians : Non rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo ; He did not thinke it Vsurpation to be equall to God his Father according to his diuinity . Wherfore it must needs appeare great ignorance in our Minister , to assigne him this his temporall Kingdome as he was God and equall to his Father . 13. But now to the principall proposition VVhether Christ his Kingdome had the preheminence of his Priesthood , or his Priesthood of his Kingdome ; though in part the matter be made cleere by that which is already spokē ; yet shal we adde two or three wordes more . And first the matter is manifest by the narration it self in Scripture , when the figure of his Priesthood and Kingdome is declared in Genesis , in the person of Melchisedech : for thus saith the text : Melchisedech King of Salem bringing forth bread and wine ( for he was the Priest of God most high ) gaue his benediction to Abraham , and tooke tithes of him for all that he had . In which example is greatly to be noted the reflection it self and emphasis which the Scripture maketh vpon his Priestoood : Erat enim sacerdos Dei altissimi : For he was the Priest of the most high God , as who should say , that otherwise he could neuer haue offred vp in sacrifice that bread and wine ( the highest action of all other vpon earth ) as King , except he had byn Priest : nor yet haue blessed Abraham , and much lesse haue taken tithes of him : Which point S. Paul doth ponder very deeply and seriously in his Epistle to the Hebrewes , repeating often times for the greater glory of Christ and his powerfull Priesthood this example of Melchisedech : Assimilatus 〈◊〉 Dei ( saith he ) manet sacerdos in perpetuum ; intuemini autem quantus sit hic , cui & decimas dedit de praecipuis Abraham Patriarcha : This Melchisedech bearing a likenes of the Sonne of God , remained a Priest perpetually : Neque initium dierum neque finem vitae habens : hauing neither beginning of his dayes , nor end of his life : consider then how great a man this was , to whome the Patriarch gaue tithes of all the principall thinges he had . 14. This is S. Paules contemplation of the matter , who in his said Epistle to the Hebrewes , laying this foundation of the figure of Melchisedech for the Priesthood and Kingdome of Christ ( though more specially as yow see for his Priesthood ) doth presently after the consideration of those wordes , Filius meus es tu , ego hodie genui 〈◊〉 ; thou art my Sonne , I haue this day begotten thee ( wherby he proueth Christ to haue byn not the adopted but natural Sonne of God ) after this , I say , he doth insist , for demonstration of his highest 〈◊〉 and dignity , vpon those wordes of God the Father for his Priesthood : Tu es facerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech : Thou art a Priest foreuer according to the order of Melchisedech ; out of which wordes of highest dignity and commission , S. Paul doth make many inferences , as that in the second Chapter : Nusquam Angelos apprehendit , sed 〈◊〉 Abrahae &c. vt misericors fieret & fidelis Pontifex ad Deum . God tooke not Angelles but the seed of Abraham to frame Christ , to the 〈◊〉 he might be both a mercifull and faithfull High Priest for vs with God , for propitiation of our sinnes . And againe in the third Chapter : Behold yow Holy brethren who are partakers of this our heauenly vocation , Consider our Apostle and High Priest of this our confession Iesus . And in the fourth Chapter hauing spoken much of the Sabboth day , that he is to giue vs in the next life , he adioineth this exhortation : Habentes ergo Pontificem magnum &c. we hauing therfore a great high Priest that hath pearced the heauens , Iesus the Sonne of God , let vs hold fast our confession , for we haue not a Priest that cannot take compassion of our infirmities &c. And againe in the fifth Chapter hauing said first : 〈◊〉 Pontifex &c. Euery High Priest chosen out of men , is appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine vnto God , that he offer giftes and Sacrifices for sin &c. after this ( I say ) S. Paul doth immediatly inferre this conclusion about the supreame honor & dignity of Christ his Priesthood : Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem &c. Neither may any man take the honour of Priesthood vnto him , but he that is called by God , as Aaron was , and so Christ ( though he were the true Sonne of God ) did not aduance himself to this honour of being high Priest , but that he who said vnto him filius meus es tu , thou art my Sonne , said vnto him also tu es sacerdos in aeternum , thou art a Priest for euer , appellatus à Deo Pontifex , being called by God to be high Priest , according to the order of Melchisedech , of whome there remaineth to vs a great speech to vtter , and such a one as needeth exposition , wherof yow as yet for your weaknes ar not capable . So S. Paul. 15. And then in the other two sequent Chapters to wit the seauenth and eight , he doth prosecute the same argument of the high dignity of Christes Priesthood much more largely . Among the Iewes ( saith he ) there were many Priestes made , for that they were letted by death to remaine , but this our high Priest remaineth for euer : his Priesthood is eternall , wherof it ensueth that he can for euer saue vs , interposing himself with God for vs by himself , and euer lyuing to make intercession for vs , for such a high Priest was it conuenient that we should haue , holy , innocent , vnspotted , seperated from sinners , and more excellent then the heauens themselues . And againe in the next Chapter : Such a high Priest we haue , as sitteth on the right hand of the seat of maiesty in heauen , and there he is Minister of the Saintes and true Tabernacle . 16. All this & much more hath S. Paul in that Epistle of the eminency of Christes Priesthood , therby to set forth the most admirable excellency of his power and glory therby giuen him from his Father for our saluation ; but of the glory of his temporal Kingdome in this life , he saith little or nothing . And had not then the foresaid Fathers and holy Bishops S. Chrysostome , S. Gregory Nazienzen , S. Ambrose and others , great cause by contemplation of this supereminent worthines of Christes Priesthood , to inferre the great preheminēce in generall of the Christian Priesthood , before Kingly dignity of earthly principality ? But let vs yet consider one reason more . 17. The office of high Priesthood , as partly hath appeared by that we haue said , and is euident by the discourse of S. Paul , appointing him for a meanes or mediator betweene God and man , consisteth principally in two thinges or partes : first in respect of that which he is to performe towardes God , as to his Superiour : secondly in the functions that he is to vse towardes the people , as inferiours and subiectes . The first consisteth in offering sacrifice , oblations , prayers and intercession for the sinnes of the people , as already touching Christ our Sauiour out of the Apostle we haue declared . The second consisteth in the spirituall power , dignity , authority and functions therof , which our said high Priest Christ Iesus , as head & high Priest of his Church , purchased with the sacrifice of his owne bloud , hath , and may exercise vpon the said Church for euer , for vnto him as our high Priest it appertaineth not only to make intercession for his said Church , but to gouerne the same also , and to direct it by conuenient meanes vnto the end of their saluation , which he hath designed , and for this to make lawes , prescribe orders , appoint Sacramentes , ordaine spirituall tribunals of iudgment , giue sentence of separation of the good from the bad , forgiue and retaine sinnes , which spirituall gouernment of soules belonging to the office of high Priesthood , is a different thing from the ciuill gouernment of temporall principality , and yet is a Kingdome also in it self , but a spirituall Kingdome ouer soules and not ouer bodies . And this had Christ our Sauiour togeather with his high Priesthood , according to the prediction and vision of Daniel : Aspiciebam & ecce quasi filius hominis &c. I did looke and behold there appeared as it were the Sonne of man , and God gaue vnto him power and honour , and a Kingdome , his power is an eternall power , and his Kingdome shall neuer be corrupted . And so in the second Psalme , after he had said , I am made King by him vpon his holy Hill of Sion , he addeth presently to shew that it was a spirituall Kingdome : Praedicans praeceptum eius , my office is to preach his commandement , and many other authorities may be alledged to proue that Christ in that he was high Priest had supreame spirituall Kingly authority in like manner for gouerning of soules . 18. But now for the temporall Kingdome of Christ in this life , to wit , whether besides this spirituall and Royall gouernment of our soules , he had Kingly Dominion also vpon our bodies and goodes , and vpon all the Kingdomes of the earth , so as he might iustly haue excercised all actions of that temporall iurisdiction , as casting into prison , appointing new officers , Kings and Monarches ; yea whether their power , and authority , and interest to their States did cease when he came , as the right of Priestly authority did : in this ( I say ) and other pointes depending herof , there are two disputable opinions betweene Catholicke Deuines ; the one holding the affirmatiue , that Christ was Lord & King temporall , as heere is set downe , which * diuers learned men both of old and our time doe de fend ; the other affirming that albeit Christ togeather with his high Kingly dignity of spirituall power , was Lord also cōsequently ouer our bodies , & shall raigne ouer the same most gloriously for all eternity in the life to come ; yet that he renounced the vse of all that Dominion in this life , and that in this sense , he fled when they would haue made him King , and refused to deuide the inheritance betweene the two Brethrē when he was demaunded ; and finally said to Pilate , My Kingdome is not of this world , confessing himself to be a true temporal King also , according to Pilates meaning ; but yet that the vse and exercise therof was not for this world , but only for the next , wherof also the good thiefe vnderstood when he said on the Crosse : Be mindfull of me when thou shalt come into thy Kingdome . And finally they alledge for proofe of this the wordes of Zachary the Prophet : Ecce Rex 〈◊〉 venit tibi iustus & Saluator & ipse pauper : Behold ( Sion ) thy King commeth vnto thee as a iust and sauing King , but he is poore ; as though he had said , he is thy true King , but hath renounced the vse and priuiledge of the same , and chosen pouerty in this world . And with this second opinion which is the more * generall , doe concurre also the Protestantes of our age , that Christ tooke vpon him no temporall Kingly power in this life , least if they held the contrary , it should be inferred therof , that he left the same authority both of temporall and spirituall vnto S. Peter his Successour ; which yet the Catholickes that hold this opinion , explicate otherwise , saying : that albeit Christ had no direct Dominion in this life vpon temporall thinges , yet indirectly for preseruation of his spirituall Dominion he had , and might haue vsed the same , and in that sense he left it to his said Successor . 19. Of all which is inferred first the preheminence of high Priesthood in Christ before his temporall Kingly principality , for that as we haue said , the actions and functions of Christes Priesthood , haue not only more high & eminent dignity , both in that they treat with men for gouerning their soules , then Christes temporall Kingdome for gouerning of bodies ; but moreouer that the dignity of Priesthood in Christ , conteineth in it self a much more high spirituall Kingly power , then is the temporall . 20. Secondly is inferred , that the reasons heere alledged by T. M. for his paradox , in preferring Christs being a King , before his Priesthood , are vaine & foolish . The first wherof is this . Christes Kingdome ( saith he ) had the preheminence of Priesthood , because he is Priest only for vs , but he is King ouer vs. But I would aske him , Is not Christ Priest ouer vs aswel as for vs ? hath he not a spirituall and Priestly iurisdiction ouer our soules ? doth not he binde and loose our sinnes ? doth not he prescribe vs Sacramentes ? appoint vs lawes of liuing , and the like ? or doe not these actions appertaine vnto him as high Priest ouer his Church ? And againe I would aske him , about the second member , as Christ in flesh was King , was he not made King aswell for vs , that is for our good , as ouer vs ? doth not this man know that the difference betweene a good and bad gouernment , a true King and a Tyrant , consisteth in this , that the one raigneth for his owne good , the other for the good of his subiects ? What impiety were it to affirme this defect to be in Christes Kingly gouernment , and consequētly what folly is it to bring in such reasons ? But let vs see what he saith further . 21. Christ ( saith he ) as Priest is suppliant to his Father , & as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities , equally with his Father : But now wee haue shewed before that there be two partes or functions of Priesthood , the one towardes God , to be suppliant by sacrifice and intercession , the other to be predominant ouer men by spirituall gouernment vpon their soules , and that both these doe agree to Christ , in respect of his high Priesthood , and as he is man , and much more the other of his temporall Kingdome : so as to make him equall to his Father in this , as T. M. doth , is an impious absurdity ; for that vnder his Fathers vniuersall Kingdome Christ himself is also conteined as a subiect , according to those wordes of graduation in S. Paul : Omnia vestra sunt &c. vos autem Christi , Christus autem Dei. All thinges are yours , life , death , the world , thinges past , thinges to come , and yow are of Christ & Christ of God ; that is to say , all thinges for Christ are subiect to yow , so you are and ought to be subiect to Christ , and Christ to God his Father . Now then see how wisely this man frameth his foresaid maine Conclusion , that as in Christ , his Kingdome had the preheminence of his Priesthood ( which is false as we haue shewed ) so must it hold also among men that Kingly power be preferred before Priestly , temporall before spirituall . Of which opinion S. Chrysostome doth thinke that no man , but mad or furious , can be . Equidem ( saith he ) neminem existere talem dixerim , nisi si quis furiarum aestu percitus sit : I cannot thinke any man to be of this opinion ( to preferre temporall authority before spirituall ) except a man should become mad with the rage of furies . And so to S. Chrysostome I leaue our Minister to be charmed from these kinde of Hereticall furies . THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER , CONTEYNING Three particular kindes of proofes , alledged by T. M. against the Popes Supremacy , to vvit : Of the new , and old Testament , and from reason it self . ALl this that hitherto hath byn treated by our Aduersary , hath byn by way , as it were , of preamble or preface , for abasing Priesthood , as you haue seene , euen in Christ himself , therby to subiect the same in Christians to temporall authority ; but about this point , I wish the Reader to looke ouer the forenamed two Chapters of the late Answere to Syr Edward Cooke ( I meane the second and fourth ) and I suppose he will remaine satisfied in the preheminency of the one aboue the other . Now notwithstanding for the second part of this Chapter we shall bring into a short view the principall pointes hādled by T. M. in this his confutation of the Popes Supremacy . And albeit you may easily make a coniecture of what substance it is like to be , by that which already you haue seéne discussed ; yet shall we descend to some principall particulars , for that he reduceth in effect all his proofes to three chief heades : the first concerning the state of the Sinagogue vnder the Iewes , the second of the Christian Church vnder the new Testament , the third by reason common to them both . From the State of the old Testament . §. 1. 23. FOr the first he setteth downe as argumentes of ours , for licencing Popes to kill Princes , a large list of Kinges and Princes deposed , murthered , or molested vnder the old Testament , as though we did found our doctrine theron ; for which cause he giueth the title of Romish pretence to the said list , alledging therin fourteene seuerall examples ; as Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel : Roboam by the Prophet Achia ; the Queene Athalia by the chief Priest Iehoida ; King Antiochus resisted and driuen out of his Dominion ouer Iury by the Priest Mathathias and the Machabees his children : the Priestes of Baal , and other Ministers of the King slaine by the Prophets Elias & Elizeus : the great Captaine Holofernes by Iudith : King Eglon by Ahod : Sisera by Iabel : Queene Iezabel by Iehu at the appointmēt of the Prophet Elizeus , with seauenty children of King Achab : the death of King Achab who was slaine also miserably himself by Godes appointment , & the Prophetes prediction : King Amon slaine by his owne seruantes for his wickednes ; to whome we may ad the death of King Agag by the commaundement of Samuel the Prophet ; the slaughter of King Ioas by his owne seruantes : And lastly King Ozias for exercising the Priestes office and function , was by the high Priest depriued of his Kingdome . 24. And when he had set downe all this ranke of these vnfortunate Princes their deathes and depositions , as though we had delighted therin or proposed all that heere is said to be imitated , he saith : Heere we heare nothing but fighting , dispossessing , and killing of Kinges , & those cheifly by Priestes and Prophetes of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new , to teach them to erect their Miters aboue Crownes . Doe yow see the malice of the man ? If himself hath gathered together this Catalogue of Princes that came to ill endes , & were slaine or deposed , is it maruaile though he heare nothing but that himself liketh to lay forth ? 25. The difference and comparison of Miters and Crownes is fond and ridiculous , and brought in only to make the matter it self odious ; for the true comparison is only betweene spirituall and temporal authority , the one apperteyning to soules , the other to bodies , the one called heauenly , the other earthly , the one proper to Priestes , the other to ciuill Princes as before yow haue heard declared out of ancient Fathers , who notwithstanding were neuer reprehended nor called into enuy for erecting Miters aboue Crownes in that sense , as this prophane Calumniator doth heere vrge : and exaggerate . 26. And as for this whole matter of the examples out of the old Testamēt , our principall question being only as before we haue declared : VVhether God hath left any lawfull meanes for restrayning euill Princes , in certaine cases of extreame danger , and whether Priestes also and Prelates in Christian Religion , but especially the highest Priest , may deale therin : These examples are fraudulently heaped and hudled togeather by T. M. as though all were equally stood vpon by Catholicke writers , and this to the end that he may giue himself matter to answere afterward , as he doth by distinguishing that all doe not proue the self same thing , nor were equally lawfull , nor done by equall authority or approbation , nor appertaine equally to the matter we haue in hād , which Catholicke writers also doe say , and haue taught him to say , though he dissemble it , wherof we may read both Cunerus , Carerius , Salmeron , Barkleius , Reginaldus and Boucherus , here by him cited out of whome he hath taken the most part of that he writeth in this affaire . 27. Wheras then we must confesse with the Philosopher and with reason it self , that Quidlibet ex quolibet non est consequens , euery thing followeth not of whatsoeuer , it seemeth that two pointes only of any moment , concerning the controuersy in hand , may truly and sincerly be deduced out of this number of examples now alledged : the first that as temporall authority of Princes is from God , and he will haue it respected and obeyed as from himself ; so one way or other he faileth not to punish them grieuously , and to bring them oftentimes to great affliction and desolation , when they gouerne not well , and this either by ordinary or extraordinary meanes , as himself liketh best . To which end is that seuere admonitiō in the second Psalme : Et nūc Reges intelligite , & erudimini qui iudicatis terram : seruite Domino in timore , & exultate ei cum tremore . Apprehendite disciplinam , nequando irascatur Dominus , & pereatis &c. And now yow Kinges vnderstand , and yow that gouerne the earth be instructed : serue almighty God in feare , and reioice vnto him with trembling . Admit discipline , lest he fal into wrath against yow , & yow perish &c. And this is the best & most pious meditatiō which a Christian man can draw or lay before Princes , out of those disasterous euentes as fell to diuers by Godes owne apointment or permission vnder the old Testament , and not the comparison of Myters and Crownes which this Minister ridiculously bringeth in . 28. Secondly may be noted , that in the execution of Godes iustice & designement in this behalfe , he vsed also oftentimes the help & concurrence of both Priestes and Prophetes , & other holy men , who notwithstanding may be presumed out of their said holy disposition to haue abhorred such effusion of bloud , war , and other calamities , which by fulfilling Godes ordinance made vnto them , either by secret inspiration or open commandment , were to ensue and follow , and consequently that all Priestes were not debarred from dealing in such affairs , when God required their cooperation therin . 29. All the question then is how , and when , and where , and by whome , and for what causes , and in what cases , & with what circumstances , this restraint of Princes may be vsed , wherin I haue shewed aboundantly before , that the moderation prescribed by Catholickes is far greater , without comparison , then is that of the Protestantes , whether we respect either their doctrine or practice , of which both kindes we haue before produced sufficient examples : and in this place the Authors most alledged by T. M. about this controuersy , against violence towardes Princes , are Catholicke , as namely Cunerus , a learned Bishop of the low Countreys , in his booke , De Officio Principis Christiani ; and Barkleius a Reader of Law in Loraine , in six bookes written by him , De Regno & Regali potestate aduersus Monarchomacos , Of Kingdome and Kingly power against impugners of Princes , the first writing against the Rebellions and violent attemptes of the subiectes of Holland and Zeland , and other Prouinces therunto annexed , and by that occasion treating in generall , how vnlawfull a thing it is for subiectes to take that course , vpon any discontentment whatsoeuer , handleth the matter very learnedly though briefly . 30. But the other Doctour Barkley , taking vpon him to treat the same matter much more largely , directeth his pen principally against the bookes of certaine Protestantes of our time , as Hottoman , Brute , Buchanan , and others before mentioned , for so he saith in his preface : Non contentus Satanas tis , qui parens ille malorum & mendaciorum Lutherus &c. Satan being not contēted with those wicked doctrines which Luther the Father of all wickednes and lies , and other slanderous Railers , that came out of his kytchin , had with infamous mouthes and intolerable audacity vomited out against Princes , he sent forth also into the world , to fly before mens eyes other most seditious bookes , Hottomani FrancoGalliam , Bruti vindicias Tyrannorum , Bucchanani Dialogum de iure Regni ; the booke of Hottoman ( dwelling in Geneua ) intituled , Free-France , or the Freedome of France ( to wit , of the Protestantes against their Kinges and Princes , ) that other also of Brutus ( a man of the same place and crew ) intituled , The reuenge that subiectes ought to take of their Princes if they become Tyrantes ; the third of Buchanan , ( schoole-maister in times past to our Kinges Maiesty ) intituled , A Dialogue of the right of Kingly power , subiecting the same to the people , yea and to euery priuate person therof , when it shall seeme vnto him necessary for the common-wealth , or expedient for Godes glory , as before yow haue heard . Against all which this Doctour Barkley , a Catholicke man writeth his six bookes ; so as in this point for Princes security we are far more forward then Protestantes . 31. And albeit this said Doctour doth include in like manner Doctour Boucher a French Catholicke writer , reprehending diuers thinges vttered by the said Boucher in his booke De iusta abdicatione , against the late King Henry the third of France ; yet in the principall point ; whether priuate men , either for priuate or publicke causes , may vse violence against their lawful Prince , not lawfully denounced for a publique enemy by the whole state and common-wealth ; in this point ( I say ) the said Boucher is absolutly against the same , & so protesteth and proueth it by diuers argumentes , shewing himself therin to be quite contrary , and to abhorre not only the doctrine of VVickcliffe and Husse condemned in the Councell of Constance about that matter , but also of the forsaid Protestant writers Hottoman , Brute , Bucchanan , Knox , Goodman , Gilby , VVhittingham and the like : among whome also I may include Iohn Fox , who in his history of Iohn Husse , alloweth that proposition of his ; Prelates and Princes leese their authority when they fall into mortall sinne ; as the Author of the VVarn-word proueth more largely out of Fox himself . 32. And thus much for the first point , about examples drawne from the times of the old Testament , out of which , little cā be vrged to the proofe or disproofe of this question , besides the two generall pointes by vs noted before . For to bring into disputation , whether Priesthood or Kingly principality had the vpper hand in that law , is to small purpose , the matter being cleere , that as the Kinges ( and so likewise their Captaines , Iudges , and Gouernours before they had Kinges ) had the preheminence in all temporall affaires , so in spirituall : and such as concerned God imediatly , the were referred principally to Priestes , and the temporall Magistrate commaunded to heare them , to take the law of them , & consequently also the interpretation therof , to repaire vnto them in consultation of doubtes , and to stand to their iudgment and definition ; that Priestes and Prophetes should consult immediatly with God , and the Prince follow their word and direction . 33. And albeit God did some-times vse for externall guiding and direction of Priestes and Priestly affaires , the authority of good Kinges in those daies , especially when they were Prophetes also , as Dauid & Salomon , in the correcting and remouing of some Priestes ; yet this was extraordinary , and proueth not , that simply and absolutly Kingly dignity and authority was aboue Priesthood in that law , albeit also it be most true , which the Authors by this man heere alledged Salmeron , Cunerus , Carerius and the rest doe note , that the Priesthood of the old Testament was nothing comparable to that of the new , this descending directly from the person and office of Christ himself , and indued with farre higher and more powerfull spirituall authority for guiding of soules , then had the Priestes of the old law , which was but a figure of the new ; & therfore to argue from that to this , is a plaine fallacy , and abusing of the Reader . 34. Wherfore leauing this of the comparison betweene Kinges and Priestes , of the old and new Testament , I will end this first point , with the very same conclusion ( concerning the safty of Princes from violence of their subiectes ) which our Aduersary himself alledgeth out of our Catholicke Author Cunerus in these wordes : VVe are taught ( saith he ) from the example of the people of God , as your Cunerus teacheth , with great patience to endure the tyranny of mortall Kinges , yea when wee haue power to resist , and because they be next vnder God in earth , in all their iniuries , to commend their reuenge vnto God ; nay he teacheth Kinges another excellent rule of pollicy , fitting for the preseruation of all States , which is ; that he who succeedeth a King violently murdered of any , though of Godly zeale ; yet ought he to reueng his Predecessours death by the death of the malefactours . So T.M. And now followeth that of the Ghospell Ex ore tuo te indico serue 〈◊〉 : for first I would aske him , is not this Catholicke doctrine ? Is it not ours ? doth he not heere call the Author therof Cunerus , ours ? how then doth he affirme euery where , that our doctrine teacheth killing of Princes ? Let him shew vs any of his Authors , that euer of this argument hath written so moderatly . 35. And yet further I must aske him whether he will stand to the iudgment of this our Cunerus , when he commeth to the point indeed , How incorrigible Princes in some cases may lawfully be restrained , as also depriued by the Common-wealth , and consent of the supreame Pastour ? will he stand to this ( I say ) or rather fleet back againe to the doctrine of the Scottish , Geneuian , French , & Flemish Ministers , when the King should mislike him , and especially for his Religion ? wherof I make little doubt , what euer he saith heere , finding himself and his at good ease . And finally I would aske him seriously , whether he would haue his Maiesty of England to practice that excellent rule of pollicy which he so highly comendeth out of our 〈◊〉 ( who notwithstanding saith not a word therof by way of rule or obseruation , but only affirmeth that Amasias did iustly put to death those seruantes of King Ioas , that vpon zeale had slaine him in his bed : ) I would aske him ( I say ) whether indeed he would wish his Maiesty of England to put the same rule , and so highly commended pollicy in vse , against such as violently murdered , abetted or procured the same , against not only his Predecessours , but parentes and immediate Progenitours , Father , Mother , and Grand-mother ? And then we know how many Ministers , and their friendes would enter into that daunce ; but these men frame their tongues according to times & fit occasiōs . And with this he endeth his proofes out of the old Testament . Out of the new Testament . §. 2. 36. ANd then comming to the second part , he beginneth his discourse with this title : The former question disputed according to the state of the new Testament , and presently in our manner he giueth the onset with this proposition : The Pope hath all absolute and direct power and dominion temporall ouer all Kinges and Kingdomes of the world &c. And for proofe therof citeth Carerius and Bozius in the margent , and beginneth to lay forth their proofes ; and then against these two that hold the opinion of Canonistes ( wherof before we haue treated , to wit , that Christ was the immediate Lord of all temporalties , and consequently also is his substitute ) he opposeth Franciscus de Victoria , Bellarmine , Sanders , and others that hold the other opinion , to wit that the Pope hath not directly , but indirectly only such authority to deale with Princes in temporall affaires : and so not informing his Reader that these are different opinions of the manner how the Pope hath this authority , but yet that both do agree in the thing it self that he hath it ; he playeth pleasantly vpon the matter , and would make men thinke that he taketh vs at great aduantage , as contrary or rather contradictory among our selues : which indeed is no more cōtradiction , then if two Lawiers agreeing that such a noble man , had such an office or authority ouer such a Lordship , by succession from the Crowne , should differ only in this , whether the said office were giuen by the Prince , seuerally and expressely by particuler gift and writinges , or were giuen by a certaine consequence included in the gift of the said Lordship : The differēce were nothing in the thing or certainty of authority , but in the manner of hauing it , and so is it heere ; and yet out of this difference of these two opiniōs , doth our Minister furnish himself with good probability of argmentes on the one side , as though they were his owne , who otherwise would appeare very poore & pittiful therin . And this tricke he plaied before with the moderate Answerer , when he serued himself of the two differēt opinions of some Deuines and Canonistes about the question : VVhether Hereticks before personall denuntiation , and sentence giuen , be subiect to externall penalties appointed by the Canons : And generally he runneth to this shift , more then any other commonly of his fellow-writers which I haue seene in these our dayes , to wit , that whersoeuer he findeth any difference of opinions in disputable matters betweene our Catholicke writers ( which S. Augustine saith may stand with integrity of faith ) there he setteth downe any one of these opinions for ours , and argueth against it with the argumentes of the other , or bringeth in the others authority & wordes against the same , which maketh some shew or muster of matter on his side , wheras in deed and substance he hath nothing at all . 37. It were ouer long to examine in this place all the obiections which he putteth downe on our behalfe , vnder the second head of our proofes , concerning the time of the new Testament , calling them Romish pretences , and the fond resolutions he giueth vnto them ; as first that we doe found the Popes temporall sword vpon the keyes giuen by Christ to S. Peter and that it is a strange art to make a sword of a paire of keyes , which seemeth to him a fine iest , & then commeth he out with this vanut : Neither can any shew me one Doctour , but of reasonable antiquity ( peto vel ex millibus vnum ) who by keyes vnderstand ciuill power : But Syr what needeth antiquity of Doctors in this behalf ? will not your owne moderne Protestant Doctors graunt , that when the keyes of any Citty , Towne , or Fort are giuē to a Prince , ciuill power ouer that Fort is meant therby ? who will deny this ? 38. And secondly whereas he alleadgeth Franciscus à Victoria to say that the keyes giuen to S Peter imported spiritual authority of remitting and reteyning sinnes , ergo no way temporall , is a fond illation : for that albeit Victoria saith that those keyes did principally importe spirituall authority ; yet they include also supreme temporall indirectly , when the defence of the spirituall doth require it . Whereupon he frameth this conclusion in the same place : Our eight proposition is ( saith he ) that the Pope ( by authority of the foresaid keyes ) hath most ample temporall power ouer all Princes and Kinges , and the Emperour himself , in order to a spirituall end , which he proueth there by many arguments . And this of the first iest about swordes to be made of keyes . 39. The second iest also is as wise and witty as this former , that when we found the same temporall sword or authority of S. Peter , and his successours vpon the words of Christ : Feed my sheep , he doth inferre that Princes also must be fed , and dietted corporally at the Popes discretion , and other such toyes , he not vnderstanding , as it seemeth , or rather dissembling the force of Catholicke argumentes drawne from those and other like Scriptures , both by later Doctors , and ancient Fathers , which this fellow turneth into scofs and contempt , or wicked railing , for that presently he falleth into these rages : O arrogant Glossers ! O impudent Glosers , and peruerters of the sacred Oracles of God! And why is all this heat of exclamations ? Forsooth for that in some Popes Bulles ( though corruptly & fraudulently alledged ) some mention is made of the great authority that was giuen to Elias , Elizeus , Ieremy , and other Prophetes , and especially to Christ himself , vpon earth to plant , destroy , pull vp , or punish where need should be ; and that this authority by allusion vnto the same wordes of Scripture , is applied to Christes Successour vpon earth , & affirmed to be left in the Christian Church , to be vsed when need shall require : and is this so great an impiety thinke yow ? 40. But he goeth on and saith : That next to this he will examine the antiquity of pretended Papall power from the Apostles time downward , and then produceth this assertion of ours : The Priestes ( saith the Romish pretence ) of the new Testament in the Priesthood of Christ haue more authority then that of the old law ouer Kinges to depose them , whervnto he adioyneth presently his owne spruse Ministeriall answere in these wordes : This is not probable except yow can shew some footinges either of Christ or his blessed Apostles , or their Holy Successours in the purer periods of times . And is not this answered as from a man of his coat ? Marke the phrase Of footings in purer periods , I will for footinges in this matter referre him to the large demonstrations which out of Scriptures , Doctours , Fathers , Councelles , and Ecclesiasticall Histories , the Authors by him heere often alledged Carerius , Bozius , Bellarmine , Sanders , Salmeron , and others doe aboundantly and substancially alledge ; & when he shall haue ouerthrowne or supplanted those footinges of theirs , which they 〈◊〉 fix throughout all periods of times from the beginning of Christian Religion vnto our dayes , and generall practice therof , then may the poore man get to haue some little footing for himself and his cause , which hitherto he hath none at all , as to any man whosoeuer , with any indifferency of iudgment , shall read ouer and examine his booke , will euidently appear ; yea though he compare but only that which himself alledgeth heere both in the text and margent , which seldome agree in true sense if you marke it well . But if yow would examine the Latin authorities cited in the said margent , with the originalles of the Authors themselues , you shall scarce euer finde them sincerly to agree , but that one fraud or other is vsed in their allegation , by chopping , changing , infarcing , leauing out , and other such sleightes and deceiptes , which though the breuity of this Treatise permit me not to examin , and lay forth at large in this place ; yet some we haue touched before , and some others shall we haue occasion to note afterwardes , and the Reader himself may vpon this warning make some little triall . 41. And as for the succession of times , which this Author T. M. pretendeth to bring downe from the Apostles dayes , ( not to ours ) but for a thousand yeares only after Christ , wherin he saith ; that no Pope can be shewed euer to haue had any temporall iurisdiction ouer any Emperour , King , or temporall Prince ; though Catholickes doe hold the later six hundred yeares also , to be of no lesse force for president of examples in the Church of God then the former thousand , yet are the instances so many and euident , which may be alledged against his former prescription of the said thousand yeares , as doe manifestly cōuince him of folly in that assertion , wherin I referre me to the collections and demonstrations therof by the foresaid Authors Carerius , Bozius , Bellarmine , Sanders , and others in the places heere quoted in the margent , but especially to the three that are not Iesuites , & to the first for all , to wit Carerius , that in diuers thinges wrote against the Iesuits , whoe in his second booke alleadgeth 10. or 12. examples out of antiquity for prouing his purpose . I remit me also to the many learned writinges , set forth of late about the cause of the Venetians , by Penia , Baronius , Bouius , Eugenius , Nardus & others , shewing the most euident right , which the Pope had , and hath to commaund them , as high Pastor of the Church , to recall certaine ciuill lawes made by them in preiudice of the said Church , and Ecclesiasticall State ; which Commandement we doubt not but God will moue that most excellent Cōmon-wealth finally to * obey , they being knowne to be so good and sound Catholickes , as they are , though for some time in regard of some temporall respectes they haue deferred to doe the same . 42. Many more pointes might be examined in this descēt of his throughout periodes of times ; but it would be ouerlong , and my intention is to giue a tast only or short view : for to examine the places cited out of Fathers of diuers ages , for proofe of his pretence , were time wholy lost . For that in effect they say nothing else , but that we graunt , which is that temporall Princes are to be respected and obeyed by Ecclesiasticall men also , but in temporall affaires . And as for his examples of some English Kings that seemed not to respect much the Popes authority in some occasions , which he hath borrowed out of Syr Edward Cookes Reportes , he may see the answere to that booke , and so I thinke remaine satisfied . Wherefore this shall suffice for the second head of argumentes throughout the new Testament , though after also in the examination of some falsifications we shall haue occasion to say more . Argumentes from Reason . §. 3. 43. VVHerfore to passe no further in the second point of argumentes vnder the new Testament , we shall say a word or two only of the third , to wit of proofes affirmed to be deduced by vs from force of reason , for so he intituleth them ; to wit , Popish Argumentes from reason . And to the end you may see his talent therin , wee shal examine only the third reason in this place which he declareth in these wordes : Except , saith the Romish pretence , there were a way of deposing Apostata Princes , God had not prouided sufficiētly for his Church ; & for this he citeth the Constitution Extrauagant of Pope Bonifacius , and saith ; This obiection is in your Extrauagantes , and so it may be called , because it rangeth extra , that is without the bondes of Godes ordinance &c. But as in all his other citations generally , he is neuer lightly true and sincere in all points , no not thrice ( I thinke veryly ) throughout all this lying booke of his ; so neither heere : and it would require a great volume alone to examine only some part of his leaues about this point of his shiftes and corruptions ; they are so many , and thicke and craftily hudled vp togeather . As for example heere , first this sentence is not in the Popes Extrauagant at all , but only in a certaine addition to the ordinary glosse or Commentary of Iohn Picard , which addition was made by Petrus Bertrandus a late writer . Secondly this Commentary saith nothing of deposing Apostata Princes , but only affirming the foresaid opinion of Canonistes to be true ; that Christ was Lord absolutly in this life ouer all , not only in spirituall authority , but in temporall also ; he inferreth therby Christ should not haue sufficiently prouided for the gouernment of his Church , & Kingdome vpon earth , Nisi vnicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset , except he had left some such one substitute or Vicar after him , as should be able to performe all these thinges , to wit , as belong both to spirituall and temporall power , according as necessity shall require : which later clause yow see , that T. M. cut of , as he added the other about Apostata Princes And thus much for his variety of corruptions in this little sentence , now to the thing it selfe . 44. The reason if we consider it without passion , is strong and weighty , and founded vpon the prouidence , wisedome , and goodnes of almighty God , who hauing prouided diligently , and admirably for the preseruation of all other thinges , and Communities by him created or ordained , should leaue the Christian Common-wealth vnfurnished of all remedy for the greatest euill of all others , that possibly can fall out , which is the corruption of the head , that may destroy the whole body wherof he is head , if it be not redressed . As if ( for examples sake ) the Prince would extirpate Christian Religion , bring in Mahometisme , or other such abhomination , ouerthrow all good lawes , plant and establish vice , dissolution , Atheisme , or commit some other such exorbitant wickednes , as were not tolerable , wherunto notwithstanding mans frailty , without the helpe of Godes grace , is , or may be subiect : In this case ( saith the obiection ) some remedy must haue byn left by Christ , or els his diuine wisdome and prouidence had not prouided sufficiently for the preseruation of his Kingdome , as by light of nature he left remedy to the body of euery Common-wealth vnder the Gentiles before his cōming , which is euident both by Plato , Aristotle , Cicero , & others that wrote of Common-wealthes in those dayes , and did alwayes presume , that the said Common-wealthes had sufficient authority by law of nature to restraine exorbitant Princes , when they were perilous to the publicke : and the same haue held al other learned men that euer wrote of that argument afterward . 45. But as for our Catholicke learned men , both Deuines and Lawiers , though they affirme ( as out of T. M. his frequent allegations of them in this his Treatise is euident ) that all obedience both externall and internall , in conscience and workes , is by Godes ordinance due vnto them ; yet that in such publicke perilles of the Church & Common-wealth as before are mentioned , when they fal out , Christ our Sauiour hath not left his Church wholy remedilesse , but rather , that besides the naturall right which ech Kingdome hath to defend themselues , in certaine cases , he left also supreame power in his high Priest and immediate substitute , to direct and moderate that power , and to adde also of his owne , whē extraordinary need requireth , though with great deliberation , consultation , weighty motiues , lawfull meanes , and other like circumstances . 46. This , I say , is Catholicke doctrine , but what Protestants doctrine is , were hard to set downe : for that they speake therin as time and occasion serueth them , hauing no rule or Canon at all wherto they are bound . For what was both their doctrine and practice , when , and where they were discontented with their Princes , both in England , Scotland , Flanders , Geneua and France , is euident by that which before we haue alledged in the first & fourth Chapters of this booke : now this man telleth vs another tale for the time present , but what he would say or doe , if he were in the discontented occasion of those his fellow-Authors , that wrote so sharpely and violently , no man can tell : but let vs see now at length , how substantially he doth satisfy this obiectiō , for he giueth three or foure seuerall solutions therunto ; you shall heare what ones they are . 47. The first is from Godes ordinance ( saith he ) for by the word of God , as your Cunerus Deuinely reasoneth , which is not partiall , nor by the self pleasing fancy of sensuall affection , must this question be determined ; though therfore it may seeme to vs a decree of nature , for euery one to defend himself and the thinges he doth enioy ; yet the Law of God doth forbid to doe this by taking armes against the higher powers &c. So T. M. out of our Cunerus . And it is well that he alloweth this Catholicke writer to reason deuinely , so far forth as he may seeme to make for him , though in truth in the cōclusion of his discourse , he is wholy against him . For as first his whole speech in this seauenth Chapter by him cited , is expresly against the Hollanders , that vnder diuers pretences , both of Religion , and Scriptures for the same liberty of their countrey , and the like , tooke armes against their true naturall King ; which he reproueth , and condemneth very piously , and learnedly throughout this whole Chapter , and in the next ensuing , whose title is , Quid in Tyrannide subdit is agendum sit , What subiectes ought to doe in case of tyranny , he sheweth two sortes of Tyranny and Tyrantes , the one that inuadeth vniustly another mans dominions against the will & authority of his King and Prince , the other that leauing the office of a King and good Prince in protecting his people , and Religion & iustice among them , turneth himselfe wholy to their affliction and oppression : and that in the former case , the people are taught by many examples of Scriptures , to resist by armes where they can ; but in the second much more moderation is to be vsed , all meanes of humble suite , intreaty , intercession , prayer to God , amendment of life and pacification to be vsed ; Quod si haec non iuuent ( saith he ) & Superiorem in tempor alibus , vti Reges , Princeps non agnoscit , tunc supremus Ecclesiae Pastor interpellandus occurrit , qui bonis & aequis subditorum querelis audit is , plura Deo cooperante ratione & auctoritate praestare poterit quàm vnquam 〈◊〉 armis impetrabit ; but if these meanes doe not help , saith Cunerus , and that the Prince doe acknowledge no Superiour in temporall causes , as Kinges doe not , then is the Supreme Pastor of the Church to be called vpon , who hauing heard the iust & good complaintes of the Subiects , God assisting him , shall be able to effectuate more by reason and authority with their Prince , then euer the people themselues should haue obteyned by force of armes . Thus he . 48. And now , will T. M. allow this also for deuinely spoken ? If he doe , then we differ not in opinion : If he doe not , why doth he so often , and continually cull out , and cut of sentences of Authors , that write directly against him , as this Bishop Cunerus , the Lawier Carerius , the Deuine Bozius , the Iesuites Bellarmine , Salmeron , Azor , and others ? And yet I must admonish the Reader heere againe , that if he compare the text it selfe of Cunerus with that which heere T. M. setteth downe in Latin , and then the Latin with that he Englisheth , he shall find such mangling vpon mangling , by cutting of , leauing out , & altering whole sentēces , as he will see that this man can scarce deale truly in any thing . And thus much for his first answere out of Cunerus , making much more against him , then for him , as yow haue seene . 49. And I leaue to discusse the Authority of S. Augustine which out of Cunerus he also alleadgeth ( for otherwise then out of our Authors bookes he hath little or nothing in any matter ) it being no lesse mangled by this man , then is the text of Cunerus it selfe , as euery one will finde that shall read Cunerus ; not so much as one note of [ &c. ] being left any where lightly , to signify that somewhat is cut of , but all running togeather , as if it were continuall speach in the Author ; whereas in deed they be but peeces & scraps ioyned togeather , and those also commonly with much corruption : wherof I dare auouch that the Author shall finde aboue a hundred examples in this fraudulent Reply , which is wholy patched vp out of the distracted sentences of our owne Authors by this art . 50. But now to his second answere to the former obiection , that Gods prouidence must needes haue lef't some remedy for the danger that may occurre by euill gouernment of Princes &c. The second is ( saith he ) the consideration of examples of the primitiue Church , when for the space of three hundred yeares it was in grieuous persecution , there was found no power on earth to restraine that earthly power , was therfore God wanting to his Church ? God forbid . Nay rather he was not wanting , for it is written : Vertue is perfected in infirmity . And againe : As gold is purged in the fire ; so by affliction &c. Because when the outward man suffereth , the inward man is renewed , and when I am weake , then am I strong . So he . And doe yow see how patient and meeke this man is become now , when there is nothing to suffer ? did his Protestant-Authors before mencioned write or teach this doctrine whē they were pressed by their Catholicke Princes to be quiet ? Or if this should be preached now at this day in Holland , Zeland , Frizeland , Hungary , Polonia , Zweueland & Transiluania , where actually Protestantes are in armes against their naturall and lawfull Princes , would it be receaued as currant and Euangelicall ? Would the examples of primitiue martyrs , when there was scarce any temporall common-wealth extant among Christians , be sufficient to prescribe a forme of patience & sufferance to these men ? Why doe they not then put it in practice ? And why cease they not , according to this mans doctrine from so notorious tumultuations against their lawfull Princes ? Why is not this doctrine of the Scripture of perfecting their vertue by bearing and suffering admitted by them ? I confesse it ought to be soe with all particuler men in their afflictions , oppressions , and tribulations , and so teach our Doctors , as before yow haue heard ; though when the hurt and danger concerneth a common wealth established in Christian Religion , there be other considerations to be had , as before hath byn set downe . 51. But Protestantes obserue neither the one , nor the other , but both in particuler and common , breake forth when they are streyned or discontēted , into the vttermost violence they can : and their Doctores are ready presently to defend them ; yea and to goe to the feild with them if need be against their Princes , as experience hath taught vs both in Zwitzerland , Scotland , France , and other places . Wherfore this pretended preaching of patience and sufferance of T. M. in this place both in his outward and inward man , is to small purpose . 52. Wherfore his third answere is to the former obiection The view ( as he saith ) of our Popish principles , wherby we teach , that the Pope may not be iudged by any person vpon earth , whether secular , or Ecclesiasticall , nor by a General Councel , though he should doe something contrary to the vniuersall State of the Church , neglect the Canons , spare offenderes , oppresse innocentes and the like : For which he citeth both Bellarmine , Carerius and Azor : and then addeth , that the Pope cannot be deposed for any of these , no not though ( saith he to vse the wordes of your Pope himselfe , one placed in the calendes of your martyrs ) he should carry many people with himselfe to hell ; yet no mortall creature may presume to say , why doe yow so . Thus he . 53. Whervnto I answere first , that all which Bellarmine , Carerius , Azorius , and other Catholicke writers doe affirme of the Popes preheminency of authority immediatly vnder Christ , so as he hath no Superiour Iudge betweene Christ and him , that may sit in iudgment ouer him , or giue sentence vpon him for matters of yll life , tendeth only to shew , that as he receiueth his supreame charge immediatly from Christ , so by him must he be iudged , & not by man , though the same Authors in the same places ( which this man of purpose omitteth and concealeth ) doe expresly affirme , that for the Crimes of Apostacy or heresy he may and must be deposed , or rather is ipso facto depriued of his office and dignity , and so may be declared by the Church in that case , to wit , aswell by Princes and Potentates both Ecclesiasticall and temporall , as by all Christian people , who in that case are bound to concurre to his expulsion and depriuation . And albeit in the other of lesser vices or infirmities of life , he haue no humaine Superiour to iudge him : yet is that of Christ himselfe so much the more seuere , & dreadfull , and his holy prouidence hath byn euer and wil be such , as these personall defectes in his supreame Pastor , shall not so much preiudicate his office , but that alwaies he shal teach his flocke that which may helpe them to their saluation , howsoeuer he liue himselfe . And of this he hauing forewarned vs with expresse premonition , the performance lieth vpon his charge whose power is omnipotent , and fidelity such , as in his promises cannot possibly faile . And this to the first point . 54. Now to the second wherin he saith , that one of our Popes , placed also in the Calends of our Martyrs , doth affirme that though a Pope should carry many people with himselfe to hell , no mortall man may presume to say , why doe yow so ? I doe greatly maruaile with what conscience , or if not conscience , with what forehead at least these men can write and print , and reiterate so often in their books , thinges that they know , or may know to be meerly false and forged ! Is not this a signe of obstinate wilfulnes , and that neither God , nor truth is sought for by them , but only to maintaine a parte or faction , with what sleight or falshood soeuer ? I find this very obiection set forth in print not many yeares gone by 〈◊〉 Francis Hastings in his VVatch-word and Defence therof , and the same auouched stoutly after him for a time by Matthew Sutcliffe the Minister , Aduocate & Proctor of that defence ; but afterward I find the same so consuted at large by the VVarn-word , and so many lies , falshoodes , and euident fraudes discouered therin , as the said M. Sutcliffe in his Reply intituled A full and round answere , thought good roundly to let this passe , without any answere at all , which I can find in his said booke , though I haue vsed some diligence in search therof ; which I doe adde , for that he changeth the whole order of answearing from the method of his Aduersary , to the end not to be found , & so answereth nothing in order or place , as it is set downe by him whome he pretendeth to answere , but rather taking a new , vast and wild discourse to himselfe , snatcheth heere a word , and there a word , to carpe at , not as they ly in his aduersaries booke , but as it pleaseth him to admit them , now from the end of the booke , then from the beginning , then from the middle : and with this substantiall methode , he taketh vpon him to answere all bookes that come in his way ; for so he hath answered of late the booke also of Three Conuersions of England , and may doe easely all that is written by Catholickes , if carping only and scolding be answering . 55. Wherfore to this instance heere resumed by T. M. though I must remit him , or rather the Reader for larger satisfaction to the said Catholike Treatise , intituled The VVarn-word ; yet heere breifly I am to tell him first , that he erreth grossely in the affirming in this place , the Author of this Canon cited by him Si Papa , to haue byn a Pope , for that the said Canon was gathered by Gratian out of the sayinges of S. Boniface martyr , as in the title of the said Canon is expressed , which Boniface was neuer Pope , but a vertuous learned English man , that liued aboue 850. yeares gone , and was the first Archbishop of Mentz or Moguntia in Germany ; of which people and countrey he is called by all ancient writers The Apostle , for that he first publickly conuerted that nation , erected that Primate sea , and suffered glorious martyrdome by the Gentils for the faith of Christ. Wherfore the scoffe of T. M. calling him our Pope placed in the Calendes of our martyrs , besides the ignorance , tasteth also of much prophane malice and impiety . 56. Secondly I say that these wordes of his are corruptly set downe , as euer commonly elswhere , and that both in Latin and English. In Latin , for that he leaueth out the beginning of the Canon , which sheweth the 〈◊〉 therof , whose title is : Damnatur Apostolicus qui suae & fraternae salutis est negligens : The Pope is damned which is negligent in the affaire of his owne saluation and of his brethren ; and then beginneth the Canon Si Papa suae & fraternae salutis negligens &c. Shewing that albeit the Pope haue no Superiour Iudge in this world , which may by authority checke him vnlesse he fall into heresy ; yet shall his damnation be greater then of other sinners , for that by reason of his high dignity , he draweth more after him to perdition , then any other . Wherby we may perceaue that this Canon was not written to flatter the Pope , as Protestantes would haue it seeme , but to warne him rather of his perill , togeather with his high authority . 57. After this the better to couer this pious meaning of S. Boniface T. M. alleadging two lines of the same in Latin , he cutteth of presently a third line , that immediatly ensueth , to wit : Cum ipso plagis multis in aeternum vapulatur us , that the Pope is to suffer eternall punishmentes , and to be scourged with many stripes , togeather with the diuell himselfe , if by his euill , or negligent life , he be the cause of others perdition ; which threat this man hauing cut of , he ioineth presently againe with the antecedent wordes , these as following immediatly in the Canon ; Huius culpas redarguere praesumet nemo mortalium ; this mans faultes ( to wit the Pope ) no mortall man shall or may presume to reprehend , and there endeth . In which short phrase are many fraudes : for first he leaueth out istic heere in this life , and then for praesumit in the present tense , that no man doth presume to checke him in respect of the greatnes of his dignity , this man saith praesumet , in the future tense , that is no man shall presume , or as him selfe translateth it may presume to controlle him , which is a malitious falshood . And lastly he leaueth out all that immediatly followeth conteyning a reason of all that is said : Quia cunctos ipse iudicaturus , à nemine est iudicandus , nisi deprehendatur à fide deuius &c. For that wheras he is Iudge of all other men , he cannot himselfe be Iudged by any , except he be found to swarue from the true faith . Heere then is nothing but fraudulent citing , and abusing of Authors . 58. But now thirdly remaineth the greatest corruption & abuse of all in his English translation , which is that which most importeth his simple Reader that looketh not into the Latin , and this is , that he translateth the former sentence of the Canon thus as before yow haue heard : Though he should carry many people with him to hell ; yet no mortall creature may presume to say why doe yow so ? But in the Latin neither heere , nor in the Canon it selfe is there any such interrogation at all , as why doe yow so ? And therfore I may aske T. M. why doe yow ly so ? Or why doe yow delude your Reader so ? Or why do yow corrupt your Author so ? Or why doe yow translate in English for the abusing of your Reader , that which neither your selfe doe set downe in your Latin text , nor the Canon it selfe by yow cited hath it at all ? Is not this wilfull , and malicious fraude ? Wherin when yow shall answere me directly and sincerly , it shall be a great discharge of your credit with those , who in the meane space will iustly hold yow for a deceauer . 59. His fourth answere to the former argument of Gods prouidence , is the difference ( he saith ) of Kings and Popes in this point , for that the Papall power ( saith he ) which will be thought spirituall if it be euill , may be the bane of soules ; the power of Princes is but corporall , therfore feare them not because they can goe no further then the body . Thus he . And did euer man heare so wise a reason ? And cannot euill Kinges and Princes be the cause of corrupting soules also if they should liue wickedly , & permit or induce others to doe the same ? And what if they should be of an euill Religion as yow will say Q. Mary , and K. Henry were , and all Kinges vpward for many hundred yeares togeather , who by Statutes and lawes forced men to follow the Religiō of that time , did all this touch nothing the soule ? who would say it but T. M ? But he goeth forward in his application , for that bodily Tyranny ( saith he ) worketh in the Godly patience , but the spirituall Tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule . This now is as good as the former , and is a difference without diuersity , so farre as concerneth our affaire , that a man may with patience , if he will , resist both the one and the other . And euen now we haue seene that when any Pope shal decline from the common receaued faith of Christendome , he cannot captiuate other men , but is deposed himselfe . Wherfore this mans conclusion is very simple , saying : Therfore heere is need , according to Gods prouidence , of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill , wherof it is written , if the salte want his saltenesse , it is good for nothing , but to be cast vpon the donghill . Marke then that concerning the spirituall , that God hath ordeined eiiciatur foras , let it be cast out ; but concerning the temporall , resiste not the power . 60. Lo heere , and doe not these men find Scriptures for all purposes ? This fellow hath found a text , that all spirituall power , when it misliketh them , must be cast to the donghill , and no temporall must be resisted ; and yet he that shall read the first place by him alleadged out of S. Matthew shall find that the lacke of saltenesse is expresly meant of the want of good life and edification , especially in Priestes and Preachers ; and yet is it no precept , as this man would haue it , to cast them al to the donghill : but that salte leesing his taste , is fit for nothing but to that vse . S. Paul in like manner to the Romanes doth not more forbid resisting of temporall authority , then of spirituall : but commaundeth to obey both the one and the other ; which this man applieth only to temporall , which he would haue exalted , obeyed , and respected , and the other contemned , and cast to the donghill . Oh that he had byn worthy to haue byn the scholler of S. Chrysostome , S. Gregory Nazianzen , or S. Ambrose before cited , who so highly preferred spirituall authority before temporall , how would they haue rated him , if he would not haue byn better instructed , or more piously affected ? No doubt eiecissent foras , they would haue cast him forth to the donghill in deed , and there haue left him , and so doe we in this matter , not meaning to follow him any further , except he reasoned more groundedly , or dealt more sincerly . 61. Yet in one word to answere his comparison , we say , that both temporall , & spirituall Magistrates may doe hurte both to body and soule : for as the temporall may preiudice also the soule , as now hath byn said ; so may the spirituall afflict in like manner the body , as when the Pope or Bishoppes doe burne Heretikes : so as in this respect , this distinction of T. M. is to no purpose ; yet doe we also say , that when spirituall authority is abused , it is more pernicious , & preiudiciall then the other : Quia corruptio optimi est pessima : The best thinges become worst , when they are peruerted : and spirituall diseases , especially belonging to faith , be more pernicious then corporall : for which cause God had so much care to prouide for the preuention therof in his Christian Church , for the conseruation of true faith , by the authority , vnion , visibility , & succession of the said Church , and diligence of Doctores , Teachers , Synodes , Councels , and other meanes therin vsed , and by his assistance of infallibility to the head therof : which head though in respect of his eminent authority , he haue no Superiours to Iudge or chastise him , except in case of heresy , as hath byn said ; yet hath he many and effectuall meanes wherby to be admonished , informed , stirred vp , and moued : so as he being but one in the world , and furnished with these helpes , bringeth farre lesse danger , and inconuenience , then if all temporall Princes ( who are many ) had the like priuiledge and immunity . And this euery reasonable man out of reason it selfe will easily see & consider . 62. As also this other point of no small or meane importance , to wit , that English Protestantes pretending temporall Princes to be supreame , and without Iudge or Superiour in matters of Religion , as well as ciuill and secular , they incurre a farre greater inconuenience therby , then they would seeme to lay vpon vs. For that if any temporall Prince as Supreame in both causes , would take vpon him the approbation , or admission of any sect or heresy whatsoeuer , they haue no remedy at all according to the principles of their doctrine ; wheras we say , the Pope in this case may and must be deposed by force of his subiectes , & all Christian Princes ioined togeather against him : so as in place of one generall Pope , which in this case is vnder authority , they make so many particuler Popes , as are particuler Kings & temporall Princes throughout all Christendome , that are absolute , and consequently without all remedy for offences temporall or spirituall in manners or faith . 63. And now let vs imagine what variety of sectes and schismes would haue byn at this day in Christianity , if for a thousand and six hundred yeares , which Christian Religion hath endured , this doctrine of liberty and immunity of temporall Princes to belieue , hold , and defend what they list , had byn receaued and practised for good and currant vnto this time . From which singuler inconuenience , danger , and desperate desolation , the doctrine & beliefe of the only Bishop of Rome his Supreame authority , and exercise therof , hath chiefly deliuered vs , as to all men is euident . And this only reason were sufficient in all reason to refute this mans ydle confutation of that Supremacy heere pretended ; which confutation standing vpon so feeble and ridiculous groundes , as now in part yow haue seene , & supported principally by certaine new shifts , and iugglinges scarcely vsed by any before , by casting out shaddowes of our Catholicke Authors sayinges and sentences , as making for him ; though I meane to passe no further in impugning his said grondes , which are of so small weight as yow haue seene : yet doe I not thinke it amisse to adde another seuerall Chapter for better discouering of the said iugglinges vsed by him in this short Treatise , not conteyning much aboue twenty 〈◊〉 in all . For by this little yow may gather what a volume might be framed of his false dealings , if we would dwell any longer therin . A BRIEF VIEVV OF CERTAINE NOTORIOVS , FALSE AND FRAVDVLENT DEALINGS , VSED BY T.M. In this his short seuerall Treatise against the Popes Supremacy : As also sundry examples of the like proceeding in the former Part of his deceiptfull Reply . CHAP. VI. IT is the saying both of Philosophers and Deuines , Bonum nisi bene fiat , bonum non esse , A good thing except it be well & rightly done , is not good : As for example if a man would relieue the necessity of poore and distressed people with almes gotten by stealth or robbery ; albeit giuing of alms of it selfe be a good thing ; yet for that it is not heere lawfully performed , in this case it is not good nor lawfull : So M. Thomas Morton taking vpon him to confute the Popes Supremacy ouer Kinges and Princes , thought no doubt to doe a good worke therin , at least-wise bonum vtile , a profitable good thing for himself , in regard of some fauour or beneuolence which he might hope to gaine with some Prince therby to his preferment ; but not performing the same by lawfull meanes of truth , but of sleightes ( not withstanding to his Maiesty he tearmeth himself the Minister of simple truth ) though it should proue vtile , yet not honestum ; that is , for his gaine , but not for his credit or conscience , and consequently deserueth rather disgrace then estimation , euen with those whome most he desired to gratify in that affaire . 2. For demonstration wherof , though I suppose to haue said sufficient before , both in the second , fourth , and fifth Chapters by occasion of matters that occurred in discussion betweene vs ; yet now hauing determined with my self , to passe on no further in the particuler refutatiō of this his Treatise , as a thing not worth the time to be lost therin , and handled far better by diuers of his owne side before him , namely by M. Iewell , M. Horne , D. Iohn Reinoldes , M. Bilson and some others in their bookes of this subiect ; I thought good notwithstanding for some kinde of recompence of this my breuity in answering so simple and idle a Treatise , to ad some few examples more in this place of other corruptions and falsifications practized by him in this his confutation : not of all , for that alone would require a great booke , but of some competent number , wherby the Reader may ghesse at the rest ; & his Maiesty take some proofe of the extraordinary vanity of that vaunt , wherwith he presented himself to his Highnes , in the very first entrance of his Epistle dedicatory , in so constant assurance of an vpright conscience ( to vse his owne wordes ) as that he would willingly remit that iust aduantage against his aduersary , which the difference betweene a Minister of simple truth , and a professed Equiuocator did offer vnto him . Now then let vs enter to the examination it self . 3. Wherin only the Reader is to be aduertised , that wheras this man by a new deuise of his owne , doth pretend to put downe the sayings of our Catholicke writers for his purpose , and that both in Latin and English , the one in the text , and the other in the margent , pretending therby to make them speake cōtrary one to the other , A course ( saith he to the Kinges Maiesty ) which I professe in all disputes ; he dealeth so perfidiously therin to bring them to debate , as commonly the simple fellow committeth three seuerall sortes of fraudes and falshood in most of his allegations . First in corrupting the meaning of the Authors , alledging them quite against their owne whole drift , and intended discourse , and conclusion therof . Secondly in setting downe fraudulently the Latin text , by peecing & patching their sentences togeather that stand farre a sunder in the Authors themselues , & by dismembring others that were coherent before , as often now wee haue complained . Thirdly in translating the same by like fraude into English , vsing manifest violence to the wordes and sense it selfe , to get therby some shew of aduantage , or at least - wise to say somewhat . All which sortes and kindes of shifts yow shall see expressed in the examples that are to ensue . 4. In the second page of his pretended confutation ; he hath these wordes ; In the old Testament the Iesuites are forced to allow , that the King was supreame ouer the Priestes in spirituall affaires and ordering Priestes . For proofe wherof he citeth in the margent Salmeron a Iesuit , a very learned man , that hath left written in our dayes many volumes vpon the Ghospells , Epistles of S. Paul , and other partes of Scriptures , and was one of the first ten , that ioined themselues with the famous holy man Ignatius de Loyola , for the beginning of that Religious order ; in which citation diuers notable corruptions are to be seene . First , for that Salmeron proueth the quite contrary in the place by this man quoted , to wit , that neuer Kinges were head of the Church or aboue Priestes by their ordinary Kingly authority in Ecclesiasticall matters , in the new or old Testament , and hauing proued the same largly , he commeth at length to set downe obiections to the contrary , and to solue & answere them , saying : Sed contra hanc solidam veritatem &c. But now against this sound truth by me hitherto confirmed , I know that many thinges may be obiected , which we are diligently to confute . First then may be obiected that Kinges in the old Testament did sometimes prescribe vnto Priestes what they were to doe in sacred thinges , as also did put some negligent Priestes from the execution of their office . To which is answered : Vbi id euenisset , mirum esse non debere ; If it had so fallen out , it had byn no maruaile : for that the Synagogue of the Iewes , albeit it conteined some iust men , yet was it called rather an earthly , then a heauenly Kingdome , insomuch as S. Augustine doth doubt , whether in the old Testament , the Kingdome of heauen was euer so much as named , and much lesse promised for reward ; and therfore those things that were then done amōg them , foreshewed only or prefigured diuine thinges that were to succeed vnder the new Testament , the other being not diuine but humane and earthly . So Salmeron . 5. Heere then are sundry important corruptions , & fraudes vttered by T.M. the one that the Iesuites , and namely Salmeron , are inforced to allow the temporall King to haue byn Supreme ouer the high Priest in spirituall matters , vnder the old law ; wheras he doth expressely affirme and prooue the contrary , both out * of the Scripture it selfe , by the sacrifice appointed more worthy for the Priest , then the Prince , & many other testimonies , as that he must take the law & interpretation therof at the Priestes hands , that he must ingredi & egredi ad verbum Sacerdotis , goe in and out , and proceed in his affaires by the word and direction of the Priest , and the like ; as also by the testimony of Philo and Ioseph , two learned Iewes , and other reasons handled at large in this very disputation , and in the self same place from whence this obiection is taken . And this is the first falsification concerning the Authours meaning and principall drift . 6. The second corruption is in the wordes , as they ly in the Latin copy , & as they are by me before mentioned : Vbi id euenisset mirum esse non debere , If any such thing had fallen out , as was obiected , to wit that Kinges sometimes had prescribed to the Priests what they should doe in Ecclesiasticall things , deposed some &c. it had byn no maruaile , for somuch as their Ecclesiasticall Kingdome or Synagogue was an earthly and imperfect thing , but yet this proueth not that it was so , but only it is spoken vpon a supposition : which suppositiō this Minister that he might the more cunningly shift of and auoid , left cut of purpose the most essentiall wordes therof Vbi id euenisset if that had happened &c. as also for the same cause to make thinges more obscure , after those words of Salmeron that stand in his text : Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur terrenum potius quàm caeleste regnum ; The Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Iewes , was called rather an earthly then a heauenly Kingdome ( wheras contrary-wise the Ecclesiasticall power in the Christian Church is euery where called Celestiall ) after those wordes ( I say ) this man cutteth of againe many lines that followed , togeather with S. Augustines iudgmēt before touched , which serued to make the Authors meaning more plaine , and yet left no signe of ( &c. ) wherby his Reader might vnderstand that somewhat was omitted , but 〈◊〉 againe presently , as though it had imediatly followed , 〈◊〉 cùm populus Dei constet corpore & animo , carnalis pars in veteri populo primas tenebat : Wheras Godes people doth consist of body and minde , the carnall or bodily part did cheifly preuaile among the Iewes , and heerwith endeth , as though nothing more had ensued of that matter , thrustnig out these wordes that immediatly followed , and made the thing cleere which are , Et ad spiritualia significanda constituebaiur , and that kinde of earthly power was appointed to signify the spirituall that was to be in the new Testament : wherby is euidently seene that Salmeron vnderstood not by carnalis pars and regnum terrenum , the temporall Kingdome of Iury , as this Minister doth insinuate to make the matter odious ; but the Ecclesiasticall gouernment of the Synagogue vnder the old law , in respect of the Ecclesiasticall power in the new , wherof the other was but an earthly figure or signification . 7. But now the third corruption , & most egregious of all , is in his English translation out of the Latin wordes of Salmeron : for thus he translateth them in our name : In the Synagogue of the Iewes ( saith Salmeron ) was a State rather earthly then heauenly ; so that in that people ( which was as in the body of a man , consisting of body and soule ) the carnall part was more eminent , meaning the temporall to haue byn supreame . In which translation are many seuerall shifts and fraudes . For wheras Salmeron saith Synagoga Iudeorum dicebatur potius terrenum quàm caeleste regnum , the Synagogue or Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes was called rather an earthly , then a heauenly Kingdome ; he translateth it , the Synagogue of the Iewes was a State rather earthly , then heauenly ; and this to the end he might apply the word of earth to the temporal Prince , and heauenly to the Iudaicall Priestes , which is quite from Salmerons meaning . Secondly those other wordes of Salmeron being Cùm populus Dei constet ex corpore & animo , wheras the people of God doe consist of body and minde , meaning therby aswell Christians as Iewes , and that the Iewes are as the bodily or carnall part of the man , and the Christians the spirituall , and consequently their Ecclesiasticall authority earthly , and ours heauenly ; this fellow to deceaue his Reader , putteth out first the word Dei , the people of God and then translateth it , in that people ( to wit the Iewes ) the carnall part was the more eminent , meaning ( saith he ) the tēporall ; which is false , for he speaketh expressely of the Ecclesiasticall power among the Iewes , which he calleth carnall and terrene , in respect of the spirituall Ecclesiasticall among the Christians , and not the temporall or Kingly power vnder the old Testament , as this man to make vs odious to temporall Princes , as debasing their authority , would haue it thought . And Salmerons cōtraposition or antithesis is not betweene the temporall and Ecclesiasticall gouernment among the Iewes ; but betweene their Ecclesiasticall gouernment and ours , that of the Synagogue , and this of the Christian Church , wherof the one he saith to be terrene & earthly , the other spirituall and heauenly , the one infirme , the other powerfull ouer soules &c. So as all these sortes and kindes of corruptions being seene in this one little authority , yow may imagine what will be found in the whole booke , if a man had so much patience and time to leese , as to discusse the same exactly through . 8. A little after this againe , he bringeth in an example of the King of Israell Ozias , who for presuming to exercise the Priests office in offering of incense , being first reprehended , and resistest for the same by Azarias the high Priest , and fourescore other Priestes with him in the Temple , was for his presumption presently and publickly in all their sightes punished by God , and stroken with a leprosy , and therupon remoued by the authority of the said high Priest , first from the Temple , and common conuersation of men , and then also from the gouernment or administration of his Kingdome , the same being committed to his sonne Ioathan all the dayes of his Fathers life : about which example , M. Morton first of all bringeth in Doctor Barkley dissenting from Doctor Boucher in this matter , about the deposition of this King , the one holding that he was deposed , the other not , but only that as a sicke man was debarred of the administration . Doctor Bouchers wordes are these cited by D. Barkley : Sic Oziam Azarias de Templo primùm , mox etiant de Regno eiecit . So Azarias the high Priest did cast out King Ozias , first frō the Temple , and then from his Kingdome . Which the other will not haue to be vnderstood that the title and interest of his Kingdome was taken from him , but only the administration , which in effect is no great difference of opinions ; for that Bellarmine also talking of this matter saith : Cùm regni administratione priuatus fuerit , wheras he was depriued of the administration of the Kingdome , which after in other words he expressing , saith , Regnandi authoritate , he was depriued of the authority of actual raigning , or exercising that authority : wherunto the wordes of the Scripture seene plainly to agree , which are these : Festinatò expulerunt &c. Azarias and the rest of the Priestes did hastily driue him out of the Temple , and he himself being terrified with that which he felt to be the punishment of God , made hast to goe forth . VVherfore this King Ozias remaining a leper vnto the day of his death , did dwell in a separate howse , and he was full of leprosy , for the which he was cast forth of the howse of our Lord : so as his sonne Ioathan did gouerne the howse of the King , & iudge the people of the land . 9. Out of which wordes of Scripture as also out of the Booke of Leuiticus , where the law saith , That whosoeuer shal be spotted with leprosy , and is separated at the apointment of the Priest , shall dwell alone without the tentes , Bellarmine doth gather that this separation of King Ozias was not voluntary but by prescript order of the said high Priest Azarias , and that consequently he was depriued also by the same sentence and authority , of his gouernment and administration of the Kingdome ; against which T. M. bringeth in a great tempestuous storme of wordes , and warre of the foresaid Doctor Barkley Scottishman , against Cardinall Bellarmine , as though he had refuted him with some contumely and contempt ; wheras Doctor Barkley neither nameth nor meaneth Bellarmine , but only Boucher vpon his wordes before recited , against whome he being , according to his custome , somewhat vehement in speech ( the difference in substance being little or nothing as yow haue seene ) T. M. endeauoreth by his sleightes to increase or aggrauate the same . For wheras Doctor Barkley presuming Boucher to vnderstand by those his wordes De regno eiecit , that Azarias had taken from K. Ozias the name and right of Kingdome , saith vnto him ; Magna sanè imprudentia vel impudentia est , ea scriptis mandare , quae manifestis scripturae testimoniis redarguuntur : It is truly a great imprudence or impudēcy , to cōmit those thinges to writing which are controlled by manifest testimonies of Scripture ; There our Minister blotteth out in his Latin text the word imprudentia , and will haue only to stand impudentia to set them further out then they be , which me thinkes was some impudency also in him ; and againe when the said Barkley writeth immediatly after the former wordes ; Malo te negligentiae quàm nequitiae reum facere , I had rarher accuse you of negligence then of malice ; these wordes also not without some malice T. M. striketh out , and pittifully mangleth the whole discourse , putting in and putting out at his pleasure , and yet all set downe in his booke as the continuall speech of the Author . 10. Heere then yow see how many wilfull corruptions there be , first to bring in Doctor Barkley rating of Cardinall Bellarmine with magna sanè impudentia est &c. Wheras he talketh not against Bellarmine at all , nor indeed is Bellarmines manner of speech contrary to that which Barkley will haue to be the meaning of the History ; for that Barkley doth not so much stand vpon the thing in controuersy for Priestes authority , but vpon the manner of proofe by the examples alledged by D. Boucher of Ieroboam , Ozias , Athalia , and some other Princes , in whose punishment God vsed Priestes for meanes and instrumentes . Non ignoro ( saith he ) Ius esse Ecclesiae in Reges & Principes Christianos , nec quale ius sit ignoro , sed id tam alienis argument is ostendi prorsus ignoro ; imò non ostendi planè scio : I am not ignorant , saith Doctor Barkley , that the Church hath right ouer Christian Kinges & Princes , nor am I ignorant what manner of right it is ; yet doe I not see how the same may be proued by such impertinent argumentes ; nay I know rather that it cannot be so proued . Which wordes going but very few lines before those that T. M. alledgeth , he could not but see , and yet left them out , and then beginneth against vs his English text thus : Your owne Doctor calleth this your assertion most false , and contrary to the direct History of the Byble , to wit , that Ozias was deposed of his Kingdome by Azarias the high Priest. 11. But now yow haue seene that howsoeuer it may be called , either deposition , depriuation , restraint , sequestration or inhibition ; certaine it is , that he was separated from the administration of the gouernment by 〈◊〉 the high Priest , and whether his sonne during his life were truly King or only regent or Gouernour vnder his Father , or whether he were bound to consult with his said Father in his greatest affaires , & take his approbation and commission , that point , which is most important , Doctor Barkley proueth not , but only that Ozias notwithstanding his separation was called King during his life , which letted not , but that his sonne might be truly King also , during his Fathers dayes : for otherwise D. Barkley might aswell say , that his Maiesty now of England ( for example ) was not King of Scotland , whiles his Mother the Queene liued in her exile , which yet I thinke he will not say ; and therfore to vse the wordes impudentia , nequitia , and falsissimum in a matter so doubtfull , might perhaps haue byn omitted ; but much more ought to haue byn the multiplicity of falsities vsed by T. M. in relating the same , & namely in bringing in Cardinall Bellarmine with such ardent desire to haue him contradicted & disgraced , as he not only applieth to him that which was spokē against another , but reciting also two lines of his speech , besides other manglinges , shufleth in falsly two or three words , that ouerthrow the whole controuersy , to wit separatus extra Regnum , that King Ozias was separated by Azarias the Priest forth of the Kingdome : wheras Bellarmine hath not these wordes extra Regnum at al , but only that he was separated from the Citty extra vrbem in domo solitaria forth of the Citty in a solitary house , which thing the Scripture it self before related doth testify ; wherby yow see what botching there is to bring matters to his purpose ; and yet will he needs stile him self The Minister of simple truth . 12. It followeth in the 16. page thus : Your deuise ( saith he ) of exemption of Priestes ( from the iurisdiction of temporall Princes in certaine cases ) is to crude to be disgested by any reasonable Deuine , for ( as your Victoria saith ) Priestes , besides that they are Ministers of the Church , they are likewise members of the Common-wealth , and a King is aswell a King of the Clergy , as of the laity , therfore the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges , for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall : A plaine demonstration . So he . And I say the same , that indeed it is a plaine demonstration of his egregious falshood , and abusing his Reader . First in making him belieue , that the learned man Franciscus de Victoria doth fauour him or his in this matter of the exemption of Priestes , wheras in this very place heere cited by T. M. his first proposition of all in this matter is this : Ecclesiastici iure sunt exempti &c. I doe affirme that Ecclesiasticall men are by Law exempted , and freed from ciuill power , so as they may not be conuented before a secular Iudge , either in criminall or ciuill causes , & the contrary doctrine to this is condemned for Hereticall , among the articles of Iohn VVickliffe in the Councell of Constance . So he . And now see whether Victoria make for him or no , or whether he disgested well this crude doctrine of Priestes exemption , as this Ministers phrase is . 13. Secondly if we consider , either the English translation heere set downe out of the wordes of Victoria , or his Latin text , for ostentation sake put in the margent , wee shall find so many and monstrous foule corruptions , intercisions , geldinges and mutilations , as is a shame to behold ; and I beseech the learned Reader to haue patience to conferre but this one place only with the Author , and he will rest instructed in the mās spirit for the rest : but he must find them as I hàue cited them heere in the margent , and not as T. M. erroneously quoteth them , if not of purpose to escape the examine . For that Victoria hauing set downe his precedent generall proposition , for the exemption of Clergy men , that they were exempted Iure by Law , he passeth on to examine in his second proposition Quo iure , by what Law , diuine or humane they are exempted ; and in his third , he holdeth that Aliqua exemptio Clericorum est de iure Diuino : That some kinde of exemptions of Clergy men from ciuill power , is by diuine Law , and not humane only , and fourthly he commeth to this which heere is set downe by T. M. but not as he setteth it downe . Our fourth proposition ( saith Victoria ) is , that the persons of Clergy men are not absolutly , and in all thinges exempted from ciuill power either by diuine or humane lawe ; which is euident by that Clergy men are bound to obey the temporall lawes of the Citty , or Cōmon-wealth wherin they liue , in those thinges that doe appertaine to the temporall gouernment , and administration therof , and doe not let or hinder Ecclesiasticall gouernment . 14. These are the wordes of Victoria as they ly togeather in him , and then after some argumentes interposed , for his said conclusion , he addeth also this proofe : That for so much as Clergy mē besides this , that they are Ministers of the Church , are Citizens also of the Common-wealth , they are bound to obey the temporall lawes of that Common-wealth or Prince in temporall affaires ; and then ensueth the last reason ( heere set downe in English by T. M. ) in these wordes : Moreouer ( saith Victoria ) for that a King is King not only of laymen , but of Clergy-men also , therfore aliquo modo subiiciuntur ei , in some sort they are subiect vnto him : Which wordes aliquo modo in some sorte , the Minister leaueth out ; and then it followeth immediatly in Victoria : And for that Clergy-men are not gouerned in temporall matters by Ecclesiasticall power , therfore they haue their temporall Prince , vnto whome they are bound to yeeld obedience in temporall affaires . 15. And this is all that Victoria hath in this matter , & in these very wordes . And let any man consider the patching , which T. M. vseth both in English and Latin in this place , to make some shew for his fained demonstration out of Victoria , and he will see how poore and miserable a man he is , and how miserable a cause he defendeth . And in particular , let the very last proposition be noted which he citeth , and Englisheth as out of Victoria , to wit , the Clergy is subiect vnto the ciuill authority in temporall thinges , for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall , wherby he would haue his Reader to imagine , that no spirituall power may haue authority to gouerne temporall matters ; wheras the wordes of Victoria are : Clerici quantum ad temporalia non administrantur potestate Ecclesiastica , that Clergy men , for so much as appertaineth to temporall affaires , are not gouerned by Ecclesiasticall power , but by the temporall which there beareth rule : So as this fellow by a subtile sleight changing the nominatiue case from Clerici non administrantur to temporalia non administrantur , frameth his plaine demonstration out of plaine cosenage and forgery . And is this naked innocency ? 16. From the page 18. vnto 27. he handleth togeather many sentences and authorities of ancient Fathers , alledged by Catholicke Authors Cunerus , Tolosanus , and especially Barkleius , to shew that the Apostles and their successours , and those Fathers amongest the rest , did not take armes against their Princes either Infidels or Christians , but did rather suffer iniuries , then seeke by force to reuenge the same ; which being our conclusion in like manner , and held and defended by our Catholicke writers as yow see , and that for the most part , by name against Protestant writers & practisers , both in Scotland , France , Flanders , & other places , yow may perceaue how corruptly this is brought in against vs , as though our common beliefe and exercise were the contrary , & this may be called falsification and sophistication of our meaning . 17. But yet if we would examine the particular authorities that be alledged about this matter , though nothing making against vs as hath byn said , & consider how many false shiftes are vsed by T. M. therin ; yow would say he were a Doctor in deed in that science , for that a seuerall Treatise will scarce conteine them . I will touch only two for examples sake . He citeth Doctor Barkley , bringing in the authority of S. Ambrose , that he resisted not by force his Arrian Emperour , when he would take a Church from him for the Arrians , but he setteth not downe what answere of his Doctor Barkley doth alledge in the very self same place , which is : Allegatur Imperatori licere omnia &c. It is alledged that it is lawfull for the Emperour to doe all thinges , for that all thinges are his ( and consequently that he may assigne a Church to the Arrians : ) Wherto I answere saith S. Ambrose ; trouble not your selfe O Emperour , nor thinke that yow haue Imperiall right ouer those thinges that are diuine ; doe not exalt your selfe , but if yow wil raigne long , be subiect to God , for it is written that those thinges that belong to God must be giuen to God , and to Cesar only those thinges that belōg to Cesar ; Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour , but Churches to the Priest , the right of defending publicke walles is committed to yow , but not of sacred thinges . Thus Doctor Barkley out of S. Ambrose in the very place cited by T. M. which he thought good wholy to pretermit , and cut of , as not making for his purpose ; and so had he done more wisely , if he had left out also the other authority of Pope Leo , which he reciteth in the eight place of authorities , out of ancient Fathers in these wordes . 