The iudgment of a Catholicke English-man, living in banishment for his religion VVritten to his priuate friend in England. Concerninge a late booke set forth, and entituled; Triplici nodo, triplex cuneus, or, An apologie for the oath of allegiance. Against two breves of Pope Paulus V. to the Catholickes of England; & a letter of Cardinall Bellarmine to M. George Blackwell, Arch-priest. VVherein, the said oath is shewed to be vnlawfull vnto a Catholicke conscience; for so much, as it conteyneth sundry clauses repugnant to his religion.
Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.
highlight hits: on | off
Page  69

ABOVT CARDINALL BELLARMINES LETTER TO M.r BLACKVVELL: And answere giuen thereunto, by the Apologer.

Paragr. III.

THE last Part of this Apology con∣cerneth a letter written by Cardinall Bellarmine → in Rome, vnto George Black∣well Arch-priest in England:* which letter, as appeareth by the argument therof, was written out of this oc∣casion: That wheras vpon the com∣ming forth of the forenamed new Oath, intituled, Of Allegiance, there were found diuers poynts combined togeather, some appertayning mani∣festly to Ciuill Allegiance, wherat no man made scru∣ple, some other seeming to include other matters, con∣trary to some part of the Catholicke faith, at least in the common sense as they ly; there arose a doubt whether the said Oath might be taken simply and wholy, by a Catholicke man, as it is there proposed Page  70 without any further distinction, or explication there∣of. Wherupon some learned men at home being diffe∣rent in opinions,* the case was consulted abroad, where all agreed (as before hath byn shewed) that it could not be taken wholy with safety of conscience, and so also the Pope declared the case by two seuerall Breues.

II. In the meane space it happened, that M. Black∣well being taken, was committed to prison, and soone after, as he had byn of opinion before, that the said Oath might be taken as it lay in a certayne sense; so it being offred vnto him, he tooke it himselfe. Which thing being noysed abroad, and the fact generally misliked by all sortes of Catholicke people in other Realmes, as offensiue, and scandalous in regard of his place, and per∣son, so much respected by them: Cardinall Bellarmine → , as hauing had some old acquaintance with him in for∣mer yeares, as it may seeme, resolued out of his par∣ticuler loue, & zeale to the Common cause of Religion, and speciall affection to his person, to write a letter vnto him, therby to let him know what reportes, and iudgment there was made of his fact, throughout those partes of Christendome where he remayned,* togeather with his owne opinion also, which consisted in two poynts, the one that the Oath, as it stood, compounded of different clauses, some lawfull, & some vnlawfull, could not be taken with safety of Conscience: the other, that he being in the dignity he was of Prelacy, and Pa∣storall Charge, ought to stand firme and constant for example of others, & rather to suffer any kynd of danger or domage, then to yield to any vnlawfull thing, such as the Cardinall held this Oath to be.

III. This Letter was written vpon the 28. day of September 1607. and it was subscribed thus in Latyn; Admodum R. dae Dom. is V ae. Frater & seruus in Christo. Robertus Card. Bellarminus.Page  71 Which our Apologer translateth, Your very Reuerēd Brother: wheras the word very Reuerend in the letter,* is gyuen to the Arch-priest,* and not to Card. Bellarmine → , which the interpreter knew well inough, but that wanting other matter, would take occasion of cauilling by a wilfull mistaking of his owne, as often he doth throughout this Answere to Bellarmine → , as in part will appeare by the few notes which heere I am to set downe, leauing the morefull Answere to the Cardinall himselfe, or some other by his appoyntment, which I doubt not, but will yield very ample satisfaction in that behalfe. For that, in truth, I fynd, that great aduantage is gyuen vnto him, for the defence of his said Epistle, and that the ex∣ceptions taken there against it, be very weake and light, and as easy to be dissolued by him, and his penne, as a thin mist by the beames of the sunne.

IIII. As for example, the first exception is (which no doubt were great,* if it were true in such a man as Cardinall Bellarmine → is) that he hath mistaken the whole State of the Questiō, in his writing to M. Blackwell, going about to impugne only the old Oath of Supremacy,* in steed of this new Oath, entituled, Of Allegiance: but this is most cleerly refuted by the very first lynes almost of the letter it self. For that telling M. Blackwell, how sory he was vpon the report, that he had taken illicitum Iuramen∣tum, an vnlafull Oath, he expoundeth presently, what Oath he meaneth, saying: Not therfore (deare Brother) is that Oath lawfull, for that it is offered somwhat tempered & modi∣fyed, &c. Which is euidently meant of the new Oath of Allegiance, not only tempered with diuers lawfull clauses of Ciuill Obedience, as hath byn shewed, but interlaced also with other members, that reach to Religion: wheras the old Oath of Supremacie, hath no such mixture, but is playnly, and simply set downe, for absolute excluding the Popes Supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall, and for ma∣king the King supreme Head of the Church in the same Page  72 causes: all which is most euident by the Statutes made about the same, from the 25 yeare of King Henry the 8. vnto the end of the raigne of King Edward the sixt.

V. Only I do heere note by the way,* that the Apolo∣ger in setting downe the forme of the Oath of Supremacie saith: I A. B. do vtterly testifie, and declare in my Conscience, that the Kings Highnes is the only Supreme Gouernour, as well in all causes spirituall as temporall, wheras in the Statute of 26. of K. Henry the 8.* where the tytle of Supremacy is enacted, the wordes are these:*Be it enacted by this present Parlament, that the King our Soueraigne, his heirs and successors, shalbe taken, accepted, and reputed the only Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England, called Ecclesia Anglicana, and shall haue, & inioy, annexed, and vnited to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme, as well the tytle and style therof, as all honours, digniyes, authorityes, an∣nuityes, profitis, and commodityes to the said Dignity of Supreme Head of the said Church, belonging &c.

VI. And further, wheras two yeares after, an Oath was deuised for confirmation heerof in Parlament, the wordes of the Oath are sett downe:*That he shall sweare to renounce vtterly, and relinquish the Bishop of Rome, and his Au∣thority, power, and iurisdiction &c. And that from hence forth, he shall accept, repute, and take the Kings M. tie to be the only Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England &c. And that the refusers of this Oath, shall be reputed traytors and suffer the paynes of death &c. And in other Statutes it is decreed, that it shall be treason to deny this title of headship to the King. And by like Decree of Parlament, it is declared vnder King Edward,* what this Authority of headshipp is, when they say: For so much as all Authority of Iurisdiction spirituall, and temporall is deryued, & deduced from the Kings M. tie as Su∣preme Head of these Churches, & Realmes of England and Ireland &c.

VII. This was wont to be the doctryne of Supremacy in the tymes of King Henry, and King Edward, and it was death to deny this tytle, or not to sweare the same: now Page  73 our Apologer thinketh it not good to giue it any longer to his Ma.tie that now is, but calleth him only Supreme Gouernour, which is a new deuise taken from Iohn Rey∣nolds, & other his fellowes, who aboue twenty yeares gone, being pressed by his Aduersary M. Hart, about cal∣ling Q. Elizabeth,*Head of the Church, he denyeth flatly, that they called her so, but only Supreme Gouernesse, which I had thought they had done in regard of her sex, that is not permitted to speake in the Church. But now I perceaue they haue passed the same also ouer to his M.tie not permitting him to inherite the tytles, eyther of King Edward, or King Henry; which misliketh not vs at all, for that so farre they may passe heerin, as we may come to agree. For if they will vnderstand by supreme Gouernour, the temporall Princes Supreme Authority ouer all persons of his dominions, both Ecclesiasticall, and Temporall, in temporall matters, excepting only Spirituall (wherin as yow haue heard a litle before S. Ambrose told the Christian Emperours of his tyme, that being Lay-men, they could not rightly meddle:) I see no great difficulty, which in this affayre would re∣mayne betweene vs.

VIII. To returne then to the Charge of ouersight, and grosse mistaking (to vse the Apologers words) layd by him to Cardinal Bellarmine → , for impugning the ancienter Oath of Supremacy, insteed of this later called, Of Allegiance, & Of giuing the child a wrong name (as he saith,) I see not by what least colour, or shew of reason, it may stād against him. For besydes that which we haue said before, of the tēperament, & modification mentioned by him to be craftily couched in this later Oath, which by his letter he refu∣teth (I meane of lawfull,*and vnlawfull clauses) which must needes be vnderstood of the second Oath; he adioyneth presently the cōfutation of those modifications, saying: For yow know that those kind of modifications, are nothing els, but sleightes & subtilityes of Sathā, that the Catholicke faith, touching the Page  74 Primacy of the Sea Apostolicke, might eyther secretly, or openly be shott at. Lo heere he mentioneth both the Oathes, the one which shooteth secretly at the Primacy of the Sea Apo∣stolicke (which is the later Of Allegiance) & the other that impugneth it openly, which is the first of the Supremacy. And as he nameth the secōd in the first place, so doth he principally prosecute the same, & proueth the vnlaw∣fulnes therof, mentioning the other but only as by the way, for that it is as Totū ad Partē to the former, as a man can hardly speake of particuler mēbers of a body, with∣out naming also the said body (as whē S. Iames inuegheth against the tōgue,* he saith, That it inflameth the whole body:) so Card. all Bellarmine → could hardly reproue the particuler branches of the Oath of Allegiance, tending against sundry parts of the Popes Primacie, without mentioning the ge∣nerall Oath of Supremacy, though it were not his purpose chiefly to impugne that, but the other. Which later Oath, albeit the Apologer sticketh not to say, that it toucheth not any part of the Popes Spirituall Supremacy: yet in the very next period, he contradicteth & ouerthroweth himselfe therin. For so much, as deuiding the said Oath of Allegiance into 14.* seuerall partes or parcels, twelue of them, at least, do touch the said Supremacy one way or other, as by examination yow will fynd, and we shall haue occasion after to declare more at large.

IX. As for example,* he writeth thus:

And that the Iniustice (saith he) as well as the error of Bellarmine → his grosse mistaking in this poynt, may yet be more cleerly discouered; I haue thought good to insert heere imme∣diatly the contrary conclusions to all the poynts and Articles, wherof this other late Oath doth consist, wher∣by it may appeare, what vnreasonable and rebellious poynts he would dryue his Ma.ties Subiects vnto, by refusing the whole body of that Oath, as it is conceaued.
For he that shall refuse to take this Oath, must of necessity hold these propositions following: First that our Soue∣raignPage  75 Lord King Iames is not the lawfull King of this Kingdome, and of all other his Ma.ties Dominions. Secondly that the Pope by his owne authority may depose, &c. But who doth not see what a simple fallacy this is, which the Logicians do call A composito ad diuisa, from denying of a compound, to in∣ferre the denyall of all the parcels therin conteyned. As if some would say, that Plato was a man borne in Greece, of an excellent wit, skilfull in the Greeke language, most excellent of all other Philosophers, and would require this to be confirmed by an Oath, some Platonist, perhaps, would be cōtēt to sweare it: but if some Stoicke, or Peripa∣teticke, or Professour of some other Sect in Philosophy, should refuse the said Oath, in respect of the last clause, might a man inferre against him in all the other clauses also, Ergò he denyeth Plato to be a Man? He denyeth him to be borne in Greece, he denyeth him to be of an excellēt wit, he denyeth him to be skilfull in the Greeke tongue, &c. Were not this a bad kynd of arguing?

X. So in like manner, if an Arrian, or Pelagian Prince, should exact an Oath at his Subiects hands,* concerning diuers articles of Religion, that were belieued by them both, and in the end, or middle therof, should insert some clauses, sounding to the fauour of their owne sect, for which the Subiect should refuse the whole body of that Oath, as it was conceyued; could the other in iu∣stice accuse him, for denying all the seuerall articles of his owne Religion also, which therin are mencyoned? Who seeth not the iniustice of this manner of dealing? And yet this is that which our Apologer vseth heere with Catholicks, affirming in good earnest, that he which refuseth the whole body of this Oath, as it is con∣ceyued (in respect of some clauses therof that stand against his Conscience, about matters of Religion) re∣fuseth consequently euery poynt and parcell therof, and must of necessity hold (in the first place) that our Soue∣raigne Lord King Iames is not the lawfull King of this Page  76 Kingdome, and of all other his Ma.ties Dominions. The contrary wherof all Catholicks do both confesse, and professe: & consequently it is a meere calumniation that they deny this. But let vs see, how he goeth, for∣ward in prouing this whole Oath to be lawfull to a Ca∣tholicke mans Conscience.

