Histrio-mastix The players scourge, or, actors tragædie, divided into two parts. Wherein it is largely evidenced, by divers arguments, by the concurring authorities and resolutions of sundry texts of Scripture ... That popular stage-playes ... are sinfull, heathenish, lewde, ungodly spectacles, and most pernicious corruptions; condemned in all ages, as intolerable mischiefes to churches, to republickes, to the manners, mindes, and soules of men. And that the profession of play-poets, of stage-players; together with the penning, acting, and frequenting of stage-playes, are unlawfull, infamous and misbeseeming Christians. All pretences to the contrary are here likewise fully answered; and the unlawfulnes of acting, of beholding academicall enterludes, briefly discussed; besides sundry other particulars concerning dancing, dicing, health-drinking, &c. of which the table will informe you. By William Prynne, an vtter-barrester of Lincolnes Inne.

SCENA QVINTA.

THE fifth Squadron of Play-oppugning Authorities, [ 5] is the resolution of sundry Chri••tian Authours,* 1.1 as well Papists as Protestants, from the yeare of our Lord 1200, to this present time, a Catalogue of whose names and workes I shall here present unto you, according to their severall antiquities, together with the Impressions which I follow. The 1.1 1.2 of them is Guillermus Altisio∣dorensis; Summa Aurea in lib. Sententiarum, Parisijs 1500, 1: 3, Tractat: 7, Quaest: 3, fol: 163. where he con∣cludes thus. Qui dat histrionibus immolat daemonibus &c. The 2.2 1.3 is Saxo Grammaticus, Historiae Danicae l. 6. Francofurti 1576, p. 103. The 3.3 1.4 is Willielmus Malmes∣buriensis, De Gestis Regum Anglorum, l. 2, c. 10, Fran∣cofurti 16••1, p. 67, 68. The 4.4 1.5 is Gulielmus Parisiensis, De Legibus, c. 13, Opera Venetijs 1591, p. 42, 43. & De Vitijs et Virtutibus, lib. c. 6, p. 262. The 5.5 1.6 is Alexan∣der Alensis, the famous English Schooleman, Summa Theologiae, Coloniae Agrip. 1622, pars 4, Quaest. 11, Ar∣tic. 2, sect. 4, p. 391, 392, 393. The 6.6 1.7 is Edmundus Can∣tuariensis, Archbishop of Canterbury, Speculum Ec∣clesiae, cap. 11. Bibl. Patrum Tom. 13, p. 359, E. The 7.7 1.8 is Vincentius Beluacensis, Speculum Doctrinale, Venetijs 1591, lib. 11, c. 93, to 98, fol. 194 &c. Speculum Morale l. 3, pars 8, Distinctio 4, & pars 9, Distinctio 6, fol. 244, 251, 252, & Speculum Historiale Venetijs 1494, l. 29, c. 41, fol. 367, where he hath excellent large Discourses, both against dicing, dancing, Cirque-playes and Stage-playes, well worth the Readers observation. The 8.8 1.9 is Matthaeus Parisiensis, our famous English Historian, Hist. Angliae, Tiguri 1589, p. 209, 210, 803, 823. The 9.9 1.10

is Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Duaci 1614, 2^a 2^ae. Quaest: 168, Artic: 2, 3, Quaest: 169, Artic: 2, 3^m, & 1^a 2^ae Quaest: 102, Artic: 6, 6^m, pag: 288, 289, 291. The 10.10 1.11 is Bonaventura, that famous popish Cardinall, In Sententias lib: 4, Distinct: 16, Dub: 13: Operum Mo∣guntiae, 1609 Tom: 5, p: 196. The 11.11 1.12 is Suidas, Histo∣rica, Basiliae 1581, p: 127. Ardaburius Caius, sec p: 193. The 12.12 1.13 is Ricardus de Media Villa, Super lib. 4, Sen∣tentiarum Brixiae 1591. Distinctio 16, Artic: 3, Quaest: 1, p: 232. The 13.13 1.14 is Nicolaus de Lyra, in Deut: 22, v: 5, Duaci 1617, Tom: 1, p: 1595. in Amos 6, Tom: 4, p: 1879 in 1 Tim: c•• 2, Tom: 6, p: 698. See him on cap: 16, Iudi∣cum, & in cap: 14, Matth: & c: 6, Marc. The 14.14 1.15 is Al∣varus Pelagius, De Planctu Ecclesiae, Lugduni 1517, l: 1, Artic: 49, f: 28, lib•• 2, Artic: 28, fol. 134, & Artic. 46, fol. 150 The 15.15 1.16 is Thomas Gualensis, alias Wallis, a lear∣ned English Writer, Lectio 77, in Proverb. Solomonis, AEdibus Ascentianis, 1510, fol: 97: an excellent full place against Stage-playes: & Summa Collationum ad omne genus hominum, pars 1, Distinctio 14, cap•• 7. quoted by Alexander Fabritius, Destructorium Vitiorum lib: pars 4, c. 23. The 16.16 1.17 is Astexanus, De Casibus &c. Nu∣rembergae 1482, lib. 2, Tit. 53. & l. 4, Tit. 17. Artic. 4. The 17.17 1.18 is that profound English Doctor, Thomas Bradwardin, Archbishop of Canterbury, De Causa Dei, lib. 1•• cap. 1, Corolla 20, Opera Londini 1618, p. 14, 15. The 18.18 1.19 is Robertus Holkot, a famous English Schooleman, Lectio 172, super lib. Sapientiae, Basileae 1506, fol. 132.133. The 19.19 1.20 is Franciscus Petrarcha, De Remedio utriusque Fortunae, lib. 1, Dialogus 24, 25, to 31, printed 1613. p. 95, to 130. where wee have an excellent Discourse against dicing, dancing and Stage-playes. The 20.20 1.21 is Ioannis Wickliffe, our famous English Apostle, Dialogorum l. 3, c. 1, fol: 45, Edit. 1545. The 21.21 1.22 is Ioannis de Burgo, Chancellour of the Vniversity of Cambridge; P••pilla Oculi, Parisijs 1521, pars 4, cap. 8, 1. pars 7, cap. 5, O. & pars 10, cap. 5, V.X.