18. The eighth Father ( saith he ) is Pope Leo , writing to a true Catholicke Emperour , saying : Yow may not be ignorant that your Princely power is giuen vnto yow , not only in worldly regiment , but also spirituall , for the preseruation of the Church : as if he said not only in cases temporall but also in spirituall , so far as it belongeth to the outward preseruation , not to the personall administration of them , and this is the substance of our English oath : And surther neither doe our Kinges of England chalenge , nor subiectes condescend vnto . In which wordes yow see two thinges are conteined , first what authority S. Leo the Pope aboue eleuen hundred yeares gone ascribed vnto Leo the Emperour in matters spirituall and Ecclesiasticall . The second , by this mans assertion , that neither our Kinges of England chaleng , nor doe the subiectes condescend vnto any more in the oath of the Supremacy that is proposed vnto them ; which if it be so , I see no cause why all English Catholickes may not take the same in like manner , so far forth as S. Leo alloweth spiritual authority to the Emperour of his time . Wherfore it behooueth that the Reader stand attent to the deciding of this question , for if this be true which heere he saith , our controuersy about the Supremacy is at an end . 19. First then about the former point , let vs consider how many waies T. M. hath corrupted the foresaid authority of S. Leo , partly by fraudulent allegation in Latin , and partly by false translation into English. For that in Latin it goeth thus , as himself putteth it downe in the margent : Debes incunctanter aduertere , Regiam potestatem non solùm ad mundi regimen , sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam . Yow ought ( ô Emperour ) resolutly to consider , that your Kingly power is not only giuen vnto yow for gouernment of the world , or worldly affaires , but especially for defence of the Church : and then doe ensue immediatly these other wordes also in S. Leo , suppressed fraudulently by the Minister , for that they explicate the meaning of the Author : Vt ausus nefarios comprimendo , & quae bene sunt statuta defendas , & veram pacem his quae sunt turbata restituas : To the end that yow may by repressing audacious attemptes both defend those thinges that are well ordeined and decreed , ( as namely in the late generall Councell of Calcedon ) and restore peace where matters are troubled , as in the Citty and Sea of Alexandria , where the Patriarch Proterius being slaine and murdered by the conspiracy of the Dioscorian Heretickes , lately condemned in the said Councell , all thinges are in most violent garboiles , which require your imperiall power to remedy , compose , and compresse the same . 20. This is the true meaning of S. Leo his speech to the good and Religious Emperour of the same name , as appeareth throughout the whole Epistle heere cited and diuers others . Nonne perspicuum est ( saith he ) quibus pietas vestra succurrere , & quibus obuiare , ne Alexandrina Ecclesia &c. Is it not euident whome your Imperiall piety ought to assist and succour , and whome yow ought to resist and represse , to the end the Church of Alexandria , that hitherto hath byn the house of praier , become not a den of theeues ? Surely it is most manifest that by this late barbarous and most furious cruelty ( in murdering that Patriarch ) all the light of heauenly Sacramentes is there extinguished ; Intercepta est Sacrificij oblatio , defecit chrismatis sanctificatio &c. The oblation of sacrifice is intermitted , the hallowing of Chrisme is ceassed , and all diuine misteries of our Religion haue withdrawne themselues from those parricidiall handes of those Heretickes , that haue murdered their owne Father and Patriarch Proterius , burned his body , and cast the ashes into the ayer . 21. This then was the cause and occasion wherin the holy Pope Leo did implore the helpe and secular arme of Leo the Emperour , for chastising those turbulent Heretiks , to which effect he saith that his Kingly power was not only giuen him for the gouernmēt of the world , but also for the defence of the Church , which our Minister doth absurdly translate not only in worldly regiment , but also spirituall for the preseruation of the Church , turning ad into in , and praesidium into preseruation ; and then maketh the commentary which before we haue set downe : As if he had said ( quoth he ) not only in causes temporall , but also in spirituall , so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation , not to the personall administratiō of them . 22. And heere now he sheweth himself intangled , not only about the assertion of Imperiall power in spirituall matters , by that S. Leo saith it is giuen ad praesidium Ecclesiae , to the defence of the Church , which proueth nothing at all for him , but against him rather as yow see , and much more in the explication therof , to wit , what is meant by this authority , & how farre it strecheth it self : wherin truly I neuer found Protestant yet that could cleerly set downe the same , so as he could make it a distinct doctrine from ours , and giue it that limites which his fellowes would agree vnto , or themselues make probable . 23. About which matter M. Morton heere as yow see ( who seemeth no small man amongest them , and his booke must be presumed to haue come forth with the approbation and allowance of his Lord and Maister the Archbishop at least ) saith as yow haue heard , that it is no more , but such as S. Leo allowed in the Emperour ad Ecclesiae praesidium to the defence of the Church , and Church matters and men , and for punishing Heretickes that troubled the same . And further more T. M. expoundeth the matter saying : That this Imperiall & Kingly authority in spirituall causes reacheth no further , but as it belongeth to outward preseruation , not to the personall administration of them . And doe not we graunt also the same ? Or doe not we teach that temporall Princes power ought principally , as S. Leo saith , to extend it self to the defence ad preseruation of the Church ? In this then we agree and haue no difference . 24. There followeth in T. M. his assertion heere : But not in the personall administration of them ( to wit of spirituall causes , & this now is a shift dissembling the difficulty , and true State of the question ) which is in whome consisteth the supreame power , to treate , iudge , and determine in spirituall causes ; which this man flying , as not able to resolue , telleth vs only , that he cannot personally administer the same ; which yet I would aske him why ? For as a Bishop may personally performe all the actions , that he hath giuen authority to inferiour Priestes to doe in their functions , and a temporall Prince may execute in his owne person , if he list , any inferiour authority that he hath giuen to others in temporall affaires ; so , if he haue supreame authority spirituall also , why may he not in like manner execute the same by himself , if he please ? But of this is sufficiently writtē of late in the foresaid booke of Answere to Syr Edward Cooke , where also is shewed , that a farre greater authority spirituall was giuen to King Henry the eight by Parlament , then this that T. M. alloweth his Maiesty now for outward preseruation of the Church , to wit To be head therof , in as ample manner , as euer the Pope was , or could be held before him , ouer England : and to King Edward , though then but of ten yeares old was granted also by Parlament , That he had originally in himself by his Crowne and Scepter all Episcopall authority ; so as the Bishops and Archbishops had no other power , or spirituall authority then was deriued from him : & to Queene Elizabeth by like graunt of Parlament , was also giuen as great authority spirituall and Ecclesiasticall ouer the Church and Clergy of England , as euer any person had , or could exercise before , which was and is another thing then this outward preseruation which T. M. now assigneth , hauing pared the same in minced wordes to his purpose , to make it seeme little or nothing , but dareth not stand to it , if he be called to the triall . 25. Wherfore this matter being of so great importance and consequence as yow see , I doe heere take hold of this his publicke assertion , and require that it may be made good , to wit , that this is the substance & meaning only of the English oath , and that neither our Kinges of England doe chalenge more , nor subiectes required to condescend to more then to grant to their authority for outward preseruation , or ad Ecclesiae praesidium , as S. Leo his wordes and meaning are , and I dare assure him , that al Catholickes in England will presently take the oath , and so for this point there will be an attonement . Me thinkes that such publicke doctrine should not be so publickly printed , and set forth , without publicke allowance and intention to performe and make it good . Yf this be really meant , we may easely be accorded ; if not then will the Reader see , what credit may be giuen to any thing they publish ; notwithstanding this booke commeth forth with this speciall commendation of Published by authority &c. 26. And for conclusion of all , it may be noted that there hath byn not only lacke of truth and fidelity in citing Pope Leo for Ecclesiasticall Supremacy in Emperours aboue Popes , but want of modesty & discretion also ; for so much as no one ancient Father doth more often and earnestly inculcate the contrary , for the preheminence of the Sea of Rome , then doth S. Leo ; in so much that Iohn Caluin , not being able otherwise to answere him , saith , that he was tooto desirous of glory & dominion , and so shifteth him of that way ; and therfore he was no fit instance for T. M. to bring heere in proofe of spirituall supremacy in temporall Princes . 27. But yet in the very next page after , he vseth a far greater immodesty , or rather perfidy in my opiniō in calumniation of Cardinall Bellarmine , whome he abuseth notably both in allegation , exposition , translation , application , and vaine insultation ; for thus he citeth in his text out of him . Ancient generall Councelles ( saith the Romish pretence ) were not gathered without the cost of good and Christian Emperours , and were made by their consentes , for in those dayes the Popes did make supplication to the Emperour , that by his authority he would gather Synods , but after those times all causes were changed , because the Pope who is head in spirituall matters cannot be subiect in temporall . Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil . cap. 13. § . Habemus ergo . 28. And hauing alledged this resolutiō of Bellarmine , the Minister insulteth ouer him in these words : Who would thinke this man could be a Papist , much lesse a Iesuit , how much lesse a Cardinal , who thus disableth the title of the Pope , granting to vs in these wordes : after these times ( that is after six hundred yeares ) the truth of purer antiquities challenging Popes to be subiect vnto Christian Emperours ? And yet who but a Papist would ( as it were in despite of antiquity ) defend the degenerate state , saying , after those times Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters ? As if he should haue said : Then gratious fauour of ancient Christian Emperours , then sound iudgment of ancient reuerend Fathers , then deuout subiection of ancient holy Popes ; in summe then ancient purity and pure antiquity adieu . But we may not so bastardly reiect the depositum and doctrine of humble subiection , which we haue receaued from our Fathers of the first six hundred yeares ; and not so only , but which ( as your Barkley witnesseth ) the vniuersall Christian world imbraced , with common consent for a full thousand yeares . So he . 29. And doe yow see how this Minister triumpheth ? Who would thinke that men of conscience or credit could make such ostentation vpon meere lies deuised by themselues , as now wee shall shew all this bragge to be ? And as for D. Barkley alledged in the last lines , let any man read him in the booke and Chapter cited , and he will wonder at the impudency of this vaunter ; for he speaketh no one word of gathering Councells , or comparison of spirituall authority betweene the Pope and Emperour , concerning their gathering of Councelles or Synodes ; but of a quite different subiect , of taking armes by subiectes against their lawfull temporall Princes . And what will our Minister then answere to this manifest calumniation so apparently conuinced out of Doctor Barkley ? But let vs passe to the view of that which toucheth Cardinall Bellarmine , against whome all this tempest is raised . 30. First then we shall set downe his wordes in Latin according as T. M. citeth him in his margent . Tunc Concilia generalia fiebant ( saith he ) non sine Imperatorum sumptibus , & eo tempore Pontifex subiiciebat se Imperatoribus in temporalibus , & ideo non poterant inuito Imperatore aliquid agere : id●irco Pontifex supplicabat Imperatori vt iuberet conuocari Synodum . At post illa tempora , omnes causae mutatae sunt , quia Pontifex qui est caput in spiritualibus , non est subiectus in temporalibus . Then in those dayes generall Councelles were made not without the charges of Emperours , & in that time the Pope did subiect himselfe vnto Emperours in temporall affaires , and therfore they could doe nothing against the Emperours will , for which cause the Pope did make supplication to the Emperour , that he would commaund Synodes to be gathered ; but after those times all causes were changed , for that the Pope who is head in spirituall matters , is not subiect in temporall affaires . So he . 31. And heere let vs consider the variety of sleightes & shifts of this our Minister , not only in citing Bellarmins wordes falsly , and against his meaning and drift in Latin , wherof we shall speake presently ; but in peruerting this Latin that he hath so corruptly set downe in his former English translation . For first hauing said according to the Latin , that generall Councelles in those dayes were not gathered without the cost of Emperours , he addeth presently of his owne , and were made by their consentes , which is not in the Latin : and then he cutteth of the other wordes immediatly ensuing , which conteine the cause ; to wit for that the Popes subiecting themselues in those dayes touching temporalities vnto the Emperours ( as hauing no temporall States or dominion yet of their owne ) could doe nothing without them , and therfore did make supplication to the said Emperours that they would commaund Synodes to be gathered : which T. M. translateth that they would gather Synodes , as though Bellarmine did affirme , that it lay in the Emperours , by right , to doe it : but after those times omnes causae mutatae sunt , all causes were changed , but he should haue said , are changed , as Bellarmins true wordes are , omnes istae causae , al these causes are chāged , to wit foure sortes of causes , which he setteth downe , why generall Councells could not be well gathered in those dayes without the Emperours help and authority , which wordes are guilefully cut of by this deceauer , as in like manner the last wordes put downe heere by himselfe , Pontifex non est subiectus in temporalibus , are falsly translated , cannot be subiect in temporall , and againe afterward , Popes might not be subiect in temporall matters , which is to make Bellarmine contrary to himselfe , who saith a little before that the Popes did subiect themselues for many years , wherby is proued , that they could doe it ; but Bellarmins meaning is that in right by the preheminence of their spirituall dignity , they were exempted , & not bound therunto . 32. And thus much now for the corruptions vsed in the wordes heere set downe both in Latin & English . But if we would goe to Bellarmine himself and see his whole discourse , and how brokenly and persidiously these lines are cut out of him , and heere patched togeather as one entier context contrary to his drift and meaning , we shall meruaile more at the insolency of Thomas Morton , triumphing ouer his owne lye , as before hath byn said ; for that Bellarmine hauing proued at larg , and by many sortes of argumentes and demonstrations , throughout diuers Chapters togeather , that the right of gathering generall Councelles belongeth only to the Bishop of Rome , and hauing answered all obiections that could be made against the same in the behalfe of Emperours , or other temporall Princes , grāting only that for certaine causes in those first ages , the same could not be done ( in respect of temporall difficulties ) without the helpe & assistance of the said Emperours , that were Lords of the world ; he commeth to make this conclusion which heere is cited by T. M. but in far other wordes and meaning then heere he is cited . Yow shall heare how he setteth it downe , & therupō consider of the truth of this Minister . Habemus ergo ( saith he ) prima illa Concilia &c. We haue then by all this disputation seene , how those first Christian Councelles were commaunded by Emperours to be gathered , but by the sentence and consent of Popes , and why the Pope alone in those dayes did not call Councelles , as afterward hath byn accustomed ; the reason was , not for that Councelles gathered without the Emperours consent are not lawfull , as our Aduersaries would haue it , for against that is the expresse authority of S. Athanasius saying : Quando vnquam iudicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit ? When was it euer seene that the iudgment of the Church did take authority from the Emperour ? but for many other most iust causes was the Emperours consent required therin &c. So Bellarmine . 33. And heere now yow see , that Bellarmins drift is wholy against M. Mortons assertion : for that he denieth that euer the Emperours had any spirituall authority for calling of Councells ; but only that they could not well in those dayes be made without them , and that for foure seuerall causes ; wherof the first was , for that the old Imperiall lawes made by Gentils were yet in vse , wherby all great meetinges of people were forbidden , for feare of sedition , except by the Emperours knowledge & licence : the second for that Emperours being temporall Lordes of the whole world , the Councells could be made in no Citty of theirs without their leaue : the third for that generall Councelles being made in those dayes , by the publicke charges & contributions of Citties , and especially of Christian Emperours themselues , as appeareth by Eusebius , Theodoretus , & other writers , it was necessary to haue their consent and approbation in so publicke an action , as that was . 34. The fourth and last cause was ( saith Bellarmine ) for that in those dayes , albeit the Bishop of Rome where head in spirituall matters ouer the Emperours themselues ; yet in temporall affaires he did subiect himself vnto them , as hauing no temporal State of his owne , and therfore acknowledging them to be his temporall Lords , he did make supplicatiō vnto them to commaund Synodes to be gathered by their authority and licence : At post illa tempora istae omnes causae mutatae sunt ; but since those dayes all these foure causes are changed & ipse in suis Prouinciis est Princeps Supremus temporalis , sicut sunt Reges & Principes alij ; and the Pope himself now in his temporall Prouinces is supreme temporall Lord also , as other Kings & Princes are , which was brought to passe by Godes prouidence ( saith Bellarmine ) to the end that he might with more freedome , liberty , and reputation exercise his office of generall Pastorship . 35. And this is all that Bellarmine hath of this matter . And now may we cōsider the vanity of this Mortons triumph ouer him before , and how falsly he dealeth with him , alledging him against his owne drift and meaning , leauing out also 〈◊〉 foure causes by me recited , and then cutting of 〈◊〉 the particle istae , these causes are now changed , which includeth reference to these foure , aid furthermore speaking indefinitely , as though all causes and matters were now changed , seeketh therby to deceaue his Reader , and to extort from Bellarmine , that confession of 〈◊〉 on his side which he neuer meant , and much lesse vttered in his writings . What dealing , what conscience , what truth is this ? 36. In the very next page after he talking of the great and famous contention that passed betweene Pope Gregory the seauenth called Hildebrand , and Henry the fourth Emperour of that name , about the yeare 1070. he citeth the Historiographer Otto Frisingensis , with this ordinary title of our Otto for that he writeth , that he found not any Emperour actually excommunicated or depriued of his Kingdome by any Pope before that time , except ( saith he ) that may be esteemed for an excommunication which was done to Philippe the Emperour by the Bishop of Rome , almost 1400. years gone , when for a short time , he was Inter paenitentes collocatus , placed by the said Pope among those that did pennance , as that also of the Emperour Theodosius , who was sequestred from entring into the Church by S. Ambrose , for that he had commanded a certaine cruell slaughter to be committed in the Citty of 〈◊〉 : both which exceptions this Minister of simple truth leaueth out of purpose , which is no simplicity as yow see , but yet no great matter with him in respect of the other that ensueth , which is , that he alledgeth this Frisingensis quite contrary to his owne meaning , as though he had 〈◊〉 Pope Gregory the seauenth for it , wheras he condemneth that cause of the Emperour , and commendeth highly the Pope for his constancy in punishing the notorious intolerable faultes of the said Henry . 〈◊〉 ( saith he ) semper in Ecclesiastico rigore constantissimus fuit : Hildebrand was euer the most constant in 〈◊〉 the rigour of Ecclesiasticall discipline . And 〈◊〉 in this very Chapter heere alledged by T. M. Inter onnes Sacerdotes & Romanos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zeli & authoritatis fuit : he was among all the Priestes and Pops that had byn of the Roman Sea of most principall zeale and authority . How different is this iudgment of Frisingensis from the censure of T. M. who now after fiue hundred yeares past , compareth the cause of Pope Gregory , to that of Pyrates , theeues , and murtherers , and so citeth our 〈◊〉 Frisingensis as though he had fauored him in this impious assertion . Can any thing be more fraudently alledged ? Is this the assurance 〈◊〉 his vpright conscience , wherof he braggeth to his Maiesty ? 37. But the next fraud or impudency or rather impudent impiety is that which ensueth within foure lines after in these words : Pope Gregory the seauenth ( saith your Chronographer ) was excommunicate of the Bishops of Italy , for that he had defamed the Apostolicke Sea by Symony , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 itall crimes , & then citeth for proofe her of Lambertus Schafnaburg . anno 〈◊〉 . As if this our Chronographer had related this as a thing of truth , or that it were approued by him , and not rather as a slanderous obiection cast out by his Aduersaries that followed the part of Henry the Emperour . Let any man read the place , and yeare heere cited , and if he be a modest man , he will blush at such shameles dealing . For that no Author of that time doth more earnestly defend the cause & vertuous life of Pope Hildebrand , then this man , whose wordes are : Sed apud omnes sanum aliquid sapientes luce clarius constabat falsa esse quae dicebātur : Nam & Papa tam eximiè tamque 〈◊〉 vitam instituebat &c. But with all men of sound wisedome it was more cleere then the sunne , that the thinges which were spoken against Pope Hildebrand were false , for that the Pope did lead such an excellent and Apostolicke life , as the sublimity of his conuersation did admit no least spot of wicked rumour against him , he liuing in that great Citty and open concourse of men , it could not haue byn hidden , if he had committed any vnlawfull thing in his life : and moreouer the signes and miracles , which by his prayers were often times done , and his most feruent zeale for God in defence of Ecclesiasticall lawes , did sufficiently defend him against the poisoned tongues of his detractours . And againe : Hildebrandi constantia , & inuictus aduersus auaritiam animus omnia excludebat argumenta humanae fallaciae : the constancy of Pope Hildebrand , and his inuincible minde against the corruption of auarice , did exclude all argumentes of humane fallacy and deceipt . So Lambertus . 38. And now let the Reader consider with what conscience and fidelity T. M. hath cited him for condemnation of Pope Hildebrand . He relateth indeed , what certaine Noble men , Captaines and others , that came with the Emperour to the Castell of Canusium , and would not haue had him made peace with the Pope in that place , said in their rage afterwardes , for that against their Counsell he had submitted himself vnto the said Pope , & when a certaine Bishop named Eppo , was sent to their Campe by the Pope , and Emperour to enforme them of the agreement and submission made : Fremere omnes ( saith this Story ) & saeuire verbis , & manibus caeperunt , Apostolicae legationi irrisoriis exclamationibus obstrepere , conuitia & maledicta turpissima quaecunque furor suggessisset irrogare . All of them began to fret and wax fierce , both in wordes and casting their handes , and with scornefull outcries to contradict this Apostolicall legation sent vnto them , and to cast vpon the Pope al the most foule reproaches and maledictions that fury could suggest vnto them . Thus saith Lambertus : and then setteth downe the particuler slanderous reproaches heere cited by T. M. which he approueth not , but condemneth as yow haue heard , & highly commendeth not only the vertue but sanctity also of the Pope . And will euer any man credit T. M. any more in any thing that he alledgeth , when this conscienceles falsification is once discouered in him ? yea though it were but once throughout his whole booke , it were sufficient to proue that he dealeth not out of any faith or conscience at all . 39. If an enemy would discredit both Christ and Christian Religion , and say your owne Euangelistes doe recount foule thinges against him ( as heere this Minister saith our Historiographer doth of Pope Gregory ) and namely that he was accused by the Scribes and Pharisies for casting out diuells in the power of Belzebub ; for deceiuing the people ; for denying tribute of the paid to Cesar ; for mouing sedition , and other like crimes , which our Euangelistes doe recount indeed , but doe condemne them also as false and calumnious ; were not this as good and faithfull a manner of reasoning , as this other of Thomas Morton out of Lambertus and Frisingensis against Pope Hildebrand , who is by them both most highly commēded as yow haue heard , and his Aduersaries condemned ? Truly , if any man can shew me out of all the Catholicke writers that be extant , English or other , that euer any one of them vsed this shamefull fraud in writing , where no excuse can free them from malicious and witting falshood , then will I graunt that it is not proper to the Protestant spirit alone . Hitherto I must confesse that I neuer found it in any , and if I should , though it were but once , I should hold it for a sufficient argument not to belieue him euer after . And this shall suffice for a tast only of M. Mortons manner of proceeding . For that to prosecute al particulers would require a whole volume , and by these few yow may ghesse at the mans vaine and spirit in writing . THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER , REPRESENTING Some of the falsifications vvhich are vttered in the former Part of M. Mortons Reply , VVhich came to our handes after our Answere made before in our second Chapter against his ten Reasons . ANd now albeit these false and fraudulent dealings laid open in the precedent Part of this Chapter , be sufficient or rather superaboundant to descry this Minister and his naked innocency , who in his Epistle to his Maiesty , as before hath byn touched calleth himself A Minister of simple truth and vpright conscience ; yet for more perfect complement of the same , I haue thought good to adioine also a second Part to this Chapter , and therin to draw to light some number of his notorious vntruthes , corruptions , sleightes , falsifications and calumniations vttered in the former Part of his Reply to the moderate Reader , which Part not comming to my handes vntill I had made the answere which before I haue set downe in the second Chapter of this Treatise against his Discouery , I could not conueniently discusse the same particularly therin : but now by that which heere yow shall see produced , you may easily ghesse how worthy a peece of worke it is , and what credit the man deserueth that made it . And albeit the breuity purposed by me in this place , permitteth not the examine of al , or of the greater part ; yet verbum sapienti sat est , the discreet Reader by a few examples which demonstrate that the writer wanteth remorse of conscience in his asseuerations , will easily see how farre he is to be credited in all his writinges . Wherfore to the examine it self . 41. In the third page of his said Reply , he beginning to talke of the nature of heresy , hath these wordes : VVee may not be ignorant , first that seeing the nature of heresy is such , that it is a vice proper to the minde , it may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke , without obstinacy , which is only a peruerse 〈◊〉 of the will , and therfore a man may be an Hereticke though he be not obstinate : And for proofe of this false doctrine , he citeth in his margent Vasquez Iesuita , whose wordes are : Malitia huius 〈◊〉 intellectu , non in voluntate consummatur , the malice of this sinne of heresy , is perfected or made consummate in the vnderstanding , and not in the will , which our Minister vnderstanding not , and yet desirous , as in his preface to the Kinges Maiesty he insinuateth , to deuide our tongues , & to make our writers seeme contrary the one to the other , hath fondly slaundered the learned man Vasquez in this place , by making him seeme to be patrone of this his absurd doctrine , that heresy may bewithout obstinacy ; wheras Vasquez in the very same disputation heere by him cited , expressely doth impugne this doctrine and establisheth the contrary , defining heresy thus : Haeresis nihil aliud est quàm error in rebus 〈◊〉 cum pertinacia , Heresy is nothing els , but an errour in matters of faith with obstinacy . 42. Which another learned mā of the same schoole , by somewhat a more ample definition declareth thus : Heresy ( saith he ) is an errour contrary to the Catholicke faith , wherunto a man that hath professed the said faith in his baptisme , doth adhere with an obstinate minde : Which definitiō he proueth ex communi mente Doctorum by the cōmon consent of schoole Doctors . And finally not to stand vpon a thing so cleere among vs S. Thomas for decision heerof hath these wordes : De ratione Haeresis sunt duo , electio priuatae disciplinae , & pertinacia : Two thinges are of the essence and intrinsecall nature of heresy , without which Heresy cannot be , the one the choice or electiō of a particuler doctrine , discipline , or opinion , contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall Church ; the other pertinacy or obstinacy in defending the same , though the party know that it be against the doctrine of the Church , without which knowledge and obstinacy there can be no Heresy . 43. This is our Catholicke doctrine about the nature of Heresy , to wit , that it cannot be without obstinacy , which is so common and triuiall , as it is now come into an ordinary prouerbe , to say : VVell I may be in errour , but Hereticke I will neuer be , for that I will hold nothing obstinatly . And as for the wordes of Vasquez : that the malice of Heresy is consummated in the vnderstanding , and not in the will ; if our Minister had read the other wordes immediatly going before , he might perhaps haue vnderstood Vasquez meaning , for they are these : Vt aliquis sit verè reus Haeresis &c. To make a man be truly guilty of Heresy , it is not necessary that he be carried directly in his affection or will against the authority of the Church , that is to say , it is not needfull that he haue an expresse will and purpose to disobey or contradict the Church , but it is inough that he doe contradict the same re ipsa , indeed , knowing that opinion which he defendeth to be against the authority of the said vniuersall Church , albeit he be not induced to this belief with a direct will to impugne the Church , but either by desire of glory , or other inducement : so as indeed the malice of this sinne is consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the will. 44. This is the discourse and doctrine of Vasquez in this place about the nature and essence of Heresy , wherin he doth not exclude either the vnderstāding , or will , but includeth them both expressely : for that as there must be knowledge , which appertaineth to the minde or vnderstanding , so must there be choise with obstinacy , which belongeth to the will and affection ; but his scholastical consideration is , in which of these two powers of our soule this sinne of Heresy receaueth her consummation . For better explication therof , let vs vse this example : If a man should hold or belieue an erroneous proposition contrary to the doctrine of the Catholicke Church , as for example , that there were but one nature in Christ , not knowing it to be against the Catholicke Church , it were false in it self , and an errour in his vnderstanding , but not Heresy , except also by act of his will he should chuse to hold it with resolution and obstinacy , euen after that he knoweth the same to be against the doctrine of the said Church , for then this knowledge ( saith Vasquez ) that it is against the Church , maketh it perfect and consummate Heresy , albeit the matter passe not to a further act of will , to wit. that he chooseth expressely to contradict the authority of the Church therin , which should be a greater sinne , but yet is not necessary , for that the perfect nature of Heresy is consummated , by knowing that it is against the Church ; and for that this notice or knowledge belongeth to the vnderstanding , therfore Vasquez holdeth , that the last perfection or consummation of this sinne , is in the vnderstanding , and not in the will , not meaning to exclude therby obstinacy of the wil ( as ignorantly T.M. doth , when he saith wee may not be ignorant : ) but to shew in what power of the minde , the last perfection & consummation of this heinous sinne consisteth , to wit , that a man may be a perfect and consummate Hereticke , by holding obstinatly any opinion against the doctrine of the Church , after wee once know it to be against the said Churches doctrine , though we haue not that further malice also of expresse will , and purpose , to contradict therby the said Church , but only we hold the same , for that the opinion pleaseth vs , or is profitable , or honorable to vs , or therby to contradict another , or some such like inducement , according to those wordes of S. Augustine to Honoratus : Haereticus est qui alicuius temporalis commodi , & maximè gloriae principatusque sui gratia , falsas ac nouas opiniones , vel gignit vel sequitur : An Hereticke is he , who in respect of some temporall commodity , but especially for his owne glory and preheminence , doth beget or follow false and new opinions . 45. The same S. Augustine also against the Donatistes proposeth this example : Constituamus ( saith he ) aliquem sentire de Christo quod Photinus &c. Let vs imagine one to thinke of Christ , as Photinus the Hereticke did , perswading himself , that it is the Catholicke faith &c. istum nondū Haereticum dico ( saith he ) nisi manifestata sibi doctrina Catholicae fidei resistere maluerit & illud quod tenebat elegerit . I doe not yet say that this man is an 〈◊〉 , vntill after that the doctrine of the Catholicke faith being opened vnto him , he shall choose notwithstanding to resist , and to hold by choice , that which before he held by errour . In which wordes S. Augustine doth euidently declare , how necessary both knowledge & will are vnto Heresy , and consequently how absurd and ridiculous the assertion of M. Morton is , that Heresy being a vice proper to the vnderstanding , may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Hereticke , without obstinacy of will. For 〈◊〉 we grant with all Deuines , that Heresy is in the vnderstanding as in her subiect ( and so is faith also that is her opposite ) and further that her last perfection and consummation is from the foresaid knowledge in the vnderstanding , as Vasquez doth explane it : yet doth not Vasquez or any Deuine els exclude the necessity of pertinacity also , and election in the will , & consequently both his wordes and meaning haue byn euidently falsified , and calumniated by T. M. and so much of this first charge , wherby yow may see what bookes might be made against him , if we would follow his steppes in all his fraudulent traces . But yet let vs see somewhat more in this very leaf and page . 46. For within few lines after he beginneth his third Chapter with these wordes : That is only true Religion ( say your Romish Doctors ) which is taught in the Romish Church , & therfore whosoeuer mainteineth any doctrine cōdemned in that Church , must be accompted an obstinate Hereticke . And in the margent he citeth Cunerus , alledging his Latin wordes thus : Haec est Religionis sola ratio , vt omnes intelligant , sic simpliciter esse credendum atque loquendum , quemadmodum Romana Ecclesia credendum esse docet ac praedicat : Which wordes if they were truly alledged out of the Author , yet were they not truly translated : for if by only true Religion ( a corrupt translation of Religionis solaratio ) be applied to particuler positions and articles of Religion ; then we grant that such true Religion may be also among Hereticks , & not only taught in the Roman Church , for that , as S. Augustine well noteth , Heretickes also hold many articles of true Catholicke Religion : but heere the corruption and falsification goeth yet further , and it is worthy the noting , for that Cunerus hauing 〈◊〉 largely against the insurrections and Rebellions of those of Holland and Zeland for cause of Religion , and other pretences against their lawfull King , taketh vpon him in his thirteenth Chapter , to lay downe some meanes how in his opinion those dissentions may be compounded , giuing this title to the said Chapter : Quae sit vera componendi dissidij 〈◊〉 , what is the true way of composing this dissention , and then after some discourse setteth downe this conclusion : Haec igitur in Religione concordiae sola est ratio , vt omnes pio ac simplici animo , purè & integrè sic sapiant , viuant , loquantur , ac praedicent , quemadmodum sancta Catholica Romana Ecclesia , quae Dei prouidentia magistra veritatis Orbi praeposita est , docet , loquitur , & praedicat : This therfore in Religion is the only way of concord , that all men with a pious & simple minde , doe wholy and purely conceaue , liue , speake , & preach as the holy Catholicke Roman Church , which God by his prouidence hath giuen for a teacher of truth vnto the whole world , doth teach , speake , and preach . 47. And now consider yow this dealing , that wheras B. Cunerus saith haec est in Religione cocordiae sola ratio , this is the only way of concord in Religion , this man alledgeth it in his margent , haec est Religionis sola ratio , this is the only way of Religion , as though concord and Religion were al one ; & then by another tricke of crafty translation in his English text that is only true Religion , as though true Religion and the way or meanes to come to true Religion were not different ; and then for all the rest how it is mangled , and how many wordes and sentences are put in by this Minister , which are none of Cunerus , and how many of his altered , and put out , is easy for the Reader to see by comparing the 〈◊〉 o Latin textes before alleadged and therby to consider how facile a matter it is for this fellow to deuide our tongues : A course ( saith he ) which I professe in all disputes , when he deuideth and separateth the wordes from their Authors , and the sense from the wordes , and the whole drift from them both : a very fine course , and fit for a man of his profession . But let vs proceed . 48. In the very next page , he going about to make vs odious by our seuere censuring of Heretickes , putteth downe first these wordes of Alphonsus de Castro : He that vnderstanding any opinion to be expressely condemned by the Church , shall hold the same , is to be accompted an obstinate Hereticke : Wherupon M. Morton playeth his pageant thus : VVhat obstinate ? It may be , some doe but doubtingly defend it , what will yow iudge of these ? wherunto he answereth out of Azor : If he doubt therof willingly he is certainly an Hereticke : But by our Ministers leaue Azor addeth more ; Quoties quis voluntariè & pertinaciter de fide dubitat eò ipso est haereticus , as often as a man doth doubt willingly and obstinatly of his faith he is therby an Hereticke , for that faith is a sure and certaine assert of minde vnto those thinges that are to be belieued ; and he that willingly & obstinatly doubteth of the truth therof , cannot haue this firme and perfect assent , & consequently hath no faith during the time of this wilfull & obstinate doubting . And that yow may vnderstand of what importance this word pertinaciter is , that this man cunningly so cutteth out of Azor his words , yow must know that he in the very same Chapter holdeth , that if a man doubt without pertinacity , being ready to submit his iudgment when he shal be instructed in the truth , incurreth not Heresy at all . So as heere the most substantiall word is left out , & craftily conueyed away by our deuider of tongues , wherby the Author is made to say the quite opposite to that he saith and protesteth . 49. It followeth presently in the same text of T. M. continuing his pleasant vaine of playing with vs : But it may be ( saith he ) that he which doubteth is ignorant ; will no ignorance excuse him ? wherunto he frameth of himself this answere citing Tolet in the margent , affected ignorance doth argue him an obstinate Hereticke : Which if yow marke , doth not answere the demaund , for he demandeth whether no ignorance at all doth excuse him , & he answereth that affected ignorance doth not excuse him , but doth rather argue him an Heretike . Now those that be learned doe know , that there be diuers sortes of ignorance , and of diuers degrees , wherof affected is the most culpable , so as this is very impertinēt , for that albeit affected ignorance doe not excuse him ; yet some other lesse faulty may doe it . And this for the sense , but if wee looke vpō the words themselues of Tolet , cited by this man in the margent wee shall discouer much more impertinency or impudency rather : for they are these : Ignorantia crassa non excusat aliquē a pertinacia , grosse ignorance doth not excuse a man frō pertinacy . Now grosse ignorance and affected ignorance are two different thinges , which may be vnderstood by this exāple , that one may be ignorant of Catholicke Religion by grosse ignorance , in that attending to worldly affaires , he doth not care to informe himself , but he is ignorant by affected ignorance , that doth purposely fly to be informed ; so as heere still our ignorant Minister either ex ignorantia crassa or affectata , telleth vs quid pro quo , in translating affected ignorance , for grosse ignorance , & then againe in Englishing non excusat aliquem a pertinacia , doth argue him an obstinate Hereticke , for that it is one thing to argue , and an other not to excuse . And wheras before T. M. held that pertinacy apperteined not at all to the nature of Heresy , here contrary-wise he translateth pertinacia , an obstinate Hereticke , making it to signify both substantiue , and adiectiue , substance and quality . But yet further then this yow must note that in citing this sentence out of Tolet he cunningly dissembleth the Authors assertion set downe cleerly not six lines before these wordes : pertinacia necessaria est ad constituendum hominem Haereticum : Pertinacy is necessary to make a man an Hereticke , being the quite contrary propositiō to that of this man before set downe in the first example of his corruptions in this former Part of his Reply . 50. But the greatest corruption in this page ( and it is notable indeed ) is of the wordes sense and meaning of our learned Countreyman Sayer , of whome T. M. writeth thus : In breif our Countreyman vpon this case of conscience saith ; an obstinate Hereticke is aswell he that is presumed so to be , as he that is manifest , and againe in the same page : seeing therfore that ( as your great Casuist hath said ) euery one presumed to be an Hereticke , is taken for an obstinate , who can be free from your censures ? &c. And then citeth in the margent these wordes of Sayer : Contumax Haereticus est tam praesumptus quam manifestus : An obstinate Hereticke is aswell he that is presumed to be so , as he that is manifest or knowne for such , which may seeme to be a great iniustice in our doctrine . But if I doe not shew this deuise to be one of the most manifest and faithles deceiptes and corruptions that euer any honest man put in paper against his aduersary , then let me be censured for to sharpe a Reprehēder . 51. For first Sayer hath no such matter at all concerning obstinacy in Heresy , his whole purpose being only to declare who may be excommunicated by a Iudge for contumacy in not appearing ( which is a different thing from obstinacy or pertinacy ) and this whether he be either Hereticke or Catholicke ; nay he speaketh either only or principally of Catholickes , who doe shew contumacy in any Court or tribunall , in not appearing or answering , according as they are cited and summoned by a lawfull Iudge , and so he defineth contumacy in these wordes : Contumacia ( saith he ) nihil aliud est quàm inobedientia quaedam , qua ius dicenti non paretur : Contumacy is nothing els but a certaine disobedience , wherby he is not obeied that sitteth in iudgment . So as heere is no mention or meaning of obstinacy in Heresy : and further he putteth downe two sortes of contumacy thus : Contumax duobus modis esse potest , nimirum , manifestus & praesumptus ; man may be contumacious in two sortes or manners , either manifest or by presumption , and he giueth diuers examples of both , as namely , if a man cited doe refuse openly to appeare , or obey his Iudge , this mans contumacy or disobedience is publicke , and manifest : but if he doe not refuse , but by idle dilations or shiftes putteth of or deludeth the Court , he is presumed to be contumacious , and so may excommunication ( if it be a spirituall Court ) proceed against him , as if his contumacy were manifest . 52. Now then what hath all this to doe with Contumax Haereticus tam praesumptus quàm manifestus ? Hath Sayer any such word or sentence ? No truly , or shall we thinke Thomas Morton to be so simple both in grammer , law , & Deuinity , as that he doth not know what difference there is betweene contumax and 〈◊〉 wherof the one is a fault in obedience towardes our Superiours , as now hath byn shewed ; the other in tenacity of opinion as before we haue declared . Or if Thomas Morton will not confesse this ignorance , but that he know the difference of the wordes , and of their significations , sense , and applications heere vsed by the Authors , then must he confesse wilfull deceipt in vsing one for the other , and much more in twice translating the wordes contumax Haereticus in this one page , for an obstinate Hereticke , and much more yet in foisting in the word Haereticus , which Sayer hath not ; and most of all in making his Reader belieue that contumax , praesumptus and manifestus doth signify in Sayer one that vpon presumption only is iudged to be as obstinate an Hereticke , as if he were manifest , wherof Sayer neither spake nor meant ; but in a quite different sense ( not appertaining to Heresy at all ) saith , that a man may be condemned as contumacious by presumption , if he appeare not , or vseth sleightes , diuerticles , or delayes , as well as if openly he refused to appeare . Now then consider what a Minister of truth this is , and of what naked innocency , thus perfidiously to delude his Reader , & yet to come forth after all with this dissembled Hypocrisy : Now let me be beholding vnto yow ( saith he ) for an answere . And so I thinke he is , but if not sharpe inough for so shamefull an abuse , it may be amended and augmented herafter vpon like occasions , which euery where are offered throughout his whole booke ; and there were no end if I would answere him to all . 53. And this now is only in one sole leafe , and no lesse may be said about another , that within some pages after ensueth , if we would stand theron , to wit , where he taketh vpon him to defend Iohn Caluin from the imputation of Arrianisme , obiected by the moderate Answerer , not only out of our Catholike writers , but from cheif Protestant Authors themselues : about which point , for that I shall be inforced to make a particuler Treatise in the third Part of this Chapter , I will heere let the most Part of that matter passe and examine only a peece therof , to wit , how Caluin doth deny the Sonne of God to be Deum 〈◊〉 Deo , lumen de lumine , God of God , and light of light , as the first generall Councell of Neece did decree against the Arrians , wherof T. M. writeth thus : Your Iesuit Bellarmine reckoneth vp Caluin and Beza to be of this opinion , and I thinke he saith truly &c. But now this doctrine being examined with the eye , not ouercast with the webbe of preiudice , doth in the iudgment of your said famous Bellarmine seeme Catholicall , bycause they deny not the Sonne to be from the Father but they deny the essence of the Godhead to haue any generation , this likewise is not the Part of common modesty , to blind-fold your self , and strike yow know not whome . 54. And who would not thinke heere vpon this asseueration of T. M. but that Cardinall Bellarmine were cōtrary to himself in accusing Caluin , and yet iustifying his doctrine : yow shall see then how many sleightes heere are vsed for deceiuing the Reader . First Bellarmine beginneth his Treatise of this matter thus in the place cited by T. M. Est noua quaedam Haeresis &c. There is a new kinde of Heresy sprung vp in our dayes , which I know not whether it consist in the thing it self , or in wordes only : Genebrard doth of purpose confute the same in his bookes of the blessed Trinity , calling it the Heresy of Autotheans , that is to say , of such as doe hold Christ to be God of himself , and not of his Father , and both he and Bishop Lindan and Petrus Canisius doe ascribe the same vnto Caluin , of which errour doth manifestly follow , that either the Sonne is not distinguished personally from the Father , which is the Heresy of Sabellius , or that he is distinguished in nature , which goeth neere to the heresy of the Manichies . So Bellarmine . Who as yow see holdeth the proposition to be Hereticall , that Christ is God of himself , being vnderstood simply as the ancient Church vnderstood it , and namely the Councell of Neece , when they set downe the contrary doctrine as true and necessary to saluation , to belieue that Christ is God of God , and light of light . 55. But now Caluin and Beza , ( as also M. VVillet , and Doctor Fulke their schollers ) in a particuler sense ( saith our Minister ) doe deny Christ to be God of God , to wit , that the essence of his Godhead hath no generation , though as he is Sonne , and the second person in Trinity , he is by generation from his Father ; which doctrine he saith our Bellarmine doth hold for Catholicall , whose words he alledgeth in the margent thus : Dum rem ipsam excutio , non facilè audeo pronunciare illos in errore fuisse , while I doe examine well the thing it self , I dare not presume to pronoūce them to haue byn in errour , to wit Caluin and Beza ; wheras Bellarmins wordes are , dum rem ipsam excutio , & Caluini sententias diligenter considero , non facilè audeo pronunciare illum in hoc errore fuisse , while I examine the matter it self , and diligently consider Caluins opinions , I doe not easily presume to pronounce him to haue byn in this errour , to wit in the particuler errour or heresy of Autotheans , set downe and confuted by Genebrard , and in his sense condemned expressely by the ancient Catholicke Church , for denying Christ to be , and to haue his essence from the Father ; but yet though in some sense it seemeth to Bellarmine , that Caluin may be excused in this priuate & particuler meaning of his , yet not absolutly , as T. M. would make his Reader to thinke , by striking out cūningly the particle hoc ( this errour ) and leauing the word errour in common , as though Bellarmine had excused him from all kinde of errour , which is most false , for that presently after he both impugneth of purpose and confuteth by many argumentes his manner of speach , as Hereticall in this behalf . 56. Restat ( saith he ) vt modum loquendi Caluini qui dicit 〈◊〉 à se habere essentiam simpliciter esse repudiandum , & contrario modo loquendum esse demonstremus &c. It remaineth that we doe demonstrate Caluins manner of speech , that saith the Sonne to haue his essence of himself , is simply to be reiected , and that we must speake in a quite contrary manner , to wit , that the Sonne hath not only his person , but essence also from the Father , and so is God of God and light of light , as the Councell of Neece declared ; and this he proueth by foure wayes : first , Quia pugnat cum verbo Dei , for that Caluins manner of speech is opposite to the word of God &c. Pugnat secundò cum Conciliis , and secondly it is repugnant to the manner of speech of ancient Councells , as the Nicene & others : Pugnat tertiò cum doctrina Patrum , thirdly it is contrary to the doctrine of the old Fathers : fourthly it agreeth with the speech of the old Arrians , and other such proofes , which Bellarmine doth prosecute at large , confirming each one of these members by diuers examples and instances , & that Caluin spake Heretically in fauour of the Arrians in this behalfe . 57. So as the cosenage heere of striking out ( hoc ) out of Bellarmins wordes , making him to say non audeo pronunciare illos in errore fuisse , insteed of illum in hoc 〈◊〉 fuisse , though it be small in sound of words : yet in substance is it much : for that therby T. M. would make his Reader belieue , that Bellarmine cleereth Caluin and Beza from all sortes of errour in this point , & for that purpose turneth illum into illos , and hoc errore , into errore that is to say him into them and this errour into any errour at all : wheras Bellarmine though in one sense he excuse him ; yet absolutly doth he condemne him , as yow haue heard ; and no man can deny but that his Latin wordes were heere fraudulently and perfidiously alledged and mangled by T. M. for that he could not doe it but wittingly , and of purpose ; and yet forsooth this man will not Equiuocate , as he saith , for a world , though lye he will manifestly for much lesse as yow see . And so much of this vntill we come to examine the matter more largely afterward in the third Part of this Chapter . 58. And heere I will passe ouer many thinges that might be noted out of the sequent pages mamely 30. 31. 34. where he doth so peruert , and abuse both the wordes , discourse , and sense of diuers Authors alledged by him , as is not credible to him , that doth not compare them with the bookes themselues , from whence they are taken . As for example Royardus the Franciscane Friar is brought in with commendation of an honest Friar , for that he saith , that a King when he is made by the people , can not be deposed by them againe at their pleasure , which is the same doctrine that all other Catholickes doe hold , so long as he conteineth himself within the nature of a King , for that otherwise ( which is the question in cōtrouersy ) Royard himself saith parendum 〈◊〉 non esse , that he is not to be obeyed , but this is not to be iudged by the people , and their mutiny , as Protestant Doctors teach . 59. And to like effect he citeth a discourse , though most brokenly alledged out of Bishop Cunerus , writing against the Rebells of Flanders , and testifying that it lieth not in the peoples hand to reiect their Prince at their pleasure , as those Protestant subiectes did ; and then M. Morton , as though he had achieued some great victory , triumpheth exceedingly , saying : That forsomuch as Friars in our Councells haue no voice , but only Bishops , he hath brought forth a Bishop against vs , whome for that the moderate Answerer had named a little before , this man scornfully telleth him Caesarem appellasti , ad Caesarem ibis , yow haue appealed to Cunerus , and now he shal be your Iudge against yow . And is not this great folly and insolency ? for that Cunerus in all that his booke saith nothing against vs , but altogeather for vs , to represse the Rebellion in Flanders , as hath byn signified . And secōdly notwithstanding all this exact obediēce , which both he and we prescribe , and require at subiectes handes towardes their lawfull Princes , he hath a speciall Chapter which is the third after this alledged heere by T. M. wherin he doth expressely , & largly proue that in some cases when Princes fall into intollerable disorders , there is authority left in the common-wealth , and Church of Christ to restraine , and remoue them . What falshood is this then to alledge Authors thus directly against their owne sense , meaning , and whole drift ? doth this become a Minister of simple truth ? Is this for a man that somuch abhorreth Equiuocation ? 60. I let passe as trifles in this very place ( but yet such as shew a guilty minde and meaning , ) that he citing the booke of Alexander Carerius , a Doctor of the Canon law in Padua , which he wrote of late de Potestate Romani 〈◊〉 , putteth in of his owne contra huius temporis Haereticos against the Heretickes of this time , which are not in the title of that booke ; and then wheras the said Author naming or citing many other writers to be of his opinion , doth say nuperrimè verò Celsus Mancinus in tract . de Iuribus Principatuum &c. and last of all Celsus Mancinus doth hold the same in a certaine Treatise of the rightes of principalities ; this man to frame vnto himself some matter of insultation , turneth verò into verè , and then playeth ridiculously vpon his owne fiction in these wordes : Carerius citeth another called Celsus , by interpretation high or lofty , and therfore insignes him with verè Celsus , as truly so named , and so truly he may be if we iudge him by the loftines of his stile , and conclusion . So he . And doe yow see this folly ? Or will yow thinke it rather folly then falshood , that could not discerne betweene verò and verè ? Or not be able to iudge by the contexture of Carerius his speech it selfe , that it could not by apt construction be verè if he had lighted vpon a corrupt coppy , as he could not ; for that there is but one , and that hath very plainly verò , and consequently all this Commentary of Thomas 〈◊〉 is out of his owne inuention . And where now is the assurance of his vpright conscience protested to his Maiesty in his Epistle dedicatory ? where is his simplicity in Christ Iesus ? where his naked innocency ? Can this be ignorance ? can this be done but of purpose , and consequently by a guilty conscience ? what may the hearer belieue of all he saith , when euery where he is found intangled with such foolish treachery ? But let vs proceed . 61. There followeth within two leaues after a heape not only of falshoodes , but also of impudencies . For wheras his Aduersary the moderate Answerer had said , that not only Kinges , but Popes also for Heresy , by the Canon lawes were to be deposed , he Answereth thus : The Authors of the doctrine of deposing Kinges in case of Heresy , doe professe concerning Popes , that they cannot possibly be Heretickes , as Popes ; and consequently cannot be deposed ; Not saith Bellarmine , by any power Ecclesiasticall or tēporall , no not by all Bishops assembled in a Councell : Not , saith Carerius though he should doe any thing preiudiciall to the vniuersall State of the Church : Not saith Azorius , though he should neglect the Canons Ecclesiasticall , or peruert the Lawes of Kinges : Not saith Gratians glosse , though he should carry infinite multitudes of soules with him to hell : and these forenamed Authors doe auouch for the confirmation of this doctrine , the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes , for the space of an hundred yeares . So he . And in these wordes are as many notorious and shamelesse lies , as there are assertions , and Authors named by him for the same . 62. For first the foure writers which he mentioneth there in the text , to wit , Bellarmine , Carerius Azorius and Gratian , doe expressely , cleerly , and resolutly hold the contrary to that he affirmeth out of them , for that they teach and proue by many argumentes , that Popes both may fall into Heresies , and for the same be deposed by the Church , or rather are ipso facto deposed , and may be so declared by the Church , and their wordes heere guilfully alledged by T. M. as sounding to the contrary , are manifestly spoken , and meant of manners only , and not of faith , that is to say , if they should be of naughty life , yet haue they no Superiours to depose them for that ( being immediatly vnder Christ ) but for Heresy they may be deposed , which in steed of all the rest , yow may read largly handled in Bellarmine , in his second booke de Pontific . cap. 30. where among other proofes he citeth this very Canon of Gratian heere mentioned by T. M. saying : Haereticum Papam posse iudicari , expressè habetur Canon . Si Papadist . 40. It is expressely determined in the Canon Si Papa , that a Pope falling into Heresy may be iudged , and deposed by the Church ; and more , that in the eight generall Councell , and seauenth Session , Pope Honorius was deposed for Heresy . So Bellarmine . And the same doctrine hold the other two cited by our Minister : so as heere be foure notorious lies togeather , that by no shift or tergiuersation can be auoided , for that T. M. could not but manifestly see , that he alledged these foure Authors quite contrary to their expresse wordes , drift and meaning , what then will yow say of this fellow , and his manner of writing ? shall he be credited herafter ? 63. But yet not contented with this he citeth other foure or fiue Authors besides in the margent , to wit Gregorius de Valentia , Salmeron , Canus , Stapleton and Costerus , all which in the very places by him cited , are expressely against him . And is not this strange dealing ? Let Canus that goeth in the middest , speake for all , who hauing proued first at large the opposite proposition to T. M. to wit , that Popes may fall into Heresy , and be deposed for the same , concludeth thus his discourse ; Non est igitur negandum ( saith he ) quin Summus Pontifex Haereticus esse possit : It cannot therfore be denied , but that the Pope may be an Hereticke , adding presently : VVherof one or two examples may be giuen , but none at all , that euer Pope though he fell into Heresy , did decree the same for the whole Church ; by which last wordes of Canus is discouered the ridiculous fallacy of T. M. alledging heere out of our foresaid writers , that Popes cannot possibly be Heretickes , as Popes , and consequently cannot be deposed : Wherof they say the flat contrary , as you haue heard , that Popes may be Heretickes as Popes , & consequently may be deposed ; but yet that God , as Popes , will neuer permit them to decree any Hereticall doctrine to be held by the Church . 64. Consider then I pray yow what a fellow this Minister is in abusing thus so many Authors so manifestly ; but especially doe yow note the impudency of his conclusion : And these forenamed Authors ( saith he ) doe auouch for confirmation of this doctrine , the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for the space of an hundred years . So he . But I would aske him of what doctrine ? that Popes cannot be Heretickes , or be deposed for the same ? yow haue heard them now protest the contrary , and yow may read it in the places heere cited , out of all the nine seuerall writers before mentioned , who by their expresse contrary doctrine doe proue Thomas Morton to haue made nine seuerall lies against them in this his assertion , and now the tenth & most notorious of all , is this his conclusion ; That they doe auouch for confirmation of that which he obiecteth the vniuersall consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for the space of an hundred yeares ; which besides the manifest falsity therof , seene in their owne wordes , and workes heere by me cited , it conteineth also great folly , and simplicity to say , that they auouch the consent of Romish Deuines and Canonistes for an hundred yeares ; for that their proofes are much elder , and Bellarmine among the rest , for deposition of Pops doth cite the eight generall Councell vnvnder Pope Adrian the second , for aboue six hundred yeares gone , and the Canon Si Papa , out of our Countreyman S. Boniface Archbishop of Mentz & Martyr , aboue seauen hundred yeares gone , and collected by Gratian , and confirmed by Popes , as Part of the Canon law aboue foure hundred yeares gone : So as to say that now they auouch Authors of an hundred yeares old against that which for so many hundred yeares before was held & established , is mere folly or rather foolish malice . 65. And albeit I haue not yet passed ouer the first halfe of the first Part of this first Treatise of his , and in this also haue pretermitted willingly many other examples that might haue byn alledged , yet finding my self weary , to prosecute any further so large a labyrinth of these intricate iuggling tricks , vsed by this Minister in his whole corpes of citations , with doe consist principally therof ; I meane to draw to an end adding only one example more in this place , about a matter more neerly concerning our argument , which is of reconciliation of Protestantes with Catholickes in pointes of Religion , which T. M. willing to accuse Iesuites , as the only hinderers therof writeth thus : Only by the insolency ( saith he ) of Iesuites all such hope of recōciliation is debarred , as is plaine by Bellarmine ; for wheras that most graue and learned Cassander honoured of two Emperours for his singuler learning and piety , did teach that Emperours should endeauour a reconciliatiō betwixt Papistes and Protestantes , bycause ( saith he ) Protestants hold the articles of the Creed , & are true members of the Church , although they dissent from vs in some particuler opinions ; the grand Iesuite doth answere , that this iudgment of Cassander is false , for that Catholickes cannot be reconciled with Heretickes , Heretically meaning Protestantes . So he . 66. But heere I would aske him why he had not vttered also that which immediatly followeth in Bellarmine , that Iohn Caluin had written a booke against this errour of Cassander , and that among Catholicke writers Iohannes à Louanio had done the same , and shewed that it was an old Heresy of Appelles , as Eusebius testifieth , & of other Heretickes afterward vnder Zeno the Emperours , named Pacifiers , as Euagrius testifieth , who held that Catholickes and Heretickes might be composed togeather : why ( I say ) did T. M. conceale this ? As also the many , great , and strong argumentes , that Bellarmine alledgeth to proue his assertion ? And why would he lay all the fault of not agreeing , vpon the insolency of Iesuites , seeing Iohannes à Louanio was no Iesuit , nor Caluin neither . 67. But to leaue this , & to come to the thing it self , and to take some more particuler view of the false behauiour of Thomas 〈◊〉 in citing this authority : It is strange that in so small a matter , he would shew so great want of truth , or true meaning as heere he doth . For first , to pretermit that he goeth about to deceaue his Reader , by the opinion of grauity and learning in George Cassander of Bruges , who was but a Grammarian in his dayes ; & that he was a Catholicke , who is censured for an Hereticke primae classis in the Index of prohibited bookes , and not only for Heresies of this time , but also , quod dicit spiritum sanctum minùs aduocandum , & adorandum esse ; for that he saith that the holy Ghost is lesse to be called vpon or adored &c. as the Index expurgatorius testifieth ; besides all this ( I say ) he corrupteth manifestly in the sentence before alledged , the wordes , & plaine meaning of his Author , to wit , Bellarmine , from whome he citeth Cassanders iudgment : for thus they lye in him : Tertius error ( saith he ) est Georgij Cassandri in libro De officio pij viri , vbi docet debere Principes inuenire rationem pacis inter Catholicos , Lutheranos &c. Sed interim dum non inueniunt , debere 〈◊〉 vnicuique suam fidem , modò omnes recipiant Scripturam & Symbolum Apostolicum : Sic enim omnes sunt vera Ecclesiae membra , licèt in particularibus dogmatibus dissentiant . 68. The third errour is of George Cassander in the booke Of the office of a pious man where he teacheth that Princes ought to seeke out some meanes of peace , betwixt Catholickes , Lutheranes , Caluinistes , and other sectes of our time , but in the meane space , whiles they finde no such meanes , they ought to permit euery one to follow his owne particuler faith , so as all doe receaue the Scripture , and common Creed of the Apostles , for so al are true members of the Church , albeit they disagree among thēselues in particuler doctrines . These are Bellarmins wordes . Now let vs see how they are mangled by M. Morton , both in Latin and English , as by him that hath the notablest talent therin , notwithstanding his solemne protestations to the contrary , that euer I read in my life . 69. He putteth downe first the Latin wordes in his margent thus : Debent Principes inuenire rationem pacis inter Catholicos , Lutheranos , 〈◊〉 ; qui omnes dum Symbolum tenent Apostolicum , vera sunt membra Ecclesiae , licèt à nobis in particularibus dissentiant . Princes ought to seeke a meanes of peace betweene Catholickes , Lutheranes , Caluinistes ; all which , for so much as they hold the Apostolicke Creed , are true members of the Church , albeit they dissent from vs in some particuler opiniōs . And heere now yow see first to be omitted cunningly and wilfully by this crafty Minister the wordes of much moment , that whiles Princes doe not finde a fit meane of peace , they ought to permit all to liue according to their particuler faith , which sentence of his graue and learned Cassander , not seeming to himself allowable in our English State , or to his owne Brethren the English Caluinistes , that now hauing gotten the gouernment , will suffer no other Religion but their owne , thought best to suppresse and cut them quite out : Secondly in steed of the condicionall speech vsed by Cassander , modò omnes recipiant Scripturam &c. So all 〈◊〉 receaue the Scripture and Apostolicall Creed , he putteth it downe with a causatiue clause , Qui omnes dum Symbolum tenent &c. All which sectes because they doe hold the Articles of the Creed , are true members of the Church , leauing out the word Scripture , as yow see and peruerting the other wholly in sense . For who will not hold it absurde , that Catholickes , Lutherans , Caluinistes , and other sectes of our time , though in wordes they doe admit both Scripture & Apostolicall Creed , yet differing in sense , and so many doctrines as they doe , are all to be held notwithstanding for true members of one , and the selfe same Church ? Can any thing be more ridiculous then this ? 70. Thirdly he doth most notably cogge in thrusting in the wordes à nobis , from vs , which are not in the originall , meaning therby to make Cassander to seeme a Catholicke , & to speake in the behalf of Catholickes , which is plaine cosenage : and to this end also he leaueth out dogmatibus ; & finally yow see that he shapeth euery thing to his owne purpose , and by making Cassander , as a Catholicke , seeme to wish and endeauour this vnion , and Bellarmine to reiect it ; he would confirme his former calumniation , that only by the insolency of Iesuites all such hope is debarred . 71. And thus much for the corruption of the Latin text : but his English hath other corruptions also , according to his ordinary custome . For first he translateth Debent Principes , that Emperours should endeauour a reconciliation , to confirme therby his former vanity , that Cassander was so great a man with Emperours , as he talketh not but to Emperours : Secōdly he translateth Catholicos , Lutheranos , Caluinistas &c. which wordes & 〈◊〉 comprehend all other sects of our time , as Anabaptistes , Arrians , Trinitarians , Hussites , Picardians and the like , he translateth them ( I say , ) Papistes and Protestantes , as though all those sectes of our time were to be comprehended vnder the name of Protestantes of the English faith , or as though Cassander if he were a Catholicke , as heere he is pretended , would call vs 〈◊〉 Thirdly wheras in his owne Latin heere set downe he saith ; Qui omnes dum Symbolum 〈◊〉 &c. All which , to wit Catholickes , Lutherans , Caluinistes , & other Sectaries , whiles they hold the Apostolicall Creed , are true members of the Church , he doth English it thus , because Protestantes hold the Articles of the Creed , and are true members of the Church , excluding Catholickes from belieuing the said Articles , or being true members , which in his owne Latin ( and that of Bellarmines ) also are included : and fourthly is the corruption before mentioned , although they dissent from vs in some particuler opinions ; which in Bellarmine is , although they dissent among themselues in particuler doctrines : and finally the wordes by him cited of Bellarmins iudgment , which he controlleth , to wit , falsa est haec sententia Cassandri ; non 〈◊〉 enim Catholici reconciliari cum Haereticis , are not so in Bellarmine , but these , potest facilè refelli 〈◊〉 ( Cassandri ) sententia : primum enim non possunt Catholici , Lutherani , & Caluinistae eo modo conciliari &c. This sentence ( of Cassander ) may easely be refelled ; first for that Catholickes , Lutherans , and Caluinistes ( for example ) can not so be reconciled as Cassander appointeth , to wit , by admitting only the wordes of the Creed , for that we differ in the sense , and sometimes in the articles themselues , as in that descendit ad inferos , he descended into hell ; and in like manner , we agree not about the sense of those other articles , I belieue the Catholicke Church and Communion of Saintes , remission of sinnes &c. So Bellarmine . All which this fellow omitteth . 72. And so you see there is no truth or sincerity with him in any thing : neither can these escapes be ascribed any way to ouersight , errour , mistaking , or forgetfulnes , but must needes be attributed to wilfull fraude , & malicious meaning , purposly to deceaue , as the things themselues doe euidently declare , for which cause , I shall leaue him to be censured by his owne Brethren , but especially by his Lord and Maister , for so notable discrediting their cause by so manifest false manner of proceeding ; and yet for that there is one example more , that remaineth within the compasse of these few Pages by vs examined , that draweth a longer sequele after it , then is fit to weary the Reader withall , without some breathing , we shall reserue the same to a third Part of this Chapter which now ensueth . THE THIRD PART OF THIS CHAPTER , CONTEYNING A CONTROVERSY : VVhether Caluin did fauour Arrianisme , or no ? VVith diuers sleightes of Tho. Morton about the same . ANd now albeit these examples before rehearsed , doe sufficiently declare the mans humour against whome we deale , who professing extraordinary sincerity in all pointes , performeth the same scarcely in any ( I professe , saith he , that simplicity in Christ , as neuer either in word , or writing to Equiuocate : ) yet for an vpshot of this Chapter , I haue thought good , to lay forth one example more , to proue worse matter then Equiuocation against him , as in the former Partes of this Chapter we haue already done , to wit , plaine falshood , and faithles dealing . But heere now is a particuler controuersy fallen out , by occasion of certaine sleightes , vsed by him in defence of Iohn Caluin , against the imputation of Arrianisme laid vpō him , not only by our doctors , but much more by sundry learned Protestāt-writers of Germany , alledged in part by the moderate Answerer in this place , and shifted of sleightly by T. M. And albeit we haue treated somewhat of this matter before , in the second Chapter of this booke , yet the thing comming againe in question now by reason of certaine corruptions vsed by T. M. therabout , I haue thought it expedient to handle the same more largely as a point of no small importance , which by the sequele yow will see . 74. First then T. M. taking vpon him to answere the obiection of his Aduersary , That Caluin was accused of Arrianisme , by the writinges of diuers most learned Protestantes of the Lutheran and other sectes in Germany , & hauing giuen this feeble answere only , which before we haue touched in our said second Chapter , and is heere repeated againe , That it is not much to be regarded , what those Protestant-writers in the spirit of opposition and contention did say of Caluin : especially ( saith he ) seing as it may seeme by their obiections , their iudgment hath beene depraued by your maliguant Doctors . 75. After ( I say ) this generall , but simple euasion ( for if this kinde of answering may be admitted , that thinges are spoken or written out of the spirit of Contradiction , what may not be answered ? ) he taketh vpon him for some shew of probability in this shift to set downe the iustification following . First ( saith he ) concerning Arrianisme , Caluin as your Iesuits affirme , doth plainly teach the same , saying ; That the Father is by a kind of excellency God , wheras both the speach & sense is most orthodoxall , and agreing with the tenure of holy writ , as your learned Iesuites confesse : for the wordes of our Sauiour are plaine Ioan. 14. My Father is greater then I , in the true sense , Is ( say your Iesuites , and truly ) the Father greater , not in substance and being , but by reason of birth and begetting ; For their authority they produce an inquest of Fathers to free Caluin in this point , who was so farre from Arrianisme , that your owne Bellarmine doth acknowledge that Caluin did impugne the doctrine of the Arrians . 76. This is his defence , wherin yow shall see how many subtilties , and shiftes there be vsed to defend Caluin from this impiety , who yet , as will appeare , is not defensible in this respect . For first where he saith , That our Iesuites doe affirme Iohn Caluin to teach Arrianisme , in that he holdeth that the Father is by a kind of excellency God , citing for the same among others in the margent both Bellarmine , and Gregorius de Valentia , his first corruption therin is , that he citeth not the wordes of their accusations , as they ly in the Authors , which in Bellarmine are these : Non veretur Valentino concedere , nomen Dei KATH ' HYPEROCHEN , id est , per excellentiam quandam , soli Patri attribui ; Caluin seared not to grant to Valentinus Gentilis ( the Arrian Hereticke ) that the name of God was attributed only to the Father by a certaine excellency . And the same obiecteth * Gregory de Valentia in the same wordes : out of which yow see , that T. M. leaueth out soli , to the Father alone , wherin consisteth the chiefest force of the charge against Caluin : this then is the first tricke . The second is , that he would make his Reader belieue , that for this only speach of Caluin our Doctors , Bellarmine , Valentia , and others , had condemned him of Arrianisme , wheras they not only for this , but for many other wicked speaches , as blasphemous as this , doe ascribe that crime vnto him . 77. As for example , for that he writeth Deum Patrem genuisse quia voluit , that God the Father did beget his Sonne for that he would , wherof ensueth euidently that if Christes eternall generation was voluntary in respect of his Father , then was it not necessary , and naturall , and consequently he could not be God at all , nor equall to his Father , of whose will his essence depended : and againe , That Christ as he is the second person of the Trinity , cannot properly be called Creator of heauen and earth , and consequently not God , nor equall to his Father . And yet further , Filium Dei subiectum esse Patri etiam ratione diuinitatis , that the Sonne of God is subiect to his Father , euen according to his diuine nature . And yet more impiously , That Christ was a mediator betweene God and Angels before the sinne of Adam , and before his incarnation , and that also according to his diuinity : Out of which for that a mediator must needes be inferiour to him , to whome he vseth mediation , all learned men inferre that Caluin in effect taught the doctrine of Arrius , who denied the equality of the Sonne with the Father , & all this is obiected by our Doctors in the places quoted by T. M. himselfe . Wherby it is manifest that he did not of ignorance or forgetfulnes leaue out these other accusations , mentioning only the first , but of plaine deceipt , & wilfull falshood , for that he thought himselfe to haue a shift for answering the first , but not the other . 78. Yet Gregory de Valentia goeth some-what further , adding moreouer to these assertions of Caluin diuers other ; as namely that he did seeke to eneruate , and make voide , togeather with the Arrians , certaine excellent places of Scripture , which the ancient Catholicke Fathers did vrge against them , as that of S. Iohn ; Ego & Pater vnum sumus , I and my Father are one , which Caluin saith is to be vnderstood , of the vnity of consent and agreement , not of substance : wherupō one George Blandrata a Trinitarian , founding himselfe ( saith Valentia ) did in a certaine publicke disputation against the Catholickes , at Alba Iulia in Transiluania , allow and confirme this Arrian interpretation of Caluin , saying : VVe doe remit our hearers to only Iohn Caluin in this behalfe who doth euery where reprehend the old writers , for that they wrested these wordes , Ego & Pater vnum sumus , to the vnity of essence or substance . He noteth also these wordes in Caluin , Impropriam esse atque duram orationem illam Symboli Niceni , Deus de Deo : that , that speach of the Creed of the Councell of Nice , is an improper and hard speech , God of God : Which speech notwithstanding S. Athanasius did greatly vrge ( saith he ) in his dayes against the Arrians , wherof we haue treated somewhat before . 79. Now then may we see how fraudulently Thomas Morton hath dealt in this matter , by putting downe slyly one reason only , for which our malignant Doctors ( as he calleth them ) doe condemne Caluin for Arrianisme , and it is as if a malefactour being condemned for many crimes , his Aduocate would giue out , that he had byn accused only of one , and then by diminishing that also make it none , and so proclaime him quit in all . But for so much as he calleth our said Doctors malignant ( from which crime I dare auouch them of all others most free ) & doth say , That the iudgment of the Lutheran Doctors , alleadged by his Aduersary the moderate Answerer against him ( namely of Doctor Philippus Nicolaus , and of the Deane and vniuersity of Tubinga , who condemned Caluin for the same crime of Arrianisme , ) hath byn depraued , ( as may seeme , saith he , by their obiections ) by our said malignant Doctors ; We shall heere with as much breuity as may be , bring forth the iudgment of another renowned Protestant-Doctor , concurring with the foresaid , he being a publike Reader of Deuinity in another famous Vniuersity of Germany , namely VVittenberg , where Martyn Luther himselfe once held the chaire , as Caluin did in Geneua ; and this Doctor whose name is AEgidius Hunnius in a seuerall Treatise set forth about a dozen yeares gone , entituled by him Caluinus Iudaizans , & dedicated vnto one Dauid Pareus a principall Caluinian Doctor , setteth downe the argument of his booke thus , in the first front therof . This booke is to shew ( saith he ) that Iohn Caluin hath most detestably presumed to corrupt ( in fauour of Iewes and Arrians ) the most cleare places , and testimonies of Scripture concerning the glorious Trinity , deity of Christ , of the Holy Ghost , and aboue all , the predictions of Prophetes for the comming of the Messias , his natiuity , passion , ascension , & sitting at the right hand of God &c. with a cleare cōfutation of his false corruptions therin &c. 80. This is the title and argument of the booke , which he doth prosecute for almost two hundred pages togeather , deuiding the same into two partes , the first wherin he sheweth , how Iohn Caluin most wickedly , and maliciously vnder pretence of interpreting the Scripture in different sense from the ancient Fathers , did goe about couertly to weaken , infringe , or take from the Christians all the strongest argumentes which they had , or haue out of the Scriptures for the Godhead of Christ , and his equality and consubstantiality with the Father . And in the second Part , that he vseth the same fraud , and malice by ouerthrowing all the predictions , & foretellinges of Prophetes about Christ as he was man. Out of the old Testament . §. 1. 81. ANd for the first Part of peruerting Scriptures , he giueth these examples out of the old Testament , first , that wheras Moyses saith in 〈◊〉 , Creauit Deus coelum & terram , God created heauen and earth , the word in the Hebrue is ELOIM , Gods , in the plurall number , out of which D. Hunnius proueth , that the ancient Fathers , and most learned also of later times in the Hebrue tongue , doe gather Moyses to haue signified the plurality of persons in the Bl. Trinity , but Caluin to take from Christians this comforte , saith : Colligere solent hic in Deo notari tres personas &c. Heere Christians are wont ( by this plurall number ELOIM ) to gather , that three persons are signified in God ; but for so much as to me it seemeth a weake proofe of so great a matter , the Readers are to be aduertised to beware of such violent glosses . Thus Caluin . And with like spirite of presumption & arrogancy , if not worse , he goeth forward in all the rest , as namely that of Genesis the 19. about raining of brimstome ouer Sodom and Gomorrha , where the wordes are Pluit Iehoua a Iehoua ( saith Hunnius according to the Hebrue text ) and is applied by Christian writers , against the Iewes for Christes diuinity , Caluin most insolently reiecteth the same saying : Quod veteres Christi Diuinitatem &c. wheras ancient writers endeauored by this testimony , to proue the Diuinity of Christ , it is but a weake argument , and in my iudgment they brabble much without cause , that so sharpely vrge the Iewes with this place . 82. In Genesis also Chap. 35. where Iacob built an Altar to God , and called the place Bethel , for that ELOIM the Gods had appeared vnto him there , vsing the plural number not only in the substantiue , but also in the verbe it selfe , Caluin without all probability of reason , will needes haue it meant , that not God , but Angels only appeared , which Hunnius refuteth , for that the apparition of Angels was not a sufficient reason to name the place Bethel , as Iacob did , that is to say , the house of God , or to build an Altar to God , for that Angels only , and not God had appeared to him . 83. But that which much more importeth , Caluin taketh from the Christians that other excellent place also of the second Psalme , wherin is proued the Diuinity of Christ by those wordes , 〈◊〉 me us es tu , Ego hodie genui te , Thou art my Sonne , this day haue I begotten thee , wherby S. Paul himselfe Act. 13. and the Author ( saith Hunnius ) of the Epistle to the Hebrues ( for that Lutherans doe not admit that Epistle to be S. Paules ) and all ancient Fathers after them , doe alleage these wordes for proofe of Christes diuinity ; but Caluin doth ouerthrow it by interpreting it to be vnderstood literally of Dauid himselfe , as Hunnius at large proueth , & exactly refuteth , as also his impiety , in taking away that other place of the 33. Psalme in like manner , Verbo Domini coeli firmati sunt , & spiritu oris eius omnis virtus eorum : The heauens were established by the word of God , and all their power by his holy spirit . Out of which the ancient Fathers proued not only the diuinity of Christ , the second person in trinity , but of the holy Ghost also , and consequently the blessed Trinity , which Caluin endeauoring to ouerthrow writeth in this manner : Subtiliùs veteres hoc elogio vsi sunt &c. The ancient Fathers did more subtily vse this place of Scripture , against the Sabellian Heretickes , to proue the eternall Godhead of the holy Ghost ; but I would not dare to vrge Sabellius with this testimony to proue the deity of the said holy Ghost . And againe in another place lib. 1. Institut . cap. 13. sect . 15. it seemed ( saith he ) a plausible thing vnto them , to cite out of Dauid the wordes now rehearsed , verbo Domini coeli firmati sunt &c. to proue that the Creation of the world was no lesse the worke of the holy Ghost , then of the Sonne the second person in Trinity : Sed infirma illa ratio fuit , but that proofe was weake . So Caluin , very piously as yow see . 84. From this Doctor Hunnius passeth to examine these wordes of the 45. Psalme as spoken of the Sonne of God , Thronus tuus ô Deus , in seculum seculi &c. propterea vnxit te Deus , Deus tuus &c. Thy throne ô Lord is to endure for euer , and therfore hath God , euen thy God anointed thee with the oile of ioyfulnes aboue thy fellowes : which the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrues ( saith Hunnius ) doth expresly apply vnto the eternall Diuinity of Christ ; but Caluin ouerthroweth the same , by applying the meaning to haue byn of K. Salomon only . The simple and naturall sense of this place ( saith Caluin ) is that Salomon did not gouerne Tyrannically , as other Kinges , but with right and equall lawes , and therfore his Kingly seate should be stable for euer . See how base a conceipt this man had of diuine thinges : but yet heare him further , for in another place he writeth thus : Faciendum est &c. VVe must confesse that this Psalme was made of Salomon , as a bridesong of his marriage with the King of Egypts daughter . Doe yow see the prophanity of this mans spirit ? But yet let vs produce a farre greater audacity of his . 85. The Apostle S. Paul in the 4. to the Ephesians doth vrge much for proofe of Christes diuinity the wordes of the Psalme 67. Ascendens in altum captiuam duxit captiuitatem , dona dedit hominibus &c. He ascending vp to heauen , did carry with him our Captiuity as captiue , & distributed giftes to men vpon earth : which thing S. Paul doth vrge , as a point of singuler moment for proofe of Christes diuinity . But what saith Caluin ? yow shall heare what he writeth both of the thing , and of his Censure of S. Paules simplicity , in so applying the same . Quia locum hunc Paulus ( saith he ) subtiliùs ad Christum deflexit Ephes. 4. videndum est , quàm bene cum mente Dauidis conuenit : For so much as Paul did more subtily wrest this place to Christ , it is to be considered how well he agreeth therin with the mind or meaning of Dauid , shewing in deed by diuers reasons , that his exposition and application doth not agree with Dauids intention in that Psalme , which is a most impious insolency if it be well considered . 86. After this the said Doctor passeth on to cite that famous place of Esay the sixt , Sanctus , Sanctus , Sanctus , Dominus Exercituum , as a testimony for the blessed Trinity , by the witnes and allegation of al ancient writers , wheras Caluin of purpose calleth the same into doubt , saying in fauour of the Arrians : Wheras ancient writers haue vsed this testimony of Esay , whē they would proue the Trinity of persons in the essence of one God , I doe not reiect their sentēce ; but yet if I should haue to doe with Hereticks , I would rather vse more strong testimonies , ne Haereticis ridiculi simus , least we be ridiculous vnto Heretikes , and in truth the Prophet by this triple repetition ( holy , holy , holy ) doth rather note a restles assiduity , or continuance of Angelicall melody , in the prayses of God &c. And doe yow not see ( saith Hunnius , ) how this arrogant fellow , doth * saucely pull by the locks old venerable antiquity ( making the same 〈◊〉 ) and how he instructeth the Arrians to illude , or shifte of this sacred testimony for the blessed Trinity ? Could the Arrians doe more for themselues , or their owne cause ? So he . Shewing also the like boldnes , and impiety in that he goeth about to weaken the Authority of Michaeas the Prophet , vsed by all ancient Fathers for the proofe of Christes Godhead , where he saith , Et egressus eius ab initio à diebus aeternitatis , and his going forth is from the beginning from the dayes of eternity ; which words Caluin , though he cannot but grant for the euidēcy therof , to appertaine to the diuinity of Christ , yet doth he diuert the Prophetes meaning to a farre different sense , and saith : Hic est simplex sensus , scio quosdam insistere pertinaciùs , quod hic loquatur Propheta de aeterna essentia Christi &c. This is the simple sense and meaning of the Prophet , albeit I know that some doe more obstinatly contend , that the Prophet speaketh heere of the eternall essence of Christ : and for my part , though I doe willingly acknowledge , that the diuinity of Christ is heere proued ; yet for that we shall neuer get the Iewes to confesse it , I would rather simply take the wordes of the Prophet as they sound . So he . And note heere his good reason ( saith Hunnius ) for that because the Iewes will not be brought to confesse the truth of this text , Caluin himself will dissemble it also , and peruert the Scriptures to another meaning to please them . Is not this wickedly to betray the cause of Christians ? And is not this secretly to collude with the aduersaries ? Is not this by dissimulation to weakē our owne forces in fauour of the enemies ? But herof yow shall see more in that which ensueth . Out of the new Testament . §. 2. 87. ANd with these places and some other the said Doctor endeth his discourse for corrupting of the Scriptures of the old Testament , in fauour of Iewes and Arrians , & passeth to the new , shewing 〈◊〉 no lesse to fauour them both therin , then in the other , but rather much more . And first he alledgeth that most excellent place of S. Iohns Ghospel before mentioned , Ego & Pater vnum sumus , I and my Father are one , which testimony al ancient Fathers , without exception , did vrge against the Arrians , as an inuincible bulwark to proue the vnity of Godhead in Christ with his Father ; But what saith Caluin ? Ego ( saith he ) & Pater vnum sumus , abusi sunt hoc loco veteres , vt probarent Christum esse Patri Homusion neque enim Christus de vnitate substantiae disputat , sed de consensu , quem cum Patre habet &c. The ancient writers did abuse this place , to proue 〈◊〉 that Christ was of the same nature and substance with his Father , for that Christ did not dispute heere of the vnity of substance , but of the vnity only of consent betweene him , and his Father : which was the very answere and shift of Arrius himselfe and of the old Arrians , and is at this day ( saith Hunnius ) of the new Arrians in Transiluania and els where , to wit of Franciscus , Dauid , Blandrata , and others . 88. And so in like manner where in the 10. and 14. of S. Iohn , Christ our Sauiour repeateth oftentimes Ego 〈◊〉 in Patre , & Pater in me , I am in my Father , and my Father in me , which was another great bulwarke of ancient Christianity against Arrians , Caluin ouerthroweth it thus : Non hic ( saith he ) de essentiae vnitate sermo habetur &c. Heere is not any speach of vnity of 〈◊〉 betweene the Father and the Sonne , but only of the manifestation of Gods power in the person of Christ. And againe in another place : Non ad diuinam Christi essentiam refero , sed ad modum reuelationis : I doe not referre those wordes to the diuine nature of Christ , but to the manner of reuelation , which were also the Answeres of old Arrians , and are at this day of the new . 