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

The Reuiew, discouering the forgery of this Case by foure probabilities, taken out of M. PARSONS his Exordium.

3 Because this case is made so notorious, that the re∣lation thereof, if it be true, must needes bewray exceeding mischiefe on the side, or else on the other side extreame malice, if it shall appeare to be false: I shall intreate thee (Good Reader) to obserue and ponder the circumstances of this Preface, which M. Parsons hath commended vnto thee; and to consider, first, Who it is that inquireth whether this pretended Equiuocation be Tollerable, or not? M. Parsons hath tould vs that he is his Friend; and in that (according to his profession) great friend vnto any Protestant. Is it not therefore altogether improbable, that his conscience should be so tenderly scrupulous about that which was his aduersa∣ries sinne, and none of his owne?

4 Secondly consider What the doubt and difficulty is, which the Friend of M. Parsons doth desire so earnestly to be decided: The only thing that he would know (poore soule) is, whether when a lawfull Magistrate proceedeth iu∣dicially

in examination vpon Oath, it may be held Tollera∣ble for any to abuse and delude this Iudge by Equiuocating in Oath, or no? But shal we thinke that M. Parsons his friend or any Christian would make question and doubt whether that be Tollerable, which euery conscience of man, yea of the very Pagans, by the onely light and instinct of Nature, can presently condemne as most intollerable? Would he haue vs to thinke that his Friend could be so sottish as to make que∣stion about a point so vtterly vnquestionable?

5 Thirdly, Whither now will his Friend trauell for meanes to remoue this great perplexity? We see that he now posteth ouer the Alpes as far as Rome, by his letters, for satisfaction in this case. But what? Is there no balme in Gilead? Is there no sufficient Counsaile in any Iesuit, or secular Priest within England, that can resolue this so silly and sencelesse a doubt? and to vntwine so loose a thred? shall we thinke this probable?

6Lastly, when all is done, Whome will the good man make choise of in Rome, for the deteiminer of this point? whom, but his friend M. Parsons? and good reason, because * 1.1 It seemed (saith M. Parsons) that he had some right to vrge me in this matter, in respect of the Treatise written by me of that matter against M. Morton, and I thought my selfe the more bound to yeeld him some satisfaction to his demand. But how could his Friend be ignorant of M. Parsons his iudgement in such a Case? We may trie this by his last Conclusion. a 1.2 I doe infer (saith M. Parsons) for resolution of the case, that this was no true, or proper Equiuocation at all, but rather a flat lie. and open perinry; as by that we haue treated before with M. Morton in the second chapter of this booke may appeare more largely: but much more throughout diuers Chapters together in my former Treatiss of Mitigation. Let vs put his former * 1.3 Reason and this Conclusion together, and hence I infer a notable absurditie, viz. that Master Parsons his Friend must bethought to haue sent many hundred miles vnto M. Parsons, to answer a doubt by his letters, which he

had largely and sufficiently vnfoulded and assoiled publikely by his booke a yeere before.

7 These fower particular circumstances, viz. 1 Who, 2 What, 3 Whither, 4 and Whom, implying these sower Im∣probabilities, the 1. to seeke to be informed in conscience concerning a sinne, that did not concerne him: the 2. about a Case, wherein there could be no doubt: the 3. by delaying time, and consulting farre off, whereas he might haue beene presently resolued at home: and 4. in vrging M. Parsons to satisfie that, which he had satisfied; do all (in my apprehen∣sion more then coniecturally tell vs, that this Case was deui∣sed either by M. Parsons his friend, or else by himselfe, ta∣ther than deriued from the practise of any Protestant. And this will be found to be not onely (as in this Exordium) pro∣bable, but euen demonstrable, by examination of the Narra∣tion it selfe.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Reckon. See aboue.
• a 1.2

  Reckon p. 674.
• * 1.3

  M. Parsons conuicted by his owne mouth.