The 22.22 1.23 is Nicolaus Cabasila, De Vita in Christo l. 2, Bibl. Patrum Tom. 14, p. 114, C, D, E, F. The 23.23 1.24 is Io∣annis Gerson, the learned Chancellour of Paris, De Prae∣ceptis Decalogi, cap. 7, Operum Parisijs 1606, pars 2, Col. 264, & Sermo Dominicae 3, Adventus; Operum pars 4, Col: 332, 333, 334. The 24.24 1.25 is Alexander Fa∣britius, a learned English-man, Destructorium Vitio∣rum, Lutetiae 1516, pars 3, c. 10, C, D. pars 4, cap: 23. De Ludis inhonestis; an excellent place against Dancing, Dicing and Stage-playes; where he quotes one Wale∣rannus and Walensis against these pastimes, whose workes there cited are not at this day extant. The 25.25 1.26 is Thomas Waldensis, a learned English Writer, Iohn Wickliffes professed Antagonist, Tit. 5, De Baptismi Sacrament. c. 49, sect. 7, Operum Venetijs, 1571, Tom. 3, p. 96, B, See here Act. 7, Scene 2. The 26.26 1.27 is Tostatus A∣bulensis, that Voluminous Writer, Comment. in Deut. 22, Quaestio 2, Operum Coloniae Agrip. 1613, Tom. 3, pars 2, p. 199, B, C. In lib. 4. Regum, Quaestio 44, Tom. 7, pars 2, f 100, C, D. & in Matth. cap. 6, Quaestio 38, & 67, Tom. 10, pars 3, fol. 40, E, &c. The 27.27 1.28 is Ricardus Panpolitanus, a famous English Hermite, In Verba Sa∣lomonis; Adolescentulae dilexerunt te nimis &c. Bibl. Patrum Tom: 15, p. 838, A, where he thus writes; Sed quidem ut pueri vadunt ad ludos, ad spectacula, ad mul∣tas alias vanitates: quamvis tamen Deum semper prae∣ponunt, quasi Deum amare nescirent: where hee stiles Stage-playes, vanities, those who resort unto them, chil∣dish persons, who know not how to love God as they ought. The 28.28 1.29 is Nicolaus de Clemangis, De Novis Celebrita∣tibus non instituendis, Tract. Oper Lugduni Batt. 1613, p. 143, to 160. De Lapsu et Reparatione Iustitiae, cap. 15, p. 54. & Epist. 28, 54, p 102, 103, 104, 148, 149. where he excellently declaimes against Dancing, Stage-playes, and other wanton effeminate exercises and disorders in his time; & De Corrupto Ecclesiae Statu, c. 2, sect. 3, p. 5, c. 4, p. 7, c. 15, sect. 3, p. 15, c. 18, sect. 1, p. 18, where he

censures the luxurie and exorbitances of the Clergy, especially for their dancing, dicing, resort to P••ayes, and their esteeme of Players. The 29.29 1.30 is Panormitanus, that industrious Abbot, 5. Decretalium, De Clerico Vena∣tore, Tit-24, Lugduni 1580, fol, 187; and in sundry o∣ther places. The 30.30 1.31 is Antoninus, Archbishop of Flo∣rence, Chronicorum, pars 2, Tit. 15; c. 10. sect. 13, Edit. Lugduni 1543, fol. 132; & pars 3, Tit. 18, c. 5, sect. 4, fol. 19. The 31.31 1.32 is AEneas Sylvi••s, afterwards Pope Pius the 2, Epist. l. 1, Epist. 166, Opera Basileae 1551, p. 721, 722, 723. & De Liberorum Educatione, p. 968. The 32.32 1.33 is Mapheus Vegius, De Educatione Liberorum l. 1•• c 14, & l. 3, c. 7, 12, Bibl. Patrum Tom. 15, p. 835, E, F, 865, H•• 847, F, &. 848•• C, D. The 33.33 1.34is Ioannis Antonius, Bishop of Champaigne, De Gerendo Magistratu, lib. Bibl. Pa∣trum Tom. 15, p. 809, B, C. The 34.34 1.35 is Paulus Wan, Quadragesimale, Hagenau, 1501, Sermo 5, De Custo∣dia quinque Sensuum, Sermo 7, De Custodia Auditus; & Sermo 10, De Custodia Tactus. The 35.35 1.36 is Michael Lochmair, Sermo 21•• Hagenaw 1550, Y, Z; Sermo 33, F, G, H; Sermo 38, K; Sermo 62, L; Sermo 65, Z; & 106, F The 36.36 1.37 is Angelus De Clavasio, Summa Angelica, Nu∣rembergae 1498, Tit. Chorea, Histrio, Infamia, Ludus. The 37.37 1.38 is Baptista Trouomala, Summa Rosella, Vene∣tijs 1495, Tit. Chorea & Histrio. The 38.38 1.39 is Raphael Vo∣lateranus, Commentariorum lib. 29, cap: De Celebri∣tate Conviviorum et Ludorum, Edit: Parisijs 1511, p: 312, 313. The 39.39 1.40 is Ioannis De Wankel, Glossa in Bre∣viarum Sexti, lib•• 3, Tit: 1, De Vita et Honestate Cleri∣corum, Parisis 1509. fol: 88. The 40.40 1.41 is Ioannis Nyder, Expositio super Praecepta Decalogi, Parisiiis 1507, Prae∣ceptum 6•• cap: 2, 3, fol: 123, 124. The 41.41 1.42 is Alexander ab Alexandro, Genialium Dierum lib: 3, c: 9, Hanouiae 1610, fol: 135, 136, & l: 5, c: 8, fol. 280, 281. The 42.42 1.43 is Lodovicus Vives, Notae in Augustinum, De Civitate Dei l. 1, c. 30, to 34, & l. 2, c. 2, to 16, &c. l. 8, c. 37; & De Cau∣sis Corruptionis Artium, lib. 2, Edit: 1612, p. 81, 83.