89. And finally not to be tedious , I passe ouer many other examples , as that Ioan. 17. in Christes speach to his Father : That my disciples may be one , as we are one . And againe : That all may be one as thou Father art in me , and I in thee , which ancient Doctors did interpret to signify the naturall vnity of Christ in Godhead with his Father . But what saith Caluin ? Multi ex Patribus ( saith he ) interpretati sunt Christum vnum esse cum Patre &c. Many of the Fathers haue so interpreted these wordes , as though they proued that Christ is one with his Father for that he is eternall God , but their contention with the Arrians drew them violently to this , that they should wrest broken sentences to a wronge sense . The like he writeth of that excellent place of S. Iohn in his first Epistle : Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo &c. There are three in heauen that giue testimony , the Father , the word , and the holy Ghost , and these three are one , which Catholike Deuines haue euer vnderstood of the naturall vnity of the three persons in the blessed Trinity , against the Arrians . But what saith 〈◊〉 on their side ? Quod dicit tres esse vnum , ad essentiam non refertur , sed ad consensum potius : In that S. Iohn saith these three to be one , is not referred to their vnity of nature and essence , but rather to the vnity of their will , or consent . And will yow say now that Caluin is not worthy to haue his fee of the Arrians ? Or will Thomas Morton say still that our malignant Doctors doe wrongfully accuse him ? Quis non videt ( saith Hunnius ) diabolum per acutum suum instrumētum &c. Who doth not see that the diuell by this sharpe instrument of his , doth goe about to disarme Christians , and arme the enemies of the blessed Trinity ? For if these should aske vs , what testimonies we haue , what proofe of Christes vnity in Godhead with his Father , we haue none left , Vniuersa per aleatoriam istam quiduis eludendi 〈◊〉 è manibus 〈◊〉 : All are stroken out of our handes by this dicing-deceipt of deluding any thing that is in Scripture for that purpose . But D. Hunnius goeth forward . 90. The like Comment maketh Caluin vpon those wordes of S. Paul to the Colossians cap. 1. where the Apostle calleth Christ Imaginem Dei inuisibilis , the image of God inuisible , and those other to the Hebrewes c. 1. Qui est splendor gloriae , & expressa imago substantiae illius : Who is the splendor of his glory , and the expresse image of his substance , where manifestly the Apostle doth affirme the deity of Christ , and the ancient Fathers out of the same wordes after him against the Arrians , and namely S. Chrysostome at large , what euasion thinke yow will Iohn Caluin teach the Arrians heere ? Yow shall heare him in his owne wordes : Scio ( saith he ) qualiter veteres exponere soleant , quia enim certamen habebant cum Arrianis &c. I know how the ancient Fathers are wont to expound these wordes , for that they hauing combate with the Arrians , doe vrge the equality , and consubstantiality of God the Sonne with his Father , out of these places ; but in the meane space they hold their peace in that which is the principall , to wit , how God the Father doth exhibite himselfe to be knowne to vs in Christ. And as for Chrysostome , who placeth all his ground in the word Image , while he striueth to proue therby that a creature can not be the image of God the Creator , it is tooto weak &c. So he . 91. And now ( saith Doctor Hunnius ) what way can be more effectuall then this to ouerthrow Christian Religion , and bring in Arrianisme ? Or what place or text of Scripture remaineth now in force against the Iewes , and Arrians for defence of Christes diuinity , if Caluins censure be admitted against all those that haue byn cited ? It is euident ( saith he ) hoc genus eludendi Scripturas quo Caluinus vtitur , exoptatissimum diabolo adminiculum esse &c. that this kind of eluding Scriptures vsed by Caluin , is the most desired help for the diuell , that can be wished , to shake the credit of one authority after another in mens hartes , vntill , before they be aware , they become Arrians . Thus Hunnius , who both for that he is a learned man , a Reader of Deuinity , a Protestant , & proueth all that he saith out of Caluins owne wordes , ought ( me thinks ) to be of great force against him , or at leastwise with all others , to looke well about them , how they belieue either him or his . About corrupting and eluding of Prophesyes . §. 3. 92. ANd this is now for the first Part of his booke but in this second about the predictions and Prophesies of Christ and Christian Religion , he saith he hath much more to produce against Caluin for his foule corruptions , Quibus illustrissima vaticima Prophetarum de Messia 〈◊〉 is peruersionibus inuoluit , wherby he hath with his Iudaicall peruersities obscured the most notorious and cleere predictions of Prophets about the Messias , or Sauiour of the world . In which expositions or rather corruptions of his non modò ( saith he ) Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum veterum & recentiorum pias interpretationes altissimè despexit & irrisit ; sed in nonnullis ipsorummet Euangelistarum 〈◊〉 Sacrosanctas explicationes nequiter illudere non est 〈◊〉 , quod nisi ad oculum demonstrauero , praesertim vbi ad illa vaticinia Prophetarum deuenero , nolim ego nuhi vlla vnquam in re postea fidem adhiberi . He doth not only most haughtely despise the Godly interpretations of all ancient and moderne Ecclesiasticall writers , but in diuers thinges also he was not a fraid wickedly to elude the holy explications of the Euangelistes and Apostles themselues , which except I shall demonstrate vnto the eye , especially when I come to examine the predictions of Prophetes , I will neuer haue any man to giue me credit afterward . So confidently speaketh Doctor Hunnius of Caluins wickednes in this behalf , so to weaken and eneruate the testimonies of Scripture that make for Christ , vt omnem ad probandum vim atque valorem amittant penitus , saith he , that therby they wholy loose al their force & value to proue any thing . And what can be more impious & perilous then this ? 93. It would be to long to runne ouer the Prophesies by him alledged as peruerted by Caluin , though it were with the same breuity that we haue perused the testimonies of Scripture before mentioned ( for I must remēber that all must goe within a part of one Chapter : ) yet some few lines I must bestow therin for exāples sake , therby to leaue a ghesse to the Reader for the rest which I must omit . First then in the very first promise of all made Gen. 3. for comming of the Messias , where God said to the serpēt : I shall put emnity betweene thee and the woman , and betweene thy seed and her seed , shee shall crush thy head , and thou shalt lay wait at her heele , which all Christian writers from the beginning , yea the Apostles and Prophetes before them , did vnderstand of the emnity to be betweene the diuell and Christ the womans seed ; but this doth Caluin wholy euacuate , & turne to a meere mockery , interpreting it to be meant only of the naturall hatred that is betweene men and serpents , and that as serpents seeke to sting men , so men indeauour euery where to kil serpents ; by which interpretation , is eluded ( saith Doctor Hunnius ) the first foundation of all Christian faith , wherby the Fathers of the old Testament did sustaine themselues . And then he turneth himself to S. Paul , shewing how Caluin doth condemne his exposition of absurdity , about the said seed of the woman mentioned both heere , & in the other promise to Abraham , In thy seed all nations shal be blessed , in which places Caluin ( saith Hunnius ) expressely against S. Paul to the Galat. will haue it vnderstood seedes in the plurall number , and not seed : Miror hominis proiectam confidentiam : Vbi frons 〈◊〉 id quod affirmat Paulus : &c. I doe wonder at the desperate presumption of this man ; where is Caluins forehead , in denying that which S. Paul doth affirme , and affirming that which S Paul doth so earnestly refute ? 94. Then passeth he to another prophesy out of Ieremy concerning Christes natiuity , where is said ; God shall create a new thing vpon the earth , a woman shall inclose a man , which being vnderstood by all ancient writers ( saith Hunnius ) of the blessed virgin Mary , and her sacred fruit of the wombe , that in respect of the perfection , which he had by his deity , euen in the wombe , was a perfect man : but Caluin scoffeth therat . Christiani ( saith he ) ferè vno consensu &c. Christians almost with one consent haue interpreted this Prophesy of Mary the virgin , and they were moued therunto by the name of a miracle , and therupon perhaps they snatched too greedily at those thinges that might seeme to make for the mistery of our saluation , saying , that Christ was both an infant and a man , for that he was full of diuine fortitude in his Mothers wombe , albeit according to his flesh he did grow in stature , in wisedome , and vertue ; Meritò hoc ridetur a Iudaeis , but this is worthily laughed at by the Iewes , and further , saith he , the true meaning of the Prophet is only that in the warres betweene the Chaldees and the Iewes , the Iewish women shal be strōger then the Chaldean men , and bring them into straights , redigent faeminae viros in angustias , saith he , women shall driue men into straightes . And is not this a good Iewish Aduocate ? Could any Infidell speake more cōtēptuously of our proofes ? 95. From this he steppeth to the fourth Prophesy of Aggeus about the comming of Christ ; Mouebo omnes gentes , & veniet desideratus cunctis gentibus , & implebo domum istam gloria &c. I will moue all nations , and the desired of all nations shall come , and I shall replenish this house with glory ; which Prophesy being so cleere , & so generally receaued by all Christians as signifying the glory of Christ , and of the Christian Church that Caluin could not for shame deny it ; yet shall yow see how he doth seeke to eneruate , and make void the same . This Prophesy ( saith he ) of the desired of all Nations may be vnderstood two wayes : first that all Nations shall come and bring with them whatsoeuer precious thinges they haue : Nam Hebraei desiderium vocant quicquid habetur in precio , vt 〈◊〉 , honores &c. For that the Hebrewes doe call desire or desired , whatsoeuer is much esteemed , as riches , honour and the like ; Sed possumus etiam intelligere de Christo &c. But yet we may also vuderstand it of Christ &c. Sed simplicior sensus est ille quem iam retuli , but the more simple , plaine , or naturall sense , is that which I haue now related , that Nations shall come with all their riches &c. And heere also doth not Caluin play well his part ? By this yow may know him in all the rest , and yet shall wee set downe one example more and so end . 96. And this shall be that famous and most excellent Prophesy of Christes Fore-runner S. Iohn Baptist most perspicuously vttered by the Prophet Esay in his fourtith Chapter , and in these wordes : Vox clamantis in deserto parate viam Domini &c. A voice of a Crier in the desert , prepare the way of our Lord , make right the pathes of our God : which wordes both S. Matthew , S. Marke , and S. Luke , at large doe expound to haue byn vnderstood of S. Iohn Baptist preaching in the desert of Iury and warning the Iewes to prepare the way of the Messias : all which this miserable man , in fauour of the Iewes , endeauoreth to elude and euacuate , applying the same wholy to another prophane purpose , affirming , first that by the voice of a Cryer , is not vnderstood any particuler man as S. Iohn Baptist , but all Prophetes in generall : and then by the desert , he vnderstandeth not that desert of Iury wherin S. Iohn did preach , but metaphorically the desert of desolatiō to haue byn meant by Esay , when the people were in the captiuity of Babilon ; and thirdly more fully to ouerthrow the whole Prophesy , he asketh this question : Quos compellat ista vox , an fideles ? minimè . Sed Cyrum , Persas & Medos . To whome doth this voice of the Cryer in the desert speake , vnto faithfull people ? No , not at all . But only vnto King Cyrus , and to the Persians & Medes , that held the people of Israel in captiuity . So he . And how greatly then were deceaued the three Euangelistes before mentioned , that so earnestly set forth vnto vs the comfort of this Prophesy , fulfilled in S. Iohn Baptist , which 〈◊〉 now hath endeauored to take from vs , wherupon Doctor Hunnius inferreth these wordes : 〈◊〉 piae mentis haec legens & audiens temperare sibi potest &c. What man of pious mind that shall read or hear these thinges , can so ouer rule himself , as not to hate with a perfect hatred , as the Prophet speaketh , yea and detest this architect of Iewish deceipts , that is not affraide to hold vp his finger against the interpretations of the Sacred Euangelistes themselues . So he . 97. But to come to an end , I will leaue nineteene or twenty more Prophesies vndiscussed , to wit three that remaine of this first point about the comming and natiuity of Christ , eight that did foretel his sacred passion and particulers therof , foure of his resurrection , and foure or fiue more of his miraculous ascension , & sitting on the right hand of God ; all which doth Iohn Caluin with metaphoricall and malicious interpretations weaken , elude ouerthrow , & take from vs ; yea though the Euangelistes & Apostles themselues haue expressely expounded them literally to appertaine to Christ ; which this Doctor Hunnius doth notably & substantially proue out of Caluins owne wordes throughout this breif , but iudicious booke of his , making many exclamations against Caluins impiety therin , especially in one place , where seeing the mā endeauoreth to take from vs that whole Psalme , Deus Deus meus , which setteth downe most of the particulers of Christes passion , as the percing of his feet and handes , deuiding of his garments , & other such points , which the Euangelists and 〈◊〉 themselues doe apply literally to our Sauiour , and this man only in a metaphoricall sense to King Dauid ; yea saying further that the Euangelistes did 〈◊〉 thinges intempestiuè ad praesentem causam , out of season to the present cause of Christ , Et quòd dum negligunt sensum metaphoricum a natiuo sensu 〈◊〉 , And whiles they did neglect Caluins metaphoricall sense , they departed from the true naturall sense of the Prophet : Doctor Hunnius ( I say ) vpon these & other like insolences , breaketh out into these wordes , that he cannot sufficiently detest extremam Caluini impietatem , cum intolerabili fastu coniunctam , quo se super sanctissimos Dei seruos , Euangelistas , & Apostolos , quasi illorum censor effert , that extreame impiety of Caluin , ioyned with intolerable pride , wherby he setteth himself aboue the most holy seruantes of God , the Euangelistes , and Apostles , as their Censurer : and therfore after he had demonstrated this pride and impiety in all the rest of the Prophesies by him peruerted , drawing towardes the end , he concludeth thus : Quapropter vt receptui canam , detectum satis superque iudico Angelum illum tenebrarum Iohannem Caluinum &c. 98. Wherfore that I may now ( saith he ) retire my self , I doe iudge that Angell of darknes Iohn Caluin to be sufficiently , and more then sufficiently discouered , who being raised from the pit of hell , to the peruerting of mankinde , hath partly by his detestable desire of wresting Scriptures , and ouerthrowing the Bulwarkes of Christian Religion , which it hath against Iewes and Arrians ; partly also by his impious pen a gainst the holy and sacred Maiesty of Iesus Nazarenus now exalted in heauen ; partly also by his peruerse doctrine of the Sacrament , and horrible monstrous paradoxes of his absolute predestination ; By all these meanes ( I say ) he hath 〈◊〉 in these our later dayes , no small part of the light and sunne of Godes truth , & drawne with him a great number of starres , as the Apocalips saith , into the bottomeles pit of eternall damnatiō . God euerlasting out of his mercy , signe his seruantes that they be not corrupted with this pestilent plague of Caluinian seducement , and bring back againe vnto Iesus Christ , the true Pastour of their soules , those that are seduced by them , that they perish not in their errour , but be saued eternally with all those that faithfully loue God Amen . And this I had ( saith he ) to admonish the Church of God , of the most wicked deceiptes of Iohn Caluin . And if Doctor 〈◊〉 will answere any thing to this , let him not entertaine himselfe in generall speech only , as his people are wont to doe , but come to particulers &c. So Hunnius . 99. And now M. Morton , will yow say that all this also , which Doctor Hunnius hath brought against Caluin about furthering of Iudaisme and Arrianisme is out of the spirit only of opposition and contradiction , as yow shifted of the Deane and Colledge of Tubinga , alledged before by your Aduersary ? Will yow answere in like manner , it is not much to be regarded what he saith , seeing he bringeth so many great and substantiall proofes for the same out of M. Caluins confessed workes and wrytinges ? Or will yow say , as yow said before , that their iudgment hath byn depraued by our malignant Doctors ? seeing that yow haue heard this your owne Doctor Hunnius speake in his owne language and sense so resolutly and earnestly against Caluin and Caluinistes ? If you dare not say this again enow , then was it but a shift and dissimulation before : and if yow should say it againe now , yow would be laughed at by all men . And though yow doe not ; yet euery wise man will consider , with what truth or ground yow said it before , to wit , for a meere shift , not vnderstanding or thinking , as yow speake . And conforme to that will they esteem of the rest , which yow say or write , without further ground of reall substance , but only that yow must say somewhat , and that it serueth for your purpose to speake it for the present . But now shall we returne to the place & page of your Reply , from whence we went forth in this digressiō about Caluin . 100. Yow complaine in the said place , as before hath byn shewed , of the charge of Arrianisme laid falsly vpon Caluin , by our Iesuites , as yow say , and this for one only speech of his where he saith ; That the Father is by a kinde of excellency God , which yow say both in speech and sense , is most orthodoxall , and agreeing with the tenour of holy writ , and iudgment of all ancient Fathers , as our owne learned Iesuites confesse , and doe produce ( say yow ) for their authority an inquest of Fathers to free Caluin in this point , which Fathers vpon those wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell , my Father is greate then I , doe affirme that the Father is greater , not in substance and being , but by reason of birth and begetting , for which yow alledge Cardinall Tolet & Maldonate , both Iesuites , in their commentaries vpon S. Iohns Ghospell . 101. But this Syr by your leaue , supposing al were so , doth not free Caluin in this point of Arrianisme : for that he is otherwise manifoldly conuinced , as now yow haue heard . And secōdly , for this sole point or sentēce heere mentioned , albeit the two forenamed Iesuites doe cite diuers ancient Fathers , that doe hold those wordes of Christ , My Father is greater then I , are true , not only in respect of his humanity , but also in a certaine sort , as he is God , to wit , that betweene those personall relations of Father and Sonne , Begetter and Begotten , in the blessed Trinity , there ariseth a more honourable respect out of the former , then of the later ; yet doth not this make that in the Godhead it self , the Father is more excellent then the Sonne , or that by excellency he is God , or that the name of God by a certaine excellency doth only belōg vnto him , as Caluin is accused to say , which in all sensible construction must import , that the Sonne is inferiour vnto him in substance of Godhead , which is a cheif point of Arrianisine wheron the old Arrians did principally stand , in all their disputes against Catholickes . 102. And wheras T. M. for his last defense of Caluin saith , that he was so farre of from Arrianisme , that our owne Bellarmine doth acknowledge that Caluin did impugne the doctrine of the Arrians , in this also , as in all the rest , he vseth great fraud . For first Bellarmine hath not this affirmatiue proposition , as heere is set downe , Caluin did impugne the doctrine of the Arrians ; but only he confesseth that Caluin and other Sectaries , who out of their wicked doctrine cōsenting with the old Arrians haue giuen occasion to the ofspring of new Arrians in our dayes , doe notwithstanding write bookes against them , as 〈◊〉 did ; which thing may arise vpon diuers occasions , concerning either their persons or sect . Bellarmins wordes are these : Albeit Luther , Melanchthon , Caluin and their 〈◊〉 doe 〈◊〉 Arrius for an Heretick ; yet can they not deny but that themselues in their writinges did sow the seedes of this errour , from whence afterwardes sprong vp these new Arrians , which they themselues impugne : So as Bellarmine doth not speake in this place particularly of Caluins impugning all the doctrine of Arrians , as heere this man would seeme to impose vpon him , citing falsly this sentence out of him : Arrianos Caluinus impugnauit , and no more ; but that he and other Sectaries of our dayes would seeme in some thinges to impugne thē , wheras in other thinges they held with them . For so presently in the very next wordes doth Bellarmine expresly declare himself , where hauing reduced the Heresies of Arrius to two heades , saith , that the former sort are held publickly by the new Arrians of our dayes , wherof the seedes were sowne by Caluin and others : but the second sort are held expressely by Caluin and other moderne Sectaries , Alterum 〈◊〉 Arrianorum docent omnes huius temporis Haeretici saith he . So as in this also there is notable fraudulent dealing of T. M. as yow see ; yea nothing almost commeth from him without fraude . 103. But as for this bragge of his & his fellows that Caluin did write diuers books against the new Arrians , and Trinitarians of our time , as namely against Seruetus , Gentilis , Alciatus , Blandrata and others , Doctor Hunnius that hath read their workes & his , can best make answere , & decide the matter , who saith : Pridem & hoc inclaruit in orbe Christiano , quibus ex Scholis & Ecclesiis ipsa illa 〈◊〉 portenta prodierint . It is now well knowne in the Christian world , out of what schooles and Churches those foule monsters ( the new Arrians & Trinitarians ) haue proceeded , that is to say , from the Caluinistes &c. And wheras ( saith he ) it is vaunted that Caluin did write against these Heretickes , wee deny not but that therin he did well , albeit in truth he gaue occasion to the diuell by his manner of dealing , to raise vp no small number of enemies against the blessed Trinity , and consequently he did no otherwise , then if one hauing holpen some to set fire on a house , should after the flame therof waxeth boysterous , help other men also for extinguishing or restrayning the same . So Hunnius : who finally concludeth with this prayer : Dominus Iesus Satanam sub pedes nostros conterat citò , & a lue Caluinistica clementer liberet Ecclesiam suam . Amen . Our Lord Iesus crush Satan quickly vnder our feet , and of his clemency deliuer his Church from the infection of Caluinistes . Thus he , and with this praier he endeth his booke . 104. And now if this man had byn a Papist , great exceptions no doubt would be taken against him ; but being a brother of the same Ghospell , & one of those oath , promise , or other band of conscience . As if an vniust Iudge or Magistrate should aske vs things that are without his iurisdiction , to the preiudice of our selues , or of others , as by enquiring after secretes that doe not appertaine to him : Or if a iealous husband should aske his wife whether she had euer comitted falshood against him , proposing the present paine of death , except she answered directly therunto , and many other such like cases , which I purposely pretermit . And it seemeth that Thomas Morton hath not studied them , but Catholicke writers , both Deuines , Scholasticall and Positiue , as also Lawyers both Canon and ciuill among vs doe discusse how men may beare themselues therin , without sin or offence to God , when they fall out , and this with more seuerity against lying , then any Protestant Author is seene to doe , as in the sequent Consideration will appeare . 24. And heere I aske Thomas Morton further what he will say to all the stratagems in warre , for so much as there may be aswell lying in factes , as in wordes , according as our S. Thomas and other Deuines doe hold ; how will T. M. excuse these stratagems , that is to say pollicies , deceiptes , and dissimulations of enemies in warres , from lies ? Will he condemne all such stratagems as sinfull , as heathenish , as hellish , as impious ? Why then doe his Protestāt Captaines & Leaders vse them ? why doe his Protestāt Ministers that liue with them allow therof ? Nay that which is much more , why doth S. Augustine approue the same , whose sentēce is : Cùm iustum bellum quis susceperit , vtrum aperta pugna vel insidiis vincat nihil ad iustitiam interest : When a man taketh vpon him a iust war , it importeth nothing to the iustice of the cause , whether he ouercome by open war or sleights : which sentence is so well liked by our Popes , lawyers and Deuines , as it is put into the corps of the Canon law . And what will T. M. then say to all this , yea to many expresse examples in Scripture it self ? 25. And namely what will he say to the fact of Iosue that going about to take the Citty of Hai , gaue order to his Captaines : Ponite insidias post Ciuitatem , nos terga vertemus &c. Lay an ambush behinde the Citty by night , and we shall follow with an army in the norning , and when those of Hai shal come forth to assaile vs , we will seeme to flee , simulantes metum , feigning to be afraid : What will he say to this stratageme ? will he deny it to be a dissimulation , and consequently also an Equiuocation in fact ? The matter is euident to the contrary by the text it self : will he call it a scarre of infirmity of the old Testament ( to vse his owne Ministeriall or rather Manichean phrase ) and thinke to escape therby ? But against this is the expresse order , and commandment of God himself : Pone insidias vrbi post eam , lay an ambush behinde the Citty , ergo stratagems in warre though they conteine deceiptes , dissimulations , and Equiuocations , may be vsed in some cases , and that lawfully without the sinne of lying . 26. Another example most manifest is in the fourth booke of the Kinges , where the King of Syria sending certaine Captaines with forces to apprehend the Prophet Elizeus in the Citty of Dothaim , he going forth of the Citty , and meeting with the said Captaines , they not knowing him , said vnto them : Non est haec via , neque ista est Ciuitas ; sequimini me , & ostendam virum quem quaeritis : This is not the way ( to Dothaim ) nor is this that Citty , but doe yow follow me , and I will shew vnto yow the man whome yow seeke for , and so they did , and he lead them into the middest of Samaria where the King of Israel his army might and would haue destroyed them , if the said Prophet had permitted : So as this stratageme also , conteyning the exteriour shew : of a great vntruth , and falshood , cannot be deined to haue byn lawfull in this Prophet , as appeareth by the concurrence of God with diuers miracles in the same . 27. The like may be shewed out of the example of Iudith , who by the instinct of Almighty God , and his plaine ordinance , as the Scripture saith , was sent to Holofornes , who told him a long narration of many thinges that in euent and outward shew were not true , as that he should get not only 〈◊〉 , but Hierusalem also , and conquer the whole nation of the Iewes , adding therunto this asseueration , Et misit me Dominus haec nunciare tibi , and our Lord hath sent me to tell yow these thinges , by which stratageme ( as you know ) she deliuered her whole countrey from the forces of the said Holofernes , which otherwise had byn like to haue destroyed them 28. And thus much in this place for stratagemes in warre : but for other examples great numbers might be alledged , wherin some Equiuocations must needes be admitted , though no ly ; as that of the Angell appearing to Toby the elder , who being taken by him to be a man , and demaunded of what family or tribe he was , he said , ego sum Azarias Ananiae Magni silius , I am Azarias the Sonne of the Great Ananias , wherunto Toby answered , Ex magno genere tu es , yow are of a great stocke indeed ; which yet was not so in the vnderstanding of the speaker , and consequently heere must be confessed an euident Equiuocation , or amphibology of speach , wherby the hearer was deceaued . And not vnlike to this is that speech of our Sauiour , when standing in the temple , he vsed to the Iewes demanding a miracle : Doe yow dissolue this Temple , and I will build it vp againe in three dayes , meaning the Temple of his body , but his hearers vnderstood him of the materiall Temple of Hierusalem , and so to their sense it seemed that he speake , for 〈◊〉 cause they accused him afterward very solemnly therof at this passion , and insulted against him for the same vpon the crosse , ergo Equiuocation may not alwayes be condemned for lying , as our Minister auoucheth . 29. I pretermit diuers other speeches of our Sauiour of like quality , as that when he said to his brethren : Ego non ascendam ad diem festum istum . I will not goe vp to Hierusalem to this feast , and yet he meant to goe vp , and so went , but not in publicke , and therin stood the : Equiuocation of his 〈◊〉 ; but his brethren vnderstood not his meaning , for if they had , no doubt they would not haue gone vp without him , ergo one sense was vnderstood by the speaker , and another by the hearer , which wee shall afterward shew to be properly Equiuocation , and yet no ly can be inforced theron , but with singuler impiety . 30. These wordes also of S. Paul to the Hebrewes : Melchisedech King of Salem &c. which was without Father , without Mother , without genealogy , neither hauing beginning of his dayes , nor end of his life , must needs be confessed to haue an Equiuocation or amphibology in them , and somewhat to be reserued by the speaker for their vnderstanding : for as they lye , they seeme impossible to be true , that a man could be without Father , Mother , genealogy , beginning or ending , & yet is there no more expressed by the Apostle , but his meaning was that nothing is set downe in Scripture of those particularities . 31. And finally the same Apostle S. Paul , seing himself pressed at a certaine time in iudgment by his enemies , and considering that they were of two factions , Pharisies and Saduces , wherof the one sort confesseth resurrection of the dead , and the other not , he protested openly that the cause wherof he was accused , was about the said resurrection of the dead , which though in his sense was true , for that his chiefe trouble was for defending the resurrection of Christ , and our hope of resurrection by him : yet was it not so then in the vnderstanding of the hearers , who vpon this , deviding themselues , let him goe , yea the Pharisies began to excuse & defend him in that Councell , who otherwise were the greatest enemies of his Religion and profession . By all which is seene that sometimes of necessity wee must admit some vse of Equiuocation without lying , for otherwise many places of the Scriptures themselues and of other holy mens writings & doings cannot be well vnderstood , or defended , as afterwardes more at large shall be shewed . 32. But now to passe no further in the recitall of more argumentes to this purpose , we may conclude with that common doctrine of Schole-men taken out of S. Augustine and other Fathers , that albeit a ly is lawfull in no case ; yet often may it be lawfull to conceale a truth , for that he handling those wordes of the Psalme , Thou shalt destroy all those which speake lyes . he saith : Aliud est mentiri , aliud verum occultare ; aliud est falsum dicere , aliud verum tacere . It is a different thing to ly & to conceale a truth ; one thing to speake that which is false , another thing to hold our peace in that which is true . And then concludeth : Non est ergo culpandum aliquando verum tacere &c. It is not therfore to be reprehended if a man sometimes doe not vtter a truth ; which hardly can be performed in sundry cases without some amphibology or Equiuocation of speech , & consequently that this may be without lying . And heerof one example may serue for all , taken out of Hieremy the Prophet , who hauing had a long conference in secret with Sedechias the King in Hierusalem , & told him many thinges of the will of God about his voluntary yeelding to the Chaldeans and army of Nabuchodonosor , King Sedechias in conclusion said thus vnto him : Nullus sciat verba haec &c. Let no man know those wordes that thou hast spoken vnto me , and thou shalt not dye , & if the Princes or Noble men of my Kingdome shall heare that thou hast spoken with me , and shall come vnto thee and say , tell vs what thou hast talked with the King , and the King with thee , and see thou hide nothing from vs , thou shalt say vnto them &c. And the said Princes came to Hieremy , and examined him , and he spake vnto them according to all the wordes which the King had commanded him , and so they left him . 33. Thus far the Scripture , and no man can probably imagine but that in this recapitulation made by Hieremy vnto the Princes , of so long a conference had with the King in secret , but that for couering of those thinges which the King would not haue to be vttered , and the Noble men were greedy to know , in such a dangerous and suspicious time of seige as that was , Hieremy himself being held for more then half a traitour to his countrey , for that he perswaded men to yeeld themselues to the common enemy ; no doubt ( I say ) but that in so strait an examinatiō as they would make about that matter , in whose power his life and death ( as the Scripture signifieth ) did ly , diuers Equiuocations of speeches must necessaryly be vsed by him , though alwaies with a true sense in his meaning , which is the difference betweene Equiuocation and lying , as after more particulerly shall be shewed , if first we set downe one other consideration for better declaring the difference in these two thinges , and how farre those are from approbation of lying who in some cases doe admit Equiuocation in our doctrine . The fifth Consideration . §. 5. 34. IN the fifth place it may be considered about this matter , how farre the teachers or allowers of Equiuocation are from teaching or allowing of lies , which is the ordinary calumniation of this malicious Minister throughout his whole seditious booke ; which if it be proued to be a false charge , then falleth all his accusation to the ground , or rather vpon his owne head . Wherfore we must stād somewhat more long vpon this point , then vpon the former , to the end it may appeare how 〈◊〉 a Minister of Sathan this is , whose principall exercise hath euer byn to calumniate from the beginning : and we shall talke especially of the Catholicke writers of these last foure hundred years by him mentioned , and of the Popes of the same time , that haue approued the same doctrine ; for that of this principall accusation , that they made no difference betweene lying and Equiuocating , but expresly rather patronized the one as much as the other . 35. First then for battery of this wicked slaunder , we will beginne our confutation from the receaued authority of the famous learned doctor S. Thomas of Aquin , that liued and died aboue three hundred yeares gone . He proposeth this question in his most excellent Summe of Deuinity , VVhether all kind of lying be alwayes a sinne , and consequently vnlawfull for any cause ? And he holdeth affirmatiuely , that it is so , alleadging many proofes and reasons for the same . And the very same seuerity of doctrine in that point doe hold all other Schoolemen , aswell after him , as before him , and our Minister himselfe citeth Vasquez the Iesuite late Reader of Deuinity in Spaine , in certaine disputations of his vpon S. Thomas , affirming : Mendacium esse malum tam : intrinsecè , vt bonum reddi nulla ratione posset . That a lye is so intrinsecally euill of his owne nature , as that by no meanes it may be made good or lawfull . And the like rigour of doctrine teacheth the said S. Thomas in the next question after , against dissimulation and Hypocrisy , which he saith to be a kind of lye in fact , deceauing a man by exteriour signes or actes , as the other sort of lies doth by wordes : against both which kindes or sortes of lies or vntruthes he holdeth this conclusion , That neither of them in any case is dispensable from sinne , though in some cases one may be a lesse sinne then another ; and if this be so , how then can Equiuocation be permitted by him , if he held it to be a lye , as our Minister would haue it . For if , as Vasquez said , no sort of ly can be made lawfull by any circumstāce ; then must M. Morton grant , that it followeth by the same reason , that either Equiuocation is no ly , or els that Vasquez the Iesuite , and his fellowes doe not allow Equiuocation in any case whatsoeuer , & consequently that Iesuites are falsely accused by this fellow for admitting Equiuocation . But let vs goe forward , and shew his folly out of other Authors of no lesse antiquity . 36. Before S. Thomas , the Maister of the Sentences Peter Lombard , in his third booke , and 38. and 39. distinctiō , holdeth the same seuerity against all sorts of lies , and falsities , deuiding them into three sortes , to wit , perniciosum , officiosum , & iocosum , the first pernicious , or malicious that intendeth hurt without good , the second that intendeth the good of some without hurte to any , the third in iest ; all which notwithstanding are condemned for sinfull , and no wayes to be practised or tolerated for any cause whatsoeuer , though the secōd two sortes may be oftentimes veniall sinnes only ; but : yet of such nature , and so intrinsecally euill of themselues , as neither for sauing our owne liues , or the life of another man they ought wittingly to be committed , as out of S. Augustine also , by him and other Schoolemen alleadged is confirmed : yea they alleadge eight seuerall kinds , sortes , or degrees of lies out of the same S. Augustine , some farre lesse then others , but yet none allowable , and so they conclude with this sentence of the said Doctor : Quisquis verò aliquod genus esse mendacij , quod peccatum non sit , putauerit , decipit seipsum 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 se deceptorem aliorum arbitretur . Whosoeuer shall thinke that there is any kind of lye , which is not sinne , he 〈◊〉 deceaueth himselfe by thinking that he may be an honest deceauer of other men . 37. This is the doctrine of the Maister of Sentences , for foure hundred yeares past , and of other Schoole Doctors ensuing after him , vnto our time , wherin yow see how rigorous they are in condemning lying , wheron this Minister Thomas Morton either by chaūce , or his good happe stumbling , found store of matter to wrangle with vs in this controuersy , and to make a shew of some reading of different Authors , wherin otherwise he must haue byn very briefe and dry . For whatsoeuer he hath of ostentation in this behalfe against Equiuocation , is stolne 〈◊〉 of the said Maister of Sentences , and Fathers by him alleadged , spoken , and meant by them against lying , and not Equiuocation . And is not this a goodly manhood trow yow ? deserueth he not a laurell for this conquest ? Our Authors detest lying , and admit in some cases Equiuocation , he applieth their detestation to Equiuocation , or their admittance to lies , and saith , that he deuideth our tongues , & turneth our owne Authors against vs : what a ridiculous toy and foolery is this ? But let vs see yet somewhat further . 38. The same Schoole Doctors stay not heere , but doe passe on to many other particularities for shewing their detestation against the foresaid kind of lying , for fauouring wherof they are brought into question by this Minister . As for example , wheras they write that God is omnipotent , and can doe all thinges , and vse his creatures to what end and vse it shall please him ; yet cannot he neither by his ordinary , nor absolute power , either by himselfe , or by another concurre to the making of a lye fraudulently to deceaue the vnderstāding of man or Angell , or induce another so to deceaue the same , with intention indeed of deceipt or fallacy . Of which point of doctrine the said Schoole-Doctors and others after them doe dispute largely vpon the third article of S. Thomas his second Part , and first question of his Summe of Deuinity , demaunding this doubt : VVhether any kind of deceipt or falsity by any meanes , mediatly , or immediatly , may proceed from God ; which they hold negatiuely , that it is impossible , he being truth it selfe , and the fountaine of all truth and sincerity in others . And albeit there be many and great arguments : alleadged out of Scriptures , which in shew doe proue the contrary , to wit , that God not only can by his absolute power , but hath also oftentimes in effect deceaued others , by meanes of wicked spirites , as S. Augustine also holdeth , and is euident by many places of Scripture , as 2. Reg. 22. where to deceaue Achab , it is said : Dedit Dominus spiritum mendacem in ore omnium Prophetarum . God gaue a lying spirit in the mouth of all his false Prophettes . And Esay 63. Ezech. 14. Iob 12. Rom. 1. it is said expressely , that God deliuereth men into a reprobate sense , which is the worst sort of deceauing a mās vnderstāding that may be : yet to all this they answere out of the ancient Fathers , and Scripture it selfe , that God doth only permit men to be deceaued , and to belieue vntruth , but doth not concurre actually or effectually to the same by any cooperation of his to any falshood or vntruth whatsoeuer , nor can he doe it by any power of his , for that he should impugne himselfe which is truth . And this is the greatest and highest detestation of lying vsed by our Doctors that possibly can be imagined : and yet will the lying Minister say that they are 〈◊〉 , Fathers , and patrons of lying . But let vs see more of our Schoole-Doctors in this behalfe . 39. Our learned countreyman also Alexander of Hales , liuing before S. Thomas , and as some say was his Maister , being held for one of the most learned of all Schoole-men that euer were before or after him , doth handle diuers questions very learnedly and piously about this point for detestatiō of lying , as namely one , VVhy theft and man-slaughter may be lawfully permitted in some cases and lying neuer . Also how it cōmeth to passe , that the least degree of lying that is to wit an officious , or 〈◊〉 , which in ordinary imperfect men is only a venial sinne , may come to be in men of perfection a mortall and damnable sinne , concluding thus : Quod sicut de Adam dicitur , quòd ratione status sui peccauit mortaliter , ita & iste ratione status in hoc genere peccat mortaliter . As it is said of Adam , that by reason of his high state of innocency he sinned mortally ( in eating an apple by disobedience ) so this man professing perfection of life in a religious state , by any sort of voluntary lying , sinneth mortally ; for which he alleadgeth diuers authorities of S. Augustine , as namely this ; Sanctus vir &c. A holy man that doth perfectly cleaue to God , which is truth it selfe , is forbidden either purposely , or rashly to vtter vntruth , and for that the Scripture saith , He that lieth killeth his owne soule , and againe , Thou shalt destroy all those that speake lies , perfect men doe fly with all care these kindes also of least lies in such sort , as no mans life may be defended therby , least they hurt their owne soules , while they goe about to profit another mans flesh . 40. Againe the said Father in another place : Tam sibi clausum deputat ad subueniendum hominem per mendacium , quàm si per stuprum transire cogatur . A good and perfect man doth thinke the way so shut vnto him from helping another man by any kinde of lye , ( though neuer so officious ) as if it were required at his hand to helpe him by cōmitting rape or incest : nay yet Halensis goeth further proposing this question ; Whether if a man did certainly know , that by any least kinde of lying on his behalfe , he might conuert an Infidell to Christianity , and not otherwise , whether he might doe it , or no , and then concludeth that he may not in any case , alleadging this reason out of S Augustine , that as it is not lawfull for me to procure another mans chastity by my owne sinne of carnality ; so much lesse is it lawfull to bring another man to the knowledge of truth , by my corrupting of truth . So this holy Religions Countreyman of ours , whose cōscience let the indifferent Reader compare with that of this irreligious Minister , who not only in iest , or officious lying to any mans good , either in body or soule , but in malicious lying , in preiudice of both , is euery where taken most manifestly , as before yow haue seene , and shall againe after vpon sundry occasions . 41. Well then this seuerity of doctrine is taught by our Catholicke Deuines , against the sinne of simple lying . But if we talke of lying in an oath , which is periury , euery man may imagine how much more earnestly the same is detested by them , in so much as the famous Doctor Nauarre before mētioned , who is held to be one of the most liberall , and largest in admitting Equiuocations both in wordes and oathes , with the due circumstances , and hath written three whole Treatises about the same : yet is he so seuere and rigorous against lying and periury , as he teacheth , that it is a mortall and damnable sinne to sweare falsely , euen in iest . And others yet goe further , auouching that it is damnable to sweare 〈◊〉 by euill custome , yea sometimes also though the thing in it selfe be true which he sweareth : the reason wherof they alleadge to be this , for that the act of swearing being actus latriae , as Deuines call it , that is to say , an act of highest honour to God , for that he is cited and alleadged in an oath , as an infallible witnes , the man that accustometh to sweare rashly putteth himselfe in manifest danger to sweare also falsely , & therby sinneth mortally , albeit , for that time he sweareth the thing that is true , but as easily would he haue done it , thogh it had byn false , in respect of his yll custome of swearing rashly , and consequently , no lesse dishonour and contempt doth he vse towardes the Maiesty of Almighty God therin , then if he had sworne false , which is an important note for rash swearers to consider of and remember . 42. Well now all this being so , will our Minister still stand in his obstinate calumniation , that we are louers of lies , patrons of periury , defenders & allowers of falshood , Doctors of deceauing , and the like ? will he still defend , that there is nothing but lying in Rome ? and that the Sea Apostolike graunteth out full priuiledge of lying , as before yow haue heard him auouch ? how then if I shew that all this , and much more against lying which yow haue heard out of the Schoole-men , and ancient Fathers , is not only allowed & admitted by the Sea of Rome , but translated also by the Popes therof into the corps of their Canon law , and so not only approued , but commended and commaunded also to be obserued ? Can any thing conuince more our Ministers Calumniation then this ? Let any man looke then vpon the second Part of Gratian his Decretals throughout the two and twentith Cause for fiue whole questiōs togeather , there he shall find not only the substance of all this , that heere I haue said , but much more cited out of all the ancient Fathers , Popes , & Councels to this effect . 43. For there he shall find set downe out of S. Augustine , and Canonized , the foresaid distinction of eight sortes or degrees of lying , with a reprobation of them all , where hauing cited those wordes of S. Augustine ; Non est igitur mentiendum in doctrina pietatis , quia magnum scelus est , & primum genus detestabilis mendacij ; we must not lye concerning doctrine of piety , or marters touching our faith , for that it is a heynous sinne , and the first kind of detestable lying : he passeth downeward by all the rest , excluding them one by one , and concluding : Quòd neque pro 〈◊〉 temporali commodo ac salute veritas corrumpenda est , neque ad sempiternam salutem vllus ducendus est opitulante mendacio : Neither is truth to be corrupted for any mans temporall commodity , nor is any man to be brought to eternall saluation by the helpe of a lye ; So S. Augustine : And so Gratian that alleadgeth him aboue foure hundred yeares gone ; and so all the Popes that haue Canonized this saying of his , & determined it for Canonicall law euer since to our dayes . And with what impudency then saith this Minister , from whence shall a man except priuiledge of lying , then from that place , where ( as your owne learned Bishop saith ) there is nothing but lying ; which in deed is lying vpon lying , for that Espencaeus whome he 〈◊〉 in the margent saith not so , there is nothing but lying , as in another place shall be shewed ; and if he did , yet the thing it selfe is euidently proued to be false by this , that we haue alleadged out of the Popes Canons , affirming all sortes of lies whatsoeuer to be indispensable . Let any man then belieue these fellowes that will be deceaued . 44. But the Popes Canons goe yet further , and doe decree , & determine out of the authority of the same Father S. Augustine and other Fathers , sundry pointes of greater perfection against the sinne of lying , as this for example : Quod non licet alicui humilitatis causa mentiri : It is not lawfull for any man to lye out of humility , saying lesse of a mans selfe then truth permitteth . And againe in another Canon : Non licet mentiri , vt arrogan●ia vitetur , it is not lawfull to lye , that arrogancy therby may be auoided . 45. And as for periury which is a lye cōfirmed with an oath , the said Canons are so seuere , as they doe not only detest the same , both in him that forsweareth , & in him that induceth another therunto , but doe also appoint greiuous penitentiall punishmentes for the same . As for example : Qui compulsus à Domino sciens peierat ( saith one Canon ) vtrique sunt periuri , & Dominus & miles : Dominus quia praecepit , miles quia plus Dominum , quàm animam dilexit : si liber est quadragint a dies in pane & aqua paeniteat , & septem sequentes annos . If any man compelled by his Lord , shall w●ittingly forsweare himselfe , both of them are periured , as well the Lord as the seruant : the Lord for commanding , and the seruant , for that he hath loued his Lord more then his owne soule : let him doe pennance by fasting in bread and water fourty dayes , and seauen yeares afterward . Et nunquam sit sine paenitentia , saith another Canon , let him neuer cease to repent , and doe some penance for this greiuous sinne , so long as he liueth . And heere is to be noted , that S. Anselme doth cite this punishment out of the penitentiall decrees of our ancient Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury , wherby it apperteineth the more to my Lord that now is of that Sea , to looke to this his Chaplaine , or miles Morton , and finding him guilty of lying against his owne often oathes and solemne protestations , as we haue discouered him in this our answere , to cast some little aspersion at least of penitentiall satisfactions vpon him . And if forty dayes in bread & water may seeme to much , let him fast some fower with contrition , and that perhaps may doe him more good then any bookes or writing against him . But to retourne to Gratian. He reciteth diuers other Canons out of sundry ancient Councels , Fathers , and Popes decrees , as out of S. Augustine : Homicidam vincit , qui sciens ad periurium hominem prouocat , he passeth a murderer in wickednes , that wittingly doth prouoke another man to periury : and the reason heerof is added in the Canon ; for that a murderer killeth but the body , this the soule ; nay two soules , both his that forsweareth , & his owne that prouoketh . So that Canon ; which me thinketh were seriously to be considered , by them that force others to sweare against their consciences , knowing or presuming probably that the swearers consciences are opposite to that which they are forced to sweare : and consequently , according to this rule of S. Augustine doe murther eternally both their owne soules , and those of them that doe vrge them therunto . Neither shall it be needfull to adde any more in this place seing the said Canons are extant to be read and seene by al , and allowed , authorized , and set forth for sacred and authenticall by all Popes whatsoeuer . 46. My conclusion therfore vpon this fifth consideration is , that for so much as Romish Catholicke doctrine doth teach and prescribe all this rigour , and seuerity against lying and periury , which in Protestants bookes , touching cases of conscience , we haue not hitherto seene expressed ; it may well be inferred , that if Equiuocation were held for lying ; it would in no case be allowed by the same doctrine , as lying is not . And that if the Sea of Rome did giue out priuiledges for lying and periury she would not authorize such seuere penitentiall Canons against the same , and that if nothing but lying were there , as Morton saith there is not , then were this lying also that she doth acknowledge these Canons , which yet is proued by the printed bookes that are extant therof : and to these inferences I doe not see what can be answeared , or brought to the contrary , except only our Minister would say , that all our Doctors are deceaued , in distinguishing betweene lying and Equiuocation , which 〈◊〉 he say , he doth first quit vs from lying wittingly , & consequently from lying at all , for that according to S. Augustine & all other Doctors , he that lieth thinking that he doth not lye , lieth not at all , quia non 〈◊〉 linguam ream , nisi mens rea , nothing maketh the tongue guilty of lying , but a guilty mind , and consequently T. M. hauing accused vs so often and 〈◊〉 of wilfull lying , hath wilfully slaundered vs , and heere vnwittingly cleareth vs. And as for the second , whether our Doctors doe well and rightly distinguish betweene lying and Equiuocation , shall now presently be 〈◊〉 in the sequent Chapters of this Treatise . THE SVBSTANCE OF THE CAVSE IS ENTERED INTO ; And it is discussed , VVhat Equiuocation , what truth , what falsity , and lying is : And some other points to this effect . CHAP. VIII . ANd forasmuch as all the Considerations laid forth in the former Chapter , haue byn set downe only by way of preamble , for better vnderstanding the true state of the controuersy ; it shall be now expedient , that we draw neere to the substance of the matter and yssue it self , especially being called therunto by the 〈◊〉 prouocation of our Aduersary , who hauing made that vainglorious entrance to his Treatise of confutation , which before we touched ; to wit , I am now to encounter this new-bred-hydra and vgly monster &c. And I shall proue this Equiuocation and approbation therof to be lying , and that no one Iota in all Scripture , no one example in all antiquity , no one shaddow of reason in the naturall wit of man , can be brought for any proofe or colour therof : After these bragges ( I say ) he passeth to another solemne vaunt saying : Now must we come into the listes of this conflict , and enter vpon our Equiuocatour to conuince him a grosse lier , wherby yow see his great confidence in the cause , which I cannot ascribe to any thing , more then to ignorance . For if he had vnderstood well , or weighed the points before laid downe , or these other which presently we are to adioine , I doe not see how he could haue spoken so confidently in so bad a cause . 2. For what ? will he hold that all kind of Equiuocation is lying ? If he doe , he forgetteth himself , for he granted in the very next precedent page , that one sort of Equiuocation ( which afterward we shall proue to be the only ) is no ly . For that hauing set downe , as it were , for a principle or foundation of all his Treatise , what we doe hold in this behalf , he saith , that we doe teach a double Equiuocation , the one mentall when any thing is reserued in mind , differing from that which outwardly is expressed , as when a Catholicke being demaunded , whether he haue any Priest in his house , may answere by Equiuocation that he hath none , reseruing in his mind that he hath none whome he is bound to vtter or discouer : the other kind is verball , when one word ( he should haue said also speach ) shall import two or more significations , as if a man should say yow goe to fast , or yow may not ly in my house , the word fast , may signify either fasting or hasty going , and lying may signify either remaining , or telling vntruth . And the like example may be taken out of Aristotle himself , of the word Dogge ; as if one should say , I am afraid of a Dogge , the speach is doubtfull and equiuocall , for that the word Dogge hath a triple signification , to wit a domesticall dogge , a dogge fish in the sea , or a signe in the heauenly spheare , wherin when the sunne hath his course we call them dogge dayes , of which some man being afraid for his health , may say , I feare the Dogge &c. 3. Now then these two sortes of Equiuocations being set downe , T. M. is forced presently to grant , that the later sort , whether it be in word or speech , is no ly of it self ; for who would say , that a man lyeth in vsing the different significations of any word or speach ? Who will affirme that he saith an vntruth , if for example , he being of a hoate & sickly complexion , and fearing the Canicular-dayes , should say , I feare the dogge , meaning the dangerous influence of that celestiall signe , or of those Canicular-dayes : so as now by his owne confession , ( for in effect he confesseth it in this place , and can doe no other ) this second part or member of Equiuocation , is no ly ; notwithstanding perhaps the hearer should be deceaued , & vnderstand the speaker to meane of a domesticall dogge , when he meaneth the celestiall . And of this more examples shal be giuen afterwardes out of the Scripture it self . 4. But heere is to be noted that 〈◊〉 , whome M. Morton stileth by the title of Oracle of all Logitians , setteh downe three sortes or degrees of Equiuocation : the first in word or speach , when it hath diuers significations : the second in custome of phrase : the third in composition of single partes togeather . Of the first he giueth the example before mentioned of a dogge , that hath different significations , of the secōd , though he name no example , yet this may be one , if I should say : I esteeme him a wise man that can hold his peace , it would be vnderstood in English for him that can gouerne his tongue , & this in respect of our English phrase or custome of speach , but in any other language it would rather be vnderstood for him that can liue in peace , or maintaine the peace he hath made with his Aduersary ; so as the Equiuocation or multiplicity of sense , riseth heere out of our English custome of phrase as yow see . 5. Of the third sort he alleadgeth many examples , and among other this : Possibile est sedentem ambulare , & non scribentem scribere : That one sitting may walke , and one not writing may write , in which sentences the wordes being taken separatly and a part out of composition , they haue but simple and plaine significations , but being compounded in this manner as they ly , haue manifest Equiuocation and amphibology in them , by reason of composition . For if wee vnderstand that a man sitting , while he sitteth , can walke , or while he writeth not , can write , which is , as Logitians say , in sensu composito , it is not possible : but if we vnderstand it in sensu diuiso that he that sitteth now may walke afterward , or he that writeth not now , hath power to write afterward , no man will deny it ; and yet are neither of those thinges falsities or lies but only Equiuocall or amphibologicall propositions , that may be true in diuers senses , and yet deceaue the Reader or hearer if he stand not attent . 6. But now whether T. M. will admit our former reserued proposition , which is partly 〈◊〉 and partly verball , vnder any of these three sortes of Logicall Equiuocations , I know not : but if he doe , then must he confesse the said proposition to be no lye , which is contrary to his asseueration in this place , saing that 〈◊〉 such Equiuocation is a grosse lye : and if he doe not , then must he acknowledge his Oracle of Logitians to haue erred grossely in making an insufficient diuision , which comprehendeth not all the partes of the thing deuided . For if the said mixt proposition be an Equiuocation , then must it haue place amongest some of these three kindes , or els the diuision should be insufficient : Quia latius pateret diuisum , quàm 〈◊〉 diuidentes . 7. But howsoeuer this be , yet M. Morton who euery where pretendeth great skill in Logicke , and therin also to be a cunning Aristotelian , calling the first ( as yow haue heard ) the art of artes , and high tribunall of reason , and the second the Oracle , shewing also some disdaine , when his Aduersary doth but so much as name Logicke in his behalf ; this man ( I say ) committeth heere one of the most childish absurdities , against both Aristotle and Logicke , that commonly can be committed by one that knoweth the first principles therof : for he maketh Aristotle to define the whole by the definition of a part , as if one should define a man by the definition of the body , or the body by the definition of one legge , or the whole science of Phisicke , by the skill of the herbal , or of the pulse , or in-sight in waters , which are but seuerall partes of Phisicke : euen so doth M. Morton , taking vpon him to set downe the definition of Equiuocatiō , therby to impugne our foresaid mentall proposition , saith thus : Equiuocation in word or speech ( saith the Oracle of all Logitians ) is whē one word , or one speach doth equally signify diuers thinges , as when one shall say , I am afraid of a dogge &c. which how wisely he applieth to his purpose to ouerthrow our proposition therby , & to proue it no proposition at all , shall afterward appeare ; now only is to be noted that these wordes are not the wordes of Aristotle in defining , but in deuiding Equiuocation , and the very first therof to wit , Equiuocation is &c. are fisted in by Morton himself , as also the Greek therof set downe by him for ostentations sake in his margent , for that Aristotle there making a diuision of three sortes of Equiuocation before mentioned , describeth only the first sort therof in these wordes : There are three sortes or manners of speach according to Equiuocation , and amphibology , the one , when a speach or word doth principally signify many thinges , as an Eagle , or Dogge &c. so as heere besides the sleight or falshood which is familiar vnto our aduersary , he is conuinced either to haue abused greatly his Oracle , in making him to erre grossely in setting downe a diuision of three partes of Equiuocation , wheras there is but one , or in defining the whole by a part only , as before hath byn declared , wherof would follow that his definition non conuertitur cum definito , the greatest absurdity that in Logicke can be committed . Or lastly ( which I easiest belieue ) that he vnderstood not Aristotle , though he would make a florish therof , & so following the bat in flying hastily without light , hath broken his head on the walles before he was a ware . 8. But to returne to consider somewhat further of the nature of Equiuocation , yow will aske me ( perhaps ) what is the proper definition of Equiuocation , and how is the former mixt proposition partly mentall and partly verbal , truly called Equiuocal or Equiuocation , for so much as it seemeth by that which hitherto hath byn said , that of the double kind set downe in the beginning , to wit mentall and verball , the second only may properly be called Equiuocation , that is to say , when a speach or word fignifieth diuers thinges equally , which I grant also to be true , if wee consider the proper nature of Equiuocation treated by Aristotle , and his particuler 〈◊〉 and reasons which he had in treating therof , which endes by his Expositours are said to be two . 9. The first as it serueth to discerne captious and sophisticall sillogismes , from demonstratiue and dialecticall ; to which end he alledgeth six seuerall kindes of the said captious speeches in his first booke of Elenchs ; and Equiuocation is the first , amphibology the second : which Equiuocation is deuided ( as yow haue heard , ) into three degrees before specified , to wit , into Equiuocation of speach or wordes that haue diuers significations ; into Equiuocation by custome ction of the dead , wherof we shall haue better occasion to set downe afterward many examples , which no wayes cā be auoided from vntruth , but only by some kind of mentall reseruation in the speaker ; though Thomas Morton striue and struggle neuer so much to fly the same : but the more he struggleth , the more he intangleth himself like a fox in a net . 12. His second conclusion also ( for two only he maketh conteining the whole subiect of his 〈◊〉 reatise ) seemeth to me very fond , simple , and vntrue , where he saith : Our second conclusion is this , that euery Equiuocation , whether it be mentall or verball , if it be vttered in an oath , though it be no ly , yet is it an abhominable prophanation of that sacred institution of God ; and I would aske him why ? for that whatsoeuer may be truly said may be truly sworne also , and without prophanation , so it be done with the due circumstances of truth , iustice , and reuerence ; an oath being nothing els , as Deuines doe define it , but the calling of God to witnes in any thing that is affirmed or denied . And as for mentall reseruation , I would aske T. M. whether a man may not aswell sweare , as say the foresaid sentence of the Prophet , wicked men shall not rise in iudgment ? And for verball Equiuocation , I would demaund him , whether a man may not sweare that which Christ our Sauiour saith and affirmeth to be true , as for example , Elias iam venit . Elias is come ; and againe of S. Iohn Baptist , Ipse est Elias , he is Elias himself , where the word Elias hath plaine Equiuocation in it , for that it signifieth both the person and spirit of Elias , and in S. Iohn was the one and not the other . And againe that saying of our Sauiour , Dissolue this Temple , and in three dayes I will raise it vp againe , the word Temple hath an euident verball Equiuocation , for it signifieth both the materiall Temple , and Christes body , and therby deceaued euen the wisest hearers , who vnderstanding the one sense , which was the more common , obiected the same to our Sauiour both in his iudgment , and vpon the Crosse ; and yet was there neither ly , falshood , nor prophanation in this speach , though Equiuocall ; no if our Sauiour had sworne it , for his word was of more truth and reuerent respect to God his Father , then our oath can be . And heerby may our Minister see his wit in setting downe so resolute a conclusion . 13. But there be many more examples as euident as this , as , Et ego si exaltatus fuero à terra omnia traham ad meipsum ; when I shall be exalted from the earth I will draw all thinges vnto my self , where the word Exaltation may haue many senses , as to be exalted to heauen , or to glory , which most men would vnderstand , rather then an exaltation vpō a Crosse , which Christ vnderstood , and consequently his speech was mixt with amphibology and Equiuocation ; as were also the wordes omnia traham , which may haue sundry senses , and some in apparence not true . And in like manner when he said of Lazarus sicknes , Infirmitas haec non est ad mortem , this sicknes it not to death ; and yet he died , and consequently there was a further sense reserued . And in the same place , Lazarus amicus noster dormit , our friend Lazarus sleepeth ; the word dormit signifieth Equiuocally either to sleep or be dead , Christ vnderstood of the second , his Disciples of the first : & will yow say that he did abuse or deceaue them , or vse prophane speach in this Equiuocation ? And yet further the same Equiuocation our Sauiour vseth in those wordes , Ignem veni mittere in terram , & quid volo , nisi ut ardeat , I came to cast fier into the earth , and what would I els , but that it burne ? The word fier signifieth both naturall fier , and zeale or feruour of spirit , and burning hath the like ambiguity ; and is this also prophanation , if it were to be sworne , as Christ did speake it ? of phrase ; and into Equiuocation by composition of single , and simple partes togeather . His second intentiō was to treat therof in regard of placing each thing in due order , in his ranke of ten Predicaments , or shew their relation therunto ; and for this cause in his first Treatise vpon the said Predicaments , he maketh that notorious diuision of wordes , so well knowne vnto Logitians into AEquiuoca , Vniuoca & Denominatiua , saying those thinges are Equiuocall which doe agree only in name , but are different in nature and 〈◊〉 , according to that name , as a liuing and painted man doe agree only in the name of a man , but not in nature , essence , substance or definition ; and the like may be said in the word dog ge before mentioned . 10. Now then wheras our proposition before mentioned with mentall reseruation , tendeth not directly to any of these two purposes intended by Aristotle ; and further hath no doubtfull sense of speach or wordes by nature of the wordes themselues , or their double or doubtfull significations , but only that it vttereth not all the whole sense of the speaker ; it cannot properly be called Equiuocall according to Aristotles meaning and definition ; but rather in a more large & ample signification , as Equiuocall may signify an amphibologicall , doubtfull , or double-sensed propositiō , in respect of the speaker and hearer , wherof the one sometime vnderstandeth the same in one sense , and the other in another . For which cause the most ancient Schoole-Doctors , Fathers , and other Authors doe vse in deed rather the word Amphibology then Equiuocation in expressing like kind of speaches as our proposition is ; which of later yeares only hath byn accustomed to be vsed in this sense , but the other is most ordinary with antiquity , not only among Philosophers , but also ( and that especially ) among Orators and Rhetoritians , in which science it is held for lawfull & most commendable in diuers occasions , wheror both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 maketh mention , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a whole Chapter The cause then why the answering by such a reserued proposition , as before hath byn mentioned , is called by some Equiuocation , is 〈◊〉 by a certain similitude , thē propriety of speach , to wit that euē as Equiuocation properly by community of name in things of different natures by variety of significations in the selfe same wordes or speach , by 〈◊〉 of phrase , and composition of sundry sortes 〈◊〉 make different and doubtfull senses , & meanings to the hearer ; so in this case by mentall reseruation of some part of the foresaid mixt proposition , the like effect of doubtfulnes is bred in the hearers 〈◊〉 , and therby consequently is named Equiuocation , although improperly as Equiuocation is taken for any doubtfull word or speach that may haue diuersity of senses or vnderstandings . 11. But now to inferre herof as T. M. doth in his first 〈◊〉 of this his wise dispute , that euery such 〈◊〉 by mentall reseruation is a grosse ly , is not only a grosse presumption , but a 〈◊〉 ignorance also in my opinion , not to call it a grosse impiety ; for by this meanes he might cōdemne of grosse lying a great number of speaches of the holy Ghost , both in the old and new Testament , where diuers propositions are set 〈◊〉 and vttered with imperfect sense , somewhat being reserued which necessarily must be supplied , to saue the said speach from vntruth . As for example , where the Prophet saith Non resurgunt impij in iudicio : Wicked men doe not rise againe in iugdment : if the Prophet reserued not somewhat in his mind vnuttered , for the complement of this speach , as namely that they shall not rise to glory , as S. Paul expoundeth it to the Corinthians it would seeme an Heresy , & contrary to the article of our creed , I belieue the resurrection spirit or life in ner , 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of maruaile of that she saw ; And againe the same holy Ghost talking of the immensity of Salomons wealth , said : Tantamque copiam praebuit argenti in Hierusalem , quasi lapidum , and Salomon made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as stones in Hierusalem , may a man sweare this without vntruth or prophanation ? what say yow M. Morton ? may a man swear this in your Lordes Court of the Arches ? & the same I demaund of those last wordes of S. Iohns Ghospell ; There are many other thinges which Iesus did , which if they should be particularly written , I doe not thinke that the world it selfe would hold the bookes that should be written therof . 18. How can this be true M. Morton in plaine and literail sense , and without some amphibology or Equiuocation ? and yet I thinke yow will not say it is a lye , being part of the Ghospell , or that it may not be sworne without abhominable prophanation . How then will yow , or can yow defend it ? Truly by no other way , but by the licence of a Rhetoricall figure called HYPERBOLE , which Quintilian defining saith , it is Ementiens superiectio , a lying exaggeration ; and yet will no true Deuine call it a lye indeed , & much lesse periury or prophanation , if any man should sweare it : wherby is made manifest , and apparent the childish vanity of our Aduersary in his former conclusion that euery verball Equiuocation is an abominable prophanation . And so much of this second kind of Equiuocation , which yow see how lawfull and vsuall it is , euen in the Scriptures themselues , and in the speaches of our Sauiour which is truth it self ; wherby hauing repressed somewhat the insolency and ignorance of this our vaunting Minister , we shall retourne now againe to the first kind of Equiuocation by mentall reseruation , about which is our principall controuersy . And for that our Minister affirmeth two pointes about the same , the first , that it is no proposition at all according to the true nature of a proposition ; and 〈◊〉 second that it is vntrue morally , & a grosse ly : we shall handle and discusse these two pointes seuerally in the two Paragraphes that doe ensue . 14. In these other wordes in like manner , Hoc est corpus meum ( about which there is so great a doe now throughout Christendome ) the Protestantes for defending their opinion about the Sacrament , must needes grant a verball Equiuocation , trope , figure , & amphibology , wherby they haue a double sense , and one far different from that naturall plaine and common signification , which all Catholicks hold throughout the world , which is the sense or senses which they & theirs doe frame of these wordes , wherby doth follow in their sense and interpretation that they are Equiuocall , according to the definition of Aristotle ; and yet did Christ vse them in a more sacred institution of the Sacrament , then was that of an oath ; and yet I thinke the impiety of Thomas Morton will not reach so farre , as to condemne Christ of an abhominable prophanation in that his sacred institution ; and consequently he may see that his second generall conclusion was but an inconsiderate , bold , vnlearned , and vntrue assertion . 15. And thus much of this second kind of verball Equiuocation , set downe and censured by T. M. which indeed is only true and proper Equiuocation , as before hath byn noted ( for that mentall in rigour is none ) and agreeth only to the definition of Equiuocation , deliuered not only by Philosophers , but Orators also , Cum pluribus rebus aut etiam hominibus ( saith Quintilian ) eadem appellatio est HOMONYMIA , vt Gallus &c. When one name agreeth to many thinges or men , it is called Equiuocation , as the word Gallus signifieth both a French man , or a Cocke , & some other thinges ; by which definition as also by these other descriptions alledged out of Aristotle before , is euidently seene that the first kind of Equiuocation by mentall reseruation , cannot properly be called Equiuocation but AMPHIBOLOGIA , ambiguity of speach , which stretcheth larger then doth Equiuocation , and is Genus vnto it , as Quintilian in the same place affirmeth ; and that the second kind , which consisteth principally in the diuersity of significations in wordes or speach ( such as before we haue alledged out of our Sauiours speaches ) is properly Equiuocation , & consequently he an Equiuocatour in this kind , which Thomas Morton saith , that his soule doth so much abhorre and detest . 16. I might moreouer to this purpose for further battering of this fond conclusion of Thomas Morton , alledge the vse of all Rhetoricall tropes , and figures , and aske him whether , as they may lawfully be vsed in speach , so likewise in an oath ? As for examples when Christ our Sauiour calleth Heretickes & euill Pastors lupos rapaces , rauening wolues , which is a trope called a Metaphor , may a man sweare it is true ? for that in nature they are men and no wolues . And so likewise when S. Paul wrote to the Corinthians vsing a figure called EIRONEIA : Iam saturati estis , iam diuites facti estis , sine nobis regnatis &c. Now yow are full , now yow are rich , now yow raigne without vs , you are wise , we are fooles , yow are strong , wee are infirme , yow are noble , we are base &c. might S. Paul haue sworne this which he writeth without an abhominable prophanation of that sacred institution of an oath ? I thinke he might , for that often he was accustomed to sweare , that is to say , to call God to witnes , that he spake the truth , and yet heere he cannot be presumed to thinke as he spake , or as the wordes literally doe import : where then is Thomas Morton in this his conclusion ? 17. Againe I would demaund of him whether a man might sweare , without prophanation , that speach of the holy Ghost , concerning the Queene of Saba , when she saw the wisedome , riches , & greatnes of Salomon , Non erat vltra in ea spiritus prae stupore , she had no longer THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER , VVhether a mixt proposition , partly vttered , and partly reserued in mind , may be a true Logicall Proposition , and Enunciation . §. 1. HAuing shewed hitherto aswell what Equiuocation and amphibology is ; as also that all Equiuocation is not lying , or rather that none is properly or can be lying so long as it remaineth within the nature of Equiuocation ( which yet afterward shall better be discussed ) and moreouer that simple & verball Equiuocation either in wordes or speach , may be lawfully vsed by any good man , to a good end ; yea & sworne also with due circumstances , if need 〈◊〉 without periury or prophanation ; and that our Sauiour Christ vpon sundry occasions did vse the same : Now we must restraine our talke to the former part of ambiguity , or supposed Equiuocation only , which is by mentall reseruation , to wit ( not to depart from our aduersaries example ) I am no Priest , so as I am bound to tell it to yow ; the first part therof being vttered , and the later reserued in mind , which so much displeaseth M. Morton as he would annihilate the same , saying first , that it is not a hidden truth , but a grosse ly , as before yow haue heard in his first proposition , and then , that it is no 〈◊〉 at all , if we respect the lawes of Logicke , which he vttering in the vehemēt heate of his spirit , hath these wordes : Consult ( saith he ) with the Ancient logitians , and proue ( marke what scope I yeald vnto yow ) that from the beginning of the world , in the whole Current of so many thousand generations of mankind , till within the compasse of these last foure hundred yeares , and lesse ; that euer any Logitian , whether Infidell or belieuer , did allow your mixt proposition ( which is partly mentall and partly verball ) or thinke it a proposition , and I will be ( which my soule vtterly detesteth ) an Equiuocator . So he . And we must consider of this last point first , and afterward of the rest ; for they are all pregnant as yow see . 20. And first to beginne with Thomas Mortons soule , I know not what it doth , or may detest in Equiuocation , but only perhaps the bare name , therby to seeme to contradict vs , seing it is so frequent in Scripture , as now hath byn said , and after shall be more amply proued : but sure I am that , that soule of his detesteth not lying , as by manifold examples hath appeared , and consequently it were sinne to admit him for an Fquiuocator , for he would infame the lawfull vse therof ; for that Equiuocation can not stand with lying , as in the ensuing Paragraph shall manifestly be proued . 21. Secondly is to be considered in these his wordes the large scope which he giueth vs , to proue from the beginning of the world , in the whole Current of so many thousand generations of mankind , that any Logitian held our mixt proposition for a proposition &c. Wherin I would aske him first , what he meaneth by the Cnrrent of so many thousand generations of mankind , or how many thousandes he thinketh them to be since Logicke was first inuented , or brought into arte , which before Aristotles time was either litle , or imperfect , though he confesseth in his Elenches that Tisias after those that went before him , & Thrasimachus after Tisias , and after him againe Theodorus had collected some obseruatiōs ; but how many thousand generations will Thomas Morton haue past from that time to ours ? S. Matthew in the beginning of his Ghospell recounting the whole current of generatiōs that had runne from Abraham vnto Christ , which were more then from Aristotles time to ours , saith they were but forty and two in all , to wit , fourteene from Abraham to Dauid , fourteene from Dauid to the transmigration of Babilon , & fourteene from thence to Christ ; and where then are so many thousand generations of Thomas Morton ? Is not this a very childish ouerlashing ? 22. But there followeth another simplicity much more notorious : Consult ( saith he ) from the beginning of the world , till within the compasse of these late foure hundred yeares , and lesse , that euer any Logitian , whether Infidell , or belieue did allow your mixt proposition , or thinke it a proposition , and I will be an Equiuocater ; By which wordes yow see that he excepteth against the Iudgment of all the Logitians that haue liued within the compasse of these last foure hundred yeares for triall , whether this sort of mixt proposition be a true Iawfull proposition or no , according to the rules of Logicke ; which if yow consider it well , is one of the most solemne fooleries that euer man of learning could vtter . For if he had excepted only against them , and their iudgment in genere moris that is to say , for triall , whether the proposition before mentioned be true morally , or in morall truth , as it is opposite to lying ; though it had byn presumption to preferre therin his owne weake iudgment before so many great and learned Deuines , and Philosophers as haue liued , and written in the time by him assigned : yet had it byn lesse maruaile , as proceeding from the ordinary pride of an Hereticall humour , exalting it selfe aboue all in such affaires ; but to reiect them all in the art of Logicke , as not able to iudge whether a mixt proposition be a true Logicall proposition , according to the rules of that science , wherin they were most exact , and eminent , and are knowne to haue byn the chiefe , & almost only Commentatours and expositours vpon Aristotle in that behalfe ; this ( I say ) is supereminent folly . For what ? Did Albertus Magnus , S. Thomas of Aquin , and so many others of that ranke know logicke ? Or to omit externe writers , did our famous Countreymen , Alexander of Hales , Scotus , Burley , Middleton , Occham and others know Logicke ? If they did , why doth Thomus Morton except against them all in this science ? If they did not , how did they write so many large and learned Treatises therof ? And for proofe I referre him to the last named VVilliam Occham his famous Logicke intituled : Summa totius Logicae Magistri Gulielmi Occhami Anglici , Logicorum argutissimi &c. And he shall find therin more Logicke then he vnderstandeth , and more iudgment then he can conceaue . 23. But to leaue this , and to examine the matter about this proposition out of his Oracle of Logitians himselfe , the said Oracle in his first booke of Resolutions , intending to set downe the laws of a good sillogisme , wherof propositions are the partes , defineth a proposition thus : Proposit to est Oratio affirmatiua , vel negatiua alicuius de alique : A proposition is a speach which doth affirme , or deny any thing of another . As for example ( not to depart from the argumēt of M. Mortons speach ) I haue a Priest at home , or I haue no Priest at home , the one is a proposition affirmatiue , the other negatiue , of which sort of propositions Aristotle according to the matter , or subiect he handleth , assigneth diuers diuisions , as heere in this place , he first deuideth it into Vniuersall , Particular , and Indefinite ; and then againe into Syllogisticall , Demonstratiue , and Dialecticall , and in his Topickes into Morall , Naturall & Rationall ; but for so much as appertaineth to our matter in hand , it shall be sufficient to note this diuision following , that some propositions be mental only , that is to say , conceyued only in our mind , and affirming , or denying any thing therin , as if they were vttered : and so according to all Deuines there may be mentall Heresy , when a man in his mind doth affirme , or giue consent to any Heresy in his hart , for the which he may be damned euerlastingly , if he repent not , though he should neuer vtter the same in word or writing to any . And in like sort Christ our Sauiour saith in the Ghospell , that there may be mentall adultery , when a man giueth consent of mind to his concupiscēce , though he commit not the externall act therof . 24. And now that this mentall proposition , is a true proposition in the nature of a proposition ( though not altogeather such as Aristotle treateth of in ordine ad 〈◊〉 , in order to make a sillogisme , as after shall be declared ) is euident ; for that it affirmeth or denieth , consenteth or dissenteth to somewhat in the mind : nor can any man doubt with reason , but that there is a mentall speach , aswell as verball . And Aristotle himselfe affirmeth it , when he saith : Ea quae sunt in voce , earum quae sunt in anima passionum notae , & ea quae scribuntur , eorum quae sunt in voce , those thinges which are vttered in : speach are notes and signes of those thinges which are in the mind , as those things that are written are notes of that which is spoken . So that according to Aristotle , as the externall writing representeth vnto vs a mans speach , so the externall speach representeth vnto vs the internall speach , affection , or asseueration of the mind . Wherfore of this there can be no controuersy , but that there is a true internall speach of the mind , affirming or denying , approuing or reiecting , consenting or repugning aswell as in externall speach , and consequently are there true mentall propositions to be graunted and allowed . And in this I thinke M. Morton will not stand with vs , though we confesse as I haue said , that Aristotles end and purpose being in his Logicke to teach vs to dispute by discourse of Enthimemes and Sillogismes , for attaining of sciences , he had no vse of these mental propositions , as neither of propositions by signes , or mixt of diuers sortes ; but only nameth the other two that consist in voice or writing , as only making for his purpose . But yet we must not imagine that he denied the other , which are cleerly proued out of nature , reason , and vse of humaine life and conuersation . 25. Wherfore the second member of this our diuision is , that besides the foresaid inward mentall propositions , there are externall also vttered in diuers manners , some by voice , some by writing , some by signes , some mixt or compound of diuers sortes , as to giue example only of this last ( for that the former are cleere of themselues : ) If a man lying on his death bedde , should say before witnes , I giue and bequeath vnto Thomas Morton &c. And then his voice fayling him 〈◊〉 call for a pen , and write a thousand &c. and then a palsey taking also his hand he should point towards an Angell of gold , shewing by signes that he meant a thousand such golden angels , I doubt not , but in this case Sir Thomas being a clerke would say in cōscience ( and so he might in iustice ) that all this were but one simple affirmatiue proposition , as if the sicke man had said , I giue and bequeath to Thomas Morton a thousand angels of gold , though it were vttered by him in three seuerall sortes of propositions , vocall , literall & by signes , as hath byn shewed . 26. And if 〈◊〉 be graunted ( as needes it must ) then why should he cry out , as he doth , against that other mixt proposition , that is partly mentall , and partly vocall ? why should he deny it to be a true proposition ? If he answere for that Aristotle did not handle any such mixt reserued propositions , he saith nothing . For that Aristotles purpose being ( as is said ) to treate of propositions in order only to Sillogismes , and argument , it was wholy from his purpose to handle any , but such as serued to that end , and so Aristotle handled no sort of mixt propositions at all , either reserued or not reserued : and yet yow see by the former example of him that bequeathed in his Testament partly in one , and partly in another , that in the common vse , trade , and conuersation of mans life ( wherof wee treate ) there may bee vse therof , as in like manner , there is of talking by signes , as deafe-men doe , who vtter truly their mindes by signes equiualēt to true propositions , affirmatiue or negatiue , and so are vnderstood : and yet Aristotle treateth of no such , not for that they are not , but for that they appertained not to his purpose : of framing sillogismes for attaining of science as hath byn said ; for which cause also he professeth to exclude deprecatoriam orationem , all deprecatory speach , and all Rhetoricall , and Poeticall tropes and figures , which yet , as we see , are fitly sometimes vsed not only in the common conuersation of men , but euen in Scripture it selfe , though they be not to the purpose of syllogisticall propositions which must be simple , clere , & plaine in their naturall signification without translation , figure , ambiguity , or Equiuocation , and consequently it is no good argument to say , that Aristotle handled not such propositions , and therfore they are no propositions at all . For that Aristotle ( as hath byn said ) respected his particuler end of Sillogismes , we ours of common conuersation . But our aduersary vrgeth yet further , and it is the whole force of all he saith , that this mixt proposition partly vocall , and partly mentall , to wit , I am no Priest , with reseruation of the other part , so as I am bound to vtter the same to yow , can be no true logical proposition : for that according to Aristotle , Euery proposition is enunciatiue , that is to say , it is ordained for signification to expresse some thing , but no mentall or inward conceipt of the mind is ordained by God ( saith he ) as a signe to expresse , or signify as wordes , and writinges doe &c. 27. Wherto I answere , graunting that euery proposition must be Enuntiatiue , that is to say ( as before hath byn out of Aristotle declared ) it must affirme or deny somewhat , true or false ; but this is not done only by externall voice or writing ( though Aristotle for the causes aboue mentioned , doe only name those two wayes ) but by signes in like manner as hath byn declared , and much more by internall actions and operations of the mind , which according to all Philosophers are three , the first simple apprehension of any thing ; the secōd affirmation or negation of the same ; the third discourse , when one thing is inferred of an other , as in arguing or disputing , as this is so , ergo the other is , or is not so . And to the first of these three inward operations of the mind and vnderstanding , doe answere outwardly three externall effectes , as to the first simple wordes , or speach , without affirming or denying , as in definitions without the verbe for examples sake , animal rationale mortale &c. all which is nothing els but simple apprehension of the thing , without diuision , composition or discourse . To the second operation doe answere composition and diuision , to wit affirmations and negations : and to the third Enthimemes and Sillogismes , that by discourse doe inferre one thing of another ; so as in our mind there passeth no lesse then in our outward speach , voice , writing or signes , but rather more , for that as Aristotle before saith , these outward actions , are but signes of that which passeth within . So as albeit the one part of a reserued mixt proposition , doth not 〈◊〉 aliquid ad extra , expresse any thing outwardly to the hearer ; yet it doth inwardly to the speaker . And if it be vrged that it must be vox , according to Aristotle , I answere , that as there is a voice in writing as well as in speaking , according to Aristotle himselfe , so is there an internall voice , as well as an externall , and an internall speach as well as an externall , which speaketh , affirmeth , or denieth to the inward eares as well or better then the voice , or letter to the outward ; which is sufficient to correspond to the Logicall definition of a proposition , euen according to Aristotles rule , though ( as hath byn said ) he defined properly externall voices only , and propositions consisting in speach or writing . 28. But our Minister will insist that it is not enuntiatiue or significant to the hearer : Wherto I answere , that the definition of a proposition or enuntiation nameth not the hearer , but that it be of his owne nature enunciatiue , affirming some thing true or false , whether the hearer vnderstand it or no. For when a man talketh to himselfe , though those that stand by vnderstand him not ; yet is his speach enunciatiue , for that it affirmeth or denieth somewhat true or false of his owne nature , though no man heare , as when a man speaketh to God , or with himselfe , or with men also if one should vtter a proposition in Greeke or Hebrew , which the hearer vnderstandeth not , shall not the proposition be enunciatiue , or a true proposition for that the Auditor vnderstandeth it not ? When Christ our Sauiour spake many high thinges of his diuinity , humanity , passion , resurrection , and other Mysteries which the Scripture saith that his disciples vnderstood not , shal we say that his speach was not enuntiatiue , or his propositions no true propositions in Logicke ? What will T. M. say to that prediction against the obstinate Iewes , They 〈◊〉 heare 〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉 , and shall not vnderstand &c. Meaning principally of the preachinges of the Apostles , will yow lay the fault that the Apostles speach was not 〈◊〉 or significant , for that the Iewes did not vnderstand the same . Hence then appeareth , that it dependeth not of the hearer to make the speach 〈◊〉 , or not , but it is 〈◊〉 that it be so of it selfe , and of his owne nature . 29. And so now to apply all this to our owne purpose in hand , this proposition wherof part is vttered in voice , and part reserued in mind , being but one simple propositiō , denying , that I am a 〈◊〉 , with obligation to vtter the same , is truly enuntiatiue of it selfe , though the hearer vnderstand not all , but one part therof only , and consequently it is truly and properly a proposition , euen according to the rules of Logicke , for that Aristotles definition agreeth therunto which our Minister before so confidently denied . 