A preamble vnto an incounter with P.R. the author of the deceitfull treatise of mitigation concerning the Romish doctrine both in question of rebellion and aequiuocation: by Thomas Morton. Published by authoritie.

The Answer.

135 He would not wittingly lie for all the world, who would not for all the world equiuocate, lest hee might he, as I feare he doth, who calleth this lapse of words [Errore and illos] a perfidious cosenage. For if I had been of so diuellish a disposition as to seek to cosen my Reader, then sure (according to the ma∣lice of the Diuell, who seeketh whom he may deuour, that is, to deuoure all) I should not haue left that Latine sentence vn∣translated, but would haue Englished it, that by the Latin and English as by a double net my cosenage might haue beene, for the number of the seduced, farre more succesfull: which con∣siderations, I hope, may free me from wilfull falshood.

136 That there is also no falshood at all, the matter it selfe will shew. For our dispute was onely concerning this one su∣spected error of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which many Iesuites and others, condemned as a Paradox, a blasphemy, an atheisme: against whom I opposed Bellarmine to acquit Caluin ab errore, that

is,* 1.1 from error, (which is all one as if I had said This error) which is the proper and only matter in question. Let P. R. procure a suspected fellow to bee arraigned at the barre, whom the Iudge knoweth to be a drunkard, a prophane swearer, and a person adulterous: but the inditement preferred against him is only cōcerning felony: the witnesses are brought forth all cir∣cumstances are examined: in the end the Iudge perceiuing the presumptions to be friuolous, shall giue this iudgement, say∣ing, Now that I haue heard the matter examined, I finde no fault in the man. By and by P. R. shall stand vp, saying, O Iudge thou knowest him to be a drunkard, a blasphemer and a lewd liuer, and canst thou find no fault with him? thou shoul∣dest haue said, I find not this fault of felony in him; and there∣fore thou hast deliuered a perfidious and a cosening sentence. A∣gaine, when our Sauiour Christ said to his Disciples,o 1.2 Pray, &c. for the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weake; would the Di∣uinity of P. R. correct the speech, and say, though it bee spo∣ken of mankind, yet it is too generally deliuered, because there is a flesh of beasts, and a spirit of Diuels: and therefore should be more expresly set downe, This kind of flesh, and this kinde of spirit? P. R. sitteth at his table, and when he seeth two sorts of bread, fine manchet, and courser; and expressing that hee de∣sireth rather the meaner kinde, should say to one of his serui∣tors a Sophister, Sirra, giue me the courses bread: would hee (for want of mentioning This bread no the Table) allow his So∣phister to runne into the stable, and bring him an horse loafe? Would he not rather whip him, for his insolency, if he would not; or for his follie, if he could not perceiue that when a man speaketh of This kinde of bread, which is before his face, it is all one as if he had said, of this bread? Such is my case, concer∣ning which (as I professe) I could not be so absurdly subtle, as willingly to conceale hoc, so am I perswaded, that no aduersa∣rie (I only except P. R.) could be so peruersly grosse, as to ex∣act a particle Hoc, i. This, knowing that the matter in que∣stion was particularly de hoc e••none, of this only error.

137 Although this last taxation be very idle,* 1.3 yet this se∣cond is (if I may so say) more friuolous, illos for illum, that is,

them in steed of him. If Bellarmine iustifie Caluin for this opi∣nion of Autotheos, doth he not likewise therein iustifie all o∣ther Protestants, which are of the same opinion? For if I con∣demne P. R. for a gracelesse Sophister, because of his defense of mentall equiuocation, do I not therein condemne all others, who are professed Aequiuocators? This is true, will P. R. say, yet the Authors word illum, should not haue beene changed into illos. This Aduersary, we see, is rigorous, I will appeale therefore vnto another Aduersary, whom I find more ingenu∣ous, euen Bellarmine himselfe; who in the place alleged, after that he had said of Caluin, I dare not say that he was in this error doth in the same Chapter iustifie Beza also, and more expres∣ly Simlerus, another Protestant, saying, Non video cur haec sen∣tentia Catholica dicenda non sit, that is, I see no cause why this sen∣tence should not be thought Catholicall: iustifying not only illum, that is, Caluin, but also Beza and Simlerus, which will make illos, euen in that opinion, which Campian, the Rhemists, their Genebrard, and others haue calumniously and wickedly called a Paradox, an Heresie, a Blasphemy, an Atheisme. Such is the blindnesse of their malice, which (God willing) I shall shew more fully in the Incounter.