XI. And that the world (saith he) may yet further see,* his Ma.ties and whole States setting downe of this Oath, did not proceed from any new inuention of theirs, but as it is warranted by the word of God:* So doth it take the example from an Oath of Allegiance, decreed a thousand yeares agone, which a famons Councell then, togeather with diuers other Councels, were so farre from condemning (as the Pope now hath done this Oath) as I haue thought good to set downe their owne wordes heere in that purpose;

wherby it may appeare, that his Ma.tie craueth nothing now of his Subiects in this Oath, which was not expresly, and carefully com∣manded them by the Councels to be obeyed, without exception of persons. Nay not in the very particuler poynt of Equiuocation, which his Ma.tie in this Oath is so carefull to haue eschewed: but yow shall heere see the said Councels in their Decrees,
as carefull to prouide for the eschewing of the same;* so as, almost euery poynt of that Action, and this if ours, shall be found to haue relation, and agreeance one with the other, saue only in this; that those old Councels were carefull, and straite in commanding the taking of the same; wheras by the contrary, he, that now vaunteth himselfe to be Head of all Councells, is as carefull and strait in the pro∣hibition of all men, from the taking of this Oath of Allegiance. So he.

XII. And I haue alledged his discourse at large, to the end yow may better see his fraudulent manner of proceeding. He saith, That the example of this Oath is taken from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand Page  77 yeares agone in the Councels of Toledo, but especially the fourth,* which prouided also for the particuler poynt of Equiuocation: But let any man read those Councels, which are 13. in number, and if he fynd eyther any forme of an Oath prescribed, or any mention of Equiuo∣cation, but only of flat lying and perfidious dealing; let him discredit all the rest that I do write. And if he fynd none at all, as most certainly he shall not; then let him consider of the bad cause of this Apologer, that dryueth him to such manner of dealing, as to auouch, Euery point of that Action to haue agreeance with the offering of this Oath.

XIII. True it is that those Councels of Toledo, vpon certayne occasions, which presently we shall de∣clare, do recommend much to the subiects of Spayne, both Gothes and Spaniards; that they do obserue their Oath of fidelity made vnto their Kings,* especially vnto Sisenandus, for whose cause principally this matter was first treated in the fourth Councel of Toledo, but no speciall forme is prescribed by the said Councell: nor is Equiuocation so much as named therin, but only (as hath bene said) Iurare mendaciter▪ to sweare falsely, as the wordes of the Councel are. Which how far it is from the true nature of Equiuocation hath bene lately and largly demon∣strated as yow know.

XIV. The cause of the treatie of this matter in the 4. Councell of Toledo, was, for that one Sisenandus a Noble man of the bloud of the Gothes, and a great Cap∣taine, taking opportunitie of the euill life of his King Sintila, whome he had serued, did by some vio∣lence (as most of the* Spanish Historiographers write, though confirmed afterward by the Common-wealth, and proued a very good King) and, as Paulus Aemilius in his French Historie recordeth, by helpe of Dagobert King of France, put out the said Suintila: and fearing lest the same people that had made defection to him, might Page  78 by the same meanes fall from him againe, he procured in the third yeare of his raigne, this fourth Councell of Toledo, to be celebrated of 70. Prelates, as some say, and as others, of 68. hoping by their meanes, that his safe∣ty in the Crowne should be confirmed. Wherupon it is set downe, in the Preface of the said Councell, that comming into the same, accompanyed with many noble and honorable persons of his trayne;*Coram sacerdo∣tivus Dei humi prostratus, cum lachrymis, & gemitibus pro se inter∣ueniedum postulauit: He prostrate on the ground before the Priests of God, with teares and sobbes, besought them to make intercession vnto God for him. And after that, religiously exhorted the Synod to be myndfull of the Fathers De∣crees, for confirmation of Ecclesiasticall rytes &c. Wherupon after seauenty and three Decrees made, about Ecclesia∣sticall matters, which whosoeuer will read, shall fynd them wholy against the Protestants,* as setting downe, & describing the whole vse of the Catholicke Church then in Spayne (which concurred with our first Pri∣mitiue Church of England conforme to that which now also is seene there) they in the last Canon, which was the 74. turned themselues to treat in like manner of matters of the Common wealth, appoynting the order how their Kings for the tyme to come, should be esta∣blished: Defuncto in pace Principe, Primates Gen. is cum Sacerdoti∣bus, successorem Regni, consilio communi, constituant. The Prince being dead in peace, let the Nobility of the Nation, to∣geather with the Priests, by common counsell, appoynt a successour in the kingdome &c.

XV. And then next to this,* they do excommuni∣cate all those, that shall attempt the destruction of the present King, or shall breake their Oath of Fidelity made vnto him: Aut si quis praesumptione Tyrannica Regni asi ium vsurpauerit: or if any shall, by Tyrann. cal presumption, vsurpe the dignity of the Crowne, aut Sacramentum fidei suae, quod pro Patriae, Gentisque Gothorum stau, vel conseruatione Page  79 Regiae salutis pollicitus est,* violauerit, aut Regem neci attrectauerit: If any man shall violate the Oath of his fidelitie, which he hath promised for the state, or conseruation of his Countrey, and Gothish Nation, and of the Kings safety, or shall attempt the Kings death &c. Lett him be accursed (say they) in the sight of God the Father, and of his Angels, and cast out from the Catholicke Church, which by his periury he hath profaned; and let him be separated from all Society of Christians, togeather with all his associates in such attēptes. And this curse they do renew and repeat diuers tymes in that Canon; Vt haec tremenda, & toties iterata sententia, nullum ex nobis prae∣senti atque aeterno condemnet iudicio; that this dreadfull and often iterated sentence of excommunication, do not condemne any of vs with iudgement present, and euerlasting also, if we incurre the same.

XVI. This then was the great care which those ancient Fathers (wherof the holy and learned man S. Isidorus,* Archbishop of Siuill was the first that subscribed) had of the dutifull obedience, & fidelity of subiects to∣wards their Princes, vnto whome they had once sworne the same. But as for any particuler forme of Oath there prescribed, wherby this new Oath now required of Alle∣giāce may be framed, that hath so many clauses therin of scruple of cōscience to the receauer, I fynd none at all. And no doubt, but if this King Sisenandus should haue exacted of any of these Bishops, or other his subiects, such an Oath of Allegiance, as should haue beene mixed with any clauses preiudiciall to any of those points of Ecclesiasticall affaires, which are handled and decreed by them, in the said 73. precedent Canons of this Coū∣cell, or others contrary to their Conscience or iudg∣ment in Religion: they would haue beene so farre of from yielding therunto, as they would rather haue gi∣uen their liues, then their consents to such an Oath.

XVII. But to go forward, and speake a word or two more of this Councell of Toledo. After those 70. Page  80 Fathers had taken this order for the temporall safetie of their Prince, and Gothish Nation (for that was a principall point that none should be admitted to the Crowne, but of that race) they turne their speach to the present King Sisenandus,* and to his successours, ma∣king this exhortation vnto him. Te quoquè praesentem Re∣gem, ac uturos aetatum sequentium Principes, humilitate, qua debemus, deposcimus, vt moderati & mites erga subiecos existentes &c.

We with due humility, do require at your hāds also that are our present King, and at the hands of those that shall ensue in future tymes, that yow be moderate and myld towards your subiects, and do rule your people committed vnto yow by God, in iustice and piety; and do yield to Christ, the giuer of all your power, good correspondence by raigning ouer them, in humility of harte, and indeauour of good workes &c. And we do promulgate here against all Kings to come this sentence; Vt si quis ex eis, contra reuerentiam legum, superba dominatione, & fastu Regio in flagitiis crudelissimam potestatem in populis exer∣cuerit, Anathematis sententia à Christo Domino condemnetur. &c. That if any of them shall against the reuerence of the lawes, by proud domination, and Kingly haughtines, exercise wickednes, and cruell power vpon the people committed to their charge, let him be condemned of Christ, by the sentence of curse; and let him haue his separation, and iudgment from God himselfe.

XVIII. After this, for better establishment of the said present King Sisenandus,* they do confirme the depo∣sition and expulsion, from the Crowne, of the foresaid King Suintila, (which by error of the print, is called in the Booke of Councells, Semithilana) pronouncing both him his wife, and their brother, to be iustly expul∣sed for their wickednes: though the foresaid S. Isidorus, then liuing, and writing the History of Spayne, dedica∣ted to this King Sisenandus, doth speake much good of the* former parte of the other King his life and raigne. Page  81 And fynally some fyue yeares after this agayne in the sixt Councell of Toledo, being gathered togeather in the same Church of S. Leocadia, the said Bishops, togea∣ther with the Nobility, did make this law, and pre∣scribed this forme of Oath to all Kings of that nation, Vt quisquis succedentium,*temporum Regni sortitus suerit apicem, non anteà conscendat Regiam Sedem, quàm inter reliquas conditiones, Sacramento pollicitus fuerit, hanc se Ca∣tholicam non permissurum eos violare fidem. That whatsoeuer future King,* shall obtayne the height of this King∣dome, he shall not be permitted to ascend to the Royall seate therof, vntill he haue sworne, among other conditions, that, he will neuer suffer his subiects to violate this Catholicke faith, Marke that he saith (this) which was the Catholicke faith then held in Spayne, and explicated in those Councels of Toledo; the particulers wherof do easely shew, that they were as opposite to the Protestant faith, as we are now.

XIX. So as, all this is against the Apologer: for that in these Councells no particuler forme of any Oath was set downe, or exhibited at all to Subiects, that we can read of, but only in generall, it is commanded, That all do keepe their Oath of Allegiance sworne to their Princes, at their first entrance, or afterward. Which thing, no Pope did euer forbid, and all English Catho∣licks at this day do offer willingly to performe the same to this Ma.tie; and consequently, all that ostentation made by the Minister before, That this Oath is no new in∣uention: That it doth take the example from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand yeares gone, by a famous Councell: That the Councel prouided in particuler for the poynts of Equiuocation: That almost euery poynt of that action hath agreeance with this of ours, sauing only in this, that the Councell was carefull, & straite in commanding the taking of the same, and Pope Paulus carefull and strayt in the prohibition &c.

Page  82 XX. All this, I say, falleth by it selfe to the ground: for so much, as neyther that Councell commanded the taking of any Oath, nor prescribed any forme to Sub∣iects, nor Pope Paulus prohibiteth this, so farre as it con∣cerneth Temporall, and Ciuill Obedience, as hath byn declared. And whatsoeuer the Apologer cyteth more out of these Councels, the meanest Reader, by looking vpon it, will easely espy, that it maketh nothing at all for him, or against vs, and consequently the entring into the narration of this mater, with so great osten∣tation, as, That the world may see, that it proceeded not of any new inuention, but is warranted by the word of God, authorized by so auncient a Councell, and the like: All this (I say) was needles; for so much, as nothing is found in this Coun∣cell that agreeth with our case, but only the naming and recommending of an Oath of fidelity, wherin we also fully agree and consent with our Aduersary.

The second Part of this Paragraph.

NOw then to come to the particuler Answere of our Apologer to the Card.lls Letter,* he doth for diuers leaues togeather, as it were, dally with him, picking quarrells here and there, vntill he come to the mayne charge of contradiction of himself, to himself, not only in this Letter, but throughout all his workes. And albeit I doubt not, but that the Card.ll or some other by his appointment, will discusse all these matters largly and Page  83 sufficiently: yet for so much, as I haue promised to giue you my iudgment of all, I shall briefly in like māner lay forth what I haue obserued about these pointe.

XXII. Page 57. of his Apology he writeth thus: That some of such Priests, and Iesuits, as were the greatest traytors, and fomentors of the greatest conspiracyes, against her late Maiesty, gaue vp F. Robert Bellarmyne, for one of their greatest authorities, and Oracles. And for proofe he citeth in the margent Campian and Hart:*See the Conference in the Tower. By which I discouer a greater abuse then I could haue imagined, would euer haue come from a man carefull of his credit: for I haue seene and perused the Conference of M.r D. Iohn Reynolds with M. Iohn Hart in the Tower, vpon the yeare 1583. two yeares after the death of F. Campian, and there it appeareth in∣deed that the said M. Hart alleadgeth diuers tymes the opinions and proofes of F. Robert Bellarmyne, then pu∣blick Reader of Controuersies in Rome, but alwayes about matters of Deuinity and Controuersies, and neuer about Treasons or Conspiracyes. And as for F. Campian, he is neuer read to mention him, eyther in the one or the other. Consider then the deceitfull equiuocation here vsed, that for so much, as M. Hart alleadged F. Robert Bellarmine → sometymes in matters of Controuersie in that conference, therefore both he & F. Campian allead∣ged him for an Author and Oracle of Conspiracy against the Queene. And how can these things be defended with any shew or probability of truth?