30. But now heere lastly he may seeme perhaps to make some doubt whether this mixt propositiō partly vttered , and partly reserued be one 〈◊〉 proposition , or no , wherof yet in reason there cā be no doubt ; for that heere is but only one single enunciation in the mind of the speaker , to wit , that he is no Priest with obligation to vtter the same ; heere is but one only simple negatiue enuntiation depending of one only verbe and negation that denieth me to be a Priest with that obligation , which is the thing appointed by Aristotle to make a persect enuntiation or proposition , which may be proued also by this example : If I should vtter those wordes of the Scripture ; Pater meus 〈◊〉 me est , My Father is greater then I , reseruing in my mind those other that I affirme them according to the sense and meaning that Arrius had , I should incurre , Heresy and be damned for this proposition , but not 〈◊〉 the former part , for that they are wordes of Scripture , nor for the later alone that are reserued , for that they affirme or deny nothing of themselues , as hauing no verbe ; and therfore they 〈◊〉 cōdemne me as part of the former , and consequently all maketh but one single proposition . For that for the first operation of our mind only , which is simple apprehension without affirmatiō , or negation , God condemneth no man , there being no consent at all therin , and consequently no merit nor demerit , but only in the second and third operations before specified . 31. And to this effect that the two partes of these and like propositions , the one partly vttered and partly reserued doe make but one single and simple proposition , we might alleage many other proofes , both by reasons , and examples . By reasons , for that they answere but to one only conceipt of the speakers mind that they conteine but one only negatiue 〈◊〉 , to wit , that I am no such Priest , as I meane , and finally that they haue but one subiectum , one copula , and one praedicatum ( Logitians know what I meane : ) for the subiectum wherof all is affirmed is I , the copula that ioineth togeather is the verbe am , and all the rest is the praedicatum , wherfore it cannot be diuers but one only proposition . 32. By examples the same may be confirmed diuers wayes , I meane both by prophane , and diuine . As first , if one should make an interrogation , & the other answere , all in effect is but one proposition : as if one should say to a seruant , Is your maister at home ? And 〈◊〉 answere , no it were in effect but one only proposition equiualent to this , my maister is not at home ; yea though the one part were vttered in signes only and the other in voice , or writing ; as if the seruant should answere only by a shrugge of the shoulders , or by 〈◊〉 : king his head , as in Italy they are wont , to expresse a negatiue . 33. But this is somwhat more perspicuous if the answere be ambiguous , as when Cicero was demanded by his aduersary in the cause of Clodius slaine by Milo , whome he defended , what time of the day Clodius was slaine , to wit before noone or after , thinking therby to intrappe Milo , Tully answered serò , which word signifying both towardes the Euening as also to late , Cicero meant in the second sense , to wit , that he was slaine to late , hauing deserued to haue byn slaine sooner , so as this only word serò conteineth the force of a whole proposition in the sense of the speaker , though not of the hearer . 34. And the like answere was that of the same Orator to a base fellow that hauing byn a cooke came after by riches to pretend an office in the common-wealth , and asked of Cicero whether he also among others that were to giue their voices would fauour him therin ? wherunto he answered , Immò , Ego quoque tibi iure fauebo , which answere hauing two senses by reason of the wordes quoque and iure , the hearer tooke it in the better sense , that he also would of right fauour him ; but the speaker meant , that he would shew him fauour due to ae cooke with a messe of pottage , and yet did not this reserued sense make it two propositions but one . 35. And finally I might alleadge all the examples that Orators doe vse and prescribe vnder the figure called by Cicero , Reticentia , and by the Grecians APOSIÓPESIS , as Quid plura ? What shall I say more , or what shall I complaine more ? which verbes say , complaine , or the like were reserued in mind by the speaker , and yet is it but one proposition ; so that of Virgil , Quos Ego ; sed motos praestat &c. Whome I , if I had them in my handes , would &c. All which later part is reserued in the mind of the speaker , and yet it maketh but one proposition with the rest that is expressed . And thus much of prophane examples . 36. But if we would alleadge all the diuine that might be cited out of the Scriptures , there would be no end , as that among other before mentioned out of the Psalme : Impij non resurgent in iudicio , wicked men shall not rise againe in iudgment , which though it seeme a whole proposition ; yet is it in deed but a part , and the other part was reserued in the Prophets mind , and expounded afterward by S. Paul to the Corinthians saying : Omnes resurgemus , sed non omnes immutabimur : We shall all rise againe , but all shall not be changed into glory , and how doe I know that these later wordes were reserued in the Prophets mind ? for that otherwise his other wordes that were vttered should conteine an Heresy against the article of our Creed , I belieue the resurrection of the dead , wherof is inferred that those wordes vttered , with the other reserued , made but one only simple and single proposition . 37. In like manner when our Sauiour said to those negligent virgins that came to late , Non noui vos , I know yow not , it made but one negatiue proposition , with other wordes reserued in his mind , to wit , vt saluem vos &c. I know yow not amongst mine to saue yow , or the like . And how know wee that these or like wordes were reserued in Christes mind ? For that the other alone had byn imperfect and false , for he knew them better , then they knew themselues , but he knew them not as his , and so was all but one proposition , or enunciation negatiue . And to deny that this was a true enunciatiue proposition , for that one part was reserued in the mind , and another vttered , is against all truth and reason , as now we haue declared , and might further by infinite examples , but that a few doe shew the force of the rest , and diuers of these examples out of Scriptures will come more fitly to haue their place in the sequent Paragraphe . 38. Wherfore to end that which now we haue in hand , wee see with what confident ignorance , or ignorant confidence Thomas Morton did so resolutly before tell , and promise vs , that if throughout so many thousand generations of mankind any Logitian whether infidell , or belieuer did allow a mixt proposition partly mentall , and partly verball , he would against the detestation of his owne soule to the contrary , be an Equiuocator : which if it be now proued a simple Hypocrisy , then may that sinfull soule of his begin rather to detest lying then Equiuocating , which may stand with truth , as now more largely we are to 〈◊〉 THE THIRD PART OF THIS CHAPTER , VVhether the former mixt proposition partly vttered , and partly reserued be a ly , or no ? §. 2. NOw come we to the chiefe point of this controuersy to discusse whether the foresaid reserued proposition be truly , and properly a lye , or no. Hitherto we haue handled that which lesse imported , whether it be properly Equiuocation , and properly a true and logicall proposition , and therin discouered the small substance and vaine cauillations of our Aduersary : but now we must examine that which is of chiefe importance , whether it be a ly , periury , deceipt , falshood ; and finally whether it be sinne or no , to vse the same in any case , or for any cause whatsoeuer , for that our Aduersary Thomas Morton his conclusion is both arrogant , and vniuersall , as before yow haue heard . Our first conclusion ( saith he ) is , that euery Equiuocation by mentall reseruation is not a hidden truth , but a grosse ly : Now with what rigour and seuerity our Catholike doctrine doth condemne and detest lying , euen in the least degree therof , we haue declared partly in the former Chapter , and for clearing the matter more in this place , it will be necessary to set downe briefly both the definitions of truth , falsity , lying , periury , deceipt , and the like , & then to consider , whether our former proposition doe incurre any of the foresaid imputations , or no ? 40. And first of all this word Truth is defined in different manner by diuers Philosophers , as also ancient Fathers , and namely by S. Augustine , S. Anselme , S. Hilary and others , who haue written of this matter . And S. Augustine in diuers places of his workes , and namely in his bookes De soliloquiis , & de vera religione . S. Anselme also hath written a speciall booke De ueritate , and it is a question , as yow know , that Pilate proposed vnto our Sauiour in his iudgment , but had so little care of the resolution therof , as he would not stand to expect the answere ; wherfore S. Thomas gathereth out of the said Authors diuers definitions , and before him againe our learned Countreyman Halensis gathereth eight , and holdeth that euery one of them is true in a seuerall sense , some as they respect God , the first truth & measure of truth ; some as they respect mans vnderstanding ; some the thinges themselues ; of all which number of definitions , two seeme to me most cleare , and effectuall , one of S. Augustine , Veritas est qua ostenditur id quod est ; Truth is that , wherby is shewed that which is in deed , to wit in the vnderstanding , as S. Thomas interpreteth , saying , that Veritas principaliter est in intellectu , secundariò verò in rebus : Truth consisteth principally in the mind and vnderstanding , and secondarily in the thinges themselues , for which cause he approueth wel this other definition set downe by a Philosopher , Veritas est adaequatio rei , & intellectus ; Truth is an equalling of the thing it selfe with mans vnderstanding , that is to say , when a man vnderstandeth a thing as it is in it selfe , and the thing in it self is in deed as it is vnderstood , then is it truth , and when this is not obserued riseth falsity . 41. For better vnderstanding wherof we must consider three sortes or degrees , as it were , of truth , and consequently as many of falsity ; for that as the Philosopher saith Contrariorum eadem est disciplina , the selfe same discipline or methood is to be held in contraries , let vs treate then of truth and falsity , as it is vttered in speach , for this is to our purpose , for examining of truth or falsity in our foresaid mixt proposition . 42. The first sort or kind of truth is when that which is spoken is conforme to the thing it selfe , though not to the mind of the speaker ; as if one should say my Father is dead , if he be dead , though the speaker thinke not so , then is this speach conforme to the thing , and it is truth in this first kind . 43. The second sort of truth is , when our speach is conforme to our vnderstanding , though not to the thing it selfe ; as If I thinking that my Father is dead , should say so , though he be not dead in deed , yet is it truth in respect of my vnderstanding , though in respect of the thing it selfe it be not so ; and in this sort : may a man speake false without a ly . 44. The third sort is when our speach agreeth both with the one , and the other , and is conforme both to our vnderstanding and the thing it selfe ; as when I say , that my Father is dead , and do thinke so , and it is so in deed ; and this is the most perfect kind of truth in speach , when there is an adequation of the speakers vnderstanding with the thing spoken , as the former definition prescribed . 45. And in contrary manner , there are three sortes of falsity , correspondent to these three sortes of truth , the first called materia , material only , when our speach is not conforme to the thing spoken , though it be agreable to the vnderstanding of the speaker . The second , a formall falsity , when the speach agreeth not with the mind or meaning of the speaker , though it doe with the thing meant or spoken . The third is when the speach agreeth neither with the vnderstanding of the speaker nor with the thing it selfe , & this is a complete falsity , as if my Father not being dead , nor I thinking him to be dead , should say notwithstanding he is dead , and these two last kindes of falsity , or either of them doe make a ly , and not the first : kind alone , for that the essence and formality of a ly requireth that the speach doe disagree from the mind and vnderstanding of the speaker : in which sense S. Augustine saith , Non facit linguam ream nisi mens rea , Nothing maketh the tongue guilty of a ly , but a guilty mind , meaning one thing and speaking another . 46. And this same distinction of truth and falsity is ser downe by S. Anselme in other wordes , thus : Sicut est veritas triplex , rei , cognitionis , & signationis , sic etiam est falsitas triplex , rei , cognitionis & signationis , seu enunciationis : As there are three kinds of truth , one of the thing it selfe , another of the inward vnderstanding , and a third of outward signification , so is there like wise a triple falsity of the thing it selfe , of the knowledge or vnderstanding , and of signification or enunciation . The first is in the thinges , the second is in our mind , the third in the voice or signe that vttereth : wherof he that will see more , let him read our foresaid learned Countreyman Alexander of Hales in the first Part of his Theologicall Summe in his sixteene question of falsity , and first member . 47. And heerby it appeareth that mendacium , a ly , is a particuler species or kind of falsity , in so much as euery speach that is false , is no ly , but only that which hath the essentiall point before mentioned of dissenting from the mind and vnderstanding of the speaker . For if I thinking , as hath byn said , that my Father is dead , should say so , though he were not dead , yet I make no lye , but only materially , which may be without any sinne at all , and hereupon are there diuers definitions , and descriptions set downe by Doctors , and holy Fathers of lyes , and lying : first S. Augustine defineth thus a lye : Mendacium est falsa vocis significatio , cum intentione fallendi : A lye is a false signification of speach , with intention to deceaue . In which definition or description rather Thomas Morton doth interprete , that by the word vox , as the most vsuall and principall signe , wherby mans mind is vttered , S. Augnstine doth meane all kindes of signes , or signification whatsoeuer , either by word , writing , signes , or actions : for that a man may lye also in factes , as he proueth out of the Philosopher , in his Moralles , and S. Ambrose wordes are cleere : Non solùm in salsis verbis , sed etiam in simulatis operibus mendacium est : A lye consisteth not only in false wordes but also in feigned workes ; though this in rigour be not so much to be called a lye , as dissimulation . And to the imitation of this definition of S. Augustine , doe Schoole-Doctors frame diuers definitions to the same effect , as the Maister of the Sentences first out of S. Augustine : Mentiri est contra mentem ire , to lye is to goe against a mans owne mind and vnderstanding : and then againe of himselfe : Mentiri est loqui contra hoc quod animo quis sentit , siue illud verum sit , siue non ; To lye is to speake against that which a man thinketh in his mind , whether it be true , or false : For albeit he should spake a truth thinking that it is false , he should lye , as on the contrary side , he that should speake that which is false , thinking it to be true , should not lye , saith S. Augustine , nor be a deceauer , but deceaued : so as the very essence of a lye consisteth in this that the speaker doe vtter wittingly that which he knoweth to be vntrue , and not in deed meant by him . 48. And as for the other clause cum 〈◊〉 fallendi , with intentiō to deceaue , S. Thomas doth note that it is an effect of lying which is not necessary absolutly to the nature of a lye , but rather as an effect , to the full complement and perfection therof . For that a lye is essentially made by that as hath byn said , when a man wittingly & willingly vttereth for truth , that which he knoweth to be false , though he should haue no expresse intentiō to deceaue ; which deceipt is defined by diuers thus : Decipere est falsam existimationem in alterius animum inducere , diuersum ab eo , quem habet is qui loquitur ; To deceaue is to ingender in anothers mans mind a false existimation , iudgement , or opinion of a thing differēt from the vnderstanding of the speaker , which deception if it be in wordes or signes only , it is called dolus or fallacia , guyle or fallacy ; but if it be in worke , or deedes , as is buying , selling , and the like , it is called fraus , fraudulent dealing , wherof S. Augustine is to be seene in his second booke De doctrina Christiana , and S. Thomas in the second Part of his Summe , where he handleth this matter at large . 49. And now the nature of a lye being thus defined , it is deuided also according to the said S. Augustine , and Schoolemen after him into three kinds or sortes ; The : one made out of maglignity to doe some hurt , and no good , and it is called a pernicious lye ; the second to doe : some man good , and no man hurt , and it is called an officious lye ; the third that meaneth neither hurt nor good , but is made in iest , and is only a merry lye . And albeit one of these kinds be much more grieuous then the other , as namely the first , which of his owne nature is a mortall sinne , & the other two often veniall ; yet are all three euer sinnes , and neuer willingly to be committted , or permitted in speach or oath for any respect whatsoeuer , nor for any mans good temporall or spirituall , according to the receaued sentence of the said Doctors , as in the former Chapter hath byn declared . 50. Wherfore to passe on ; An oath is when any thing is affirmed with calling God to witnes therunto , which when it is false , and falsely sworne , is a grieuous sinne , named periury , for the contempt vsed therin towardes the Maiesty of God , whose testimony is alleadged for the confirmation therof . For auoiding of which heinous sinne , three conditions are required by Schoole-Deuines , as necessary to be obserued according to the admonition of Hieremy the Prophet , to wit , truth , iustice and necessity , which latter includeth due circumspection and reuerence . 51. Now then to apply all this to our present purpose , about the former proposition , I am no Priest reseruing in mind the other clause , So as I am bound to vtter it vnto yow : Schoole-Deuines doe easely shew that such a proposition , according to the definitions before set downe , of truth , falsity , deceipt , lying , and periury may be in certaine cases , and with due circumstances truly auouched , and sworne without incurring any sinne at all ; and I say in some cases , and with due circumstances , for that hereupon dependeth much the lawfulnes of the thing . For that if a Priest ( for example ) should be asked this question by his lawful Superiour or Iudge , to whome the conusans of the thing demaunded , did lawfully appertaine , and that the said Iudge demaunded lawfully , that is say , according to : order of law and iustice ; then were he bound vnder paine of mortall sinne to answere truly and directly , : although it were with euident daunger of his owne life , or of others . And this is the common sentence , and iudgement of all Catholicke Schoole Doctors without exception , vnles sometimes the smalnesse of the matter it selfe should in some cases make it veniall , but of his owne nature it is damnable , because it is against the Maiesty of almighty God , whose substitute euery lawfull Magistrate and Iudge is , and against publicke iustice and the common good of each State and Kingdome , as also against charity towards our neighbour , and obligation vnto truth it selfe . Wherby it followeth , that albeit a mans present life or death stood vpon it , and that by denying a truth without swearing he might saue the same ; yet is it not lawfull to doe it . And this is our seuerity in that behalfe . 52. But on the other side , if the Iudge be not lawful or competent , or haue not iurisdiction in that matter which he demandeth : as if a lay Magistrate in a Catholicke countrey would enquire of matters not belonging to his iurisdiction , as for example , sacred or secret ; or that he should offer iniury against law to the Respondent , in the manner of his proceedings , wherby he should be disobliged in conscience to answere to his meaning or interrogatories , yea somtims rather obliged not to answer therunto , when it concerneth other mens hurt : then may he * answere , as though he were alone , and no man by ; for that he hath no necessary reference to him at all , nor to his demaundes , questions , or speach , but that he may frame to him selfe any proposition that is true in it selfe , and in his owne sense & meaning , though the other that heareth vnderstand it in a different sense and meaning , & be therby deceaued . 53. Neither is this to deceaue another , but to permit him that offreth me iniury , and is no Superiour of mine in that cause , to be deceaued by my doubtfull speach , and by concealing that which I am not bound to vtter vnto him : which kind of deceipt or dissimulation is lawfull , as in the precedent Chapter hath byn shewed , by the example of stratagemes in warre , wherby though many be slaine , and 〈◊〉 hurtes done ; yet nihil homo iustus ( saith S. Augustine ) praetereà cogitare debet in his rebus , nisi vt bellum iustum suscipiat , quod cùm susceperit , vtrum aperta pugna vel ex 〈◊〉 vicerit , nihil ad 〈◊〉 interest . A 〈◊〉 man in warre ought to thinke 〈◊〉 nothing , but that the warre be iust , that he taketh in hand , which being certaine , it importeth nothing in respect of iustice , whether he get the victory by sleightes , or by open warre . And this he speaketh by occasion of the direction of God vnto Iosue , when he taught him what snares and wiles he should vse to intrappe the inhabitantes of the Citty of Hai , as he did , to their ruine and destruction : and therby * all Deuines doe inferre , that such dissimulations & stratagemes are lawfull in iust warre , which yet S. Thomas doth limite out of S. Ambrose to be true , when the parties haue not giuen their word and promise to the contrary : but yet both he , and all other Deuines doe hold that these stratagemes are no lies . 54. This same point also , that it is lawfull in this sense to deceaue , that is to say , to permit another man to be deceaued by our speach or doinges , so we vtter no lye , is made most manifest by the example of God himselfe , who though , as before hath byn said , he cannot possibly deceaue , or make a lye , no not by the omnipotency of all his power ; yet are there manifold places in Scriptures to shew , that at least he permitteth men to be deceaued by words , & factes of his , & of so many holy Patriarches , Prophets , Apostles , and other Saints gouerned by his spirit ; yea of his owne Sonne that is the most exact rule of all truth , for otherwise how could so many Heresies arise , which are all commonly founded vpon the euill vnderstanding of some wordes or sentences of our said Sauiour , and his Apostles , or of the Prophetes and Patriarches before them , which yet Christ & the holy Ghost did forsee , togeather with the infinite errores , and hurtes that would ensue therof ; and yet did not they preuent that deceipt , nor cease to vtter those speaches by which they knew that so many would be deceaued : nay as in the former Paragraph hath byn declared , Christ our Sauiour spake 〈◊〉 thinges doubtfull , ambiguous & Equiuocall in themselues , that had or might haue different meaninges and interpretations ; & yet I presume Thomas 〈◊〉 will not goe about to bring our Sauiours said speaches within the compasse of this clause of the 〈◊〉 of a lye , cum mentione fallendi &c. 55. Wherfore to returne to the application of both clauses of this definition of lying to our proposition , I say , that neither of them doe agree therunto , and much lesse both . Not the former , for that the speach agreeth to the mind , and meaning of the speaker , for that I doe truly and really meane that I am no Priest , in the sense that I speake it , which may be any that pleaseth me , or that I list to 〈◊〉 to my selfe , seing I haue no obligation to respect any thing what the demaunder speaketh or asketh , for so much as he demaundeth me against law and equity , so as I may meane that I am no Priest , such as I should be , such as I desire to be , such as is worthy of so great an office , and sacred a 〈◊〉 , such as he ought to be that occupieth the place of God in gouerning of soules , I am no Priest subiect to the demaunder , or obliged to answere his demaundes , or the like : and as if I were alone I might make to my selfe this proposition , I am no such Priest , and it were true , and not false , for that it agreeth as well with my meaning , as with the thing it selfe : so also now is it truly meant and spoken in my sense , though not in the hearers , and consequently the definition of truth before mentioned agreeth therunto , for that there is heere adaequatio rei & intellectus , an agreement betweene the thing , and the speakers vnderstanding , and so much for the first clause of this definition of lying . For as touching examples to proue the verity of like speaches out of holy Scripture they shall be alleadged more aboundantly afterward . 56. The second clause also which is intentio fallendi , intention to deceaue , is easely excluded from this our propositiō , both by that I haue said before of the lawfulnes of stratagemes , when iniuries are offred , and by the forme of Christes owne speaches ; as also by that notorious distinction of S. Augustine to this purpose alleadged , and auerred by S. Thomas and other Schoolemen , and related into the Canon law it selfe by Gratian , to wit : Aliud est celare veritatem , aliud falsum dicere : It is one thing to conceale a truth , another to speake an vntruth . And againe : Manifestum est ( saith the same Father ) non esse culpandum aliquando verum tacere : It is manifest , that it is not reprehensible sometimes to conceale the truth . And yet further speaking of the fact of Abraham , that desired his wife to say she was his sister , veritatem ( saith he ) voluit celari , non mendacium dici , his meaning was to haue the truth hidden ( to wit , that she was his wife ) but not a lye to be spoken , for that according to the phrase of Scripture she might also be called his sister , for that she was his brothers daughter , wherupon S. Thomas determineth the matter thus : Verbo mentitur aliquis quando significat quod non est , non autem quando tacet quod est , quod aliquando licet : He lieth in word who signifieth a thing that is not so ( to wit in his mind ) but he lieth not , that concealeth somewhat that is , which sometimes is lawfull . And againe in another place : It is not lawfull ( saith he ) to make a ly for deliuering another man from any kind of perill or hurt whatsoeuer , but to conceale prudently a truth by some dissimulation is lawfull , as S. Augustine in his booke against lying doth testify . So S. Thomas . 57. Now then in this our Case we doe affirme , that there is no ly or vntruth auouched at all , but only a concealing of that truth-which I am not bound to vtter vnto him , that demaundeth it vniustly . For as if Avraham had byn demaunded , whether Sarai were his 〈◊〉 , he might for concealing that truth which he would not haue knowne , haue answered yea , & this truly , & without a ly , according to S. Augustine , though in another sense then the demaunder meant : So in our case , for that I deny my selse only to be a Priest in that sense , which in my vnderstanding & meaning is true , and I affirme nothing false , or that is not so , but only doe conceale some certaine truth which , as hath byn said , I am not bound to vtter to him that demandeth , for that I am not his subiect in this cause , nor he my lawfull iudge ; nor if he were , yet doth he not lawfully demaund me , for that the matter in right appertaineth not to his iurisdiction , as hath byn said : in this case ( I say ) my answere is lawfull and allowable by all the Catholike Deuines , Lawiers , and Canonistes that write of like cases , as after in a seuerall Chapter shall more particularly be declared . 58. There remaineth then only in this place to be considered whether I in this case doe deceaue or no , or haue intention to deceaue according to the second clause of the definition of a ly cum intentione sallendi , wherin according to that which before hath byn set downe , it is euident that my intention is not to deceaue in this propositiō , but to defend my selfe against the captious , and iniurious demandes of an vnlawfull Iudge , I speaking a truth in it selfe according to my meaning , though he taking it otherwise is deceaued therby , but without any fault of mine . For as in the examples before mentioned , when our Sauiour said to his Disciples of Lazarus , Lazarus sleepeth , and they deceiued therwith , answered , If he sleepe he is safe , Christ deceiued them not , but they themselues vpon his doubtfull wordes . And when the Iewes were deceiued with those other word s of Christ , Dissolue this Temple and I will build it vp againe in three dayes , the Sonne of God cannot be truly said to haue deceaued them , for that he spake that which was truth in his owne sense , and permitted only the other to be deceaued : so in the proposed case , the vniust examiners are only permitted to be deceaued , for that the Priest his principall intent is not intentio fallendi , intention of deceiuing , as the definition of lying prescribeth , or as S. Augustine in another place saith fallendi cupiditas , a desire of deceiuing , but rather euadendi desiderium , a desire to escape , and defend himselfe . And therfore , as if he should goe to one of himselfe without necessity , and tell him that he is no Priest , he being a Priest , might be argued of lying , for that his principall intent may be supposed to haue byn cupiditas fallendi , an appetite of deceiuing ; so heere the thing being euident that primaria respondent is intentio , the first and principall intention of the answerer is not to hurt or impugne others , but to defend and couer himselfe vnlawfully pressed , as he presumeth , that his defence is by speaking a truth in his owne meaning ( which meaning and vnderstanding of the speaker is the chiefe rule and measure of truth , as before yow haue heard : ) it followeth euidently , that it can be no ly , nor deception on his part , though by his manner of answering they deceiue themselues , which is not to be imputed to any fault of his . And thus much of this matter in this place ; the rest shall be more fully explaned in the Chapter that ensueth . THE TRVTH BEFORE SET DOVVNE IS FVRTHER DEBATED and proued by the assertion of Schoole-Doctors , Deuines , Lawiers , both Canon and Ciuill , Reasons , Practice of the Aduersaries ; and by the very instinct of nature itself . CHAP. IX . THat which briefly hath byn auouched in the later end of the precedent Chapter , about the lawfulnes of the former proposition , might be greatly enlarged many waies , if we would stand theron , or handle the same to the satisfaction of learned men ; but for that the compasse of this short Treatise beareth it not , and I must haue a care aswell of the capacity of the vulgar Reader as of the more learned : I shall only adde to that which hath byn said , some few more perticulars , in sundry kindes of proofe , fit for the confirmation of our purpose ; and in the ensuing Chapter lay forth some speciall and principall cases , wherin the said ambiguous Proposition or Equiuocation may be vsed , wherby I doubt not but that the whole controuersy will remaine cleere and manifest . The first Point about Schoole-Deuines , Doctors and Lavviers . §. 1. 2. YOw haue heard in the precedent Chapter , how Thomas Morton challenging vs to proue out of Logitians , that our former reserued proposition , I am no Priest , with obligation to tell it vnto yow , is a true Logicall proposition ; he excepted presently against all Logitians for these last foure hundred years , wherin Logicke most florished , and yet he calleth it , a new-bred-hydra ( to wit of foure hundred yeares old by his owne confession , ) and addeth further , Mark what scope I yeeld vnto yow : which if yow marke it well , is a very markable point indeed , for that after Aristotle ( by whose rules the said proposition is proued ) he can shew I suppose very few Authors that haue written of that science , vntill within the said foure hundred yeares : wherfore to except those , and yet to call it so large a scope , is a large folly in my opinion . 3. And the same I say of Deuines , which haue written within the said foure hundred yeares , commonly called Schoole-Deuines and Schoole-Doctors , against whome he excepteth in like manner , notwithstanding they be those to whome it belongeth principally to discusse , examine , and determine this matter , as afterwardes shall be shewed . And yet as though he had made no such exception , but admitted all kind of writers throughout all times in this matter , he maketh this new ridiculous vaunt : Shew vs ( saith he ) for your mentall reseruation , but one Father , whether Greeke or Latin , one Pope whether Catholicke or Antichristian , one Author whether learned or vnlearned , who did euer so fancy &c. 4. Wherunto I may answere , that if the maker of this vaunt had had but one dram of discretion , he would neuer haue set downe so many ones , to confound himself : for that presently we shall shew so many Fathers , Greeke and Latin to haue allowed of the foresaid speech , as had occasions to handle such Scriptures , as conteine like propositions ; and so many Popes to haue approued the same , as haue allowed the said Fathers sentences , or haue liued since the collecting of the Canon Lawes , wherin the said Fathers sentences are aboundantly cited and set downe : and that so many learned , graue & pious Authors haue byn of this fancy ( if it be a fancy ) as haue byn consulted in cases of most moment , that comprehend this controuersy . So as for this Minister to except against foure hundred yeares togeather ( which in effect conteineth a graunt of all the learned of that time ) and yet to challeng one Father , one Pope , one Author learned or vnlearned , sheweth a broken phantasy of an ydle braine indeed . 5. But now to lay before the Readers eyes some brief consideration what is reiected in the exclusiō of these last foure hundred yeares , about our point in controuersy , it is to be noted , that the science of Deuinity , called by the Greeks Theology , for that it is properly & immediatly about God , & matter belonging vnto God , hath growne frō time to time , according to the growth of mankind and to the most ordinate and excellent prouidence of almighty God , as S. Paul diuinely 〈◊〉 in diuers partes of his Epistles , which we shall heere indeauour to declare by this particuler deduction , that from the beginning of the world vnto the deluge , there passing aboue a thousand and six : hundred yeares , to wit more then from Christ to this time , set downe in Scripture vnder the liues only of ten mē , there was no other Theology in all that time , but only by speech and tradition , of Father to sonne , freind to friend , maister to scholler , & predecessour to successour : and from this againe vnto the time of Abraham , which was vpon the point of three hundred : yeares , the same was obserued : and from him to Moyses , which was aboue other foure hundred yeares , no : booke is extant that was written , though in these last foure hundred yeares from Abraham to Moyses God had his seuerall people , as is knowne , which were gouerned without any written word at all . 6. But Moyses hauing written the fiue first bookes of the Bible , commonly called the Pentateuch so many ages after the beginning of the world , and sundry other holy men diuers bookes and Treatises after him againe , vntill the comming of Christ ; albeit the sciēce and study of Deuinity was much enlarged therby ; yet was it barren in a certaine sort , in respect of that : which ensued after vnder Christ , in the writinges of the Apostles and Apostolicke men , and large Commentaries and expositions written theron by succeeding Christian ages , which in time growing to be so many and great volumes , partly of the said expositions and explanations of Scriptures , partly of Treatises , bookes , and dogmaticall discourses , partly of Ecclesiasticall Histories , partly of discussions and determinations of Councelles , both Generall , Nationall , & Prouinciall , and partly finally of resolutions & decrees of Bishops & chiefe Pastors , for directiō of their flocks , especially of the highest that held the Chaire for gouerning and moderating of all the rest . 7. These thinges ( I say ) growing at length to so great a bulke , & manifold multitude of bookes , Treatises , tomes , and volumes , as many men had not time to read them ouer , and much lesse leasure and iudgement to digest or conceaue them , with that distinction , order and perspicuity , which was necessary ; it pleased almighty God , out of his continuall prouidence , for his said Church , to inspire certaine men 〈◊〉 foure hundred years past , to reduce the said vast corpes of Deuinity , to a cleare methode , by drawing all to certaine common places and heades , and by handling and discussing the same so punctually , distinctly , and perspicuously , as any good wit in small time may come to comprehend the whole , without reading ouer the other so many huge volumes as before was necessary . And this method was called afterwardes Schoole-Deuinity , for that it did principally consist in disputation and discussion of matters exactly , by discending into particulers , and dissoluing all doubtes ; wheras the other manner of 〈◊〉 of Scriptures , Fathers , Doctors , Histories , and Councells , seuerally remained with the name of positiue : Deuinity , as contenting it self only with assertiue doctrine , without disputation or further discussion . 8. The first and principall Authors of this method , or methodicall study is accounted to be Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris , aboue foure hundred & fifty yeares past , who for that he gathered into the foresaid method of generall heades , all that any way appertained to Deuinity , out of the sayinges and sentences of Scriptures and Fathers , deuiding the same into foure bookes , and euery booke into seuerall distinctions , he was called afterwardes the Maister of the sentences , and many learned men in ensuing times wrote Commentaries theron , enlarging with great variety of matter , the said method which he had inuented . Others also made seuerall Summes of Theology , differēt in name , but in effect to the same imitation , wherof may be accounted one of the first , our often named learned Countreyman Alexander of Hales in Suffolke , and after him S. Thomas of Aquine , vpon whome many other learned men , since that time haue , and doe vnto this day write large Commentaries . Diuers also considering that this methodicall study hath two partes , the one speculatiue , which is handled principally by the exercise of our vnderstanding in dispute , the other moral , that apperteineth to manners and action of life ; sundry learned men doe betake themselues principally to this later , as more necessary to practice of Christian life , and cases therin to be resolued in Conscience . 9. And about the very same time , or little before , it came to passe by the like prouidēce of almighty God , that the same method was thought vpon , for reducing the Decrees and Constitutions of Councels , Fathers , Bishops , and Popes , apperteyning to Ecclesiasticall gouernment ( which grew now to be many ) vnto like general heades , bookes , causes , questions and Chapters , 〈◊〉 more facility of comprehending and remembring the same , the cheif Author therof being Gratian , a learned Monke of S. Benedicts Order : which laborious and methodicall compilation approued by Popes at that time , and from time to time afterwards , and expounded by the writinges and Commentaries of many skilfull men in that science , is called the 〈◊〉 as the other part appertaining to ciuill affaires , deduced from the ancient Imperiall Romane Lawes , is called the Ciuill-law ; and both of them concurring togeather , in this our cause , with the foresaid Schoole-Deuinity , and florishing more within thes last foure hundred yeares then euer before , as yow haue heard ; the exception made against them all by this our Minister , must needes be iudged for light , vaine and impertinent . 10. For he that will cast his eyes vpon the face of Christendome , for these last foure hundred yeares , & consider with himselfe that in all these ages , the most eminent renowned men for learning , conscience , and vertue in all those three sciences , or faculties now mentioned , and vnto whome for all doubtes , and difficulties appertayning vnto iustice , equity and truth , recourse was made , as vnto Oracles of their dayes , for the high esteeme they were held in among all men , he ( I say ) that shall consider this , and with what integrity they dealt in this affaire , and must be presumed to haue dealt according to their skill , for that they were not interessed therin for any temporall respect whatsoeuer ; he that shall but thinke of this , & weigh their vniforme and graue resolutions vpon this point , that a man pressed vnlawfully to answere by vniust manner of proceeding , may delude his demaunder , & not answere to his intention but to his owne , will easely see , what differēce there is to be made betweene these mens iudgmentes , and the clamours of a few vnlearned Ministers in this behalfe , that vnderstand not the grounds wheron the other , or themselues doe speake . 11. And to name some few examples ; who were accompted more learned Schoole - Deuines in their daies in France , Germany , and Flanders , then the forenamed Petrus Lombardus Bishop of Paris , Maister of the sentences ? Iohn Gerson Chancellour of that Vniuersity ? Petrus Paludanus Patriarch afterward of Hierusalem ? Henricus de Gandauo Archdeacon of Tornay ? Gabriel Biel a very Religious learned man ? Adrianus that was Maister to the Emperour Charles the fift , and after that Cardinal and Gouernour of Spaine for Philip the first , & finally Pope by the name of Adrian the sixt ? I might name also Iansenius Bishop of Gaunt in these dayes , and others of our times , but of these their learned works are extant , and vpon diuers occasions they fauour & defend the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in sundry cases , as in the next Chapter shall be more particulerly declared . 12. In Italy & Sicily also many might be named both for Schoole - Deuinity , Canon , and Ciuill law , but I shall be contented with them only , whose workes I haue had time to looke vpon for this point , as Gratian with his Commentaries , Pope Innocentius , S. Thomas of Aquin , Cardinal Caietan , Astonsis in his Summe written almost three hundred yeares since , Angelus de Clauatio , famous Siluester , Cosmus Filiarcus Chanon of Florence , Abbot and Archbishop Panormitan , Bartolus & Baldus most famous Lawiers . 13. But of the Spanish Nation many more , as Didacus Couarruuias President or Chancellour of Spaine , Martinus Nauarrus his Maister , both excellent Lawiers ; Dominicus Sotus Confessour to the Emperour Charles the fifth , Cardinal Tolet , Emanuel Roderiquez , Ludouicus Lopez , Antonius de Corduba , Petrus Nauarra , Dominicus Bannes publicke Reader of Deuinity in Salamanca , Michael Salon Doctor and Professour of the Deuinity-Chaire in Valentia , Petrus de Arragon publicke Professour of the same science in the foresaid Vniuersity of Salamanca , Gregorius de Valentia , and Ioannes Azorius publicke Readers in Rome , all renowned men for learning , science , & conscience , and through whose hands great matters haue passed for direction of iustice and equity both in foro fori , and foro poli , as Schoolemen speake , both for diuine and humane proceedinges ; and yet doe none of all these condemne or deny absolutly the vse of Equiuocation in certaine cases , but doe rather approue and confirme the same , I meane both lawiers and deuines , when they treat vpon these heades following , de seruando secreto , of concealing secretes , both knowne in the Sacrament of Confession and otherwise : de mendacio of lying : de iureiurandis , of swearing : de fraterna correptione & restituenda fama , of brotherly admonition and restitution of another mans fame wrongfully taken away : de Iudice , de Reo , de accusatore , de testibus : of a Iudge and his office , of the defendant , accuser , witnesses and the like , what they may doe or answere lawfully in cases that may occurre . 14. Neither are these Authors to be accompted as single and separate from the rest of the learned men of their ages in this point which we handle , but rather are conioined wholy with them , both in iudgment and practice ; so as what these men did define to be lawful , that did others in like manner both mainteine & put in vre in iust occasions , especially if they were of the self same order and ranke : So as when for example wee cite Siluester , Dominicus Sotus Caiëtan , Paludanus , Lopez and Bannes , of the order of S. Dominick to haue taught this doctrine without reprehension of others of the same order , we may inferre probably that all or most learned men of that Order throughout Christendome are of the same opinion . And the like we may inferre of those of S. Francis order in respect of Angelus de Clauatio , Astensis , Antonius de Corduba , here cited . And the same of S. Augustines order , by Petrus de Aragon and Michael Salon . And of the most ancient and venerable Order of S. Benedict conteyning many thousandes of learned men , by that which Abbot Panormitan , and Gregorius Sayer our learned Countreyman haue written vpon this matter , and the later more largely then many others . And the like may be inferred of the order of Iesuits , by that which is extant written by Cardinal Tolet , Gregorius de Valentia , Emanuel Sà , Francisius Suarez , Ioannes Azorius , Ludouicus Molina and others . So as by these few witnesses we may take a notice of the whole body and corpes of learned men throughout Christendome ; for that Lawiers also both Ciuill and Canon , that haue written of the foresaid heades haue conformed themselues to the same doctrine , as lawfull in equity and conscience . And if any haue dissented , it hath byn in particuler cases only , as before in the seauenth Chapter and third Consideration hath byn noted . 15. As for example Ioannes Genesius Sepulueda Historiographer of Charles the fifth Emperour , whose authority Thomas Morton doth often times alledge against vs , though in the principall he make fully with vs in his booke intituled Theophilus ; De ratione dicendi testimonium in causis occultorum criminum ; how a man may beare witnes in causes of secret crimes ; yet in some cases he dissenteth from the foresaid Authors , holding singuler opinions by himselfe , but yet vpon such groundes as doe indeed confirme the common sentence of the rest , as afterward in due place shal be declared . 16. Wherfore to end this Paragraph about the Cōsideration of Schoole - Deuines and Lawiers , it shall be sufficient to haue named these few , and though I had purposed once to haue set downe in particuler the seuerall places of their workes , where they handle this matter , and shew their opinions in approbation therof ; yet finally not to trouble the Reader with so many quotations , I iudged it best to deferre these vnto the next Chapter , where I meane to lay forth some particuler cases in which their seuerall sentences are to be alledged , and so we shall passe on now to the other pointes of his Chapter that doe remaine : only aduertising by the way , that if our few English Ministers that doe contradict this common receaued doctrine ( for I doe not thinke all to be so rash or sensles ) should be put in a paire of ballance , for learning , piety , and discretion , with these Authors here named , and that a man were to aduenture his soule with one party , I doe not doubt , but that the discreet Reader will easely see where it were reason to make his chose . And so much of this . THE SECOND POINT touching Scriptures and Fathers , For mixt and reserued propositions . §. 2. 17. ANd first of all I haue thought best for more breuity , to ioine Scriptures and Fathers togeather , in this Point of mixt and reserued Propositions , for that the exposition of the 〈◊〉 going with the text of Scripture , doth euidently shew both their senses therin , and conioine both their testimonies . For if we can shew that the holy Ghost in Scriptures doth vse such doubtfull and ambiguous propositions as is that , I am no Priest , with some mentall reseruation , equall vnto this of ours , with obligation to reueale &c. ) and that by ordinary sound and signification of the wordes vttered , the hearer may be deceaued , and take it in one sense , and the speaker by the part reserued in his mind may truly vnderstand it in another , and that the ancient Fathers doe by their expositions confirme the same , then doe we proue directly our purpose , both out of Scriptures and out of Fathers in like manner , notwithstanding Thomas Mortons vaine assertion , that not one Iota in all Scriptures , not one example in all Catholicke antiquity &c. And albeit I haue shewed diuers examples already in the two precedent Chapters , that doe conuince most euidently that which we are to proue ; yet for that we haue not vrged before the exposition of Fathers vpō those places , we meane heere out of the aboundance that we haue , to adioine sundry other testimonies , to the end the matter may remaine vndoubted . 18. And we shall begin with an example so cleere , as it shall be like to that of ours in all pointes , if we chang only the names of the persons , and conditions of 〈◊〉 that spake and heard . As that example of S. Iohn 〈◊〉 , who being examined and demaunded by them that were sent vnto him from the Iewes , whether he were a Prophet or no , he deined it . Propheta es tu ? Et respondit non : Are yow a Prophet ? and he answered no ; and yet he meant not absolutly to deny himself to be a Prophet , for that it had byn false both in respect of that his Father Zacharias had prophecied of him in his natiuity , Et tu puer Propheta Altissimi vocaberis &c. And thou child shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest , for that thou shalt goe before his face to prepare his wayes ; as also for that the testimony of Christ himself in S. Mathewes Ghospell is cleare , Quid 〈◊〉 videre ? Prophetam ? etiam dico vobis & plus quàm Prophetam : What went yow forth to see in the desert ? A Prophet ? yea I say vnto yow , and more then a Prophet . Wherunto our said Sauiour in S. Lukes Ghospell addeth , 〈◊〉 inter natos multerum Propheta Iohanne Baptista nemo est , there is no greater Prophet among the children of women then Iohn Baptist. 19. Heere then yow see a proposition vttered by the holy Ghost , that of it self is ambiguous and of a doubtfull sense , and according to the ordinary sound and sense of the wordes vttered , seemeth false , no lesse then our proposition I am no Priest. For as this may be refuted by them that know me to be a Priest , and as Thomas Morton still vrgeth ( though fondly , ) is contrary to my knowledge and conscience , that know my self to be a Priest : so heer S. Iohns deniall , that he is a Prophet , may be refuted by Scripture , and must needes be contrary to his owne knowledge & conscience also , after Mortons manner of vrging , 〈◊〉 that he could not but know himself to be a Prophet , & is no lesse subiect to the calumniation of lying , then our speech of denying my self to be a Priest , except it be saued by some mentall reseruation , which he vttered not in wordes . 20. But now what this reseruation was , is not so cleere among ancient Fathers , though all doe agree that there was some , & consequently doe stand with vs against Morton , that some such reseruation may be vsed . And first S. Chrisostome , S. Cyrill , Origen , Theophilactus , Euthimius , Apollinarius , and other Greek writers doe thinke this 〈◊〉 to haue byn in S. Iohns speech , that he was not that great Prophet promised in Deutronomy to come at the time of the Messias , of whome Moyses said : Thy Lord shall raise vp vnto thee a Prophet out of thy owne Nation , and among thy owne Brethren , as he hath raised me , and him shalt thou heare , meaning of Christ himself . And their proofe for this is , for that in Greek , the article ( ho ) is ioined with PROPHETES , which signifieth commonly an excellency , eminency or singularity of the thing when it is added : so as these Fathers will haue S. Iohns meaning to be , I am not that eminent and singuler Prophet mentioned by Moyses , which indeed as hath byn said was Christ himself . 21. But other Fathers , as S. Augustine and S. Gregory doe vnderstand another reseruation to haue byn in S. Iohns mind , to wit that he was not only a Prophet , but more then a Prophet as Christ said of him , & therfore denied himself to be a Prophet : As if a Bishop should deny himself to be a Priest , for that he is more then a Priest. But Rupertus and some others doe interprete this reseruation of S. Iohn to haue byn that he was no Prophet , by ordinary office to foretell Christ as other Prophets did ; but only that he was a Prophet in spirit and vertue , to shew Christ present : So as heere are diuers reseruatiōs discouered by these Fathers , which doe make the proposition true , that otherwise would be false , and consequently all these Fathers doe agree , that there may be a true mixt proposition , partly vttered and partly reserued , and therby true in one sense and false in another , and one way vnderstood by the hearer , and another way meant by the speaker , which is properly the Equiuocation that we spake of in this place , and is foolishly condemned by Thomas Morton for grosse lying . 22. And albeit I meane to make a seuerall Chapter afterward of his wise argumentes that he alledgeth to proue his purpose ; yet will I not pretermit in this place , to touch one solemne foolery of his vsed to cōuince ( as he saith ) the former answere I am no Priest , with the referuation , to tell yow , of a manifest ly . And to performe this , he will needes leaue for a time the Schoole of Aristotle , and his forme of disputing , and fall to Socraticall demaundes and interrogations . Suffer me ( saith he ) Socratically to debate this point with yow , and answere me friendly to these demaundes . Quest. when being asked whether yow are a Priest , yow 〈◊〉 no , what signification hath this word no ? Answ. It doth signify directly I am no Priest. Quest. And yet yow thinke yow are a Priest ? Answ. Yea I know it . Quest. Wherwith doe yow know it ? Answ. By my inward mind and vnderstanding , my conscience testifying this vnto me . Quest. Can conscience beare witnes , then can it also speake ? Answ. It speaketh as verily to my inward soule , as my tongue speaketh sensibly to your eares &c. Quest. Then will this be as true , that when your cōscience affirmeth that which your tongue denieth , that your tongue speaketh against your conscience , and this is that which we haue proued to be flat lying : a Conclusion that no art of Equiuocation can possibly auoid . Lo heere the victory of Thomas Morton , which he might take against S. Iohn Baptist , for denying himself to be a Prophet , asmuch as against an English Priest , for answering in such a case , I am no Priest. 23. For let vs suppose it had byn as punishable in Iury to haue byn a Prophet in S. Iohns time , as it is now to be a Priest in England , and that he had byn demaunded , as he was by those Priestes and Scribes , whether he were a Prophet or no , & he answering no , I would argue by interrogations , as Morton doth , what signification hath this word no ? And then S. Iohn must answere , as Thomas Morton answereth for him I am no Prophet , which had byn a direct ly in Mortons doctrine , for that his tongue denieth the thing which his cōscience testifieth , knowing that he is a Prophet : and will Morton stand to this his impious processe against S. Iohn , or wil he haue me to tell him his errour , to deliuer S. Iohn and our Priest also from his calumniation ? Let him know then , that this negatiue no , when he saith , I am no Priest , doth not fall only vpon the wordes vttered , according to the sense of the hearer ; but vpon the whole proposition , as it is in the speakers mind , and meaning : so as whē being asked whether I be a Priest , I answere no , the word no serueth to my signification , that I am no such Priest , as I am bound to vtter . And so in S. Iohns answere , he being demaunded whether he were a Prophet , and answering no , his meaning was , that he was no such or such Prophet ; so as this negatiue did not signify directly he was no Prophet , as Morton would haue it , wherby is fallen to the ground all his Socratical sciēce in arguing by interrogatories . It may be he desired to giue a tast therby of his fitnes to haue some office of an Examiner against Catholickes , for his sharpe manner of concluding , which now men will see that he little deserueth , but in defect of a better . 24. I might 〈◊〉 heere to this effect and purpose , that ambiguous and equiuocall answere of the said S. Iohn about Elias , Elias es tu ? ( said the Pharises ) he answered Non sum : Are 〈◊〉 Elias ? he answered , I am not , and yet Christ our Sauiour , that is truth it self , saith of the same S. Iohn : Si vultis illum recipere , ipse est Elias qui venturus est : If yow will receaue him , he is Elias that is to come ; and the later wordes make the sense more hard , for that it seemeth that he describeth the true Elias in deed that was to come . But all the fore alledged Fathers , and others doe agree , that S. Iohns negation was true in his reserued sense , to wit that he was not Elias in person , as the demaunders tooke him to be , and Christes wordes also were true in his reserued sense , to wit , that he was Elias in spirit , though not in person , without which two reseruations , neither of their speeches can be verified , & with them they are made doubtfull , ambiguous , and equiuocall to the hearer , but not false . So as now in one and the self same thing , we haue both Christ and S. Iohn Baptist , for manifest witnesses of amphibology and Equiuocation ; & consequently it is likely that the thing is not so hellish , heathenish , heinous and monstrous , as Morton maketh it ; nor is it such grosse lying , as his first lying and vnlearned cōclusion auoucheth it to be . But let vs goe forward . 25. The next place shall be out of our Sauiours wordes to the Pharises in S. Iohns Ghospell , where he saith , Ego non iudico quemquam , I doe not iudge any man , which proposition without some reseruation cannot stand , for that it should be contrary to many other places of Scripture , as that Pater omne iudicium dedit filio , the Father hath giuen all iudgment to his sonne : and againe in the Actes of the Apostles , S. Peter auoucheth in his Oration to Cornelius , and those that were with him , that God had commaunded him and the rest of the Apostles to testify to the whole world , Quia ipse est qui constitutus est à Deo Iudex viuorum & mortuorum , that Christ is appointed by God , Iudge both of the liuing and the dead , which S. Paul confirmeth aswell to the Romans , as to the Corinthians , that we must all stand before the tribunall of Christ to be iudged by him . 26. So as if we take this propositiō as it lieth written without any mentall reseruation , it is false . For if any man should aske of me whether Iesus Christ be our iudge or no , if I should answere no , I should speake both falsly and impiously ; and how then may this negatiue be made true ( which as vttered by Christ cannot be false ? ) Surely by no way , but by a mentall reseruation of the speaker Christ our Sauiour , which reseruation the ancient Fathers doe seeke after , and lay forth vnto vs in diuers manners . For that S. Augustine , S. Bede , and Rupertus in their explication of this place , doe affirme , that the reseruation was secundum carnem according to the flesh ; so as the whole proposition was , I doe iudge no man according to flesh and bloud , as yow Pharises doe , for that the wordes of Christ immediatly going before were these to the Pharises ; Yow iudge according to the flesh , but I iudge no man ; but other Greeke Fathers S. Chrysostome , Leontius , Theophilact and Euthymius doe thinke that this cannot stand , in respect of the wordes immediatly following : Et si iudico ego , iudicium meum verum est , and if I doe iudge any man , my iudgment is true , which seemeth should not be so , if he should iudge according to flesh and bloud as the Pharises did . 27. Wherfore these Fathers doe propose another mentall reseruation of Christ in this matter to wit in hac vita in this life , meaning that albeit he hath full authority and power of iudging all ; yet that he came not into the world to exercise that power in this life , but only to instruct , comfort , and saue men , reseruing his exercise of iudgment vnto the last day , and in the next world , according to his owne speech in another place , God hath not sent his Sonne into the world to iudge the world , but that the world should be saued by him . And yet other Greeke writers as S. Gregory Nazienzen and Elias Cretensis say , the reseruation to haue byn , as Christ was ; man only , and of himself he had not power to iudge , but from his Father , according to that his saying ; All power is giuen me in heauen & in earth where he acknowledgeth to haue receaued all in gift from his Father . And others doe propose other interpretations and reseruations , but all doe agree in one conformity as yow see , that this proposition of our Sauiour cannot be verified , but only by some mentall reseruation , conteyning more then is vttered . And therfore these Fathers doe acknowledge the vse of mixt reserued propositions , euen in the Sonne of God himself , and consequently also of amphibology or Equiuocation , when need requireth . 28. But let vs see some more examples : when our Sauiour was called to raise from death the Prince or Archsinagoge his daughter , as in S. Mathew , S. Marke & S. Lukes Ghospell is recorded , and he comming to the house , found the people in tumult , weeping , and lamenting for her death , he repressed them saying : Recedite , non est enim mortua puella , fed dormit ; depart , for that the maid is not dead , but sleepeth ; & yet is it certaine that naturally she was dead , by separation of her soule from her body , which is proued both for that the people did know her to be dead , and therfore scoffed at Christ , for saying shee was not dead , but a sleep ; as also for that otherwise it had byn no miracle to raise her againe . So as if this proposition be taken 〈◊〉 as it lieth , without any mentall reseruation by our 〈◊〉 , it cannot be true , neither in it self nor in the sense of the hearers , no more thē in our propositiō , I am no Priest. For if our Sauiour had byn asked , Is this maid dead ? and he had answered no : this word no in the force of Thomas Mortons Socraticall argumentation must needes be the negatiue of that which is demaunded , and so , to vse his words , directly to haue signified 〈◊〉 she was not dead , which had byn directly false , if it had not byn extended to a further reserued meaning of Christ according to our doctrine , and therby the said answere made true . 29. Which mentall reseruation in our Sauiour , according to S. Augustines explication , and of other expositours was , that albeit she was dead in their sight , and vnto humane power : yet vnto him , and vnto his diuine power and will to raise her againe , shee was not dead , but only in a sleep . Verum dixit Dominus , ( saith S. Augustine ) nō est mortua puella , sed dormit ; sed illi , à quo poterat excitari . Christ said truly the maid is not dead , but sleepeth , to wit vnto him , that was able to raise her againe . So as by this reseruation , S. Augustine defendeth Christes proposition from falsity , & consequently acknowledgeth such Equiuocatiō in our Sauiours speech as we treat of . For as Christ being asked whether the maid were dead , and he answering no , saith no vntruth , for that the negatiue no fell not vpon the : wordes vttered only , but vpon his whole meaning , partly vttered , and partly reserued , to wit that she was not dead in respect of his power and will to raise her againe : euen so our no to that demaund , whether I be a Priest or no , falleth not only vpon the wordes vttered or question of the demaunder ( for so it should be false ) but vpon the whole proposition , as hath byn said , and so it is true . 30. I might alleadge almost innumerable places to this effect , as that of Christ in S. Iohns Ghospell 〈◊〉 of the eating of his flesh : If any shall at of this bread , he shall liue foreuer . And againe a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : He that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting : and yet S. Paul saith to the contrary , whosoeuer shall eat this bread or drinke the cup of our Lord vnworthily , shall be guilty of the body and bloud of our Lord ; And further , he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily , doth eat and drinke his owne iudgment , or condemnation , for that he discerneth not the body 〈◊〉 our Lord By which wordes of S. Paul , it is made manifest , first , that the former wordes of Christ cannot absolutly be true , without some mentall reseruation or restriction in his vnderstanding , for that all eaters of his flesh , & drinkers of his bloud haue not life euerlasting therby , but some rather damnation ; & secondly is discouered , what this reseruation was , to wit dignè , worthily : as if he had said he that shall eat : worthily my flesh and drinke worthily my bloud , shall haue life euerlasting therby , which yet Christ vttered not but reserued the same in his mind , as yow see , and therby left the proposition ambiguous and equiuocall . 31. And in very like manner those other speeches of our Sauiour , If yow shall aske any thing of my Father in my name , he will giue it to yow : and yet we see by experience , that many doe aske and receaue not , wherfore somewhat is reserued in Christes mind and meaning ; which reseruation S. Iames vttereth in these wordes : Petitis & non accipitis , eò quòd malè petatis ; yow aske & receaue not , for that yow aske not as yow should doe ; this mentall reseruation then was in Christs wordes , when he vttered the foresaid generall proposition , to wit , that he which should aske , as he ought to aske , should receaue &c. And so againe those wordes in S. Marks Ghospell ; He that shall belieue and be baptized shal be saued , the reseruation is , if he belieue according to : Christs commaundementes , as after both Christ himself in the end of S. Mathewes Ghospell , and S. Iohn in his Epistles doe expoūd the same : according to which sense also , those wordes of the Prophet Ioel : VVhosoeuer shall call vpon the name of our Lord , shall be saued , are expounded by Christ himself , when he saith : Not euery one that saith , Lord , Lord , shall enter into heauen , but he that doth the will of my Father , that is in heauen ; which reseruation was not vttered , but kept in mind by the Prophet . And all these being mixt propositions , partly of wordes vttered , and partly of further hidden sense reserued , making the part that is vttered doubtfull , ambiguous , and equiuocall , as you see ; they doe all determine our controuersy most cleerly , and confound Mortons vanity most apparently , that saith , and auoucheth No one Iota to be found in all Scripture , no one example in all antiquity , for the iust proofe or colour of any such Equiuocation or mixt proposition . 32. I should vtterly weary my Reader , if I would follow all , or the greatest Part of that which may be sayed in this behalfe , for that alwaies commonly all Prophecies that are minatory and doe threaten punishment , haue still some secret-reseruation , if they repent not : as that of Isay to King Ezechias : Haec dicit Dominus , dispone Domui tuae , quia morieris tu & non viues : This 〈◊〉 our Lord , dispose of thy houshold , for thou shall dy , and shalt not liue , and yet he liued 〈◊〉 yeares after . If therfore the Prophet had byn demaunded ; shall not Ezechias liue any longer ? & he had answered no , vpon what had fallen the negatiue no ? If only vpō the wordes vttered , it had byn false , for he liued longer , but if vpon that togeather with the reseruation in the meaning of the holy Ghost , it was true . And the like may be said of the Prophecy of Ionas : Adhuc quadraginta dies , & Niniue subuerietur ; There remaine but fourty dayes before Niniue shall be destroyed , & so infinite other places . Wherfore in this Th. 〈◊〉 was greatly ouerseene in making of confident a chaleng , as before yow haue heard . THE THIRD POINT OF THIS CHAPTER CONCERNING Other Scriptures alleadged , And pretended to be answered by Thomas Morton . §. 3. 33. BVt now we must come to a greater conflict , which is to examine how our aduersary hath answered certaine examples out of Scripture , alleadged as he saith , ( for I haue not yet seene the writing it selfe ) by a Catholicke Treatise in written-hand intercepted , wherby the lawfulnes of this kind of Equiuocation is auouched , & by his answere to those that are cited by himselfe , we may imagine what he will be able to say to these other which haue byn here produced by vs , and innumerable others that might be alleadged . Examples out of the old Testament . First then out of the old Testament , he produceth two examples only , the one of Iacob , that told his Father that he was his eldest sonne Esau , which in deed he was not , and consequently we must graunt that either he spake false , & lied ( which the ancient Fathers , S. Ambrose , S. Augustine and others doe piously deny ) or els that he had some reserued further sense in his mind , wherby his said speach might be verified , and consequently his proposition be ambiguous , and Equiuocall . 34. But herunto T.M. answereth first , that Cardinall Caëtan , and diuers other learned men doe hold , that Iacob is inexcusable from some sort of 〈◊〉 in this his speach ; and for this he alleadgeth the testimony of Pererius a Iesuite in his Commentaries vpon Genesis ; who disputing this matter at large in fiue seuerall disputations , whether Iacob did ly , or sinne at all in this speach , saith , that the said Caïétan with some other moderne writers doe hold , that it may be graunted that the said Patriarch did commit some veniall sinne , by making an officious ly in that behalfe . But what ? doth 〈◊〉 himselfe agree to that opinion ? No truly ? But maketh this title of his last disputation therabout . The common sentence of Deuines ( saith he ) is declared , and defended , which doth excuse and free Iacob from all manner of lying in his foresaid speach , and then beginning with S. Augustine , who in diuers partes of his workes doth most earnestly defend the Patriarch Iacob in this behalfe , by many and manifold reasons , and authorities both from all ly and sinne , doth shew and declare that his speach was figuratiue , and not deceiptfull , conteyning mysterium , non mendacium , a mystery , and not a ly . To which effect one place out of his booke against lying shall serue for all : Non est mendacium ( saith he ) quando silendo absconditur verum , sed cùm loquendo promitur falsum : Iacob autem quòd matre fecit auctore , vt patrem fallere videretur , si diligenter , & fideliter attendatur , non est mendacium , sed mysterium &c. It is no ly , when a truth is concealed by silence but when a falsity by speach is vttered : that which Iacob did by the persuasion of his mother , as though he would deceaue his Father , if it be diligently and faithfully considered , was no ly , but a mystery . 35. And then a little after in the same Chapter talking of such misterious speaches , that seeme to say one thing , and yet doe meane another , he saith thus : Vera non falsa dicuntur , quoniam vera non falsa significantur , seu verbo seu facto , quae significantur enim vtique ipsa dicuntur , putantur autem mendacia , quoniam non ea quae vera significantur , dicta intelliguntur sed ea quae falsa sunt dicta esse creduntur . In a mysterious speach true thinges , and not false are spoken , for that true thinges and not false are signified either by the word , or fact that hath a mystery in it , for that in deed those thinges are spoken which are mysteriously signified by the speach , but they seeme to be lies , for that all men vnderstād not those things that are truly signified by the speach , but rather those thinges that are false are thought to be spoken . So S. Augustine . Wherby is euident , what he meaneth by a mysterious speach , to wit , when one sense is gathered by the wordes , & another sense truly signified , which the naturall signification of the wordes doe not beare , and therby a mysterious proposition must be called also Equiuocall in the sense that now wee handle , and consequently also S. Augustine must needes be graunted to admit this kind of Equiuocation without lying , wherby he so earnestly defendeth this Patriarch from all kind of ly whatsoeuer . 36. And with S. Augustine doe concurre in this defence of holy Iacob both S. Hierome , S. Chrysostome , S. Gregory , Theodoret , S. Ambrose , S. Isidorus , S. Bede ; and of later writers , Rupertus , Gratian , Alexander Halensis , Petrus Lombardus , S. Thomas and almost infinite others ; so as for Th. Morton to creepe out now vnder the shaddow of Caïētan , and two or three other moderne Authors more , against the whole streme , and torrent of so many ancient Fathers , and Catholike Deuines , is a ridiculous euasion , and worthy of Thomas Mortons defence , and full satisfaction . 37. His second example out of the old Testament , is that of Hieremy the Prophet , set downe by me before in my seauenth Chapter and fourth Consideration therof , which this Minister the better not to be vnderstood relateth only in these few obscure wordes , out of his aduersaries answere : Such Equiuocation ( saith he ) did the Prophet Ieremy vse . Ier. 38. when he tooke aduise of the King. This relation is briefe , abrupt , and darke as yow see , but we haue declared the matter with the circumstances in the former place , to wit , how Ieremy being vrged to make a repetition to the Captaines , & Princes of King Sedechias , that were tempted against him , of that conference which had passed in secret betweene him and the said King , of thinges that the King would not haue the said Princes to know , it seemeth by the text of Scripture , that albeit so great and holy a Prophet , sanctified in his mothers wombe , may be presumed not to haue lied ; yet that in so large a repetition wherin diuers truthes at the Kinges request were to be concealed , there must in al probality , passe diuers ambiguous , and Equiuocall speaches , for couering those truthes that were not to be vttered , and that so it may be gathered out of Hieremies owne narration in the text ; and therfore all Equiuocation is not lying , nor heathenish , or abhominable prophanation , as Thomas Morton would haue it . 38. This is the force of the argument : what answereth he therunto ? First , he saith , that our owne ancient expositor Lyranus in his Commentary , holdeth that Ieremy did not ly , but what of this ? So we say also , for that otherwise , we should graunt the Prophet to haue sinned , and Equiuocation to be lying , both which we vtterly deny . Secondly then he leauing quickly this first hold , steepeth to another , more liked by him and his , who would haue all men liars with themselues , and this is , that Ieremy did ly in deed , in that his relation to the Princes of Sedechias , if we iudge ( saith he ) the outward speach of Ieremy , was false ; yet is it not written for our imitation &c. And to this he applieth the words of S. Paul to the Corinthians : Let him that standeth take 〈◊〉 least he fall , that is to say into lying , as Ieremy did : and herwith also he giueth a generall note out of S. August . who saith , that all examples of the old Testament , wherin there may be any scarres of infirmities , ( to vse the wordes of T. M. ) are not to be imitated , which is true in S. Augustines meaning , who alleadgeth the example of Lot , in prostitution of his daughters , and of Dauid that swore rashly that he would kill Naball , & the like : but it was farre from S. Augustines meaning hereby to touch any such holy Prophet , Patriarch , or Saint , as Ieremy was , or to condemne them of voluntary lying : therfore here Thomas Morton sheweth lesse piety then folly in shifting of thus this place of Scripture . 39. And if it were a scarre of infirmity in Hieremy , to couer sometimes a truth by Equiuocation , or amphibology of some speach for a good and necessary end ; yet I hope he will not say so of Christ himselfe , nor lay his scarres also vpon him , though yow haue heard now already by many examples , how frequent that manner of speach was with him , vpon sundry occasions , and yow shall heare more presently , for that now we passe to the examples which he citeth , as alleadged by his aduersary out of the new Testament , and we shall see whether he will answere them better then he hath already done these two of the old . And if yow stand attent , yow shall see him confirme our part as clearly , as if he had written for vs , and against himselfe . Out of the new Testament . 40. THe first place which he taketh vpon him to satisfy out of the new Testament as obiected by his Aduersaries , is that our Sauiours saing in S. Iohns Ghospell : All thinges whatsoeuer I heard of my Father , haue I made knowne vnto yow ; & yet in the very next ensuing Chapter , Christ saith , that he had many thinges to say vnto them , but that they were not able to beare them away then ; Wherof is inferred that Christes former speach had some mentall restriction , or reseruation in it , as that he had told them all that he had receaued from his Father , that is to say , all whatsoeuer he thought conuenient for them to heare at that time , or 〈◊〉 fit to beare away , or to make their profit by , or the like , which yet was not expressed in wordes in the former proposition , but reserued in Christes meaning , & consequently that proposition was mixt , and Equiuocall in sense by this mentall reseruation ; what will Thomas Morton say to this ? For if a Iesuite should come to him , and relate him some case from another , with this asseueration in the end , that he had told him all whatsoeuer he had heard from the other , and yet the next day after should say that he had many pointes more to tell him from the same party , but it was not time to tell them now , I doubt not but that he would haue cried out , that the Iesuite had lied the day before , for the euill conceipt he hath of Iesuites in that behalfe : but if , on the contrary side he had held a good opinion of that Iesuite his integrity in his point , and that for no worldly respect he would make a ly , great or smal , ( as according to our former doctrine he should not ) then must M. Morton imagine at least , that that 〈◊〉 did Equiuocate without a ly , and so consequently lying & Equiuocation should be two distinct things . 41. Well then now I expect what he will answere to this speach of Christ , whome he will not grant I am sure to haue Equiuocated , least he speake against himselfe and authorize therby Equiuocation , nor dareth he ( I presume ) 〈◊〉 say , that he lied , least he cast vpon him so soule a scarre of infirmirty : I expect ( I say ) to see how he will shift of this matter , for that the case seemeth to be very like , or rather the same in both examples , setting a side the maine difference of the persons . Yow shall heare what full satisfaction he wil giue in this behalfe . I answere ( saith he ) with S. Augustine , now mans infirmity playeth her part , but know yow that no man learneth of Chastity to be adulterous , or of godlines to be 〈◊〉 , and shall we learne of truth to be liars , and periurious ? God forbid . Thus he out of S. Augustine as he pretendeth , but in deed so brokenly & corruptly alleadged , if yow looke vpon the place it selfe , as it may scarsely be called S. Augustines speach . But as for the sense it appertaineth nothing to our purpose , for S. Augustine saith , we my not learne of the truth to be liars , as the Priscillianistes indeauoured to doe by confirming the vnlawfulnes of lying out of the wordes of Christ , which we doe not , nor doe we affirme that our Sauiour when he said , All thinges whatsoeuer I haue heard of my Father I haue made knowne vnto yow , did ly , or vtter any falsity at all , but reserued somewhat in his mind not vttered , which ioined with his wordes made the proposition most true , and how then is the sentence of S. Augustine brought in against vs for an answere to the difficulty proposed ? By this 〈◊〉 yow may see what full satisfaction he is like ●o giue to these places of Scripture . But let vs heare the rest . 42. Touching this text ( saith he ) your owne Bishop Iansenius answering this obiection saith , that these kind of speaches , and all such are to be expounded according to the circumstances either of state , place , time or condition of the persons speaking , or to whome they were spoken , as namely , that whatsoeuer yow aske my Father in my name he will giue yow . What any thing absolutly ? Nay but vpon condition if it be expedient for yow . So heere Christ saying I haue manifested all thinges , it is expounded by the circumstāces of the present state , signifying all that appertaineth vnto yow to be knowne ; so then 〈◊〉 is no concealed sense to deceaue the hearer &c. 43. Doe yow see what an inference he maketh , that because Iansenius doth shew the way how to seeke out the reseruation , or concealed sense in such ambiguous propositions , therfore there is no such mentall reseruation , or concealed sense at all ? Can the Reader tolerate such an impertinent writer ? Nay doth not all this speach of Iansenius make wholy against Morton ? For if he doe set downe these circumstances of place , time , state , and condition , wherby to seeke out the hidden sense of such dubious propositions , may not we well , and iustly inferre quite contrary to Mortons inference , Ergo there is some such hidden sense , more then is expressed in the wordes , which we call reseruation , wherby the hearer may cōceaue a wrōg sense if he hit not vpō the said true reseruation , which being not manifest to euery one , but rather a cōtrary sense appearing in the words vttered , maketh the proposition ambiguous , doubtful and Equiuocall ; for that it may haue diuers senses , one in the vnderstanding of the hearer , & another in the meaning of the speaker . And for that the whole importance dependeth of the later to wit of the speaker , especially in the speaches vttered by the holy Ghost that cannot be false , the ancient Fathers doe labour by examination of the circumstances , set downe here by Iansenius , & 〈◊〉 such like , to find out what the speakers true meaning was , when the speach of it self is doubtfull according to the wordes vttered . 44. Nor is the matter so easy to euery man to find this out by consideration of circumstances , as Thomas Morton would haue men to thinke , that there is no doubt or difficulty at all : for as in the places before alleadged yow haue heard sundry Fathers of sundry opinions , and iudgmentes about the points that were reserued by our Sauiour : so heere in this place vpon those wordes , Omnia quaecunque &c. all thinges whatsoeuer I haue heard of my Father &c. diuers Authors as Leontius . and others make the reseruation to be this , whatsoeuer I heard of my Father , with order to tell yow , that I haue vtterd vnto yow ; but S. Chrysostome , Theophilact , Euthimius , and other Greeke writers expound it thus , that whatsoeuer I heard of my Father conuenient for yow to know , that I haue reuealed vnto yow . S. Augustine , and S. Bede doe thinke Christes meaning to be , that he had reuealed all to his disciples , except such thinges as were reserued for the holy Ghost to reueale , and vtter vnto them , as in the precedent Chapter he promised : so as albeit here diuers learned Fathers by examining the circumstances before mencioned , doe ghesse at diuers mentall reseruations as yow see ; yet all doe agree that there were some not vttered in the wordes , and not so easy to be determined , which doth vtterly ouerthrow our Ministers idle imagination to the contrary , that the matter is euident for euery man to vnderstand by circumstance of speech . And yet he concludeth his answere in these confident wordes , VVherby ( saith he ) yow may perceaue that not that infallible verity , but your owne infirmity and vanity hath deceaued yow in so peruerting the truth , to patronize a ly . Would yow not thinke that the man had spoken somewhat to the purpose , that thus concludeth ? Surely not a iote more then yow haue heard , wherin he hath confirmed euidently our part , and ouerthrowne his owne ; and yet he braggeth like a Conquerour , as yow see : but let vs leaue him in his vanity , and passe to a second place , or example alleadged . 45. The second place is taken out of the Ghospell of S. Marke , where our Sauiour speaking of the day of Iudgment , said , that de die autem 〈◊〉 , vel hora nemo scit , neque Angeli in coelo , neque filius , nisi Pater : Of that day , or houre no man knoweth , neither the Angels in heauen , nor the Sonne , but the Father : which is repeated againe in effect by S. Matthew , who hath Nemo scit nisi solus Pater , No man knoweth therof but only the Father : & yet doth the whole course of Scripture runne to the contrary , shewing that Christ must be Iudge in that day , as before hath byn shewed , and consequently must needes be presumed to know therof , S. Paul saith also expressely to the Colossians , that all the treasures of wisedome , and knowledge were hidden in Christ , ergo it is euident that the former proposition of Christ had some reseruation of mind in it , for that otherwise it had byn false . And for more perspicuities sake , let vs frame the case more plaine : If those disciples to whome our Sauiour spake those words , had demaunded him , if he knew any thing of the day of Iudgment , and he had answered , no , what would that no haue signified according to Thomas Mortons 〈◊〉 argumētation ? Would it not haue directly signified ( as his words be ) that he had not knowne therof in deed ? and would not his hearers haue taken it so ? and yet had it byn false , and they deceaued . Why ? For that he had some further reseruation in his mind , wheron that ( no ) did reflect , which his wordes did not vtter . 46. Well then compare Thomas Mortons case which he obiecteth against vs and is this : A Catholicke hauing a Priest in his house , and demaunded whether he know where such a Priest is , he answereth no , reseruing in his mind a further true meaning , wheron that no in his intention doth fall , to wit , that he knoweth it not so , as it is conuenient to vtter it vnto them that aske him , Syr Thomas cryeth out , that this not a hidden truth but a grosse ly . But I would aske him why ? And further intreate him , to set downe the difference betweene these two answers of Christ , and a Catholike in the manner of speach , and nature of a reserued proposition . 47. If he would say that there is no reseruation in our Sauiours speach , but that the sense is cleare according to the wordes as they sound , it would be ridiculous , both in regard of the opposite authorities before alleadged out of Scriptures ; as also of the great variety of expositions , which the ancient Fathers did leaue vnto vs , for finding out the true reseruation . And first of all condemning for Heretikes , as S. Damascene testifieth , vnder the name of 〈◊〉 , or Agnoetae , all those that following the litterall apparent sense of those wordes of our Sauiour , did hold him to be ignorant in deed of the day of Iudgment , which being decreed and established by the Church , ech Father endeauoured to find out the true reserued meaning , of our Sauiour , as hath byn said ; which by experience they proued to be so hard , and therwith all to defend the same against the Arrians , who vrged strongly the litterall signification of the wordes , against Christes Diuinity , as some of them held this text to be corrupted , as appeared by the testimony both of S. Hierome vpon this place , and S. Ambrose in his bookes de fide : wherupon euen at this day in S. Matthewes Ghospell , where Christ vseth the same speach , the word neque filius , neither the Sonne knoweth , is not read either in Greek or Latin , & yet was it found in diuers Copies of both languages in old time , as may appeare by Origen , and S. Chrysostome in Greeke , and S. Hilary , and S. Augustine in Latin , who did read it in their dayes in their Copies of S. Mathews Ghospell , as we doe now in S. Marke , and therupon , as hath byn said , indeauoured ech one to find out Christes hidden meaning , and mentall reseruation therin . 48. As for example Origen & S. Epiphanius doe thinke Christes reseruation to haue byn , that he knew not the day of Iudgment in this life , but in the next ; and others , that he knew it not , quoad experientiam , by experience , for that he had not yet experienced the same ; nor doth S. Chrysostome seeme in one place altogeather to mislike this interpretation . Other Fathers in great number doe thinke Christs meaning and reseruation to haue byn , that he knew not of the certaine day of Iudgment , as he was man , that is to say , by vertue of his humanity alone , without his diuinity , for though as he was man and God he knew it ; yet not by force or power of his humanity . And of this opinion are S Athanasius , S. Ambrose , S. Gregory Nazianzen , S. Cyril , Theodoret and others . 49. Many Fathers also , yea the greatest number of all , haue an other exposition expressing the very same reseruatiō in Christes wordes , which we talked of in our former proposition , affirming that Christes meaning was , whē he said he knew not the day of Iudgment , that he knew it not so , as he might discouer it vnto them , or make them know it . And so doth hold S. Augustine in many places of his workes , S. Chrysostome also in his homilies vpon S. Mathew and S. Marke , S. Gregory in his Register , S. Hierome and S. Bede in their exposition vpon this place , with whome doe concurre Theophilact , and diuers others . 50. Now then we haue heere , that there are three or foure sortes of reseruations at least , sought out by the foresaid circūstances touched in the former example , al which doe proue vnto vs , that in the proposition of Christ , the Sonne of man knoweth not of the day or houre of Iudgment , is an amphibologicall and Equiuocall mixt proposition , conteyning a mentall reseruation of our Sauiour , not expressed in his wordes , which ouerthroweth and vtterly vndoeth Th. Mortons whole Treatise : and how doe yow thinke will he play the man heere to auoid all this battery ? Yow shall heare it presently , and see him brought to miserable straites : for thus he beginneth to answere the matter , hauing confessed first out of his aduersaries Treatise of Equiuocation , that Augustine , Ambrose , Chrysostome , Basil and Theophilact doe expound it so , as lastly hath byn said , that Christ knew not the day of Iudgment to vtter it to his disciples , wherunto he answereth thus . 51. It will not ( saith he ) be pertinent to oppose the other exposition of Fathers , who as your Maldonate saith , were many , expounding this text thus , that Christ as he was man knew not the day and houre . This is his first struggle , and if it be impertinent , as himselfe confesseth , why doth he alleadge it , but for lacke of better defence , and that it is impertinent in deed , is euident ; for that this exposition of some Fathers alleadged by him , doth rather proue that there were diuers reseruations in Christes wordes , then that there was none at all , which he should proue . Wherfore it falleth out to Thomas Morton in this case , as when playing a bad game at Tables that is past recouery , he should say , this game is lost which way soeuer I play it , and yet will I play it out with what shame soeuer , rather then giue it vp . Let vs see then what play he maketh . 52. He followeth on immediatly after his former speach thus : But the question is ( saith he ) whether the former exposition of S. Augustine and others doth imply any mentall Equiuocation , and because Garnet at his arraignment did select only S. Augustine of all the Fathers , we will appeale to S. Augustine for answere to them all , by whose testimony it doth appeare , that when our Sauiour said , I know not the day , signifying vt dicam vobis , to tell vnto yow , this clause wherby he meant to conceale the time , was not concealed from thē , who though they were by the sense of the speach held in ignorance not to know the day ; yet were they not ignorant of the sense of the speach , which was , I may not let yow know it . So he . And doe yow vnderstand him ? or doth he not labour asmuch to hold yow in ignorance of his meaning , as Christ did his Disciples of the day of iudgment ; but let vs draw him out of this affected darkenes . 53. First he saith the question is , ( and he saith well ) whether the former exposition of S. Augustine , & other Fathers doe imply any mentall Equiuocation or rather mentall reseruation , which maketh Equiuocation or doubtfulnes of meaning ; and I see not how he can deny it , sor that the proposition , Christ knoweth not of the day of Iudgment is false , without some reseruation , but with the reseruation gathered vpon S. Augustines exposition , to wit , that he knew it not to make them know it , that is to say , to vtter it vnto them , it is true , ergo S. Augustines exposition doth imply and declare vnto vs a manifest mentall reseruation , and cōsequently also an Equiuocation . For that as before we haue defined the matter , Equiuocation or amphibology in this our controuersy , is nothing els , but when a speach is partly vttered in wordes , and partly reserued in mind , by which reseruation the sense of the proposition may be diuers . 54. Secondly wheras Thomas Morton saith , that Father Garnet at his arraignment did select only S. Augustine , of all other Fathers to depend vpon , concerning the former exposition of Christes wordes , and therfore that he also will appeale to S. Augustine for answere to them all , it is a shift , therby to auoid the authority of all the other Fathers , both in this and the other expositions before mentioned , all which doe conclude against him , as hath byn said , that there is a mentall reseruation in Christes wordes , without which vnderstood , the proposition is false . Neither did Father Garnet so select S. Augustines authority at his arraignmēt to stand vpon , as that he left any way the other Fathers , but being pressed to be briefe , he named him for all , and no small maruaile it is that at such an arraignment he had leysure , or list to name any Father , or other proofe at all , knowing how vnequally the same would be heard after the hydeous clamours of so many Ministers out of bookes , speeches , & pulpittes against that doctrine : but sure I am , that if Henry Garnet , and Thomas Morton had met togeather at any equall barre out of arraignment , to plead and dispute this matter , there would haue byn as little cause for Thomas to haue triumphed of that disputation , as there is like to be now of this his writing ; and therfore he might haue spared him heere if he had pleased . 55. But his third act of manhood in his defence is most notorious , where hauing fled all other Fathers , as yow see , to sticke to S. Augustine , he bringeth in S. Augustine wholy against himselfe , as now yow shall see , though he endeauour by some , obscure words to dazle the sense of his hearer . For in the words of Saint Augustine by him alleadged he saith thus : Nescientem se esse dixit , quia illos nescientes occultando faciebat . Christ said he was ignorant of the day of Iudgement , for that he made them ignorant therof , by hyding the same from them . And in another place : Hoc nescit filius quod nescientes facit , hoc est , quod non ita sciebat , vt tunc discipulis indicaret : the Sonne of God is said not to know that , which he maketh other men not to know , that is to say , that he knoweth it not so , as he would vtter it at that time to his Disciples . And for proofe of this exposition S. Augustine alleadgeth that place of S. Paul to the Corinthians : neque enim iudicaui me scire aliquid inter vos , nisi Iesum Christum , & hunc Crucisixum : Neither did I esteeme my selfe to know any thing among yow , but only Iesus Christ , and him crucified , where S. Paul saith he knew no more of that thing , for that he thought it not time to vtter vnto them any more : which is so plaine for our purpose , as Thomas Morton would neuer haue alleadged it , but vpon plaine despaire of the game lost in deed . For what is more conforme then this to our answere obiected by him , I am no Priest to vtter it vnto yow : I know not where such a Priest is , that is , I make yow not to know it by concealing the same , for that I am not bound , nor is it expedient to vtter it . 