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

SECT. III.

The summe of the tenth charge, of M. PAR∣SONS his Reckoning.

HE maketh Carerius say, that The high Priest was Supreme * 1.1 in ciuill causes, which words, Ciuill causes, he putteth in of * 1.2 his owne: for Carerius hath them not either in words, or sense, but teachcth the plaine contrary in all his discourse, to wit, that

he meaneth, in matters belonging vnto religion and Priest hood, and not of temporall Principality, or ciuill causes, as this Mini∣ster doth beue him: Neither could Carerius meane so, except he should be contrary to himselfe, and therefore that clause was per∣fidiously thrust in by the Minister, &c.

The Reuiew.

8 Except M. Parsons had a dispensation to traduce his Aduersary by wilfull vntruthes, I would not thinke that he could deale thus vnconscionably: the matter is, whether Carerius named, or meant that the Priests of the old law had a superiority ouer Kings in Ciuil matters. M. Parsons denieth it, I haue affirmed it, and shall now demonstrate it out of Ca∣rerius. * 1.3 And because M. Parsons calleth to witnesse All the discourse of Carerius, I shall craue so much leaue of my Rea∣der, as to suffer me to passefrom the fountaine downe the ri∣uer of this discourse.

9 Carerius in his booke ca. 9. laieth downe this position, that h 1.4 The Pope hath by diuine law most full power throughout the world, Tùm in rebus Ecclesiasticis, tùm in Politicis, that is, both in Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill things. And concludeth the Chapter in the same tearmes of Both in Ecclesiasticall and Ci∣uill things. And this is the expresse and direct subiect of that discourse, which he laboureth to prooue (professedly against Ballarmine) from Canonists, from Decrees of Popes, from Reasons, vntill he come to the 13. chap. concluding therein, as before, that The Pope hath power ouer the whole world in Ecclesiastical and Ciuil matters. i 1.5 He pursueth the same point vnto the 18. chap. wherein we now insist, where he seeketh to remooue an Obiection, which was made against his for∣mer conclusion of the Popes authority in Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill matters. The obiection is this k 1.6 The Kings of ludah did depose the Priests, Ergo, The Emperour may depose the Pope. Marke now (good Reader) the answers of Carerius. His first is, that In the old Testment the iurisdiction Ecclesia∣sticall and Ciuill were both one, and was gouerued by the King,

who had power ouer Priests to put them to death. This, you will say, is contrary to my assertion; it is true, I consesse it: but now heare his last answer in the same Chapter. There (as though he would recant the former, and be contrary to himselfe) he thus assirmeth. I say (saith he) that euen in the old Testment the high Priest was aboue the King, which I proue out of Num. 27, where it is sayd that at the word of the high Priest Iosuah the Prince and all the people was to go in and out. The obiection being concerning both Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill power of the high Priest, and that the King might put him to death (a ciuill censure): The answer being of the Prin∣ces and peoples going in and out (ciuill acts): and the whole scope being about Ecclesiasticall and ciuill matters, M. Par∣sons must, to his owne shame, necessarily acknowledge that I haue not been contrary vnto Carerius, but Carerius hath been contrary to himselfe. To this Paduan Doctor M. Par∣sons joyneth a Dominican.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Reckon. p. 426.
• * 1.2

  Lib. 2. de po∣testate Rom. Pont. c. 18.
• * 1.3

  M. Parsons his egregi∣cus and open falshood.
• h 1.4

  Carerius lib. 2. de postate Rom. Pont. cap. 9.
• i 1.5

  Carerius lib. 2. cap. 18.
• k 1.6

  Ib. num. 13.