The 43.43 1.44 is Polydorus Virgilius, De Inventoribus Rerū, 1604, l. 5, c. 1, 2, p. 380, to 389. & l. 3, c. 13, p. 251, 257. The 44.44 1.45 is Ioannis Aventinus, Annalium Boiorum, Ba∣sileae 1590, lib 7, pag. 536, & 668. The 45.45 1.46 is Episcopus Chemnensis, Onus Ecclesiae, 1531, c. 23, sect. 1, fol. 43, cap. 27, sect. 15, 16, 17, 18, fol. 53, & cap. 28, sect. 6, fol. 54. The 46.46 1.47 is Marc: Antonius Coccius Sabellicus AE∣neadis 2, l. 9, Basileae 1538, p. 299, l. 4, p. 200. AEneadis 4, l. 1, p. 482, l. 3, p. 508. AEneadis 5, lib. 4, p. 730, 748, lib. 7, p. 799. AEneadis 7, l. 2, p. 201, 203, lib. 1, p. 191: where he shewes at large, how Stage-playes were originally devoted to the Roman Idol-Gods, who exacted them at their hands to their great expence. The 47.47 1.48 is Stepha∣nus Costa, De Ludo Tractatus, num. 3, 4, 9, 12, 14, to 25. in Tractat. Tractatuum, Parisijs 1545, pars•• 1, f. 156, 157, 158, 159, 160. The 48.48 1.49 is Nicolaus Ploue, De Sacra∣mentis, Ibid. Tractat. Tractatuum, pars 8, p. 51, sect. 3. The 49.49 1.50 is reverend Mr. Iohn Calvin, Sermo 126, in Deut. 22, 5. Epistola Facillo, Operum Genevae 1607•• Tom. 6, pars 2, Col. 93, 94. See Sermo 70, 79, & 80, in lib. Iob. The 50.50 1.51 is Henricus Cornelius Agrippa, De Vanitate Scientiarum, cap. 20, 59, 63, 64, & 71. Coloniae 1581. The 51.51 1.52 is learned and laborius Radolphus Gualter, Hō. 11. in Nahum 3. f. 214, 215. See Hō. 186. in Mat. fol. 349, 350. & Hō. 51, in Marci Evangeliū, fol. 74, 75. The 52.52 1.53 is judicious Martin Bucer, De Regno Christi Sempi∣terno, lib. 2. cap. 54. where he condemnes all popular Stage-playes, though he seemes to allow of academicall with some restrictions. The 53.53 1.54 is acute and learned Peter Martyr, Locorum Communium, Classis 2, cap. 11, sect. 62, 66 c. 12, sect 15, 19•• & Commentary upon Iudges in the English translation, p. 214, 215. The 54.54 1.55 is Olaus Magnus, Archbishop of Vpsalis, Historia, Basileae 1567, lib. 15, c. 10, 11, 12, 13, 31, to 35: which he notably censures all amo••ous lascivious ribaldry dan∣ces, pictures, songs and musicke, together with Stage-playes and common Actors; taxing all such Princes and Great ones, who harbour these lewd Players in their

Courts or territories, or tollerate their Enterludes a∣mong the vulgar. The 55.55 1.56 is Petrus Crab, in his seve∣rall forealledged Councels: See Scene 3, in the margent. The 56.56 1.57 is Frranciscus Ioverius, Sanctiones Ecclesiasti∣cae tam Synodicae quam Pontificiae, Parisijs 1555, Clas∣sis 1•• fol: 611: 156, Classis 2, fol. 5, 6, & 27. The 57.57 1.58 is Henry Stalbridge: his Exhortatory Epistle to his deare∣ly beloved Country of Engl••nd, against the pompous Popish Bishops thereof: as yet the true members of their filthy Father, the great Antichrist of Rome: prin∣ted at Basil 1556, fol. 18, where he writes thus. So long as minstrels and Players of Enterludes played lies, and sung bawdy songs, blasphemed God, and corrupted mens consciences, the Popish Prelates never blamed them, but were well content, &c. The 58.58 1.59 is Andreas Frisius, De Republica Emendanda, Basileae 1559, l. 1, c. 6, p. 23, cap. 17, p. 62, 63, cap. 7, p. 25, 26, cap, 23, p. 90, & lib. 2, cap. 11, p. 132: where he condemnes all Stage-playes, dan∣cing, dicing, and scurrilous songs and Enterludes as un∣sufferable evils in any Christian well-ordered Common∣weale. The 59.59 1.60 is reverend Matthew Parker, Arch∣bishop of Canterbury, De Antiquitate Ecclesiae Britta∣nicae, 1572, pag. 445. The 60.60 1.61 is pious and learned Tho∣mas Beacon, his Catechisme, in his Workes, London 1564, part 10, fol. 341, 355, 361, 366, 400, 486. where he condemnes, not onely as Dicers, Card-players and Gamesters, but even Stage-playes too, as theeves; se∣verely censuring Dancing•• Stage-playes, Enterludes, scurrilous songs and Play-bookes, as the fomentations of lewdnesse, the occasions of adultery, and things alto∣gether misbeseeming Christians, especially on the Lords day, which they most execrably prophane. The 61.61 1.62 is Theodorus Balsamon, Canones Apostolorum et Conci∣liorum, Paris: 1620, p. 217, to 224•• 284, to 288, 422, 423 658, 659. The 62.62 1.63 is Claudius Espencaeus, in Epist: 1, ad Timotheum, Lutetiae 1561, c. 2, p. 44, H: c. 4, p. 88, G: c. 5, p. 101, A: & Digressionum l. 2, c. 14, p. 202, 203. The