56. Now then heere yow see Thomas Morton in the dust , as one fighting against himselfe . For to cauill , & quarrell , as he doth afterward , that the Apostles are to be presumed to haue vnderstood this reserued meaning , aswell as S. Augustine , S. Ambrose , and other Fathers did , and that if they did , then it was no Equiuocation : and further that it were blasphemy to say that Christ did Equiuocate with his Apostles ; all these shiftes ( I say ) are but ridiculous . For first it importeth not to our question , whether the Apostles vnderstood the secret meaning of Christ in this deniall , or not , but rather whether there were any reseruation , & whether the speach of it selfe were ambiguous , and Equiuocall to the hearers ( who were many besides the Apostles ) by reason of this reseruation , and all Christians haue byn and shall be to the worldes end . And then if this so , it is no blasphemy to say , that Christ did Equiuocate , that is to say , speake doubtfully , but rather it is blasphemy by excluding all Equiuocation , to condemne the same for lying , as Morton is forced to doe , or to say nothing . 57. And lastly where he concludeth the whole matter by the testimony of our Doctor Genesius as he calleth him , I haue told before how he is ours , and how in some sort he may in this controuersy be called his , though he detested his Religion , as by his workes appeareth . Ours he is , as in all other points of Religion , so in the substantiall and principall point of this question , for that he defendeth the vse of Equiuocation in concealing some secrettes , but denieth it in others , wherin he fauoureth somewhat the aduerse party , with small ground , as in the next Chapter shall be declared . But what saith this Doctor Genesius ? He will tell yow ( saith Morton ) that this sense ( of this text of Scripture ) which yow conceale , is not only contrary to the sentence of all Fathers , but also against all common sense . And is this possible ? Will Sepulueda deny all those Fathers alleadged by me before for our interpretation to be Fathers ? will he say that their exposition is contrary to all common sense ? Doth not Genesius himselfe in the very Chapter heere cited alleadge both S. Hierome and S. Augustine for this interpretation , and alloweth the same ? What shameles dealing then is this of our Minister to charge Genesius with such folly or impiety which he neuer thought of ? For Genesius denieth not either the sense , or interpretation of the place , and much lesse saith , that it is contrary to the sentence of the Fathers , and least of all to common sense , but denieth only the application therof for vse and practice to certaine cases , wherin he admitteth not Equiuocation , and saith , that vpon this interpretatiō , to bring in such a new law were greatly inconuenient ( wherin afterward notwithstanding we shall shew him to haue byn greatly deceaued ) and his Latin wordes are : Contra non modò veterum & grauissimorum doctorum , sed communem hominem sensum , quasi legem inducere : to bringe in , as it were , a law not only against the iudgment of ancient , and most graue Schoole - Doctors ( for of them only he speaketh in that place ) but also against the commō sense or opinion of men . This is Genesius his speach , wherin though his iudgment 〈◊〉 reiected by other Schoolmen as singuler and paradoxicall in this point , as after shall be declared ; yet is he egregiously abused by Morton , who first maketh him to say of the interpretation , and sense of this place of Scripture , that which he speaketh only of the application therof , to vse and practice in tribunalles . And secondly he maketh him to discredit the Fathers which himselfe alleadgeth : thē he Englisheth ancient Fathers for ancient Schoole-Doctors : and last of all addeth consensum of his owne , leauing out hominum , to make it sound common sense , and other such abuses , which any man may see by conferring the place . And these are other manner of sinnes , then simple Equiuocation , if the art of falsifying or forgery be any sinne with him at all , and so much for this place of Scripture . 58. The third place alleadged , and pretended to be answered by this man , is that of S. Lukes Ghospell , when our Sauiour drawing towardes the Castell of Emaus , with his two disciples , Ipse se finxit longius ire , saith the text ; himself feigned that he would goe further : wherupon they forced him to stay with them , and heerof is inferred , that Christ vsed at that time some doubtfull action or wordes , importing a different externall signification to his disciples , from his inward meaning , which may truly be called ambiguity , amphibology , or Equiuocation in fact , for that Equiuocation as hath byn said , may be vsed either in factes or speach , and consequently that our Sauiour did heere Equiuocate with his disciples making them belieue a different thing from that he meant , for he meant to goe no further , but to stay there with them , as is gathered out of the text it selfe , for that otherwise the Euangelist would not haue said , and he feigned to goe surther ; nor may it without impiety be called 〈◊〉 ly , of what sort soeuer , as S. Augustine expresly doth proue in diuers partes of his workes : how then will Thomas 〈◊〉 deliuer himselfe from this labyrinth ? He hathno probable escape at all , as yow shall see in the sequent point about feigning or deceauing , for that this place doth more properly appertaine to that matter and subiect , this being no 〈◊〉 proposition , but rather a dissimulation , or fiction in act , as is presumed , as that our Sauiour went further then the place , or made shew that he would doe so , or the like , and consequently we shall differre the larger declaration of this place vnto the ensuing point or paragraphe , which is the fourth and last of this Chapter . 59. The fourth and last place then , which our Minister hath alleadged out of the foresaid Catholicke Treatise of Equiuocation , with pretence to answere the same , is the speach of our Sauiour to his brethren or kinsmen in S. Iohns Ghospell , who exhorting him to goe vp to Ierusalem to celebrate the feast of Tabernacles , and therby to be knowne to the world , he answered with shewing first a great difference betweene his state and theirs , and how the world hated him , but not them , and why , and then said , goe yow vp to this festiuall day , I doe not goe vp to this feast , for that my time is not yet accomplished ; but yet after they being gone vp , he ascended also . Out of which speach and fact is gathered , that Christ when he said to his brethren , I doe not ascend , or will not ascend to this feast , he had some further mentall reseruation , which his brethren vnderstood not , for that otherwise they would not haue gone vp without him , so as heere is a plaine Equiuocall proposition , that hath one meaning according to the wordes in the hearers vnderstanding , and another in the sense of the speaker , wherby the hearers were deceaued : and yet was this no ly . What then will Thomas Morton say to this ? Yow shall see him bestirre himselfe for some euasion , but with as good successe as the good-wife that was early vp , & neuer the neare , which example I vse to temperate somewhat his intemperate Ministeriall speach of louing and imbracing queanes in the very beginning of his answere : for thus he writeth : 60 Yow haue ( saith he ) bestowed many lines in commencing vpon this text , to euince from hence your reserued conceipt : let me borrow a little leaue to plead as well for truth , as yow doe for a ly , and shew yow , how expounding this place , yow blinded with the loue of your Thais , had rather snatch at any meaning , then take that which is meant : for those words , I will not goe vp , in the Greeke are , I will not goe vp yet : But your Helena the Latin vulgar text must be imbraced &c. Doe yow see what manner of accusation he bringeth in against vs , and in what light & lasciuious wordes , in so graue and sacred a subiect as is the text of holy writ ? Hath he no honester comparisons to bring in then the blind loue of Thais , and embracing of Helena ? yow may iudge of the mans spirit by his wordes . 61. But what doth he accuse vs of in effect ? forsooth that we haue left the 〈◊〉 text , which hath ' 〈◊〉 nondum , not yet , & doe follow the vulgar Latin , which hath only ' ou , that is non , not , the difference of which word maketh a maine diuersity in the matter if yow marke it well , for if the true text be nondum , I will not yet goe vp , then is there no doubt or difficulty at all of the sense , for that Christ had said plainly that he would not goe vp then , and so his going vp afterward had byn no contradiction any way to his former speach of not going vp , as heere our Maldonate cited by Morton doth cōfesse : but on the other side if the matter were so plaine by reading nondum in the Greeke , why doe the ancient Fathers labour so much to find out the secret meaning , and reserued sense of our Sauiour in this sentence and seeming contradiction of his ? For S. Augustine and S. Bede after much search , doe thinke his meaning to haue byn , that he would not ascend to that feast with a humane spirit , to procure worldly honour , name or fame , as his brethren exhorted him by making himselfe knowne , and admired to the world by working of miracles &c. Strabus & other expositours doe interpret , that he would not ascend to suffer , or exhibite his passion in Ierusalem at this feast of tabernacles , but reserue it for the pasch , or feast of Easter , according to the appointment of his Father , and to this effect said , tempus meum nondum aduenit , my time is not yet come . Eucherius in his questions vpon this 〈◊〉 , thinketh that our Sauiour meant that he would not ascend vp to the first day of the feast , ( which was properly called the festiuall day , ) but some day after , for it lasted seauen dayes , as appeareth Exod. 25. Leuit. 23. Deut. 16. And this exposition is approued in like manner both by S. Cyril , S. Augustine and Ammonius and others in respect of those wordes of the Euangelist vers . 14. Iam autem die festo mediante ascendit Iesus in templum ; Christ ascended to the Temple the feast being halfe ended : albeit this being spoken of his going vp to the Temple , other thinke that he went vp to the citty after his brethren , before the first day , but not into the Temple to celebrate the feast . 62. Wherfore seing these and other Fathers doe labour so much to find out the meaning of Christ in this sentēce , it is not like , that the matter was so cleare as T. M. would make it , by the clause nondum : for if that word had byn in all Greeke bookes , and so held for the true text , there had byn no question , or controuersy as expositours confesse : yet we grant with Maldonate alleadged by Th. Morton , that very many Greeke copies had it so in former times , & haue it at this day ; neither doth our vulgar translation deny or dissemble the same , for albeit it haue non , & not nondum ; yet doth it expresly signify in the margent , that diuers manuscriptes haue nondum , and so doth set it downe for varia lectio , yea the Rhemes English Testament it self doth expresse that translation also in the margent , I will not goe vp yet : so as Mortons scoffe of our Thais and Helena is a meere calumniation as yow see , and worthy of a man of his profession . 63. Nor doe we reiect the Greeke text any where , when with more probability of truth it may be admitted , as heere in this place they are our expositours & not his , that haue taught him to talke of ' óupoo , nondum to wit , Iansenius , Tolet and Maldonate . And the two former for more facility of explication doe follow the same , and the sense therof in their commentaries : we also in our vulgar Latin translation , which Morton calleth our Helena , doe goe neerer many times to the Greeke then Protestants , as heere our said Latin text saith , Ego non ascendo in the present tense according to the Greeke , I doe not ascend , wheras Thomas Morton translateth , I will not ascend in the future , which the Greeke hath not . And againe diuers Greeke textes haue not at all these wordes , I doe not ascend to this feast , according to Maldonate and Tolet , and diuers other Greeke textes haue the word nyn ( nunc ) added , that is , I will not ascend now , both which notwithstanding are reiected by the Protestants themselues : all which being so , yow may consider of the wise speach of T. M. in this place : VVe will not ( saith he ) so strictly chalenge our right in this equity approued by all antiquity , which is , that as in discerning pure water , rather to examine it by the fountaine then the riuer , so we iudge of the truth of textes by the 〈◊〉 rather then the translation 64. And doe yow so Sir ? And doe we contradict this ? Your very next immediate wordes doe cleare vs from this your calumniation , for it followeth in your speach : Your Latin text ( say yow ) doth sufficiently betoken the same sense of the Greeke , ( not yet ) and so doe two of the principall Doctors of your Church , Tolet , and Iansenius paraphrase . And is it so ? how then are we so blinded with the loue of our Thais , as rather to snatch at any meaning , then take that which is meant ? how say yow that our Helena , the Latin translation , is imbraced by vs before the Greeke , if our Latin doe not only betoken the same sense of the Greeke , as heere yow confesse , but setteth it downe so as varia lectio in the margent , as before hath byn shewed ; yea and that two of our principall Doctors doe follow the same in their paraphrases ? Is not this to accuse and defend , affirme and deny , and to speake contraries with one and the same breath ? 65. But to drawe to an end , and conclude the principall point of this controuersy , yow see how Thomas Morton seeketh to auoid the force of this place , where Christ denied that he would goe vp to the festiuall day , and yet afterward went vp , by this only euasion , that very many Greeke copies haue the word nondum : and for this he alleadgeth the testimony of our Maldonate in his Commentary vpon that place . But what ? did Maldonate say , that all Greeke copies had it so ? or that the most ancient , and purest did so read ? or that he himselfe was of that opinion ? No truly : but the quite contrary , for he proueth by diuers strong argumentes , that this word ' óupoo , nondum was not in the old copy in S. Hieromes time , and before , when our vulgar Latin translation was set forth . First , for that it is like that the said Latin translation would aswell haue expressed it , as betoken it , to vse Mortons owne phrase , and put it in the margent , especially for so much as the sense , and difficulty of Christes meaning , should haue byn made 〈◊〉 easy therby . Secondly for that diuers Greeke Fathers as Cyril , Euthymius , and others doe not read ' oupoo but ' ou , non and not nondum , which is a token that those Greeke textes of the Ghospell , which they vsed in their dayes had it as our Latin hath now . Thirdly for that Beda , Strabus , Rupertus and all other Latin Authors whatsoeuer , not any one excepted in Maldonats iudgment doe read non and not nondum , who notwithstanding did conferre with the Greeke Copies of their time , and especially S. Hierome most learned in all languages , who is held for the principall Author of this our Latin vulgar translation . 66. Fourthly all the Ancient Fathers before named both Greeke and Latin , that laboured to find out the true meaning of Christ in this his doubtfull speach , did not know this euasion in their dayes by the word nondum , for that it had byn folly to take so much paines to discouer a meaning or reseruation that was cleare of it self . Fifthly we doe read in S. Hierome that Porphyrius the Apostata in his most spitefull inuectiues against our Sauiour , did obiect this as a principall place to discredit him withal , that he saying he would not goe vp to that feast , did notwithstanding goe vp afterward , which he being a most learned Grecian , and vsing all the Greeke textes of that time , for his purpose , as hauing byn a Christian before , it may be presumed , that if any of them had then read ' óupoo , wherby his obiection had byn answered , he would neuer haue vpbrayded the same , especially against such learned Christian Doctors of the Greek Church that liued with him , and wrote against him , as Origen , Ammonius , Dionysius Alexandrinus and others , all within three hundred yeares after Christ , who no doubt would haue answered Porphyrius as Thomas Morton doth now answere vs , with ' óupoo , if there had byn any such thing in the Greeke text in their dayes . 67. And finally if Christ our Sauiour had answered his brethren , I will not yet goe vp , they would haue asked him againe , when he would go , & would haue stayed for him , and of likelyhood would not haue departed without him ; All which reasons , and considerations Thomas Morton passeth ouer and dissembleth , & is full glad that he hath a hole to slipp out any way . And yet to shew one point of manhood in this his flight , he taketh vpon him to answere one of these six arguments alleadged against him , which is the fourth cōcerning the ancient Fathers that laboured to seeke out 〈◊〉 reserued meaning , and you shall see how full satisfaction he giueth according to the tytle of his booke : VVhat shall we then say ( saith he ) to the other expositions ( of Fathers ) obiected ? Only this ; that whatsoeuer exposition they vnderstand , they did thinke that the same was as well vnderstood of the Apostles as of themselues . Heere be two pointes insinuated , if you consider them attentyuely , the first , that the ancient Fathers did suppose , that whatsoeuer Christs meaning was in these wordes to his brethren ( whom Mortö calleth heere the Apostles ) they did ( the said kinsmen of our Sauiour ) vnderstand the same aswell then , to wit before the ghospell was written , and before the holy ghost was giuen , as the said Christian Fathers and learned Doctors did afterward by the learning , and light they had from the spirit and tradition of the Church : which proposition if he were put to proue in the presence of learned men , I doubt not but that he would quickly be in a poore and pittifull plight . 68. The second thing which by this his answere he would haue vs vnderstand is , that if these brethren or kinsmen of Christ , did any way conceaue our Sauiours meaning , then was there no reseruation at all , for that as he saith , our ioyned reseruation is alwayes supposed to be a clause concealed , and not vnderstood . But this is a greater foolery then the first , for that there may be a reseruation in the speakers mynd , though vnderstood to some of the heares . As for example in our proposition being demaunded , whether I be a priest , and I say no , reseruing to my selfe , as often before hath byn declared , that I am no such , or such priest , as I ought to vtter the same to you , though some of the examiners should ghesse at my reseruation , or know the same certaynly , for that otherwise they know I am a priest , this doth not make that this proposition in it selfe , & in my meaning is not a reserued or equiuocall proposition , for that they vnderstand it . And yet as though the poore man had played his prize well , he concludeth 〈◊〉 in these wordes : Therfore 〈◊〉 all these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , there 〈◊〉 not the least haire of your fox 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 : Scriptures forsake you , or rather you them , now will you haue recourse vnto Fathers ? 69. But whether Scriptures haue forsaken him , or vs in this conflict , or whether the Fathers expositions haue stood with his , or our cause , the reader I suppose hath sufficiently seene : nor is it needfull for vs , to make any further recourse vnto Fathers , hauing shewed them to stand fully for vs in allowing reserued mixt propositions , which of necessity do make ambiguity , and equiuocation euen in Christes owne speaches , as hath bene declared : Which if Mortons vncircumcised mouth will call also fox-tayles we may well be contented to beare such a Ministeriall scoffe in so good a cause and company . And finally what this man esteemeth of holy Fathers when they make against him , is easely seene by that he saith in the next Chapter after , where hauing cyted out of the former Catholicke Treatise , the saying of S. Gregorie the Great , that we ought not to respect so much the wordes of any speech , as the will & intent of the speaker , 〈◊〉 non debet intentio verbis deseruire , sed verba intentioni ; for that the intētion of the speaker ought not to serue to his wordes , but his wordes to his intention ; after a soffe or two against the said Father , that if an Author must be sought for a lye , it was most likely he should be a Pope , he maketh this cōclusion : I dare boldly conclude ( saith he ) that though S. Gregorie , or a thousand of Saincts ; yea 〈◊〉 celestiall Gabriel , or any Angell from heauen should teach , and authorize such a Doctrine as this , we may from the word of God pronounce him Anathema . So he . 70. And he concludeth boldly in deed , but who more bold then blynd Bayard ( as the prouerbe saith ) he may as well pronounce Anathema and curse , not only vpon Saincts and Angels , but vpon the Sonne of God himselfe , as by this time his discreete Reader hath seene and considered . And can there be any more blind boldnes then this ? Is he not ashamed of this so shamefull ouersight ? doth he not remember what he said before , not one iota in all Scripture , not one example in all antiquity , not one shaddow of reason in all the wit of man can be brought for any colour of Equiuocation ? I wil not pretermitt his very last wordes immediatly following , wherwith he concludeth his twelueth Chapter , for that they conteyne a full vpshot of his folly . Now ( saith he ) that we haue wrested your weapons out of your handes ( by answering Scriptures and Fathers as before he hath answered ) it wil be easie to pearce you euen with 〈◊〉 , the bluntest kind of arguments that are : And then he followeth on in the next Chapter to pearce vs with signes , coynes , Giges ringes , and other like toyes : but we , as you haue seene haue pearced him in the meane pace wit h substantiall arguments of truth her selfe , out of both Scriptures and Fathers , and shall do yet more in the ensuing paragraph , leauing him now to his similitudes , signes , coynes , Giges ringes , and other such like iugling wordes , and instruments fitt for a man of his disposition . THE FOVRTH AND LAST POINT OF THIS CHAPTER About Scriptures , and Fathers That defended Equiuocation from the name and nature of Deceipt and fallacy : VVITH Some other proofes out of common Reason &c. §. 4. 71. I May be very breifin this , for that I haue handled the same argument in the later end of the former Chapter , and in this I haue byn longer then I had purposed , & therfore I will only adioyne in 〈◊〉 place some few examples more , for iustifying of that which there we touched in few wordes . For wheras according to S. Augustines defynition before set downe , two thinges are to be required to a ly , first to vtter that with is false and disagreeing from the vnderstanding of the speaker ; the other that there be intention to deceaue ; the first , of falsitie , hath byn largly proued not to be found in our reserued proposition , I am no priest , for that the speaker hath a true meaning in his sense : Now must we handle the second about deceit , of which we haue said 〈◊〉 , that neither this clause of the definition of lying is found in the said proposition , for that the Answerers first & principall intent is not to deceaue the demaunder to his hurt , but to deliuer himselfe by concealing a truth only , which truth he is not bound to vtter , & this in effect is to permit the other to be deceaued , and not properly to deceaue , or to haue intention or cupidity of deceauing , as S. Augustines wordes are . 72. And for that I promised in the former paragraph to handle more largly in this place , the dissimulation or fiction of our Sauiour related in the end of S. Lukes Ghospell , when he went with his two disciples to the Castle of Emaus , which by the Euangelist it set downe in these words : Iesus autem finxit se longiùs ire , Ie sus did feigne that he would goe further , or as the Greek hath it , Prosepoiêito , he did make shew or pretend as though he would go further ; I shall heere relate somewhat largely the wordes of a learned Bishop of our time , vpon that place to wit Iansenius oftentymes cyted by Thomas Morton himself . 73. Est mendacium ( saith he ) secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nem &c. Aly according to S. Augustines definition , is a false signification , with a will to deceaue ; wherfore as it is no lye or fallacy at all , when a man speaketh that which in his owne sense is true , though it be false in the sense which the hearer conceiueth , so that the speaker doe not vtter those ambiguous words with intention to deceaue another , but only to conceale profitably some truth ; euen so fiction and simulation which is in facts , is not vnlawfull , but profitable and wholsome , wherwith a man doth something by which he knoweth that another man will conceiue a false opinion of that he saith , so that he doth not this with intention to ingender this false opinion in him , but for some other profitable end . As for example S. Paul in a certaine manner , did feigne himself to be an obseruer of the Iewish Law , when he did circumcise Tymothy , and did beare himself as a Iew with the Iewes , and vnder the Law with them that were vnder the Law , and he did know that by keeping the ceremonies of the Law , the Iewes would think him to liue vnder the law ; but yet he deceaued them not , for that he did not obserue those ceremonies of the Law , to the end to deceaue them , but rather that by concealing his owne opinion for a time , he might gaine them , or at leastwise not alienate them from Christ : and so now Christ our Sauiour did feigne himself to goe further , composing his gestures & motions of body , as though he would go beyond that Castle ; by doing wherof he knew , that his disciples would think , that he had a purpose to go further ; but yet he did not compose his gestures and motions , to make them thinke so , but his end was by this meanes to stirre vp in them their loue towards him , and the vertue of hospitality , wherby they might be made apt , and worthie to haue their eyes opened to know him . 74. This is the discourse of this learned Bishop , for defending our Sauiours deed frō reprehensible fictiō and dissimulation ; to wit , that his first and principall intention was not ( as neither that of S. Paul ) to deceaue his hearers , albeit that did follow consequently vpon their facts , that is to say , that the other were deceaued . And the very same falleth out in our case , yea with one principall circumstance more of iustification , then is expressed in the former exāples , which is , that in our case ( as before hath byn shewed ) violence and iniury is offred by the demander , meaning to punish the partie examined vniustly , or to draw secrets from him , which he is not boūd to vtter , but rather is bound sometymes not to vtter to his owne & other mens preiudice , hurt , and dammage : by which circumstance of iniuryes offred , we haue recorded before that 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 are made lawfull , by S. Augustine , and all other Deuynes iudgment . And to 〈◊〉 more Fathers sentences in proofe of this were wholy needles , forsomuch as the practice therof throughout all Christendome for all ages , amongest what Religions or Sects soeuer , is admitted and put in vre without any doubt or contradiction . 75. It remayneth then most certain among deuynes , and most 〈◊〉 by Scripture it self , that the clause of S. Augustine in the definition of lying , animus fallendi , intention to deceaue , doth not include 〈◊〉 , when one permitteth another to be deceaued ; nor yet the clause set downe by diuers Authors in the definition of deceipt , which is to ingender a false opinion in the hearers mynd , different from that of the speaker , includeth the said permission , when I suffer another man to gather a false conceipt or opinion vpon any fact or speech of mine that is true , and lawfull in my sense . For if we should condemne this , we should condemne God himself of iniustice and iniquitie , which were blasphemy . 76. And for proof of this doe our deuynes cite many places , and examples out of holy writ , besides those already alledged , wherby is shewed , that Almighty God , of whome otherwise all Catholicks hold , as an article of faith , that he is not able by any power of his to deceaue any man : yet that in this kynde of permissiue deceipt he may do it , and hath don it , and doth it dayly , according to that of the Psalme talking of wicked men and their prosperitie in this life , by which they are deceaued and ouerthrowne , not knowing to vse them well , the Prophet saith to almighty God ; Veruntamen propter dolos posuisti eis ; Thou hast giuen them ( these riches ) for snares to intāngle them , that is to say , thou hast permitted them to be intangled , and snared in them to their damnation , by taking away thy light of grace from them . 77. Yea oftentimes God goeth so farre in this permission , and the Scripture 〈◊〉 the same in such effectuall wordes , as it may seeme at the first sight , that God doth not only permit men to be blynded , and mistake , & be deceaued ; but rather that he doth it actiuely & positiuely himself , to which effect sound those wordes of the Gospell : Tenebantar oculi 〈◊〉 , ne eum 〈◊〉 ; There eyes were held to the end they should not know him . And that of Iob speaking of Almighty God , Qui immutat cor Principum 〈◊〉 terrae , & decipit eos , vt frustrà incedant , & errare eos facit quasi 〈◊〉 : he doth chang the harts of Princes of the earth , and deceaueth them to make them walk in vaine & doth cause them to erre , as if they were drunke . Who would not thinke that this were more then only permission ? We read also in the third Booke of Kinges , that God appearing vnto 〈◊〉 the Prophet , sitting vpon his state of Maiesty , with an army of heauen about him , said , who shall deceaue King Achab , to make him go vp and make warr in Ramoth-Galad , and be ouerthrowne there ; and when diuers had spoken diuersly , a lying spirit stept forth and said that he would deceaue him , and God answered , egredere & fac it a , go forth and do so ; whervpon Micheas inferreth presently dedit Dominus spiritum mendacij in ore omnium Prophetarum , God gaue a lying spirit in the mouth of all the false Prophets , which seemeth may inferre , that God did actually cooperate to that deceipt , and not only permit the same , and so haue diuers heretickes taken it : but the Catholick Church hath neuer vnderstood the same further , then as a permission , as that speech of our Sauiour to Iudas , quod 〈◊〉 fac citiùs , that which thou art to doe , doe it quickly , which was no commandment , but a permission , and so the other fac ita , to the lying spirit . 78. And the very same is to be vnderstood in many other places of Scripture , as that of Isay ; Quare errare 〈◊〉 nos Domine de viis tuis ? why hast thou made vs : ( o Lord ) to erre from thy wayes ? And that of Ezechiel , where God saith of himself : Propheta cùm errauerit , ego Dominus aecepi Prophetam illum ; when any Prophet doth erre , I the lord , haue deceaued that prophet . And S. Paul to the Romans , speaking of the old heathen Philosophers ; Tradidit illos Deus in reprobum sensum , vt faciant ea quae non 〈◊〉 : God hath deliuered them ouer into a reprobate sense , that they may doe these thinges that are not conuenient . All which places , according to the interpretations of holy * Fathers , and Doctors of the Catholicke Church ( which were ouer long to recite in this place ) are to be vnderstood that God doth permit men to be deceaued , and to be deliuered ouer into a reprobate sense for their sinnes , and so , as a great Deuine of our time doth obserue , it is not only a simple permission of Almighty-God , but conioyned : also with his diuine ordination that ordayneth out of his iustice such a permission for punishment of their sinnes , that are so blynded or deceaued , which he proueth out of the wordes and reason of the last recited sentence of S. Paul , concerning the old Philosophers , saying , propter quod tradidit illos Deus in reprobum sensum , for which God deliuered them ouer into a reprobate sense : what meaneth this causatiue , for which , saith this deuine ? S. Paul himself doth expound it , when he saith a little before , Quia cùm 〈◊〉 Deum , non sicut Deum glorificauerunt , for that wheras they knew him to be God , they did not glorifie him as God : this then ( saith he ) is more then a simple permission in respect of their demerit , that God is said to haue blynded them , which is not said in the fall of the Angell , nor of Adam that God did blynde them , though he suffred them to fal . So this learned Doctor . 79. Out of which obseruation is made euident , that the more fault the party deceaued is in , the more iustly he is permitted to be blynded , & deceaued , and if it be lawfull for a good end to suffer any to erre or be deceaued so we vtter no ly or falshood of our part , but rather speake a truth in our owne meaning ( as out of the former Doctrine of Iansenius , which is the common Doctrine of all Catholickes , and out of diuers sayinges of Christ himself , and his Apostles hath byn declared : ) how much more is it lawful for a mans owne necessary defense to vse the same ; when iuiustice , violence , or iniury is offred as before hath byn declared ? 80. And truly this matter is so cleer euen by the instinct of nature it self , that God hath left some refuge in reason for a man to declyne lawfully such an assault , when it falleth vpon him , as to deny this , is to deny common sense and feeling of all men . For who is there of any meane wit or capacitie , that being asked of a secret which he would not vtter , and pressed so as he must either incurre great inconuenience by vttering , or make a lye by denying ( which lye euery good mynd by nature hateth , as both Aristotle and S. Augustine doe confesse : ) who is there ( I say ) that naturally doth not seeke out some euasion , by answering doubtfully , but yet endeauoring to retaine some true sense in his owne meaning ? Do not all sortes of men euen by the instinct of nature it self vse and practice this , without any instruction at all ? they being commonly the best mynds and most tymerous cōsciences , that doe seek to vse these 〈◊〉 by amphibologies , & equiuocall speeches , wheras the other of worser myndes , make no scruple to lye at all ? 81. And I would in this point aske my Aduersary Thomas Morton this case , that if a great man in England whose fauour he much desireth and esteemeth , and yet would be loth to lend him money for that he knew him to spend much , and not to hold payment of his debtes to be necessary to saluation , if : this great man ( I say ) demanded him whether he had fyue hundred poundes to lend him , & supposing that he had them , but loth to lend or loose them , what would he do or answer in this case , if there be no other meanes , but either to confesse that he hath them , and therby loose them by lending , or denie that he hath them , & therby incurre a lye and loose his soule ? Is there no meane between these two extreames ? Hath God and nature left no lawfull manner of euasion , by force of wit and reason whereby a man may deliuer himself from such an incumbrance ? If not , it may seeme that God hath prouided worse for mans defence in this case , then he hath done for many vnreasonable creatures , to whom he hath giuen such sharpnes of sense in this behalf for their lawfull defence , as the stratagems are very strange which Pliny , Solinus , Cicero , and many other Authors doe recount of them , as the Hare and Fox , by leaps , turninges , and wyndinges , and going backe again in the same trace they come , therby to deceiue the doggs : the Hearnshaw and other foules for deluding the faulcon ; and other creatures in like occasions of defence . 82. And for somuch as the vse of reason and wit is the cheif armour and weapon of mankynde , there can be no doubt , but that a man may euen by Law of nature it self , extend the same to all wayes of defence : that may be , without offence of Gods law , and therfore seeing that we haue shewed before , that doubfull or amphibologicall speech that hath a true meaning in the speakers vnderstanding and is vsed by him not to deceaue or hurt , but to defend himself , is noly , or : falshood at all , and consequently is lawfull ; it cannot be reprehensible in iust occasions to vse the same . And I say in iust occasions , according to the explications therof before set downe , which afterwards in like manner , shall more particularly be declared ; for that without iust cause , as in confession of our faith , common conuersation , mutuall traffique , and the like where preiudice therby may grow to any man , or to the common credit of dealing there may they not be vsed , as often hath byn said . 83. Now then to retourne to our example of Thomas Morton and his fyue hundred pounds , I do not doubt but that he would answere the Noble man , that he had them not , though they lay in his chest , vnderstanding by force of equiuocation ( though neuer somuch detested by his soule as he saith ) that he had them not to lend him , or not in his purse , or not so , as he could spare them , or some other like reseruation , which we say that without a lye he might vse . And I doubt not but that either with a lye or without a ly he would practice it , if I be not deceaued in my opinion of his wisdome , and conscience in that behalf . 84. The like case might be proposed of his wyfe ( if he haue any ) or of any other married woman who being demaunded by her iealous husband , whether she had byn false vnto him or no , if she say yea , and confesse the truth , there goeth her honour and temporall life therin ; but if she say no , & make a lye , there goeth the spirituall death of her soule : what would yow M. Morton counsell her to doe in this case , if yow 〈◊〉 her Ghostly Father ? to ly you may not aduise her , according to S. Augustine before recited ; no not for the sauing of her owne life , or of any other : to destroy or disgrace herself by her owne cōfession , when the cryme is secret , nor any witnes or other proofes extant , were hard to counsell her , and against equity : if then without making a ly she might escape and deliuer her self by vsing some equiuocation of words , will you call it heathenish , 〈◊〉 , & a monstrous hydra ? But I do hope by this time that yow are somwhat calmed in your former heates against this doctrine , and therfore I will vrge no further your outragious tearmes against the same , but nowe shall passe to set downe the particuler cases , wherin our Doctors do hold that some equiuocation or amphibologie of words may be lawfully vsed without ly or other offence . OF CERTAINE PARTICVLER CASES , AND OCCASIONS , VVherin it may be lawfull to vse the manner of Equiuocation , or Amphybology before set downe , either in speach or oath : VVith the reasons therof . CHAP. X. HYtherto haue we treated of Amphibologie , and Equiuocation in generall , to wit , what their nature is , how different from lying , & consequently that in some causes , and occurrent occasions they may be lawfull , and vsed by good men without sinne , or offence , and so haue byn by 〈◊〉 & holy persons , yea often by the holy Ghost himselfe , as before largely hath byn declared . Now then for more perspicuitie it remayneth that we lay forth breifely some particuler , and principall cases , wherin the said vse of Amphibologie or Equiuocation by learned Catholick Deuynes is admitted and allowed ; which we shall do with the greatest breuitie , and perspicuity that we may , considering the great variety of Authors , matters , and opinions , that vpon such Cases doe arise : the seueral explication wherof would require a great volume . But it shall be sufficient for the iudicious Reader to vnderstand , that as in all other humaine , and morall matters , there may be and is commonly difference of opinions , how this or that ought to be done or practised , though they agree in the Doctrine : so heere also when and how , and in what wordes , and what forme os speach a man may iustlie vse Amphibologie or Equiuocation , for couering of Secrets that are not conuenient to be vttered , all doe not agree , but haue their different iudgements , though in the principall they doe all concurre that in some cases the said Amphibologie or equiuocation may be lawfully vsed without lying , or other sinne : of which Cases we shall heere recite some principall . The first case about the secret of Confession . §. 1. 2. THE first and most generall case , wherein * all Schole Doctors without exception do agree that such Equiuocation may be vsed , is in matters appertayning to the seale of Sacramentall Confession , to wit , if a Cōfessour or Priest that hath heard an other mans confession , should be demaunded whether such a one had confessed such a syn vnto him or not , though no wayes , nor vpon any consideration whatsoeuer he may tell a lie , according to our former Doctrine ; yet may he not only say , nescio , I know nothing , but answere directly , that he hath not confessed any such thing vnto him , albeit he had so done ; and that the said Confessour may not say , but sweare also this answere of his , vnderstanding & reseruing in his mynd , that the penitent hath not cōfessed the same vnto him so as he may vtter it . The reason of which answer , albeit diuers Authors do diuersly explicate , as that this was confessed to him , not as to man , but vnto God , or as to Gods substitute in the tribunall of Cōfession , and the like : wherin I remit the Reader to Dominicus Sotus , a learned Deuine , and to Doctor Nauar no lesse renowned lawyer , who handle the matter at large in seueral Treatises ; yet both they , and all other Deuines and lawyers , as hath byn said , do hold that in this case of Confession , the obligation of secrecy is so great , as for no respect whatsoeuer , nor to what person soeuer , though he be neuer so lawful a Iudge , Prince , Prelate or Superiour , nor for sauing of a whole Kingdome or common wealth , and much lesse the liues of any particuler men , or women , or of the confessour himselfe , no nor of the whole world togeather if it were possible , or to worke neuer so much good therby , nor though the said Cōfessour were put in neuer so great torments , imò si mille mortes 〈◊〉 essent , if a thousand deathes ( saith * Tolet ) were to be suffered by him , yet might he not vtter the same . And further if the Case should fall out that he could not confesse his owne sinnes , without giuing some particuler , and personall suspicion of the other vnto his confessour , he were bound vnder sinne to pretermit his owne confession , vntill he found another Confessour , vnto whome without this perill he might be confessed . 3. Which sacred and inuiolable seale of this Sacramentall secrecy being considered , and that Amphibologicall and Equiuocall speach with a true reseruation of mynd is no lye at all , as in the precedent Chapters hath byn largely proued , it is inferred that a Confessour in this case , is not only allowed to vse the same prudently , when need is , for couering of the said secrecy , but is bound also in conscience thervnto , vnder greiuous sinne , when by no other meanes of silence , diuersiō , or euasion the said secrecy can be concealed . 4. And in this al Schole-Deuines whatsoeuer do agree , as hath byn said , and namely all those whome before we haue mentioned in the precedent Chapter , and first point therof ; and among other M. Mortons Genesius in like manner is with vs , & against him , whom he hath picked out as singular and single among all Catholicke writers in this behalfe , denying the lawfulnes of Equiuocation in sundry other Cases , but in this granting and auouching the same with great asseueration in these wordes : Deus & Ecclesia , ipsaque ratio naturalis arcanum sacrae confessionis , quod multis scriptis legibus nominatim est sancitum , tam sanctum esse voluerunt , vt in nulla ( prudenti modò , & coacta ) sic cognitorum peccatorum inficiatione possit esse vel periurium , vel mandacium , propter Sacramenti huius maiestatem , & maximam publicamque Religionis Christianae perturbationem . God and the 〈◊〉 , and naturall reason it selfe , would haue this secret of holy Confession to be so inuiolable , which is established also by many written lawes ( of the Church ) as by no denyall of sinnes so knowne in confession ( so it be prudently done , and vpon compulsion ) can there be either periury , or lying , both in regard of the Maiesty of this Sacrament of Confession , and of the great and publicke perturbation of Christian Religion , which would otherwise ensue if matters reuealed in confession , might at any time , vpon any occasion , be vttered againe . So he . Holding as you see , that no denyall of matters heard or knowne by confession , in what sort soeuer , can be a lye , or periurie : the reason therof being not only that which heere Sepulueda doth touch ; but 〈◊〉 for that which before hath 〈◊〉 insynuated , that thinges knowne in Almighty Gods Court and trybunall , and as vttered vnto himself , may truly be denyed to be knowne in a humaine tribunall , and as the priest is a priuate man , and not a publicke minister of God. 5. One only Case there is , wherin all the said Deuines agree that a Confessor may vtter any Cryme confessed vnto him . Vnus est solus casus ( saith Tolet ) in quo Confessarius potest alteri manifestare peccatum Confessionis . &c. One only case there is , in which the Confessor may manifest a syn heard in Confession vnto an other , to wit , by licence and Commission of the penitent himself , which thing Doctor Nauarre doth proue at large by the common opinion of S. Thomas , & other Schoole Deuines , with the concurrence , and consent of the Canon law , and lawyes cyted by him And then must he reueale it also , but to him alone for whom he hath licence , & qui 〈◊〉 casu reuelat , grauissimè peccat 〈◊〉 ( saith Tolet : ) and whosoeuer in any other case doth reueale it he doth sinne a most grieuous mortall sinne , and 〈◊〉 also the punishment assigned by the church in the Canon law , for so heynous a cryme : And if further ( saith he ) any wicked Iudge should compell him to reueale the same vnder an oath , he may 〈◊〉 , that he knoweth no such sinne , though he know it indeed , but yet knoweth it not so as he may reueale it . And this is the common Doctryne of all , disputed more at large by the Reuerend and learned man Dominicus Sotus the Emperour Charles his Confessor , in a speciall Treatise called , * Relectio de tegendo 〈◊〉 : A Relection about couering secrets ; wherin he sheweth how farre a man may disclose them , and what obligation he hath of conscience to conceale them , in euery sorte or kind . And thus much breifly for this first case . The second case about Secretes of the Common welth . §. 2. 6. THE second Case that for obligation of secrecy commeth next to this first , though in a different degree , is , when Magistrates , and such as haue gouernement in the Common wealth , as Senatours , Councellours , Gouernours Secretaries , Notaries , and 〈◊〉 like , and con equently do know the secrets therof , 〈◊〉 pressed to vtter them , which they may not do in matters of moment , and that may turne to the preiudice of the said 〈◊〉 wealth , or of any particuler man , if the businesse be of great weight , and handled secretly by the Cōmon wealth , for any cause or peril whatsoeuer ; yea though their liues should go therin , for that they are more bound by reason of their offices to the reseruation of publicke secrets , both by law of nature , humane & diuine , then priuate men are : though as Dominicus Sotus in his foresaid booke . De tegendo Secreto doth shew , that a priuate man also comming to know any secrets of the Common wealth , is bound vnder mortall sinne to conceale them , and rather to suffer death then to disclose the same , especially to enemyes , as the Ciuil law also declareth ; but much more those that are in publicke office , wherof Sotus giueth this example among other . If a Iudge which heareth a weighty cause , should be assayled by one party , vt merita causae prodat , to vtter the merites or secrets of the cause , debet potius gladio succumbere , quam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : He ought rather to suffer himselfe to be slayne by the sword , then to breake his faith by vttering that secret : but much greater , & more greiuous sinne it should be to vtter the same for money or bribery , hatred , malice , or other like cause . Et idem crediderim ( saith he ) de Scribis , quorum fidei causae graues committuntur : and the same I would thinke of Notaryes , Scribes , or Secretaries , to whose faith weightie matters are committed . 7. And finally the said Author hauing handled in the first part of his said learned booke , the great obligation that man hath by law , both of faith , iustice , equitie , and charitie to conceale secrets , he putteth these degrees therof : In primo gradu ( saith he ) est secretum Confessionis ; in secundo secretum publicum &c. In the first degree is the secret of Confession , wherof we haue handled before ; in the second degree , is the secret of the Common wealth out of Confession ; in the third degree , is the secret of priuate persons , and that in different sort , all which we are bound to conceale ordinarily , vnder the payne of mortall sinne , except the smalnes of the cause do sometymes excuse the same , and make it veniall . So this learned man ; and it is the common opinion of other Schoole-Deuines in like manner . 8. Wherfore seing the obligation not only of concealing secrets heard in Confession , but of those also that be secular out of Confession , is so great , especially of those that be publicke and appertayne to the common wealth ; it followeth that when a man shall be vniustly pressed to vtter the same , he may not only deny to vtter them , which he must do vpon payne of damnation as yow haue heard ; but also dissemble to know them by any way of lawfull speach , that may haue a true sense in his meaning , though in his that presseth to know them , it be otherwise : wherof besides that which in the precedent Chapters hath byn said , we shall haue occasion to treate more in the next case ensuing , which is more generall . For if it be lawfull for any priuate man that is called in question touching matters concerning himselfe , and is wrongfully vrged to vtter his secrets , to make euasion by any kind of lawfull amphibologie , or Equiuocation , as presently shall be proued , then much more in defence of the publicke secret , that concerneth the good of the Common wealth , may the said Magistrate , or publicke officers when they are iniustly demaunded , or vrged contrary to the forme of law , vse the benefit of like euasion so they speake no lye ( which alwayes is presupposed to be forbidden as vnlawfull for what cause soeuer : ) and so much the more , for that being publicke persons , and as such , knowing the said secrets of the common wealth , they may as 〈◊〉 persons deny to know the same , with this or like true reseruation of mynd , so as they are bound , or may vtter the same vnto him , that vnlawfully demaundeth . &c. 9. And for that this case as hath byn said , is for the most parte included , & handled againe in that which ensueth , we shall heere treate the same no further , nor cite more Authors about the determination therof , for that those arguments and authorities that determine the one , do decyde also the other . The third case about any Party accused or called in Question . §. 3. 10. THE third Case considerable in this place , is de Reo , of the partie accused , or called in question in iudgement , what or how he is bound to answere vnto crymes laid against him , or to interrogatoryes proposed . About which point , first all the foresaid * Schoole-Deuine , lawyers , and others do agree with one consent , that euery such partie is bound vnder paine of mortall sinne , to answere directly , truly , and plainly , according to the mind , and intention of the demaunder , and not to his owne , and to confesse the truth without art , euasion , Equiuocation , or other shift or declination , when soeuer the demaunder is his lawfull Iudge in that matter , and proceedeth lawfully , that is to say , according to forme of lawe , and equitie therin . And if the said accused , or defendant either by wilfull holding his peace , or by denying the truth , or by deluding the Iudge do refuge to do this , he sinneth greuously therin . Neither may his ghostly Father absolue him in confession from this , or any other sinnes , vntill he yeeld to performe his dutie in this behalfe , though it should be to the euident perill , and losse of his life by confessing the Cryme . And this do the foresaid Authors S. Thomas , and others proue cleerly , first out of the Scriptures , as where it is said Eccles. 4. Pro anima tua ne confundaris dicere verum , be not ashamed to speake the truth though thy life lye theron , ( which is to be vnderstood , when a lawfull Iudge or Superiour doth lawfully demaund it : ) and Iosue also Cap. 7. when by Gods direction he 〈◊〉 Achan the sonne of Charmi , about the thinges he had 〈◊〉 , vsed this phrase , Dagloriam Deo , & confitere , giue the glory to God , & confesse the truth , wherby is inferred that he taketh Gods glory from him , and : sinneth grieuously that refuseth to consesse the truth to a lawfull Magistrate , proceeding lawfully against him , for that the Magistrate is in the place of Almighty God , and he that resisteth him in his lawfull of fice , resisteth Gods power and ordination , & incurreth damnation therby , as S. Paul Rom. 〈◊〉 . auoucheth . And for so much as the inquiring out , and punishing of malefactors is one of the chiefe , and principall partes of the Magistrates office , for conseruation of the Common wealth , both temporall and spirituall , to resiste , deceaue , delude , or contemne the Iudge , or Magistrates authority in this so principall a point therof , must needs be a great and grieuous mortall sinne , except as some Doctors do note , the smalnes or lightnes of the matter obiected should be such as might mitigate the greiuousnes of the same . And this is the seuerity of Catholicke Doctrine for answering directly , obediently , and truly to lawfull Iudges proceeding lawfully . 11. But now when the Iudge is not lawfull , or not cōpetent at least in that cause , or proceedeth not lawfully ; then all these foresaid obligations do cease in the defendant . As for example , if in France , Spayne , or Italy , a great man that is no Iudge , nor hath authority from the Prince , Prelate , or common wealth , should take vpon him to examine any party of crymes without commission , or other power , or being a lay Iudge should examine priests of Ecclesiasticall matters , who both by diuine and humane law according to Catholicke Doctrine are exempted from lay mens iurisdiction , ( as largely hath byn proued of late in an Answere against Sir Edward Cookes fifth Part of Reportes , which I would wish the Reader to pervse : ) or if his iurisdiction were sufficient in that matter , yet if that he proceeded not iuridicè , lawfully , or according to forme of law in that cause , indiciis , vel infamiâ , vel semi-plenâ saltem probatione non praecedentibus , that is to say , that neither signes , or tokens , or common fame , or some one substantiall witnesse at least be extant against him , ( which circumstances of lawfull proceeding are handled by lawyers in that case : ) when this ( I say ) or any of this falleth out , then hold the former Doctors that all the forsaid obligations of true answering vnto him do no more bynde , for that he is no more a Iudge : in that cause , but rather an enemy , for that he proceedeth contrarie to iustice , and forme of law , by which he should iudge ; and consequently that in this case the defendant may either deny to answere , or appeale from him , if it may auaile him , or except against the forme of proceeding , or deny all that is proposed in the forme , as it is proposed , or vse any other lawfull declination saith S. Thomas , but yet so , as he do not lye , or vtter any falsitie . Potest vel per appellationem ( saith he ) vel aliter licitè subterfugere ; mendacium tamen dicere non licet . He may either by appellation , or otherwise lawfully seeke some euasion ; but yet so as he vtter no lye . 12. And hitherto now in this point all the former Authors do agree without discrepancy , that the defendant being thus vninstly pressed , may vse all lawfull meanes to auoyd the iniury offered him : and Dominicus Sotus that is the most scrupulous in this matter , saith : Possunt & debent sic contra ius requisiti , quacunque vti amphibologia , quam vsitatus sermo citra mendacium ferre possit : they that are so required to answere against lawe , may and ought to vse whatsoeuer amphibologie , or equiuocation the vsuall speach of men doth , or may beare , without a lye . 13. And thus farre also doth concurre Genesius Sepulueda , whome Thomas Morton hath chosen out for some helpe in this matter ; who though in some particuler pointes , he dissent from the rest , as presently shall be shewed ; yet in this he agreeth . For thus he writeth : 〈◊〉 Theologi ac Iurisperiti consentiunt , neque reum in sua , nec testem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 causa de occulto crimine rogatum , teneri vt veritatem confiteatur , aut testificetur , 〈◊〉 si dederit quidem 〈◊〉 andum se vera responsurum : Both Deuines and lawyers do generally agree in this point , that neither the defendant in his owne cause , nor a witnes in another mans , being examined of a secret cryme , is bound to confesse or testifye the truth , no , though they haue taken an oath first to vtter the truth . So he of the Generall eōsent of all Deuines , and lawyers , adding his owne opinion more particuler in the same Chapter , and telling vs first , when the Iudge demaundeth vniustly , to wit , when he demaundeth of secrets , or matters not belonging to his iurisdiction , as before hath byn said . In which Case he writeth thus : Itaque vrgente Iudice iniustè vt neget , aut confiteatur , sine culpa 〈◊〉 potest 〈◊〉 Iudicem appellare , & 〈◊〉 alia quacunque ratione , modò sit honesta defugere , nulla adhibita fraude , nullo dolo qui vim obtineat mendacij . When a Iudge doth vniustly vrge the defendant to deny , or confesse , he may without any fault either appeale to a Superiour Iudge ( if it be permitted ) or by any other honest meanes declyne the force and violence that is offred vnto him , so it be done without any such fraud , or guyle , as may include the nature of alye : so as in this all do agree , first , that for no cause a lye may be admitted , or committed ; & secondly that any manner of euasion either by amphibologie , or equiuocation may be vsed , which is not a lye . And this in generall . 14. But now in particuler what manner , or forme of wordes may be vsed by the defendant for auoyding the iniury offred him , and deluding the vniust Iudge , is not so generally agreed of among all men . For this same Sepulueda holdeth that , 〈◊〉 inficiatio veri , as his wordes are , that is to say , all manner of deny all of the thing that is true , except of matters in confession , hath the force of a ly , or falshood , and consequently cannot be admitted . But this is commonly refuted by all , and that with great reason , as afterward shal be shewed , for that otherwise in the examples before alleadged , neither S. Iohn could truly haue denyed himself to be a Prophet , nor Christ himselfe to be our Iudge in the sense they did ; for that they were truly both Prophet and Iudge in their meaning , and yet did they truly deny them both . 〈◊〉 Sotus also , though he go further , and do confesse that the defendant in such a Case being iniustly pressed by the 〈◊〉 , may lawfully answere , nescio , I know nothing therof ; yet dareth he not , as he saith to allow that he may say absolutly non feci , I haue not done it , as the priest may say of matters confessed vnto him non audiui , I haue not heard any such thing , for that in his iudgemēt , as also in that of Sepulueda there is a great difference in the cases , which though in some respectes it be graunted also by others ; yet in this point which is the only & principall , whether it be a lye or no , all the rest doe hold that this negatiue answere of the defendant is no lesse free frō the nature of a lye , then the other of the priest , the one and the other being freed therfrom by the due , and iust reseruation in the speakers mynd , wherby the sense is made true , not only in the meaning or vnderstanding of the speaker , but in the sight of Almighty God the highest , and supreme Iudge of all , vnto whom it is lawfull to appeale in harte and word , when any man is vniustly oppressed by humane iniquity . 15. To begin then with the Authors of this cōmon opinion , that the defendant may say , I haue not done it , vnderstanding , so as by right and law I am bound to vtter it vnto yow ; first of all the famous Doctor Nauar that was schoolfellow with Sepulueda and liued togeather with Sotus , discusseth the matter at large in diuers partes of his workes ; but especially in a particuler large Commentary vpon a Canon of the law , taken out of S Gregories wordes that beginneth , Humanae aures , where he proueth that the said defendant being so pressed vniustly to answere , when he hath no other way lefte to defend himselfe , may truly , and without any lye at all , say , he did it not , with the foresaid reseruation of mynd , that he did it not in some such sense , as in his owne meaning , and in the eares of Almighty God , is true ; though the vniust Iudge taking it in another sense , be deceaued therby , which falleth out iustly vnto him , for that he proceedeth iniustly against law . And the said Doctor proueth this his assertion by many arguments taken both out of Scriptures , Canon law , and reason it selfe , maruailling at the scrupulosity of Sotus in this behalfe , and alleadging against him that of the psalme : Trepidauit timore vbi non erat timor , he trembled with feare , where there was no feare , to wit , of sinne or lying in this case . And moreouer refuteth his fellow-scholler 〈◊〉 , by telling him , that he was greatly deceaued in saying , that no Schoole-Deuine vntil Gabriel had held this opiniō ; wheras saith he both S. Hierome , S. Gregory , and S. Thomas haue in effect expressed the same ; but more clearly Scotus , Richardus , Henricus Gandauensis , Paludanus , 〈◊〉 , Io. Maior , Siluester , Angelus de Perusio , Ioannes ab Anania , whose places he cyteth out of their workes , & addeth the Ordinary Glosse , ab omnibus nostris recepta , receyued ( saith he ) by all our Canonists in cap. Ne quis 22. quaest . 2. in locis infra q. 2. nu . 10. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . citat is : This writeth that renowned Doctor Nauar , who was held for no lesse scrupulous , tender and timerous of Conscience , then any other writer cōmonly in his dayes , as his austere manner of life did well testifie . And after him haue written and defended the same opinion , the most learned men for Scholasticall Deuinity in our age , as a Franciscus Toletus , b Michael Salon , c Dominicus 〈◊〉 , d Gregorius de 〈◊〉 , e Ioannes Azorius , f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , g Franciseus 〈◊〉 , h Tho. Sanchez , all publicke Readers of Deuinity , and others , which for breuities sake I do omit , and shall passe to set downe breifly the proofes of this their opinion . The argumentes and groundes of this common opinion . §. 4. 16. 〈◊〉 first is taken out of that we haue set downe before about the nature , & definition of truth and lying , that whensoeuer any speach , is cōforme in a true sense to the meaning of the speaker it is true , and not a lye ; though the hearer should vnderstand it otherwise , especially when there is no obligation at all of satisfiying the said hearer , or demaunder as heere is presumed not to be , and consequently saith Valentia , a man may vtter any true proposition to himselfe , though neuer so impertinēt to the demaund proposed by the vniust Iudge , as if there were no man present , or as if no such demaund had byn made at all : as for example , if a man that hath stolne , should say to 〈◊〉 alone , or to God truly & sincerely , I haue not stolne of malice or hatred to the person , but of need , or necessitie , or I haue not stolne of my owne inclination , but by induction of others , or I haue not stolne , so as I am bound to confesse it publickly , for that there is no witnesse , proofe or presumptiō against me , or the like : in all these speaches the proposition were true , I haue not stolne , though he reserued the other pointes in his mynd vnuttered . It were true ( I say ) in it selfe , and in the sight and eares of Almighty God , and consequently no lye , whatsoeuer the vniust Iudges do conceaue therof , whose presence , or demaundes in this case are nothing to be respected , but that the defendant may answere and speake as though he ( the said Iudge ) or other hearers that haue no authority to examin him were not there , so he vtter no falsity in it selfe . 17. And for confirmation of this is alleadged the Authority of S. 〈◊〉 in his booke contra 〈◊〉 , cyted by me before , about the nature of a mysterious speach , that vttereth one thing in wordes , an another in sense , and yet is 〈◊〉 by S. Augustine to be no lye . Quae significantur ( saith he ) vtique 〈◊〉 dicuntur . &c. Those thinges that are signifyed in a mysterious speach are indeed truly spoken , but they are thought to be lyes , for that not the true thinges which are signifyed by that speach are vnderstood to be spoken , but those that are false . So S. Augustine , wherby is euident that in his iudgement the nature of a lie cōsisteth not in that it be held for a lye by others , or that the hearer be deceaued , but only that it agree not with the iudgement , and meaning of the speaker , as before hath byn discussed . 18. But the authority of S. Greg. vrged by Doctor 〈◊〉 is more cleare , who in his bookes of Morals taking vpō him to defend the truth of certayne words of holy Iob against Heliu , that calumniated the same saith : Quid 〈◊〉 , si à rectitudine 〈◊〉 humano iudicio verba 〈◊〉 superficie tenus discrepent , quando in cordis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concordent ? &c. What importeth it , if our wordes in outward shew do seeme to disagree from the rectitude of truth in mans iudgement , if in the hinge of our hart , our said wordes be compact togeather , and agree therunto ? Mans eares do iudge of our wordes as they sound outwardly , but Gods iudgement is according as he seeth them come truly from our hart : he knoweth that albeit mans will , and intention may be declared or vttered in sundry formes of wordes ; yet that we ought not so much to consider wordes as the said will , and intention of the speaker . So S. Gregory : wherby he sheweth euidently , that God considereth the hart , and intention of the speaker , and that when he hath a true sense , and meaning in the intention of his harte , though the same wordes seeme false vnto man , yet is it no lye in it selfe , or in the eares of almighty God , who iudgeth thinges as they be in themselues , and not as they are taken by man. 19. An other foundation of the lawfulnes of this doctryne , is grounded vpon this rule , that when in any proposition that seemerh imperfect in sense , there may be supplied other particles , or causes for the perfect sense therof , out of the circumstances of place , tyme , and persons , both of the speaker , and hearer , ( which clauses for iust reasons the speaker is not alwayes bound to expresse in wordes to the hearer ) it is asmuch for the truth of the proposition , as if the said clauses were expressed ; and it is the rule of Doctor Bannes , Salon , Azorius , and others , and it was touched before by Iansenius in the precedent Chapter , as a meane wherby to supply the vnperfect sense of many speaches of our Sauiour , as those , I do not iudge any man : I do not ascend to this feast : The sonne of man knoweth not the day , and houre of Iudgement , and the like : which speaches though in outward shew of wordes they seeme false ; yet are they verified by the supplement of certayne reserued clauses not depending vpon euery mans priuate imagination and will , but such as may be gathered and truly applyed according to the said circumstances of tyme , place , persons , &c. as clauses agreable therevnto . 20. As heere , when the defendant that is guylty saith , non feci , non vidi , non occidi , &c. I haue not done it , I haue not seene him , I haue not killed him ; if we consider only these bare wordes , and the iudges demaunde to whome it seemeth the defendant maketh these answers ( though indeed he doth not but speaketh as if the other were not present at all ) they are vntruthes , he hauing done it : but if we consider the circumstāces first of the person , that is iniuriously demaunded , and therby is not bound to answere at all to the others intention , but to his owne ; and secondly the Iudge that presseth , and demaundeth vnlawfully , and therby deserueth to be deluded ; and thirdly the tyme and place of iudgement , wherin the defendant contrary to law is vrged , eyther to accuse him selfe , or to escape by hauing some other meaning in his wordes , then is set downe : these circumstāces , I say , do easely defend the said speach from the nature of a lye , agreable to the matter , tyme and circumstances , shewing that somewhat is necessarily vnderstood , or reserued in mynde , which maketh the said proposition to be true in the speakers meaning , as hath byn shewed by many examples of Scriptures , and Fathers in the foregoing Chapters . 21. Wherfore all these Authours do conclude , that in the foresaid case , when iniurie is offred against lawe , and when no appellation or other refuge is permitted , nor any doubtfulnes of amphibologie or wordes can take place , then is the oppressed defendant to turne himselfe to almighty God the righteous Iudge of all , and framing to himselfe some true reserued sense , may say , I haue not done it , I haue not seene him , I haue not killed him and the like , vnderstanding that he hath not done it so , as the examination or punishment therof is subiect to that tribunall , or he subiect to their iurisdiction , wherby he is bound to vtter the same vnto him . 22. Neyther is this to deny a truth , or to lye , but to conceale some truth , which the defendant is not bound to vtter at that tyme , and to that man , and to vtter another , which is different from that . As for example he denyeth not , that he hath done the thing that he is demaunded , but not being bound to answere to that demaund , he saith , that he hath not done it in this or that maner , which is a truth not demaunded : neyther is this to lye , for that a lye is when the : speaker vttereth a thing which he knoweth to be false , as before we haue largly shewed , which in this case happeneth not , for that he knoweth that he speaketh a truth in his owne meaning , and in the sight of God , which alwayes he must do when he vseth this euasion , for that otherwise he should lye , & commit synne , if he had not some true sense reserued in his mind , conformable to the matter , tyme , and place , and not feigned at randome as some fondly doe imagine . 23. Nor is this doctryne preiudicial to the common conuersation of mans lyfe , as Sepulueda & some other haue obiected , for that this manner of Equiuocation as Valentia , Sayer , and other learned men haue noted , is not to be vsed without necessity , or vrgent causes , as particularly in iudgement , when the 〈◊〉 is iniustly pressed to answere , and when he hath right duty , band , or obligation to conceale the secret which the Iudge would know : but in common conuersation , though it should not be properly the syn of lying , for the reasons aforesaid , nor against the negatiue precept of truth ; yet should it be an other synne against the publick good of cyuill society , and consequently against the affirmatiue precept of truth , bynding euery man to speake truth with his neighbour , according to the intention of the hearer , and demander , except he should demaund somwhat in preiudice of vs , and we had right to conceale the same . And thus much of this third case , wherby all the rest may in a sorte be determined . The fourth case about VVitnesses . §. 5. 24. IN the fourth place ensueth the consideration of witnesses , who do testify in another mans cause , as the defendant doth in his owne ; and consequently many thinges of those which before we haue touched concerning the said defendant , do appertaine also to witnesses . For first the common opinion and consent of Deuines is , that when any man is called to beare witnesse against another , before a lawful Iudge , who proceedeth rightfully , and according to forme of law doth demaund the truth of him , he is bound to vtter the same sincerely , and wholy vnder payne of mortall sinne , for the same reasons which we haue alleadged before , concerning the defendant ; to wit , that the Iudge being in the place of almighty God , & of the Cōmon wealth , & demaunding him iustly , he is bound by the law of Iustice , subordination , and obedience , to reueale vnto him the sincere truth of all that he is demaunded , and knoweth in that behalfe . 25. Yea & further then this , he doth not only sinne mortally , as hath byn said , in denying , or concealing the truth or any parte therof necessary to be vttered : but is also bound in conscience to make restitution to the partie endamaged by his concealment of all those losses either in fame , estimation , goods or otherwise which he hath suffered , and might haue auoyded , if the other had confessed the truth . So hold Syluester , Nauar , Sotus , Salon , Bannes , Valentia , and commonly all the rest . And this is the seuerity of Catholicke Doctrine , about obligation of witnesses for telling the truth , when they are called , and examined by a rightfull Iudge , extant in all our Authors , as hath bene said ; and I would gladly know of T. Morton what his Deuinity doth define , and prescribe in this case , and what his Authors haue written therof for the practice ; yea what the practice it self is there daily with him , in all mens sight : which point I thinke rather expedient to leaue to euery mans particuler knowledge , and conscience , to thinke & consider , then here to set downe , what fruites their new Ghospell hath brought forth in this matter about vnconscionable witnesses . 26. But on the other side our Doctors say , that when the Iudge is not lawfull , or that he enquireth of secretes , which appertayne not to his iurisdiction , nor that forme of law doth permit him so to enquire , then the same Authors are of opinion , that he may refuse to answere , for that the Iudge hath no Authority to demaund him ; yea although first he hath sworne to answere directly , for that , that oath did presuppose that he should answere directly to that which the other should iustly demaund of him , and therfore in this case he may vse the same kinds of refuge , which before haue byn touched in the case of the defendant , that is to say , he may hold his peace , or refuse to answere , or appeale from him or deny all in forme , as it lyeth , or vse doubtfull , or Equiuocall wordes , and other such manner of ordinary euasions , which if they preuaile not , then say these Doctors , that he may deny , and say , nihil scio , nihil vidi , nihil audiui , I know nothing , I haue seene nothing , I haue heard nothing , reseruing in his mynd the other parte , that he knoweth nothing , hath seene nothing nor heard nothing , which in that iniust examination he is bound to vtter , as being demaunded against law , and iustice . And this shall be sufficient for this case . The fifth case about Equiuocation in swearing . §. 6. 27. THE fifth case that we meane to handle at this tyme is about Equiuocation in swearing , which act of swearing comprehending as before we haue said a calling of God to witnes in that we affirme , as it is honourable to God when it is done with the foresaid due circumstances of Truth , Iustice , and Reuerence : so is it a greiuous sinne when any of those points do want , and especially when truth , and iustice fayleth therin , it is the heynous sinne , & cryme of periury , so greatly detested in Catholicke Doctrine as before hath byn declared in the seauenth and eight Chapters . Now only is to be considered , whether Amphibologie or Equiuocation may be vsed in an oath , or no , and how farre without deceipt , and whether he that sweareth , be alwayes bound to sweare to the intention of him to whom the Oath is made , or that sometimes , and in some cases , he may without falshood , or periury , sweare to his owne true intention , keeping the same secret from him that exacteth the oath . 28. About which point they do determine first , that who soeuer offreth himself volūtarily to sweare , that is to say , of his owne free - will and choise , he is bound vnder payne of mortall sinne to sweare truly , and directly * according to the intention & meaning of him to whome he sweareth : the reason wherof is , for that he swearing freely , and without compulsion , is bound to vtter the truth , and to follow the common vse of swearing , which is to sweare to the intention of him that exacteth the oath . And the same they determine , when any man is called , and commanded to sweare by his lawfull Iudge , and Superiour , and in a lawfull cause : and he that doth otherwise , though it were to the sauing of his owne , or another mans life , doth commit periury . 29. But if the Iudge that exacteth the oath be not a lawfull Iudge , or proceedeth not lawfully in exacting the same , then hath he that sweareth , no obligation to sweare to his intention at all , but may sweare to his owne , so he make no lye , but haue some true meaning and sense in his oath , according to the circumstances of the place , tymes , matters , and persons before mentioned . Of which point I thinke good to alleadge heere the wordes of a great Schoole-Deuine , that hath written in our age , called by Morton the Great Moralist , who proposing diuers rules concerning the subiect of taking an oath , setteth downe his second rule thus : Secunda regula ( faith he ) est , si 〈◊〉 à Iudice contra , vel praeter ius rogetur de crimine occultò patrato , &c. The second rule is that if the defendant should be demaunded an oath by the Iudge about a secret cryme committed by him , and this contrary or besides the order of law , he may with a secure conscience answere , and sweare that he hath not committed that cryme , nor knoweth any thing of it : the reason of which rule is , not that which some men do giue , that it is lawfull for vs , when we sweare , to take wordes in our sense at our pleasure , or as wee feigne them our selues , otherwise then the hearers vnderstand them ; but this only is the true reason , that when our wordes may haue an ambiguous signification , we may take them in what sense we will , when we are vrged against law , though the hearers take them in another sense . And wheras the ambiguity of our wordes may arise from diuers heades , aswell of their significations , of the circumstances of time , place , persons , manner of proceeding , and the like before mentioned ; wee may out of these verify our speach . As for example , when a priest denyeth to any Iudge that he knoweth of any Cryme in Confession , which is a diuine iudgment and tribunall , it is vnderstood by the circumstance of his office , that no such crymes are to be enquired of in that humane court or iudgement . And so when the defendant denyeth that he hath done this , or that secret cryme , though he seeme to deny it absolutly ; yet the circumstance of the place , action , and persons may easely declare , if a man looke into them , that his true meaning may be , that he hath done no such thing , as ought to be enquired in that manner or vttered publickly in that tribunall . 30. So he in this and all other like cases : about which this general foundation is held by the foresaid Deuines ; and related by our Countreyman Sayer in his Cases of conscience in these wordes . Interrogatus à Iudice incompetente . &c. He that is examined by an incompetent Iudge , or if he be competent and lawfull , yet doth he not proceed lawfully , & according to forme of law , as examining him of secret 〈◊〉 , or matters , or circumstances impertinēt to the cause , then in that case is he not obliged to sweare according to the intention of the said Iudge , that offereth the oath ; nor on the other syde may he lye , or sweare against his owne intention , or true meaning , for that he should synne deepely , and incurre periury ; but he may when he is thus pressed , and cannot otherwise auoid the violence , and iniuty offered vnto him , so accommodate his wordes , as they may be true according to his owne intention , and in the sight of God , though they be false according to the intention of him that doth iniustly exact the oath ; and in so answering he lyeth not , nor incurreth periury , though the said Iudge be deceaued . For that S. Thomas well noteth the formall , and essentiall reason of a lye consisteth not in the intention of the speaker , to leaue the hearer deceaued , for that otherwise he should lye whosoeuer should vse doubtfull and equiuocall wordes to hide a truth ( which both S. Thomas , S. Augustine and other Deuines do deny ) but it consisteth in this , that a thing is otherwise spoken then is in the mynd of the speaker , vnde mentiri , est contra montem ire , to ly , is to go against a mans owne mynd , as * before hath sufficiently byn declared . Thus Sayer . Diuers other Cases in particuler . §. 7. 31. AND now in the last place shall we lay togeather some few seuerall cases , which vpon these and like rules , reasons , and principles , 〈◊〉 do resolue . And the first shal be that case , which our Minister Morton so often proposeth , and odiously doth exagerate about Couentry , saying : That our English Equiuocators do teach , that if a man come from Couentry , which towne is held to be infected with the plague , himselfe dwelling in a parte of that Cittie which is free from infection , and being asked at London-gates , whether he came from Couentry , they intending to aske him concerning a place infected , he may answere no , for that herein he deceaueth not the mynd of the questioner , but answereth directly to his intention . So propoundeth he the case , as he pretendeth out of the Catholike treatise of Equiuocatiō , which hitherto I haue not seene , and consequently cannot affirme how truly or falsely the same is related : but he hauing so vttered the said case , doth in opposition 〈◊〉 cyte the forsaid Iesuite Azor his sentece against this , as though he said that if we admit this case : Nihil tam falsum esse posse , quod non que at ab omni mendacio liberari : nothing is so false , but that it may be freed from a lye ; which wordes are indeed in Azor , but not applyed by him to this case , but to another , saying : That if it were lawfull for vs , to feigne what words we would in an oath without regard to the circumstances of tyme , place , and persons before mentioned , then nothing were so false in deed , that might not be freed from all lying : but this case of ours goeth not conioyned with these wordes of Azor , as Morton hath perfidiously heer tyed them togeather , but Azor speaking twice of this our case in one page , first in the name of others by way of obiection , and againe in his owne name by way of resolution ; he saith : Libenter concedimus de eo , qui ad portas 〈◊〉 rogatur , &c. we do willingly grant the example of him who coming to the gates of a Citty , and being asked whether he came from a certayne place , which by errour is thought to be infected with the plague , and is not ; tuto citra 〈◊〉 iurare potest , se ex eo loco non venire , he may securely sweare without lying , that he cometh not from that place ; so as , he vnderstand that he cometh not from any place infected with plague , nor that himselfe is infected . This is Azor his iudgement and resolution . And before him this case was so resolued by Doctor Syluester , Nauar , Tolet , Roderiquez , Cosmus Philiarchus , and diuers other learned men , as after him also by our often-named Countreyman Gregorius Sayer : and the reason of the lawfulnes of this answere is , for that the answerer being sure , that either the place is not infected from whence he came , or that himselfe hath brought no infection about him ( for otherwise he should be periured ) it were great iniury vnto him to be stayed at the Gate without cause , and therfore for declyning this iniury and 〈◊〉 , it is lawfull for him to answere to the finall end , and intention of the keeper , and of the Cittie or Common-wealth ( whose intention only is to exclude infected people ) and not to their immediate words about the particuler place . 32. And now all this being so , consider 〈◊〉 pray yow , the shamelesse forhead of this deceauing Minister , in cyting Azor quite against himselfe , and his owne sense and meaning , and tying his wordes togeather that were spokē separatly to another end : & yet as though he had played no such iuggling tricke , but had gotten some victorie ouer vs , heare his insolent speach about this answere sett downe by so many learned men as you haue heard named : An answere ( saith he ) so grossely false , that a Iesuite of high esteeme in your Church ( to witt Azor ) writing against this spirituall iuggling of his subtilelying-brethren doth confesse , that if this kind of answere concerning a place infected with the plague , &c. be not false , then there is no speach so false , but it may be freed from falshood , by whom your Equiuocators ( saith he ) may learne that if the man yow fancied came not from a place infected with bodily pestilence , yet this your Equiuocating proceedeth from myndes spiritually infected with the contagion of pestilent lying . So he . 33. And I do willingly remit my selfe to the indifferent Reader , where this contagion of pestiling lying raigneth , either in these graue learned men , that haue decyded this question without lying , & against lying , or in Morton , that hath multiplied so many lyes togeather in this place , as is a shame to number them ? For besides all that I haue noted already , he corrupteth also heere the very text of Azor , which himself alleageth in his margent , by translating it falsely into English , wheras Azor saith in the Case proposed , Sivenit ex loco aliquo peste minimè infecto , qui falsò habetur pro infecto , he Englisheth the same by leauing out the wordes minimè and falsò , sayng ; If he come from a place infected , which altereth the whole case . For if either the place , or himselfe be infected , he cannot sweare without periury as hath byn sayd . Secondly he saith that Azor the Iesuite doth write against the spirituall iuggling of his 〈◊〉 - lying-brethren , and yet are neyther the principall Authors of this answere and resolution Iesuites , as by their names you haue heard , nor writeth Azor against them , but with them , and for them in this case , conforming his iudgement as yow see , to theirs , that a man coming from such a place , may iustly sweare in the forme that byn said . Nor is their answere 〈◊〉 as the minister slandereth , but plaine , & reall dealing , yeelding their resolution togeather with the reason therof , as hath byn declared . And all the iuggling is on Mortons syde , who declaming against lying , doth nothing but lye : and yet finaly concludeth most ridiculously his speach thus : Therfore be yow exhorted for the loue of God , who is truth , to recant your doctrine of Equiuocating , the Metropolis of lyes . Wherunto my answere is , that in my opinion Thomas Morton is well worthy to be Metropolitane of that Metropolis . For if euer man honest or vnhonest , lay or Clergie , learned or vnlearned , ( to vse his manner of exaggerations ) did tell so many lyes togeather and in print , & within the compasse of so few lynes , as Morton heere hath done , I am much deceyued . For yet he hath not done , but presently after the former lyes , vttered against Azor he proceedeth to do the same with others also , and namely against Dominicus Sotus in these wordes . 34. Behold ( saith he ) one Doctor among you so subtile , that for that faculty , he hath by figure of excellency byn called , The subtile Doctor , who doth conclude all your Equiuocators for liars , saying ; to say that I did not that which I know I haue done , although I speake it with this limitation , or reseruation of mynd , vt tibi significē , it is not Equiuocatiō but a lye . And then he quoteth Sotus in his bookes Deiure iustitia , setting downe also in the margèt the latin wordes conforme to this . But all is treachery , falshood , and lying in this impertinent impugner of Equiuocation . For first by the Subtile Doctor , according to the phrase of Catholicke Schooles , euery Child knoweth to be meant Ioannes Scotus & not Dominicus Sotus which liued more then 200. yeares after the other , and was of the Order of S. Dominicke , the other being of S. Francis ; so as this is foolish and ridiculous errour , if it be errour : but the other is clearly false , and malitious , that these wordes as heere they are cited are in Sotus , which Morton will neuer be able to shew , for sauing his honesty in this point ; and much lesse will he be able to proue , that Sotus doth conclude all Equiuocators for lyars , which is an other incredible impudency in him to affirme , for that Sotus in this very booke , question , and article by him cited doth teach & proue largely the playne contrary , to witt , that to Equiuocate is lawfull in diuers cases , to which effect we haue cited him before , when he saith in generall : Possunt & debent sic contra ius 〈◊〉 quacunque vti amphibologia . They which are vnlawfully required to speake or sweare as we haue declared , may and ought to vse any kynd of Amphibologie , or Equiuocation . 35. This is his generall assertion , but afterward in particuler he putteth many exāples to proue the same . And first he setteth downe this proposition , dum testis de alieno actu interrogatur , potest ritè respondere se nesoire ; when a witnesse is ( vnlawfully ) demaunded of an other mans action which he knoweth , he may iustly answere he knoweth nothing . The reason wherof he saith is this ; Quia oratio illa nescio , recipere hunc sensum citra mendacium potest , nescio , vt tibi modò dicam : for that the answere I know nothing therof , may without falsity admit this sense , I know it not to tell it yow at this time , sicut filius hominis nescit 〈◊〉 iudicij , vt dicat , as Christ knew not the day of Iudgment to tell , or vtter it to his disciples . And doth it seeme to yow that Sotus in this place doth go about to conclude all Equiuocators for lyars , as Morton affirmeth ? If he did , he concludeth our Sauiour Christ also in his sense . What extreme impudency is this in a Minister ? But let vs heare Sotus yet further in this matter . 36. In his booke detegendo secreto , his third member , and third question , he repeateth againe the very same conclusion heere mencioned , that a witnes being vniustly demaunded whether he knoweth such and such a thing of an other , may answere he knoweth nothing , though he secretly know it : and then going further , he demaundeth , whether I hauing seene Peter kyll Iohn , & being afterward examined vpon the same iniustly , whether I may say I know nothing therof ? To which he giueth this answere : Respondetur quod iure possum respondere nescio , quia iure intelligitur nescio , vt dicam , aut nescio eo modo quo iure debeam dicere . I affirme ( saith he ) that I may rightly answere , I know nothing therof , for that by law it is vnderstood that I know it not to tell it , or I know it not in such manner , as by law I ought to vtter the same . And presently he refuteth Tho. Mortons Doctor Genesius Sepulueda , that calleth this pulchrum commentum , a faire glosse , and putting him in number of iuniores quidam , certayne yonger fellowes , that would reprehend that which they vnderstood not , saith : Hi aut non capiunt , aut dissimulant vim argumenti : these ( yonglings ) either do not vnderstand , or do dissemble the force of the argumēt for this our doctrine . And this note giuen to 〈◊〉 Mortons Doctor 〈◊〉 by so graue a man as Sotus was , may easely wype out his authority about this matter of Equiuocation , if in some thinges he dissent from the rest , that were far more learned Deuines then himself : about whome notwithstanding I cannot but meruaile why 〈◊〉 Morton , in cyting him , doth adorne him with this 〈◊〉 tytle your Deuine of 〈◊〉 , for so much as we read not , that euer he was at Colen , but was borne at Corduba in Spayne , and there dyed , though for many yeares he liued in Italy : but whether he did euer looke vpon Colen or no I know not , & cōsequently I would gladly know Thomas Mortons mysterie 〈◊〉 naming him so confidently our Deuine of Colen . But whatsoeuer his mysterie might be in this , sure it is , that his Myserie was and is apparant in being taken in so many liues , about Sotus and Azor , as heere he hath byn . 37. And now for that we haue byn ouer long in this one example , drawne out by the multiplicity of 〈◊〉 manifold vntruthes , we shall breifly touch an example or two more and so make an end . A wyfe being demaunded by her husband , that is no competent Iudge , and compelled to sweare , whether she be an adulteresse , or no , may lawfully sweare , if the sinne be secret , ( say our Doctors ) that she is not , vnderstanding , VT TIBI REVELEM , that I am bound to reueale it vnto yow , and therby auoid the danger that otherwise she were like to incurre . In which resolution , though Sotus do somwhat differ from the rest , as also about the answere of a defendant in his owne act , whether he may say absolutly , he hath not done it , or no , as before in the third Case hath byn debated ; yet doth Doctor Nauarre at large proue that she may answere truly so , as a priest may answere also in matters of Confession by Sotus owne rule , though the Cases be different in other pointes . And with a Nauar do concurre in this b Syluester , c Lopez d Cosmus Philiarchus e Angelus de Clauatio f Pedrazza , g Tolet h Azor , and others . 38. An other Case is that a man hauing borrowed an hundred pondes of another , and payd him againe , but being not able to proue the said payment in iudgment , and therupon forced by the Iudges to sweare that he will pay an hundred poundes by such a day , he is not 〈◊〉 if he pay him not , or haue no intention to pay him : for that in his oath , Soluam , I will pay him , is vnderstood by law , and by the very circumstance of the thing it selfe , that I will pay him : so much as I owe him , for that this also must be presumed to haue byn the true intention of the Iudge , according to right and law , though otherwise by his externall actuall iudgement he bound him to pay it absolutly . 39. Many more such like cases and examples might be added , but it were ouer long . The substance of Schoole-doctrine in this poynt , & of Canon-lawers is , That when a man is offered iniury , or iniustly vrged to vtter a secret , that without his hurt or losse , or publicke damage he may not do ; then is it lawfull for him without lying or periury , to answere eyther in word or oath , according to his owne intention and meaning , so it be true , though the hearer be deceaued therwith : But whersoeuer this iniury is not offered , nor violence vsed , or that he hath liberty to sweare or not sweare as in common conuersation and traffique it falleth out , ther is he alwayes bound to sweare according to the intention of him to whom he sweareth , and this vnder payne of periury , and much more , where the Equiuocation may turne to the hurt of others that offer him no iniury , nor cannot force him to sweare against his will. This is the resolution of Catholike-schooleDoctors , vpon the groundes which before yow haue heard , both of reason , equity , Scriptures and Fathers against the vnlearned clamors of a few English ministers , that out of emulation and ignorance doe impugne the same without proofe at all . And this shall suffice for this Chapter . THE ARGVMENTS AND REASONS OF THO. MORTONS BOOKE are examined , and ansvvered : AND His notorious errors , follyes , and falsifications therin discouered . CHAP. XI . ALBEIT whatsoeuer hath hitherto byn said , and written by vs about this subiect of Equiuocation , hath byn in reprofe of Thomas Mortons reasons and arguments against the same ; yet haue I not thought it amisse in this place , to looke ouer his booke againe , and to bring againe into the Readers sight by way as it were of methodicall repetition , whatsoeuer substāce he pretendeth to haue in this affaire : which though it be so small that it is scarce worth the repetition ; yet may the reuiew therof make some impression , what 〈◊〉 of people they are , that take vpon them to write bookes at this day in England against Catholiekes , and to be Maisters and directors of others , that are so ignorant , and farre out of the way themselues . 