XXIII. Page 60. he frameth a great reprehension against the Card.ll for that in his letter he saith, that this Oath is not therfore lawfull, for that it is offered as tem∣pered and modified. Whereupon the Apologer plyeth, and insulteth, as though the Card.ll had reprehended the tē∣perate speech therin vsed, adding, That in Luther and others of the Protestant writers, we mislike their bold & free speaking, as comming from the diuells instinct. Page  84

And now if we speake (saith he) moderately, and tem∣perately, it must be tearmed the diuells craft, and ther∣fore we may iustly complaine with Christ, That when we mourne, they will not lament, and when we pype they will not dance. And neyther Iohn Baptist his seuerity, nor Christ his meeknes can please them, who buyld but to their owne Monarchy, vpon the ground of their owne Traditions, and not to Christ, &c.
Thus he, and much more exprobration to this effect, that we mislike the temperate style and speach vsed in this Oath of Allegiance. But all is quite mistaken, and the Apologer hath iust cause to blush at this error, if it were error and not wilfull mistaking. For that Bellarmyne doth not say, that this Oath is temperate in wordes, but tem∣pered in matter, aliquo modo temperatum & modificatum: in a certayne sort tempered and modified by the offerers, in setting downe some clauses lawfull, touching Cyuill Obedience, and adioyning others vnlawfull, that con∣cerne Conscience, and Religion. Which meaning of Bellarmyne is euident by the example, which he allead∣geth, of the Ensignes of the Emperour Iulian, out of S. Gregory Nazianzen, to wit; That the images of Pagan Gods were mingled, and combined togeather with the Emperours picture, & therby so tempered, and modified, as a man could not adore the one,* without the other. Which being so, let the indifferent Reader consider what abuse is offered to Card.all Bellarmyne, in char∣ging him to mislike temperate speach in the forme of this Oath, which of likely hood he neuer thought on, and yet theron to found so great an inference, as to accuse him to buyld therby to a Monarchy, and not to Christ. Is this a token of want of better matter, or no?

XXIV. Page 62. the Apologer hauing said with great vehemency of asseueration,

That heauen and earth are no further asunder, then the profession of a Temporall Obedience, to a Temporall King, is diffe∣rent Page  85 from any thing belonging to the Catholicke faith, or Supremacy of S. Peter (which we graunt also, if it be meere Temporall Obedience without mixture of other clauses:)
* he proposeth presently two questions for application of this to his purpose. First this: As for the Catholicke Religion (saith he) can there be one word found in all this Oath, tending to matter of Religion? The second thus: Doth he that taketh it, promise to belieue, or not to belieue any article of Religion? Wherunto I answere first to the first, and then to the second. To the first, that if it be graunted, that [ 1] power, and authority of the Pope, and Sea Apostolicke left by Christ, for gouerning his Church in all occa∣sions & necessityes, be any point belonging to Religion among Catholicks, thē is there not only some one word, but many sentences, yea ten or twelue articles, or branches therin, tending and sounding that way as before hath bene shewed.

XXV. To the second question may make answere [ 2] euery clause in effect of the Oath it self. As for example the very first:*I A. B. doe truly, and sincerely acknowledge, professe, testify, & declare in my Conscience, that the Pope neither of him∣self, nor by any authority of the Sea or Church of Rome, hath any po∣wer & authority to &c. doth not this include eyther beliefe, or vnbeliefe? Againe: I doe further su eare, that I doe frō my hart abhorre, detest, & abiure, as impous, & here icall, that damnable do∣ctrine, & position, That Princes which be excommunicated, and de∣priued by the Pope, may be deposed &c. Doth not heere the swearer promise, not to belieue that doctrine which he so much detesteth? How thē doth the Apologer so grosly forget, and contradict himself, euen then, when he goeth about to proue contradictions in his Aduersary?

XXVI. It followeth consequently in the Oath: And I doe belieue,*and in Conscience am resolued, That neyther the Pope, nor any person whatsoeuer, hath power to absolue me from this Oath, or any part therof. These wordes are plaine as yow see. And what will the Apologer say heere? Is nothing Page  86 promised in those wordes to be belieued, or not to be belieued?

XXVII. But now we come to the contradictions of Cardinall Bellarmyne, wherof the Apologer taketh occasion to treate, for that the Cardinall affirmeth in one part of his letter, That neyther his Maiesty of England, nor any Prince else, hath cause to feare violence from the Pope; for that it was neuer heard of, from the Churches infancy, vntill this day, that any Pope did commaund,* That any Prince, though an Hereticke, though an Ethnicke, though a Persecutour, should be murthered, or did allow the murther, when it was done by an other.* Which assertion, the Apologer to improue, bringeth in examples first of doctrine, that Bellarmyne himself doth hold,

That Princes vpon iust causes may be deposed by Popes: and then of facts, That diuers Emperours haue bene deposed, and great warres raised against them, by Popes, as Bellarmyne in his workes doth confesse, and cannot deny, and consequently doth contradict himself.
But surely this seemeth to me a very simple opposition or contradiction. For who doth not see, that these things may well stand togeather, are not opposite, and may be both true; That Popes vpon iust causes, haue waged warres against diuers Princes, and Potentates; and yet neuer caused any to be vnlaw∣fully made away, murthered, or allowed of their murthers committed by others. For, may not we say iustly, that warlike Princes are no murtherers, though in the Acts of warres thēselues, many haue bene slaine, by their authority and commandement? Or may not we deliuer our Iudges of England, from the cryme of murther, though many mens deathes haue proceeded from them, by way of Iustice? No man (I thinke) will deny it.

XXVIII. And so if some Popes haue had iust warres with some Princes, Kinges or Emperours, or haue per∣suaded Page  87 themselues, that they were iust, in respect of some supposed disorders of the said Princes (as here is mentioned the warre, and other hostile proceedings of Pope Gregory the seauenth against the Emperour Henry the fourth) this is not contrary to the saying of Cardinall Bellarmyne,*That no Pope euer commaunded any Prince to be murthered, or allowed therof, after it was done by an other. For as for that which heere is affirmed by the Apo∣loger, That the Pope was inraged at the Emperour Henry the 5.*for giuing buriall to his Fathers dead corps, after the Pope had stirred him vp against his Father, and procured his ruyne, neyther proueth the matter, nor is altogeather true, as heere it is alleadged. Not the first: for this pro∣ueth not, that the Pope eyther commaunded or procured this death, which Bellarmyne denyed. Not the second: for that the two Authours by him cyted in his margent, to wit, Platina and Cuspinian, doe not auerre the same. For in Platina I finde no such thing at all; and Cuspinian his wordes are plaine to the contrary:* That when Henry the Father was dead, and buried in a Mo∣nastery at Liege, his Sonne would not make peace with the Bishop of that place, called*Otbert, except the dead body were pulled out of the graue againe, as it was, and so remayned for fiue yeares.

XXIX. And againe Cuspinian writeth, That the report was, that Gregory the 7. did before his death ab∣solue the Emperour; but that his Sonne Henry the 5. and his followers neuer left to sollicite the succeeding Popes vntill he was excōmunicated againe,* & thereupon had afterward this Christian buriall denyed him. And how then, is all this ascribed to the Pope, which pro∣ceeded from the Some against his Father? Our Apo∣loger saith, That he was sett on by the Pope to rebell against him, but this his witnesses affirme not. For Cuspinian saith that it was, Suasu Marchionis Theobaldi, Be∣rengarij Comitis Noricorum, & Ottonis sibi ex materna sirpe Page  88 cognati. And in this commonly agree all other Authors, asaVrspergensis, who then liued,bCrantzius,cSigonius,dNauclerus, and others. And why then is this so vniustly layed vpon the Pope? What Author can he bring for it, that auoucheth the same? Why is it couertly cast in, as though this matter apperteyned to Gregory the seauenth, who in his life had warres with Henry the fourth, but yet dyed before him? Heere then nothing is so apparent, as the desire to say much against Popes, with neuer so litle occasion, and lesse proofe. But let vs go forward.

XXX. In the second place he produceth the appro∣bation of the slaughter of the late King of France by Pope Sixtus in his speech in the Consistory: But no record of credit, eyther in Rome or elswhere, can be found to testify, that any such speech euer was had by Pope Sixtus.* And I vnderstand that diuers Cardinalls are yet liuing, who were then present in the first Consi∣story, after that newes arriued, who deny that Sixtus euer vttered any such words, as of the allowance of that horrible fact, though he might, and did highly admire the strange prouidence of God, in chastising by so vnexpected a way, so foule and impious a murther, as that King had committed vpon a Prince, Bishop, and Cardinall (and those neerest of bloud vnto his Maiesty of England) without any forme of iudgment at all. And that a spectacle heerby of Gods Iustice was proposed vnto Princes,* to be moderate in their power, and passions: for that in the midst of his great and Royall army, and corporall guardes, he was strangely slaine by a simple vnarmed man, when nothing was lesse expe∣cted, or feared. Nor can any thing be more improbable or ridiculous to be imagined, then that which is heere affirmed by our Apologer (and yet, he saith, he is sure therof) That this friar, which killed the King, should haue bene canonized for the fact, if some Cardinalls, out of their wisedome, Page  89 had not resisted the same. No such thing being euer so much as imagined, or consulted of, as many doe testify who were then in Rome. So as nothing is more common here, then bold assertions without wittnesses.

XXXI. And the like may be said to his third exam∣ple of the late Queene of England, against whose life (he saith) that so many practises, and attempts were made, and directly iioyned to those traytors, by their Confessours, and playnly authorized by the Popes allowance.* So he saith. But if a man would aske him, how he can proue, that those things were so directly inioyned, and plainly authorized, what answere will he make? Yow shall heare it in his owne wordes, for he hath but one: For verification (saith he) there needeth no more proofe, then that neuer Pope, eyther then or since, called any Church-man in question, formedling in those treasonable conspiracyes. And needeth no more (Syr) but this,* to condemne both Confessours and Popes of conspiring the last Queenes death, That no Pope hath called in question, or punished any Cleargy-man for such like at∣tempts? What i he neuer knew of any such attempt? What if he neuer heard of any Clergy-man to be accused therof, except such as were put to death by the Queene her self, either culpable or not culpable? What if he saw some such ridiculous false deuises, made against some Priests to make their whole company and cause odi∣ous, as iustly discredited with him all their other cla∣mours and calumnious accusations in that behalfe? As that of Squier, induced (as was sayed) by Fa. VValpole in Spaine to poyson the Queenes chayre,* or the Earle of Essex his sadde, which was so monstrous a fiction, and so plainly proued for such in forrayne Countryes (and so confessed by the miserable fellow at his death) as tooke all credit from like deuises in these attemptes, of hol∣ding the Queene in perpetuall frightes, to the end, she should neuer attend to the true way of remedy.

XXXII. And with what little care of sincerity. Page  90 or of punctuall truth, all these things are here, and elswhere, cast out at randome, to make a sound and noise in the Readers eares,* appeareth sufficiently in the very next sequent wordes, wherein speaking of Do∣ctor Sanders he saieth: That whosoeuer will looke vpon his Bookes, will fynde them filled with no other Doctrine then this. And will any man thinke it probable or possible that so many bookes as Doctor Sanders hath written, both in Latyn and English, and of so different arguments con∣cerning Religion, haue no other Doctrine in them, but this of killing, and murthering of Princes? And that other assertion also, that ensueth within very few lines after, against Cardinall Bellarmynes whole Workes, That all his large and great Volumes are filled with contradi∣ctions, wherof we are to treat more presently. Now only I doe note the facility, and custome of ouerlashing in this Apologer.

XXXIII. To conclude then about Queene Eli∣zabeth. Albeit Pius Quintus, and some other Popes did excommunicate her, and cut her of from the body of the Catholicke Church by Ecclesiasticall Censures, in regard of her persecuting Catholicke Religion: yet did I neuer know it hitherto proued, that any Pope pro∣cured or consented to any priuate violence against her person: albeit, if the forealledged Statute of the 28. yeare of King Henry the 8. be true, wherin it is de∣termined both by the King himself, his Counsell, and whole Parlament, as by the Archbishop Cranmer, with his Doctors, in his Iudiciall Seat of the Arches, that Lady Elizabeth was not legitimate, nor that her mother was euer King Henryes true wife (which once being true, could neuer afterward by any humane power be made vntrue, or amended to the preiudice of a third, rightly by due succession interessed therin:) & if,* as the whole Parlament testifyed, it should be Against all honour, equity, reason, and good conscience, that the Page  91 said La. Elizabeth, should at any tyme possesse the said Crowne, then the said Popes,* respecting in their said sentence (as it is certayne they did) the actuall right of the Queene of France and Scotland, and of her noble issue his Ma.tie that now is, they might proceed, as they did, against the other, for her remouall (whome they held for an vsurper) in fauour of the true inheritours op∣pressed by her, not only by spirituall, but temporall armes also, as against a publicke Malefactor and intruder contrary to right and conscience. And I cannot see, how this fawning Apologer, can eyther without open vntruth, or manifest iniury to his Maiesty, auerre the contrary. Which being true, doth greatly iustify the endeauours and desires of all good Catholicke people, both at home and abroad against her, their principall meaning being euer knowne to haue bene the deliue∣rance, & preferment of the true Heire, most wrongfully kept out, & iniustly persecuted for righteousnes sake.