63.63 1.64 is Bartholmeus Carranza, Summa Conciliorum, Parisijs 1624, in the places forequoted, Scene 3. The 64.64 1.65 is Franciscus Zephyrus, Epistola Nuncupatoria in Apolog. Tertulliani adversus Gentes, apud Tertulliani Opera 1566, Tom. 2, p. 550, to 555: and Commentar: in Tertul: Apologiam, Ibid: p. 591, 626, 627. The 65.65 1.66 is learned George Alley, Bishop of Exeter, and Divinity Lecturer at Paules, in the second yeare of Queene ELI∣ZABETHS raigne, In his Poore Mans Library, London 1571, part 1, fol. 13, 39, & fol. 46, 47: where he notably declaimes against Play-bookes, and Stage-playes, as the fomentation, the fire and fewell of mens lusts, the occasion of adultery, & other intollerable evils among Christians or Pagans. The 66.66 1.67 is Laurentius Surius, in his forequoted Councels Coloniae Agrip. 1567. See Scene 3. The 67.67 1.68 is Caelius Rhodiginus, Antiquarum Lectionum, 1599, l. 8, c. 7, 8. Col. 353, 354. The 68.68 1.69 is Iohn Bodine, his Com∣mon-weale, l. 6, c. 1, London 1606, p. 644, 645. See here p•• 483•• 484. The 69,69 1.70 70,70 1.71 71,71 1.72 72,72 1.73 are Flacius Illyricus, Ioannis Wigandus, Mattheus Iudex, and Basilius Faber: in their Centuriae Ecclesiasticae, 1564, &c. Centuria ••••, Col. 266, 279, 280. Centur. 3, Col. 141, 142. Cent. 4, Col. 458, 857. Cent. 5, Col. 721, 1509, & Cent. 9, Col. 259, 260. The 73.73 1.74 is Theodorus Zuinger. Theatrum vitae hu∣manae, Basileae 1570, vol. 12, l. 5, p. 1834, 1835. The 74.74 1.75 is Ioannis Bertochinus, Repertorium Basileae 1574, pars 2, pag. 669. Histrio. The 75.75 1.76 is Petrus de Primaudaye, in his French Academy, London 1618, cap. 20, p. 205, where hee censures Stage-playes as unsufferable mis∣chiefes. The 76.76 1.77 is Antonius de Brutio, Super lib. 3, Decretalium, Venetijs 1578, Tom. 5, cap. 12. De Vita et Honestate Clericorum, fol. 4, 8. The 77.77 1.78 is Ioanni•• Simlerus, in Exodum, cap. 32, Tiguri 1584, p. 156. The 78.78 1.79 is Andreas Hyperius, De Ferijs Bacchanalibus. Basi∣leae 1580. The 79.79 1.80 is Guilbertus Genebrardus, Chroni∣con, Lugduni 1609, lib. 2, p. 212, & 314. The 80.80 1.81 is Pau∣lo Lanceletto, Institutiones Iuris Canonici, lib. 2, Tit. De

Eucharistia, Lovanij 1578. p. 269, 270. The 81.81 1.82 is Petrus Berchorius, Dictionarij sive Repertorij Moralis, Vene∣tijs 1583, pars 2, Tit. Ludere, p. 428: & De Episcopis in Tractatu Tractatuum, pars 4, fol. 25, num. 101. The 82.82 1.83 is Lambertus Danaeus, De Ludo Aleas, cap. 5, et E∣thicae Christianae, l. 2, c. 8, in his Opusc. Theolog. Gene∣vae 1583, p. 107. The 83.83 1.84 is Ioannes Langhecrucius, De Vita et Honestate Ecclesiasticorum, Duaci 1588, lib. 2, c. 11, 12, 20, 21. where he copiously censures Playes and Play-haunters out of Lactantius, Cyprian with other Fathers and Councels. The 84.84 1.85 is Didacus De Tapia, in Tertiam partem divi Thomae, Salamancae. 1589, p. 545, 546. See here p. 483, 484. The 85.95 1.86 is Petrus Op∣meerus, Opus Chronographicum Orbis Vniversi, Ant∣werpiae 1611, p. 186, 185. See here p. 481. The 86.86 1.87 is, Barnabas Brissonius, Commentarius De Spectaculis in Cod. Theodosij, Honoviae 1600, p. 208, to 210, where he largely discourseth against Stage-playes, producing sundry passages out of Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, Chrysostome, and other Fathers, to testifie their unlaw∣fulnesse, and lewd mischievous effects. The 87.87 1.88 is Io∣annis Mariana, Tractatus 7, Coloniae Agrip. 1609. Tra∣ctatus de Spectaculis, professedly written against Stage-playes, where he proves their unsufferable naughtinesse, and unlawfulnesse both by Councels, Fathers, and Hea∣then Authours. The 88.88 1.89 is Petrus Faber, Agonistarum lib. Lugd. 1590, where he professedly censures Stage-playes, and such like Enterludes. The 89.89 1.90 is Petrus Gregorius Thosolanus, Syntagma Iuris Vniversi, Franec. 1599, lib. 39, cap. 5. The 90.90 1.91 is learned Arias Monta∣nus, De Varia Republica, Sive Commentaria in lib. Iu∣dicum, Antwerpiae 1592, cap. 16, p. 568, to 575. The 91.91 1.92 is Iustus Lipsius, De Gladiatoribus lib: & De Amphi∣theatro lib: Antwerpiae 1584. where he not onely de∣scribes at large the formes and severall fabrickes of The∣atres, Scenes and Amphitheaters, together with the de∣testablenesse of Sword-playes and such like Amphithe∣atricall