2. First then to pretermit the 〈◊〉 exaggerations , vsed by him in the beginning of this booke , which vpon some occasions I haue touched before , intituling the same , Against more then heathnish Equiuocation , and in another place , Against the doctrine of sacrilegious Equiuocation : and yet futther , Against the impious conceipt of Equiuocation ; and lastly , Against the wicked doctrine of Equiuocation , against the new-bred-hydra , and vggly monster ; a peece of the black art , the mystery of iniquity , and the like : we shall briefly go to the substance of the matter , for now already yow haue seene how vaine , and childish these termes are , and much more that asseueration , That no iota in all Scripture , no one èxample in all antiquity , no one reason in all the naturall wit of man is to be found for profe , or colour of any lvwfull vse of Equiuocation . Yow haue seene ( I say ) how light and vaine these wordes of his are , and haue pittyed ( I thinke ) the poore mans ouersight in vttering them , forasmuch as so many Scriptures , so many Fathers , so many Doctors , and graue learned men , both in Law and Deuinity , so many euident reasons and arguments , haue byn alleadged for the iust vse therof , in due occasions , tymes , matters , and places , as no modesty can maintayne the former fond and childish vaunts to the contrary . 3. To hasten then to the matter , I am first to admonish the reader , that wheras this Minister doth take vpon him to confute a certaine Catholicke manuscript Treatise , made in defence of Equiuocation , and intercepted ( as it seemeth ) by them , I could neuer yet come to the sight therof , and therfore must be forced to admitt , what he saith out of it , without controlment , heere a peece , & there a peece ; though there be diuers coniectures , 〈◊〉 he , as in other matters , so in this , dealeth very vnfaithfully : partly for that such peeces as heere are alleadged , do not seeme well to hang togeather , or to haue any due connexion : and partly also for that I hauing taken Thomas Morton in so many falsifications , of thinges alleadged by him , as before yow haue seene , and that the law saith , VVhosoeuer is once euill , is presumed to be euill still , vntill he proue the contrary : I must in a manner assure my selfe , that the minister hath vsed notable legter-de mains , in citing the sentences , and textes of this Catholicke Treatise , which I haue hope to see ere it belong , and if it come in time , I may chance by some appendix , to giue yow more notice of the particulers . 4. This then presupposed , we come to the 〈◊〉 pointes of his whole Treatise , which 〈◊〉 as yow haue heard of two conclusions . The first , that euery Equiuocation by a mentall reseruation , is not a hidden truth but a grosse lye : The second , that euery Equiuocation whether mentall or verball , if it be vsed in an oath , though it be no lye , yet is it an abhominable prophanation of that sacred institution of God &c. And for proofe of these two conclusions , he alleadgeth seuerall argumentes , which heere we shall discusse in order , to wit , seauen for the first , and foure for the later . His argumentes for the first are these . 1. The definition of a lye . 2. The definition of Equiuocation . 3. The description of lying . 4. The nature of periury . 5. Truth God , lying the Diuell . 6. Scriptures Fathers Pagans . 7. Signe , interpretations , coyne , Giges ring . And for the second conclusion he bringeth 4. argumentes . 1. The forme of an oath . 2. The end of an oath . 3. A minore from the lesse to the more . 4. A paribus , or from thinges equall . And now shall you see one by one , how equally vaine , and of no force all these argumentes be . The first argument from the definition of a lye . §. 1. 5. NOvv must we come ( saith he ) into the listes of this conflict , and enter vpon our Equiuocator , to conuince him a grosse liar , by manifest argumentes . Maior . Whosoeuer vseth any signification of speach against his conscience , is properly a lyer : Minor. But our Equiuocator doth vse signification of speach directly against his cōscience , Ergo he is directly a lier . The Minor is not only the confession , but also the profession of our Equiuocator , who saith , that if a Catholicke being demaunded before a Magistrate , vpon his oath whether a priest be in his house , he may contrary to his perfect knowledge , answere no ; and can any man of conscience deny this conclusion ? Yet because we haue to deale against Consciences daw bed vp with morter vntempered , wee adde a consirmation of the former argument . So he . 6. And I haue thought good to lett him play his parte somwhat largely in this first argument , to the end you may know him the better in the rest . You see how he entereth with menacing wordes , and then how he maketh a sillogisme , & when he should proue his Minor proposition , that wee deny , to witt , that euery one that 〈◊〉 Equiuocation doth vse a signification of speach directly against his conscience , he saith , that we do not only confesse , but professe the same . And how doth he proue this ? Forsooth for that we hold that a Catholicke being exam ned whether he haue a priest in his house , he may answere no , though he know he be there . But now this simple fellow doth know before this time , if he hath read that which in the precedent Chapters we haue written , that the 〈◊〉 , no , in this answere doth not fal only vpon those wordes vttered , but vpon my whole meaning , and reserued proposition , and consequently doth not signifye , that I know no priest to be there , but , that I do not know him so to be there as I am bound to vtter him , as S. Iohns , no , to the Pharisies did not signify that he was no Prophet at all , but that he was no such Prophet as they imagined . 7. 〈◊〉 it is great folly for him heere to say , that we both confesse and professe , that when we vse 〈◊〉 speach in a reserued proposition , we speake against our knowledge , & conscience . For we speake as we thinke , and as we thinke truly both in our meaning and in the sight of God , though the hearer by his owne default , as proceeding vniustly , be permitted to be deceaued : so as , when I say , I haue no priest in my house reseruing in mynd this other clause , which I ought and am bound to vtter vnto yow , is a true proposition , and truly meant by me , and not contrary , but conforme to my knowledge , & conscience : which being vnderstood , all the daubing with morter which the minister Morton bringeth in heere out of our owne Authors ( for other ( poore man ) he hath none ) to 〈◊〉 vp his contradiction withall , dissolueth of it selfe , and falleth to the ground , as meere daubing in deed . For first we graunt the definition of lying , alledged out of the Maister of 〈◊〉 , which is : Lying is when a man speaketh any thing , contrary to that which he thinketh in his mynd : for in this proposition of ours I thinke as I speake , for I thinke and know that I haue no priest in my house , which I ought to discouer . Secondly wee admit also the definition of S. Thomas of Aquin : A lye is when a man will signify in outward wordes , another thing then that which he hath in his mynd , which in our case we do not . We admit also the saying of S. Augustine heere alleadged , that the former property of periurie is to sweare that , which I thinke is false . 8. And now Thomas Morton hauing alleadged these authorityes out of our owne Doctors , as yow see , and making nothing for him , but altogeather for vs , he passeth on to vrge vs with his wise 〈◊〉 interrogatoryes , wherof we haue made mention * before , and maketh this preface thervnto . 9. Now must we examine ( saith he ) whether that we haue not by this proofe so intrapped the Fox Equiuocator , that he cannot find any hole wherby to escape . Suffer me Socratically to debate this point with you & answere me frendly to these demaundes &c. Which childish trifling , for that we haue answered sufficiently before , we shall say no more in this place . And this is all he hath of any substance in this argument . His second argument from the definition of Equiuocation . §. 2. 10. INTO this argument also he entreth with like vaunt , as 〈◊〉 the former ; That if euer 〈◊〉 Logitian , whether Infidel , or belieuer did allow a mixt propositiō partly mentall , and partly verball , I will ( saith he ) which my soule vtterly detesteth , be an Equiuocator But to this folly hath byn answered sufficiently before in the eight Chapter , where his grosse ouersight is discouered in this childish vaunt . 〈◊〉 he goeth forward saying : But I must not now expect impossibilities from you , to try what you would proue , but shew heerin what I can disproue . Your proposition , I am no priest , mixed with your mentall reseruation , to reueale it vnto yow , if it be true , it is either in his simple signification , or by vertue of 〈◊〉 : but it is true in his simple signification : This yow graunt . Neither can it be true by vertue of Equiuocation : This I proue . 11. Well Syr , we shall see presently your proofe for this second point , but in the meane space we deny the former , which yow say we grant , but do alleadge no proofe for it . For who is so simple , as to grant that this whole proposition , I am no priest bound to reueale it vnto yow , or no priest subiect vnto your iurisdiction , is not a true proposition in his owne simple signification ? For it signifyeth to me simply , and plainly , that I am not a priest subiect to seculer mens examination , according to Canonicall and Ecclesiasticall lawes : how then do we grant that the proposition is not true , in his simple signification , or where is that grant registred ? Is not this great simplicity , to presume a grant and to plead that grant in print , wheras the thing is euidently denyed ? Who would argue thus but Thomas Morton ? But let vs see your proofe in the second , seeing yow faile so much in the first . . Equiuocation say yow ) in word or speach , according to Aristotle the Oracle of Logitians , is when one word or one speach , doth equally signifie diuers things , as when one shall say , I am afraid of a dogge , this word dogge hath a triple signification , &c. This hath byn examined before in the seauenth Chapter , where it is shewed , how yow abuse Aristotle in this place , by making him to define Equiuocation in generall by a part ; that is to say the definition of one , among three manners or degrees of Equiuocatiō there by him set downe , wherby also yow destroy vnawares your owne cause : for that if this be the definition of Equiuocation in generall , then cannot our reserued proposition haue any equiuocation in it at all , for that the wordes and speech haue no double , but simple signification of themselues , and consequently yow do accuse vs vniustly of equiuocating , in vsing this answere , wherof also your self say presently after : But your mixt and patched proposition is not one word or speach , signifying equally diuers things , but contrarily diuers partes of speach , one in the mynd , and another in the mouth , which whosoeuer shall call equiuocall , may be iustly suspected to be bvtten with the highest dogg , the proposition is so absurd , and vnreasonable . 13. And now ( good Syr ) what will yow proue by all this ? That our mixt reserued propositions are not ambiguous , doubtfull , and equiuocall ? And why then ( I pray yow ) do yow call vs Equiuocators ? yea hellish and heathnish Equiuocators for vsing the same ? Who is like rather to be bitten of the highest dogg , eyther we or yow that cannot tell what yow say or proue , eyther for yow , or against your selfe ? We haue stood hithertoto defend those mixt propositiōs against your imputations of hellish , heathenish , impious , and sacrilegious Equiuocations ; and now yow take vpon yow to proue , that they are not equiuocall at all , and that they are bitten with the highest dogg , that say so : and yow are 〈◊〉 earnestly sett to proue it , as yow dare aduenture to corrupt Aristotles owne text , to make some shew therof , not only in choice of the definition before mentioned ; but in the very wordes also of his Greeke text heere cyted , where yow say that Equiuocation is in any one word , or one speach that doth equally fignifie diuers things , and by vrging these ones , yow exclude our mixed propositions , for that they are not one word , nor one speach as yow say , but diuers partes of speach , wheras Aristotle hath neyther of these one 's in his text , as the Greeke wordes alleadged in the margent do shew , but are foisted in by Morton to ouerthrow himselfe . And is not this like to be the bytting of a doggish influence indeed ? 14. Wherfore to conclude , this argument is against himselfe , who vnderstādeth not the state of his owne question , and therfore for instruction of the Reader , I say , that albeit these mixt reserued propositions be not properly equiuocall , in the sense that Aristotle did define his three degrees of Equiuocation , by wordes , custome or construction ( which * before we haue related ) for that they do not of themselues , nor their owne natures , signifye equally diuers things , but being vnderstood wholy haue a single and simple signification in the mynd , and vnderstanding of the speaker : yet for that the hearer conceauing but one parte therof , apprehendeth a different sense from the speaker , they may ab effectu be called ambiguous , amphibologicall , and equiuocall after a large , and improper manner of equiuocation , for that they leaue a different sense in the hearer , and speaker , albeit of themselues , as I haue said , they be playne , cleere , and true to them that heare them out , or do cōceaue the mentall reseruation , as God , and the speaker do . And this shall suffice for the second argument . His third argument from the description of lying . §. 3. 15. YOVV haue seene his first argument to haue byn deduced from the definition of a lye , and now this his third is from the description of lying : what great difference do yow imagine there may be betweene lye and lying ; why had he not drawne one argument at least from the definition of truth , as we haue done diuers before against him ? But let vs heare the method of his arguing , thus it goeth . Maior . No man doubteth ( saith S. Augustine ) but that he lyeth , which speaketh any thing which is false with intent to deceaue another . Minor. But our Equiuocators professe by a false speach to delude Protestant examiners , &c. Ergo , by their art of equiuocating haue they obteyned a perfection of lying . What can yow answere ? So he . 16. And my answere is , that I would gladly haue this great disputer to proue his Minor proposition , and not to suppose it , and say we professe it , as he did in his first argument , wheras we deny it , or that in our foresaid proposition we speake false with intent to deceaue , for we speake a truth , as often before hath bene declared ; nor is our intent to deceaue , but to defend our selues , when iniury is offered , and to permit the iniust examiner to be deceaued . And so for that this hath bene amply proued , and declared before , and this poore Cauiller bringeth nothing at all of new , to proue the said Minor proposition , but fondly supposeth vs to graunt it , which we vtterly deny as false : we shall say no more of this argument , but take pitty of the disputer , who calling vpon vs so freshly for our answere , is brought with one simple denyall to an euident Non-plus . For as for his impertinent running into the example of Couentry infected , and one that commeth from thence , the case hath byn handled so sufficiently in the precedent Chapter , and our Aduersary conuinced of so many notable vntruthes therin , as there needeth no more to be spoken of that matter , wherfore we passe to the fourth argument . His fourth argument is taken à specie , or from a particular kind of lying , which is Periury . §. 4. 17. THIS man as yow see cannot yet get out of lying and periury , and by naming them only as impugned by him , he thinketh to credit his owne cause , and discredit ours , wheras in deed by practising eyther one or both in this his very impugnation , he honoureth our cause , and ouerthroweth his owne . Let vs heare his formall argument . Maior : Periury , as Iesuites do confesse , is a lye made in an oath : Minor : But mentall equiuocating in an oath is periury : Ergo , Simply in it selfe without an oath it is a ly . Heere againe I would desire our disputer to proue his Minor proposition , that euery speach mixt with a mentall reseruation is petiuryif it be sworne : the folly and impiety of which assertion is sufficiently detected before , for that it being a most certaine principle , as well in reason , as in Deuinity , that what a man may truly say , he may truly also sweare , And that it is euident , that many such mixt and reserued propositions were vttered by Christ , and his Saintes , as holy Scripture testifieth , and we haue giuen many examples in the ninth Chapter going before : as it were impiety to say that those propositions were lyes out of an oath ; so were it more impiety to conceaue that they should be periuryes in an oath if they had bene sworne . And what will Thomas Morton now say to this ? or what scrap of proofe can he bring for his Minor proposition , that euery mentall reserued speach or other equiuocall proposition is periury in an oath ? He alleadgeth first those wordes in Exodus ; Thou shalt not beare false witnes , expounded by our Azor ( as he saith ) that we must sweare in truth , and for the confirmation of truth ; but is this any thing against vs ? And do we not say , that all such reserued propositions are true in themselues in the eares of God , and mynd of the speaker ? How impertinent then is this proofe ? 18. But hearken further , for he will bring another more strange then this . Your great Moralist Azor ( saith he ) doth condemne all Equiuocators heerin ( to wit for mentall Equiuocation in an oath ) as periured lyars , or otherwise ( saith he ) there is nothing in an oath that may not be affirmed , and denyed without a lye . Thus he . And I would demaund him about this matter , whether he will sweare this to be true which he saith of Azor ? For if Ministers and priests go in equall ranke in England , a Ministers word ought to be equall to an oath , as a priests word , laying his hand on his breast , is with vs : and then must I needes conclude Tho. Morton for a periured lyar in deed , who hath so perfidiously belyed Azor in this place , and that in so many points . For first Azor hādling in the booke and Chapter by him cyted , De iureiurando , cui videtur veritas aliquo modo deesse : Of an oath which may seeme in some sorte to want truth , he doth put downe diuers examples ( 8. or . 9. at least ) wherin the swearer may sweare truly in his owne sense , though false in the sense of him that exacteth the oath , all which are so many plaine approbations of swearing Equiuocall propositions without periury , and so many publicke contradictions and confutations of Tho. Mortons notorious slaunder auouched heere against him , that he condemneth al Equiuocators for liers . Of which cases heere determined by Azor against Morton , the first is , Si Sacerdosrogetur &c. If a priest be asked any thing which he hath heard in confession , he may answere , se nihil scire , nihil audiuisse , that he knoweth nothing , he hath heard nothing . And how then doth this great Moralist condemne all Equiuocators herein as periured lyars ? Is not this publicke lying in Tho. Morton , and that in print ? And were not this formall periury , if he did sweare it in any court whatsoeuer ? as namely in his Lords Court of the Arches ? And should he not be punished in that Court as a periured person , if it were proued against him ? And how then dareth he to commit the same so publickly without blushing ? But let vs leaue him to his Lords correction in this behalfe ; and so passe on to an other point . 19. Secondly then , not only the sense and drifte but the wordes themselues set downe by T. M. out of Azor are most fraudulently and falsely alleadged : Quidam putauit ( saith he ) fas esse cuiquam , vt vitam suam conseruet , hosti iurare , tantummodo eo sensu , quem mente intus concipit , possemus enim hac ratione quiduis negare , & nihil non absque mendacio dicere . Some haue thought it lawful ( saith he ) to euery man , for the cōseruation of his life , to sweare to his enemy only in that sense , which he conceaueth inwardly in his owne mynd , which if it should be graunted , then might we by this meanes deny any thing , and speake what we will without a lye . 20. These are 〈◊〉 for Azor his wordes , and in deed the most of them are in Azor , but not togeather as they lye heere , but some in one place , and some in another , spoken to 〈◊〉 purposes , & in different sense from that T. M. alleadgeth them corruptly in this place . And for proofe heerof , and of the egregious cosenage of this lying Minister , it shall be sufficient to let yow know that this speciall example alleadged here as out of Azor , and as reiected by him of one that sware to his enemy , for sauing his life in another sense then his wordes did sound , is not reiected but allowed , and approued by Azor. For that he hauing proposed the case first , vnder other learned mens names , much after the sense as heere is set downe by Morton , he commeth at length to resolue , and approue the same in his owne name saying : Quare libenter concedimus id quod paulò antè dicebatur de co , qui vt se saluum tueatur 〈◊〉 latroni , tyranno aut hosti daturum se illi pecunia quantitatem &c. Wherfore we do willingly grant that , which before was proposed of him that by oath doth promise vnto a these , a tyrant , or his enemy for sauing his life , to giue him a certayne quantity of money , which yet notwithstanding in his 〈◊〉 he hath no purpose to do , swearing with this reseruation , dabo , si debeo , I wil giue it if I owe it . Now then consider good reader the honesty and truth of Tho. Morton , that bringeth in Azor to condemne that as lying periury which he doth not only allow , as truth , and no ly , but proueth also the lawfulnes therof by many examples ; and especially by this of him that sweareth by Equiuocation , which example Morton bringeth in as cōdemned by Azor , for periurious lying : what will yow say ? or what will you do with such men ? And doe yow note also that in the former wordes of Azor , he cutteth of Latroni & Tyranno , and this to preueut a case resolued against him afterward by Cicero , praedonibus & piratis , to theeues and pirates periury 〈◊〉 not committed ; what then ( I say ) is to be thought , or said , or done with such men ? Himselfe setteth downe a rule out of Tully in his Epistle to the King , 〈◊〉 such as are taken once in lying may neuer after be credited againe , which he applyeth against the Catholickes , but 〈◊〉 iustly it ought to be practised in him , and his fellowes , that are taken at euery turne in such notorious wilfull lying , is euident to the discreet Reader . His fifth argument , Truth God , lying the diuell . §. 5. 21. IF a man had time to loose in discussing this two-membred argument , it might be some recreation to see the disputers folly , & weaknes in that he taketh in hand . For first he setteth downe the wordes of S. Paul vnto the Hebrewes , That it is impossible for God to lye , which we graunt , as yow know , and haue proued it largely before , and this , neque de 〈◊〉 ordinaria neque absoluta ; & then he inferreth out of that , that it is as vnlawfull for God to Equiuocate , for that otherwise ( saith he ) the elect of God should not haue any strong consolation , for that they may still doubt , that God doth Equiuocate with them : and so when his spirite doth witnes to the spirites of his elect , that they are the sonnes of God , and that they shall not perish ; yet might they suspect ( saith he ) that it is spoken with some secret reserued clause of delusion , which blasphemy ( saith he ) be farre from the hartes of his regenerate . 22. Wherto I answere first , that hauing set downe that which we haue before , about the different nature of falsitie and Equiuocation , euery child will laugh at Thomas Mortons inference : God cannot lye , or vtter a false proposition , Ergo , he cannot vtter a doubtfull or Equiuocall proposition , that may haue one sense in the hearers vnderstanding , and another in the speakers , such as that was of Christ our Sauiour , when he said , dissolue this temple , and I will buyld vp the same againe in three dayes , which the Pharisees , and all other hearers commonly vnderstood of the materiall temple , wherin he stood , when he spake the wordes , but they were deceyued , for himselfe meant the holy tēple of his sacred body , Ergo , in this he did Equiuocate according to the definition of Equiuocation now agreed vpon betweene vs : yea Aristotles definition also agreeth to this speach of Christ , for that the word temple heere doth equally signify two thinges , and consequently either Morton must deny Christ to be God , or affirme that God can Equiuocate , though he cannot lye . And the many examples which we haue alleadged before in the 9. Chapter , and shall do afterward in this , to the next argument , must needes put this Minister in a sacke & stopp his mouth in this behalfe . 23. His second inference also , that if God could Equiuocate , the consolation of the elect could not be strong , is ydle in like manner . For if God could lye , this inference might haue place , but an Equiuocall proposition in the sense we talke of , that is to say , where some parte is vttered , and some other reserued in the mynd , is as true and certaine in the vnderstanding of the speaker , as any other proposit on is , or can be ; and in matters of religion it belongeth to the faith of the hearer so to belieue , and to seeke out the speakers reseruation for his better assurance , as in the examples before alleadged , when God said by the Prophet , That whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of our Lord shal be saued : and the hearer on the other side seeth all heretickes and Sectaries whatsoeuer to call vpon the same name , and yet shall not be saued ; yea he heareth also those wordes of Christ : Not euery one that saith vnto me Lord , Lord , shall enter into the Kingdome of heauen , &c. Yet is he bound vnder payn of Infidelity to belieue that the former generall proposition of Ioel the Prophet , which hath a further reserued mentall meaning then in wordes is vttered , is true and infallible , and consequently he must seeke out the true reseruation , or clause not expressed , whereby the whole proposition is made true , which otherwise , as it lyeth , and soundeth , is false ; for that to speake generally without reseruation , That euery one that calleth vpon the name of God , shal be saued , cannot vniuersally be true , for so much as the contrary therof is euident , that many who call vpon that name , are not saued but damned . And almost infinite other places like to this are foūd in Scripture , as he that belieueth and is baptized shal be saued ; he that eateth my flesh , and drinketh my bloud , hath life euerlasting ; and such other , which cannot be verifyed in the generall 〈◊〉 of the words , without some reseruation not expressed . 24. And as for that he would not haue his new elect Protestants , to want of their strong consolation , or to stand in doubt of some reseruation ( as he saith ) when Gods spirit witnesseth to their spirits , that they are the sonnes of God , & that they shall not perish ( which reseruation he wickedly calleth A clause of delusion ) he might more truly terme that their fond presumption , delusion , wherby they will needs apply vnto themselues that thing absolutly , which God speaketh alwayes with due reseruation , and condition , as now hath byn shewed in the examples alleadged , that not euery one absolutly shall be saued , that calleth vpon the name of our Lord , or belieueth and is baptized , or eateth his flesh , and drinketh his bloud , but they only that call vpon his name rightfully , and as they ought to do , and as Christ himself expoundeth it , to witt they that call vpon him , and ioyntly doe performe the will of his Father in keeping his commandemēts ; and the like in those that belieue & are baptized , and liue well , and those that eat his flesh and drinke his bloud worthily : which conditions and reseruations must necessarily be vnderstood also in the speach of that spirit that speaketh to protestants , if it be from God , as both S. Iohn and Christ himselfe expoundeth , and this is not blasphemy as Tho. 〈◊〉 imagineth , but true humility , for here the doubtfulnes is not of the assurance of Gods promise , but of our performance , that is to say , whether we do performe 〈◊〉 necessary conditions which alwayes are to be vnderstood in Gods promises towards vs for keeping his commandements . And thus much of the first part of his argument apperteyning to God. 25. But now for the other parte , concerning the Dyuell , it is much more childish , for thus he argueth . MAIOR : That doctrine cannot be true , which stopped a mans mouth from geuing the Dyuell the lye . MINOR : But if Equiuocation be admitted , all mankind is silenced from geuing the 〈◊〉 his due tytle of lyer . ERGO Equiuocating is no doctrine of truth , &c. 〈◊〉 for proofe of his Minor , he alleadgeth only the 〈◊〉 of Eue in paradise , demaunding of vs , whether whē the dyuell said to her : Though yow eate , yow shall not dye , she might haue said to him , thou lyest For if we deny that she may , then do we tye her tongue from calling the dyuell a lyer , and if we grant that she may say so , then would the dyuell escape by saying to her , that he did not lye but only Equiuocate . 26. And is not this goodly stuffe ? fit for a booke ? fit for a print ? fit for a Chaplyn of my Lord of Canterbury ? Are these things suffred to passe without controlment in England ? If the dyuell be father of lyes , and consequently of them that do lye , of what kynred will he proue to be 〈◊〉 this Minister that hath byn taken now with so many notorious witting and wilfull lyes as before hath byn shewed ? which how they are Equiuocatiōs also in a worser sense shall be shewed in the chapter following , and consequently that T. Morton is an egregious Equiuocator in that sorte and kind , which Sathan himsefe did vse to deceaue our Grandame Eue. His fixt argument intituled , from examples of dissimulation condemned by Scriptures , Fathers , Pagans . §. 6. 27. HEERE yow see how he tyeth togeather Scriptures , Fathers , and Pagans , & all do proue indeed his purpose alike ; for that he bringeth nothing to the purpose out of any of them . And first yow see that he flyeth the word Equiuocation , and nameth only Dissimulation , which Equiuocation we haue proued lately before to be a different thing from Dissimulation , for that Equiuocation hath a true sense and meaning in the mynde of the speaker , conforme to the matter and circumstance that is handled , and most euidently vsed by Christ himselfe and diuers holy men , as largely before hath bene declared , which yet without impiety cannot be called or tearned Dissimulation , in such a sense as Tho. Morton would haue it , to wit , as Dissimulation importeth deceipt or fraud , for otherwise S. Augustine himselfe writing contramendacium , against lying , doth confesse that in a good sense Christ did dissemble , when he said : 〈◊〉 tetigit , who touched me , when he knew well ynough 〈◊〉 it was ; and of Lazarus , Vbi posuistis eum ? where haue yow buryed him ? Per hoc , nescire se finxit , saith S. Augustine : Christ by this kynde of speech did feigne that he knew not . And againe in the same booke , neyther that which Iacob did to obtayne the benediction of his Father , nor that which Ioseph did to delude his brethren , nor that which Dauid did when he feigned himselfe to be mad , Neque caetera huiusmodi mendacia iudicanda sunt , neyther other such like dissimulations as these are , may be iudged for lyes : Before also we haue heard his opinion for allowing all dissimulation in stratagems , so the war be iust . And thus much for the tytle of his argument , now to the substance . 28. First to begine with his examples out of Scriptures , I say that he might better haue said Example in the singuler number : for wheras we of our parte haue alleadged so many , and so great variety of examples in our former discourse to the contrary , he ( poore man ) out of all the body of the whole Bible , hath alleadged but one , and that nothing to his purpose , as presently shall appeare . His example is out of the Acts of the Apostles , where it is recounted how Ananias and Saphira his wife , hauing sold a certayne field of theirs , and bringing a parte of the price , and laying it at the feete of the Apostle , as though it had bene the whole price , were miraculously punished by Saint Peter for defrauding the Community of that which they had promised , or would pretend to giue ; An Act ( saith T. Morton ) proper to the infancy of the Church , to bring their substance , and tender it to the Apostles for the comon good of the Saints . By which words if he allow that fact , as a forme of perfection in that purity and integrity of the Christian Churches begining , why then now is the imitation therof in religious men of our dayes impugned by the Protestants ? And if by the word infancy he meane weaknes or imperfection in the sense of S. Paul , saying : Cùm essem paruulus , &c. VVhen I was a child or infant , I speake as a child , I vnderstood as a child , I thought as a child : but when I came to the yeares of a man , I cast of those thinges that belonged to a child : If this ( I say ) be Thomas Mortons meaning to note the act of imperfection , the ancient * Fathers do stand wholy against him , and do allow it rather for great perfection , and that it was a vow of voluntary pouerty to liue in comon , which those first Christians had made by counsell of the Apostles , and consequently do interprete those wordes , Nonne manens tibi manebat , &c. Did it not remayne in your power to giue it , or not to giue it ? to haue byn meant by S. Peter before their vow , which if it be true and that S. Peter did giue so dreadfull a sentence vpon the first vow-breakers of voluntary pouerty , euen for deteyning somwhat of their owne , how much may Thomas Morton , and some friends of his feare the like sentence , for teaching it to be lawfull to take away that from a Religious cōmunity , which themselues neuer gaue . 29. But let vs come to the application of this example against Equiuocation , which he hath chosen to vse principally about the womans speach . The woman is asked ( saith he : ) Sould yow the land for so much ? Her answere is ; yea , for so much , meaning but one halfe , & concealing the other , in which dissimulation it is impossible , but that your reserued clause must haue come into her mynd , to thinke but so much to giue in common , or to signifye vnto yow . Thus Thomas Morton teacheth that poore woman to equiuocate , after his manner of Equiuocation , that is to say , to lye : for that now I suppose he hath learned , by that which hath byn set downe in our precedent Chapter , that to speake an vntruth , or to conceale a truth , or to vse any Equiuocation when we are iustly demaunded by our lawfull Superiour , and when no iniurie , or violence is vsed vnto vs , is a greiuous mortall sinne in our Catholick Doctrin , and consequently she being lawfully demaunded by S. Peter in a lawfull cause , touching her owne vow & promise , no clause os reseruation could saue her speech from lying , as our Minister doth foolishly imagine . 30. Wherfore S. Peter as most lawfull Iudge and gouernour of the vniuersall Church vnder Christ , & the holy Ghost in him , did worthily punish that dissimulation and lying both in her and her husband , for example of others in that beginning , and for manifesting the great and special assistance of the holy Ghost , that assisted him , and should be in his Successors to the worldes end in that their gouernement , to the terror of wicked men that should impugne it , or otherwise deserue by their demerites to be punished by the same . And thus much of his examples out of Scriptures , which is but one as yow see , and that much against himselfe and his owne cause if I be not deceaued , for that it proueth all equiuocation is not lawfull , as 〈◊〉 will nedes suppose vs to hold . 31. In the Fathers he is more copious , for he hath two examples , but of as small moment to the purpose as this . The first out of S. Augustine in his booke against lying , where he proposeth a certaine Case , that if a sicke Father hauing a sonne vpon the point of death , whom he loueth so tenderly , that if he should know he were dead , it would indanger also his owne life , what might his friend answere vnto him , who comming from his sonne , and knowing him to be dead , should be demaunded by the said Father , whether he were dead or no : S. Augustines resolution is , that which before we haue also set downe in our generall Doctrine to be true , that for sauing any mans temporall life , a lye is not to be made : But he will replye perhaps , that S. Augustine saith , he could not say , nescio , I know not whether he be dead , or aliue , which is allowed by vs in some Equiuocations , as in the precedent Chapter hath byn said . But to this I answere , that this case is not like those , for that heere is no 〈◊〉 demand , no force , no compulsion , no iniurie offred , and consequently no right of vsing such euasion foriust defence , for so much as this is in common conuersation , from which we haue exempted before the vse of Equiuocations , albeit we haue heard also out of the same S. Augustine himselfe , Aliud est mentiri , aliud veritatem celare . It is one thing to lye , and another thing to couer a truth without lying . S. Augustine speaketh against the first , and so do we , and consequently this example proueth nothing . 32. His second is out of the same Father in another worke of like argument , where he putteth the example of a certain Bishop of Tagaste in Africa , named Firmus , who in time of the Pagan Emperours hauing hidden a man that fledd to his refuge , answered the Emperours officers that came to seeke him , nec prodam , nec mentiar , I will neither bewray him , neither will I make a ly , and so was content rather to suffer tormentes , then he would do either : for which S. Augugustine greatly commendeth him , and so was he worthy , for it was indeed an heroicall act . And if therin he did more resolutly then he was bound , as many priests in England haue done , that presently vpon their apprehension haue confessed themselues to be priestes , it inferreth no law , that all men are bound to do the like . For as the lawe it selfe saith : Cuique licet de iure suo cedere : It is lawfull for euery man to yeeld of his owne right what he please , as S. Paul , though in one place he saith , that it is lawfull for him that scrueth the Altar to liue by the Altar , and that he which soweth spirituall thinges , may well reape temporall : yet of himselfe he saith that he did it not , nor would do it , and that he would rather dye then loose this glory , to wit , of not hauing vsed his right therin . This was perfection in that glorious Apostle , but not obligation : and though it edifye all , yet it byndeth not any to the necessarie imitation therof , but he that will ; and the like we may say of the renowned fact of Bishop Firmus . His third example of Pagan writers he setteth downe in these wordes out of Cicero . §. 7. 33. THERE was a man ( saith he ) who togeather with mine other prisoners , being dismissed out of the prison of Carthage vpon his oath , that he within a prefixed time should returne againe : As soone as he was out of prisō he returned as though he had forgot somthing , and by & by departeth home to Rome , where he stayed beyond the time appointed , answering that he was freed from his oath : but see now the opinion of his owne Countryman ( Cicero ) concerning this Equiuocation of returne . This was not well done , saith Tullie , for that craft in an oath , doth not lessen , but make the periury more heynous . Wherfore the graue Senators of Rome sent this Coseming mate backe againe to the prison of Hannibal their enemy , from whome he had escaped . &c. 34. Thus relateth Morton the case , and then maketh this malicious conclusion against vs : This was the honestie of the ancient heathenish Rome , which must ryse vp in iudgement against this present Rome to condemne it , which hath changed that faithfull Roman faith , in fidem Punicam , into Carthaginian faith , which now by custome of speach is taken for perfidiousnes it selfe . And would not yow thinke that Morton did hold himselfe very free from this perfidiousnes , that obiecteth the same so freely against vs ? And not only against vs , but to the whole Church of Rome it selfe , and to the vniuersall Catholike Religiō conioyned therwith ? Marke then the deportment of this man in this one poynt , and if yow knew him not before learne to know him by this . 35. First then I would haue some Grammer-scholler that studyeth Tullies Offices , to turne to the places heere quoted , and comparing them with that which this Minister setteth downe in English , consider how they hange togeather , and how he picketh out one sentence in one place , & another in another , & leapeth forth and backe to make some coherence of speach , contrary to the Authors order , sense , and method , as is ridiculous to behold , and fit for the Cosening mate of whom he talketh in his text . And secondly after this , is to be noted , that he setteth downe the narration it selfe of ten men deliuered vpon their oath by Hannibal , not as Cicero doth out of two historio graphers Polybius and Accilius , and in particuler against the faith of both their histories , and Tullies asseueration , which saith that those ten were dismissed by Hannibal out of his campe , post Cannensem pugnam , after the famous battle of Canna in Apulia , Morton ignorantly saith they were dismissed out of the prison of Carthage , wheras they of all liklihood had neuer seene Carthage in their lyues . 36. But the most notorious Cosenage is , that he peruerteth all Cicero his meaning , wordes , sense , and discourse in this matter , alleadging them quite contrary to himselfe , as before yow haue heard him do many other Authors , so as he belyeth and corrupteth them all , both prophane and dyuine : And if in this one poynt he can deliuer himselfe from Punica fides , I will say he playeth the man indeed . For first Cicero whom heere he would seeme to bring against vs , doth fully agree with vs , for that we say in the case of those ten Romanes deliuered by Hannibal vpon their oath to returne againe , if they should not obteyne that which they were sent for , ( which was to persuade the Senate to redeeme diuers thousands of other Roman souldiers whom Hannibal had taken in the said victory at Canna ) we hold I say first that if they swore absolutely to returne againe if they obteyned not their sute they were bound truly to performe the same , and secondly , that they being now iustly by law of armes prisoners of Hannibal , they were bound to sweare sincerely to his intention , and not to any other reserued meaning of their owne as in the former chapter hath byn declared . And this very same doctryne also 〈◊〉 Cicero by light of nature in these wordes perfidiously cut of , and left out by this Minister Morton in the very same place , out of which he taketh the rest . 37. Est autem ( saith he ) ius etiam bellicum fidesque iurisiurandi saepe hosti seruanda , quod enim ita iuratum est , vt mens conciperet fieri oportere , id seruandum est : quod aliter , id si non feceris , nullum periurium est . There is 〈◊〉 a law of armes ( saith he ) and a faith in our swearing to be obserued oftentymes , euen vnto our enemy , for that which is so sworne by vs , as our mynd doth conceaue that it must be donne , that is to be obserued : but if it be otherwise sworne , that is no periury , if he performe it not . Behold heere the very same distinction which Catholicke Deuines put downe of swearing according to the intention , and vnderstanding of the swearer , or of him to whom it is sworne , and that the former is that byndeth , and maketh periury , if it be not performed , and not alwayes the second , to wit , when any violence or force is vsed , which Cicero doth expresse in the very next immediate wordes by the selfe same example that Azor vsed 〈◊〉 : Si praedonibus pactum pro capite pretium non attuleris , nulla fraus est , ne si iuratus quidem id non feceris , &c. non enim falsum iurare peierare est : Sed si ex animi tui sententia iuraueris sicut verbis concipitur more nostro , id non facere periurium est . Scitè enim 〈◊〉 : Iuraui lingua , mentem iniuratam gero . If yow should not pay the price or ransome vnto publicke theeues , which was agreed betweene yow for sauing of your life , it is no deceipt , no though yow had sworne to performe it , for that periury is not to sweare false in any sorte : But if yow sweare a thing which yow determine in your mynd , and do vtter it in wordes according to the cōmon custome of speach and do not performe it , this is periurie . For well and fitly to the purpose saith the Poet Euripides , I haue sworne with my tongue , but my mynd hath not sworne . So he . 38. And consider now heere ( I pray yow ) the Punica fides of our Minister against our Romane faith . He saith that Cicero , and other heathenish Romanes shall ryse vp against vs at the day of Iudgement , for that they condemne all 〈◊〉 or doubtfull sense in an Oath , and do condemne it for periury : wheras Cicero affirmeth that there is neither periury , nor fraud therin . And the same Philosopher alloweth the very same example of swearing with a reserued intention to a publicke theefe , without either meaning or obligation to performe it , which Morton obiecteth to Azor in the precedēt Chapter ( though craftily , leauing out the words Latroni & Tyranno , for auoyding the force of this place , as before is noted ) saying , that Azor did condemne for lyiug all such Equiuocation against his subtile brethren , wheras he both affirmeth and proueth the same , no lesse then Cicero doth heere in this place , as before hath byn shewed . Who then shall ryse in Iudgment against Thomas Morton , for all this wilfull lying ? No doubt but Sathan himselfe , that is the Father of lyers in this life , and shall be their tormentor in the next . And so much about his sixt argument . His seauenth argument taken from a signe , an interpreter , a coyne , and Giges-ring . §. 8. 39. AT this argument I presume yow laugh before yow beginne to read it , seing it is only of cōparisons , and similitudes : yet doth he enter into the same with this insulting preface . Now ( saith he ) that we haue wrested your weapons out of your handes it will be easie to pearce yow , euen with similitudes , the bluntest kind of argumentes . And then he beginneth to lay about him with these blunt weapons , saying out of his first comparison or similitude of signes : That where as voyces and writinges are by our confession signes , and instrumentes to expresse a proposition , and that euery signe which is contrary to the signification is a lying signe , as an Iuy-bush at a Bakers dore is a lying signe , ydols in visible formes are lying vanityes , miracles not proceeding from omnipotent power aboue nature , are lying wonders , the action of the stage-player lifting vp his hand to heauen , and looking downe with 〈◊〉 O earth , is a lying gesture : so is the voyce of a priest , that saith , I am no priest , a lying voyce , and the penne that defendeth this doctrine , a lying pen. This is all the force of this argument , which prouing nothing as yow see in it selfe , may be iustly reiected , & answered with this other comparison not in similitude only , but substance of truth , that for a Minister to be taken in so many apparāt lyes , as before hath byn 〈◊〉 downe must needs be no lying , but a true signe of a false & lying spirite in that kinde of men . And so much for this . 40. His second , third and fourth similitudes are yet more blunt . For in the scoend he saith : That as if the Pope should send his Nuntio with an Interpreter to congratulate our King , wishing him all health , & reseruing in his mynd , admodū exiguam very small health : and in the the third ; That as clypping and impayring the kynges coyne is high treason : so Equiuocators by clypping of some wordes of their speach , which is the Image of God , are guylty of higher then highest treason . And in the fourth , that as Giges-ring when the pale was kept on the backe syde of his hand he was visible , but being turned to the palme of his hand , he was inuisible : so ( saith he ) our Equiuocator , when he shall happely turne his equiuocating clause outward to manifest it in speach , he lyeth openly and is easely knowne for a disloyall subiect : but when he keepeth it close in his mynd he is emboldened to practice against his King. So he . 41. And I thinke euery man would condemne me of folly , if I should go about to spēd tyme or more words in confuting so vaine , and ydle conceipts , cast out only to entertayne the Reader for lacke of better matter , without ground or proofe . Wherfore leauing to treat of these his blunt weapons any further , and of this first conclusion , which yow see how bluntly he hath proued , or rather improued against himselfe ; we shall passe to his second conclusion , which yet is more improbable , and absurd then the first , as by treating therof wil manifestly appeare . Of his second conclusion and proofes therof . §. 9. 42. HAVING byn longer about this first conclusion of T. M. then was intended at the begining , we shall now endeauour to be much breifer about the second . Our second conclusion ( saith he ) is , that no manner of Equiuocation , whether ment all or verball , can be vsed in an oath without sacrilegious prophanation : and then presently , as it were , forgetting himselfe what he had said , he beginneth his Treatise with this playne contradiction to his owne conclusion : We deny not ( saith he ) but ambiguous wordes may somtymes be vsed in common speach , for so we read of Athanasius , who flying by ship the malice of the persecutor , and being ouertaken was asked , did not 〈◊〉 passe this way ? who answered , yea , he is a little before , if yow make hast yow may ouertake him , whervpon the persecutor imagining that a little before must signify some other ship that went before , passed by and pursued a butterfly . 43. This is his narration , and the silly disputer ( for in that name he seemeth to delight ) hath not the discretion to see that this example ouerthroweth fully his former proposition . For if it were lawfull for Saint Athanasius to vse this Equiuocation in speach and fact for deluding his persecutors ; then had it bene lawfull also to sweare the same without sacrilegious prophanation , if they had vrged him vnto it . For as all Deuines hold , that which may lawfully be said may also lawfully be sworne , what will T. M. answere tò this ? what will he answere to that euasion of S. Paul mentioned by vs before , when for escaping the hands of the Iewes , that pursued him in iudgement , he vsed an apparent equiuocall speach , saying ; That his trouble was about the hope and resurrection of the dead . Paul knowing ( saith the text ) that one parte of them that pursued him were of the Saduces , that denyed the resurrection of the dead , and the other of Pharises that held the contrary , he cryed out in the iudgement-place , saying : De spe & resurrectione mortuorum ego iudicor , I am called to iudgement about the hope and resurrection of the dead , which was true in one sense , but false in another ; wherby the Pharises being deceyued , tooke his parte , Et facta est contentio ( sayth the text ) inter Pharisaeos & Saducaeos , & soluta est multitudo , and vpon this equiuocall speach there arose a dissention betwene the Pharises and Saduces , one interpreting it in one sense , and another in another , and so the people departing the iudgement brake vp . And what will Thomas Morton now answere to this ? did S. Paul lye in this Equiuocation ? or was his dissimulation impious , for that one part was deceaued ? or had he committed 〈◊〉 prophanation if he had sworne it ? I demaund him also of that equiuocall oath of the Patriarch Ioseph , who in one conference with his brethren , did twice sweare vnto them 〈◊〉 Equiuocation , that is to say , with a reserued sense different from that he vttered to them in wordes , the Scripture saying : VVhen his brethren had adored him , & he knowing them to be his brethren , spake sharpely vnto them as to strangers , saying , yow are spyes sent to discouer the strength of this land , I sweare by the health of King Pharao , yow shall not go hence , &c. And againe : Per salutem Pharaonis , &c. I sweare by the health of Pharao that yow are spyes , when notwithstanding he knew them not to be spyes , & so thought of them in his mynd . And will T. M. say , that this was a lye or at least a sacrilegious prophanation of an oath ? But I must go yet a little further in prosecution of this folly against the Minister . 44. What then will he say to all those former examples of Equiuocall propositions , which I haue alleaged out of holy Scripture , out of the new Testamént , and from the mouth of our Sauiour himselfe , especially such as haue verball equiuocation in them : As , Dissolue this temple , and I will build it vp againe in three dayes , where the word temple , hath euidently two significations , and was taken in the one by Christ our Sauiour , & in the other by the Iewes . And the other , Our friend Lazarus sleepeth And againe , The maid is not deed , but sleepeth ; where the word sleepeth is equiuocall , and hath two significations , the one of death , the other of naturall sleepe , and Christ vnderstood it in the one , and his hearers in the other . And so the like where Christ said vnto the Iewes : Abraham vidit diem meum , & gauisus est : Abraham did see my day , and did reioyce , the word see is equiuocall , and signifieth eyther seing in flesh , or seing in spirite , and the Iewes being deceyued with the equiuocation of the word , vnderstood it in one sense , and Christ in another , wherupon they said vnto him : Thou hast not yet fifty yeares of age , and hast thou seene Abraham ? And therupon tooke stones to cast at him . 45. And the very like example is of our Sauiours speach vnto the Samaritan at Iacobs well , by the Citty of Sychar . If thow knewest the gyfte of God , and who it is that saith to thee , Giue me water , thou wouldest aske of him , and he would giue thee liuing water , where the word water being equiuocall , signifieth both the element of water , and heauenly grace , which is the water of lyfe euerlasting : which Equiuocation the woman not vnderstanding , tooke it in the common sense of naturall water , and asked him how he could giue her water , for so much as he had no bucket to draw it vp in : but Christ our Sauiour addeth an other equiuocall speach to her , saying , That he which shall drinke of the water , which I will giue him , shall neuer thirst more , where not only the word water , but the word thirst also is equiuocall , & hath two different senses , wherby the woman deceaued , said , Giue me ( I pray ) of this water that I may thirst no more , nor come hither to draw , vnderstanding still of materiall water . 46. Now I would demaund , that for so much as all these speaches were manifestly equiuocall , and had double senses , and significations , and that 〈◊〉 ech one of them the hearers were deceaued , conceauing another sense then that which Christ mentally reserued to himselfe , I would demaund ( I say ) whether notwithstanding this , they were not true of themselues , and whether Christ might not as well sweare them as speake them . And if Thomas Morton will haue many examples togeather , wherin Christ our Sauiour after his manner of swearing ( which is Amen amen dico vobis ) doth sweare or auouch by oath , sundry equiuocall propositions ; let him looke vpon the later parte of the sixt Chapter of S. Iohn ; where Christ doth put the Antithesis betwene himselfe and Moyses , and betwene the bread that Moyses gaue from heauen , & that which he was to giue , being his owne flesh , and betwene the lyfe that Manna gaue , and that which his flesh was to giue , and he shall fynd many equiuocall propositions , both verball , and mentall , auouched by our Sauiour vnder this kind of oath , repeated at least three or foure tymes in that matter . One example of ech kynd shall suffice . 47. When he saith Amen amen dico vobis , qui credit in me babet vitam aeternam , Truly , truly , I say vnto yow , that he who beleeueth in me hath lyfe euerlasting , this is a mentall reserued proposition , as before hath byn shewed , for that it is not true generally that euery one that beleeueth in Christ hath lyfe euerlasting , but he that beleeueth accordingly , which was reserued in Christs mynd ; and then the wordes immediatly following , Ego sum panis vitae , I am the bread of lyfe , haue a verball equiuocation , signifying of bread that gaue tēporall lyfe or spirituall lyfe , as also the other words that ensue : Your Fathers did eate manna in the deserte and are dead , but he that shall eate of this bread , shall not dye . Dying heere signifyeth eyther the death of the body , or the death of the soule , and Christ meant of the later 〈◊〉 the Iewes of the first . Nay which is more to be obserued , as Euthymius noteth and some other , Christ himselfe without explicating his owne meaning , in one parte of the sentence , meant of the one sorte of death , and in the other parte , of the other . For where he saith , Your Fathers in the desert did eate Manna and are dead , he meaneth there of the temporall death of the body , and in the other clause of the Antithesis , But he that shall eate of this bread shall not dye , he meant of the eternall death of the soule , though others also referre it to the eternall lyfe of the body , after resurrection . 48. In like manner that sentence of our Sauiour to the yonge man in S. Matthwes Ghospell ; Dimitte mortuos sepelire mortuos , Suffer the dead to bury the dead , hath a playne equiuocation ; Christ vnderstanding in the former those that were dead in spirite , and in the second dead in body , and yet was this no Cosenage nor deceipt in our Sauiour , nor had it beene sacrilegious impiety to sweare it . All which being so , & we hauing tantam nubem testium , as S. Paul saith , so great a cloud of witnesses , and these omni exceptione maiores , without exception for their credit , and the absurdity and folly of this second proposition appearing so manifest in it selfe , as it doth : what should we stand to examine the arguments and reasons that may be brought for it by so fond a disputer , as now Tho. Morton is proued to be ? For so much as no reason can serue for vpholding a paradox so ridiculous as this is , euen to common sense . And yet for that he putteth downe foure arguments , or reasons for the same as before hath byn sayd , let vs see breifly what they are . 49. His first argument for this conclusion is drawne from the forme of an oath , set downe by vs before , and heere againe alleadged by him out of Tolet and other Authors of ours ( for of his owne he seemeth to haue 〈◊〉 : ) That an oath is a religious inuocation of God , eyther expresly , or by impluation for witnes of our speach , and the wordes 〈◊〉 or implicitè are added , for that when we sweare by creatures we sweare by them in respect of the truth of God that is in them , and so by God himselfe implicitè . 50. Now then out of this principle T. M. taketh vpon him to proue this proposition ; That whensoeuer , or to whom 〈◊〉 we sweare , we are bound in conscience to answere directly , that is to say , to sweare to his intention , to whome we sweare , which we haue proued before by generall consent of Deuines & lawyers to be false , and Cicero himselfe hath so determined the case in like manner , as yow haue heard , when a man should be compelled to sweare to theeues : but yet let vs heare how Tho. Morton will proue this his new and strange Deuinity . His syllogisme is this in his owne wordes . The competency of God ( saith he ) by whome we sweare , maketh euery one competent Iudges , and hearers to whome we sweare . But by swearing by God wheme we cannot deceaue , we Religiously protest that in swearing we intend not to deceaue . Ergo , Our deceipfull Equiuocating is a prophanation of the Religious worshippe of God. 51. This syllogisme I leaue to be discussed by Cambridge Logitians , where I heare say the man learned his logicke ( if he haue any ) for heere he sheweth very little or none at all , no boy being among vs of foure monethes standing in Logicke or Sophistry which will not hisse at this argument , both for forme and matter . For as for forme , it is toto ridiculous , the syllogisme hauing no medium terminum , at all , nor the cōclusion any coherence with the premisses nor with his chiefest purpose that he would proue : nay , which is most absurde , wheras according to Aristotle ( whome as yow haue heard T. M. tearmeth the Oracle of Logitians ) a good Syllogisme hath only three terminos , wherof the one is called Maior extremus , the other Minor extremus , and the third Medius terminus ; this syllogisme of his hath six terminos , and wheras the Medius terminus should be repeated in the Maior and Minor propositions , & the conclusion should consist only of the extremes , as if a man should say : Euery man is a liuing Creature : Peter is a man ; Ergo , Peter is a liuing Creature . Heere the word man is medius terminus , and so repeated in the Maior and Minor proposition ; Peter , and lyuing creature are the two extremes , wherof is framed the third proposition or conclusion by connexion of the said extreemes by vertue of the medius terminus that hath part in them both . 52. But now Thomas Mortons syllogisme hath no such medius terminus , nor any such connexion of his propositions togeather , but euery one of them hath his extremes , to wit , his 〈◊〉 and praedicatum separatly , not one depending of the other , and consequently it is no syllogisme or argument at all , concluding any thing in forme , no more then this syllogisme . Euery man is a liuing Creature : Euery oxe is a four-footed beast ; Ergo , Euery Asse hath two long eares . Where yow see that there be six termini , as in Tho. Mortons sillogisme , without connexion , or dependance one of the other . And as much concludeth this as that . And now compare this his skill ( I pray yow ) with that bragg of his in the beginning of this his Treatise against Equiuocation , when he said to his aduersary : Dare yow appeale to Logicke ? This is the art of artes , and the high tribunall of reason and truth it selfe , which no man in any matter , whether it be case of humanity , or Deuinity , can iustly refuse , who would not thinke but that the man were very skilfull in that art , wherin he presumeth to giue such a Censure ? 53. But now let vs helpe him out to make his foresaid syllogisme in forme . It should haue gone thus , if he would haue said any thing in true forme . The competency of God by whome we sweare maketh euery one competent Iudges to whom we sweare : But in euery oath we sweare by God , either exprefly or implicatiuely : Ergo in euery Oath they are competent Iudges to whom we sweare . And then by an other inference againe he might haue argued , that vnto euery competent and lawfull Iudge we haue confessed before , that a man is bound to answere directly , and to sweare to his intention , and not only to his owne , Ergo , in no oath to whomsoeuer , may a man Equiuocate , which is his principall proposition . And thus had his forme of reasoning byn good , according to the rules of Logicke , though in matter it had ●yn false , as now also it is . For that his first Maior proposition can neuer be proued , to wit , That the competency of God by whom we sweare maketh euery one competent Iudges to whom we sweare , that is to say , for so much as God by whom we sweare is competent Iudge of all , this maketh euery one to whome we sweare by God , to be our competent and lawfull Iudge , which is most absurd , euen in common sense . For that a man may sweare ( for exāple ) to a theefe or murderer by God , for sauing of his life , as also to a cōmon queane , yea , and to the dyuell himselfe , and yet this maketh not the murderer , the queane , or the diuell to be his competent , and lawfull Iudge , or giueth lawfull iurisdiction , so as he is bound to answere directly to whatsoeuer they demand , or sweare to their intention if he should be compelled by them . And the like in other such examples wherof euery man may frame infinte store vnto himself , at his pleasure : and the reason of this is , that albeit in euery oath God be lawfull and supreame Iudge , to discerne whether I haue a true meaning of mine Oath in my mynd : yet this doth not make the other to whome I sweare my lawfu●l Iudge , except otherwise he hath iurisdiction ouer me , for that this absurdity , among infinite others would follow , that if a King should sweare to his Kitchin-boy by God , he should therby make his said Kitchin-boy his lawfull and competent Iudge , and to haue Iurisdiction ouer him , both to examine and cōmaund him , and bynd him in conscience vnder sinne to answere him directly : which how great a folly and absurdity it is , ech man that hath reason will easily of himselfe consider . Wherfore hauing shewed this , let vs now heare and comtemplate ( if yow please ) how Tho. Mor. himself will proue his said Maior proposition , for it is like he will doe it substantially , it being the foundation of all his whole drifte . 54. The Maior ( saith he ) is true , for that our Sauiour in auouching truth , held Pilate a competent Iudge , though he did not proceed 〈◊〉 , but falsely . S. Paul in his cause appealed to Cesars tribunall-seate , who was a Pagan . Iacob did couenant with Laban an Idolatour : and the maid to whom S. Peter swore , was competent inough to heare a true oath , if he had bene as ready to sweare truly : and yet neyther the mayd , nor that Iudge did proceed iuridicè , for she was no lawfull examiner , and he was a partiall Iudge . So he . And this is his wise discourse , wherin the man descryeth himselfe fully what is in him , and that in truth , he doth not vnderstand the very termes in the subiect , wherof he treateth For we meane by a competent Iudge , or hearer , and so do all Deuynes and Lawyers , that vnderstand what they speake , a Iudge that hath lawfull iurisdiction ouer him that sweareth , & may compell him to sweare , and to vtter the truth sincerely vnder mortall synne . And when we say , that he must proceed iuridicè , it is vnderstood , that he must proceed according to forme of law , prescribed by Ecclesiasticall Canons or Ciuill Decrees . Now then according to this explication , to say that Pilate was lawfull Iudge vpon Christ , so as he was bound in conscience to answere all his demaunds , I maruaile how Thomas Morton will proue it : and yet were it nothing to the purpose , for that Christ is not read to haue sworne to Pilate . And as for S. Paules appealing to Cesar , which at that tyme was Nero , & Iacobs couenant with Laban an Idolatour , what doth it make to our purpose , for that heere is no swearing mentioned , nor do we deny , but that an Infidell , or Pagan may be a lawfull Iudge ouer faithfull people in secular causes , if otherwise they haue lawfull temporall iurisdiction . 55. But of all other iestes , is most pleasant his conceipt of the Maid , to whom S. Peter swore , or rather forswore his maister , that she was his competent Iudge , or hearer therin , if he had byn ready to sweare truly , though presently he contradicteth himselfe saying , that she was no lawful examiner , which is false , if she were a competent hearer or Iudge , which he seemeth to graunt , though he say she proceeded not iuridicè , that is according to forme of law , with S. Peter in his examination ; wherof ensueth that she had lawfull iurisdiction ouer him , though the execution therof were not iuridicall : & can any thing be more ridiculous then this ? 56. And yet all this notwithstanding hauing set downe so vaine and childish a discourse as this is , he assumeth vnto himselfe the person of a very graue wise man against vs , vsing these cōtemptuous words in the next paragraph ensuing : These our Equiuocators ( saith he ) do by their new subtilityes foolefy the honest simplicity of their ancient Schoole , the two eyes wherof Lombard and Aquinas saw 〈◊〉 in this kind of swearing an horrible prophanation of the sacred name of Almighty God. Heere yow heare him talke of foolefying , let vs see then his wisedome . First I aske him wherin we foolefy the simplicity of our ancient Schoole . He alleadgeth some sentences out of Peter Lombard , as also out of some others , to shew that fraud and deceipt is not to be vsed in an oath , as also out of S. Isidore , alleadged by Lombard , and the like out of S. Hierome to shew that fraud , deceipt or subtility is not to be vsed in swearing , which is plainly to be vnderstood when the Iudge is competent , and proceedeth competently , for vnto a theefe , murderer , pyrate , or tyrant yow haue heard before how 〈◊〉 hath determined that it is not fraus ; and in this very place of S. Thomas by Thomas Morton alleadged , the said Doctors wordes are : That if a Iudge , though otherwise lawfull , should require any thing which by order of law he cannot , the party accused is not bound to answere at all ( and much lesse directly to his meaning ) meaning ) but may either by appeale , or other meanes , deliuer himselfe by euasiō , though he may not speake a lye . So S. Thomas . And what wyse man doth not see , but that this maketh quite against Thomas Morton . First if it be lawfull vnto the defendant not to answere at all , euen to a competent and lawfull Iudge , when he proceedeth not according to forme of law , then much lesse is he bound to answere or sweare directly to his intention in that case , but may vse any lawful euasion by doubtfull speach or otherwise , which is directly against our aduersaryes conclusion , so little doth he discerne when he alleadgeth authorityes flatly against himselfe . 57. And now by the full discussion of this first proofe of his cōclusion , we may imagin what might be said , if with like diligence we would examine the other three that remayne , to wit from the end of an oath , à maiori , & à paribus , for as for the end of an oath , which is to put an end to contention , it is not hindred by the vse of Equiuocation , where law permitteth the same , and I do not doubt but that T. Morton hath egregiously abused both in this and other places , the Catholicke manuscript Treatise against which he writeth , by setting downe certayne palpable absurdityes , which is impossible to be there in the manner that he setteth them downe . And for that I fynd him to belye all kind of Authors commonly , which he cyteth , I must presume the same of this vntill we fynd the contrary by viewing the Treatise it selfe which I shortly hope for . 58. But now to his third argument à minore : That Iesuiticall 〈◊〉 is lesse honest then the doctrine of Infidels and Pagans , procedeth of lesse wit , I suppose , then malice , seing that for proofe therof he cyteth only this sentence of Emanuel Sà the Iesuite : Iurans redire in carcerem , &c. He that sweareth to returne into his prison ( except he were iniustly deteyned ) is bound euen with the perill of his lyfe to returne to the same prison , yea , and some are of opinion that albeit he were iniustly imprisoned , yet ought he to returne , except his oath were released by the Bishop . Marke this authority , whether it do proue the doctrine of Iesuites to be worse then that of Infidels and Pagās : the ministers malice in cyting this determination of Emanuel Sà Iesuite alludeth to the place of Cicero before mentioned , and is alleadged by him immediatly after in this place : but yow haue heard that Cicero is quite against him ; and fully maketh with vs , first that a man being iustly deteyned in prison , as those ten Romanes are presumed to haue bene that were let forth vpon their oath by Hannibal ( to returne if they could not effectuate their busines ) is bound in conscience to returne againe , which is the first parte of this speach of Emanuel Sà . 59. Secondly , that if he be iniustly deteyned , & made prisoner as by theeues , pyrates , tyrants , or the like , Cicero saith , he is not bound to returne , albeit he had sworne it . Sà the Iesuite saith , that some are of opinion , that he ought notwithstanding to returne , except his oath be dispensed by the Bishop . Heere then we agree fully with Cicero the pagā , adding also some further restraint as yow see , and now then is Morton so shameles as to say and put in print vpon this authority of Sà , that Iesuiticall doctrine in this matter , is lesse honest then the doctrine of Infidels or Pagans ? Is this honesty in a Minister ? but especially in him , that professeth himselfe a Minister of simple truth ? but such is his truth , and such is his simplicity , as in his Ministry . Let vs draw to an end . 60. His last argument à paribus wherby he compareth vs to the heretike Arius , and vnto his dissimulation in Religion , may better fall vpon himselfe and his fellowes who more neerly do follow the spirite and steppes of that and other ancient heretickes , and principally in this one point of varying one from an other and among themselues , and changing their opinions so often and frequently , as that which is noted by Tertullian in the heresies of his dayes , That euery yeare brought forth a newe faith . And this may be seene in the number of sects , that haue risen in this age from Lutber downward , which are come to be so many in effect , as scarcely they can be numbred , and a hard matter it is to bring them to any certainty of sentence , when they are pressed , but do dissemble , Equiuocate , and ly with such facility , as scarsely any thing can be proued against them , wherof among many others before mentioned , we haue had a good example of Tho. Morton himselfe in this and the precedent Chapters , and shall haue of some more of his fellowes in the next . 61. And yet as though he were a great , and sincere louer of truth , he entitleth the last paragraph of his Treatise thus : This our Apostolicall defence of Protestantes I will cōclude with the protestations of the Apostle , I say the truth , & lye not my conscience bearing me witnesse &c. And againe : God the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ knoweth that I lye not . And yet further to his scholler Timothy : I speake the truth and ly not . And finally to the Galathians ; This that I write vnto yow , behold I witnes before God , and ly not . 62. And now consider heere I pray yow , Thomas Mortons Apostolicall defence by protestations , which more truly perhaps may be called Apostaticall , for that he who shall read the monstrous multitude of his malicious and wilfull lyes , which haue bene discouered , and layd open through out his booke , and especially in the second , sixt , and this Chapter , and withall heare him make these solemne protestations against lying , must needs thinke that rather the spirite of Apostacy then Apostleship doth possesse his tongue , pen , and harte , that speaketh , writeth , and protesteth so desperatly , and directly against his deedes , knowledge and Conscience : which thing that yow may the better vnderstand , I am content to adioyne also this next ensuing chapter for better proofe , and confirmation therof . OF TVVO SORTES OF EQVIVOCATION . The one true and lavvfull ; the other false , and synfull . And that Catholickes only vse the first in certayne cases , and with due circumstances , and limitations : But T. M. and his fellowes impugning the first , do vse ordinarily the second , which is false & lying Equiuocation indeed . CHAP. XII . HITHERTO we haue declared , and made manifest ( as I suppose ) that all Equiuocation is not lying , both for that the definition of a lye agreeth not ther vnto , & for that Christ himselfe , and many of his seruantes both in the old and new Testament haue vpon iust occasions vsed the same , and the common consent of Catholicke Deuynes and Lawyers haue allowed , and confirmed the lawfulnes therof in certain Cases , with due and iust circumstances , and considerations . 2. But now must we further distinguish the same into two different sortes or kyndes , the one proper , according to the true nature of Equiuocation before defyned , which though it may seeme to haue falsitie in it , and somtymes also hath in deed , in respect of the wordes only or vnderstanding of the hearer : yet alwayes hath it truth in respect of the speakers meaning . The other sorte is improperly called Equiuocatiō , for that no way it is true , & therfore his proper name in deed is a lye , though after a large & improper manner , it may be called also Equiuocation for the reason which after we shall declare . 3. Now then both of those kyndes of Equiuocation are subdeuided againe ech one into two sortes , for that true Equiuocation may be either verball or mentall , as before hath byn shewed . Verball is that , when any word or speach hath either naturally , or by peculiar custome of particular language , two or more significations , as out of Aristotle hath 〈◊〉 declared . Mentall Equiuocation is , when any speach hath , or may haue a double sense , not by any double signification , or composition of the wordes themselues , but only by some reseruation of mynd in the speaker , wherby his meaning is made different frō that sense which the wordes that are vttered do beare , or yeeld without that reseruation . And of both these sortes of Equiuocations that they are lawfull , and free from falsity , and may be vsed without syn in certaine cases before specifyed , we haue now layd forth so many examples out of Scriptures and Fathers in the precedent Chapters , as it were a needles worke to name them heere againe . 4. Wherfore all our speach in this place shall be about the second kynd of Equiuocation , which is false and lying , and therby also euer vnlawfull ; which though not properly , yet in a generall manner may be called Equiuocation , as I haue said , for that the hearer is alwayes wrongfully deceyued , or intended to be deceaued by some falsity , which is knowne to be such by the speaker , and consequently is playne lying : and for that lying hath byn shewed also before to be deuided into two sortes , the one a materiall lye , when the thing spoken is false in it selfe , but not so vnderstood by the speaker , the other a formall lye when the speaker doth know it , or thinke it to be false , and yet speaketh it . This kynd of Equiuocatiō which really is a lye , must haue also the same subdiuisiō , so as the one sort therof may be called a materiall lying Equiuocation , and the other a formall : and so much worse , as a formall lye is in it selfe ( which alwayes is sinne ) then a materiall ( which oftentymes may be without sinne of the speaker : ) by so much is a formall lying Equiuocation worse , then a materiall . We shal giue examples of both that shall make all playne . 5. If one should say to me that my Father is dead , thinking in deed that he is dead , though he be a liue , it were a materiall lye , as before hath byn declared , for that in deed my Father is not dead , though he perhaps that made the lye may haue said it without sinne , for that he thought it so : and I say ( perhaps ) for that in some case ignorance could not excuse him , if it were a matter wherof he were bound to know the truth , & might with diligence haue learned the same . But if he should say , my Father is dead , knowing in deed that he is not dead , and meaning to deceiue me therby , this is a formall lye and alwayes sinfull , either veniall or mortall , according to the importance of the matter , wherin the lye is made . And conforme to this may be the diuision also as is said of lying Equiuocation . 6. Examples of the first may be these , and other like : An Arian deliuereth to the people those wordes of Christ , Pater meus maior me est , My Father is greater then I , vnderstanding it heretically according to their meaning of the very Godhead : this is an Equiuocation , and in his sense is false , and consequently alye , for that the hearer is deceaued , and yet because the speaker thinketh it to be true , the lye is but materiall in the Arian , and not formall , and in that respect lesse synne then if it were formall : but yet is it damnable by another way , for that this error , as hath bene said , being wilfully defended against the Church is not excusable . The other sorte of false Equiuocatiō called formall , is when the hearer conceyueth any false thing vpon the speach of another , which other knoweth it also a be false , and so vttereth a lye against his owne knowledge , and conscience . As for example : If a preacher in England who in deed is no Protestant in harte , should preach Protestāt doctrine that is false , and himselfe should thinke it also to be false ( as diuers perhaps doe ) this were to Equiuocate both falsely and formally , which is the worst kynd of lying Equiuocation that may be , and this is that which I say that Thomas Morton and his fellowes , who inueigh bitterly euery where against true and lawfull Equiuocation , do vse almost at euery turne . 7. As for example when he saith , No one iota of Scripture , no one example in all antiquity , no one reason in the naturall wit of man , no one Author Greeke or Latin , no one Father , no any Pope Christian or Antichristian , doth make for Equiuocation as we defend it , or any color therof : neither did they so much as fancy any such thing . Heere is first seene a notorious vntruth of the assertion it selfe , & consequently it is a materiall lye , and materiall Equiuocation ; for that the matter deliuered is vntrue , aud secondly it is most probable that Th. Morton must needs know it to be a lye ; hauing seene so many Authors & reasons alleadged for it by the Catholicke Treatise , which he pretendeth to confute ; wherof it followeth , that it was a formall lye also , and a formall lying Equiuocation in the highest degree of deceipt and falshood . 8. And so in like manner in the former Chapter when he alleadgeth Azor , Dominicus Sotus , and Cicero directly against their owne meaning , words and drifte in the very same places , which he cyteth , and taketh words out of them for his pretēded purpose , he could not but see , and know that it was a lye , to cyte them to the contrary , and yet he thought best to do it , and tell his Reader that they were of a contrary opinion : this then is formally to lye and equiuocate in the worst and superlatiue degree of false Equiuocation . 9. About which poynt the Reader may be remitted to the second Chapter of this Treatise , and last paragraph therof , where he shall see diuers examples laid togeather ; as among other , that which he reporteth of the death of our English Pope Adrian choaked ( as he saith ) with a flye , and cyteth Nauclerus for the same , who though he mention , yet refuteth expresly that fable , which T. M. concealed , where he is shewed in like māner to corrupt notably a passage of Doctor Boucher , auouching him to say that which he expresly impugneth about the killing of a Tyrant by a priuate man , and priuate authority . And the like corruption he is conuinced to haue vsed in cyting Gratian the Collector of the Canon-lawes , and his Glosses , peruerting their wordes , and whole sense , as is there set downe , with sundry other examples , which shew that the man did not lye of error or ouersight , but meerely out of malice to deceyue the simple and credulous Reader , knowing indeed , that he did lye . And the same is demonstrated by many examples most apparent , and euident throughout the whole sixt Chapter of this booke , and other places : so as if we had no other proofe of this spirite , but in Tho. Morton himselfe , it were sufficient to proue our purpose , for that of all other lightly of his coate , he profesleth most innocency , simplicity , and sincerity in this behalfe , and by this doth principally proue our purpose , which is , that they equiuocate and lye , both wittingly and willingly , and then most of all , when they make greatest protestation of truth . 10. As when T. M. talketh of his naked innocency in his epistle to the Kings Maiestie , of 〈◊〉 Equiuocation from his soule , of styling himselfe A Minister of simple truth : and finally his vsurping of those protestations of Saint Paul before mentioned , That in all things he spake the truth , and lyed not , which Thomas Morton , as we 〈◊〉 haue proued before , could not choose but know to be a wilfull lye in deed , hauing seene & read the Authors which so manifestly he belyeth , as neuer in this he will be able to cleare himselfe . And herof we do finally inferre that he and his do equiuocate in the worst kind , which by vs & ours is neuer vsed : and so while he declameth against lawfull Equiuocation , and practiseth vnlawfull , he sheweth himselfe a playne preuaricator . And for that this matter is of so great importance for the Reader well to conceaue in these dayes of controuersies betwene vs , I meane to stay my selfe somewhat in this Chapter vpon this poynt , and to shew that indeed it is a substantiall signe , distinctiue betwene all Sectaries & vs , at this tyme , and that in matters of controuersy our writers shall neuer be found guylty in these kyndes of false lying & malicious equiuocatiōs , where not only vntruth is vttered , but it is wittingly also vttered , the writer knowing that he writeth vntruth , as often now hath bene said . Which manner of dealing inferreth two points ; the one that such a writer or speaker hath no conscience that vttereth things against his owne knowledge , and which God seeth to be false , and falsely meant in his harte , and the other that his cause hath no ground of substantiall truth , which cannot be defended without such wilfull lyes . 11. In this then if yow please let vs insist a while , and let Thomas Morton bringe forth any Catholicke Authors whatsoeuer , that wrote against Protestāts since these heresies began , that hath bene taken in this impiety , I meane , that hath set downe in print any such falsity , as cannot be excused eyther by ignorance , ouersight , negligence , error of print , translatiō , diuersity of editions , or the like , but that it must needs be presumed that he knew the vntruth , and yet would set it forth : of this kynd ( I say ) let him shew me but one example among all Catholicke writers of our tyme , and I will in my conscience greatly mistrust , and discredit the Author , whether it be another , or my selfe : But if he shew me two or three in any writer of this kind I shal neuer be able to beleeue him more . And wheras the number and variety of Catholicke writers is so great as the world seeth , it were no great labour to shew it in some , if that spirite did raigne among them , as it doth in Protestant writers , out of whom great volumes might be framed of this one point , if a man would imbrace them all throughout all nations : But I meaning to speake of Englishmen , and those very few in respect of the multitude , and not hauing al their workes by meat this present , am forced only to vse some few notes taken heertofore out of their books , which notwitstanding shall suffice for this short view , which we pretend . And for better methode & memory , I haue thought good to reduce my Notes at this tyme to three sortes of men , that haue writen against vs. First Protestant Bishops ; then Ministers , and lastly Lay-men , but of good sorte , I meane , Knightes ; and of ech one of these shall we make our seuerall Paragraphes . The vse of Equiuocation in some Protestant English Bishops . §. 1. 12. AND first in this ranke may we worthily put in the first and chiefe place , M. Iohn Iewell called afterwards Bishop of Salisburie , who being the first and chiefest man that in the beginning of Queene Elizabethes raigne , tooke vpon him the publicke defence of Caluins doctrine in England , and was named by many for that respect , The Iewell and prim-rose of that Ghospell , had primitias spiritus in that behalfe , for cunning and artificial deluding of others by these kind of false , and deceyuing Equiuocations , as both by his wordes , workes , preachinges , and protestations , extant this day in print , is most manifest , and the conuersion of many men , from Protestant to Catholicke Religion , vpon sight and consideration therof , hath euidently couinced , wherof heere we meane to giue some briefe taste for examples sake . 13. He then , as wel in his Sermons at Paule crosse , and the Court , set forth afterward in print , and answered as well by Doctor Harding , as other learned men of the Catholicke party , did make such a generall and vniuersall chalenge against all Catholickes whatsoeuer , for proofe of 28. seuerall articles , framed out by himselfe , standinge in controuersy betweene vs , as he made the world to wonder at him , and diuers of his owne side that were more learned and discreete , to murmur at his rashnes therin ; but many more with great disdayne to condemne his hypocrisy . For thus he began . 14. O mercifull God , who would thinke there could be so much wilfulnes in the harte of man ! O Gregorie , O Augustine , O Hierome , O Chrysostome , O Leo , O Dionyse , O 〈◊〉 , O Sixtus , O Paul , O Christ ! if we be deceaued herein yow are they that haue deceyued vs : yow haue taught vs these schismes & diuisions ; yow haue taught vs these heresyes . &c. and that yow may the more maruaile at the wilfulnes of such men , ( the Papistes ) they stand this day against so many old Fathers , so many Doctors , so many examples of the primitiue Church , so manifest Scriptures , and yet haue they herein not one Father , not one Doctor , not one allowed example of the primitiue Church , I speake not this in vehemency of spirit , or heate of talke , but euen as before God by way of simplicity and truth , least any of yow should happily be deceaued , and thinke there is more weight in the other side , then in cōclusion there shal be found , and therfore once againe I say of all the wordes of the holy Scriptures , of all the examples of the Primitiue Church , of all the old Fathers , of all the ancient Doctors in these causes , they haue not one . Thus in that Sermon at Paules crosse , and in an other at the Court of the same subiect , which was the occasion and beginning of all the Combat that ensued afterwards betweene Catholicke men and him . 15. And in another Sermon to the same effect he vseth this speach for confirmation of his former protestation . Heere ( saith he ) the matter it selfe that I haue now in hand , putteth me in remembrance of certayne thinges that I vttered vnto yow to the same purpose at my last being in this place , I remember I layd out then before yow a number of thinges , that are now in Controuersy , whervnto our aduersaryes will not yeeld ; And I said perhaps boldly as it might then seeme to some man , but as I my selfe , and the learned of our Aduersaryes themselues do well know , sincerely and truly , that none of them all that stand this day against vs , are able or * shall euer be able to proue against vs , any one of all these pointes , either by Scriptures , or by example of the primitiue Church , or by the old Doctors , or by the ancient generall Councells &c. 16. And againe . Loth I am to trouble yow with rehearsall of such thinges , as I haue spoken before , and yet because the case so requireth , I shall desire yow , that haue already heard me , to beare with me in this behalfe , better it were to trouble your eares with twice hearing of one thing , then to betray the truth of God. The wordes I then spake , as neere as I can call them to mynd were these ; that if any learned man of all our Aduersaries , or if all the learned men that be aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholicke Doctor , or Father out of any one old Generall Councell , out of the holy Scriptures of God , or any one example of the primitiue Church , wherby any of these ensuing articles , of priuate Masse reall presence , Primacy of the Bishop of Rome , setting vp and honoring of Images , Common prayer in a strange language , offering vp Christ in sacrifice &c. may be proued , I am content to yeeld and subscribe &c. 17. And againe in an other place : My offer was this ( in my sermon at the Court : ) that if any of all those things that I then rehearsed could be proued by your side , by any sufficient authority , either of Scriptures , Councels , or by any one allowed example &c. I would yeald : now it standeth vpon yow to proue but one example to the contrary . And yet further in an other place in my Sermon ( saith he ) at Paules , and els where , I required yow to bring forth on your parte , either some Scripture , or some old Doctor , or some ancient Councell , &c. and if yow of your parte would vouchsafe to bring but two lines , the whole matter were concluded . And yet further , I protest before God , bring me but one sufficiēt authority , or one old Doctor , on your side , and I will yeeld &c. At least yow should haue alleadged Augustine , Ambrose , Chrysostome , Hierome , &c. I haue offered yow oftentymes bring me but two lines of your side , and the field is yours &c. O M. Doctor deale simply in Gods cause , and say yow haue Doctors when yow haue them indeed . 18. This and much more hath he to this effect , all tending to shew his rare confidence in the Protestant cause , which he defended : but yet that he did not speake as he thought , in these matters , and that his iudgement did not concurre with his tongue and pen , and consequently , that he did Equiuocate in this worse sorte of Equiuocation , many argumentes do mightely perswade me , and especially these halfe dozen that follow . Sixt argumentes of Maister Iewell his hipocrysy in this case . §. 2. 19. FIRST for that he cannot be presumed to haue beene so ignorāt , but that how soeuer he might thinke of the Scriptures , that by his priuate interpretations he could shifte them of , and deliuer himselfe from their Authority : yet that the Fathers could not so easily be dispached , wherof he had seene the profe but few yeares before , in the disputation held in Oxford with B. Cranmer , Ridley , and Latymer , vpon the 16. 17. and 18. dayes of Aprill in the yeare of Christ 1554. in which disputation , M. Iewell as Fox saith , was Notary among others , and saw so many most euident testimonyes , of auncient Fathers , both Greeke and Latyn alleadged there , and vrged against them , as they could no wayes answere , or handsomely shifte of , as yow may see in Fox himselfe , though neuer so partially related , but much more orderly & fully in a speciall Treatise , writen of late of that matter intituled , A Reuiew of ten publicke disputatiōs , about Religion , vnder the raignes of K. Edward and Queene Marie : which euidency of testimony did worke so greatly with M. Iewell himselfe , as after these disputatiōs ended , he subscribed publikly in S. Mary-Church of Oxford to the Roman Catholicke doctrine in that behalf , as M. Doctor Harding then present writeth to himfelfe , in a speciall Epistle prefixed before his Reioynder : which being so , with what conscience , could he say now so soone after ; Shew me one only Father , one Doctor , one place , one sentence , two lynes and the like ? for so much as lately before he had heard and registred so great a multitude of Fathers sentences , that are yet extant in those disputations ; wherfore this must needs be Equiuocation of the worst kynde , which could not be true , neyther in the meaninge of the speaker himselfe . 