XXXIIII. This then being so, and nothing pro∣ued at all against Popes for their murthering attempts against Princes, which Cardinall Bellarmyne denyed: yet this Apologer, as if he had proued much against him, in this point of contradicting himself, he writeth thus: But who can wonder at this contradiction of himself in this point, when his owne great Volumes are so filled with contradictions, which when either he, or any other shall euer be able to reconcile, I will then belieue that he may easily reconcile this impudent strong denyall of his, in his letter, of any Popes medling against Kings. Wherin is to be noted first, that wheras Card.llBellarmine → doth deny any Popes murthering of Princes,* this man cal∣leth it, An impudent strong deniall of any Popes medling against Kings, as though medling, and murthering were all one. Is not this good dealing? Truely if the Card.ll had denyed, that euer any Pope had dealt, or medled against any King, or Prince, vpon any occasion whatsoeuer, it had beene a strong denyall indeed: but for so much, as Page  92 he saith no such thing, I maruaile of the Apologers proceeding in this behalfe, for with the word impu∣dent I will not meddle. But let vs heare him yet further.*

XXXV. And that I may not seeme (saith he) to imitate him, in affirming boldly that, which I no waies can proue, I will therefore send the Reader, to looke for wittnesses of his contradictions in such places here mentioned in his owne booke. Thus he, very confidently, as you see, And verily I cannot but mar∣uaile, that he knowing how many men of learning would looke vpon the places themselues, (for I vnder∣stand now also that the book is out in latyn) would not be ashamed in him self, to suffer their iudgement of him and his doings in this behalfe: albeit he had not respe∣cted the Cardinals answere, which must nedes be with exceeding aduantage against him, such as, in truth, I am ashamed for Countrey sake, that strangers should laugh vs to scorne for such manner of writing. For if I doe vnderstand any thing, and that myne owne eyes, and iudgement doe not deceaue me, this Apologer will remayne vnder, in all & euery one of these oppositions, no one of them being defensible in the nature of a true contradiction,* and consequently Cardinall Bellarmynes great volumes of Controuersies, will not only, not be proued full of Contradictions by this tast here giuen, as is pretended: but will rather be infinitly iustifyed; that in so many great Volumes, this Author hath not bene able to picke out any better contradictions then these. Wherof againe, I must say and auouch, that no one seemeth to me any contradiction at all, if they be well examined.

XXXVI. And though I meane not to discusse them all in this place, nor the greater part of them, they being eleuen in number, as hath bene said, both for breuityes sake, and not to peruent the Cardinalls owne Answere, and satisfaction therin (which I doubt not Page  93 but will be very sufficient, and learned:) yet three or foure I shall touch only, for examples sake, thereby to giue the Reader matter to make coniecture of the rest. This then he beginneth his list of eleuen contradictions against the said Cardinall.

XXXVII. First in his bookes of Iustification (saith he) Bellarmyne affirmeth,* that for the vncertainty of our owne proper righteousnes, and for auoyding of vayne glory, it is most sure and safe, to repose our whole con∣fidence in the alone mercy and goodnes of God:* which proposition of his, is directly contrary to the discourse, & current of all his fiue bookes De Iustificatione, wherin the same is conteyned &c. Of this 〈◊〉 contradiction we haue said somewhat before, to wit, That it is strange, that fiue whole bookes should be brought in, as contradictory to one proposition. For how shall the Reader try the truth of this obiection? Shall he be bound to read all Bellarmynes fiue bookes, to see whether it be true or no? Had it not bene more plaine dealing to haue alleadged some one sentence, or conclusion contradictory to the other? But now shall we shew, that there can be no such contradiction betwixt the sentence of one part of his said Booke of Iustification, & the whole discourse or current of the rest: for that Bellarmyne doth make all the matter cleere, by soyling three seuerall Questions in one Chapter, which is the seauenth of the fifth Booke here cyted.

XXXVIII. The three Questions are these,* about Fiducia, quae in meritis collocari possit, what hope and con∣fidence, may be placed, by a Christian man, in his good workes, and merites. The first Question is, whether good workes, in a Christian man, doe in∣crease hope and confidence by their own nature, and the promise of reward made vnto them? And Bellar∣myne answereth that they doe: and proueth it by many [ 1] places of Scriptures, as that of Toby the 4. where it Page  94 is saied: That almes-deeds shall giue great confidence, and hope to the doers therof in the sight of God.* And Iob sayeth: That he which liueth iustly,*shall haue great confidence, and hope, and shall sleep securely. And S. Paul to Timothy saith: That who∣soeuer shall minister well,*shall haue great confidence, &c. And I omit diuers other plaine places of Scriptures, and Fa∣thers there alleadged by him, which the Reader may there peruse to his comfort, shewing euidently, that the conscience of a vertuous life, and good workes, doth giue great confidence to a Christian man, both while he liueth, and especially when he commeth to dye.

[ 2]

XXXIX. The second Question is, whether this being so, a man may place any confidence wittingly in his owne merits, or vertuous life. And it is answered, That he may; so it be with due circumstances of hu∣mility, for auoyding pride, and presumption. For that a man feeling the effect of Gods grace in himself, wher∣by he hath bene directed to liue well, may also hope, that God will crowne his gifts in him, as S. Augu∣stines wordes are. And many examples of Scriptures are alleadged there by Card.ll Bellarmyne of sundry holy Saints, Prophets and Apostles, that vpon iust oc∣casion mentioned their owne merits, as g••ts from God that gaue them hope and confidence of his mercifull re∣ward: and namely that saying of S. Paul: I haue fought a good fight, I haue consummated my course, I haue kept my faith, &c. and then addeth,* that in regard hereof, Reposita est mihi Corona Iustitiae, A crowne of Iustice is laid vp for me, which God the iust Iudge shall restore vnto me.

[ 3] XL. The third Question is (supposing the sore said determinations) what counsaile were to be giuen: Whe∣ther it be good to put confidence in a mans owne me∣rits or no? whereunto Card.ll Bellarmyne answereth, in the words set downe by the Apologer, That for the vncer∣tainty of our owne proper Iustice, and for auoyding the perill of Page  95 vaine glory, the surest way is to repose all our confidence in the only mercy and benignity of God;* from whome and from whose grace our merits proceed. So as albeit Card.ll Bellarmyne doth confesse, that good life, and vertuous acts doe giue hope, and confidence of themselues, and that it is law∣full also by the example of auncient Saints, for good men to comfort themselues with that hope and confidence: yet the surest way is to repose all in the benignity and mercy of almighty God, who giueth all, and is the Au∣thour, as well of the grace, as of the merits, and fruites of good workes that eusue therof. And thus hath Car∣dinall Bellarmyne fully explicated his mynd in this one Chapter, about Confidence in good workes, by soluing the foresaid three different Questions, wherof the one is not contrary to the other, but may all three stand togea∣ther. And how then is it likely, that the foresaid propo∣sition, of reposing our Confidence in the mercy of God, should be contradictory, as this man saith, to the whole discourse and current of all his fiue Bookes of Iustification? Let one only sen∣tence be brought forth, out of all these fiue Bookes that is truly contradictory, and I shall say he hath reason in all the rest of his ouerlashing.

XLI. His second obiected contradiction is as good as this,* which he setteth downe in these wordes.aGod (saieth Bellarmine → ) doth not incline a man to euill, eyther na∣turally or morally: and presently after he affirmeth the contrary, saying:bThat God doth not incline to euill naturally but morally. But this is a plaine fallacy of the Apologer, for that the word morally is taken heere in two different senses, which himself could not but see. For first Card.ll Bellarmyne hauing set downe the former proposition, That God doth not incline a man to euill, eyther Physicè vel Moraliter, naturally or morally, he expoundeth what is vnderstood by ech of these termes, to witt, That Naturall or Phisicall concurrence is, when God con∣curreth to the substance of the action, as mouing or Page  96 impelling a mans will: but Morall concurrence is, when he doth commaund or ordayne any synne to be done. As for example, If a great man should concurre to the murther of another, he may doe it in two manners, eyther Naturally or Phisically, concurring to the action it self of poysoning, strangling, or the like: or Morally, by counselling or commaunding the same to be done, which is properly called Morall concurrence. And by none of these two wayes, God doth concurre to the committing of a synne.

XLII. But there is a third way of concurring,* tear∣med Occasionalicer, occasionally, or by giuing occasion, which improperly also may be called Morall: and this is, When God seeing an euill man euill-disposed, to doe this or that synne, though he doe not concurre therunto by any of the foresaid two wayes, of assisting or com∣maunding the action to be done: yet doth he, by his diuine prouidence, and goodnes, make occasions so to fall our, as this synne, and not that, is committed; and consequently it may be said, That almighty God, without any fault of his, or concurrence in any o the forsaid two wayes, hath bene the Occasionall cause of this synne.* As for example, we read in Genesis, That when the brethren of Ioseph were obstinately bent to kill him, God, by the pulling by of certayne I smaelites, Merchants of Galaad, gaue occasion of his selling into Egypt; so as he was herby some Occasionall, or Morall cause of this lesser synne, for eschewing the greater, but not in the former sense of Morall concurrence, which includeth also commandement.

XLIII. This Occasionall concurrence then, though in some large sense, it may be called also Morall: yet is it much different from the former, and conse∣quently, the one may be affirmed, and the other denyed, without any contradiction at all. And so this second obseruation against Cardinall Bellarmyne, is wholy im∣pertinent: Page  97 for that Contradictio must be in eodem, respectu eiusdem, which heere is not verifyed. For that when the Cardinall saith in the first place, That God doth not cōcurre Morally to synne, he meaneth by cōmaūding or counselling the same: & whē in the later place, he graū∣teth, That God doth cōcurre somtymes Morally, he mea∣neth by giuing occasiō only for this synne to be cōmit∣ted, rather then that, which is a plaine different thing.

XLIIII. And of the same quality is the third Contradiction,* set downe by the Apologer in these wordes: All the Fathers teach constantly (saith Bellarmyne) that Bishops doe succeed the Apostles, and Priests the seauenty dis∣ciples. And then in another part of his workes, he affir∣meth the contrary: That Bishops doe not properly succeed the Apostles. But whosoeuer shall looke vpon the places here quoted,* shall fynde this to be spoken in diuers senses, to witt, that they succeed them in power of Episcopall Order, and not in power of Iurisdiction, and other extraordinary priuiledges:* so as both those doe well stand togeather. And the like I say of the 4. contradi∣ction obiected, which is, That Iudas did not belieue: & yet in an other place,*That Iudas was iust, and certaynly good: which is no contradiction at all, if we respect the two seuerall tymes, wherof Cardinall Bellarmyne doth speake,* prouing first, out of S. Iohns Ghospell, by the in∣terpretation of S. Hierome, that Iudas at the beginning was good, and did belieue; and then by other words of Christ in the same Euangelist, vttered a good while after the Apostles vocation, That he was a dyuell. and belieued not. And who but our Apologer, would found a cōtradictiō against so learned a man as Bellarmyne is, vpon a ma∣nifest Equiuocation of tymes, wherby he may no lesse argue with Bellarmyne for calling S. Paul an Apostle and persecutour, and Nicolaus an elect of the holy Ghost, and yet an Heretick, for that the one was a Persecutour first, and then an Apostle, and the other first a chosen Page  98 Deacon by the holy Ghost, and afterward an Here∣ticke, possessed by the diuell, as most do hould.

XLV. But I should doe iniury (as before I said) both vnto Cardinall Bellarmyne and my self, if I should goe about to answere these supposed contradictions at length. To the Cardinall, in preuenting him, that will doe it much better. Vnto my self, in spending tyme in a needles labour, for so much as euery one of meane iudgemēt, that will but looke vpon the bookes, and places themselues heere cyted, will discouer the weaknes of these obiections, and that they haue more will, then ability to disgrace Cardinall Bellarmyne.

XLVI. After the obiecting then of these deuised contradictions, our Apologer returneth againe to exagitate yet further the foresaid saying of Bellarmyne,* That neither his Maiesty, nor other King hath need to feare any daunger to his Royall Person, by acknowled∣ging the Popes spirituall authority in his Kingdome, more then other Christians, and Monarches haue done heretofore,

or doe now in other Kingdomes round about him, who admitt the same Authority and haue done euen from the beginning of their Christianity, without any such dangers of murther incurred therby.
Wherupon this Apologer maketh a large new excur∣sion, numbering vp a great Catalogue of contentions, that haue fallen out, betweene some Popes and Empe∣rours, & the said Emperours receaued hurtes, domages, and dangers therby, and consequently had cause to feare, contrary to that which Bellarmyne writeth.

XLVII. And in this enumeration the Apologer bringeth in the example of the Emperour Henry the 4. brought to doe pennance at the Castle of Canusium,* by Pope Gregory the seauenth; as also of the Emperour Fredericke the first, forced by Pope Alexander the third to lie agroofe (as his word is) on his belly, and suffer the other to tread on his necke: Of the Emperour Philip, that is said Page  99 to haue bene slaine by Otho at the Popes motion; and that in respect therof,* the said Otho going to Rome, was made Emperour, though afterward the Pope deposed him also:

Of the Emperour Fredericke the second, ex∣communicated, and depriued by Pope Innocentius the fourth, who in Apulia corrupted one to giue him poy∣son, and this not taking effect, hyred one Manfredus to poyson him, wherof he dyed: That Pope Alexander the third wrote to the Soldane to murther the Emperour, & sent him his picture to that effect: That Pope Alexander the sixth, caused the brother of Baiazetes the Turkish Emperour, named Gemen, to be poysoned at his brothers request, and had two hundred thowsand crownes for the same: That our King Henry the second, besides his going barefooted in pilgrimage, was whipped vp and downe the Chapter-howse, like a schoole-boy, and glad to escape so too: That the Father of the moderne King of France, was depriued by the Pope of the Kingdome of Nauarre, and himself (I meane this King of France) forced to begge so submissiuely the relaxation of his excommunication, as he was content to suffer his Em∣bassadour to be whipped at Rome for pennance.