spectacles, but likewise inveigheth against stage-playes too. The 92.92 1.93 is Rodolphus Hospinianus, De Ori∣gine Festorum, Tiguri 1593, cap: 22. fol. 118, 119, 151, 152, 153. The 93.93 1.94 is Carolus Sigonius, Historia de Oc∣cidentali Imperio, France 1593. lib. 1, p. 32. See here p. 482. The 94.94 1.95 is Erasmus Marbachius, Comment. in Deutr. 22. v. 5. Argentorati 1597. p. 217, 218. The 95.95 1.96 is Laurentius Bochellus, Decreta Ecclesiae Gallicanae, Pa∣risijs 1599. lib. 6. tit. 19. and in sundry other places al∣ready quoted. Scene 3. in the margent. The 96.96 1.97 is Don Antonio de Guevara, his Diall of Princes, Booke 3. cap. 43. to 48. London 1616. p. 509. to 522. where the in∣tollera••le mischiefes that Players and Playes occasion are anatomized to the full, and their unlawfulnesse ma∣nifested by the testimony of heathen Authours. The 97.97 1.98 is that laborius Roman Historian Cardenall Baronius, Annales Ecclesiasticae, Coloniae Agrip. 1609. Anno 120. sect. 30. Anno 179. sect. 47. Anno 201. sect. 34. Anno 206. sect. 4. and in sundry other places. The 98.98 1.99 is that famous Popish Cardinall Robertus Bellarminus, Con∣cio 6. De Dominica 3. Adventus, et Concio 9. de Do∣minica Quinquagesimae, Operum Coloniae Agrip. 1617. tom. 6. Col. 60, 61, 204, 205. where he censures stage-playes and dancing as unlawfull unchristian Pastimes, es∣pecially on Lords-dayes and holy-dayes. The 99.99 1.100 is Thomas Zerula, Bishop of Beneventum, Praxis Epis∣copalis. Venetijs 1599. pars 1. tit. Ludus fol. 141. The 100••100 1.101 is Onuphrius Paniunius Veronensis, De Ludis Cir∣censibus. Venetijs 1600. lib. 1. cap. 1, 2, 3, 4. et lib. 2. p. 120. to 136. where he at large relates the idolatrous hea∣thenish Originall of Cirque-playes and Stage-playes, which he there professedly condemnes, quoting St. Cy∣prian, and Tertullian, De Spectaculis, against them, which bookes are there verbatim transcribed. The 101.101 1.102 is Paulus Windecke, Theologia Iurisconsultorum, lib. 1. Locus 38. Coloniae Agrip. 1604. p. 110, 111. The 102.102 1.103 is Iulius Caesar Bulengerus, De Cuco et Ludis Circensi∣bus,

De Venatione Circi, & de Theatro &c. Opusculo∣rum Tom. 2. Lugduni 1621. p: 71. to 90. De Theatro lib. 1. throughout, especially cap. 50, & 51, De Scenae et Or∣chestrae obscenitate, & de Infamia Theatri: in which bookes, he not onely at large relates the Originall of Cirque-playes, Sword-playes and Stage-playes, toge∣ther with the severall formes and parts of Theatres, Scenes and Stage-playes, with the severall sorts of A∣ctors, and all other Stage-appurtenances, it being the best discourse in this nature that I have hitherto seene; but he likewise peremptorily censures Stage-playes (a∣gainst which he produceth sundry Fathers, Councels and Authorities) as intollerable polluted Spectacles, which misbeseeme all Christians. The 103.103 1.104 is Francis De Croy, his First Conformity, printed in English, Lon∣don 1620, cap: 19, 20. The 104.104 1.105 is Severinus Binius, in his forealledged Councels. See Scene 3. in the margent. The 105.105 1.106 is Gentianus Hervetus, Comment. in Clement. Alexandrini lib. 3, Paedagogi cap: 11. Parisijs 1612. The 106.106 1.107 is Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae, Ge∣nevae 1617, l: 10, c: 25, 26. & lib. 9, c. 35, p. 665, 666. The 107.107 1.108 is Henricus Spondanus, Epitome Baronij, Mo∣guntiae 1614, Anno Christi 206, sect. 2, p: 194, Anno 371, sect. 10, p: 393, Anno 399. sect. 5, 9, p. 445, Anno 469. sect: 2 p: 549, Anno 404. sect. 1, 2, p. 458. See Anno 59. sect: 8 p. 108, Anno 325. sect: 52, p: 296, Anno 327, sect: 23, p: 351, & Anno 365, sect. 5, p: 383. where hee proves that Stage-playes were evermore condemned by the Fathers and primitive Christians, as the very Di∣vels Pompes. The 108.108 1.109 is Philippus Gluverius, Germa∣niae Antiquae, Lugduni Batt. 1616. lib•• 1, c: 20, p: 181, 182. See here pag: 457, 458•• The 109.109 1.110 is Gulielmus Am••••ius, de ••ure Conscientiae, 1630, lib. 5•• c. 34. p. 271. The 110.110 1.111 is Dr. Thomas Beard, his Theatre of Gods Iudgements, Edition 2, London 1631. Booke 2, c: 36, p: 435 4••6. These 110.110 1.112 forraigne and domestique ••u∣thours of all sorts, as well Papists as Protesta••ts. Histo∣rians,

