The vvarn-vvord to Sir Francis Hastinges wast-word conteyning the issue of three former treateses, the Watch-word, the Ward-word and the Wast-word (intituled by Sir Francis, an Apologie or defence of his Watch-word) togeather with certaine admonitions & warnings to thesaid [sic] knight and his followers. Wherunto is adioyned a breif reiection of an insolent, and vaunting minister masked with the letters O.E. who hath taken vpon him to wryte of thesame [sic] argument in supply of the knight. There go also foure seueral tables, one of the chapters, another of the controuersies, the third of the cheif shiftes, and deceits, the fourth of the parricular [sic] matters conteyned in the whole book. By N.D. author of the Ward-word.

The calling in of O. E.

[ 30] But wil yow heare now in a woord or two, what S^r. F. Frācis souldiar of supply O.E. saith in this point?* 1.1 First yow must imagine he had seene all both what the watchman and the Warder had said before, and what Syr Francis also had replied, and yet he commeth in with a flat new assertion as though he had seene no∣thing hitherto.* 1.2 Likewayes (saith he) they teach that laymen may not medle with, matters of religion, that is, that Princes haue no power to reforme the Churche nor make Ecclesiastical lawes. Yea (Syr Mi∣nister) wil yow run out at that hole? and is that the meaning of the K^t. assertion? How then followeth the second part; that therby we make all laymen carelesse of God and all godlynes? and how doth the K^t. himself go about to defend it by saying, that we barre ••ay-men from rea∣ding scriptures in English? can this be vn∣derstood only of Princes and their authority to make ecclesiastical lawes? Who euer saw such brasen faces, as not to blush thus to disa∣gree? But harken to his inference vpon this bold assertion and confesse that he may beare the bel for impudency.

[ 31] Yf the Papists (sayth he) do so remoue lay-men from gouernment in Eeclesiastical causes that they need

not to care how God is serued then are they not wrōged by S^r. Francis, &c. Who would loose tyme to dispute with this compagnion, and much lesse to answere him in his ••rantick contumelious speech against F. Persons, which all men kno∣wing to be vniust and false and so to be proo∣ued by infinit witnesses, and to proceed only from a slaunderous and ignominious tongue of a lewd malitious minister, is rather to be ••ontemned then answered. And so this shal suffice for examination of this position.

Notes

• * 1.1

  VVhat the minister O. E. saith about this contro∣uersy.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 5••.