20. The second reason is , that M. Iewell could not be ignorant , that diuers ancient Fathers within the tyme by him limited , had not only many sentences for the Catholicke parte in these heades of controuersyes alleadged by him , and others , but whole discourses also , homilyes , sermons , chapters , and treatises , if not bookes therof . As for exāple about the reall presence , if he had read the Fathers he could not be ignorant of the mayne multitude of large Authorityes , alleaged in these our dayes aswell by Bishop Claudius de Sainctes , as Bellarmin and others about that matter , not out of single , or doubtfull sentēces , but of whole discourses , as hath bene said , and those as effectually writen by the Authors for the truth of the reall presence , as we can do in a manner now , as namely S. Cyprian , S. Hilary , both Cyrills , S. Ambrose , S. Basil , three Gregories , Saint Chrysostome , S. Hierome , and others downward . And the like multitude , or more , is alleadged for the Masse or dayly sacrifice of the Catholicke Church by the same Author . And further no man can deny , but that S. Augustine for example , hath many large discourses , treatises , or Bookes directly tending to the proofe of diuers poynts now in controuersie , betwene Protestants and vs , as De cura pro mortuis habenda . De libero arbitrio . De fide & operibus . De nuptiis & concupiscentia , & many others , where he doth largely , and of purpose impugne diuers Protestant opinions , and confirme ours both about the valour of the Masse , or dayly sacrifice for quicke and dead , merite of workes and the like , not only approuing , but prouing also the same by great variety of Scriptures . And the like doth S. Hierome against Iouinian and Vigilantius , and S. Epiphanius against Aërius , and other heretickes that held the same proposition that Protestants do now . All which authorityes , if M. Iewell had read or heard of them ( as may be presumed he had ) how then could he say with any conscience at all , Bring me one Author , one Father , one Doctor , one sentence , one place , or two lines , and the like , which he could not do without notable Equiuocation as yow see , himselfe knowing that he spake falsely in that behalfe . 21. The third reason is that M. Iewell could not but haue seene and considered the small accoumpt which other Protestāt writers more elder then himself had made , and did make of the ancient Fathers , when in any thing they were against their opinions , nay their reiecting of them with contempt , doth euidently shew that they held them for their aduersaries . As for example M. Iewell beginneth his chalenge , as yow remēber : O Gregory ! O Augustine ! O Hierome ! O Chrysostome ! O Leo ! O Dionyse ! &c. Now as for S. Gregory , Caluin giueth this generall sentence of him : Gregorius homo multis erroribus imbutus , Gregory a man corrupted with many errors : and Martyn Luther the Father of Protestants writeth of him : Gregorius admodum leuiter agnouit Christum , & verbum Euangelij ; Gregory did know Christ and his ghospell very sleightly : and then talking of S. Gregories famous workes and writing , so greatly esteemed by learned , and holy men , he saith of his sermons : Gregorij conciones ne teruncium quidem valent ; Gregories sermons are not worth a halfpenny . And then speaking of an other parte of his workes , or bookes called his Dialogues , saith : 〈◊〉 eum in Dialogo suo crassè decepit : The dyuell did grossely deceaue him in his Dialogue : and thus of him . 22. And as for S. Augustine , who is the second in ranke of his Apostrophe , albeit they do not reiect him with so great contempt as S. Gregory , yet when he maketh against them , they esteeme him little . Quisest Augustinus ? ( saith Luther against King Henry of England ) quis nos coget illi credere ? Who is Augustine ? or who shall compell vs to beleeue him ? but S. Hierome whome next M. Iewell adioyneth they handle much more spitefully . Quinte Hieronyme ( saith Luther ) conculcamus cum tua Bethlem , cuculla , & deserto : Know thou Hierome that we do tread thee vnder our feete with thy Bethlem , thy hood , and they desert . And againe in an other place . VVhat can be more carnally spoken , more wickedly , sacrilegiously , and blasphemously , then that of Hierome , Virginitas caelum , coniugium terram replet ? Virginity doth fill heauen , & marriage filleth the earth . And yet further , I know no man ( saith he ) to whom I am so much an enemy as to Hierome , for that he writeth nothing but of fasting , choise of meates , and of virginity , and in truth Hierome should not be 〈◊〉 among the Doctors of the Church for that he was an hereticke , &c. And Caluin saith of the same Doctor ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 natura fuit cauillator : Hierome was by nature a wrangler . But Beza worse then all , calleth him blasphemous , wicked , and impious , and iniurious to the Apostle . 23. Of S. 〈◊〉 whom M. Iewell calleth vpon in the fourth place , Luther writeth thus : Chrysostomum nullo loco habeo ; non est nisi loquaculus : I hold Chrysostome in no accompt at all , for that he is a brabling fellow . And the Magdeburgians in their historie say of him contemptuously , that he was , bonorum operum Encomiastes , & liberi arbitrij patronū agebat , a prayser of good workes , and an aduocate for freewill . So that yow see , that the cause of their reiection , and contempt is for that they are contrary in their doctrine . As for S. Leo named by M. Iewell in the fifth place of Fathers , it is easy to imagine of what credit he was among them , seing that in the very controuersy of the Popes Supremacy heere handled by him , both Caluin and Beza do note and cōdemne him of Ambition , for taking vpon him , and defending that authority . Constat ( saith Beza ) Leonem in epistolis Romanae Sedis antichristianae arrogantiam planè spirasse ; It is manifest that Leo in his Epistles doth clearly breath forth the arrogancy of that Antichristian Roman Sea , which in other wordes Caluin also Beza his maister , doth confirme : which being so and all this knowne to M. Iewell , I would aske , why he did call vpon these Fathers so earnestly , saying , If we be deceaued heerin , yow are they that haue deceaued vs , as though he had taught nothing but that they taught , and that their authority had byn his rule , as their aule was Paul and Christ ? Nay , why doth he himselfe afterward , expressely , and by name , reiect S. Leo in some of these very articles for proofe wherof he doth here call vpon him ? And namely about the Popes Supremacy and sacrifice of the Masse , saying : That there was no credit to be giuen vnto him , &c. Is not this double dealing ? Is not this pernicious Equiuocation on one side to call vpon him & on the other to reiect him ? 24. Nay why did he adde further , O Dionyse , O Anacletus , O Sixtus , as though he had followed their doctrine also , or admitted their authority ? wheras neither himselfe , nor other Protestantes are knowne to admit any booke or worke of theirs now extant , but to reiect , and rayle against them all . Dionysius Areopagita , ( saith Luther ) nihil habet solidae eruditionis . Dionysius Areopagita hath no solide learning at all . Your counterfeit Anacletus ( saith M. Iewell to Doctor Harding ) doth not clayme all the Bishops throughout the world as belonging to his admission . And the like they say of the other , out of all with is euidently conuinced , that this Apostrophe of M. Iewell to these Fathers , O Gregory , O Augustine , O Hierome , O Chrysostome , O Leo , O Dionyse , &c. if we be deceaued yow haue deceaued vs , was an hypocriticall Equiuocation to deceaue the hearer , contrary to the knowledge , and conscience of himselfe , that vttered the wordes , for he could not be ignorant , but that they were against him , and his doctrine , for that otherwise they had neuer byn so reiected and discredited by him , and his . 25. The fourth reason is , for that the said ancient Protestantes , Maisters of M. Iewell , and from whome he tooke his learning and spirite , did in sundry of the Articles heere by him named , reiect & contemne the ancient Fathers as contrary vnto them , and their doctrine ; and how then could M. Iewell so confidently call vpon them in the same . Let any man read Martin Luther in his booke de Captiuitate Babylonica , about the Sacrifice of the Masse , and he shall fynd , that he reiecteth all the Fathers in that controuersy . Si nihil habetur ( saith he ) quod dicatur , tutius est omnia negare , quàm Missae Sacrificium esse concedere . If there be nothing to answere to the Authorityes of the Fathers , it is more safe to deny all , then to grant that the Masse is a Sacrifice . And in an other booke ; Profiteor inprimis &c. I do in the very beginning make this profession , against those that will cry out , that I teach against the vse of the Church and decree of Fathers heerin , that I respect none of these thinges . And yet further against King Henry of England : Dicta Patrum induxit Rex &c. The King bringeth in the sayings of Fathers against me , for his massing Sacrifice , and scoffeth at my folly , that I would seeme more wise then all they ; but this is that which I said before , that these Thomisticall asses haue nothing to bring forth , but a multitude of men . And then he goeth forward , saying : That if a thousand Augustines , and a thousand Cyprians stand against him in this matter , he careth not . And fynally in another booke : Non moramur , si clamitent Papistae , Ecclesia , Ecclesia , Patres , Patres &c. We care nothing at all if Papists cry out against vs , the Church , the Church , Fathers , Fathers , they are but the sayings or deeds of men , in so great a cause as this , we care nothing for them . And to the very same effect disputeth Caluin , though more cyuilly and cunningly about the same matter , saying : Non est cur vlla hominum authoritate , vel annorum praescriptione , &c. There is no reason why we should suffer our selues to be drawne a side from the doctrine we teach by any authority of men , or prescription of yeares . Where yow see , that he graunteth both antiquity of time , and authority of the ancient Fathers to be against him , in that controuersy of the Masse , and Sacrifice . And as we haue shewed the same in this article ; so might we in all the rest , if time and place did permit , but this is sufficient to proue , in my opinion , that the protestation of M. Iewell before mencyoned which so solemnly he made in the presence of almighty God , was feigned , and hypocriticall , when he saith , Not one father , not one Doctor &c. and then addeth for more asseueration , when I say not one , I speake not in vehemency of spirite or heate of talke , but euen as before God , by the way of simplicity and truth . For if M. Iewell did know that this his maisters and elders , Luther and Caluin were forced to reiect generally all the Fathers , or the most parte of them , for that they were against him for the sacrifice of the Masse ; then was it notable cosening Equiuocation to sweare & protest before God in simplicity , that no one did make for vs , either in this or the rest of the articles . 26. The fifth reason is , for that we see by experience that all other English Protestant writers , succeeding M. Iewell , and being as it were his schollers , and participating of his spirite , sense , and meaning , began presently to reiect , and cast of the Fathers , vpon euery occasion , wherin they were pressed , by their authority , as by the writings of Doctor Calshill , Doctor Humfrey , Fulke , Charke , VVhitakers , and others is euident , wherof I will alleadge only one example out of the last named , in steed of all , who being pressed with the consent of Fathers in a 〈◊〉 controuersy against him , answered in this wise . We repose no such confidence in the Fathers writinges , that we take any certain proofe of Religion frō them , because we place all our Faith and Religion , not in humaine , but in diuine Authority . If therfore you bring vs what some one Father hath thought , or what the Fathers vniuersally altogeather haue deliuered , the same , except it be approued by testimonyes of scriptures , auayleth nothing , it gayneth nothing , it conuinceth nothing . For the Fathers are such witnesses , as they also haue need of the Scriptures to be their witnesses . If deceyued by error they giue forth their testimony disagreeing from Scriptures , albeit they may be pardoned , erring for want of wisdome ; we cannot be pardoned if because they erred , we also will erre with them . So Doctor VVhitakers . Where yow see what accompt he maketh of ancient Fathers , and Doctors . Patres etiam simul 〈◊〉 , to vse his owne wordes , yea all Fathers put togeather without proofe of Scripture to Authorize them , it 〈◊〉 nothing ( saith he ) gayneth nothing , it conuinceth nothing . So as if M. Iewell had dealt plainly he might only haue called for Scripture at our hands , and not so often for Fathers , knowing by all probability , aswell as his schollers , that the Fathers were at least in many controuersyes against him ; and what Equiuocation then was this to call so often , and earnestly for ancient Fathers ; yea some one place or sentence , some two lines , for wynning of the field ? was not this singuler and extraordinary , yea hypocrisy , and lying Equiuocation in the highest degree ? 27. The sixt reason is the consideration of his earnest exhorting of Catholickes to answere his Chalenge . Now it standeth vpon yow ( saith he ) to proue but one affirmatiue against me , and so to require my promise of subscribing . And againe , If yow of your parte would vouchsafe to bring but two lynes , the whole matter were concluded . And yet further , Me thinketh both reason , and humanity would , that yow should answere somewhat , especially being so often and so openly required , &c. VVhy be yow so loth , being so earnestly required to shew forth but one Doctor of your side , &c. VVhat thinke you there is now iudged of you , that being so long tyme required , yet cannot be wonne to bring forth one sentence in your defence ? And yet againe more earnestly . I protest before God bring me but one sufficient authority in the matters I haue required , and afterward I will gently and quietly conferre with yow further at your pleasure . And therfore for as much as it is Gods cause , if yow meane simply , deale simply , betray not your right , if yow may saue it with one word : the people must needs muse at your silence , for thinke not that any wise man will be so much your friend , as in so weighty matters he will be satisfied with your said silence , &c. And not content with this , he concludeth in these wordes of earnest exhortation . Wherfore heere I leaue putting yow eft-somes gently in remembrance , that being so often and so openly desired to shew forth one Doctor , &c. Yow haue brought nothing , and that if yow stand so still it must needs be thought yow do it conscientia imbecillitatis , for that there was nothing to be brought . And heere once againe I conclude , as before , putting yow in remembrance that this long tyme I haue desired yow to bring forth some sufficient Authority for proofe of your party . Thus farre M. Iewell . 28. And would yow not thinke that this desire , this intreaty , this vrging , and prouocation did proceed from a great confidence in his cause ? Truly if the confidence were not great , the crafte and dissimulation was singuler : but what ensued ? M. Doctor Harding , and other learned men lying in Flanders being moued by zeale of Religion , and prouokd by these insolent eggings , began soone after to write bookes in answere of these challenges , and to lay open the vntruthes and vanities therof , which labours wrought so great effect with diuers of the discreeter sorte , both Catholickes , & Protestants in England , as M. Iewell thought it best to procure the publike prohibition of those bookes by the Magistrate , for which he had so earnestly called before , wherupō there were diligēt searches made to find out the same , both in the vniuersities , townes , cittyes , & portes of the Realme , as * one that was then a searcher among others , and a Protestant preacher in Oxford , but conuerted afterward by these very reasons , and by the vntruthes found in M. Iewell bookes , doth testifie at large in an answere of his written to M. D. VVhitakers , whose wordes I haue thought good to sett downe in this place . For hauing refuted a speach of M. VVhitakers who pretended to be very glad that the Rhemes English Testament was abroad in many mens handes , M. Reynolds writeth thus : With like phrase ( saith he ) and character of shamelesse vaunting , wrote M. Iewell to Doctor Harding , saying : VVe neuer suppressed any of your bookes , M. Harding , as yow know , but are very well content to see them so common , that as now children may play with them in the streets . Thus his face serued him co write then , when in the selfe same Defence , he by leauing out suppressed the very substance of that booke , which he then pretended to answere , and when by helpe of his fellow Superintendent , and other friends euery corner of the Realme was searched for those bookes , when the portes were layd for them , Paules Crosse is witnes of burning many of them , the Princesse proclamation was procured against them in the Vniuersityes by soueraigne authority , Colledges , chambers , studyes , clossets , coffers and deskes were ransacked for them , when not only children were forbid to play with them , but ancient men , and students of Deuinity were imprisoned for hauing of them , so that all this can be nought els , but a plaine example of palpable dissimulation , and affected lying . 29. So this learned and vertuous man , who was so moued by the said dissimulation , as it wrought his conuersion , and detestation of that doctrine , which could not be mainteyned but with such shiftes , and cunning lyings as afterward more largely , and particulerly yow shall heare him relate of himselfe , for that conforme to this generall entrance by singuler hypocrisy and equiuocation as hath beene declared , M. Iewell behaued himselfe also in particuler cases that did occurre , making no 〈◊〉 to affirme or deny any thing that serued for his purpose , though in his conscience he knew it to be neuer so false , wherof we shall heare touch some few examples proportionable to the 〈◊〉 of reasons before set downe , if not more ; in which is to be remēbred by the Reader , that all the forsaid circumstances must be obserued , to witt ; that the falshood cannot be excused by any probable error , mistaking , or ouersight of the speaker , nor by any default of the Printer , edition , translation , or the like , but that it must needs proceed of a 〈◊〉 will to deceyue wittingly , as before hath byn said . And with this preuention , and admonition shall we passe to the examples themselues . Six Examples of Maister Ievvells particuler Equiuocation . §. 3. 30. THE first example then shall be where M. Iewell going about to prooue in a certain sermon of his , that it was no synne to marrie after vowes made of Chastity , bringeth in this sentence of S. Augustine out of his booke * de 〈◊〉 viduitatis , to proue the same in these wordes : Quapropter nō possum dicere à proposito meliori 〈◊〉 si nupserint 〈◊〉 adulteria esse non coniugia : I cannot say that women which are fallen from a better purpose ( of continency ) if they marry , that their mariage is adultery and not mariage at all : and vpon this authority so alleadged , and so plainly seeming to make for the Protestants doctrine of Votaries mariages , yow must imagine how M. Iewell would exult , and make the Schollers of Oxford thinke that he had said much for his purpose ; but he that shall read ouer that shorte booke de 〈◊〉 viduitatis , of the good that is in wyddowhood , written to Iuliana a religious seruant of God , as S. Augustine calleth her , shall fynd that the whole drifte of this holy Father in that 〈◊〉 , is directly against M. Iewell , and his fellowes , prouing by many arguments , that 〈◊〉 marriage in them that haue made a simple vow of Chastity , or ( to vse S. Austines wordes ) that had a better purpose then mariage , be true mariage , and not adultery ( except there come afterward a solemne vow , which maketh it no 〈◊〉 : ) yet doth S. Augustine plainly proue , that the slyding backe from that good purpose and vow is damnable , not for that the mariage doth not hold , but for that they haue broken their first faith made to Christ according to the wordes of S. Paul , which S. Augustine affirmeth to haue byn meant to this purpose . 31. So then heere is great wilfull falsity , to alleadge S. Augustine as though he fauoured the marriages of Votaries , whereas throughout this whole booke he doth purposely impugne the same , yea that which is more , in the very next immediate wordes that follow in the same sentence before alleadged by M. Iewell S. Augustines expresse wordes do ouerthrow all that is alleadged for Votaries . For wheras he writeth , I cannot affirme that women fallen from a better purpose if they marry , that their marriages are adultery , and not marriage , it followeth immediately : Sed plane non dubit auerim dicere lapsus & ruinas à castitate sanctiori , quae vouetur Deo adulteriis esse peiores : but I do not doubt at all to affirme ( saith S. Augustine ) that the ruynes , and fallinges of from holyer chastitie , which is vowed to God , are worse then adultery ; which he proueth by many strong reasons , and arguments . And now let the Reader consider what Equiuocation this might be in M. Iewell , and whether it be possible to imagine that he was so occupyed , and distracted , as he did read the one halfe of the sentence , and not the other , or that he was so simple as he did not vnderstand , what was the whole drifte , and argument of S. Augustine in that booke : and if he did , and yet alledged him to the contrary , yow see what ensueth . And thus much of this first example . 32. The second example is taken out of M. Iewells defence of the Apologie of England pag. 176. where taking againe in hand to proue that priests and Votaryes may marry ( for he was very frequent and copious in that matter , it importing them much in that beginning to draw priests and fryers vnto them by this bayte ) he alleadgeth an example of a certayne noble man called 〈◊〉 of Caesarea in Cappadocia taken out of Cassiodorus the historiographer in these wordes . At that tyme they say that Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesarea dyed in martyrdome , hauing marryed a wyfe a little before , being as yet in manner a new marryed man &c. and he cyteth for this in the margent Cassiodorus in the tripartite historie . And in an other place he alledgeth the same example to the same purpose , out of Nicephorus ; but aswell these two authors , as Zozomenus are witnesses against him , of a notable wilfull falsification in this behalfe ; for that neither of them do say that Eupsychius was a Bishop or priest , but only that he was Patritius Caesareae in Cappadocia that is to say a noble man , or Senators sonne of Cesarea in Cappadocia : and the falsification is so playne to him that shall read all the foresaid Authors , and places by him cyted , as no modest man can but blush to see M. Iewell alledge , and vrge this forged example twice in one booke of his with such apparant falsitye : nor can any of the foresaid circumstances of ignorance , error , or negligence probably excuse or defend him . 33. The third exāple may be that of M Iewels slaunderous speach cōcerning the holy man Augustine sent by S. Gregory to conuert our nation to the Christian faith , which Almighty God wrought by him so myraculously , as both the said S. 〈◊〉 and S. Bede after him , and all other ancient historiographers , as Malmesbury , 〈◊〉 , and the rest do call him our English Apostle , of whose many , and great miracles wrought in that worke , not only the said Authors , but S. Gregory himselfe doth write a speciall narration to Eulogius Archbishop of Alexandria : yea 〈◊〉 Fox himselfe in his Acts and Monumentes , albeit not a little imbued with M. Iewels spirit , against this holy man , for that he planted Catholicke Romane Religion in England , yet writing the story of the conuersion of Ethelbert our first Christian English King , he hath these words at lēgth . When the King had well considered the honest conuersation of their life , and moued with their miracles wrought through Gods hād by them , he heard them more gladly , and lastly by their wholsome exhortations , and example of Godly life , he was by them conuerted , and Christened in the yeare of Christ aboue said 596. and the six and thirtith of his Reigne . So Fox . Whervnto I may add a testimony of much greater credit , out of S. Bede , that liued neere vnto his time , & recordeth the very Epitaph remayning in his dayes written vpon S. Augustines tombe in these wordes . 34. Heere lyeth Blessed Augustine the first Archbishop of Canterbury , who was sent hither , by S. Gregory Bishop of Rome , and strengthened of God by working of miracles , who conuerted King Ethelbert , and his Realme from the worshipping of Idolls to the faith of Christ. And thus much of the sanctity of this blessed man out of their testimony that liued with him , or not long after him . But now what writeth M. Iewell of him , and with what truth and conscience ? He was a man ( saith he ) as it was iudged by them that saw him , and knew him , neither of Apostolicke spirite , nor any way worthy to be called a Saint , but an Hypocrite , a super stitious man cruell , bloody , and proud aboue measure , and for proofe of all this , he cyteth only in his margent 〈◊〉 of Monmouth , in his history of the Britans , which Ieffrey dyed in the dayes of King Henry the 2. very neere 600. yeares after S. Augustine , and almost 500. after S. Bede , and writeth no such thing at all of S. Augustine as heere is set downe by M. Iewell , but rather much in his commendacion with note of the emulous dealing of the British Bishops against him , for the hatred they bare to the English nation , and their conuersion . 35. So as heere now M. Iewels assertion is not only false , and impious against so venerable a man as Augustine was , but must needs be also against his owne conscience , & this in diuers pointes . For first he knew that there was no Author extant that wrote in his dayes , saw him , and knew him , but only S. Gregory , who writeth 〈◊〉 in his commendations , as yow haue heard . Secondly he knew that S. Bede who liued in the very next age after him , and all other English Authors succeeding for the space of eyght or nine hundred yeares , till our time , did highly cōmend him in their workes , and especially the forenamed Malmesbury & Huntington that liued with Ieffrey Moumouth . And lastly he knew that this only witnes , the said Ieffrey , had no such thing . And what then will yow say to this Equiuocation ? may not M. Mortons Epithets of hellish , heathenish , impious , and sacrilegious , haue place heere ? 36. The fourth example may be those wordes of M. Iewell in the Apology of England , writing against the Pope . Let him in Gods name ( saith he ) call to mynd , let him remember that they be of his owne Canonists which haue taught the people , that fornication betwene single folke is not synne , as though they had fetched that doctrine from 〈◊〉 in Terence , whose words are : It is no synne , belieue me , for a yong man to haunt harlotts . And for this he cyteth in his margent Io. de Magistris li. de Temperantia . And who would not thinke but that this accusation were sure , for so much as it is so opprobriously vrged and insulted vpon ? But now I pray yow considerthe particulers , and therwithal what a conscience this man had . 37. First then Io. de Magistris was Martinus de Magistris , not a Canonist , but a Schoole - deuine , that wrote a Treatise De Temperantia & Luxuria , so as it seemeth that he that gaue this charge eyther had not read the Author himselfe , which I suppose M. Iewell will not confesse , or else meant to dazle the eyes of his Reader by naming Iohn for Martin . Secondly this Author in his said Treatise , as the fashion of Scholemen is , propoundeth this question : Vtrum simplex fornicatio sit peccatum mortale ; whether simple fornication be a mortall synne ; and according to vse of Schooles , saith : Arguitur quòd non . It is argued or reasoned for the negatiue parte thus , and so 〈◊〉 downe some arguments for that syde by way of obiections , which afterward he solueth , and cometh to conclude absolutly in the affirmatiue parte by six conclusions , that simple fornication is not only synne , but mortall synne ; for that it is forbidden by Gods law , and excludeth from the Kingdome of heauen , as S. Paul affirmeth . And now lett any man consider of the conscience of him , that auoucheth in print the other slaunder : Would Maister Garnet or M. South-well , or any other Catholicke man accused for lawfull Equiuocation , euer haue made so notorious a lye against their owne consciencies ? Let our aduersaryes bring forth but two examples . 38. The fifth example shall be also out of his wordes in the same Apologie , writing against the reading of Saincts lyues in the Church : The old Councell of Carthage ( saith he ) commaundeth nothing to be read in Christs congregation , but the Canonicall Scriptures , but these men read such things in their Churches , as themselues know to be starke lyes , and fond fables . So he . But now let vs see , whether it be more probable , that we know to be lyes those thinges which we read in our Churches or that he knew to be a lye that which heere he relateth and printeth in his booke . For if he read the Canon it selfe which he mentioned , which is the forty and seauenth of the third Councell of Carthage , wherin Saint Augustine was present , then must he needs know that he lyeth indeed egregiously , for that the Canō beginneth thus : Item placuit , vt praeter Scripturas Canonicas nihil in Ecclesia legatur sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum ; sunt autem Canonicae Scripturae , Genesis , Exodus &c. 〈◊〉 , ludith , Hester , Machabaeorum libri duo , &c. It hath seemed good to this Councell , that nothing be read in the Church vnder the name of diuine Scripture , but only such as be Canonicall Scriptures in deed , as are Genesis , Exodus , &c. The two bookes of the Machabees , Tobias , Iudith , Esther , and the rest . Wherby we see that in alleadging these words , that nothing be read in the Church but Canonicall Scriptures , is guylfully cut of the other clause that expounded all , sub nomine diuinarum Scripturarum , vnder the name of diuine Scriptures . And secondly , that in relating which are diuine Scriptures , the bookes of the Machabees , Tobie , Iudith , and others excluded by him and his , from that number , are set downe for Canonicall . And thirdly which maketh the falfification most notoriously wilfull , is , that in the selfe same Canon there followeth these wordes : Liceat etiam legi passiones Martyrum cùm 〈◊〉 dies eorum celebrantur : It is lawfull also to read in the Church ( besides Canonicall Scriptures ) the passions of Martyrs , when their yearly festiuall dayes are celebrated : which wordes do cleerly decide the controuersy , and proue M. Iewell a wilfull lyer , and that he did know that he did lye , as nothing can be more cleare or euident . And besides , they decyde two seuerall controuersies against them as yow see , the first , that the books of Machabees were held for Canonicall by this Councell in S. Augustines tyme : and the second that the festiuall dayes of Saincts were celebrated 〈◊〉 yeare publikely in the Church , and the histories of their 〈◊〉 read in those dayes . 39. The sixt and last example in this place ( for I haue promised to passe no further ) shall cōteyne two or three cases togeather , the first out of Leo the great . Pope Leo saith M. Iewell in the Apologie ) holdeth , that vpon one daye it is lawfull to haue but one massem one Church , but these men say dayly in one Church commonly ten masses 20. or 30. yea sometimes more . So M. Iewell . But he that shall looke vpon the place it selfe in S. Leo , shall find the quite contrary decreed , and sett downe by that holy man , for thus he writeth vnto the Archbishop or Patriarch of Alexandria : Vt in omnibus obseruantia nostra concordet , illud quoque vloumus custodiri , &c. That our vse or obseruance may agree in all poynts ( as well in Alexandria as heere ) we will haue this also to be kept , that when any more solemne sestiuity shall call togeather a more aboundant meeting of people , and that the multitude of the faithfull shall be so great as the Church or Chapell cannot hold them togeather , that then without doubt of further deliberation , the oblation of the sacrifice be iterated , or celebrated againe , least otherwise if they only which came first , should be admitted vnto this deuotion , they which came afterward might seeme to be excluded , wheras it is conforme both to piety and reason , that so often as the presence of new people do fill the Church wherin the solemnity is exhibited , so often also should the sacrifice be offred , for that otherwise it must necessarily fall out that some parte of the people should be depriued of their deuotion , if the custome of saying one masse only being reteyned , none could offer sacrifice but such as came in the first parte of the day . 40. These are the wordes of S. Leo , by which yow see that he doth determine & decree the plaine contrary to that which M. Iewell affirmeth , to wit that as 〈◊〉 as any multitude of people should come to the Church ; so often the sacrifice of the masse should be reiterated for their deuotion . In which wordes though among Catholiks there may be some question about S. 〈◊〉 his meaning , to wit , whether he meant of more then one chiefe or solemne masse , to be said in one Church or Chappell , or that one and the selfe same Priest in such cases might reiterate his owne masse and sacrifice , if there were no other Priest present , as Strabo and Dur and do interpret him : yet in this controuersie there can be no doubt or question , but that he saith the quite contradictory to that which M. Iewell affirmeth him to say , who telleth vs , that Pope Leo saith , that it is not lawfull to say vpō one day mere then one masse in one Church ; wheras S. 〈◊〉 saith , it is both lawfull , expedient , and necessary to be done . What Equiuocation then call yow this in M. Iewell ? And furthermore S. Leo in this place as supreme Bishopp , prescribeth and giueth order in Ecclesiasticall rites as yow see , to Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria , for offering and iterating the sacrifice of the Masse , wherby is euident , that in these two articles at the least of Supremacy & the Masse ( which are of the first and principall that M. Iewell setteth downe ) S. Leo was against him , and flatly for vs : so as it may please him now to leaue out of his Apostrophe , O Leo ! if we be deceaued , your haue deceaued vs , &c. And this for the first case . 41. The second case may be that of M. Iewell in the defence of the Apologie pag 131. where talking of the most excellent man Pope Celestinus that sarte in the Sea before Leo , he saith of him thus : Pope Celestinus was a Nestorian heretike ; but cyteth no Author at all for it , and the assertion is so strange , and so contrary not only to truth and reason , but also probability , as of no man he could haue spoken it more falsely and absurdly : for that it was Celestinus that condemned Nestorius , and all his heresyes : it was Celestinus , in whose place Cyrillus the Archbishop of Alexandria sate President in the third generall Councell at Ephesus , where Nestorius was accursed , and condemned . Of this Celestinus the learned Bishop Prosper , who then 〈◊〉 writeth : Nestorianae impietati praecipua Alexandrini Episcopi industria & Papae Celestini repugnat authoritas : The speciall diligence of the Bishop of Alexandria , and the Authority of Pope Celestinus resisteth the impiety of Nestorius And yet is Pope Celestinus a Nestorian . Who would say so , but M. Iewell , who careth not what he saith ? 42. The third Case is somwhat more pleasant , though no lesse malicious , for wheras it had byn obiected vnto M. Iewell for the 〈◊〉 of S. Peter , in feeding & gouerning , that Christ had said to him alone : pasce oues meas , pasce agnos meos , feed my sheepe , feed my lambes ; M. Iewell to 〈◊〉 this priuiledge , alledgeth a sentence of Christ out of S. Markes 〈◊〉 , quoted in the margent : Quod vni dico omnibus dico : What I say to one , I say to all , therby inferring that the foresaid wordes of Christ to S. Peter , as a so the other , Thou art Peter or a rocke , and vpon this rocke will I buyld my Chruch , and other such like speaches , were equally meant also of the rest , wheras in deed , Christ neuer vsed these wordes , Quod vni dico omnibus dico noris it to be 〈◊〉 out of Scripture ; but rather our Sauiour hauing made in S. Marks Ghospell a large Sermon about the day of Iudgement , and the terror therof , and exhorted all sortes of people to be watchfull , extended the same also vnto those that were absent or should liue in succeeding ages saying : Quod vobis dico , omnibus dico , vigilate . That which I say to yow heere present I speake to all both absent , & to come , be watchfull : which last words M. Iewell leaueth out of purpose , to couer and conceale the meaning of our Sauiour , and addeth of himselfe , quod vni dico , which our Sauiour hath not . And thirdly he peruerteth wholy the meaning of Christ , which was to perswade attention , and watchfulnes about the day of Iudgement , and applyeth it against the preheminence of S. Peter his Authority , which he well knew to be farre from our Sauiours meaning . And moreouer there ensueth an other most grosse absurditie , which is that our Sauiour speaking to all & euery one of them that were present , when he saith , vigilate be watchfull , it followeth ( I say ) that in M. Iewels sense , and application of his wordes , euery one to whome the word vigilate apperteyneth , which are all sortes and sexes of people both there 〈◊〉 and absent should haue as great spirituall authority ouer the Church of God , as S. Peter ; quia quod vni dico , omnibus dico , whatsoeuer I say to only Peter , to wit , that he must feede , that he is the rocke , and the like , I say to all men . And now let any indifferent man consider with what conscience M. Iewell could feigne Christ to say as he alledgeth . For either he had read the place in S. Marke which he cyteth , or had not . If not , it was great negligence , the matter , and subiect being so weighty as it was : and if he did and yet alledged it quite otherwise then there it is found , what shall we say of this 〈◊〉 dealing . What of such lying , and perfidious Equiuocation ? who in this can excuse or defend him for a man of any conscience at all . 43. And yet was he ( forsooth ) the Father and chiefe maister of all 〈◊〉 Caluinian doctrine in Englād , which was first established by Queene Elizabeth at her entring ( for that Zuinglianisme had bene only admitted in King Edwardes dayes ) & he was not only held for the chiefe preacher and teacher therof ; but for the publicke Champion also to defend it , and therfore as the doctrine was false ; so must he haue a more speciall eminent gift of cunning and falshood to beare it out , then other men , for that others were to take 〈◊〉 eius , of his fulnesse in that science . And albeit he had diuers brethren also at that time , that did participate with him of that spirite in their writings , as M. Horne Bishop of VVinchester by name , and some others ; yet were they esteemed farre inferior to M. Iewell in this point , especially in the elegancy of cōueyance , though in will and substance they might be equall . And so if yow looke vpon six hundred fourescore and ten vntruthes , which Doctor Stapleton gathered out of one worke of the said M. Horne written against Doctor Fecknam about the oath of the supremacy , yow shall fynd as many , and grosse lyes , as any lightly , of M. Iewell , but not so sleightly 〈◊〉 , nor smoothly faced out . 44. As for example where he auoucheth flatly that the cōuersion of our King 〈◊〉 of Britanie and of his whole Realme , & establishing therof was done without any knowledge or consent of Pope Eleutherius is so grosse alye , as it is refutable by all historyes from that tyme to ours ; yea by Iohn Fox & Bale themselues , who were greatest enemyes to all Popes : So as this matter was not handsomely carryed . And againe in the same worke M. Horne pretending to alledge some temporall lawyers to his purpose against the Popes Ecclesiasticall preheminence in England , cyteth one Broughton , as saying : That the king 〈◊〉 Supreme in his Kingdome , and saffereth no equall or superior ; and other such pointes which are not denyed when speach is of temporall men and affayres , and he leaueth out diuers other passages in the very same Author , and place , which he cyteth expresly , affirming that in spirituall , affayres the Pope & Bishops are to Iudge , & not temporall men , which is the very decision of the Controuersie . 45. And in this kind I might alledge an excefsiue multitude , both out of the one , & the other Bishops workes , but that the repetition therof would be ouer tedious ; albeit it fell not out , without Gods speciall prouidence in that beginning , that so notorious falsityes should be vttered and published to the world by these chiefe ring-leaders : for that sundry principall Protestants , that were curious to read these books in that 〈◊〉 entrance of heresye , were conuerted & made Catholicke by this speciall and principall motiue , that they 〈◊〉 so many notorious and inexcusable vntruthes vttered by these principall men in their writinges at that day : wherof I my selfe knew sundry , & in some other place haue named three ; one in the vniuersity of 〈◊〉 , M. VVilliam 〈◊〉 , a learned and zealous preacher of the Protestant doctrine : the other in the court , Syr Thomas Copley ( made afterward Lord by the King of France ) a great follower of my Lord of 〈◊〉 , and feruent in the new profession , as being extraordinarily well seene for a man of his calling in controuersies himself : the third in London M. Doctor Stephens Secretary to M. Iewell and well seene at that time in Deuinity and the learned tongues : all which made change of their Religion , though to their great temporal losses vpon the great auersion they tooke at the discouery of the wilfull falshood of these chiefe teachers of new Religion , whervpon the first of the aboue named three , maketh this marginall note in a booke of his written against M. Doctor VVhitaker : The incredible lying ( saith he ) and falsisication vsed by the 〈◊〉 writers of our time , are a great motiue to the Catholicke 〈◊〉 . And then in the text he declareth the matter further in these wordes . 46. I know many ( saith he ) who hauing byn brought 〈◊〉 not in Catholike Religion , but in heresie with M. 〈◊〉 and continuing a long tyme in the same , and 〈◊〉 it with all their hartes ; yet comming afterwards to better iudgement through the grace of God , vpon consideration of such lying writers , as 〈◊〉 VVhitakers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to wit , Maister 〈◊〉 , Maister Horne , &c. haue byn so altered , as they haue detested his ghospell , euen to hel gates , of which number I confesse my selfe to be one . So he . 47. And surely if we consider the speciall learning and vertu of this man , and how he had read exactly all writhers that could be gotten of the Protestants side of what sort or sect soeuer , as by his writings doth well appeare , as also with what singuler patiēce , humility , and contentement of mynd he lyued for many yeares after in voluntary banishment , and pouerty for loue of the Catholicke Religion , wheras by accommodating himselfe to the current of the tyme , he might haue receyued great prefermēt in his country , and was in the way towards them when he lefte the same ; he will say , that this motiue of lying Equiuocation in Protestant writers , had made deepe and strong impression in him in deed . And thus much for the Bishops : now let vs looke into the like spirite of Ministers in this behalfe . The vse of Equiuocating in English Protestant-Ministers . §. 4. 48. AS for this sort of men , though it might be sufficient which before we haue noted and set downe out of the writings of this one Minister T. M. for proofe of our 〈◊〉 ; yet to shew the conformity of spirit in others also of the same profession , & coate ; we shall briefly heere alledge some few more examples , and those of the chiefest English Ministers ( for to talke of forraine were infinite ) that haue writen against Catholike Religion in these our dayes . 49. And with whom in this poynt may we better begin , then with Iohn Fox himselfe ( not vnfitly called by some , the Father of lyes ) in his huge Volume of Acts and Monuments , who , as he was one of the first that tooke vpon him , in our language to set abroad the prayses of that Protestant Church by way of history , so did he by deedes leaue a document what liberty the writers of that professiō do take vnto themselues in this kynd of Equiuocation , that auoucheth falsities , well knowne to be such to the vtterer . For that not only throughout his whole worke doth he vse the same vpon euery occasion ; but euen in the very first lynes , and tytle also of his booke , promising to set downe , The continuance , and succession of his said Church , from the beginning to our dayes : but indeede neuer meant to performe any parte therof , as well knowing that he could not , as by a special Treatise hath byn these years past most euidently made manifest , & that the said Fox towards the end of his said volume was enforced to begin his broken succession , & cōtinue the same with notorious condēned heretiks from Berengarius downeward , as in that Treatise is largely declared ; & manifold exāples are layd forth of his voluntary falshood in almost infinite points by him recorded against his owne knowledge , and conscience , as may be seene in the Table or Index of that booke vnder the word Fox . 50. And finally the same Author in the end of the third parte of the said worke , doth in one Chapter conuince him of aboue an hundred and twenty wilfull lyes vttered by him in lesse then three leaues in his said Acts and Monuments , and those such , as no wayes they may be excused , eyther by ignorance , error , or other such circumstance , which before we haue touched , but must needs proceed of voluntary fraud and malice , himselfe knowing , that it was false which he related . One only exāple will I cyte heere out of all the said 120. lyes , wherby yow may make a ghesse of all the rest . 51. The Papists do teach ( * saith he ) most wickedly , and horribly , saying , 〈◊〉 Christ suffred for Originall synne , or synnes going before baptisme , but the actuall synnes which follow after baeptisme must be done away by mans merits . And this assertion of ours he putteth downe in a different letter , as though they were our owne very wordes , and sense , which is most false , for that we hold them neyther in wordes nor sense , so as the are rather two wicked , and horrible lyes of his , then any wicked , or horrible doctrine of ours . 52. For first we say not , That Christ suffered only for Originall synne , but for all synnes , both originall & actuall , precedent and subsequent after our baptisme . S. Thomas his wordes are cleere for our common doctrinè in that behalf , part . 3. q. 1. art . 4. Certum est , &c. It is certayne ( saith he ) that Christ came into the world to blot out not only originall sinne , but all sinnes , &c. And this is the common doctrine of all Deuynes amongst vs. The secōd poynt also , That actuall sinnes after baptisme cannot be done away by mans merit , but by the merits of Christ , and by the grace , and vertue of his said passion , is no lesse euident in all our writings , as you may see in S. Thomas for all 1. 2. q. 114. art . 7. where he saith : Nullus potest mereri sibi reparationem post lapsum , &c. That no man can merite his rysing againe after synne , but that it must needs proceede of the only grace of God , and merite of Christ. And the same teacheth the Councel of Trent sess . 6. cap. 14. & 16. &c. So as these are two not orious lyes , in re grauissima , in a matter of most moment , as yow see , and cannot be imputed to error , or ignorance with any probability . And of the same kynd are the other hundred and odde , which before we haue mentioned , and are vttered , as hath byn said , within the compasse of three leaues and therby we may take a scantling of Iohn Fox his Consciencie in this kind of lying equiuocation when it may make for his aduantage . And this shall suffice for the first example . 53. The second example shall be out of an other Minister , that liued ioyntly with Iohn Fox , to 〈◊〉 , Doctor Calfhill of Christs Church in Oxford , who was a speciall great defender of M. Iewells chalenge in those dayes of the primitiue English Protestant Church , to wit , That no one Doctor , no one Father , no one Councel , no one Anthority could be brought for our doctrine , &c. But when a litle after there were certaine ordinarie 〈◊〉 appointed euery Saturday in a seuerall isle of the said Colledg-Church , for triall of Controuersies , and for some 〈◊〉 of the Protestants confidence therin , those may remēber that liued in the vniuersity at that tyme , that M. Bristow , and some other 〈◊〉 students in Deuinity , repayring thither to dispute , forced M. Calfhill that was the moderator , to deny or 〈◊〉 to shifte of so many Fathers , Doctors and other ancient authorities , as most men langhed to heare it : and his owne friends were ashamed at the matter . And when a litle after he wrote a very irreligious , and prophane answere to a certaine Catholike Treatise writen by M. Martiall of the Holy Crosse of Christ ; he was oftentymes dryuen to the same follies , eyther of open reiecting , or ridiculous shifting of the same Fathers : As for example when S. Ambrose writing of the necessity of 〈◊〉 signe among Christians , and especially in Churches 〈◊〉 ; That a Church cannot stand without a Crosse , no more then a shippe without a mast , &c. He answereth that it cannot stand without a 〈◊〉 beame , or crosse 〈◊〉 , or one piece of tymber shut into another : And do yow imagine that he did think as he said ? 54. Againe in the same booke where it is obiected out of S. Athanasius words against the Gentils , That infinite miracles were wrought by the signe of the Crosse , as casting out dyuels , and the like : yea , and that S. Athanasius did prouoke the Gentils to come and make proofe therof and Christians to vse the same , saying : Vtatur signo , vt illi dicunt ridiculè , Crucis &c. Let him vse against all inchauntments the signe of the Crosse which Pagans call ridiculous , and he shall see the Diuels to be put to flight by 〈◊〉 , southsaying to cease , Magicke and poysoning destroyed , &c. So 〈◊〉 Athanasius : Whervnto Calfhill answereth thus : If yow gather ( saith he ) that the vse of the Crosse is commendable , because of myracles done ; by the same reason the 〈◊〉 and thiefe may defend and maintayne their vnlawfull doinges , because as great or greater miracles be wrought by them . So he . And do yow not thinke that he knew himselfe heere to lye , and egregiously to Equiuocate in the worst sense ? And yet 〈◊〉 wheras the ancient Father S. Cyrill writing against Iulian the Apostata , that obiected to Christians the vse of making the signe of the Crosse vpon their forheades , and setting vp the same vpon their doores , answered : That such speach of the Apostata proceeded of wicked thoughtes and sauoured so extreme ignorance , and that the said Salutare signum , healthfull signe of the Crosse ( so are his reuerend wordes ) was made by the Christians in remembrāce of Christes benefites , exhibited in his sacred 〈◊〉 , &c. M. 〈◊〉 teacheth his hearer , that this was spokē by S. Cyrill , to excuse the Christians and couer their fault , as though in deed S. Cyrill had bene of the same mynd with Iulian the Apostata and had misliked the making of that signe as he did , which is manifestly false , and a great slander to the said holy Father . And what then will yow say of this Ministers Equiuocating spirite in the worst kynd of 〈◊〉 ? 55. The third example we shall take out of the writings of Meridith Hanmer , and M. VVilliam Charke , Ministers , who being charged with a certayne pernicious doctrine 〈◊〉 Martyn Luther whom they earnestly defended , and not being other wise able to escape , vsed both of them a notorious Equiuocation in this kynd of lying : The doctrine of Luther was this , That if any woman ( saith he ) cannot , or will not proue by order of lawe the insufficiency of her husband , let her request at his hands a diuorce , or els by his consent let her priuily lye with his brother , or with some other man. And this doctrine being obiected to these two ministers , Hanmer thought best ( yow may imagine by what Equiuocation ) vtterly to deny the thing , as neuer written or spoken by Luther , inueighing greatly against Catholickes for raising such a slaunder vpō him : but Charke doubting least he should be conuinced with Luthers owne booke and Edition of VVittenberge , durst not stand to this Equiuocation , but deuised another farre worse , to wit , that Luther gaue this Counsell , when he was yet a Papist , and therfore , saith he , if any shame be in this doctrine it lighteth vpon yow and not vpon vs. 56. But two things do conuince this of a notable wilfull vntruth . The first for that the tyme and yeare being considered wherin Luther wrote this Sermon , it appeareth euidently that he had left long before the Catholicke vnion : though yet himselfe said in this place , that he remayned still with some feare and dread of Antichrist , which he meant in respect that it was yet doubtfull vnto him , whether the Protection of the Duke of Saxonie would be sufficient for his defence , against the Pope , Emperour , and other Catholicke Princes that sought to haue him punished : but when in Processe of time he perceyued in deed that he was secure , then he said he would giue other counsell . Consilium tale iam tum impertij ( saith he ) cum adhuc me detineret pauor Antichristi ; nunc verò secùs longè animus esset . I gaue such Counsell , when I was yet vnder some feare of Antichrist ; but now my mynd should be to giue farre other counsell . And heere VVilliam Charke breaketh of , and leaueth out the wordes of Luther that immediatly follow , and do solue the case , which are these : Talique marito , qui adeò mulierem deludat dolis , vehementius * lanificium , immissa manu , conuellerem , &c. That laying my handes vpon the lockes of such a husband , that should so craftily deceyue a woman , I would vehemently shake or pull him by the lockes . So he . And what will yow say now of the craftie Equiuocation of these two Ministers ? which of them had least conscience , either he that knowing it to be so , yet denyed that Luther had any such wordes , or the other that confessing the wordes , wittingly peruerted the sense , by cutting of that which should make all cleare ? 57. And I might cyte also an other like deceiptfull Equiuocation of VVilliam Charke , not farre from the same place , where being pressed with sundry arguments that proue concupiscence in the regenerate , to be no sinne , if consent be not giuen thervnto , and namely by the Authority of S. Augustine , saying : Concupiscentia non est peccatum , quando illi , ad illicita opera , non consentitur ; Concupiscence is not sinne , when consent is not giuen thervnto , for working thinges that be vnlawfull ; he to auoyd this authority of S. Augustine , forgeth a place of the same Doctor to the contrarie , thus : S. Augustines place ( saith he ) is expounded by himselfe afterward , where he saith , Concupiscence is not so forgiuen in baptisme , that it is not sinne ; but that it is not imputed as sinne : and cyteth for his proofe the same booke of S. Augustine De nuptiis & concupiscentia . Cap. 23. & 25. But if yow looke vpon the places , yow shall fynd that the Minister hath heere of his owne foysted in the chiefe word , that maketh or marreth all , to wit , peccatum , sinne , for that S. Augustines wordes are these : Ad haec respondetur , dimitti concupiscentiam carnis in baptismo , non vt non sit : sed vt in peccatum non imputetur , quamuis reatu suo iam soluto , maret tamen , &c. To this is answered ( saith S. Augustine ) that the Cōcupiscence of the flesh is forgiuen in baptisme , not so that it is not : ( or remayneth not ) but that it is not imputed vnto sinne , it remayneth still though the guylt therof be taken away . So he . And was not this a subtile Equiuocation to make in a trice S. Augustine to be contrary to himselfe . 58. The fourth example shall be of an other Minister VVilliam Perkins , who though he wrote since the other , yet in diuer , points hath he out-gone them , as well in this of false Equiuocation , as in the deepe humour of phantasy , by which he hath writen and published many bookes with strāge tytles , some of them conteyning matter , that neyther he , nor his reader ( I 〈◊〉 say ) do vnderstand , as namely about the Concatenation or tying together of causes of mans prodestination or reprobation , and the like : but among other his pretiest fancy was , to write a booke calling it , Areformed Catholicke , which was in deed that which by Logitians is tearmed Implicatioin adiecto , An implicancy or contradiction of the one word to the other , for that he which is a Catholicke ( if we speake of 〈◊〉 belonging to doctrine and beliefe , and not to manners ) cannot be reformed , the essence of Catholicke Religion consisting in this , that all and euery point of the receyued Christian faith be belieued and nothing more , or lesse , so as if any point must be added , taken away , altered or reformed , it is not Catholicke , and consequently A reformed Catholicke in matters of faith must needs be A deformed Catholicke , such a 〈◊〉 , as Perkins in deed describeth , that admitteth one , two , three , foure more or lesse points of the common Catholicke receaued Religion : and yet starteth from the fifth or sixt , as himselfe best liketh , and this calleth Perkins A reformed Catholicke , when the belieuer chooseth to belieue , or leaue what points do please him best : which choise we say , is properly heresy , for that an Hereticke is a Chooser , as the Greeke word importeth : and this heresy or choice in matters of beliefe doth Perkins professe to teach his hearer , saying : That he will shew them how neare they may come vnto the Romane faith , and yet not iumpe with it , which is a doctrine common to all hereticks , and heresies that euer were , for that all haue agreed with the Catholicke faith in some points , for that otherwise it should be Apostacy and not heresy if they denyed all : yea the Turkes and Mores at this day do hold some points of Christian Religion with the Catholickes ; but for that neither they nor heretickes do hold all , therfore they are no true Catholickes , but such Reformed Catholickes as VVilliam Perkins would teach his disciples to be , to wit , properly Heretikes by their choise of religion . 59. And to the end we may see not only the mans folly in choosing his argument , but his falshood also in prosecuting the same , I shall lay forth one only example out of his very first Chapter that beginneth with his ordinary argument of the VVhore of Babylon , and by this one example , let the reader iudge , whether he be not a fit Chaplyn for that honest woman , iflying , cosenage , and calumniation be propertyes of her profession . For that hauing spent many impertinent wordes to shew that the impieties prophesied by S. Iohn of the said VVhore of Babylon , and Saincts of God to be slayne by her ; was not meant of the persecution of Rome vnder the Pagan Emperors , but of the Church of Rome now vnder the Christian Bishopps and Popes , he hath these wordes . 60. This exposition ( saith he ) of the Apocalips besydes the Authority of the text , hath also the fauour and defence of ancient and learned men : Bernard saith , They are the Ministers of Christ , but they serue Antichrist . And againe , the beast spoken of in the Apocalips to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies , and to make warre with the Saints of God , is now gotten into Peters Chaire as a lyon prepared to his pray . It wil be said , that Bernard speaketh these later wordes of one that came to the Popedome by intrusion , or vsurpation . It is true in deed , but wherfore was he an vsurper . He rendreth a reason therof in the same place : bycause the Antipope called Innocētius , was chosen by the Kings of Alemaine , France , England , Scotland , Spaine , Hierusalem , with consent of the whole Clergy and people in these nations , and the other was not . And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict , that not only this vsurper , but all the Popes for this many yeares are the beast in the Apocalips , because now they are only chosen by the Colledg of Cardinals , &c. Thus he . 61. And now how many 〈◊〉 decepts , and falsities there be in this litle narration is easie for any man to see , admyre , and detest that will but looke vpō the places of S. Bernard by himselfe quoted . For in the first place out of his 33. Sermon vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he saith : They are the Ministers of Christ , but do serue Antichrist , he speaketh against the vices of the Clergy , especially of France where he liued in his dayes . And that it is not meant particulerly of the pope , S. Bernardes owne words do shew in that ve y place , saying : They will be and are Prelates of Churches , Deanes , Archdeacons , Bishopps , & Archbishopps : so as this is falsely brought in to proue any speciall thing against Rome , or the Pope , and much more wickedly alledged to proue Perkins his exposition of the Apocalips , against Christian Rome to be true in S. Bernardes sense , which he neuer thought of , or by any least cogitation admitted , as by the whole course of his writings to the contrary is euident : no man more extolling the dignity of the Pope , and Sea of Rome , then he , euen then , when most he reprehendeth euill lyfe and manners . 62. But the other that followeth is much more fraudulenty alledged : For if S. Bernard complained greatly that in his tyme one Petrus Leonis , an vsurper and Antipope , being chosen by the 〈◊〉 lesse number of Cardinals voyces , did by violence notwithstanding thrust himselfe into the Chaire of Peter , and playe therin the parte of Antichrist , what was this in preiudice of the true Pope Innocentius the second , whome Saint Bernard doth call Christs Vicar , and highly commendeth him as lawfully chosen by the maior part of the Colledge of Cardinals , and exhorteth all Christian Kings to obey and follow him , as their high and true lawfull vniuersall pastor ? So as heere 〈◊〉 Perkins maketh a notorious lye in saying , that Innocentius by S. Bernards iudgement was an Antipope , wheras he proued him expresly in the places heere alleadged to be the true Pope and Vicar of Christ , and Petrus 〈◊〉 to be the Antipope . Numquid ( saith he ) non omnes Principes cognouerunt , quia ipse est verè Dei electus ? Francorum , Anglorum , Hispanorum , & postremò Romanorum Rex Innocentium in Papam suscipiunt & recognoscunt 〈◊〉 Episcopum animarum suarum ? Do not all Princes know , that Innocentius is truly the elected of God ? The Kinges of France , England , Spaine , and 〈◊〉 do receyue Innocentius for Pope , and do acknowledge him to be the singular Bishop of their soules . 63. Secondly he lyeth much more apparantly , when he saith , that Innocentius was chosen by the said Kings of Alemaine , France , England , &c. wheras S. Bernard saith not that he was chosen by them , but that he was accepted , followed , & obeyed by them , as true Pope after his election : Alemaniae ( saith he ) Angliae , Franciae , Scotiae , Hispaniarum & 〈◊〉 Reges cum vniuerso clero & populis fauent , & adhaerent Domino Innocentio , tanquam filij Patri tanquam capiti membra . The Kings of Germany , France , England , Scotland , Spaine , and Hierusalem togeather with their whole Clergy and people do fauour , and adhere to Pope 〈◊〉 ( he doth not say they choose him ) as children to their Father , and as members to their head . 64. Thirdly , Perkins lyeth most desperately of all in his last conclusion , 〈◊〉 : And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict , that not only this vsurper , but that all the Popes for 〈◊〉 many yeares are the beast in the 〈◊〉 , because now they are only chosen by the Colledge of Cardinals . This ( I say ) is a notorious lye ; for that S. Bernard giueth no such verdict , but alloweth well the election of Innocentius by the said Cardinals , saying : Meritò autem illum 〈◊〉 Ecclesia , cuius & opinio clarior , & electio sanior inuenta est . nimirum 〈◊〉 & numero vincens , & merito : Worthily doth the Church admit him ( to wit Innocentius ) whose estimatiō is more renowned , & whose election is found to be more lawfull as passing the others election both in number and merit of the choosers . And so in these few lynes we see how many wilfull lyes , and falsifications this Minister hath vsed , which cannot be excused , eyther by ouersight , ignorance , or error , but must needs be ascribed to wilfull malice , and expresse purpose of deceyuing his hearer . And so though I might alledge diuers other places to like effect , yet this shall 〈◊〉 for one example ; yea for all them of that sorte in this behalfe . For albeit examples without number may be alleaged out of these mens workes : yet by these few , 〈◊〉 may be made of the rest . I shall therfore adioyne some three or foure examples more of lay-men , to shew the conformity of their spirits to their spiritual guydes , and so make an end . The vse of Equiuocation in Lay-men and Knightes . §. 5. 65. OF this sorte of men I will alledge only three in this place that in these later dayes haue written against Catholicke Religion ; but yet such as are more eminent amōg the rest , they being Knightes all three , whose honorable condition , & state of calling , ought to haue obliged them to defence of truth , and that also by true meanes , and not by sleightes of this worst kynde of Equiuocation , as heer yow shall see them doe . The first is Sir Francis Hastings that wrote the iniurious VVatchword some yeares past , aga nst Catholickes : The second is Sir Philip Mornay , Lord of Plessis , that hath written many workes much respected by those of his partiality in Religion . The third is Syr Edward Cooke late Attorney of his Maiesty , now a Iudge , and writer against Catholicks . And albeit the second be a French-man borne , yet for that he hath liued much in England , and wrote some of his bookes there , and all or most parte of them are 〈◊〉 to be in the English language , I may well accompanie him with English Knightes in this behalfe . 66. For the first then which is Syr Francis , I may be the briefer with him , for that his aduersarie , or Antagonist hath in his Answers to the said VVatchword , and Apologie therof , often put him in mynd of his 〈◊〉 against truth , euen then , when himselfe must needs know it to be so , and consequently , that it was not only voluntarie , but witting also and wilfull 〈◊〉 , wherof I might alledge many particulars , but two or three shall be ynough for a tast . 67. In his defence of the VVatch-word pag. 74. he treating against the abuse of pardons , auoucheth out of sundry Chronicles , as he saith , the storie of the poysoning of King Iohn by a Monke named Symon , and this vpon dispensatiō first obteyned of his Abbot to do the fact without sinne , which historie being taken by him out of Iohn Fox his Actes and Monumentes , who affirmeth that most of the ancient Historiographers of our Country do agree in this matter , both of them are conuinced of wilful vntruthes , for that they could not be ignorant , but that of all the old Historiographers that liued in the time of King Iohn , or within two hundred yeares after , no one did euer affirme the same , but rather the quite contrarie , setting downe other particuler causes & occasions of King Iohns death . And further they could not but know , and haue read Iohn Stowes Chronicle printed anno . 1592. who hauing made diligent search about this matter , out of all authors of antiquity , could fynd no such thing : and so he testifyeth in these wordes . Thus ( saith he ) haue I set downe the life and death ( though much abbreuiated ) of King Iohn , according to the writinges of Roger 〈◊〉 , Roger Houeden , Rad. Niger , Rad. Cogshall , Matthew Paris , and others , who all lyued when the King raigned , and wrote for that tyme what they saw or heard credibly reported &c. 68. Now then if this Chronicle of Stow was out , and in euery mans hand some yeares before Syr Francis wrote his VVatchword , and that hereby is euident according to all ancient writers , that the foresaid poysoning of King Iohn by a monke , was neither written , nor reported by any in those dayes ; with what Conscience could 〈◊〉 Francis and Fox alledge the 〈◊〉 againe 〈◊〉 a truth ? Was not heere wilfull deceipt , nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will and desire of deceauing ? 69. The same is layed against Syr Francis in cyting of sundry others as namely the Authority of S. Hierome , for proofe of common prayer in a vulgar tongue , Tota Ecclesia ( saith S. Hierome ) instar tonitruireboat Amen , The whole Church like a mighty thunder doth sound out 〈◊〉 , inferring therof that all by liklyhood did vnderstand the language wherin publicke seruice was then celebrated , for that otherwise they could not so answere : But marke the fraudes that are in this allegation . First the Knight doth not explicate in particuler what Church it was wherof S. Hierome spake , nor vpon what occasion , nor to whome , and secondly he doth conceale the wordes ' that immediatly went before & followed after , for that they made al against him . For first S. Hierome spake of the Church of Rome in particuler , where the latin tongue being in vse so commonly in his dayes , that it was , as it were , their naturall language , no maruaile though the common people could sound out Amen , they vnderstanding for the most parte the latin tongue : for we see also that in other Catholicke Countryes where the latin tongue is not so commonly in vse , the common people by vse and practice can , and do with common voyce sound out Amen in Letanies , and other partes of latin seruice ; wherfore this circumstance was fraudulently concealed . 70. As that other was in like manner , that S. Hierome wrote these wordes vnto two vowed virgins , Paula , and Eustochium , to whom he dedicated his said second booke of his Commentaries vpon the Epistle to the Galathians , commending vnto them the faith and deuotiō of the Church of Rome aboue other Churches , and yeelding a reason why the Apostle S. Paul did so highly commend the Roman Christians in his time , both for their faith and obedience , saying of the first : I do giue thankes to my God by Iesus Christ for yow all , sor that your faith is divulged throughout the whole world : and in the end of the same Epistle , he saith of their obedience in liuing according to their faith : Your obedience is divulged into euery place of the world , wherfore I take ioy in yow , &c. Vpon which testimony of the Apostle S. Hierome writeth thus : Romanae plebis laudatur 〈◊〉 , &c. The faith of the Roman people is praysed by the Apostle , for in what other place of the world is there such cōtinuall concourse vnto Churches , and vnto the Sepulchers of Martyrs as in Rome ? In what place do they so sound out the word Amen , to the likenesse of a certayne heauenly thunder ? Not for that the Romanes haue any other faith , but that which all Christian Churches haue , but only that there is greater deuotion in them , and greater simplicity to beleeue . 71. These are S. Hieroms wordes , which if Syr Francis had set downe wholy and simply as the lye in him , he saw how they would make against him in diuers poynts , and therfore he willingly and wittingly cut of both the beginning and ending , as yow haue heard , & applied the midst to a wrong sense , neuer thought of by the Author himselfe . And the same is proued against him in the allegation of many other Authors , as of S. Augustine pag. 18. of S. Bede , and Arnobius pag. 34. & 35. and of S. Chrysostome pag. 52. all to one end corruptly and fraudulently alleadged for some shew of proofe that publike seruice ought to be in vulgar tongues only : which yet being truly examined make nothing for his purpose , but quite contrary . And thus much in this place for the first Knight . 72. As concerning the second Knight Syr Philip Mornay his case is notorious , that hauing published a great booke full of authorities against the Masse vpon the yeare 1599. seeming to shew great learning therin , the same was fond afterward to be so full of deceipts and wilfull falsifications , as a very learned man Monsieur Peron then Bishop of Eureux , and now Cardinall made publike offer to proue aboue fiue hundred such wilfull falsifications to be in that booke , requesting also , by humble suite , his Maiesty of France to command publike triall with his presence , as at length it was effectuated in the presence of the King and great parte of his 〈◊〉 , and other learned men on both sides , vpon the yeare 1600. and 4. of May , as appeareth both by the Kings owne letter extant in print , as also by the publike Acts set forth by the approbation of the said King and his Counsell . 73. In this Conserence of tryall , fiue hundred wilfull falsifications being obiected , as I said , to this Knight , and when the tyme grew neere , three score 〈◊〉 exhibited vnto him by the said Bishop out of which to make his choise for the first dayes tryall , the said Syr Philip Mornay choise 19. of those , which he thought himselfe best able to defend or excuse , and of this number also he placed in the first ranke such as seemed to him to be of least enormity , wherof notwithstāding , the straitnes of tyme permitting only 9. to be handled , he was conuinced publikely in all , and euery one of them , and had sentence geuen against him , by the Iudges , as well Protestants chosen of his side , as the other that were of the Bishops Religion : the summe wherof I shall briefly touch in this place . 74. The first was that he had falsified the Schole-Doctor Ioannes Scotus , alleadging him as though he had doubted of the Reall-presence , for that hauing proposed the question , whether Christ were really in the Sacrament , vnder the formes of bread and wyne , he did according to the fashion of Scholes , make arguments to the contrary , saying : Videtur quòd non , it seemeth that he is not so there , for these and these reasons , which afterwards he solueth and holdeth the contrary position for true , and Catholike , to wit , that Christs body is really there , wherupon the sentence of the Iudges was , that Mōsieur Plessis in this matter had taken the obiection of Scotus for his resolution . 75. The second falsification wherof he was conuinced was that he had alledged Bishop Durandus an other Scholasticall Author very fraudulently about the controuersie of Transubstantiation , affirming him to say , and hold for his owne position that which he cyteth only as an obiection out of an other , and answereth the same . The third and fourth falsifications were , that he had corrupted plainly S. Chrysostome in two seuerall places by him alledged about prayer for the dead , producing two particuler testimonyes out of him quite contrary to his owne meaning , and expresse wordes . The fifth was out of S. Hierome about praying to Saints . The sixth out of S. Cyrill about honouring the holy Crosse. The seauenth out of the Code or Imperiall lawes about painting or keruing the signe of the said Crosse. The eight out of S. Bernard about honouring our blessed Lady . The ninth and last of an authority of Theodorete about Images . 76. All which places being diligently examined , and Syr Philipp Mornay suffred to say , and alledge what he could for his defence or euasion , he was conuinced manifestly by the said Bishop of Eureux , and sentenced by all the Iudges to haue committed falfification , and vntrue dealing in them all . And the like would the said Bishop haue shewed , & declared in all the rest to the number of fiue hundred , if the said Mornay could haue byn brought to haue continued the combat , which he would not , as yow may see in the said publike Acts printed in French vpon the yeare 1601. with approbation of the King himselfe . And he that will see more particulers of this in the English tōgue , may read a Treatise , or relation therof set forth in the yeare 1604. taken out of the foresaid French publike Acts of the said tryall . And so this shall serue for this French Knight , wherby yow may see the conformity of spirit in them all , when occasion is offered to Equiuocate in the worst sense . 77. Our last example then shall be of S. Edward Cooke lately the Kings Attorney , who hauing taken vpon him these yeares past to be both a sharpe writer , and earnest actor against Catholiks , seemeth therwith to haue drunke also of this spirite in such aboundant measure , as he is like in tyme to ouer-runne all the rest , if he go forward , as he hath begonne . For that being admonished not long agoe by one that answered his last booke of Reportes , of diuers notorious his excesses committed in this kind , he is ( men say ) so farre of from correcting , or amēding the same , as he hath not only in a late large declamatiō against Catholicks in a charge giuē by him at Norwich repeated and auouched againe the same excesses , but hath 〈◊〉 others also therunto of much more apparant falsity . As for example , he was admonished among other points , that it was a notorious vntruth , which he had writen and printed , that for the first ten yeares of Queene Elizabeths raigne no one person of what religion , or sect so euer did refuse to go to the Protestants Church and seruice ; which the Answerer confuteth so clearly , and by so many witnesses , as a man would haue thought that the matter would neuer haue byn mencioned more for very shame ; and yet now ( they say ) that the Attorney being made a Iudge , hath not only repeated the same , but auouched it also againe with such asseueration in his foresaid Charge , as if it had neuer byn controlled , or proued false . 78. Nay further they write , that he adioyned with like asseueration diuers other things no lesse apparātly false then this : as for example , that Pope Pius Quintus before he proceeded to any Ecclesiasticall Censure against Q Elizabeth , wrote vnto her a letter , offering to allow and ratifie the English Seruice , Bible , and Communion-booke , as now it is in vse in that Kingdome , if she would accept it as from him , which she refusing to do , he did excommunicate her ; by which tale he acquitteth notwithstanding Catholicks ( if yow marke it ) from procuring that excommunication for rebelliō , which els where he often obiecteth most odiously against them . For if vpon this cause she were excommunicated , what parte had Ca holicks therin ? But yet I must needs say , that the sictiō is one of the most vnlikely things . and the most impossible in morall reason , that any man can deuise . For that Pope Pius Quintus , albeit some man would imagine him to be so good a fellow as to care for no religion ( who is knowne to haue byn most zealous ) yet had he aduentured his Popedome by making such an offer , for he should haue allowed of diuers points in the Communion-booke , which are held by the Catholike Church for heresy , and so condemned by the Councell of Trent , and other Councels : and now yow know it is a ground among vs , that a Pope that should be an hereticke , or approuer of heresie , therby ceaseth to be Pope ; how improbable then is this of Pius Quintus his offer . And why had not this letter in so many yeares byn published to the world for the credit of rhe English seruice , and discredit of the Popes ? And yet the voice is , that the Lord Cooke did so earnestly auouch this matter , as he pawned therin not only his credit & honesty bv expresse termes of protestation : but euen his faith also to God and man : A great aduenture no doubt . And for that I assure my selfe 〈◊〉 the greater parte of the auditory being discreet men , did imagine it to be quite false , as I , and others in effect do know it to be ; it must needs be a great blemish to my Lordes credit at the beginning of his Iudgeship , that in other thinges also he be not belieued . 79. But I vnderstand that the booke of this speach , or charge now printed is expected shortly togeather with some other appertayning to the same man , and then it may be that some body will examine matters more particulerly ( especially those that appertayne to the iniuring of Catholickes ) and afterward returne with the aggreuances to the Iudge himselfe ( seing he is now a Iudge ) to giue sentence of his owne ouersightes : albeit I must confesse that as well my selfe , as diuers other men haue lost great hope of his Lordship by this accident , for before we did thinke that his ouerlashing in speaches when he was Attorney did proceed in great parte of the liberty of that office , and that when he came to be iudge he would reforme his conscience ratione status , in regard of his state of life ; but now it seemeth that he is farre worse , though this ( I say ) shal be lefte by me to others to be discussed vpon the sight of the foresaid printed bookes . 80. My speach at this time shall be only about that which passed in his booke of Reportes , while he was Attorney , and which hath byn disputed these monethes past betweene him , and a Catholicke Deuine of our partie , in his answere to the said Reportes , which answere is in England . And albeit therby may easely be seene the talent which M. Attorney had while he was Attorney in this kynd of worst Equiuocation ( notwithstanding his often declamations against the other sorte , that with due circumstances we haue proued to be lawfull : ) yet will I heere adioyne one example more , but such a one as is worth the noting , & bearing away . And it is this . 81. That wheras in answering of dyuers lawes , 〈◊〉 and ordinances which the Attorney alledged out of the raignes of sundry ancient Kinges , to proue that they did exercise spirituall authority , and iurisdiction , the Deuine somtymes not hauing the law-bookes by him , out of which the said lawes or authorityes were cyted , supposing the allegations to be ordinarily true ( for who would suspect lawyers to be false in their cytations , that were wont to be accompted most exact in that point ) did answere the same with that sincerity of truth and reason , as to a man of his profession appertayned , though somtymes also he was forced to suspect some fraud , and thervpon requested such as had commodity in England to see the bookes , that they would pervse the places , and take them out verbatim , which some haue done , and haue found such store of Equiuocations , and false dealing in the alleadging therof , as neuer could be imagined in a man of his calling . I shall only set downe one example and it shall be the first that is cyted by him in the whole booke , to wit , of the Charter of King Kenulphus of the VVest-Saxons , vnto the Abbey of Abindon in Barkeshyre , which Charter M. Attorney set downe with this preface : To confirme ( saith he ) those that hold the truth , and to satisfie such as being not instructed know not the ancient , and moderne lawes , &c. these few demonstratiue proofes shall serue . 82. And then beginneth he with the said Charter of King Kenulphus before the Conquest , meaning to proue therby that the said King did giue vnto the said Abbey of Abindon spirituall Iurisdiction , by vertue of his temporall Crowne , exempting the same from all Authority of the Bishop , which in deed was done by the Pope , and so the Charter it selfe doth plainly expresse , if it had byn truly related by M. Attorney . And for that the Case is not long , I shall set it downe verbatim , as the Attorney hath it in his booke pag. 9. only putting into English that which is recyted by him in latin , and left without any translation to make the matter more obscure : and then shall wee lay forth also the true case wherby will be seene how true a dealer M. Attorney is in those his writinges , and protestations , which after we shall more largely consider of . Thus then beginneth the Charter . 83 Kenulphus Rex &c. per literas suas patentes , consilio , & consensu Episcoporum , & Senatorum gentis suae , largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark . & cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij &c. quandam ruris sui portionem , id est , quindecim mansias , in loco qui à ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad eandem pertinentibus-tam in magnis , quam in modic is rebus , in aeternam haereditatem . Et quod praedictus Kuchinus , &c. ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus : vt inhabitatores eius nullius Episcopi , aut suorum officialium iugo inde deprimantur ; sed in cunctis rerum euentibus & discussionibus causarum , Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijciantur , ita quod , &c. Thus goeth the Charter as M. Attorney alleageth it , which in English is as followeth . 84. King Kenulphus , &c. by his letters patentes with the counsell , and consent of the Bishops , and Counsellours of his nation , did giue to the 〈◊〉 of Abindon in Barkshire , and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that Monastery , a certayne portiō of his land , to wit , fifteene Mansians , in a place called by the country-men Culnam , with all profittes , and commodityes great and small , appertayning thervnto for euerlasting inheritance . And that the foresaid Ruchinus , &c. should be quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer ; so as the inhabitantes of that place , shall not be depressed for the tyme to come by the yoke of any Bishop , or his officers , but that in all euentes of thinges and controuersyes of causes , they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said Monastery : so as , &c. And then doth M. Attorney continue his speach thus : This Charter was pleaded in 1. H. 7. and vouched by Stanford , as at large appeareth ; which Charter graunted aboue . 850. yeares sithence , was after confirmed per Eduinum Britaniae Anglorum Regem & Monarcham anno Domini . 955. by which appeareth , that the King by this Charter , made in Parliament , ( for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell , and consent of his Bishops , & Senators of his Kingdome , which were assembled in * Parlament ) did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop &c. And by the same Charter did grant to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction within his said Abbey : which Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being * deriued from the Crowne , continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of King Henry the eight . So he . 85. And by this yow may see what an important conclusion he doth inferre of the Kinges supreme iurisdiction in spirituall affayres at that time . Whervnto the Deuine comming to answere , and supposing that M. Attorney would not falsity or belye his Authors , hauing protested most solemnly fol. 40. of his his booke , that he had cyted truly the very wordes , and textes of the lawes , resolutions , iudgmentes , and actes of Parlament , all publicke , and in print , without any inference , argument , or amplification , quoting particularly the bookes , yeares , leaues , Chapters , and other such like certayne references , as euery man at his pleasure may see and read them , &c. The answerer I say ) hearing this formall protestation , and supposing besides that the man would haue some respect to his credit and honour in this behalfe , granting all as it lay , answered the same , as yow may see in his booke : but now vpon better search , it falleth out , that this whole 〈◊〉 was falsely alledged by M. Attorney in the very point of the principall controuersy in hand about the Kinges spiritual Iurisdiction , for that whatsoeuer the Charter did ascribe expresly to the Pope , & his Authority , the Attorney suppressing the true wordes , relateth it , as proceeding from the King , & temporall authority of his Crowne . For proofe wherof I shall set downe the very wordes of my learned friends letter out of England about this point , after view taken of the law-bookes themselues , and then let any man say how farre M Attorney is to be credited in any thing he writeth , or speaketh against Catholickes . 86. As concerning ( saith he ) the Charter of King Kenulphus for the Sanctuary of the Monastery of Abindon , yow must know that M. Attorney hath egregiously abused his Reader in that and other points . For the Case standeth thus . That in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. Humphrey Stafford was attainted by Act of Parlament of high 〈◊〉 , and tooke Sanctuary first in Colchester in Essex , & after fled to Culnam , and tooke Sanctuary in the Abbey of Abindon , and being taken from thence brought vnto the Tower of London , & from thence brought vnto the Kings-bench , he pleaded , that he was drawne by force out of the said Sanctuary of Culnam , and prayed his Counsell to plead that poynt , which by all the Iudges of both benches was graunted vnto him . And so they pleaded in this manner 87. Idem Humphridus per Consilium suum dixit , quod Kenulphus Rex Merciorum , per litteras suas patentes , consilio & consensu Episcoporum & Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit Monasterio de Abindon , ac cuidam Ruchino tunc Abbati Monasterij illius , quandam ruris sui portionem , id est , quindecim Mansias in loco qui a ruricolis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam , cum omnibus vtilitatibus ad 〈◊〉 pertinentibus , tam in magnis quàm in modicis rebus in aeternam haereditatem . Et quod praedictus Ruchinus ab omni Regis obstaculo , & Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus , vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis aut ministrorum suorum , Episcopiue , aut suorum Officialium iugo inde deprimerentur , sed in cunctis rerum euentibus , & discussionibus causarum Abbatis Monasterij praedicti decreto subijcerentur . 〈◊〉 quod , &c. And heere ceaseth M. Attorney leauing out as yow see in his recitall , the wordes that go before , ab omni Regis obstaculo , &c. that the monastery should be free from all obstacle of the King , as also these wordes , vt inhabitatores eius nullius Regis , aut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deprimantur , that the inhabitants be not opprest with any yoke of any King or his ministers . wherby is euident that the King in his Charter did for his part giue exemptions from temporall & royall power : but especially the fraude is seen by cutting of the wordes that do ensue , which decyde the whole controuersy , which are these : Et etiam allegauit vltra quod Leo tunc Papa concessit dicto Abbati dictas 〈◊〉 , & 〈◊〉 . Et quod Eduinus tunc Britaniae Anglorum Rex , & Monarchus concessit , quod praefatum Monasterium omnis terrenae seruitutis esset liberum , quae 〈◊〉 praedecessoribus suis Catholicis , videlicet à dicto Sancto Leone Papa & dicto Rege Kenulpho &c. Et quod virtute litter arum & bullarum praedictarum , & tempore confectionis earundem , eadem villa de Culnam fuit Sanctuarium , & locus priuilegiatus &c. Which in English is thus . And moreouer the said Humphrey Stafford by his Counsell alledged furthet for himselfe , that Pope Leo had graunted vnto the said Abbot the said immunityes and priuiledges , & that K. Edwin then King & monarch ouer all the English in Britany had graunted that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude , which by his Catholike predecessors , to wit , the said holy Pope 〈◊〉 , & the said King Kenulphus , was graunted ; and that at the tyme of the making of the foresaid letters patentes and Bulles , the said village or towne of Culnam was a Sanctuary , and priuiledged place by vertue of the said patents and Bulles . 88. This is word for word the very plea of Humphrey Stafford for the Sāctuary of the Monastery of Abindon , as it was pleaded by his learned Counsell in law , euen as it is recorded in the reportes of the yeares of King Henry the seauenth , as they are printed by Pinson the law-printer in the tyme of King Henry the eight before the Protestant religion came vp . And the Lord Brooke in his Abridgement of the law , in the tytle of Corone , placito 129. doth accordingly sett downe the same case , with mencyoning of the Bulles of Pope 〈◊〉 for the said immunities and priuiledges . But all the Protestant editions in the tyme of the late Queene Elizabeth printed by Tottell and 〈◊〉 - wert haue committed a notable tricke of falsificatiō in leauing out altogeathcr these markable wordes : That Leo then Pope did graunt the said immunityes , and priuiledges , and also those wordes of King Edwyn , which of his Catholike 〈◊〉 S. Leo & King Kenulphus were granted , &c. And againe , By force of the letters , and Bulles aforesaid the said village of Culnam was a Sanctuary , and place priuiledged . 89. And hereby allois euident that the King did not by his Charter in Parliament ( for it appeareth to be made by the Counsell and consent of his Bishops and Senators & not by Parlament , as M. Attorney doth misreport it ) neyther was there any Parlament held at that tyme in the land , or many hundred yeares after ( for as it appeareth by Holinsheds Cronicle pag. 34. the first vse of Parlament in England was in the tyme of King Henry the first ) it is cleare ( I say ) that the King did not discharge and exempt the said Abbot from Iurisdiction of the Bishop , nor did graunt vnto the said Abbot Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within the said Abbey , neyther had that Abbot any Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction deriued from the Crowne : But as it appeareth by the authenticke reporte of the Case , the Pope and the King did both ioyne in making the said Sanctuary , according vnto their seuerall powers & authorityes . So that the exemption from Episcopall Iurisdiction did proceed duely from the graunt of Pope Leo ; as likewise the exemption from all regall and temporall Iurisdiction proceed from the Charter of King Kenulphus . Note also that King Edwins grant was only that the said Monastery should be free from all earthly seruitude , and toucheth not any spirituall immunities , or iurisdiction at all . 90. Thus farre my friend out of England . And by this now yow may see how well M. Attorney hath obserued his foresaid protestation , that he had cyted the very wordes , and textes of the lawes , without any inference , argumēt , or amplification at all . And this being my friends aduertisement from England , with like obseruation of many other places cyted by M. Attorney , with like fidelity , I thought good to produce this one amongst many ( being the first in order ) for a taste in this place , reseruing the rest to a fitter , or at leastwise to a second Edition of the foresaid answere of the Catholicke Deuyne , where euery thing may be referred to his due place . And with this will I end both this Chapter and the whole Booke . THE CONCLVSION OF THE VVHOLE VVORKE , VVith a briefe exhortation vnto Catholickes , not to use the liberty of Equiuocation , euen in lawfull cases , but where some urgent occasion induceth them therunto . CHAP. XIII . AND now , gentle reader , hauing brought this Treatise to an end , and iustified ( as I hope ) our Catholicke doctrine in the eyes and Iudgments of all indifferent men , from the two odious imputations of Rebellion and Equiuocation , iniuriouslie cast vpon the same by the malice of Thomas Morton ; there remayneth nothing , but that I conclude this our small labour , with an exhortation to all Catholicke people , not only to abstayne from the first , which is vtterly vnlawfull ( I meane the attempting of any thing contrary to their loyall dutyes in subiection , be their pressures neuer so great : ) but also from the practice , and frequent vse of the second , though in some cases most lawfull as abundantly hath byn 〈◊〉 ; except some vrgent occasion , or obligation , either of defence of innocency , secresy , right , iustice , or the auoyding of open wrong , do force them to the contrary . For as the holy Apostle in two seuerall places affirmeth to the Corinthians in cases not much vnlike to this about matter of scandall : Omnia mihi licent , sed non omnia expediunt : All thinges are lawfull vnto me ( touching meates , and other such thinges ) but all are not expedient to be practised . And againe : Omnia 〈◊〉 licent , sed non omnia edificant ; All things are lawfull vnto me , but all things do not edifye : So I say in this case , that albeit a man may without breach of truth , or offence of almighty God in certayne cases , equiuocate , or vse a doubtfull speach for a good and necessary end , either in oath , or out of oath , though the hearer doe not alwayes vnderstand it , or be deceyued therwith , and that many holy men haue done the same , yea Christ himselfe , that is the example , and paterne of all holinesse and truth in speach , as by many examples before at large hath byn declared : yet considering the tymes , and condition therof , wherin Catholicks at this day liue in England , the offence , and scandall which Protestants , and some others , that vnderstand not the lawfulnes therof , or will not vnderstand the same , do receyue , or raise thervpon ; my wish and counsell to Catholickes should be to vse the benefit of this liberty most sparingly euen in lawfull thinges , and neuer but vpon great and vrgent 〈◊〉 , and occasions . 