A true relation of Englands happinesse, vnder the raigne of Queene Elizabeth and the miserable estate of papists, vnder the Popes tyrany / by M.S.

CHAP. IX. A catalogue of certaine principall lies, vttered by Robert Parsons in his late Warne-word.

THe Spirit of God (as the Apostle sayth) speaketh eui∣dently, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, and shall giue heed vnto spirits of errour, and doctrines of diuels, which speake lyes through hypocrisie, and haue their 〈◊〉〈◊〉 burned with a hote yron. Which prophecy, as in other heretikes, so especially in y^e 〈◊〉〈◊〉 we may sée most plainely and euidently to be fulfilled. For they depar∣ting from the auncient and Catholike faith, taught by the

holy Apostles and Prophets, and recorded in holy Scrip∣tures, haue giuen héed to spirits of error, and beléeued the trash of vnwritten traditions, and lying legends, and ther∣upon haue founded their prohibitions of certaine meates, and mariages, and such like doctrines of diuels, confirming their opinions with grosse lies, vttered with seared consci∣ences and brazen faces, contrary to all shew of truth. They take to themselues the name of doctors and fathers, but are false teachers and vnkind traitors. And as Theodoret saith of certaine heretikes, Christianorum sibi appellatione imposita a∣pertè docent contraria. Calling themselues Christians (or Catho∣likes) Catho∣likes) they openly teach contrary. I could specifie it by Caesar Baronius and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, by Sanders, Stapleton, and diuers other principall authors of the popish sect. But I will not match any man of note, with so notorious a dolt, and so base a swad as Robert Parsons is, of whom we are now to speake, though not much to his commendation. The onely example of Parsons, and y^e in one of his fardles of lies, which we are now to rip vp, shall shew them to be notorious and bold lyers. The diuellish and erronious doctrine of friars, we haue touched before, and shall haue often occasion to mention.

In the front of his booke, he promiseth the issue of three former treatises, and in the second page talketh of eight en∣counters. But he falsifieth his promise, and lieth grossely. For of the thrée former treatises, he toucheth onely two chapters, and of eight encounters, entreth onely vpon two. Further, he declineth the true issue of matters, and runneth bias, like a warped bowle of dudgeon, into impertinent & idle questions. Doth he not therfore, as Hierom saith of one, make shipwwracke in the port?

In his Epistle to the Reader taking vpon him to deliuer the summe of the controuersie betwixt him and vs, he wrac∣keth himselfe like wise, thinking to wreake his malice vpon vs, and beginneth with á grosse lie. There hapned (saith he) some few yeares past (he noteth 1599. in the margent) as of∣ten also before, a certaine false alarme of a Spanish inuasion

then said to be vpon the seas towards England. Where I néed not to note the idiotisme of Parsons speech, that talketh of a Spanish inuasion vpon the sea towards England, being else∣where noted: but only I wil touch his impudencie in lying, and denying, that about this time the Spaniards were ready with forces at the Groyne for the inuasion of England. And the rather, for that this was the occasion that moued Sir Francis Hastings to giue warning to his countrey: and also because the same sheweth that Parsons is very sorie, that any man is acquainted with the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Spanish King, and that he could not take vs sléeping, and so closely and priuiliy cut his countrimens throtes. I say then, it is a lie most notorious, to affirme that the alarme giuen vpon occasion of the Spanish preparations anno 1598. for an in∣uasion of some part of England, was false. And proue it first by the words of the King, who recouering out of a trance, and comming to himself, asked if the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were gone for England. Secondly, by the prouisions of ships and men, made at the Groyne and Lisbone, and which coming thence shaped their course for England, albeit they were by wether beaten back. Thirdly, by the testimony of one Leake a Masse priest, that was dealt with all to come for England. Fourth∣ly, by the testimonie of the Secular priests in their reply to Parsons his libell, fol. 65. & sequent. who directly charge Parsons to be a solicitor of these pretended attempts, anno 1598. Fiftly, by Parsons his letters from Rome to Fitzher∣bert, wherein he desireth to vnderstand the successe of the fleete, that anno 1598. was to go for England. Finally, by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 proclamation made at the Groyne, and whereof diuers printed copies were to be dispersed in En∣gland vpon his arriuall here. The which, for that it disco∣uereth the pride of the Spaniard, and the malice of the En∣glish traitors, I haue thought it not amisse to set downe the whole tenour of the proclamation with some animaduer∣sions in the margent.