XLVIII. All these examples are heaped togeather to make a muster of witnesses, for proofe of the dan∣gers wherin Princes persons are, or may be, by acknowledging the Popes Supreme Authority. But first in perusing of these, I fynde such a heape indeed of exaggerations, additions, wrestings, and other vnsyncere dealings, as would require a particuler Booke to refute them at large. And the very last here mētioned of the present King of France, may shew what credit is to be giuen to all the rest, to witt, That he suffered his Embas∣sadour to be whipped at Rome, & the latin Interpreter turneth it, Vt Legatum suum Romae virgis caesum passus sit: as though he had bene scourged with rodds vpon the bare flesh, or whipped vp and downe Rome; wheras so many hun∣dreds Page  100 being yet aliue that saw that Ceremony (which was no more, but the laying on, or touching of the said Embassadours shoulder with a long white wand vpon his apparell, in token of submitting himself to Ecclesiasticall discipline) it maketh them both to won∣der, and laugh at such monstrous assertions, comming out in print: and with the same estimation of punctuall fidelity doe they measure other things here auouched.

IXL. As for exāple,* that our King Henry the second was whipped vp and downe the Chapter-house, & glad that he could escape so too, for which he cyteth Houeden, and this he in∣sinuateth to be,* by order of the Pope: in respect wher∣of (he saith) the King had iust cause to be afraid. But the Author doth plainly shew the contrary, first setting downe the Charter of the Kings absolution,* where no such pennāce is appointed: & secondly after that againe in relating the voluntary pennances which the King did at the Sepulcher of S. Thomas,* for being some occasiō of his death, doth refute therby this narration, as frau∣dulent, and vnsyncere, that the King was whipped like a school-boy by order of the Pope, as though it had not come frō his owne free choice, and deuotion.

L. That other instance of the Emperour, that lay a∣groofe on his belly (which I suppose he meaneth of Fredericke the first) and suffered Pope Alexander the third to tread on his necke, is a great exaggeratiō, and refuted, as fabu∣lous, by many reasons, and authorityes of Baronius, to whome I remit me. The other in like māner of Celestinus the Pope, that should with his foote beate of the Crown from the head of Henry the sixt Emperour, being only mentioned first of all others by Houeden an English Au∣thour, and from him taken by Ranulph of Chester, no other writer of other nations, eyther present at his Coronation as Godesridus Viterbiensis his Secretary, or others afterward asaPlatina,bNauclerus,cSabellicus,dBlondus,eSigonius,fCrantzius, so much as mentioning the same, though yet Page  101 they write of his Coronation,* maketh it improbable, and no lesse incredible then the former.

LI. That also of the Emperour Philip, affirmed to be slaine by Otho his opposite Emperour, at the incitation of Pope Innocentius the third, is a meere slaūder. For that, according to all histories, not Otho the Emperour, but an other Otho named of VVitilispack▪ a priuate man & one of his owne Court, vpon a priuate grudge, did slay him. And albeit Vrspergensis, that followed the faction of the Emperours against the Popes, doe write, that he had heard related by some the speech here sett downe, that Innocentius should lay, That he would take the Crowne from Philip, or Philip should take the Myter from him: yet he saith expresly, Quod non erat credendum, that it was not to be belieued. And yet is it cyted here, by our Apologer, as an vndoubted truth, vpon the onely authority of Vrspergensis in the margent.

LII. The like may be said of the tale of Frederick the second, attempted to haue bene poysoned, first in Apulia by Pope Innocentius the 4. and afterward effe∣ctuated by one Mansredus, as hyred by the Pope: which is a very tale in deede, and a malicious tale. For that he which shall read all the Authors that write of his life, or death, as1Platina (whome the Protestants hold for free in speaking euill of diuers Popes)2Blondus,3Sabellicus,4Nauclerus,5Crantzius,6Sigonius, & others, shall fynd, that as they write very wicked thinges committed by him in his life: so talking of his first danger in Apulia by gre∣uous sicknes, they make for the most part no mention of poyson at all, and much lesse as procured by the Pope Innocentius, praysed* for a very holy man, and to haue proceded iustly against Fredericke. And secondly for his death, they agree all, that it was not by poyson, but by stopping his breath and stifelyng him in his bed with a pillow, by Mansredus his owne bastard Sonne, to whome he had giuen the Princedome of Tarentum, for feare least Page  102 he should take it from him againe, and bestow it vpon Conradus his other soone. But that the Pope was priuy to this, or hyred him to doe the fact, as our Apologer affirmeth; there is no one word or sillable in these Au∣thors therof.

LIII. But you will say, that he cyteth one Petrus de Vineis in his margent,* and Cuspinian in the life of Fre∣dericke, both which are but one Authour; for that Cuspi∣nian professeth to take what he saith, out of Petrus de Vi∣neis, which Petrus was a seruant to Fredericke, and a pro∣fessed enemy to the Pope, and wrote so partially of this contention, as Pope Innocentius himself wrote Libros Apo∣logeticos (as Blondus recordeth) Apologeticall Bookes to coniute the lyes of this Petrus de Vineis in his life tyme:* And yet yow must note, that he auoucheth not all that our Apologer doth, nor with so much stomacke, or affirmatiue assertion. For thus relateth Cuspinian the matter, out of Petrus de Vineis: Non potuit cauere, &c.

The Emperour could not auoyd, but when he returned into Apulia he perished with poyson, the 37. yeare of his raigne, and 57. of his age, on the very same day that he was made Emperour. For wheras at the towne of Florenzola in Apulia, hauing receaued poyson he was dan∣gerously sicke, and at length, by diligence of Phisitions, had ouercome the same, he was stifeled by Mansredus his bastard sonne, begotten of a noble woman his Concubine, with a pillow thrust into his mouth, whe∣ther it were, that Mansredus did it, as corrupted by his enemyes, or by the Pope, or for that he did aspire to the Kingdome of Sicilia.
So he.

LIV. And albeit, as yow see, he saith more herin against the Pope, then any of the other Authours be∣fore mentioned,* for that he desired to cast some suspi∣tions vpon him: yet doth he it not with that bold as∣seueration, that our Apologer doth, saying: That both his first sicknes was by poyson, of the Popes procurement, and his mur∣thering Page  103 afterward by hyring of Manfredus to poyson him againe: whereas the other ascribeth not the first poysoning to the Pope (if he were poysoned) neyther doth so much as mention the second poyson, but onely the stifeling, and finally leaueth it doubtfull, whether the same pro∣ceeded from the Emperours enemyes, or from the Pope, or from his Sonnes owne ambition, and emulation against his brother.

LV. To the other obiection, or rather calumniation out of Paulus Iouius,* that Alexander the third did write to the Soldane, That if he would liue quietly, he should pro∣cure the murther of the Emperour, sending him his pi∣cture to that end: It is answered, that no such thing is found in that second booke of Iouius, by him here cyted, nor elswhere in that History, so far as by some dili∣gence vsed I can fynde: and it is not likely, it should be found in him, for so much as he beginneth his Hi∣story with matters only of our tyme, some hundreds of yeares after Alexander the third his death.

LVI. So as the only chiefe accusation,* that may seeme to haue some ground against any Pope, in this catalogue, for procuring the death of any Prince, is that which he alleadgeth out of Cuspinian, that Alexander the sixth tooke two hundred thowsand Crownes of Baia∣zetes Emperour of the Turkes, to cause his brother Gemen to be put to death, whome he held captiue at Rome, which he performed (saith our Apologer) by poyson, and had his pay; this I say, hath most apparence: for that some other Authors also besides doe relate the same, affirming, That albeit Prince Gemen the Turke, when he dyed, eyther at Caieta, or Naples, or Capua, (for in this they differ) was not the Popes prisoner, but in the hands of Charles the 8. King of France, who tooke him from Rome with him, when he passed that way with his army: yet that the common fame or rumour was, that Pope Alexander the sixth, had part therin, or, as CuspiniasPage  104 words are, Pontifice non ignorante, the Pope not vnwitting therof.* The reason of which report Guicciardine allead∣geth to be this, to wit, That the euill nature and condi∣tion of Pope Alexander, which was hatefull to all men, made any iniquity to be belieued of him.aOnuphrius Pan∣uinus writeth that he dyed in Capua of a bloudy flux without any mention of poyson. AndbSabellicus before him againe, relateth the matter doubtfully saying; Fue∣runt qui crederent, eum veneno sublatum, &c. There were some that belieued, that he was made away by poyson, and that Alexander the Pope was not ignorant therof; for that he was so alienate in mynde from the French-men, that he was loath they should take any good by him: Thus we see, that the matter is but doubtfully and suspi∣ciously related only, and the French-men being angry for his death, by whome they hoped great matters, might easily brute abroad a false rumour, for their owne defence in that behalfe.

LVII. But as for the two hundred thowsand crownes, though Iouius doe say, that they were offered by Baiazet, as also Vestis inconsutilis Christi, The garment of our Sauiour without seame: yet doth he not say, that they were receaued, eyther the one, or the other. So as whatsoeuer euill is mentioned of any Pope, our Apo∣loger maketh it certayne: and when it is but little, he will inlarge it to make it more: and when it is spoken doubtfully, he will affirme it for a certaynty: wherin he discouereth his owne humour against Popes, and therby limiteth the Readers faith in belieuing him; though we do not take vpon vs to defend the liues and facts of all particuler Popes, but their faith and authority; being forewarned by our Sauiour, that vpon the Chayre of Moyses shall fit Scribes and Pharisyes, whome we must obey, in that they teach, and not follow or imitate, in that they doe. And this shall serue for this point: Card.ll Bellarmyne, I doubt not, will be more large. If a man Page  105 would go about to discredit Kingly authority, by all the misdeeds of particuler Kings that haue byn registred by Historiographers, since the tyme that Popes began, he should fynde, no doubt, aboundant matter, and such, as could not be defended by any probability. And yet doth this preiudicate nothing to Princely power or dig∣nity, and much lesse in our case, where the facts them∣selues obiected, are eyther exaggerated, increased, wre∣sted, or altogeather falsifyed.

The third Part of this Paragraph.

THERE remayneth the last part of [ 1] this impugnation of the Cardinalls letter,* which consisteth in the exa∣mining all the Authorityes and Sen∣tences of ancient Fathers, alledged by him in the same. As first of all, the comparison of the art, and deceipt vsed by Iulian the Emperour,* surnamed Apostata, and recounted by S. Gregory Nazianzen, in placing, and in∣serting the images of his false Gods, into the pictures of the Emperour, in his Imperiall banner: so, as no man could bow downe,* or reuerence the Emperours picture, (as then was the custome) but that he must adore also the images of the false Gods. Which art of temperament, the Cardinall doth compare vnto this mixture & com∣bination of clauses lawfull, and vnlawfull, Cyuill, and Ecclesiasticall in the Oath proposed; so as a man can not sweare the one, but he must sweare also the other. Page  106 Which similitude, although it do expresse most fitly the matter in hand; yet the Apologer being sorely pressed therwith seeketh many euasions to euacuate the same, by searching out dissimilitudes, and saying; That albeit a similitude may be admitted claudicare vno pede, to limp, or halt on one foote: yet this (saith he) is lame, both of feete & hands, and euery member of the body: And then he taketh vpon him to set downe at length the diuersityes that may be picked out. As first,

that Iulian was an Apostata, but our Soueraigne is a Christian: he changed the Reli∣gion which he once professed, but our King not: he became an Ethnicke, or an Atheist, our King is not ashamed of his profession: Iulian dealt against Chri∣stians, but his Ma.tie dealeth only to make a distin∣ction betweene true subiects, and false-harted tray∣tours.
And so he goeth forward to weary his Reader with many more like diuersityes, which must needs be loathsome to euery man of meane iudgment, who know that a similitude requireth not parity in all poynts (for then it should be idem, and not simile) but only in the poynt wherin the comparison is made, as heere in the compounding and couching togeather of lawfull and vnlawfull things in the Oath, as the other did in his banner.

LIX. For if a man would tryfle, as our Apo∣loger doth, and seeke out differences betweene things, that are compared togeather, as like in some certayne poynts,* but vnlike in other; we should ouerthrow all similitudes whatsoeuer, and consequently we should eneruate many most heauenly speaches of our Saui∣our in the Ghospell, that stand vpon similitudes. As for example: Be yow wise as Serpents, and simple as Doues. What enemy of Christian Religion might not cauill,* and calumniate this? seeking out diuersityes betwixt a serpent and a man, and betweene the malicious craft of that malignant creature, and the wisedome that Page  107 ought to be in a prudent man. But it is sufficient that the similitude do hold in that particuler poynt, wherin Christ made the comparison. And so agayne, When our Sauiour maketh the comparison betweene the King∣dome of heauen, and the litle grayne of mustard-seed; who cannot fynd out infinite differences betweene the one and the other,* making the similitude to halt and limp in many more parts,* then it can go vpright. But it is sufficient,* that it stand, and halt not in that one poynt, wherin the comparison is made.