Statists, Civilians, Morralists, Canonists, as Di∣vines. To which I might adde Mr. Iohn Northbrooke, his English Treatise against Playes and Enterludes, Lon∣don 1579. Mr. Stephen Gosson, his Schoole of Abuses, London 1578. and his Playes confuted in five Actions, London 1580. The 2. and 3. Blast of Retrait from Playes and Theaters, London 1580. the latter of them penned by a penitent reclaimed Play-Poet. The Church of evill men and women, whereof Lucifer is the head, and Players & Playhaunters the members, &c. written by a nameles Authour, & printed by Richard Pinson. Mr. Iohn Field HIS DECLARATION OF GODS IVDGEMENT AT PARIS GARDEN, Ianuary 13. 1583, London 1588. Mr. Philip Stubs, his Anatomy of Abuses, Edition 4. Lon∣don 1595, p. 101, to 107. Dr. Iohn Rainolds, his Over∣throw of Stage-playes, printed 1599, and reimprinted, Oxford 1629. I. G. his Refutation of the Apologie for Actors, London 1615. A short Treatise against Stage-playes, printed 1625. and dedicated to the Parliament: (all English Treatises professedly written against Stage-playes by English men, and published by authority, which I would desire our Players, our Play-haunters to peruse at leisure:) Mr. Osmund Lake, his Probe Theo∣logicall upon the Commandements, London 1612, p. 167, to 272. and those 30 other forequoted English Writers, (pag. 485, 486, 487, 488.) whose names and workes I pretermit: all which being put together, a∣mount to 150 in the totall summe. These 150 moderne Christian famous Writers, I say, with b 1.113 sundry others whō I pretermit; have in their recited works, by a con∣stant uninterrupted succession from the yeare of our Lord 1200, to this present, unanimously oppugned and condemned Stage-playes, (together with all c 1.114 mixt effe∣minate, lascivious, amorous Dancing, the epedemicall cor∣ruption of our present age,) as most pernicious, execrable, lewd, unchristian, heathenish Spe••tacles, not sufferable in any Christian Church or State; branding all d 1.115 Stage-players

for gracelesse, lewd infamous miscreants, who ought to be excommunicated ipso facto both from the Church, the Sacraments, and all Christian society, till they have whol∣ly renounced their diabolicall vile profession, and given publike testimony to the world, both of their reformation and sincere repentance. And as all these recited W••iters, even so our owne Magistrates, our Vniversities, and all our faithfull Ministers, both in their publike Sermons, and private discourses, together with all godly zealous Christians from age to age, have passed the very selfe-same doome and verdict against Playes and Players, as I have e 1.116 elsewhere largely proved, and our owne experience can su••ficiently testifie. If then all these Pro∣testant and Popish Authours, Magistrates, Ministers and godly Christians, both at home and abroad, have suc∣cessively from age to age, from yeare to yeare, thus pub∣likely, thus professedly condemned Stage-playes, both by their words and writings, as most pernicious evills; and that not coldly or slightly, but with the very height of zeale and earnestnesse; dare any Christian now be so perversely obstinate, so singularly wilfull, so desperately audacious, as still to magnifie, frequent, or patronize them? Never, I dare confidently averre, was any one thing whatsoever (except onely some grosse notorious sinne against the expresse law of God and nature) so u∣niversally, abundantly, professedly condemned by Coun∣cels, Fathers, Christian and prophane Emperours, Princes, Magistrates, States, and Writers of all sorts, all ages, all places whatsoever, as Stage-playes, against which the f 1.117 Fathers of olde, and many Christians of late have written whole Treatises, Bookes and Volumes with such affection and acumen, that wee shall never finde them more sharpe and piercing•• more vehement, elegant, and divinely rhetoricall, than in their Impressi∣ons against Stage-playes, wherein they farre transcend themselves. Yea such hath beene the harmonious una∣nimity of Writers in condemning Stage-playes, and

Actors, that I never met with any Christian or Hea∣then Authour (Lodge onely and Haywood, two E••glish Players excepted) that durst publikely pleade in any printed worke for popular Playes and Actors. It is true, that these two Players Lodge & Haywood, the first of them in his Play of Playes, the latter in his Apologie for Actors, thrust out in print by stealth, perceiving Play-houses, Playes and Actors to grow into disgrace by reason of sundry pious Bookes that had beene writ∣ten against them, by Mr. Northbrooke, Mr. Gosson, Mr. Stubs, Dr. Rainolds, and others forerecited; un∣dertooke the patronage of Playes and Players (as g 1.118 Demetrius and his silver-smithes did the defence of their great Diana and her silver shrines) for their owne pri∣vate ends, it being the craft by which they got their wealth and living. But their ridiculous Player-like Pleas, ••avouring of nought but paganisme, ignorance and folly, were no sooner published by connivance, but they were presently so soledly refuted, (the first of them, by Mr. Stephen Gosson, a penitent Play-Poet, in his Playes con∣futed in 5 Actions; the latter by I: G: in his Refutation of the Apologie for Actors, London 1615. both pub∣lished by authoritie:) that they durst not, yea they could not since replie unto them, there being so much against Playes and Players in all writers, all ages, so lit∣tle (and that little as good as nothing) for them, that it is not onely bootelesse, but impious and absurd, for any to indeavour their defence, which h 1.119 Dr. Gager, i 1.120 Dr. Gentiles, and k 1.121 Dr. Case, who writ some∣thing in behalfe of academicall Stage-playes onely, (in which argument they were likewise so utterly foyled and overthrowne by that ornament of our Church and Nation, l 1.122 Dr. Rainolds, as they were glad to yeeld the wasters to him, to m 1.123 change their opinions, & set downe with losse;) durst never undertake; they all condemning popular Plaies and Plaiers, even in their Apologies for private academicall Enterludes. Let therefore the nu∣merous

concurring resolutions of all these learned emi∣nent approved Authors, whose single opinions wee highly estimate in most other things, n 1.124 overballance the prejudicate erronious inconsiderate private and subi∣tane Opinions of all ignorant novices, or lascivious in∣judicious Players or Play-haunters whatsoever, who are so prepossessed, so besotted with the love of these most sinfull pleasures, that they are altogether unable to judge rightlie of them: And let us chuse rather to judge aright of Plaies and Plaiers, with all these worthie Sa∣ges, than to erre with novices, children, fooles, or lewd ones, who for want of grace and rectified judgements, are o 1.125 unable to discerne betweene good and evill; contra∣cting the summe of all our present Resolues into this 50 Play-refelling Syllogisme.