A tenth obiection of fals∣hood, with this insul∣tation: Is not this rather falshood than fol∣ly? where is his naked innocen∣cy? where is his vpright consci∣ence? where is his simplicity in Christ Iesus?

138 The matter is only for changing a title of the booke of Carerius, and altering the word verò into verè: but trifles (saith P. R.) yet such as bewray a guilty minde and meaning. But I haue p 1.4 shewed euidently, that I neither altered the title, nor the text, so that P. R. standeth chargeable to his Reader to satisfie for his owne mind and meaning, which must haue beene either giddily rash, or gracelesly false.

An eleuenth obiection of falshood, with this in∣sultation: How can this malicious cauilling Mi∣nister expect to bee trusted heere∣after? or how may any thinke, that he writeth from his conscience, see∣ing him vse such grosse shifts and falshoods in so important a matter?

139 Iq 1.5 haue discussed this obiection already: the point is concerning the testimony of Doleman, because it was not ci∣ted in the very literall words, although (as I haue manifestly euinced) it was deliuered according to the reall and demon∣stratiue sense. And if such accusations might preuaile, then might P. R. (but I hope he will not be so blasphemous) accuse the diuine Oracles of God,* 1.6 the holy Scriptures, where the A∣postles citing the testimonies of the old Testament, doe not commonly allege the words, but the sense: As Ephes. 5. 14. Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall giue thee light. The words [He saith] sig∣nifie God speaking in Scripture, yet not by manifestation of words, but by collection and comprehension of sense. There be many such like places, as Heb. 1. 1. Heb. 3. 5. Act. 10. 43. Nay himselfe and their owne Popish Canon (asr 1.7 hath beene shewen) haue alleged the text of Deuteronomie, but not ac∣cording to expresse words, although not disagreeable from the true sense. And may Popes thus presume in alleging of Gods truth, and may not man make as bold with mans testi∣monie, so that still there be no deprauation of the true sense?

A twelfth obiection of falshood, wherupon he thus insulteth: Consider how falsly and calumniously this Make-bate doth reason: will hee not bee ashamed to see himselfe condemned of so great ouerlashing?

140 The question is about the hinderance of the due successi∣on of a Protestant prince vnto his crowne: This P. R. inde∣uoured to condemne by a triple instance, ands 1.8 hath himselfe beene confuted both by his owne Doctours, and also by a tri∣ple instance taken from himselfe.

A thirteenth obiection of falshood, with this spight∣full insultation: Hee allegeth Frisingensis quite contrary to his owne meaning. Is this the assurance of his vpright conscience, whereof he braggeth so much?

141 In this cauill about the testimonie of Frisingensis P. R. hath played foure treacherous parts, that he might (though falsly) conuince me of one: as hath beene alreadyt 1.9 prooued. Yet in this, together with that which followeth, he triumph∣eth more than of any taxation he hath in the whole booke.

A foureteenth and most rigo∣rous obiection of falshood, with this insultation: It is a fraud and impudencie, or rather impudent impietie, a slandrous obiection, shamelesse dealing. Will euer any man credit T. M. heereafter?

142

I am ready to heare this grand crimination of P. R. who beginneth thus:u 1.10 But the next fraud or impudencie, or rather impudent impietie, is that which insueth within foure lines after, in these words: Pope Gregorie the seuenth (sayth your Chronologer) was excommunicate of the Bishops of Italie, for that he had defamed the Apostolike See by Symonie, and other capitall crimes. And then citeth for proofe heereof, Lam∣bertus Scaffnaburg. Anno 1077. As if this our Chronogra∣pher had related this as a thing of truth, or that it were approoued by him, and not rather a slanderous obiection cast out by his Ad∣uersaries that followed the part of Henrie the Emper••r. Let any man reade the place and yeere heere cited, and if hee be a modest man he will blush at such shamelesse dealing. For that no Author of that time doth more earnestly defend the cause and vertuous life of Pope Hildebrand,* 1.11 then this man, whose words are: Sed a∣pud omnes sanum aliquid sapientes luce clarius constabat falsa esse quae dicebantur: Nam & Papa tàm eximiè támque Apo∣stolicè vitam instituebat, &c. But with all men of sound wise∣dome it was more cleere then the Sunne, that the things which were spoken against Pope Hildebrand were false, for that th