LX. I passe ouer many other like similitudes,* as that the Kingdome of heauen, is like to a man that sow∣eth good seed in his field: As also it is like to leauen, which a woman tooke and hid in three measures of meale, vntil the whole was leauened: It is like also to a treasure hid in the ground; and to a Marchant man, that seeketh good margarites, and precious stones: And vnto a net cast into the sea, and gathering togeather of all kynd of fishes. Who cannot (I say) fynd out diffe∣rences and diuersityes, if he would study for them in all these similitudes vsed by our Sauiour. For as for the last of the net, that gathereth togeather perforce, good and bad fish in the sea, seemeth hard to be applyed to the Kingdome of heauen, whether we vnderstand it, eyther of Gods Kingdome in the next world, or of the Church in this; for that in the next world good & bad are not admitted; and in this world, the Church of Christ gathereth none perforce, as the net doth. But yet in the poynt it selfe, wherin Christ our Sauiour made the comparison, the similitude doth hold; and that is sufficient to shew the impertinent indeauour of this A∣pologer heere, to seeke out diuersityes, that appertayne not to the poynt wherin the comparison is made.

LXI. The next example which our Apologer see∣keth [ 2] to auoyd or euacuate in the Cardinalls letter, is that of old Eleazar in the booke of Machabees, who rather Page  108 then he would do a thing vnlawfull, and against his owne conscience,* or that might be scandalous to others, he refused not to suffer all kynd of torments; which the Cardinall applyeth to the taking of this vnlawfull Oath,* by such as are Catholicks, but especially by the Arch-priest, head of the Clergie in England, whose case he presumeth to be more like to that of Eleazar, for his age, estimation, and authority aboue the rest. To which example the Apologer answereth thus:* That if the Arch-priests ground of refusing this Oath were as good as Eleazars was, for refusing to eate of the swynes-flesh that was proposed, and vrged vnto him, it might not vnfitly be applyed to his purpose:

But the ground fayling, (saith he) the building cannot stand.
But this is an escape much like the former, that runneth quite from the matter: for that the Cardinall supposeth a Catholicke conscience in him to whome he writeth, to which con∣science it is as repugnant to sweare any thing, sounding against any poynt of Catholicke Religion or Doctrine, as it was to Eleazar to eate swynes-flesh, against the law of Moyses. Which supposition being made, and that in the Cardinalls iudgment, this Oath conteyneth diuers clauses preiudiciall to some poynts of the said Catho∣lice beliefe and doctrine concerning the authority of the Sea Apostolicke, and that the taking therof would not only be hurtfull to the taker, but offensiue also, and scandalous to many other of that Religion, both at home and abroad; the application of this example of Eleazar was most fit and effectuall. Let vs see what ensu∣eth of the rest of the Authorityes.

LXII. The third example is of S. Basill surnamed [ 3] for his rare learning and holinesse, The great, who being most earnestly exhorted (as Theodoret recounteth the story) by Modestus the deputy of Valens the Arrian Empe∣rour,* sent of purpose to that effect, that he should ac∣cōmodate himself to the said Emperours will,* & pre∣sent Page  109 tyme, and not suffer so many great Churches to be abandoned (for that all such bishops,* as would not accommodate themselues were sent into banishment) for a little needles subtility of doctrines, not so much to be esteemed: offering him also, the friendship of the Emperour, and many other great benefits to ensue, both to him and others, if he would in this poynt shew himselfe conformable. But this holy and prudent man (saith the Cardinall) answered, That it was not to be indured, that any one syllable of* dyuine doctrynes, should be corrupted, or neglected; but rather, that for the defence therof, all kynd of torment was to be im∣braced. Out of which example the Cardinall doth gather, how strict and wary a good man must be, in yealding to any thing neuer so litle, that is preiudicall to the integrity of Catholicke doctryne: and it seemeth very fit to the purpose, and the cases somwhat like.

LXIII. Yet doth our Apologer by all meanes pos∣sible seeke to wype of, or weaken all that can be infer∣red out of this example.* And first of all, he beginneth with a meere calumniation thus:

First I must obserue (saith he) that if the Cardinall would leaue a common and ordinary tricke of his,* in all citations, which is, to take what makes for him, and leaue out what makes against him, & would cyte the Authors sense, as well as the sentence; we should not be so much troubled with answering the Ancients which he alledgeth. And to instance it in this very place, if he had conti∣nued his allegation but one lyne further; he should haue found this place of Theodoret, of more force, to haue moued Blackwell to take the Oath, then to haue dissuaded him from it. For in the very next words it followeth (in S. Basils speach:) I do esteeme greatly the Emperours friendship, if it be ioyned with piety, but without it, I hold it for pernicious.
So he.

LXIV. And do these words last adioyned make Page  110 any thing at all for our Apologer? Or rather agree they not fitly to the purpose of the Cardinals exhortation, though for breuityes sake he left them out? How then is their omission brought in for a profe of A common & ordinarie tricke of the Cardinals, in all his citations, to take only that which is for him, & leaue out what makes against him? How is this against him? Or how doth this shew any such ordinary tricke of falshood in the Cardinal, not in one or two, but in all his citations? Doth this man care what he saith? This then is one shift, to answere this Ancient, or rather Anticke, as heere he is made. Let vs see an other.

LXV. His second is by taking aduantage of tran∣slation out of the Greeke,* in which Theodoret wrote his story, or rather by peruerting the same in some pointes to his purpose. For which cause he repeateth againe the substance of the history in these wordes: But that it may appeare (saith he) whether of vs hath greater right to this place (of Theodoret about S. Basil) I will in few wordes shew the Authous drift.* The Emperour Valens being an Arrian, at the perswasion of his wife, whē he had depriued all the Churches of their Pastours, came to Caesarea, where S.* Basil was then Bishop; who, as the story reporteth, was the light of the world. Be∣fore he came, he sent his Deputy to worke it, that S. Basil should hold fellowship with Eudoxius (which Eudoxius was Bishop of Constantinople and the principall of the Arrian faction) or if he would not, that he should put him to banishment. Now when the Emperours Deputy came to Caesarea,* he sent for Basil, intreated him hono∣rably, spake pleasingly vnto him, desired he would giue way to the tyme, neyther that he would hazard the good of so many Churches

tenui exquisitione dogmatis,
pro∣mised him the Emperours fauour, and himselfe to be Mediatour for his good. But S. Basil answered,
These intising speaches were fit to be vsed to children, that vse to gape after Page  111 such things. But for them that were throughly instructed in Gods word, they could neuer suffer any syllable therof to be corrupted. Nay, if need required, they would for the maintenance therof, refuse no kind of death. In deed the loue of the Emperour ought to be greatly esteemed with Piety; but Piety taken away, it was perni∣cious.

LXVI. This is the truth of the storie (saith he:) & I haue layd downe at length his declaration, to the end that his sleightes may the better appeare in eluding the force of this Answere of S. Basil, as though he had said only, that no syllable of Gods word was to be suffered to be corrupted, wheras his meaning was, not only of Gods word, or of Scriptures alone, but, Ne vnam quidem syllabam diuinorum dogmatum,* not any one syllable of dyuine doctrine, taught by the Catholicke Church, and so much import his wordes in greeke, which are guylfully heere translated: for that insteed of the forealleadged sentence, wherein consisteth the substance of the said answere, to witt: That for them that are throughly instructed in Gods word, they can neuer suffer any syllable thereof to be corrupted, he should haue said:*That they that haue beene brought vp & nourished in sacred learning, cannot suffer any one syllable of dyuine doctrynes (of the Church) to be violated, which is cōforme also to S. Ba∣sils purpose in hand. For that the controuersy, which he and other Catholicke Bishops had with the Arrian Doctors in those dayes, was not only, nor immediatly about the Scriptures out of which the Arrians alleadged more aboundantly then their aduersaries, but about cer∣tayne doctrynes determined by the Church, especially by the Councell of Nice, as namely about the vse of the wordes and doctrines of homsion, or consubstantiality, hypostasis, substance, person, trinitie, and other the like; and whether they should say Gloria Patriet Filio, or Gloria Patri cum Filio; or in Filio, & such other differences, which vnto the Deputy Modestus, seemed but small matters and subtilityes of doctrine, but to S. Basil matters of great Page  112 moment: for so much as they were now determined by the Church, and thereby made Diuina dogmata, Diuyne doctrines, though they were not all expresly found in Scriptures. So as this sleight in trāslating S. Basils answer, That such as were throughly instructed in Gods worde could neuer suf∣fer any syllable therof to be corrupted (as though he had meant only of Scripturs) is not sincere, neyther agreable eyther vnto the letter of the Greeke text, or meaning of S. Basill.

LXVII. Let vs see then his third shift,* to put of this matter, which is the same that before we haue mentioned in the first example of Iulian, to witt, by seeking out differences, & disparityes, betweene the clauses or members that are compared togeather, saying: That albeit Basil and the Arch-priest may haue some compa∣rison; yet not our Orthodoxe King with an Arrian Emperour. Basil was sollicited to become an Arrian: but the Arch-priest, not once touched for any article of faith. And so he goeth forward with many contrapositions. But I haue spoken suffi∣ciently before of the weaknes of this manner of argu∣ment. And if we remoue the mentions of some persons, that may be offensiue, the matters themselues will easily discouer their conformity. For if yow had de∣maunded Modestus the Deputy then, in fauour of what religion would he haue S. Basil to conforme himselfe & subscribe; he would haue said the Orthodoxe, no lesse then the Iudges of England do now, that require this Oath: And yet did not S. Basil thinke so.* And if any man should haue called that Emperour an Arrian, it would haue bene no lesse offensiue, then to call a Protestant-Prince at his day, a Caluinist or Lutheran; notwithstanding that the reason of difference betweene the Catholicks and Arrians at that day, be the same, that is betweene Catholicks and Protestants at this day: to witt, the following, or impugning of the vniuersall knowne Church, descending from Christes tyme, vnto Page  113Saint Basils, and from Saint Basils to ours.

LXVIII. There remayne yet 3. or 4. other exāples mentioned by the Cardinall in his Epistle to the Arch∣priest, wherof the first two are of S. Peter, and Marcellinus the Pope, whose fortitude and diligence in rysing agayne, he desyreth him to imitate, if perhaps he follo∣wed their infirmity in falling. The other two, are of S. Gregorie,* and S. Leo, two holy and learned Popes, and for that cause both of them surnamed the Great, who do set downe in dyuers places, the obligation that all Ca∣tholicke Christian men haue, to hold vnion and subor∣dination with the Sea Apostolicke. Vnto the first two examples, as there is litle said, but disparityes only sought out, betweene Peter and Marcellinus, and the story also of Marcellinus called in question; so I leaue the same to the Cardinall himselfe to treate more at large: for so much, as in his former books, & workes, he hath hand∣led the same sufficiently; as also the third obiection, made against S. Gregorie, about refusing the name of Vni∣uersall Bishop. And the same I must say of the 4. also, S. Leo, whome the Apologer confesseth to be truly alledged against him,* for exalting the Authority of S. Peter, and firmitie of his faith, which he putteth of with this scoffe borrowed from D. Iohn Reynolds his booke of Conference in the Tower,* That as Tully said to Hortensius the Orator, when he praised immoderatly eloquence, That he would lift her vp to heauē, that himselfe might go vp with her: so would S. Leo lift vp S. Peter with prayses to the sky, that he being his heire, might go vp also, and be exalted with him.

LXIX. And after this scorne, he picketh out diuers sentences of S. Leo his works,* which seeme somewhat o∣dious, & to contayne ouermuch praise, & exaltation of S. Peter, & his Authority; all takē out of the said Reynolds Booke, as Reynoldes himselfe had takē the greatest part of thē out of M. Iewell, to whome the same was very suffi∣ciently Page  114 answered before by D. Harding, and the most of them shewed to be meere calumniations. The first and chiefe wherof is this,*That our Lord did take S. Peter into the fellowship of indiuisible vnity; which S. Leo his aduersaries going about to wrest to an absurd sense, to wit, that this indiuisible vnity must eyther be in person, or nature with Christ, D. Harding sheweth playnly by S. Leo his owne words, sense, and drift, that he meant it only of the indiuisible vnity or fellowship of the high name of Rocke of the Church, which Christ our Sauiour the chiefe and fundamentall Rocke imparted to none, but to S. Peter, and consequently that vnity of name of Rocke was indiuisible betwene them: which if eyther M. Iewell, or M. Reynolds, or our Apologer would haue equally considered, they needed not to go about to disgrace so ancient a Father with so meere a cauill: or at leastwise it being once ans∣wered, they ought not to haue so oftē repeated it againe, without some new matter, or reason for the same, or impugnation of the former answere.