That which above ••50 moderne Protestant and Popish Writers of all sorts, of our owne and other Nations;* 1.126 together with many learned godly Ministers and private Christians have professedly written, prea∣ched, declaimed against from time to time, with an unanimous consent, without any publike oppositi∣on or controll; must certainely bee execrable, un∣seemely, unlawfull unto Christians•• Witnesse, Mat∣thew 23.2, 3. Luke 10.16. 1 Corinth. 10.32, 33. Hebr. 13.17. 2 Cor. 7.15. c. 9.13. Ephes. 5. 21. cap. 6.1, 2. 1 Pet. 5.5.

But above 150 moderne Protestant and Popish Writers of all sorts as well domestique as forraigne, together with many learned godly Ministers and private Christians, have professedly written, preached, de∣claimed against Stage-playes from time to time, (even from Anno 1200, till now;) and that with a most unanimous consent, without any publike op∣position or controll: Witnesse the premises.

Therefore, they must certainly be execrable, useemely, unlawfull unto Christians.

Notes

• * 1.1

  150 Moderne Christian Wri∣ters have con∣demned Stage-playes.
• 1 1.2

  Guillermus, Altisiodorensis Anno Dom. 1206.
• 2 1.3

  Saxo Gram∣mati••us, Anno 1220.
• 3 1.4

  Will. Mal∣mesburiensis, 1230.
• 4 1.5

  Gulielmus Parisiensis, Anno 1240.
• 5 1.6

  Alexander Alensis, Anno 1240.
• 6 1.7

  Edmundus Cantuariensis, Anno 1240.
• 7 1.8

  Vincentius Beluacensis, Anno 1250.
• 8 1.9

  Matthaeus Parisiensis, Anno 1250.
• 9 1.10

  Aquinas, Anno 1260.
• 10 1.11

  Bonaventu∣ra, Anno 1262.
• 11 1.12

  Suidas, Anno 1270.
• 12 1.13

  Ricardus, de Media Villa, Anno 1290.
• 13 1.14

  Nic. De Ly∣ra, Auno 1320.
• 14 1.15

  Alvarus Pe∣lagius, Anno 1330.
• 15 1.16

  Thomas Gualensis, Anno 1330.
• 16 1.17

  Astexanus, Anno 1330.
• 17 1.18

  Thomas Bradwardin, Anno 1340.
• 18 1.19

  Robertus Holkot, Anno 1350.
• 19 1.20

  Franciscus Petrarcha, Anno 1370.
• 20 1.21

  Ioannis Wickliffe•• An. 1380.
• 21 1.22

  Ioannnis de Burgo, An. 1390.
• 22 1.23

  Nicolaus Cabasila, Anno 1400.
• 23 1.24

  Ioannis Gerson, Anno 1410.
• 24 1.25

  Alexander Fabritius, An. 1426.
• 25 1.26

  Thomas Waldensis, Anno 1430.
• 26 1.27

  To••tatus Abulen••is, Anno 1430.
• 27 1.28

  Ricardus Panpolitanus, Anno 1430.
• 28 1.29

  Ni••olaus De Clemangis, Anno 1230.
• 29 1.30

  Panormita∣nus, An••o 14••0.
• 30 1.31

  Antoninu•••• Anno 1444.
• 31 1.32

  AEneas Syl∣vius, Anno 1450.
• 32 1.33

  Mapheus Vegius, Anno 1450.
• 33 1.34

  Ioannis An∣tonius, Anno 1540.
• 34 1.35

  Paulus Wan, Anno 1460.
• 35 1.36

  Michael Lochmair, Anno 1470.
• 36 1.37

  Ang••lus De Clavasio, Anno 1480.
• 37 1.38

  Baptista Tro••omala, Anno 1490.
• 38 1.39

  Raphael Volateranus, Anno 1500.
• 39 1.40

  Ioannis de Wankel, Anno 1506.
• 40 1.41

  Ioannis Nyder, Anno 1506.
• 41 1.42

  Alexander ab Alexandro, Anno 1510.
• 42 1.43

  Lodovicu•• Vives, Anno 1510.
• 43 1.44

  Polydor Virgil, Anno 1510.
• 44 1.45

  Ioannis Aventinus, Anno 1520.
• 45 1.46

  Episcopus Chemnensis, Anno 1530.
• 46 1.47

  Coccius Sabellicus, Anno 1538.
• 47 1.48

  Stephanus Costa, Anno 1540.
• 48 1.49

  Nicolaus Ploue, Anno 1540.
• 49 1.50

  Mr. Iohn Calvin, Anno 1540.
• 50 1.51

  Cornelius Agrippa, Anno 1546.
• 51 1.52

  Radulphus Gualther, Anno 1548.
• 52 1.53

  Martin Bu∣cer, Anno 1550
• 53 1.54

  Peter Mar∣tyr, Anno 1550
• 54 1.55

  Olaus Magnus, Anno 1550.
• 55 1.56

  Petrus Crab, Anno 1550.
• 56 1.57

  Franciscus Ioverius, Anno 1554.
• 57 1.58

  Henry Stal∣bridge, Anno 1556.
• 58 1.59

  Andreas Frisius, Anno 1558.
• 59 1.60

  Matthew Parker, Anno 1560.
• 60 1.61

  Thomas Beacon, Anno 1560.
• 61 1.62