2. And the reasons of this my wish and counsell are principally the two already touched : The one the auoyding of scandall euen with the Aduersary himself : and that as Catholicke Religion is the only true in doctrine , so the practice also therof in conuersation ; should not only be in all truth , and sincerity re ipsa , in very deed ; but in opinion likewise , and estimation of others , in so much as the word of a Catholicke man ought to weigh more then the oath of an other , and the oath , or promise of a Catholicke , more then any band , or obligation of an other , which for the most parte I doubt not , but is so already taken in England . For that albeit by this doctrine before declared about Equiuocation , men do know that Catholickes in certayne cases may vse the same : yet know they also that the said cases are straitly limited with many exceptions , and that in common conuersation , as in buying selling , traffique , and the like , Equiuocation may not be * vsed to the 〈◊〉 , or preiudice of any man : and that in Iudgments and tribunals , where most vse therof doth fall out , all lawyers , Iudges and Magistrates do know in Catholicke Countryes , wherin the 〈◊〉 may vse Equiuocation , & wherin not , and consequently truth & Iustice can suffer no wrōg therby . And moreouer they know , as before hath byn said , that the obligation of a Catholicke man , is so great to auoyde all kynd of lyes , whether veniall , or mortall , as for the gayning of a world no one is wittingly and willingly to be committed : which accōpt I doubt whether men of other sectes and Religion do make or noe . So as though already I perswade my self , that Catholicke people stand in good conceipt with all sortes of men , for their truth in concionable and vpright dealing ; euen with those which endeauour most in this point to slaunder them : yet would I wish the same to be confirmed more daylie by factes in respect of this new calumniation raysed against them of the liberty of Equiuocation . And this of the first reason . 3. My other reason is , as before hath byn insinuated , in regard of the tyme present , which being a tyme of tryall & persecution , requireth at Catholickes hands , a more perfect Confession of their faith , and of all matters belonging thervnto , then at other tymes . And albeit in the former Treatise among the Cases reserued , wherin Equiuocation may not be vsed , confession of faith be expresly and in the first place excepted , so as therin no doublenes or doubtfulnes may be vsed : yet no man can deny but many factes and cases may fall out , concerning matters of Religion not tending to confession ( 〈◊〉 in tyme of persecutiō ) wherin a man may or perhaps also must by obligation , if otherwise he cannot auoyd the wrong & violence that is offred to himself or others , vse Equiuocal speaches , for concealing of that which in conscience he cannot vtter . But whersoeuer this obligation is not , there my wish is , as now I haue said , that Catholicke people , but especially Priestes , whose example must instruct the rest , should yeald also of their right for encrease of their merite , and crowne in heauen , and vse all playnesse , and sincerity in speach , and free discouering , not only of their religion , but also of their state , where it is hurtfull to none , but to themselues : which yet I speake in that sense , and with that limitation , which the holy Apostle did , when he said : That he gaue counsell of himselfe , but no precept of our Lord. And for that this whole Treatise of Equiuocation hath proceeded vpō that question so often before repeated , VVhether a Priest being taken , may deny himselfe to be a Priest , or no , I shall 〈◊〉 downe dyuers circumstances , and considerations of the Case , wherby also shal be made more playne , what my meaning is in this behalfe . 4. When a Priest commeth first into England with full intent and resolution to offer his life if there be need , for the confession of Catholicke Religion , and is taken afterward , & brought before the Magistrate , either he is taken in some mans house , of whose ouerthrow he must be the cause if he confesse that he is a priest , or be being taken forth of any house ; yet hath he cause to suspect , and perswade himselfe , that it may be knowne afterward by cōfession of others , that are also taken , or may be taken , that he belongeth to such , or such a house ; & in these two cases there is no doubt but that if he thinke , that his denying of himselfe to be a priest , may saue them from hurte , he is bound to deny the same with some kynd of lawfull Equiuocation , but without telling a lye , as * before at large hath byn declared . But if this priest should be taken in the port , as he entreth , or soone after in the high way or otherwise , and brought before a Magistrate , so as his confessing himselfe to be a priest could not preiudice any other , and presupposing that he is vnlawfully demaunded that question , against law , reason , and religion , heere is he at his owne liberty to deny or confesse himselfe to be a priest , and no man can absolutly determine , what were best for him to answere , but the spirite of God that speaketh within him , to whome Christ hath promised to imparte such wisedome , as is necessarie for that tyme and action : yet if he were not a man of such great extraordinary talēts , as by his losse or restraint , Gods cause were to leese much , or that he were not sure by his denyall to procure his liberty , or that he might iustly doubt that he should quickly come to be knowne in prison , and therby some scandall to arise to the simple , or yll affected by his denyal ; In al these Cases I would thinke it more meritorious and of greater perfection and edification to confesse himselfe a priest without further denyall , or declination , which I speake not to condemne them , or their doinges that being taken haue done , or shall do the contrary , for that they vse but their owne right , as hath byn declared : but rather I speake it for information of others that may doubt of the Case . Nor do we intend heere to preiudice the most holy doctrine of S. Athanasius , and other ancient Fathers of the lawfulnes of flight and escape in persecution , councelled by Christ our Sauiour , and authorized by the example of the Apostles themselues , and namely of S. Paul , when he fled , and escaped out of a window , and at an other tyme deluded the enuious pursuite of his enemyes by an Equiuocall speach to the Pharisies , and Saducies , as before hath byn declared : but rather to shew that cleare confession is somtymes also most commendable , and that in such a tyme of tryall , and of Crownes offred to Catholicks , and especially to Priests for the said confession of the Catholicke faith as now is ; no lawfull occasion is to be left for acquiring the same . 5. And this is so much as in this matter I had to aduertise Catholickes in the Conclusion of this my answere , not meaning to discend into further perticulers of actions & obligations that may fall out , which heere are hard to be determined ; but only by the present circumstances of the tyme , place , and matter in hand , with regard and respect vnto the two principall vertues that must gouerne vs in these afayres , to witt , Truth , and Iustice. Truth , that all manner of falsity and lying be vtterly auoyded : and Iustice , that no iniury be done by vs to Gods cause , our selues , or other men , which is the lawe of a iust man , and true seruant of God , to be obserued , whatsoeuer temporall hurtes , or damages may ensue therof . 6. And wheras my Aduersary Thomas Morton , doth conclude the very last lynes of his booke with a fynall Charge againe renewed of our Antichristian doctrines of lying , and treason , and threatning vs for the same , not fancyed fyre of Purgatory ( saith he ) as for wood and strawe , but vnquenchable hell-fyre , as for pitch , and tarre , sulphur , and pouder ; we shall more charitably conclude with him , wishing that his offences of malice , 〈◊〉 , and deceipt discouered by vs in this our Answere , may be wood and straw , and that the fyre prepared by Gods Iustice for punishing the same may be a purging fyre , and not a consuming 〈◊〉 , or rather a consuming fyre , and not an vnconsuming fyre , as that is of hell , which he threatneth to vs , but in deed purchaseth to himselfe , by the course he hitherto holdeth . 7. And to this wish and prayer for him , I doubt not but to drawe not only all good , and pious Catholicks that vse it 〈◊〉 for their enemyes , and persecutors , but the very Iesuites also , against whome he rageth most bitterly , euen in the next precedent lynes before his said conclusion , calling them the Theologicall Alchimists of our tyme , that can extract aurum ex carbone , and the Monopolists of all 〈◊〉 in whome notwithstanding he saith , no art to be singuler , but that of Equiuocation , and other such like intertaynments of his vnciuill Vrbanity , wherby he would seeme to his Reader pleasant and ingenious ; but in deed maketh himself ridiculous . For that all men know now , or at least wise his Reader will by this our Answere , that the doctrine of Equiuocation in certayne Cases , and with due circumstances , is not Alchimy of the Iesuites , but the ignorance of Morton , and his fellowes , who ascribe that vnto them , as the chife Authors , which was in vse many hundred years before they were in the world . And as for the Monopolie of artes , if he vnderstand therby , their teaching aboue others of liberall Artes , and sciences in their schooles throughout Christendome , it is true in a certayne sorte , that this kynd of Monopolie , or preeminent labour may be granted vnto their endeauours of their Godly instruction & institution of youth . And happy had it beene for Tho. Morton , if he had beene brought vp vnder that Monopoly , for it is like he would haue had , if not more grace , yet more witt at least and vnderstanding , then to haue obiected vnto them , as heere he doth , that no art is singuler in them but that of Equiuocation , wheras the doctrine of Equiuocation , as Catholickes hold it , and we before expounded it , is no art , but a sound position in Deuinity , belonging to the direction of a good Conscience , against lying , wherof Morton and his fellowes haue so learned the art , and confirmed the habit therof by repetition , and multiplication of so many actes , as it floweth now from them with as great facility in euery occasion , as the notes , and tunes of singing do from him , that hath made a long habit therin , or as the fingers of a musition , that without deliberation , or thinking of the player do runne their stoppes and performe their perticuler motions by vertue of the habite before made and confirmed . 8. For proofe of all this I referre my selfe to that which hath byn set downe in the former Chapters , and especially in the sixt , and so will heere shut vp all this Treatise , adding only some few lynes of aduise and admonition , as wel vnto myne Aduersary , as also vnto them whome he by his iniurious and slaunderous sycophancy , hath sought to draw into hatred and danger of the State ; and so to him I say , let him remember what the Iustice of God doth menace , and threaten vnto false accusers of their brethren , as haue wrongfully traduced so many innocent persons , as this fellow hath , both in his Epistle to the King , and Preface to the Reader , and throughout all his virulēt and spitefull Treatises , being three or foure in number against all sortes of Catholickes , and the 〈◊〉 body therof , accusing them of most heynous rebellions , and heathenish Equiuocations , and for blood-thirsty men , and speakers of lyes without conscience : and himselfe ( forsooth ) to be a Minister of simple truth , naked innocency , and to hate all lying and equiuocating euen from his very soule . But these things we haue sufficiently I suppose layd open before throughout this worke , and haue shewed him ( if I be not deceyued ) to be one of the foulest , and most frequent lyers , that euer ( perhaps ) set pen to paper in these our dayes . 9. And now at this very instant hauing written hitherto , cometh to my handes the Catholicke Treatise it selfe of Equiuocation before mēcyoned , against which Morton frameth his answere , and promiseth A full satisfaction in the tytle of his booke ; of which Treatise not hauing byn able to procure the sight vntill this tyme I fynd so much occasion of new matter giuen therby against the shifting falshood of this Minister , as I might dilate my selfe to the making of a newe Treatise , if I would pursue the particulers of his said deceipts and abuses therin offred . For wheras he professeth A full answere , and satisfaction , as hath by r said , which importeth as much , as that he would answere it wholy and truly to the full satisfaction of euery indifferent Reader , he is so farre of from performing that , as he hath not touched , or so much as mencyoned the tenth part therof in his answere , albeit the whole 〈◊〉 it selfe be not large , nor conteyneth aboue 8. or 9. sheetes of written paper : nay he doth not so much as name or mencion diuers whole Chapters therin , and those which he doth touch , he doth it with such art and subtility , skipping hither , and thither , forth and backe , at length , and crosse-wise , taking heere a sentence , and there an other , as though his principall care had byn not to be vnderstood , or at leastwise not to be found out where he walketh , wherof I shall giue heere some short tast , or note , as it were , with the finger , wherby the rest may be coniectured . Stand attent then gentle Reader , and marke his manner of answering . 10. First then to begin his confutation pag. 48. he layeth hands on the first wordes or tytle of the Preface , alledging therof six lynes for his purpose , as for the ground of his whole workmanship , and then in the same page he steppeth from the Preface to the fifth Chapter of the Treatise , and taketh thence three lynes : then pag. 53. he recoyleth backe to the second Chapter cyting seuen lynes from thence : & pag. 55. he aduaunceth himselfe forward againe to the third Chapter , and produceth an eleuen lynes : and then in the very next leafe in two seuerall tymes he draweth from the same Chapter some 9. lynes ; and after some ten pages of silence , cyteth 4. lynes more from the said third Chapter of his Aduersaryes Treatise , from whence presently in the next leafe pag. 70. he giueth a large leape to fetch 3. lynes out of the tenth Chapter , which is the last of all , and from thence in the next 〈◊〉 pag. 72. he runneth backe againe to the 4. Chapter , and alleageth but 7. lynes only : & pag. 73. fiue lynes more ; & pag. 78. 7. lynes more out of the said 4. Chapter : and then geuing a stryde to the 8. Chapter pag. 80. he bringeth thence 〈◊〉 3. lynes to worke vpon ; then pag 85. giueth a skipp backe to the 4. and 7. Chapters and out of them both draweth some 6. or 7. lynes towards his buylding ; and from hence againe pag. 88. he stretcheth himselfe to the tenth Chapter for some 3. or 4. lynes to helpe himselfe withall ; and pag. 93. and 99. for some 9. or 10. lynes more , and with this endeth his whole answere . 11. And now consider prudent Reader what manner of full satisfaction this is , that in so little a Treatise leaueth out so principall partes vnanswered , as that of ten Chapters he omitteth wholy three without mencion therof , which are the first , sixth , and ninth Chapters , and then in the other examineth the matter so slenderly , as that out of the whole fifth Chapter he handleth only three lynes , & out of the 7 scarse other three , and out of the second , but seauen , and none of all these Chapters are handled by him either in order or methode as they lye , or as they haue connexion togeather by designement of the Author ; but with skypping and leaping hither and thither , as hath byn shewed . And the chiefe and principall points therof , which are very learnedly hādled by his Aduersary , are either left out , and suppressed , or so weakly touched , the difficultyes also so dissembled , and the reasons and authorityes alleadged by his Aduersary so omitted or concealed , as a man may see that the Minister durst not in deed come within the lystes of lawfull combat , though as before yow haue heard he vaunted greatly that he would . 12. And by this yow may take some scantling of Thomas Mortons worth , what it is , without 〈◊〉 entrance into particulers of this Treatise , which are ouer long for this place . If he reply , we may then perhaps examine the matter more largely . Now I will conclude with him only with that admonition before mentioned , that he consider how odious a matter it is , both in the sight of God and man , to be so publicke a calumniator of his brethren , as he hath shewed himself to be . 13. And as for the Catholickes against whom his calumniations are , smal exhortation may serue to beare it patiently , and make their benefit of it , for so much as all the whole streme of holy Scriptures , & exhortations of the holy ghost doth runne aboue all other pointes to this end to comfort godly men in this case , when lying lippes , wicked tongues , slaūderous pennes opprobrious calumniations , and spitefull contumelyes do most insult against them . For then is properly that tyme , and occasion wherof the Apostle speaketh : Cùm id quod in praesenti est momentaneum , & leue tribulationis 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 modum in sublimitate aeternum gloriae pondus operatur . When that which in this present mortall life , is but momentary and light tribulation ( for what is more light and momentary then the darts of wicked tongues , that passe with the wynd ? ) doth worke notwithstanding ( being patiently borne ) an eternall weight of glory in heauen : Whervnto almighty God bring vs all , and our enemyes also , if it be his holy wil. Faultes escaped in the Printing . Page Line fault Correction . 25. 20. my his . 74. 13. prison poyson : 82. 1. Reipublicae Respublica . 168. 4. our manner our name . 225. 18. assert assent . 252. 15. Faciendum Fatendum . 276. 30. dele way . 311. 28. fisted foisted . 317. 28. adde dicitur . 385. 32. hominem hominum . 396. in titulo lege defend . 414. 25. refuge refuse . 436. 16. liues lyes . 445. 4. is true is not true . 486. 16. abe to be . 497. 29. aule rule . Other lesser faultes , it may please the gentle Reader himselfe of courtesy to correct . A TABLE OF THE PARTICVLAR MATTERS CONTEYNED IN THIS BOOKE . A ADRIAN the fourth Pope , an Englishmā by byrth , cap. 2. nu 46. Egregiously abused by Thom. Morton , ibid. Adultery vvhen and hovv it may be concealed by 〈◊〉 . cap. 20. nu . 37. Alexāder Halensis his rigour against lying . cap. 7. nu . 40. S. Ambrose abused and his text imbezeled by T.M. cap. 6. n. 17. Amphibology how it differeth from Equiuocation . cap. 8. n. 10. Ananias and Saphyra their fact discussed . cap. 11. n. 28. & 29. S. Anselme his distinction betwene Truth and Falsity , cap. 8. num . 46. Approuers of Equiuocation in certaine cases , who they be ? cap. 7. n. 12 & cap. 10. num . 15. Their qualities and holynesse of lyfe . ibid n. 16. & 17. & cap. 9. n. 11. 12. 13. & deinceps . Archbishop of Canterbury 〈◊〉 testimony of the Primitiue English Geneuians , cap. 1. n. 19. Archisynagoges daughter raised by Christ , cap. 9. 〈◊〉 . 28. Aristotle his definition of Equiuocation , ca. 8. n. 4. 5. 6. & 7. Aristotle Thomas Mortons Oracle of Logitians , cap. 8. n. 6. Abused by him afterward , ibid. n. 5. 6. 7. & deinceps in aliis . locis . Arrianisme whether fauoured by Caluin or noe , cap. 6. part . 3. per totum . Diuers Arrian speaches vsed by Caluin , ibidem nu . 77. S. Augustines definitiō of Catholicum , Prefat . n. 16. His moderation about Hereticks , and their belieuers , cap. 2. n. 18. His seuere sentēce against them ibidem nu . 54. His explication about heresy consummated in the vnderstāding and not in the will , cap. 6. n. 45. His definition of Truth , cap. 8. nu . 40. Item of a lye , ibid. n. 47. His authority alleadged by F. Garnet at his arraignement for the lawfullnes of Equiuocatiō , cap. 9. n. 52. & 54. His further authority for Equiuocation , cap. 10. n. 17. His case about a sickeman , cap. 11. n. 31. Abused notably by M. Ievvell , cap. 12. n. 30. & 31. & 34. Authors discourse against Cathol . without name or truth of argument , Prefat . n. 13. 14. & 15. Azor the lesuite falsified and corrupted by Thom. Morton . cap. 6. n. 48. & cap. 11. n. 18. His discours about Equiuocation in an oath . cap. 10. n. 29. B D. BARKELEY his writings against Protestants cap. 5. nu . 30. Bellarmine notably abused by the Minister Morton . cap. 6. n. 27. 28. & 71. & alibi 〈◊〉 . S. 〈◊〉 abused by Perkins cap. 12. n. 61. 62. & 63. Betulia deliuered by the 〈◊〉 of Iudith , cap. 7. n. 27. Bishop of 〈◊〉 somtymes temporal Lord also of that Citty . cap. 4. n. 43. Bookes writen by Protestants without name of Author or truth , Prefat . n. 13. 14. & 15. S. Boniface an Englishman , Author of the Canon Si Papa . cap. 5. n. 55. Falsified and abused by Tho. Morton , ibid. 43. D. Boucher calumniated and abused by T. Morton , cap. 2. n. 24. & 47. Buckanan & Knox their wicked doctrine & reuell in Scotland , cap. 4. n. 24. C CALVIN whether he denyed Christ to be God of God , cap. 6. n. 53. His manner of speach therin condemned by Bellarmine , ibidem , n. 56. 76. & 77. VVhether he fauoured Arrianisme , or noe ? cap. 6. part . 3. 〈◊〉 totum . Diuers Arrian speaches vsed by him , ibidem n 77. His inuectiue against the Ancient Fathers , cap. 12. n. 23. Caluinian doctrine about obedience to Princes , cap. 1. n. 10. 11. 12. & postea . The pactice therof by Protestants , ibidem . Carerius a Lawyer abused egregiously by Th. Morton . cap. 5. n. 5. 6. 7. & cap. 6. n. 90. Cassander the hereticke his doctrine confuted , cap. 6. n. 67. Cases particuler of Equiuocation , cap. 20. per totum . Catholicks tolerable in a Protestant state , cap. 1. per totum . Cause of setting forth this present booke . cap. 3. per totum . Celestinus Pope abused by M. Ievvell , cap. 12. n. 41. Censure of Thomas Mortons writings , cap. 3. n. 17. Charge of the Lord Cook against Catholicks at Norvvich , cap. 12. n. 79. & 80. Charge of heresy against Protestants by their owne side , cap. 4. n. 11. Charke and Hanmer their Equiuocations , cap. 12. n. 55. & 56. & deinceps . Their Bookes against F. Campian , ibidem . Charter of K. Kenulphus falsified by the Lord Cooke , cap. 12. n. 81. 82. & deinceps . Choyse or election maketh heresy , cap. 2. n. 20. Christ his tēporall Kingdome , cap. 5. n. 18. Christ how he is our Iudge , and how not , cap. 8. n. 26. How he did feigne to go further then the castle of Emaus , cap. 9. n. n. 98. 72. & 73. His denyall to ascend to the festiuall day , ibid. n. 59. Cicero his doubtfull answers , cap. 9. n. 33. & 34. Commotion of VVales anno 1605. and for what cause , Pref. n. 7. & 8. Comparison betwene the disobedience of Catholickes and Protestants , cap. r. n. 27. Conference betwene two shamelesse Ministers . cap. 4. n. 47. Confession and the secret therof , cap. 10. n. 2. & 3. Equiuocation lawfull for not reuealing matters heard in Cōfession , ibidem . Consent of Emperours necessary for gathering of Councels in oldtyme , & why , cap. 6. n. 33. Contention about the expulsion of K. Ozias of Israell , cap. 6. n. 8. 9. 10. & 11. Contumacy defined by Sayer the Benedictine , cap. 6. nu . 51. Couētry case about the plague cap. 10. n. 31. B. Cunerus abused by Thomas Morton , cap. 6. n. 47. 59. D DAVID Q. Maries Secrecary of Scotland murdered , cap. 1. n. 21. Definitiō of Cōtumacy , c. 6. n. 6 Definition of Truth by S. Augustine , cap. 8. n. 40. Item of a lye , ibidem nu . 47. Deposition of Princes by the liuely word of God , cap. 4. n. 34 Deuinity deducted from age to age , cap. 9. n. 5. Increase therof , ibidem nu . 6. Schoole-Deuinity & positiue their beginninges , ibid. nu . 7. Deuinity speculatiue and morall . ibid. n. 8. Difference of contumacy and pertinacy , cap. 6. n. 52. Disagreement betwene Protestants & Caluinists , cap. 2. n. 13. Dignity of Priesthood aboue Regalty , cap. 5. n. 4. 5. & deinceps n. 10. 11. & 12. Discourse against Catholicks without name of Author or truth . Prefat , n. 13. Disobedience cōpared betwene Catholicks and Protestāts , cap. 1. n. 27. Disputation of Plessis Mornay with the Bishop of Eureux , cap. 12. n. 53. & 54. Dissimulation when it is lawfull and when not , cap. 11. n. 17. Doctrine and practice of rebellion whether more in Catholickes than Protestants , cap. 1. n. 7. 8. 9. & deinceps . Dolman author of the Succession egregiously abused by Th. Morton , cap. 2 n. 23. 34. & 35. E ECCLESIASTICALL Supremacy in temporall causes , how it is to be vnderstood , c. 6. n. 22. Syr Edvvard Cooke his booke of reportes against Catholicks , Pref. n. 9. & 10. His Paradox of English Kings , ibidem . His false and odious assertions against Catholicks , Ibid. n. 11. His Equiuocations , ca. 12. n. 77. vsque ad finem capitis . His notable fiction against Pius Quintus , ibid n. 78. His Charge against Catholicks at Norvvich , ibid. n. 79. Emperours consent necessary for gathering of Conncells in old tyme , and why , cap. 6. n. 33. England her pittifull state at this day Prefat . n. 2. Equity of Catholike doctrine tryed by the effects , cap. 4. n. 13. Equiuocation & the doctrine therof , how and when it is lawfull , cap. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. & 12. per totum . How the same is defended , ibi . cap. 7. n. 2. 3. 4. The vse therof receyued for 400. yeares . ibid. n. 8. 9. 10. 11. & deinceps . The necessity therof in certain cases , ibid. n. 20. 21. & deinceps . Equiuocation vsed by S. Paul , cap. 7. n. 51 , & alibi in diuersis locis . Equiuocation what it is , cap. 8. per totum . Equiuocation of two sorts . ibi . num . 2. The definition therof by Aristotle , ibid. n. 5. 6. & 7. How it differeth from Amphibology , ibid. n. 10. Equiuocation mentall & verball , cap. 8. n. 3. & 12. Equiuocation defended by all foraine Cath. writers , cap. 9 n. 11. 12. 13. & deinceps . & cap. 10. n. 15. Equiuocation by reason and instinct of nature , cap. 9. n. 81. Equiuocation preiudiciall to common conuersation , cap. 10. num 23. Equiuocation in an oath , how and when it is lawfull , cap. 10. n. 29. & 30. Equiuocation in Protestantes starke lying , cap. 12. per totum . Equiuocall and ambiguous speaches of our Sauiour , cap. 8. n. 13. & 14. & cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. & 61. Examples of false dealing of Thomas Morton , cap. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. & 12. per totum . Exasperations in Englād what they cause . Prefat . per totam . The inconueniences that ensue therby , ibidem . Exemption of Clergy-men & Th. Mortons notorious false dealing therin , cap. 6. n. 13. 14. 15. & deinceps . Experience of tyme a good proofe , cap. 7. n. 9. Extrauagant of Pope 〈◊〉 the eight falsified by Th. Morton , cap , 6. n. 43. F MY FATHER is Greater then I , hovv ancient Fathers do vnderstād the same , cap. 6. n. 100. & 101. Footinges of Protestants in periodes of antiquity , c. 5. n. 40. Fox his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes . cap. 12. n. 48. Hovv he is called the Father of lyes , Ibid. The same confuted , Ibid. n. 50. & 52. Syr Francis Hastinges his Equiuocations , cap. 12. n. 66. 67. 68. & deinceps . His vvillfull vntruth about the poysoning of K. Iohn . Ibid. His abuse of S. Hierome , Ibid. n. 69. Fraud and Fallacy vvhat they be , cap. 8. n. 48. 49. & deinceps . Fraud and deceipt of Thomas Morton in alleaging all sortes of Authors , cap. 2. n. 23. & 24. & cap. 5. nu . 5. 6. 7. & 49. & 53. & per totum Caput Sextum , & deinceps per totum librum . G F. GARNET his alleadging S. Augustine for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō , at his arraignment , cap. 9. n. 52. & 54. Genesius Sepulueda his opinion of Equiuocation , cap. 9. n. 57. Abused notably by Tho. Morton . Ibidem . Giges-ringe one of Thomas Mortons signes , cap. 11. n. 39. Gilby the Minister his doctrine and immodest speach of K. Henry the 8. cap. 4. n. 35. 〈◊〉 Cassander vvhat he vvas and his doctrine . cap. 6. n. 69. The same condemned by English Protestātes . Ibid. n. 69. & 70. God cannot deceaue or cooperate to an vntruth , cap. 7. n. 38. God hovv he permitteth men to be deceyued , cap. 8. n. 54. & cap. 9. n. 77. Gods Ordination oftentymes ioyned vvith his permissión , cap. 9. n. 78. Goodman , and other English Protestantes of Geneua their doctrine , cap. 4. n. 16. 17. & 34. Gratian Collector of the Canon-lavv , cap. 9. n. 9. Gratians text corrupted and falfifyed by Thomas , Morton , cap. 2. n. 49. & 52. S. Gregory his authority for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocatiō , cap. 10. n. 18. Gregory de Valētia his Charge against Caluin for Arrianisme , cap. 6. n. 78. His authority for Equiuocation , cap. 10. n. 16. H HAMMOND his booke of the Cōmotion of Papistes in Herefordshire an . 1605. Pref. n. 7. Hanmer and Charke their bookes against F. Campian , cap. 12. n. 55. Their Equiuocations . Ibidem . n. 56. & 57. & deinceps . Hanniballs ten prisoners their case set dovvne by Cicero , cap. 11. n. 33. Heape of falsityes togeather committed by Thomas Morton . cap. 5. n. 57. & 58. Henry the fourth Emperour his submission to Pope Hildebrand at Canusium , cap. 6. n. 38. K. Henry the 8. of England his Supremacy impugned by diuers Protestantes , cap. 4. n. 35. Heresy vvhat it is , cap. 2. n. 19. Who is an hereticke , Ib. n. 20. Heresy consummated in the vnderstanding and not in the vvill , cap. 6. n. 44. Heresy cannot be decreed in the Cath. Church by Popes , as Popes . cap. 6. n. 63. M. Horne his Equiuocations . cap. 12. n. 43. D. Hunnius his booke against Caluin , cap. 6. n. 78. 80. His protestation and prayer against Caluinistes , Ibid. n. 98. His opinion about 〈◊〉 vvryting against Arrians , Ibid. n. 103. I IACOB vvhether he lyed or noe in saying he vvas Esau , cap. 9. n. 34. B. Iansenius his discourse about the feigning of our Sauiour to goe further then Emaus , cap. 9. nu . 73. Ievvell Bishop of Salisbury his notable lying-Equiuocation , cap. 12. nu . 12. 13. 14. & deinceps . His abusing & rayling against S. Augustine , Ibid. n. 30. 31. & 34. His Apostrophe in his sermon at Paules Crosse , Ibid. n. 12. Impiety of Porphyrius the Apostata , cap. 9. n. 66. Incertainty of Saluation dependeth on our partes , cap. 11. n. 24. Inconueniences of exasperation and despayre , cap. 1. nu . 3. Insolencies vsed tovvardes K. 〈◊〉 of England by Protetestant-Ministers in Scotland , cap. 1. n. 24. Insurrections against lavvfull Princes by New-Ghospellers in our dayes , cap. 1. n. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. & deinceps . Intention to deceyue , a principall clause in a lye , cap. 8. nu . 47. & 56. S. Iohn Baptist his mentall Reseruation , cap. 9. n. 18. 19. 20. & 21. His ansvvere compared to the ansvvere of a priest in Englād , cap. 9. n. 23. & 24. Iohn Caluin vvhether he fauoured 〈◊〉 or no ? cap. 6. part . 3. per totum . His diuers Arrian speaches , Ibid. n. 77. Whether he denyed Christ to be God of God , Ibid. n. 53. His manner of speach condemned by Bellarmine , Ibid. n. 56. 76. & 77. His extreeme pride and impiety , cap. 6. n. 97. Whether , and hovv he impugned the Arrians , cap. 6. n. 102. Iosue his stratageme in taking the Citty of Hay by Gods appointment , cap. 7. n. 25. Ironicall speach a kind of Equiuocation , cap. 8. n. 16. K KING Kenulphus his charter for Abindon-Monastery notably falsified by the Lord Cooke , cap. 12. n. 81. 82. & deinceps . Keyes hovv they may signify authority both temporall and spirituall , cap. 5. n. 37. King Iames of Great-Brittany his speach in his Proclamation & Court of Parlamēt , Prefat . n. 16. His moderation therin . ibidem . His affliction and molestation by Protestants in Scotland , cap. 1. n. 23. 24. & 25. His iudgement of English ministers notes vpon the Bible , cap. 4. n. 25. Kingly power or Priesthood in Christ whether greater , cap. 5. n. 10. 11. 12. 13. & 14. Knox his pestilent and wicked doctrine against the soueraignty of Princes . cap. 2. n. 48. His Reuel and cruelty in Scotland against Catholicks . cap. 4. n. 24. & 33. L LAMBERTVS Scasnaburgensis abused by Thomas Morton , cap. 6. n. 37. S. Leo notably corrupted by Thomas Morton , cap. 6. n. 19. 20. & 21. Lord of Salisbury his booke and answere to a threatning letter sent him anno 1605. Pref. n. 18. & 19. The scope therof , ibid. n. 20. 21. 22. & 23. How he was deceyued by his Deuyne , ibid. n. 20. & 21. Luthers wicked opinion of the ancient Fathers when they make against him , cap. 12. n. 21. 22. & 23. Lying and dissimulation how different from Equiuocation . cap. 7. n. 34. S. Thomas his seuerity against lying , ibid. n. 35. Item of the Maister of Sentēces ibid. n. 36. Lying defined by S. Augustine , cap. 8. n. 47. The essence therof , ibidem . Item by S. Thomas of 〈◊〉 , ibid. n. 56. & 57. M MARTINVS de Magistris abused by M. Ievvell , cap. 12. n. 36. Mentall reseruation proued in S. Iohn Baptiste his answere , cap. 9. n. 18. & 19. Ancient Fathers their expositions for the same , ibid. nu . 20. & 21. Mentall reseruation in diuers speaches of our Sauiour . cap. 8. n. 13. 14. & cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. & 44. & 58. 59. 61. & cap. 11. num . 45. Metropolitan of lying Metropolis , cap. 10. n. 33. Miters how they be aboue Crownes , cap. 5. n. 25. Murder of the Lord Darley K. of Scotland by Protestants , cap. 1. n. 21. Murder of Dauid Secretary to the Q. of Scotland , cap. 1. n. Ibid. Mysterious speaches how they be Equiuocall , cap. 9. n. 35. N NATVRE of heresy and pertinacy , c. 6. n. 41. Necessity of Equiuocation in some cases , cap. 7. n. 20. 21. 22. & deinceps . Necessity not required to perfection in many thinges , cap. 7. nu . 5. O OATH vvhat it is , cap. 8. num . 50. Oath of Supremacy in Englād and T. M. his iudgment therof , cap. 6. n. 24. Obedience to Princes and doctrine therof deliuered by Caluinistes , cap. 1. n. 10. Obstinacy necessary to make heresy , and vvhy ? cap. 6 n. 43. Offers , and kind Offices of the Sea of Rome , tovvards K. Iames of Great Brittany , cap. 2. n. 41. Old-Testament a figure of the nevv , cap. 5. num . 6. Opinion of Catholickes for restrayning of euill Princes , cap. 5. n. 45. Opinion of forraine vvryters for the lavvfulnesse of Equiuocation , cap. 10. num . 15. Oracle of Logitians , cap. 8. num . 6. Orders of Religious men that defend Equiuocation , cap. 9. num . 14. Otho Frisingensis abused by T. Morton , cap. 8. num . 36. Ozias King of Israell his expulsion , and contention therabout , cap. 6. n. 8. 9. 10. & 11. P PARLAMENTES their first beginning in Englād , cap. 12. num . 89. Perfection requireth not necessity in many thinges , c. 7. n. 5. Perkins the Minister his equiuocations , cap , 12. n. 58. 59. 60. & deinceps . His falsifying of S. Bernard , ibid. n. 60. 61. & 62. Plessis Mornay his Equiuocations , cap. 12. n. 72. 73. &c. His disputation with the Bishop of Eureux in France , ibid. n. 74. 75. His falsifying of Authors , ibid. Ponderations about the vncertainty of Protestants doctrine , cap. 6 part . 3. § . 4. per totum . Popes may and must be deposed for heresy . cap. 5. n. 53. & cap. 6. n. 62. & 63. Pope lesse dangerous without Superior , then many Princes , cap. 5. n. 61. Pope Pius Quintus abused by the Lord Cooke , cap. 12. n. 78. Pope Hildebrand slaundered by Th. M. cap. 6. n. 33. & 34. The Emperours submissiō vnto him at Canusium , ibidem . Porphyrius the Apostata his impiety , cap. 9. n. 66. Princes how they must deposed by the liuely word of God , cap. 4. n. 34. Prior Iames of Scotland made Earle of Murrey , and Lord Protector of that Kingdome , cap. 1. n. 20. & 21. Priesthood & the dignity therof greater then Regalty , cap. 5. n. 32. & 33. Two principall points therof , ibid. n. 17. Priesthood and Kingly power in Christ whether greater on earth , cap. 5. n. 10. 11. 12. 13. & 14. Proofes for the lawfullnes of Equiuocation , cap. 9. per totum . Prophesyes corrupted and eluded by Iohn Caluin , c. 6. part : 3. § . 3. per totum . Propositions reserued , how they be equiuocall , and how not , cap. 11. n. 14. Protestants their bookes and writinges against Caluinistes , cap. 2. n. 12. 13. & deinceps . Protestant-Princes many of them neuer molested by the Pope . cap. 2. n. 40. & cap. 3. n. 8. Protestant-People more perillous then Popes . cap. 2. n. 44. Protestantes in what cases they may be subiect to the penaltyes of heresyes ; cap. 3. n. 9. Protestants charged with heresie by men of their owne profession , cap. 3 n. 12. & cap. 4. n. 5. 6. 7. 8. & 9. Protestants footings in periods of Antiquity , cap. 5. n. 40. Puritans condemned by Protestants and Protestants by them , cap. 4. n. 9. Q QVEENE Maries of Scotland mother & daughter their afflictions by Protestants cap 1. n. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. & 23. Queene Mary of England her gouernmēt impugned by Protestants , cap. 4. n. 28. 29. & 30. The conspiracy of Syr Thom. VViat against her , ibid. n. 37. Queene Elizabeth her gouernment cōtradicted by some Protestants at the beginning . cap. 4. n. 25. Quality and holynesse of such men as haue admitted the vse of equiuocation for lavvfull , cap. 7. n. 16. & 17. R REBELLION & doctrine of Protestants about the practice therof , cap. 1. n. 6. Rebellions against Q. Marie of England how they be ansvvered by Tho. Morton , cap. 4. n. 29. 30. 31. & 32. Rebellions in Flaunders and Germany by Protestāts against their lawfull Princes , cap. 4. n. 48. 50. 51. & 52. Reseruations mentall in Christes speach , cap. 8. n. 13. & 14. & cap. 9. n. 26. 27. 28. & 44. Circumstances necessary to find out mentall reseruations , ibidem . Reseruations mentall in Saint Iohn Baptist , ibidem nu . 18. 19. & 20. M. Reynoldes boke of Caluino-Turcismus . cap. 2. n. 6. His collectiō of moderne heresyes , ibid. n. 8. Abused by Th. Morton , 〈◊〉 num . 27. Royardus the Franciscan abused by Th. Morton , cap. 7. n. 59. S SSACRIFICE of Christians ceased in Alexandria , cap. 6. n. 20. Salmeron the lesuite egregiously abused by Tho. Morton , cap. 5. n. 7. & cap. 6. n. 4. Sayer the Benedictine falsified and corrupted by . Th. Morton cap. 6. n. 50. & 51. His Discourse about Equiuocation in an oath . cap. 10. n. 30. Scarres of infirmity in Tho. Morton , cap. 9. n. 39. Scottish-Ministers their absurd positions & doctrine . c. 4. n. 23. Secretary Dauid barbarously murdered in Scotland , cap. 1. num . 21. Secret of confession , cap. 10. n. 2. 3. & 4. Secretes of the Cōmon-welth , ibidem . n. 6. & 7. How Equiuocatiō may be lawfull in defense therof , ibid. n. 8. Sheep byters not tolerable in a Common-welth , cap. 1. n. 4. Sociabylity in doctrine vvith Protestants not sufferable . cap. 2. n. 5. Sotus the Deuyne abused and falsified by Th. Morton , cap. 10. nu . 34. 35. & 36. D. 〈◊〉 abused by Tho. M. cap. 2. n 25. Stratageme of Iosue in taking the Citty of Hay , cap. 7. n. 25. Also of Eliseus the Prophet , ibidem , n. 26. Of Iudith in 〈◊〉 Holofernes ibid. n 27. Supremacy impugned by diuers Protestants in the beginning and vvhy ? cap. 4. n. 36. Sutcliffe Deane of Excester and his notable shifting , cap. 4. n. 9. & 10. His testimony of Protestants doctrine for deposing of Princes , ibid. n. 44. His full and round Ansvvere to the Three Cōuersions of England , hovv vaine and impertinent , cap. 5. n. 54. T S. THOMAS of Aquin his seuere sentence against lying , cap. 7. n. 35. Alledged by T. M. against himselfe , cap. 11. num . 56. Syr Thomas VViat his pretence against Queene Mary , cap. 4. num . 37. Thomas Morton his booke against Romish doctrine , Pref. nu . 12. His maine drift and seditious scope therin , cap. 1. nu 1. 2. 3. & deinceps . The same confuted , Ibid. & alibi sapè . His reasons against the disloyalty of Catholickes confuted , cap. 2. per totum . His egregious abusing of all sortes of Authors , sacred and prophane , cap. 2. nu . 23. 24. & 28. & cap. 5. num . 5. 6. 7. & nu . 49. & per totum librū deinceps . A Catalogue of his corruptiōs cap. 2. n. 57. & cap. 5. nu . 57. His lending and borrovving of the Lord Cooke , cap. 3. n. 2. His fond florishes , Ibidem . n. 5. & per totum librum . His bad protectorshippe of Protestantes , cap. 3. nu . 13. His silly deuise of flattery about the deposition of Kinges , cap. 4. nu . 26 , & 27. Thomas Morton not able to defend his Religion from heresy against his ovvne Protestant brethren , cap. 4. num . 12. His Treatise of the Popes Supremacy as head of Rebelliō , confuted , cap. 5. per totum . His great hypocrisy , cap. 5. num . 50. & vbique deinceps . His impudency , Ibid. num . 58. His impertinent Reasons confuted , cap. 2. per totum . & cap. 5. num . 59. His conceipt of the Oath of Supremacy in England , cap. 6. n. 24. & 25. His notable abuse of ●ardinall Bellarmine , cap. 6. n. 27. & 28. Item the like of Cardinall Tolet , Ibid. nu . 49. & alibi . His ten lyes at a clap , c. 6. n. 64. His Oracle of Logitiās , cap. 8. num . 6. His detestation of Equiuocation , but not of lying , cap. 8. num . 20. His Socraticall demaundes , ca. 9. num . 22. His scarres of infirmity , cap. 9. num . 39. His Wanton and lasciuious speaches , Ibid. num . 60. His abuse of Doctor Genesius Sepulueda , cap. 9. num . 57. His Couentry-case about the plague . cap. 10. nu . 31. His egregious impudency and abuse of authors 〈◊〉 . Ib. nu . 32. & 33. His lying Metropolis , Ib. n. 33. His booke against Equiuocatiō examined and ansvvered , cap. II. per totum . Hovv he impugneth himselfe , Ibidem . num . 13. His abusing of Azor , cap. II. n. 18. & 19. His Punica fides about falsification , cap. II. nu . 36. His egregious Cosenage , Ibid. num . 38. His absurd syllogismes , cap. II. num . 50. His Apostolical defense against lying , cap. II. num . 61. & 62. Truth defined by S. Augustine cap. 8. nu . 40. Three sortes or degrees therof . Ibid. nu . 41. Tumultes against lawful Princes practized by Protestantes , cap. 1. num . 13. 14. 15. & deinceps . Tumultes in Scotland , cap. 1. n. 20. 21. 22. 23. & 24. Tyranny and Tyrantes of tvvo sortes , cap. 5. nu . 47. V VALENTIA the Iesuite his Charge against Caluin for Arrianisme , cap. 6. n. 78. His authority for the lavvfulnes of Equiuocation , c. 10. n. 16. Vanity of Thomas Mortons vaunt of Truth , cap. 6. n. 2. Vasquez his discours about pertinacy , cap. 6. n. 43. Venetians their disagreement vvith Pope Paulus Quintus . cap. 5. num . 41. Vncertainty in Protestantes doctrine , Cap. 5. nu . 46. Vse of Equiuocation receyued by Cath. Doctors for 400. yeares , cap. 7. nu . 8. VV VVHITTINGHAM deane of Durham his doctrine , cap. 4. num . 35. D. VVhitaker his absurd ansvvere to Doctor Sanders , about the authority of Ancient Fathers , cap. 12. num . 26. VViat his practice and conspiracy against Q. Mary of England , cap. 4. nu . 35. M. VVilliam Reynoldes his booke of Caluino-Turcismus , c. 2. n. 6. His collection of moderne heresyes , Ibid. num . 8. Abused by Tho. Morton , Ibid. num . 27. VVitnesses hovv , and vvhen they are obliged to speake the truth , cap. 10. nu . 25. & 26. Y YESTVVERT the Printer his falsification in printing the Charter of K. Kenulphus , cap. 12. nu . 88. Z ZVINGLIVS the chiefe styrrer of Rebellion in the Cantons of Zuitzerland , c. 1. num . 14. Slaine . Ibid. Zuinglianisme impugned by Luther , cap. 2. nu . 15. & 16. FINIS . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A09111-e330 The Authors first intention . 4. Reg. 18. Esay . 36. 〈◊〉 of hearers . Reasons of the dedication . Sundry heades vvherin Equiuocation is touched both in Lavv and Deuinity . T M his app●ale to his Maiesty Epist , ● . initio . The conformity of T. M. A Minister of simple truth . Epistle to the King. A sayned march against his Maiesty . A 〈◊〉 march against his Maiesty . Vāguard 〈◊〉 CathoIicke Gentlemen suffering for his Maiesties title . 〈◊〉 accused for their deuotion to the title of Scotland . * Gen. 11. 7. & 9. The vanity 〈◊〉 T. M in deuidinge our tongues . A fond vaunt of T. M. refated . Epist. ad Regem . A false and malitious obseruation of T. M. against Popes refuted . Hovv T. M. his bookes are so published as not published . Epistle to the King against Equiuocation . T. M. his idle Epistle to the deceaued brethren . 1. Tim. 2. The diffi culty of 〈◊〉 . M. hovv men may knovv vvhat is done 〈◊〉 they are a sleepe resolued . Iohn . 11. Priesthood of the old Testamēt derided by T. M. greatly honored by Christ and his Apostles . Act. 23. Heb. 7. 1. Thes. 2. False calumniations . Baron . tom . 2. anno 100. sub finem & in tom . 8. anno . 604. fusè . The defence of the bodily assumptiō of the B. virgin . See S. Bernard in his 5. Sermons of the Assumption of our B. Lady & alibi . Miracles vvrought by God for the cōuersion of the Indians scoffed at by T. M. Act. 4. Marc. vlt. The contumely of T. M. about S. Francis louse . Notes for div A09111-e5790 * Anglicanos . * Flemus . Plus quàm ciuilia . The pittifull 〈◊〉 of Englād . Iusque datum sceleri . Populumque potentem in sua , &c. Mat. 12. Exasperations . Psal. 136. Malitious extension . Of bookes and pamphletes . Commotion of vvales . In the Epistle of T. H. 22. Iunij 1605. * Auant false and lying Varlets ( saith one ) your vvordes are vaine , and your hopes are more vaine . Sir Edward Cookes booke against Catholicks . His argument . M. Attorneyes paradox of English Kings . * Novv I heare it is answered . False & odious 〈◊〉 of M. Attorney . The booke of T. M. about Romish doctrine A discourse vvithout name of Author or truth of argument . Another Treatise . Two other furious bookes . * Now they are passed . The Princely moderation of his Maiesty in his speach . VVhat is Catholicum according to S. Augustine . VVhich is the best sort of Catholicks My Lord of Salisbury his booke . Against my Lord of Salisburies Deuine . The first question about authority ouer Princes . The second questiō . The third questiō . Sess. 15. About the doctrine of Equiuocation . The law fulnes , necessity , and circumstances of Equiuocatiō . The argument of the ensuing booke against T. M. Notes for div A09111-e7340 The 〈◊〉 drift and seditious scope of T. M. The maine propositiō of T. M. censured . Cicero lib. offic . Inconueniences of exasperation and despaire . Sheepe-biters not to be tolerated in a Common vvealth . His vniuersall proposition improued by diuerse particulers . 10. Reasons . About doctrine and practice of Rebellion . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. An impor tant consideratiō , Caluinian doctrine about obe 〈◊〉 to Princes . Archb. of Cant. in the first Booke of dangerous positions . cap. 4. & 5. and 〈◊〉 in the Suruey of pretended discipline . Forraine vvriters of Protestantes pernicious doctrine against Princes . Launay in Replique Christienne . lib. 1. c. 9. 6 n. 1566. & Belfor . lib. 6. cap. 〈◊〉 . fol. 1565. A ' markeable point . Practice of the Protestant doctrine for tumultes against Princes . The Rebellions vpon Luthers doctrine . The Smalcaldian associatiō . Multitudes of insurrectiōs against true Princes by the nevv Ghospel . North. South . In the East . In the VVest . France . Flanders . England . Scotland . See the Histories of Scotlād 〈◊〉 by Bucchanā , and Knox and by Holinshed , and my Lord of 〈◊〉 . his booke of dangerous Positions , cap. 2. 3. 4. &c. 〈◊〉 afflictions and death of Q Mary Regent of Scotland . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proceeding against his Maiesties Mother . A brief summe of matters fallen out in Scotland . 〈◊〉 . Holinsh. 〈◊〉 supra . Prior 〈◊〉 made Earle of Murrey . 1563. 1566. The barbarous murther of the Secretary Dauid . The murther of the King. The barbarous dealing against his 〈◊〉 Mother . VVhat the King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath suffered at Protestats handes in 〈◊〉 of disobe dience & Rebelliō . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . Intollerable insolencies of Ministers against the King. A vveighty consideratiō 〈◊〉 Princes . Streyned 〈◊〉 against Catholickes . The comparison betvveene the disobedience of Catholicks and Protestāts . Notes for div A09111-e9820 A decalogue of T. M. his reasons hardly streined Hovv T. M. proueth his assertions . Iurginicius . M. VVright . M Reinoldes . D. Gifford 〈◊〉 . No sociability in doctrine but in cōuersation there may be . Perkins Catholick The harde speeches against Caluinistes ansvvered . CaluinoTurcismus of M. Reinoldes . Maister VVrights speeches . D. Thomas 2. 2. quaest . 5. art . 3. Ibidem quaest . 10. art . 6. Hovv heinous a sinne heresy is . * See Tertull . li. de pudicitia . Cypr. li. 4. ep . 2. Athan . ser. 2 contr . Arrian . Aug. li. de gratia . Hier. con . lucifer . &c. Tit. 3. M. Reinoldes collection about moderne heresies . Franciscus Stancarus Minister epad Regem Poloniae . Conradus Schlusselburgius in l. de Theologia Caluinistarū impress . Francof . 1592. l. 2. art . 13. 〈◊〉 Schulz . lib. de 50. 〈◊〉 lit . A. 6. lit . Q. 〈◊〉 . Tilmanus Heshusius AEgidius Hunnius . fol. 181. Apo. 12. Many bookes of the learneder Protestantes against Caluinistes . Ioannes Modestus . 1587. Ioannes Matthias . Albertus Grauerus Refutatiō of his second medium . Luther . contr . art . Louanien . Thes. 27. Luther , de Caena Dotomo 2. Ger. f. 182 & 190. Concerning the penalties incurred by Heresy according to the Canons . The moderation of S. Augustine vvillingly admitted . Aug. lib. de vtilitate credendi ad Honoratum Manichaeum . VVho is an Hereticke . lib. 4. de bap . contra Donatistasc . 16. Euery one that belieueth heresy is not properly an Hereticke . Choice or election make Heresy . Dol. par . 1 pag. 13. cyted in Discouery pag. 9. Dolemās text abused in vvordes & sense . D. Bouchier p. 36. cyted in Disc. pa. 8. His cauillation against D. Bouchier . Buchan . l. de iure regni . p. 13 Stapleton in Dydimo pa. 261 cyted in Disc. pa. 8. Peeuish vvrāgling against D. Stapletō . Buchanan li. de iure regnip . 61 Reginaldus de iusta Reip. auctoritate &c. c. 1. cited in Disc. pa. 8. 1. Pet. 2. M. Reinol des discourse . M. Reinolds abu sed by T. M. The secōd charge ansv vered about the Popes authority . The ansvver to S. Edvvard Cooke . T. M. putteth his fictions for our positions . Calumniation 〈◊〉 cōuinced . Catholick Princes successiōs resisted by Protestāts . Calumn̄ia tiō against Doleman . Doleman part 1. pag. 216. T. M. 〈◊〉 bad dealing . A rabblement of false illations . Iniurious dealing of T. M. The 〈◊〉 authority strained to many brāches of 〈◊〉 . Many 〈◊〉 Princes neuer molested by the Pope . Kinde offices of the sea Apostolick tovvardes his Maiesty of great Britanny . See Thynnes addition to Holinshed pag. 446. & the booke of dangerous positions p. 26 Pope Gregor . 13. Tvvo Protestant Princes only censured by the Sea Apostolicke in our age . Q. Elizabeth . K. of Nauarre . The happy successe in the K. of France . Protestant people more pe rilous thē Popes . Examples of bad dealing in T.M. Disc. p. 31. Naucl. p. 〈◊〉 gener . 39. Our English Pope Adrian egregiously abused by T.M. Disc. p. 23. A notable corruptiō about Doctor 〈◊〉 . 1. Pet. 2. Consil. Constan. Sess. 15. Catholick moderation tovvardes censuring of Princes . Knox 〈◊〉 hist. p. 372. Knox appel . fol. 33. Disc pa. 4. Another cosenage about a text of Gratian. Apud Gra. causa 15. q. 6. cap. 4. gloss . A doubt proposed & solued . See of this History of the Disputation before the King of France annexed to the confut . of the first 6. moneths of Foxes Calendar . Another fraudulēt case out of the Canon lavv . Decret . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . de Haer. tit . 7. c. 〈◊〉 . Theseuere sentence of S. Augustine against Hereticks . August . l. de 〈◊〉 Cath. Deut. 13. Hier. contr . vigilant . eit . a 〈◊〉 caus . 23. q. 〈◊〉 . c. legi . A Catalogue of cor 〈◊〉 . The very first text of Scripture alledged by him most corruptly . Notes for div A09111-e15270 T. M. his nevv Reply . T. M. lendeth and borrovveth of S. Edvvard Cooke . T. M. my Lord of Canterburies Chaplaine The Ministers manner of dealing . Fond florishes of T. M. 〈◊〉 T. M. 〈◊〉 our Catholick Authors . Iob 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 lib. Prior. 〈◊〉 Protestant Princes troubled by Popes in our daies . Hovv Protestantes vvere denied by the Ansvverer to be subiect to the penalties of Heresy . Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the more moderate follovved by the Ansvverer . Moderate Ansvvere cap. 1. §. 〈◊〉 . Reply c. 4. 5. 6. &c. Greg. de val . to . 3. disp . 1. q. 12. de Apostas . 〈◊〉 . 2. para . 4. T. M. vvill needes proue Protestantes to be held for Heretickes . T. M a bad Proctor for Protestantes . The imputation 〈◊〉 Heresy vnto Protestantes 〈◊〉 brought in by T. M T. M. an example of Equiuocation . The Authors Cēsure both of the Ansvverer & Replyer . Notes for div A09111-e16470 The Ministers Sleightes . Marke these consequences Aug. de fide Cathol . citat . apud Grat. tit . 7. de Haereticis c. 2 First charge of Heresy laied vpon Protestantesby men of their ovvne pro fession . Moderate Ansvver . pag. 14. In praefat . & cap. 1. 2 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. &c. Reply pag. 17. His sleight 〈◊〉 not satisfying the doubt . Stanc l. de Trinit . & medi. Lut. li. contr . Sacra . & epist. ad Marchio . Pruss . Ansvverer pag 15 The secōd charge of Heresy frō Puritanes . Admonit . 2. to the Par. pa. 25. & suppl . vers . 36. Hovv T. M. doth shift of the Censure of the Puritanes . The notable shifting of Deane Sutcliffe . Sutcliffe in his full ansvvere , part . 1. C. 1. pag. 14. A third charge of Heresy against Protestantes by one of their ovvne . Moderate Ansvver . pag. 14. M. Hugh Broughtō . Reply c. 7. T. M. cannot defend his Religion from Heresy against his ovvne people . Aug. l. de vera Relig . cap. 7. The equity of our doctrine tried by the effects The contrary effects of Protestant doctrine . The vanity of this Reply . Moder . Ansvverer cap 4. The doctrine of Goodman and other English Protestāts of Geneua Goodman pa. 94. 119. 203. &c. Cap. 1. Full satisfaction , part 2. pa. 103. Dang . posit . l. 2. c. 1. A shameles assertion of T. M. denying a manifest truth . The B. of Cant. his testimony of the primitiue English Geneuiās . dan. posit . pag. 218. 219. 220. 221. In his preface to Goodmās booke . An euasiō taken avvay . Their sedicious do ctrine against Q. Elizabeth . Dan. posit pag. 18. 133 〈◊〉 . suppl . to the gouernour of VVales p. 16. 36. 37. 38. Mod. ans . cap. 4. Positions of Scottish Mininisters . Knox in Hist. p. 372 item to Engl. and Scotland f 78 Buechanan de Iure Reg. p. 13. 25. 40. 58. 61. Cap. 2. §. Contrarywise . Hovv fully T. M. ansvvereth matters & giueth satisfaction . Reply 〈◊〉 . 107. To the obiection about Knox & Buchanans doctrine . Reply pa. 103. To theobiection of his Maiesties iudgmēt about the English Ministers notes 〈◊〉 the Bible . Marke his poore shift . 2. Par. 15. Not only Kings by Gods lavv appointed deposers as the Minister T. M. saith . Reply pag. 101. To the Rebelliōs against Q. Mary vvhat he ansvvereth . Stovv , Holinshead , & others in their Cronicles Many cleere exāples to cōuince T. M. Stovv . an . 1554. May 18. 〈◊〉 other insurrections . 〈◊〉 & conspiracies by Ministers . More exāples of Ministers treasons against 〈◊〉 . Mary . Knok in his 〈◊〉 . to the Nobility fol. 63. & 77. Goodman in his booke , hovv Superiours ought to be obeied . c. 〈◊〉 . fol. 54. Princes to be deposed by the liuely vvord of God. M. VVhittingham in his preface to Goodmās booke . Gilby in Admon . pag. 69. Gilbyes immodest speech against K. Henry and the supremacy . Fox in an . 1554. pag. 1289. The 〈◊〉 of Syr Tho. VVyat . 〈◊〉 . l. 2 de Schis . p. 332. Reply 〈◊〉 . 107. No substantiall ansvvering to any thing . Dang . posit . l. 1. c. 6. To the examples of France . Vide Lodouicum Richome in expost . apolog . ca. 94. A vaine shift . To the examples of Geneua Reply pa. 116. Ibid. pag. 119. Reply pa. 19. Mod. Ansvver . c. 9. Great hypocrisy in the demaund of T. M. Bishop of Geneua vvas Lord 〈◊〉 also of the Citty . Caluin to Sadolet . p. 171. Bodinus l. de Repub. pag 353. Sutcliffe in Suric . pag. 14. D Sutclifs testimony of Protestants doctrine for deposing of Princes Full satisfaction pag. 119. A 〈◊〉 conferēce be tvveene Sutcliffe & Mortō . The absurd false dealing of tvvo Ministers togeather . Sundry other Rebellions of Protestāts . Seely ansvveres or rather shiftings of . Reply pa. 124. Notes for div A09111-e22040 The title of T. M. his 〈◊〉 Treatise . The cause of this seuerall Chapter . Confut. pag. 1. To his first cauillation . Math. 4. To his second cauillation . Pag. 2. Carerius li. 2. Rom. Pontif. ca. 18. & Sander . in visib . monarch . The dignity of Priesthood proued to be more then Regall . False dealing against 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . p. 2. Carer . l. 2. c. 1. Salmeron Disp. 12. in 〈◊〉 Paul. Carer . l. 2. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 Hebr. 4. Hovv the old Testament vvas a figure of the nevv . 1. Cor. 9. Deut. 25. 1. Cor. 10. 〈◊〉 . p. 3. 〈◊〉 of T. M. Conf. par . 3. pag. 3. A Sophisticall fallacy in steed of a demonstratiue argument . Reply par . 3. pag. 54. VVhether Christes Priesthood or Kingly povver vvere grea ter vpon earth . 〈◊〉 . l. 3. de Sacerdotio subinitio . Chrys. ho. 5. de verb. Isaiae . Ibid. Naz. orat . ad ciues timore 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . l. 3. de fid . c. 5. Aug. l. 1. de consensu 〈◊〉 . cap. 3. Psal. 2. Ibid. & Hebr. 1. Psal. 8. 〈◊〉 . 28. Phil. 〈◊〉 . Gen. 14. Hebr. 7. 〈◊〉 . 109. Hebr. 2. Hebr. 3. Hebr. 4. The dignity of Priesthood in Christ aboue his Kingly authority . Hebr. 7. The auncient Fathers inferēce about Priesthood . Tvvo prin cipall partes of Priesthood . Christ a spirituall King by his Priesthood but not a temporall . Dan. 7. Of Christes temporall Kingdome . Almain . l. de potest . Eccl. c. 8. Turrecr . l. 2. sum . c. 116. Nau. in c. Nou. de iudic . * D. Tho. l. 1. de reg . Prin. c. 11. D. Anton. 3. par . ti . 3. cap. 2. Luc. 12. 〈◊〉 . 18. Luc. 25. Zach. 9. * Ita tenet Abulensis . q. 30. in Math. 21. VValdens . l. 2. de doctrina . ca. 76. & 77. Victoria velect . 1. de potest . Eccl. q. 5. Sotus l. 4. de iustitia q. 4. art . 1. Armacan . l. 4. contr . 〈◊〉 . c. 12 Burgensis in Scrutinio 〈◊〉 P. 1. dist . 7. Inferēces vpon the premises about the preheminence of Priesthood aboue temporall Kingly authority . Pag. 〈◊〉 . The folly of T. M. his discourse . 1. Cor. 3. Chrys. l. 3. de 〈◊〉 . A list of Kings and Princes deposed or slaine , impertinently brought in by T.M. 4. Reg. 19. 1. Reg. 15. 4. Reg. 12. Conf. P. 4. 5. Hovv myters are aboue Crovvnes . The true State of the Question . Tvvo prin cipall pointes to be cōsidered in these examples of Kings punished . The true controuersy . Supr . c. 1. 4 Cuner . ep . Leouard . D. Barkley Prefac . ad Henr. 4. Gall. Reg. Catholiks principall vvriters for the safty of Princes . D. Boucher . See Boucher l. 3. c. 16. Sess. 15. VVarnvvord Encounter 2. ca. 3. n. 〈◊〉 4. The comparison of Priesthood and Kingly authority in the old lavv . Conf. p. 13 〈◊〉 . de of . Princ. c. 7. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 4. Reg. 14. 2. Par. 24. A 〈◊〉 made 〈◊〉 T.M. Pag. 14. An example expressing the state of the question . See before cap. 2. Aug. l. 1. contr . 〈◊〉 . cap. 2. 〈◊〉 . pag. 15. That keies may 〈◊〉 authority both spirituall and temporall . Conf. p. 17 The poore footings of Protestantes in periods of antiquity . Carer 〈◊〉 . 2. depotestate Pont c. 19. & 20. Bell. 〈◊〉 . de Rom. Pon. Sande . l. 7. de Monar . Bozius l. 5 de temporali Eccl. Mon. &c. The cause of the Venetians . * Now they haue obeyed . Pag. 14. Extrauag . communium de maiorit . & obed . §. Vnam Sanctam . The Extrauagant of Bonifacius ● . falsely alleadged . Addit . ad comen . Extrauag . de maior . in c. 1. ad finem . The great force of the former 〈◊〉 . Pla. Dial. 1. de repu . Aristot. 2. Polit. Cicer. 3. de leg . Bart. lib. de Tyrannide . The Catholicke opinion & moderation about restraining euill Princes . 〈◊〉 vncerteinties . 〈◊〉 . pag. 35. The first ansvvere . B Cunerus drift 〈◊〉 T. M. 〈◊〉 alleadgeth him . Tvvo 〈◊〉 of tyranny and tyrantes . Cuner . l. de officio Principis cap. 8. Great fraude and corruptiō in mangling Authors . The secōd ansvvere . Rom. 11. 1. Cor. 12. 2. Cor. 12. Dan. 3. Great hypocrisy . The third ansvvere . Confut. p. 35. & 36. Bellar. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 26 Carer . l. 1. de potest . Pont. c. 〈◊〉 . Azor Inst. l. 5. c. 14. Fraudulent dealing in T. M by concealemēt . The 〈◊〉 may and must be deposed for heresy . Math. 23. Shameles facing of vntruthes . A note of M. Sutolifs manner of ansvvering . VVarn-word , Encounter 2. c. 13. num . 18. 19. 20. &c. The error about S. 〈◊〉 the English martyr . A heape of 〈◊〉 . Great impudency . His fourth ansvvere . Confut. p. 3. & 36. Impertinent reasons . Math. 5. Rom. 13. Much lesse dangerous to haue one Pope vvithout all Superior , then many Princes . Notes for div A09111-e28410 The fraud of T. M. The vanity of T. M. his vaunt of truth . A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deuise of T. M. 〈◊〉 braggeth . The first example . Pag. 2. Salmer . disp . 12. in Epistolas Pauli in gen . §. sed contra . August . l. 19. contr . 〈◊〉 . e. 31. in princ . 2. Corruption about the meaning . * Disp. 12. pag. 324. & 325. Leuit. 4. 〈◊〉 . 17. Num. 27. Philo l. de victimis par . 2. circa mediū Ioseph . 3. Antiquit. cap. 〈◊〉 c. 2. Corruptiō about the vvordes . Sundry 〈◊〉 . 3. Corruptiō about the translation . Confut. pag. 2. Malitious interpretations to make vs odious . The secōd example pag. 7. 4. Reg. 15. 2. Par. 26. A contention about the expulsion of K. Ozias . Barkleius l. 5. c. 11. Bell. l. 5. de summo Ponti . c. 8. 2. Par. 26. Leuit. 13. Dealings of a make-bate . Enumeration of falsities . Ibid. c. 11. Ozias hovv he vvas separated by the high Priest. The third example pag. 16. 〈◊〉 . de Victoria relect . 1. de potest . Ecclesiae Sect. 4. Variety of corruptiōs Victoria his propositions about exēption of Clergy men , and T. M his corruptiōs therin . Changing of nominatiue cases . The 4. example pag. 18. 19. 20. Fraudes vsed out of the ancient Fathers and Cath. vvriters . pag. 24. Barkleus l. 3. cap. 5. Ambros. l. 5. Ep. 33. A cleere authority of S. Ambrose imbezeled by T. M. The fifth example . Pag. 26. Many falshoods . Leo ep . 75. ad Leonē Augustū . Ibid. c. 5. The Christian sacrifice ceased in Alexādria . Notable corruptiō of S. Leo his meaning . About Ecclesiastical supremacy in temporall Princes . Pag. 26. T. M. his cōceipt of the oath of 〈◊〉 in England . Answere to Syr Edward Cooke c. 2. & 3. Statut. 〈◊〉 26 Hen. 8. cap. 1. ann . 〈◊〉 1535. Statut. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 6. 〈◊〉 1547. Stat. 1. Eliza. 〈◊〉 . 1559. Hold takē on the offer of T. M. about the oath of Supremacy . S. Leo 〈◊〉 ep . 34. 46. 62. 81. 87. Serm. 1. de nata . Apostolorum Petri & Pauli . 〈◊〉 . l. 4. instit . c. 7. §. 11. The sixt example of Cardinall Bellarmine . A childish insultatiō of T. M. ouer Cardinall Bellarmine . Barkleius l. 6. aduers . Monarch . c. 26 Bellar. l. 1. de Conciliis ca. 13. §. habemus ergo . Diuers sortes of corruptiō . The sūme of Cardinall Bellarmines discourse 〈◊〉 by T. M. Bellar. l. de Concil . cap 13. §. Habemus ergo . Athan. in ep . ad solitar . vitam agentes . Fovver causes vvhy Emperours consents vvere necessary for gathering of Councells in olde time . See ff . de Coll. ill . & l. conuent . de Episc. & Presbyteris . Euseb. l. 3. de vita Constant. Theodor. l. 1. Histor. cap. 16. The 7. exāple out of Otho Frisingensis . Frisin . l. 6. hist. c. 32. Otho Frisingensis abused . 〈◊〉 . l. 6. c. 36. The 8. example of Lamb. Scafnaburgensis . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . in histor . Germaniae an . 1077. sub finem . The submission of the Emperour Henry the fourth to Pope Hildebrand at 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 vbi 〈◊〉 . A comparison expressing the fraud of T.M. The first example of corruptions . Vasq. disp . 126. c. 3. In 1 tomo . About the nature of heresy and pertinacy . Ibid. c. 1. Valentia in 2. 2. qu. 〈◊〉 . punct . 1 〈◊〉 . 4. summa par 2. c. 1. & Doctores omnes 4 d. 13. & D. Tho. 2 , 2 art . 2. Vide etiā Clar. 24. q. 3. Can. dixit Apostolus , & Can. Qui in Ecclesia . Obstinacy necessary to heresy . Vasquez his discourse about pertinacy . Hovv 〈◊〉 is cōsummated in the vnderstāding and not in the vvill . Aug. l. de vtil . credend . ad Honor. Aug. l. 4. contr . Donat . c. 16. S. Augustines explicatiō of the vvhole matter . 2. Example about true Religion . Cuner de offic . Princip . cap. 13. S. August . in Psa. 54. in verba Psalm . In multis 〈◊〉 mecum , & Epist. 48. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 egregiously peruerted . In his Epistle to the King. 3. example pag. 4. De iusta pun . Haer. l. 1. c. 10. Azor corrupted . 4. example Tolet abused . Lib. 1. Iust. Sacer. c. 19 〈◊〉 . example Sayer . in casib . cons. l. 1. c. 9. §. 30. A notable falsificatio of Sayer . The definition of cōtumacy . The difference betvveene cōtumacy and pertinacy . Manyfalse shiftes . Pag. 4. 6. example Pag. 20. VVhether Caluin denied Christ to be God of God. Bellar. l. 2 de Christo cap. 19. Bellarmins vvor des fraudulently alleadged . Caluins manner of speech 〈◊〉 by Bellarmine . 7. example Pag. 30. 31. 34. 〈◊〉 . Serm. 1. in Domin . 1. Aduent . Royard . Serm. 2. in Domin . 23 post Pentecost . Royardus & Cune nerus abused . 〈◊〉 . 25. Cap. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . example Pag. 14. Carerius corrupted 9. example Pag. 38. Bellar l. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 2. Carer . l. 1. cap 〈◊〉 . Azor. 〈◊〉 . 5. cap. 14. Gratian. Canon Si Papa . dist . 40. that Popes may fall into Heresy & be de posed for the same . Gregor . de Val. analys . l. 8. c. 3 Salm. com . in Gal. 2. disp 24. Canus l. 6 Loc. Theo c. 8. Stap. doct . Princ. l. 6. initio . Coster . de Pontif. in Enchirid cap. 3. Though Popes may fall into Heresy yet shall they not be per mitted to decree it . Pag. 38. Ten lies made at one time . 〈◊〉 . Example . Pag. 55. Bellar. l. de Laicis cap. 19. Cassand . l. de 〈◊〉 pij viri . Euseb. 5. Hist. c. 13. Euagr. l. 3. Hist. c. 14. & 30. Cassander vvhat māner of mā he vvas . Index expurg . in 〈◊〉 . Cassand . De officio pij vi ri . fol. 314. Bellar. l. de laicis cap. 19. Cassanders iudgment not allovved by English Protestāts . The 〈◊〉 tes of his English 〈◊〉 . Bellarmines opinion falsified . The conclusion . Pag. 17. Tolet. com . in Ioan. 14 & Mald. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 locum . Bell. praef . 〈◊〉 . de Christo §. Sed iam . & l. de notis Eccles. c. 9. & de Chri sto media . c. 3. & 8. * Greg. de Valent. l. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnit . & trinit . c. 9. Diuers At 〈◊〉 speeches of Caluin . Caluin . l. cōtr . Gentilem in Conf. 10. proth . Calu. l. 2. Instit. c. 14 the charge of Gregory de Valentia against Caluin . Ioan. 10. Caluin . l. 2. Institut . cap. 14. Disp. Alban . actio . 2. 2. dici . D. Aegidius Hunnius his booke of Caluin . An. 1593. VVittenberg . apud viduam Mathaei VVelaci . 1. example Gen. 1. Hunn . in Calu. Iudaiz . pa. 9. 2. example Gen. 19. 3. example Gen 35. Hun. p. 17. 4 example Psal. 2. Heb. 1. & 5 Pag. 21. 22 5. example Psalm . 33. Hun. p. 25. Pag. 28. 6. example Psalm 45. Hebr. 1. Caluin . in com . in c. 1. ad Hebr. 7. example Psalm . 67. Pag. 35. 8. example Esa. 6. Pag. 42. * Seni'em & venerandā canitiem petulanter vellicat . 9. example Mich. 5. 10. Example . 〈◊〉 . 10. 11. Exāple . Ioan. 10. & 14. Hun. p. 53. Comm. in c. 14. Ioan. 12. Exāple Ioan. 17. Pag. 45. 13. Exāple . 1. Ioan. 5. Pag. 59. 14 Exāple . Colos. 1. Pag. 61. Hebr. 1. Pag. 62. 63. Pag. 〈◊〉 Pag. 6. 15. Exāple . Gen. 3. Caluinus Com. in c. 3. Genesis . Pag. 71. Cal. Com. in 3. ad Galatas . Pag. 74. 16. Exāple Hier. 31. Pag. 75. 17. Exāple . Agg. 2. Pag. 81. 18 Exāple . Isa 40. Pag. 91. The corruption of 〈◊〉 . Prophesies more omitted for breuities sake . Psal. 22. Pag. 135. Pag. 136. The extreme impiety and pride of Caluin according to D. Hunn . Pag. 184. D. Hunnius protestation and praier against Caluinistes . The conclusion to M. Mortō . The Returne to the Reply . Pag. 17. In vvhat sense ancient Fathers doe vnderstād the vvordes My Father is greater then I to be vnderstood also in a certaine sorte as Christ vvas God , and the second person in Trinity . Hovv and vvhether Caluin did impugne the Arrians . 〈◊〉 de notis Ecclesiae c. 9. Pag. 187. D. Hunn . opinion about Caluins vvriting against Arrians . Pag. 190. Pag. 193. Cases con cerning secrecy . Aug. l. qu. 6. qu. 10. Gratian. in causa 23. q. 2. §. Dominus . Iof. 〈◊〉 . The stratageme of Iosue . 4. Reg. 6. The stratageme of Elizeus . Iudith 11. The stratageme of Iudith . Tob. 〈◊〉 . Other examples of Scriptures concerning Equiuocations . Ioan. 2. Math. 27. Ioan. 7. Hebr. 7. Some Equinocations vsed by S. Paul in his ansvvere to the vniust Ievves . Act. 〈◊〉 August . in Psal. 5. 22. quaest . 2. Psal. 5. 〈◊〉 . 38. 5. Hovv farre the allovvers of Equiuocation are from approuing of lies . D. Tho. 2. 2 quaest . 110 art . 1. 3. 4. Reply par . 3. Pag. 62. Vasq. disp . 53. 〈◊〉 . 22. D. Tho. 2. 2 quaest . 111. art . 〈◊〉 . & 4. The seuerity of S. Thomas against lying and dissimulation . Mag. Sent. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . dist . 38. & 39. The Maister of the Sentences doctrine 〈◊〉 lying . Aug lib. de mend . ad cons. c. 14. Thomas Mortons toyes . Read in 2. 2 quaest . 1. art . 3. Gregor . de Valent . Duran . in 3. dist . 24. quaest . 2. 〈◊〉 . in 3. q. 14. Canus l. 2. de locis cap. 3. Greg Arim . in 1. dist . 42. q. 2. & alios . 〈◊〉 . 83. q.q. vltima . God cannot deceaue or cooperate to an vntruth . Alex. Halens . 2. p. summe Theolog. q. 122. Aug super illud 〈◊〉 . 1. Bene ergo fecit &c. Aug. lib. contra mend . cap. 20. The rigorous sentence of Halensis against lying . Nau. com . 2. in com . in cap. humanae 〈◊〉 res . 22. q. 5. p. 453. Ludouic . Lopez in Instructorio consc . c. 42. de iu ramento : §. quanquam . Caetan . Comm. in 2. 2. q. 791. art . 3. A man may sinne mortally in 〈◊〉 truth . Conf. p. 48 All the for mer 〈◊〉 against lying and periury approued by Popes . Cansa 22. q 2. c. 8. §. Primum est . Conf. p. 48 Cap 9. Ex Aug. de verbis Apostoli serm . 31. Cap. 10. ex Aug. tract . in ●oa . 43. Caus. 22. q. 5 cap. 1. Ibid. c. 4. Causa 22. q. 5. c. 5. Ex Aug. ser. 11. de sanctis . The Conclusion of this consideration . Aug. in Enchirid. cap. 18. & cont mēd , cap. 5. Notes for div A09111-e46040 Conf. p. 〈◊〉 Pag. 50. Conf. p. 48 Tvvo sortes of Equiuocation . Arist. 1. Ele●ch . c. 3 Verball Equiuocatiō no ly . Three sortes of Equiuocation out of Aristotle . T. M. maketh his oracle to erre in Logicke . Pag. 53. Conf. p. 54 Homonymia ' estìn &c. Arist. l. 1. Elench . c. 3 ' Eisì dè trêis trópoi tôn 〈◊〉 tèn homony mian , kaì tèn ' amphibolian . hêis mèn &c. Arist. l. 1. 〈◊〉 . c. 3 T M his 2 conclusion . Equiuocation both mentall & verball shevved out of Scripture . Math. 17. Marc 11. Math. 11. Ioan. 2. Math. 26. Marc. 14. Ioan. 12. Ambiguous and Equiuocall speaches of our Sauiour . Ioan. 11. Luc. 12. Homónyma légetai , hôn ' ónoma mónon koinon , hò dè katà t'óunoma lógos tês ' ousias , héteros &c. Of Equiuocation and amphibology hovv they differ . 〈◊〉 lib. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . l. 7. c. 9 Pag. 49. T. M. first cōclusion . Psal. 1. 1. Cor. 15. Quint. l. 〈◊〉 . inst . orat . cap. 6. About the vvordes hoc est cor pus 〈◊〉 vvhether they conteine Equiuocatiō or not . Quint. l. 7. inst . orat . cap. 1. 1. Cor. 4. Ironicall speach a kind of Equiuocation . 〈◊〉 . Paral. 9. Pag. 54. Thomas Mortons soule detesteth Equiuocation , but not lying . Arist. l. 2. Elench . c. 8 T. M. his erroneous account of generations . Math. 1. The foolish insolency of T. Mortō . Arist. l. 1. Prior resolut . c. 1. Prótasis mèn ' estì lógos kataphatikòs , ' è ' apophatikòs , tinòs katá tinos . Lib. 1. Topicor . c. 12. Diuersdiuisions of propositions . A mentall proposition . Math. 5. Arist. l. de interpretat . cap. 1. ' Estì mèn tà ' en tê , phoonê . tôn ' en tê , psychê , pathemátoon symbola kaì aà graphómena tôn ' en tê phoonê . Fovver sortes of externall propositions . Diuers 〈◊〉 : 〈◊〉 of mixt propositions . In morall : matters there may be mixt Propositions . Lib. Periher . c. 4. An obiection ansvvered . Conf. p. 56 Lib. de interp . c. 4. & prior . lib. 〈◊〉 . c. 1. Lógos ' apophātikòs ' en hô , tò aleetheúein ' eè pseúdest hai hypárchei . Three internall operations of the mind . 1. Perihermen . cap. 1. That a mixt 〈◊〉 ued proposition is 〈◊〉 . Luc. 〈◊〉 . Math. 13. Ibid cap. 16 & 17. Marc 4. & 6. Luc. 2. & 8. & 18. VVhether a mixt proposition be one only proposition . Ioan. 10. Proued by logicall reason to be one proposition . Tvvo doubtfull ansvvers of Cicero . See Quint. l. 6. Instit. Orat. c. 4 , & Donat. in comēt . in Adelphos Ter. Ego Coque tibi iure fauebo . Virgil 〈◊〉 . 1 Diuine examples . Psal. 1. 1. Cor. 15. Math. 〈◊〉 . The conclusion of this paragraph . Pag. 49. The definition of truth . Aug. lib. 5. & deinceps c. 36. Ioan. 13. D. Tho. 1. quaest . 16. art . 1. Halens . 1. part . 〈◊〉 q. 15. par . 3. 〈◊〉 . Sortes or degrees of Tiuth . Arist l. 1. topicor . c. 8 3. Sortes of 〈◊〉 . Aug. ser. 28. de ver . Apostoli . Ansel. in dialogo de veritate cap. 2. Aug. l. de mend . c. 4. & l. cont . mend . c. 12 2. 2. q. 110. art . 1. Arist. 4. Eth. c. 7. Ambr ser. de Abrah . Lib. 3. dist . 38. The essence of a ly . Aug. li. de mend . c. 5. D. Tho. 2. 2 q. 110. ar . 1 VVhat deceipt , guile , fraud , and fallacy is . Aug. li. 2. de doctrina Christiana c. 3. D. Tho. 2. 2 q. 55. art . 4 Aug. li. de mend . c. 14 & in verba Psal. 5. Perdes Omnes qui loquuntur mendacia . VVhat an oath is . See Tolet. l. 4. 〈◊〉 . ca. 〈◊〉 . 21. Ier. 4. The appli cation of the former definitions to our proposition . Of this see S. 〈◊〉 . 2. 2. q. 69. Siluest . verbo accusatio cap. 13. & verbo cōfessio cri minis q. 1 Sotus l. 〈◊〉 . de iust . q. 6 art . 1. & 2. Gabr. in 4. dist . 15. q. 6 art . 2. Angelus verbo cōfessio secreti . Nauar. in manuale c. 18. n. 57. &c. 25. n. 36. Bannes , Arragon & Salon comentar . in . S. Tho. 2. 2. q. 69. & many others . * This doe hold all the foresaid Authors and others related by Petr Nau. l. 2. de restit . cap. 4. part . 2. Mich. Sal. 2. 2. q. 69. art . 2. controu . 11. Petrus de Arragon & Petrus Bannes vpon the same place & others , as the cōmon consent of al. Aug. q. 10. in Iosue . Iosue 8. * See Henriq . quodl . 15. q. 16. Adrian . in 4. de restit . §. Sed nunc . Victor . relect . de iure belli . nu . 37. and others . D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 4. art . 3. Ambros. li. de offic . cap. 29. Though God deceaue not yet permitteth to be deceaued . The first clause of a definition of a ly excluded from our proposition . The exclusion of the second clause in like manner . August . in Psal. 5. v. perdes omnes &c. & li. 22. contra Faust. c. 33. & 36. & quaest . 26. in Genes . Grat. caus . 22. q. 2. Gen. 12. D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 111. art . 1 D. Tho. 2. 2 q. 110. art . 3. ad 4. Aug. li , de mend . c. 10 VVhether in our pro position there be intention to deceaue Ioan. 11. Ioan. 2. Notes for div A09111-e52270 A large folly . Pag. 71. An idle Phantasy . The deduction of Deuinity from age to age . The encrease of Christian Deuinity . The beginning of Schoole-Deuinity . Positiue Deuinity . Maister of the sentences . Speculatiue and morall Deuinity . Gratian Collector of the Canon lavv . Canō lavv Ciuil lavv . A consideration of moment . Learned men of France & Flanders that defend Equiuocation . In Italy & Sicily . In Spaine and the Kingdoms therof . The titles vnder vvhich Equiuocation is ordinarily handled . Different orders of religious men concurring all in one . Ioan Gen. 〈◊〉 Pag. 48. A cleere example out of S. Iohn Baptist his ansvvere . Ioan. 1. Luc. 1. Math. 11. 〈◊〉 7. S. Iohn had a men tall reseruation . Chrys. ho. 5. yr l. 1. in o. c. 14. Orig. tom . 7. Theoph. Euthim. & 〈◊〉 in Graeca 〈◊〉 . Deut. 〈◊〉 . Aug. tract . 4. in Ioan. Gregor . homil . 1. Rupertus in hunc locum . Expositiō of Fathers for mētall . reseruatiō . Pag. 52. Socraticall demaundes of T. 〈◊〉 . The comparison of S. Iohns ansvvere vvith the ansvvere of a Priest. Mortons errour discouered . Ioan. 1. Math. 11. Pag. 48. & 49. Ioan. 8. Ioan. 5. Act. 10. Rom. 14. 2 Cor. 5. Hovv Christ is our Iudge and hovv he is not . In bune locum . Ioan. 〈◊〉 . Diuers reseruations sought out by the Fathers . Ioan. 3. Marc. vlt. Math. 9. Marc. 5. Luc. 8. The exam ple of Christ raising the Archsynagogues daughter . Aug. serm . de verb. Domi. 44. Christ his ansvvere conferred vvith ours . 〈◊〉 . 6. Iob 16. Iac. 4. Marc. 16. Other examples . Math. 28. Io. epist. 〈◊〉 . Iocl . 2. Math. 7. Isa. 38. Tvvo 〈◊〉 out of she old 〈◊〉 . Perer. in c. 27. Gen. dis . 4. & 5. VVhether Iacob did ly or no in saying he vvas Esau. Aug. q. 74. in Genes . & l. 16 de Ciuit. Dei. c. 37. & l. contra mend . c. 10 That mysterious speeches are Equiuocall . Hier. in c. 2. ad Gal. Chrys. ho. 53. in Gen. Greg. ho. 6. in Ezec. & lib. 17. Mor. Theod. q. 80. in Ge. Ambr. lib. de Patria . Iacob . Isid. Beda . & Ruper . in 27. Gen. Grat. cau . 22. q. 2. c. Quaeritur . Hal. 2. parte q. 139. Mag. in 3. d. 38. D. Tho. 2. 2 q. 110. ar . 3 The secōd example . Num. 32. Conf. p. 70 The mode rate Ans. cap. 10. T. M. his ansvvere refuted . Pag. 71. 1. Cor. 10. Aug. l. cōt . mend . c. 9. T. M. his scarres of infirmity . The first place of the nevv Testamēt . Ioan. 15. Ioan. 16. A comparison expressing the case . Pag. 72. Aug. l. cōt . mend . c. 19 Pag. 〈◊〉 . The confutatiō of his ansvv . Circumstances to find out mentall reseruations . Leont . Chrysost. Theoph. Euthim. in hunc locum . Aug. tract . in c. 15. 10. & Ep. 57. & lib. de Agon . Christ. c. 9. Beda in hunc locū . Ioan. 14. Diuers reseruations in Christ his speech Pag. 73. About the day of iudgmēt . Marc. 13. Math. 24. Supra point 2. Colos. 2. Pag. 49. Dam. l. de Haeresib . haer . Agnoetae . Amb. l. 5. de fide c. 8. Orig. tra . in Mat. 24 Epiph. haeres . 69. Chrys. 〈◊〉 de trin . Atha . ser. 4. 〈◊〉 Aria Am. 〈◊〉 . 5. de fide 4. 8 Naz. Orat. 4. 〈◊〉 Theo. Cyr. l. 〈◊〉 . de thesau cap. 4. Theod. An. cont . Cyr. Aug. l. 8. q. 6. & l. 〈◊〉 . de trin . c. 1. & l. de Gen. contr . Manicheos c. 23. Chrys. hom 78. S. Greg. li. 8. Regist. cap. 42. Th. Mortō brought to great straites . S. Augustines authority alleadged by F. Garnet examined . The definition of Equiuocation as heere it is vnderstood . F. Garnets alleadging S. August . at his arraignmēt . Aug. vbi suprà . 1. Cor. 2. S. August . authority vvholy against T. M. that alleageth the same . Shiftes confuted . Of Doctor Genesius , Sepulueda Genes . Sepulu . l. de rat . dicend . testim . c. 3. Genesius much abused by T.M. Hovv Christ did feigne or dissemble . Luc. vlt. ver . 28. Cap. 9. About our Sauiours deniall to ascend to the festiuall day . Ioan. 7. Pag. 78. VVanton and vndecēt speech of T. M. Ioan. 7. Cap. 9. Diuers expositions of the Fathers about Christes mentall reseruation . A cleere argument . The Catholicks 〈◊〉 not the Greek text vvhere it 〈◊〉 more probably be follovved . Pag. 79. 〈◊〉 vaine vaunt of T. M. óuk 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diuers 〈◊〉 to proue that ' oupoo 〈◊〉 vvas not in the more ancient 〈◊〉 truer Greeke copies . Tvvo strōg argumēts . 〈◊〉 2. cōtra Pel. The impiety of Porphyr . T. M. his manhood in his flight . Pag. 80. Pag. 〈◊〉 A reserued proposition may be vnderstood by the 〈◊〉 rers and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Greg li. 26. 〈◊〉 . c. 7. The abuse of S. Gregory by T. M. Pag. 82. Pag. 48. Pag. 82. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 55. About the fictiō of our Sauiour at the Castle of Emaus . Luc. 24. 〈◊〉 . 28. Prosepoiêito 〈◊〉 éroo poréuesthai . Iansenius comment , in 〈◊〉 . Euang. c. 146. The discourse of B. Iansen . about Christes fiction . 〈◊〉 . 16. Application of our case vvith this of our Sauiour . Supra . c. 7. Permitting an other to be deceaued is not to deceaue . Tolet. li. de sept . peccat . c. 46. Maldonat . coment . in cap. 24. Luc. v. 28. D. Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. ar . 3. Bannes Valētia & alij in eumdē locum . Psalm . 72. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Iob. 12. Cap. 22. 〈◊〉 God cōcurreth to deceit 〈◊〉 permission . 〈◊〉 . 13. Isay 63. Ezechiel . 14. Rom. 1. * See S. Hier. epist. ad Helio . quaest . 10. S. Gregor . li. 13. moral . cap. 16. Damascen . li. 4. Theolog. cap. 14. D. Tho. li. 3. contrae gentes c. 162. & lib. 12. quaest . 79. Dominicus Bannes . in 2. 2. q. 1. ar . 3. dub 2. ad 7. Gods ordination ioyned 〈◊〉 vvith his permissiō . Arist. li. 4 Ethicor. cap. 7. August . li. cont . mendac . cap. 15. & in Enchirid . c. 22. Equiuocation by 〈◊〉 & instinct of nature . A peculier case proposed to Thomas Morton . Stratagems of vnreasonable creatures . Plini . li. 9. cap. 42. Solin . cap. 38. Cicero li. 1. de natura 〈◊〉 . VVherein equiuocations may not be vsed . An other case proposed . Notes for div A09111-e62040 * D Thom. in 4. d. 21. q. 3. & 2. 2. q. 70. art . 1. ad 2. Caiet . ibi . in 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 ib. concl . 5. Arag . ib. in solut . ad arg . 2. S. T. Palu . 4. d. 21. q. 3. ar . 1 〈◊〉 . 1. & ar . 3. cōcl . 1 Scot. ibi . 2. §. de ista qu. cōcl . 1. & 2. Ant. p. 2. ti . l. c. 19. §. 7. in fi . Sot. li. 5 de iust . q. 7 ar . 1. ad 1. & in rel . de tegen . secreto . 〈◊〉 . 1. q. 2. Syl. verb. Testis . q. 8. versu Secundū . Nau. in m. c. 18. n. 51. & 52. & in caput interverb . 11. q. 3. cōc . 6. 〈◊〉 . 64. num . 707. & alij omn. * lib. 5. c. 66. Genes Sepulueda de rat . dicendi testim in causis occultorum 〈◊〉 cap. 3. Genesius against T. M. Tolet. lib. 3. de instruct . Sa erdot . cap. 〈◊〉 . Nauar. comment . in cap. human : aures 22. q. 〈◊〉 . & de paenitent . dist . 6. cap. Sacerdos . nu . 〈◊〉 . Tolet ibid. 〈◊〉 . cap. 〈◊〉 . * 〈◊〉 omnis vtriusque sexus de 〈◊〉 . & rem ssione . Sotus relect . de tegendo secreto memb . 〈◊〉 . 9. 4 Conclus . 6. L. omne delictum ff . de re militari . Sot relect . mem . 1. q. 1. & . 2. Sot. ibid. memb . 1. q. 2. conclus . 4. Hovv a man may vse equiuocation or amphibology for defence of publick secrets . * See D. 〈◊〉 . 2. 2 q. 69 in corp 〈◊〉 . i. id . 〈◊〉 2. ration . Set. de tegen secr . 〈◊〉 2 q. 2. & latius 〈◊〉 . 7. q. 1. & 2 & 5. lib. de 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 6 art . 2. 〈◊〉 . 2. Cordu . lib. 1 q. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 du 3 Nau 〈◊〉 . 25. Sum lat n. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 scip in d ca. interverb . n. 725. Et reuera ita tenet & n. 814. & nu . 822. Couar . in 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 23. n. 5 Ga. br . in 4 d 15 g. 6 a. 2 cō . 6 R sel. v. 〈◊〉 . paragr . 1. Palud . in 4. d. 19. q. 4. n. 7. Henriq . guodl . 1 q. 33. ex Iuri 〈◊〉 . Grego . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 7. tit . 29. l. 4. At 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 quod dicitur 〈◊〉 q 2 〈◊〉 inl . Marcel lus . ff . de actionib . rerū amotatū 〈◊〉 . de paenitentib . parag . 7. 〈◊〉 . 19. Roder. Suar. l. 〈◊〉 . ti . 12. de las iuras . lib. 2 〈◊〉 um . Ant. Gom. to . 3. var. re sol c. 12 n. 15 Bernat . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 6. 118. 〈◊〉 . in sum . lib. 1 6. 14. nu . 35 Cap. 2. nn . 37. & 38. Extra . de accusationibus . cap. aequaliter & cap. inquisitionis . VVhen a man is not boūd to ansvvere D. Th. 2 , 2. q. 69. ar . 1. Sot. lib. 5. de Iur. iustit . q. 6. ar . 2. Genes . Dialog de rat . dicen . testim . cap. 17. Hovv 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cōcurreth vvith the rest . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 . Psal. 51 Coment 〈◊〉 aures 〈◊〉 . nu . 9. a Lib. 3. c. 58. instruct . b coment . in 2. 2. q. 69. art . 2. c Ibidem . d 〈◊〉 . 3. disput . 5. q. 13. 〈◊〉 . 3. e lib. 11. inst moral . 〈◊〉 . 4. f li. 12. c. 17. Clau. reg . g Relatus à Bannes h li. 8. de matrim . disput 25. nu . 15. The first reason giuen by Gregory de Valentia . S. 〈◊〉 authority . Li. contr . 〈◊〉 , cap. 10. S. 〈◊〉 his authority . S. Greg. li. 26. 〈◊〉 ral . cap. 〈◊〉 A rule for iustification of Equiuocall propositions vvith due circumstances . Bannes & Salon com . in 2. 2. q. 69. art . 3. Nauar li. 11. cap. 4. Ians . c. 9. punct . 3. Hovv and vvith vvhat circūstances the accused may deny to haue done that vvhich he is not bound to vtter . Supra cap. 8. Vse of 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 to cōmon 〈◊〉 . D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 70. art . 1. 〈◊〉 . Salon . Petrus de Aragon , Bannes in 〈◊〉 locū . Halens . part . 3. q. 43. memb . 1. S. Antonin . p. 2. tit . 1. c. 19. Sotus l. 1. de iustitia cap. 7. & alij . Obligatiō of vvitnesses to speak the truth . Hovv vvitnesses may deny or 〈◊〉 ansvvering . See supra cap. 7. & 8. * See about this matter Alex. Halen . p. 3. q. 31. m. 〈◊〉 . Nauar. in man ca. 12 nu 8. Sot. lib. 8. de Iust. q. 〈◊〉 . art . 7. D. Tho. 2. 2. q. 〈◊〉 . art . 7. ad 4. Caie . & Aragō ibi . Sylu. v. Iuramē . 3. q. 2. Cos. Philiar . de offic . Sacerd. p. 2 lib. 〈◊〉 . c. 14. Pedrazza in explic . 2. praecepti § 〈◊〉 . Tolet. insum . li. 4. ca. 21. & others . Azor. li. 11 〈◊〉 . c. 4. The discours of Azor , about Equi uocation in an oath Sayer lib. 5. Clau. Reg. ca. 4. nu . 〈◊〉 . The discours of Sayer to the same effect . * Supra cap. 8. Tho. Mortons case of Couentry . Azor. lib. 11. inst . c. 4 §. Primo quidem . Azo . ib. §. 〈◊〉 regula . Syl. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . q. 2. 〈◊〉 . in ma 〈◊〉 . c. 12. 〈◊〉 . 19. Tolet in Instruct. Sacer. c. 21 lib. 4. Roder in sum map . 〈◊〉 . ca. 〈◊〉 . concl . : 4. Cosmus Phil. p. 2. lib. 3. c. 14. Sayer lib. 5. c. 4. nu . 22. Egregious impudēcy of T. M. Diuerse grosse vntruthes of T. M. T. M. Metropolitan of his lying Metropolis . Pag. 59. Sotus li. 〈◊〉 . de 〈◊〉 . q. 6. art . 2. Sotus falsly abused by T. M. Mar. 13. Sotus 〈◊〉 impugneth T. M. Lib. de tegen . secreto m. 3. q. 3. Conclus . 4. Tho. Mortons Doctor Genesius refuted by Sotus . The case of secret 〈◊〉 . a Nauar com . in 〈◊〉 . humanae aures . q. 2. nu . 9. b v. iuram . q. 2. c p. 1. c. 42. d de offiic . p. 2. li. 3. cap. 14. e v. 〈◊〉 . 4. distin . 1. f in expli . praecep . 2. §. 3. g li. 4. 〈◊〉 . c. 21. notab . 2. h li. 10. instit . c. 4. The cōclusion of all this Chapter . Notes for div A09111-e67100 Confut. pag 1. Pag. 97. Pag. 47. Childish rayling . Pag. 49. Tvvo propositions the groūds of his booke . Pag 50. His first argumēt 〈◊〉 . Lib. 〈◊〉 . dis . stinct . 38. 2. 2. q. 111. art . 1. Lib. de mend . c. 5. & ser 28. de verb. Apost . & abud D. 〈◊〉 . 2. 2. q. 98. art . 1. * Supra Cap. 9. Pag. 51. Pag 54. His secōd ansvvere confuted . Ibidem . Arist Elench . li. 1. cap. 4. Pag. 55. T M impugneth himselfe . Homonymia ' estìn hótan ho lógos e'e t'óunoma kyrioos seemainei pleioo . Arist , lib. Elenc . c. 4. * Cap 〈◊〉 . Hovv reserued propositions are equiuocall & hovv not . ' Suprà cap. 8. Aug. li. de mendacio c. 〈◊〉 . & 5. His third argument confuted . Suprà c. 8. & 9. 〈◊〉 the 6. Case . Supr . 〈◊〉 . 9. The confutation of his 4. argumēt . Exod. 20. Ierem. 4. Pag. 60. & 61. Azor notably belyed by T. Mortō . lib. 11. c. 4. §. Quintò 〈◊〉 . Azor. lib. 11. c. 4. §. Primo 〈◊〉 VVilfull and persidious dealing . Heb. 6. Supra Cap. 7. Rom. 〈◊〉 . Pag. 62. Hovv reserued propositions are true and cert eyn in themselues . Iocl . 2. Matth. 7. Incerteinty of saluation not on Gods part but on ours . Matt vlt. 〈◊〉 . Ep. 〈◊〉 . cap. 2. 3 , 4. His argument 〈◊〉 from the Deuill . 〈◊〉 . 3. Supra cap. 8 VVhat dissimulation is vnlavvfull and vvhat not . Aug. lib. contra mendacium c. 12. in fine . Marc. 5. Ioan. 11. Gen. 27. Gen. 42. 1. Regum 〈◊〉 . Supra Cap. 7. The fact of Ananias and Saphyra discussed . Acto . 5. Pag. 64. * Chrys. 〈◊〉 . 12. in Acta Apostolorū Hier. epist. 8. ad Demet . August . ser. 27. de verbis Apost . Fulgētius epist. de debito cōiugali c. 8. Grego lib. 1. epist. 33. 〈◊〉 . Oecū enius Arator , Rabanus , Lyra , & alij in hunc locum . Pag. 65. The vvomans examination by S. Peter . Lib. cont . mend . c. 18. S. Augustines case about the sick man. Supra . c. 7. Supra c. 7. & 8. The secōd case of S. Augustine about B. 〈◊〉 vvhoe vvould neither ly nor betray . Aug. li. de mend . cap. 13. 〈◊〉 . Cor. 15. 1. Cor. 9. Pag. 90. The case set dovvn by Cicero of prisoners let forth vpō their oath by Hanniball . Lib. 3. Officio . §. Regulus . Cic. lib. 3. Offic. §. Regulus & §. 〈◊〉 si . T. M. much pressed vvith Punica fides , about falsification . Cicero most plaine against T. M. and for Catho like Doctrine . T Morton conuinced of egregious cosenage . Pag. 〈◊〉 . The first signe 〈◊〉 against himselfe . Three vayne signes taken for argumentes by T. M. Pag. 85. Socrates , Sozomen , & alij . Act. 23. Gen. 42. T. M. 〈◊〉 to ansvver to 〈◊〉 equiuocation vsed in an oath . 〈◊〉 . 2. Ioan. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 5. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . 4. 〈◊〉 ex 〈◊〉 of scripture that allovv as vvell verball as mentall equiuocation . Examples of equiuocation svvorne by our Sauiour . Matth. 〈◊〉 . Tolet lib. 4. Instruc . cap. 20. A false principle and generall proposition . Pag. 〈◊〉 . The absurd 〈◊〉 of T. M. neither true in forme nor 〈◊〉 . Arist. lib. 1. Prior. Resolut . 〈◊〉 . 1. The faultes of 〈◊〉 . Mortons syllogisme Pag. 53. The syllogisme of T. M. brought into forme VVho is a lavvfull Iudge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvith authority . Pag 〈◊〉 . Lomb. 3. d. 39. lit . K D. Th. 2. 2. q. 69. ar . 1. Isidor . 2. de summo bonoca . 13. Hier. in . 7. Ezech. S. Tho. alleaged by Tho. M. against himselfe . To his other 3. arguments for his second conclusion . Pag. 59. Eman. Sà in Aphor. tit , suramentum . Cic. 3. Offic . 〈◊〉 sup . To his last argument . Tertul. li. de praese . cont . haereses . Thomas Mortons conclusion and Apostolicall defence by protestations against lying . Rom. 9. 2. Cor. 11. 1. Tim. 2. Galat. 1. Notes for div A09111-e74460 Tvvo 〈◊〉 of Equiuocations 〈◊〉 their 〈◊〉 . Cap. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . False and lying Equiuocatiō 〈◊〉 c. 7. Ioan. Materiall false 〈◊〉 . Formall false equiuocation vvhat it is . Formall lying equi 〈◊〉 in T. M. T. Mortōs talents in lying equi uocation . M. Iohn Ievvell B. of Salisbury . Maister Ievvells chalenge and hipocriticall apostrophe in his printed sermon . Fol. 41. Singuler 〈◊〉 . * Yet aftervvards he denyeth diuers Doctors that make against 〈◊〉 . All the learned men aliue cannot bring one sentence . In his first ansvvere to Doctor Coles letter fol. 4. In his second ansvver to D Cole fol. 13. Ibid. fol. 〈◊〉 . Ibid. fol. 26. In his reply to D. Coles last letter fol. 44. Ibid. fol. 65. Ibid. fol. 112. The first reason . See in the end of the second parte of the examē of Fox his Calender parag . 5. The secōd reason . See Bellarm . lib. 2. de Eucharisti● . The third reason . Caluin ad c. 2. Habac. Luther . ad c. 49. Gen. Luth. in 〈◊〉 Germ. fol. 499. Luth. cōt . lib. Reg. H 8. de 〈◊〉 . Luth. ad c. 22. Gen. Lib. de seruo arbitrio . In colloq . conuiual . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theol. Calu. adc , 4. loan . v. 14. Beza adc . 13. Act. Luth. in colloq . con 〈◊〉 . c. de Patribus . Magd. 〈◊〉 . 5. cap. 1. Beza in confes . Geneuen . c , 7. § 12. Calu. li. 4. instit . c. 7. §. 11. Ievvell in defence of the Apology pa. 111. Luth ad 〈◊〉 . 7. Deut. Ievvell Ibidem pag. 130. The 4. reason . Luth. de Capt. Babyl . c. 〈◊〉 . Lib de abroganda missa initio . Lib. contr . Reg. Angl. Libr. de 〈◊〉 priuata . Calu. lib. 4. instit . 〈◊〉 . 18. §. 12. A strange kinde of simplicity vttered vvith duplicity . The fifth reason . D. VVhitakers ansvvere to D. Sanders demonstrat . pag. 21. The 〈◊〉 reason . Ievvell in his 2. ansvvere to D. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 desire of M. Ievvell to haue his vvritings ansvvered . The bookes so earnestly called for procured by M. Ievv ell to be forbidden . * M. VVilliam Reynoldes . M. VV. Reynoldes in the refut . of M. VVhi tak cap. rs . pag. 460. The first 〈◊〉 . * Cap. 10. M. Ievvel 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 at S. peters in Oxford in obe Lent. S. August . egregiously abused and falsified . 1. Tim. 5. The secōd example . Cassiod . li. 〈◊〉 . cap. 〈◊〉 . Hist. trip . lib. 6 c. 14. Niceph. l. 10. hist. 〈◊〉 . 10. Zozomen . l. 5. c. 11. Pag. 176. & 514. The third example . Greg. l. 7. Epist. 30. indict . 1. Fox act . & 〈◊〉 . pag. 105. col . 2. 〈◊〉 . S. August . Epitaph . Beda lib 2 cap. 3 hist. Anglorū . M. Tevvlls rayling against S. Augustine in his Reply pag. 〈◊〉 . The 4. example . Ievvel in the Apol. 〈◊〉 part . Martinus de Magistris shamefully abused . 1. Cor. 6. The 5. example . The 6. example 〈◊〉 3. cases . Leo epist. 8. ad 〈◊〉 . Leo epist. 81 ad Dioscorum 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 - pis . ca. 2. Strabo de rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. 21. Durand . lib. 2. de ritibus Ec clesiasticis cap. 7. Pope Celestinus egregiously calumniated by . M. Ievvell . Ioan. 2. Ievvell defence of 〈◊〉 108. Marc. 13. Christes vvordes egregiously abused by . M. Ievvell . A dilemma about M Iuells equiuocation . M. Hornes equiuocations . M. Horne to 〈◊〉 pag. 9. Horne pag. 89. Broughtō . li. 1. cap. de Papa . Archiepis . & aliis Prelatis . M VVill. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 . of VVhitak . pag. 475. First example of Iohn Fox . The Treatise of 3. Conuers . of Engl. part . 2. c. 2. 3. 4. * Fox pag. 22. nu . 35. See the ex amen of the last 6. monethes of his Calendar ca. 19. n. 17. Confutation of Iohn 〈◊〉 his lyes . 2. Exāple . D Calfhill . S. Ambr. Serm. 55. Calfhill 〈◊〉 . 78. Athan. li. 2. de 〈◊〉 . Calf hill fol. 〈◊〉 . Cyril . lib. 6. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . Calf hill 〈◊〉 . 172. The 3. Example Meridith Hanmer & VVilliam 〈◊〉 . Luther sermone de matri . tom . 5. VVittenb . fol. 120. Hanmer & Charke in their bookes against F. Campian . Charke in his ansvv . to the Censure . * Lanificium is heer much more modestly translated , then Luthers meaning seemeth to beare . Charke in his ansvv . to the Cēsure . art . 2. Aug lib. 1. de nupt . & concup . cap. 23. The 4. example . VVilliam Perkins . VVhat is properly Catholick , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Perkins in his 〈◊〉 . Cath. c. 1. Apoc. 17. Serm. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 33. Epist. 124. Diuers falsifications of S. Bernards vvordes . Bern. epis . 124. Vbi 〈◊〉 . Epist. 〈◊〉 . ad 〈◊〉 . Perkins in reformed Cath. c. 8. 〈◊〉 . epist. 〈◊〉 . The 〈◊〉 of Syr Francis 〈◊〉 . A vvilfull vntruth . Iohn 〈◊〉 in his 〈◊〉 in the life of K. Iohn . Defence of the 2. Encount . pag 18. S. Hier. in proem . lib. 2. Comen . ad 〈◊〉 . Rom. 〈◊〉 . Rom 16. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 . 99. vvarn . Bed. & Arnob. ibib . Encont 2. fol. 14. & . 5. Chrys. hom 13 in 2. ad Cor. vvarn . En ont . 1. 〈◊〉 63. En ont . 1. fol. 67. 〈◊〉 of Sir Philip Mornay . Actes de la Conference tenue entre le Sieur Euesque d'Eureux , & le 〈◊〉 du Plessis , &c. a Foūtain-bleau le 4. de May. 1600. Imprimez chez Anthoine le Marié . In the french printed Actes fol. 34. Printed actes fol. 52. Act. fol. 46. Act. fol. 52. & 58. See in the 3. 〈◊〉 . 3. p in the end of the first 6. mo neths of Fox his 〈◊〉 . Equiuocatio 〈◊〉 Syr Edvvard Cooke . See the ansvver of the Cath. Deuine to the 1. p. of Syr Edvv. Cookes Reportes . cap vlt. A notable fiction against Pius Quintus . Decret . p. 1. dist . 40. ca. 6. Si Papa . The Lo. Cookes charge against Catholickes . The Deuine deceaued by the subtil ty of the Lavvyer . King Kenulphus his charter notably falsyfyed by M. Attorney . Report . fol. 9. The charter as M. Attorney alleadgeth it an . 755. Stanford . lib. c. 9. fol. 1012. Marke M. Attorneyes Inference vpon his ovvne falsification . * This is false . * This also is false . M. Attorneyes so 〈◊〉 protestation falsifyed . Report . fol. 40. The relation sent 〈◊〉 of England about the true charter of K. Kenulphus . This decydeth the vvhole Controuersy and therfore vvas fraudulently cut of by M Attorney . 1. Hen. 7. printed by Pinson & Brooke tit . Cor. pl. 129. A falsification of protestat printers . VVhen Parlamēts beganne in Englād . The conclusion of all . Notes for div A09111-e85410 Lavvfull causes of the vse of Equiuocation . 1. Cor. 6. 1. Cor. 10. The reasons vvhy Catholickes ought to vse the liberty of Equiuocation sparingly . * See of these thinges before & namely Cap. 7. Consid. 1. Hovv a Priest may somtymes yeeld of his right vvith more merit . 1. 〈◊〉 . 7. Diuers cases falling out in the examinatiō of priests . * Supra cap. 7. 8. 9. 10. Luc. ●● . Diuers consideration● . Lib. de fuga sua . Math. 10. Act. 9. 2. Cor. 11. Act. 23. The tvvo mayne vertues to be respected , Truth , and Iustice. Conf. pag. 103. Mortons scoffs against Iesuits reiected . The facility of lying in T. M. by habit . The 〈◊〉 behauiour 〈◊〉 T. M. The Catholicke Treatise of Equiuocation 〈◊〉 to sight . A note vpon the Ansvvere of T. M. to the Catholicke Treatise of 〈◊〉 . A consideration vpō Mortons methode of ansvvering . To the Catholickes . 2. Cor. 4.