LXX. But I will not trouble yow with any more at this tyme, albeit there ensue in the Apology diuers other poynts that might be stood vpon, not for that they conteyne any great substance of matter, but for that they seeme to proceed out of no small auersion of mynd, acerbity, and gall in the writer, against all sortes of Catholicke people: which CHRIST IESVS amend and mollify, and giue him light from heauen to see the truth, that he so bitterly impugneth.

LXXI. And as he dealeth with S. Leo, so doth he much more in the same kynd with D.or Sanders, and Cardinall Bellarmine → ,* cyting out of their workes, dyuers sentences culled and layd togeather, that seeme lesse respectiue to the Authority of temporall Kings and Princes, and all this to incite more his Ma.tie against them, and those of their Religion: and fynally, against the Cardinall, he concludeth in these wordes: That God is no more contrary to Page  115 Belial, light to darknes, and heauen to hell, then Bellarmines estima∣tion of Kings is to Gods.* Which is a very passionate Conclu∣sion, if yow consider it well, for that setting asyde the preheminēce for iudging in matters of Religion, which in his Controuersyes he proueth both by Scripture, and testimony of all antiquity, to appertayne to Bishops and not to Princes (& so was practised for 300. yeares after Christ, when few, or no Kings, or Emperours were yet Christians;) in all other poyntes he speaketh so reue∣rently of them, and defendeth their Supreme Authority with as great respect as any Authour (perhaps) hath euer done before him. And to pretermit other places, let the Reader but looke ouer the first 16. Chapters of his Booke de Laicis, and he shall fynd not only the Au∣thority of Princes proued to be from God, by many Scriptures, Fathers, Councels, Reasons, and other Au∣thorityes of Saints, against Anabaptists, Atheists, and other miscreants of our tyme; but the quality also, and ex∣cellent power of the said Princely Authority so exalted both for making of lawes, iudging, condemning, wa∣ging warre, and like actions of supreme power; as will easily refute this cauillation.

LXXII. And among other propositions tending to that effect, he hath this in the beginning of his eleuenth Chapter, which he proueth largely, and of purpose throughout the same; not only, That Temporall Princes are to be obeyed out of Conscience, or for Conscience sake; but also, Quod lex Ciuilis non minùs obligat in Conscientia, quàm lex Diuina:* That the Cyuil law of the Temporall Prince doth no lesse bynd the Subiect in Conscience, thē the law that commeth immediatly from God him∣self. And how then is Cardinall Bellarmyne said heere to be no lesse contrary to God,* concerning Kings Autho∣rity, then light to darknes, and heauen to hell? But especially if yow consider further, that when Cardinall Bellarmyne in that booke, commeth to treat of the Authority of Tem∣porall Page  116 Princes in matter of Religion, though he set downe this Conclusion, That, Non pertinet ad eos Iudicium de Religione, The authority of iudging of Religion (which is true or false) belongeth not vnto them, but vnto Bi∣shops: yet, Pertinet ad eos defensio Religionis, the defence and protection of Religion appertayneth vnto them: as also the cyuill gouernmēt in cyuill matters ouer all persons, as well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall, which is so much as a Catholicke man can giue to Caesar, reseruing to God that which is Gods.

LXXIII. And albeit this might be sufficiēt to shew the tooth that is held against Cardinall Bellarmine → , and the ardent appetite these Ministers haue to disgrace him in somewhat: yet am I inforced to lay forth some few examples more, wherby, as in a cleere glasse, the indiffe∣rent Reader will see, behold, and wonder also, at the manner of dealing vsed against him to that end.

LXXIV. And now we haue already seene, what general Conclusions haue bene gathered against him: That he vseth to contradict himselfe wittingly, so often as euer he is pressed with any hard argument by his Aduersary: That his common tricke is to tell the sentence of his Authour without his sense: That he seeketh euery-where to debase Kingly authority,*and the like. Which generalityes, as, in truth and reason, they may not be inferred, but vpon proofe, and induction of many particularyties: so when it commeth to tryall, yow haue seene not so much, as any one particuler sufficiently proued. Now shall yow heare some more examples of calumnious dealing with him.

LXXV. Pag. 92. the Apologer speaking of S. Gregorie the Great, and going about to interpret those wordes of his, alleadged by the Cardinall, where he calleth▪* the Sea Apostolicke Caput fidei, the Head of faith, in regard of the direction in matters of Faith, that is to be taken from thence, as from the Head; the Apologer would haue it vnderstood, that for so much as in that Page  117 place he speaketh to the Bishop of Palermo about the vse of the Pall, accustomed to be gyuen by the sea Apostolicke to Archbishops, S. Gregories meaning is, that the Sea Apostolicke of Rome is head only in matters of Cerimo∣nyes,* and then he inferreth thus: VVhich sense (saith he) if yow will not admit, giue me leaue to say that once of one (Gre∣gorie) which Bellarmyne himselfe saith often of many of the Fa∣thers, Minùs cautè locutus est: Gregorie spake not so aduisedly: And the latin translation hath, Quod ille de multis, & saepe dicit, ex omni numero Patrū, That Bellarmyne saith it often, & of many, and of all sortes of Fathers; to wit, that they spake inconsideratly: and yet when I went to examyne the two places of Bellarmynes workes, cyted by our Apo∣loger in the margent, I found a strange abuse, to wit, no such thing at all spoken of the Fathers, but only of one Nicolaus de Lyra, made a Christian of a Iew, not much aboue two hundred yeares past, who seeming by some words of his, to hold a certayne extrauagāt opiniō, that S. Peter, & S. Paul were not put to death at Rome, but at Hierusalem,* against the generall consent of all antiquity, Cardinal Bellarmyne expoundeth first, what his true meaning was, to witt, nothing in deed differing from the Fathers expositions, and namely of S. Hierome, and then addeth, Quanquam minùs cautè locutus est &c: Albeit Lyranus in his manner of speach, was not so wary, as he might haue byn, in giuing suspicion of so absurd an opinion, and so contrary to all the ancient Fathers. Heere then yow see, how matters are strayned. That which Cardinall Bellarmyne speaketh only of Nicolaus Lyranus vpon so iust occasion, as this was, is extended by our Apologer, to often, many, and all sortes of Fathers. Is this good dealing? How can the Apologer defend himself in this place, from willfull exaggeration, and voluntary mi∣staking? In the other place cyted by him lib. 2. de Christo cap. 2. there is no such matter at all. But let vs see some other like examples.

Page  118 LXXVI. Pag▪ 108. he setteth downe this generall odious proposition-out of Bellarmyne: That Kings are rather slaues, then Lordes. And may a man thinke this to be true or likely, that so rude a proposition should come from Bel∣larmine? Looke vpon the place by him cyted lib. 3. de Laicis cap. 7. & yow will maruaile extremly at this manner of proceeding. For that in this very place, yow shall fynd that the Cardinall doth most exalt, and confirme by Scriptures, Fathers, and other arguments, the dignity and authority of the cyuill Magistrate among Chri∣stians. And in the next precedent Chapter before this cyted, he hath this begining.

The fourth reason, saith he (to proue the lawfulnes and dignity of the Cyuill Magistrate against the Anabaptists) is from the efficiēt cause, to witt, God the Authour therof, from whom it is certayne, that Cyuill power proceedeth, as S. Augu∣stine proueth throughout his whole fourth, and fifth bookes De Ciuitate Dei,* and it is euident by the Scriptures, for that God saith: By me Kings do raigne &c.

LXXVII. So Bellarmine → : and then passing to the next Chapter heere cyted, which is the seuenth, he proueth the same by another argument, which is. That in the state of Innocency, if Adam had not synned, wee should haue had Cyuil subiection and gouernment; and consequently it cānot be thought to be euill, or brought in by sinne, or for the punnishment of synne, as the Ana∣baptistes affirmed, but must needs be of God, & from God. True it is (saith he) that seruile, or slauish subiection, was brought in after the fall of Adam, and should not haue byn in the state of In∣nocency, but cyuill subiection should. And then he sheweth the differences betweene these two sortes of gouernment, and subiections, to witt, that the one, which is the ser∣uile, tendeth wholy to the vtility and emolument of him that gouerneth, and nothing to them that are go∣uerned. But the other which is cyuill and politick, ten∣deth principally to the profit of them that are gouer∣ned Page  119 therby. So as if there be any seruitude, saith Bellarmine → (but he meaneth not slauish) in this Ciuill principality, it falleth rather vpon him, that gouerneth the people to their owne vti∣lity, then vpon the subiectes that receaue the said vtility therby. And so are Bishops called the seruantes of their flockes, and the Pope himselfe, The Seruant of seruants: and S. Augustine vpon those wordes of our Sauiour in S. Matthews Ghos∣pell (He that will be made first (or chiefe) among you,*must be the seruant of all the rest) doth proue at large, that, In Ciuili Principatu, magis sruus est, qui praeest, quàm qui subest: In a Ciuill Principality, he is more a seruant that gouerneth to other mens profit, then he that obeyeth, to his owne.

LXXVIII. This is all that Cardinall Bellarmyne hath about this matter: wherin he doth scarce name a King,* as yow see, but Bishops, and Popes to be ser∣uants in the gouermēts of those, whome they gouerne; though he include good Kings in like manner, putting this difference betwene a good King, & a Tyrant, out of Aristotle; That a good king gouerneth to the profit of his Subiects,* wherin he is their seruant in effect (though not their slaue, as this man odiously vrgeth) and a Ty∣rant, that turneth all to his owne vtility without respect of those, whome he gouerneth. And is this so absurd doctrine? Or doth this iustify the Apologers outra∣gious proposition, That Bellarmyne affirmeth Kings to be rather slaues then Lordes? Who would not be ashamed of this intemperate accusation?

LXXIX. And now there remayne eleuen places more of like quality, alleadged by the Apologer out of Cardinall Bellarmynes workes,* which being examined by the Authors wordes, meaning, and sense, haue the same want of sincerity which the precedent had.* The second is, That Kings are not only Subiects to Popes, to Bishops, to Priests, but euen to Deacons. This is a playne cauill: for the fault, if any be, falleth vpon S. Chrysostome, and not vpon the Cardinall, whose wordes are these: S. Chrysostome in Page  120 his eyghtie and three Homilie vpon S. Matthewes. ghospell, doth subiect Kings and Princes (in Eccle∣siasticall matters) not only to Bishops, but also to Dea∣cons. For thus he speaketh to his Deacon: Si Dux quis∣piam, si Consul, si is qui Diademate ornatur &c. If a Duke, if a Consul, if one that weareth a Crowne, commeth to the Sacramēt vn∣worthily, restrayne him, and forbid him, for that thou hast greater power then he. What fault hath Cardinall Bellarmine → heere in alledging the words, and iudgement of S. Chryso∣stome?

LXXX. The third place is,*That an Emperour must content himself to drinke, not only after a Bishop, but after a Bishops Chaplin. But these wordes are not found in Bel∣larmine, but are odiously framed by the Apologer out of a fact of S. Martyn Bishop of Tewers in France, related by auncient Sulpitius in his life,* that he sitting one day at dynner with the Emperour Maximus, and the Empe∣rours officer bringing a cup of wine to his Lord, he would not drinke therof first, but gaue it to the Bishop to beginne, who accepting therof, and drinking, deliue∣red the said cup to his Priest to drinke next after him, thinking no lay-man to be preferred before a Priest, saith Sulpitius. But what doth this touch Bellarmine → , that doth but relate the Story. May he, in truth, be said to rouch, that an Emperor must be cōtēt to drinke after a Bishops Chaplin? Who seeth not this violēt inforcemēt?

LXXXI. His fourth place is this,*That Kinges haue not their Authority, nor office from God, nor his law; but from the law of Nations. Good God! what desyre is here descried of calumniation? Let any man read the two places here quoted, and he will blesse himselfe, I thinke, to see such dealing. For in the first place his wordes are these: Prin∣cipatus saecularis. &c. Secular Princedome is instituted by mā, & is of the law of Nations; but Ecclesiasticall Princedome is only from God, and by dyuine law, which he meaneth expresly of the first institution of those Principalyties, or Gouernmentes: Page  121 for that at the beginning God did not immediatly ap∣poynt these particuler and different formes of Tempo∣rall gouernment, which now the world hath, some of Kinges, some of Dukes, some of Common-wealthes, but appoynted only, that there should be Gouernment, lea∣uing to ech nation to take or choose what they would. But the Ecclesiasticall Gouernment by Bishops was or∣dayned immediatly by Christ himselfe, for which cause Bellarmine saith in the second place heere alledged: That Kingdomes are not immediatly instituted from God, but mediatly only by meanes of the people; which people therfore may change their formes of gouernment, as in many Countryes we see that they haue: but yet when any forme of Gouernment is established, and Gouernours placed therin, their authority and power is from God, and to be obeyed out of Conscience, vnder payne of damnation,* as before I haue shewed out of Bellarmyne. And he that will read but from his third Chapter de Laicis vnto the 13. shall fynd store of assertions & proofes to that effect, to omitt many other places throughout his workes. So as the former proposition, That Kings haue not their Authority nor office from God nor his law, is very frau∣dulently sett downe. For if he vnderstand, that their forme of Principality and Office therin, is not imme∣diatly from Gods institution, but by meanes of humane lawes, of succession, election, or the like; it is true. But if he meane, that their Authority is not from God, eyther mediate, or immediate, or induceth not obliga∣tion of Conscience in obeying them, as it seemeth he would haue his Reader to thinke; it is most false. And the Apologer ought not to haue walked in these obscu∣rityes, if he had meant vprightly.