  Theodorus Balsamon, Anno 1560.
• 62 1.63

  Claudius Espencaeus, Anno 1560.
• 63 1.64

  Bartholme∣us Carranza, Anno 1560.
• 64 1.65

  Franciscus Zephyrus, Anno 1561.
• 65 1.66

  George Alley, An. 1562
• 66 1.67

  Laurentius Surius, Anno 1566.
• 67 1.68

  Caelius Rhodiginus, Anno 1566.
• 68 1.69

  Iohn Bo∣dine, An. 1566.
• 69 1.70

  Flacius Il. lyricus, Anno 1566.
• 70 1.71

  Ioannis Wigandus.
• 71 1.72

  Matthaeus Iudex.
• 72 1.73

  Basilius Faber.
• 73 1.74

  Theodorus Zuinger, Anno 1570.
• 74 1.75

  Ioannis Bertochinus, Anno 1574.
• 75 1.76

  Petrus de Primaudaye, Anno 1576.
• 76 1.77

  Antonius de Brutio, Anno 1558.
• 77 1.78

  ••osias Sim∣lerus, An. 1580.
• 78 1.79

  Andreas Hy∣perius, An. 1580
• 79 1.80

  Gilbertus Genebrardus, 1580.
• 80 1.81

  Paulo Lan∣celetto, Anno 1580.
• 81 1.82

  Petrus Berchorius, Anno 1583.
• 82 1.83

  Lambertus Danaeus, Anno 1583.
• 83 1.84

  Ioannes Langhecrucius Anno 1588.
• 84 1.85

  Didacus De Tapia, Anno 1589.
• 95 1.86

  Petrus Op∣meerus, Anno 1590.
• 86 1.87

  Barnabas Brissonius, Anno 1590.
• 87 1.88

  Ioannes Mariana, An•• 1590.
• 88 1.89

  Petrus Fa∣ber, An. 1590.
• 89 1.90

  Greg. Tho∣losanus, Anno 1590••
• 90 1.91

  Arias Mon∣tanus, 1590.
• 91 1.92

  Iustus Lip∣sius, An. 1590.
• 92 1.93

  Rodolphus Hospinianus, Anno 1593.
• 93 1.94

  Carolus Si∣gonius, Anno 1593.
• 94 1.95

  Erasmus Marbachius, 1597.
• 95 1.96

  Laurentius Bochellus, An. 1598.
• 96 1.97

  Ant. Gue∣vara, An. 1600.
• 97 1.98

  Baronius, Anno 1600.
• 98 1.99

  Bellarmine, Anno 1600.
• 99 1.100

  Thomas Zerula, Anno 1600
• 100 1.101

  Onuphri∣us, Anno 1600.
• 101 1.102

  Paulus Windecke, Anno 1604.
• 102 1.103

  Bulenge∣rus, An. 1606.
• 103 1.104

  Francis de Croy, Anno 1606.
• 104 1.105

  Severinus Binius, Anno 1606.
• 105 1.106

  Gentia∣nus Hervetus, Anno 1610.
• 106 1.107

  Amandus Polanus, Anno 161••.
• 107 1.108

  Henricus Spondanus, Anno 1614.
• 108 1.109

  Philippus Gluverius, An. 1616.
• 109 1.110

  Dr. Ames, Anno 1630.
• 110 1.111

  Dr. Tho∣mas Beard, An. 1631.
• 110 1.112

  Dr. Tho∣mas Beard, An. 1631.
• b 1.113

  See Herman∣nus Schedell Chronicon Chron. AEtas 5, fol. 83. Iaco∣bus Spielegius Lexicon Iuris Civi••is, & Io∣annis Calvini, Lexicon Iuridi∣cum: Tit. Histri∣ones & Ludus, Pardulphus Prateus Lexi∣con Iuris Civi∣lis et Canonici, et Hieronimus Verrutius, Lex∣icon Vtriusque Iuris. Tit. Lu∣dus, & Mai••∣ma: who there condemne both Stage-players and Stage-playes. With Budaeus, Gothefredus, & others here∣after quoted, Part. 2. Act. 2.
• c 1.114

  See Act. 5. Scene 8. & Act. 6. Scene 3, 4.
• d 1.115

  See Act. 4. S••ene 1. Act. 6. Scene 12, 20. Act. 7. Scene 2, 3.
• e 1.116

  Act. 6. Scene •• p. 489, to 498. Act. 7. Scene 2, 3, 7. See the E∣pistle before D. Rainolds Over∣throw of Stage-playes, and I. G. his Resu∣tation of the Apology for Actors accor∣dingly.
• f 1.117

  See Cyprian & Tertullian, De Spectacu∣lis lib. Salvian de G••berna••. Dei lib. 6. Au∣gustine De Ci∣vit. Dei lib. 1, 2. and others in their forequo∣ted places.
• g 1.118

  Acts 19.24, 25, &c.
• h 1.119

  See Dr. Rai∣nolds his O∣verthrow of Stage playes, whe••e his words are ci∣••ed and an∣swered.
• i 1.120

  In his two Epistles to Dr. Rainolds O∣verthrow of Stage-playes, p. 264. &c.
• k 1.121

  Ethicorum, l. 2. c. 8. & Po∣lit. l. 5. cap. 8.
• l 1.122

  In his Over∣throw of stage-playes.
• m 1.123

  See the Epi∣stle before Dr. Rainolds his Overthrow of Stage-playes accordingly.
• n 1.124

  Homini men∣te praedito pau∣ci sapientes, multis insipi∣entibus magis sunt vere••di. Platonis Sym••posium, p. 291.
• o 1.125

  Hebr. 5.14.
• * 1.126

  Argum. 50.