Pope did lead an excellent and Apostolike life, as the sublimitie of his conuersation did admit no least spot of wicked rumour against him, he li••ing in that great citie and open concourse of men, it could not haue beene hidden, if he had committed any vnlawfull thing in his life: and moreouer the signes and miracles, which by his pray∣ers 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 detractors. And againe: Hildebrandi constantia & inuictus aduersus auaritiam animus omnia ex∣cludebat argumenta humanae fallaciae: The constancie of Pope Hildebrand and his inuincible minde against the corruption of a∣uarice, did exclude all arguments of humane fallacie and deceit. So Lambertus. And now let the reader consider with what con∣science and fidelitie T. M. hath cited him for condemnation of Pope Hildebrand. Hee relateth indeed what certaine noblemen, cap∣taines, and others, that came with the Emperour to the castle of Canusium, and would not haue had him made peace with the Pope in that place, saide in their rage afterwards, for that against their counsell he had submitted himselfe vnto the said Pope: and 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;* 1.12 Fremere omnes (saith this story) & insanire, verbis & manibus coeperunt, Apostolicae legationi irrisorijs exclamati∣onibus obstrepere, conuicia & maledicta turpissima quaecun{que} furor suggessisset, irrogare. All of them began to fret and wax fierce both in words and casting their hands, and with scornefull outcries to contradict this holy Apostolical legation sent vnto them, and to cast vpon the Pope all the most foule reproches and maledi∣ctions that furie could suggest vnto them. Thus saith Lambertus, and setteth downe the particular slanderous reproches heere cited by T. M. which he approoueth not, but condemneth, as you haue heard, and highly commendeth not onely the vertue but also the sanctitie of the Pope. And will euer any man credit T. M. any more in any thing that he alledgeth, when this consciencelesse falsifi∣cation is once discouered in him? yea though it were but once thorowout his whole booke, it were sufficient to prooue that he dea∣leth not out of any faith or conscience at all. If an enemie would dis∣credit

both Christ, and Christian religion, and say, your own Euan∣gelists doe recount foule things against him (as heere this Mini∣ster saith our Historiographer doth of Pope Gregorie) and name∣ly that he was accused by the Scribes and Pharisees for casting out Diuels by the power of Beelzebub, for deceiuing the people, for denying tribute to be paid to Caesar, for moouing sedition, and other like crimes, which our Euangelists doe recount indeed, but do con∣demne them as false and calumnious; were not this as good and as faithfull a maner of reasoning, as this other of Thomas Morton out of Lambertus and Frisingensis against Pope Hildebrand, who is by them both most highly commended as you heard, and his aduersaries condemned? Truly if any man can shew me out of all the Catholike writers that be extant, English or other, that euer any of them vsed this shamefull fraud in writing, where no excuse can free them from malicious and witting falshood, then will I grant that this 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 be∣leeue him euer after. And this shall suffice for a taste onely of M. Mortons maner of proceeding, for that to prosecute all particulars would require a whole volume, and by this few you may guesse at the mans veine and spirit in writing.

Hitherto P. R.

Notes

• * 1.1

  A stupid cauill.
• o 1.2

  Matt. 26. 42.
• * 1.3

  Another fri∣uolous cauill.
• p 1.4

  See aboue §. 6. pag. 1••.
• q 1.5

  See aboue §. 7. pag. 22. nū. 23. 24. 25. &c.
• * 1.6

  An impious cauill.
• r 1.7

  See a little before in this §. num. 132.
• s 1.8

  See aboue §. 7. pag. 19. nū. 21, &c.
• t 1.9

  See aboue §. 8.
• u 1.10

  Treat. Mitig. ca 6. num 37. pag. 215.
• * 1.11

  La. S••aff. hist Germ. ann. 1077. sub fin.
• * 1.12

  Lamb. vbi••sup.