LXXXII. I am weary to wade any further in these obiections, and yet will I not let passe to note three more, though most briefly, and almost in three words, leauing the rest to be examined by the Reader himselfe. The first is, That Church-men are as farre aboue Page  122 Kings, as the soule is aboue the body. The other: That Obedience due to the Pope, is for Conscience sake. The third: That Obedience due to Kings, is only for certayne respects of order and policy; The first and last being meere calumniations and the other not denyed by vs. For as for the first, though the words heere mentioned be not in Bellarmyne: yet the compari∣son it self of Ecclesiasticall and Temporall powers in the Church, vnto the soule, and body, is the comparison of S. Gregorie Nazianzen related only by Bellarmyne,* and con∣sequently it must needs follow, as the same Father also inferreth, that so much more eminent, as the soule is aboue the body, so much more excellent is the power Ecclesiasticall aboue Temporall, which S. Chrisostome in like manner proueth at large in his books de Sacerdotio: So as this is not Bellarmynes comparison, but of the said two auncient Fathers, and consequently Bellarmyne is not here reprehended, but they.

LXXXIII. The other two places, if they be two, and not one, but made two for multiplying of odious matter against vs, haue byn so fully answered by vs before, as we shall need to say no more heere therof. For as Obediēce is due out of Conscience vnto the Pope, & other Bishops, & Spirituall Gouernours, in spirituall Gouernments,* by the Apostles precept, Obedie Praepositis vestris, &c. Obey your Prelates, & be subiect vnto them; for they watch, as being to render accompt for your soules: So the same Apostle hath commanded also, due Obedience to Temporall Magistrates, in temporall affayres, by the same obligation of Conscience, as Car∣dinall Bellarmyne doth shew at large, in the places by me alledged. And I maruaile with what Conscience the Apologer heere can deny it, cyting a place for the same in his margent, which hath no such matter, as he would inferre,*That not for Conscience, but only for certayne respects &c. For that treating of the obligation of Obedience to temporall lawes, in temporall affayres, his second pro∣position is; Non sunt exempti Clerici ab obedientia legum Ciui∣lium:Page  123 Clergie-men are not exempted from the obedience of temporall lawes. And in another place before cyted;*Lex Ciuilis non minùs obligat in conscientia quàm lex diuina: The Temporall law byndeth no lesse in conscience, then the Diuine. So as all those odious matters are but frandu∣lently layd togeather to make Catholicks, & their cause hatefull, especially vnto him, whom vnto they desyre most of all men vnder God, to yield most satisfaction for their temporall dutyes, and would hope also to effe∣ctuate it, if these make-bate Ministers did not by their continuall incitations, clamours, and false suggestions disturbe the same, and renew daylie iealosyes and distrustes in his Ma.ties mynd against vs.

The Conclusion.

WHERFORE to draw to an end of this dis∣tastfull argument, it cannot but grieue, & afflict much the hartes of all that loue ey∣ther Prince or Countrey, & looke into the naturall sequels of like proceedings, to see matters runne dayly vnto such extremityes as they do, & that by such instigators, as are both both lesse carefull to foresee the hurts both priuate & publick that may ensue, & lesse able to remedy thē when they fall out. The prin∣cipall of whom (being the first & chiefe motors) besydes the generall hatred wherin they are with both extremes of opposite in Religion, are so interessed in like māner by the spoyles, & rapines which their rauenous Purseuants daylie bring home, out of their continuall searches, and ransacks of innocent mens houses, goodes and persons, as litle moderation may be expected from them.

LXXXV. Would God it might please his dyuine Ma.tie so to inlighten and illustrate that excellent vn∣derstanding of our Prince and Soueraigne, as he may see the many & great inconueniēces, that do & must follow vpon so violēt courses as these men for their owne vti∣litie Page  124 do suggest, & prosecute. Nothing can be more pit∣tifull, then to see a Noble House diuided in itselfe, & the one to beate, hunt, & pursue the other, & this to be their continuall exercise, especially of Children, vnder the sight of their owne Father, louing them all, and desy∣ring to be beloued. Ah! what sollicitude must there needs be in that Fathers hart! And were it not a great synne to increase the same, by casting in oyle to augmēt the flame?

LXXXVI. Would God his Ma.ties eares, and those of his wise Counsell could reach into these partes be∣yond the seas, and to all forrayne nations of Christen∣dome besydes, to heare what is said, what is writtē, what is discoursed by men of best iudgment in this behalfe, not only in regard of iustice and piety, but in reason also of State and Policie; no man being of so simple vn∣derstanding, but that he must see, that so notorious dif∣ferēces, of Subiects for Religiō, pursued with such hosti∣lity among thēselues, must weaken greatly their forces, and make them lesse esteemed both of friends and ad∣uersaryes. So as, besydes internall dangers, which are euer consequent vpon such inward diuisions, if forrayne occasions should be offred vs agayne (as in former tymes they haue beene) by forrayne warres; we should not know how to trust the one the other.

LXXXVII. The cryes & cōplayntes of these affli∣ctions running throughout Christendome, do giue strange admiration vnto men, and do worke strong ef∣fectes both in iudgments and affections: Admiration, for that no such thing was euer expected vnder his Ma∣iesties gouernment, for many causes: strong effectes, for that they worke great alterations both in the one, and the other: In iudgment, for that wise men fynd not any reason, eyther of Religion or State, why such extre∣mityes should be pursued, with such rigour at the insti∣gation of partyes interessed, to the euident danger of so great and honorable Kingdomes, who if in wills they were vinted, as they are in one Prince and Gouernour; Page  125 their forces were both admirable and dreadfull: In affe∣ctions, for that the compassion which naturally doth ac∣company our brethrens afflictions, especially for a cause that we most esteeme and loue, to wit, our Religion; must needes worke the contrary effect of inward auer∣sion, both in Princes & people abroad, notwithstāding they hold externall amity, and friendship for the tyme.

LXXXVIII. I let passe the generall obloquies, and murmurations that are to be heard euery where, almost in Christendome, vpon this manner of proceeding, and much more the publicke and priuate complaints, out∣cryes, and praiers that are made and offered daylie to heauen, throughout all Catholicke Kingdomes lightly, in all particuler Congregations, Oratoryes, Chappels, & meetings of zealous men, that pray instantly to Al∣mighty God for some remedy of these oppressions, and persecutions of English Catholicks, sufficiently (as they thinke) declared vnto thē & to the whole world by the very printed Catalogues of English Statutes extant in Print against them, for profession of their Religion: for that by the view of those Statutes, they do easily con∣ceaue, what enormous effectes, do, and must follow in the execution therof; albeit they did not both heare & see daily so many lamētable presidēts & spectacles therin.

LXXXIX. As for example, there haue not passed many moneths, since there were seene some threescore Priests more or lesse (to omit others) cast into banishmēt about one tyme, & wandring vp and downe, through∣out Christēdome, according as euery man had occasion, or necessity for their mayntenance, gaue a lamentable spectacle to all nations, to see mē of so good partes, amia∣ble aspects, sweet behauiour, naturall borne subiects of the Lād, the most of them of very worshipfull parētage, all of learned education, cleere and deuoyd of any suspi∣tion of crymes that could be obiected vnto them (for otherwise they should not haue bene dismissed) in the flower of their age, to be cast out of their natiue soyle, for Page  126 professing that Religion only, wherby their said Coun∣trey was first made Christian, & so continued vnder all their noble Princes, Kings, Queenes, and Soueraignes, Nobility, and Communatly, from the beginning of their Conuersion, vnto this our age.

XC. This spectacle (I say) presented to the eyes of most Nations of Europe, moued men not a litle, especially hearing them protest their duetifull affections to his Ma.tie and Realme in all Cyuill & Temporall respects, without seeking of any preferments, dignityes, riches, or other emoluments by staying at home; but only the rest & vse of their owne Consciences in matters of Religion, which Protestāts in many other Catholicke Countryes are suffered to inioy, though with farre lesser reason, in regard of the ancient right & possession, which ech part pretendeth for the vse of their said Religion.

XCI. And since this tyme agayne there hath beene seene very lately another spectacle, not much vnlike to the former (though much more markable) to wit, a like number of Noble and Gentlemen, with their followers and trayne, passing in very good sort through sundry Countryes, being lately retyred out of his Ma.ties King∣dome of Irelād, for the selfe same cause of their Consciēce, and Religion; which when men do behold, and heare them otherwise to speake honourably of his Ma.tie & the State, ascribing rather their afflictiōs to some vnder Magistrates in Ireland, and Ministers that set them on; it moueth more compassion, and maketh men thinke and muse, what may be the end of all this, and whereunto fynally it may grow? Whether the like may not be ex∣pected in tyme or doubted, out of other partes also of his Ma.ties dominions, vpon like angariatiō of Consciēces: which points seeme to be of no small consideration, and consequence to wise men; though those that be the im∣mediate causes therof, will and must make light of all: but the naturall yssue of such euentes, are not vnknowne. And if the occasioners therof were guylty of no greater Page  127 fault, but only to cast his Ma.tie & the State into perpe∣tuall cares about the same (his Royall nature being in∣clined otherwise to sweetnes, peace, and tranquillity) it were a great synne in them, and scarce sufferable.

XCII. Nor is the remedy heere attēpted by our Mi∣nister-Apologer (of denying all, and saying that there is no persecution, nor hard dealing with any, for mat∣ters of Religion, no not in the late Queenes dayes, when so many were so rackt and rented for the same) any re∣medy at all; but rather a doubling of the iniury to the afflicted, with encrease of exasperation & auersion of myndes; as also a leesing of all credit with others that heare it, eyther at home or abroad: for that facts con∣trary to wordes, do preponderate with all sober men, and preuaile against the same.

XCIII. And truely, I cannot but wonder, why this late Apology hath beene so greedily published by the Apologer, both in English and Latyn to the world, for that the Popes Breues, being but written priuatly to the Catholicks of England, for informing their Consciences in a matter of necessary doctrine about the lawfulnes, or vnlawfulnes of taking the Oath, and the Letter of Cardinall Bellarmyne being directed only to a priuate friend; both of them might haue remayned also pri∣uate, if this attempt had not byn made of publishing the same. But now being drawne by the Apologer into the Vniuersall Theatre of the world, besydes, that di∣uers will hold themselues obliged, or at leastwyse prouoked to answere the same; it will follow also, that the vnlawfulnes of the said Oath to Catholicke Con∣sciences will more be seene, disputed, & condemned by all Vniuersityes, Schooles, Bookes & Treatises of par∣ticuler learned men, throughout all Countryes of Christendome that professe Catholicke Religiō. Wher∣vpon also the vniust violence, inforcing men to sweare the same Oath, vnder so rigorous paynes, as are the losse both of goods & libertie, and therwithall to sweare in Page  128 like manner, that they do it willingly, freely, and without coaction: will be censured (no doubt) for one of the greatest contradictions in it selfe, and the most iniurious manner of proceeding with Christian men, that euer, perhaps was heard of in the Christian world.

XCIII. And this now occurred to me (deare Syr) to write to you cōcerning my iudgmēt vpō this matter. What more may be said to this Apologie, when it shall come into the handes of learned men; you will easily ghesse by these few notes, that I haue heere laid togea∣ther, which conteyne but little in respect of that which may be written of the matters heere handled. God of his endles mercy inclyne the hart of his Maiesty, to take the best way in this his course of Royall Gouernment: & for so much, as he hath byn pleased to ioyne so many Great Kingdomes vnder his only Scepter, and permit∣ted them to haue so great differences of iudgements in matters of Religion, that their vnion of wills, at least, in dutifull affections, may be so combined and conserued by sweet and temperate proceeding towards all, as despayre, the mother of headlong precipitation, enter not. The Prouerbe is knowne, Qui nimium emungit, elicit sanguinē: & patientia laesa vertitur in furorem. I neuer heard or read, that too much violēce towards free Subiects euer ended well, especially for supposed faultes that are not acknowledged for such, by the punished: & cōsequently no hope of amendment by way of compulsion. Some may dissemble for feare, but they are more lost in their affections then the other. Some reasonable toleration, and friendly treatie would bynd vp woundes from bleeding on all sydes: Exulceration maketh them fester more greiuously, and dangerously. To Gods holy Pro∣uidence the whole is to be committed, who will dispose of all to his greater glorie, siuè in vitam, siuè in mortem. And to him also I committ yow, with my hartiest Com∣mendations, &c. This 10. of Iune. 1608.

Page  [unnumbered]
highlight hits: on | off