Considering (saith the Adelantado) the obligation which his catholike 〈◊〉〈◊〉, my Lord and master hath receiued of God

almightie, to defend and protect his holy faith, and the Apo∣stolicall Romane church: he hath procured by the best meanes he could, for to reduce to the(a) auncient and true religion the kingdomes of England and Ireland, as much as possibly hath bin in his power. And all hath not bene sufficient to take away the(b) offence done against God in dommage of the selfesame kingdoms, with scandale of whole christianity, yea rather abu∣sing the clemency and benignity of his(c) Catholike Maiestie: the heads and chiefe of the(d) heretikes, which litle 〈◊〉〈◊〉 God, haue taken courage to extend their euill doctrine with the op∣pressing of(e) Catholikes, martyring them, and by diuers wayes and meanes taking from them their liues and goods, forcing them by(f) violence to follow their damnable sects and errours, which they haue hardly done to the losse of many soules. Which considered, his Catholike Maiesty is determined to fa∣uour and protect these Catholikes, which couragiously haue defended the Catholike faith, and not onely those, but(g) such also, as by pusillanimity and humane respects haue consented vnto them, forced thereunto through the hard and cruell dea∣ling of the said Catholikes heretical enemies. And for the exe∣cution of his holyzeale, he hath commaunded me, that with(h) force by sea and land, which be and shall be at my charge, to procure al meanes necessary for the reduction of the said king∣domes vnto the(i) obedience of the Catholike Romane church. In complement of the which, I declare and protest, that these forces shall be employed, for to execute this holy(k) intent of his Catholike Maiestie, directed onely to the common good of the true religion and Catholikes of those kingdomes, as wel those which be already declared catholikes, as(l) others who wil declare themselues for such. For all shall be receiued and admitted by me in his royall name, which shall separate and a∣part themselues from the 〈◊〉〈◊〉. And furthermore, they shall be restored to the honour, dignity and possessions, which heretofore they haue bene depriued of. Moreouer, euery one shall be rewarded according to the demonstrations and feates which shal be shewne in this godly enterprise. And who shall proceed with most valour, the more largely and amply shall be

remunerated with the goods of obstinate(m) heretikes. Wherfore seeing almightie God doth present to his elect so good an oc∣casion, therfore I for the more security ordaine and command the captaines generall of horse and artilerie, the master gene∣rall of the field, generall captaines of squadrons, as all other masters of the field, the captaines of companies of horse and foote, and all other officers greater and lesser, and men of war, the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 generall, and the rest of the captaines and offi∣cers of the armie, that as well at land as sea they(n) vse well, and receiue the Catholikes of those kingdomes who shall come to defend the Catholike(o) cause with armes or without them. For I commaund the Generall of the artilerie, that he prouide them of(p) weapons which shall bring none. Also I ordaine and strcitly commaund, that they haue particular respect vnto the houses and families of the sayd Catholikes, not touching, as much as may be, any thing of theirs, but onely of those that will obstinately follow the part of(q) heretikes: in doing of which, they be altogether vnworthy of those fauours which be here granted vnto the good, who will declare them selues for true Catholikes, and such as shall take(r) armes in hand, or at least separate themselues from the heretikes, a∣gainst whom and their fauourers all this(s) warre is directed, in(t) defence of the honor of God, and good of those kingdomes, trusting in Gods diuine mercy that they shall recouer againe the Catholike relgion so long agone lost, and make them re∣turne to their auncient quietnesse and felicitie, and to the due obeience of the holy Primitiue church. Moreouer, these king∣domes shall(u) enioy former immunities and priuiledges, with encrease of many others for the time to come, in great friend∣ship, confederacie, and trafficke with the kingdome of his Ca∣tholike Maiestie, which in times past they were wont to haue for the publike good of all Christianity. And that this be put in executiō speedily, I exhort al the faithful to the fulfilling of that which is here contained, warranting them vpon my(w) word, which I giue in the name of the Catholike King my Lord and master, that all shall be obserued which here is promised. And thus I discharge my self of the losses and damages which(x) shall

fall vpon those which will follow the contrary way, with the ruine of their owne soules, the hurt of their owne country, and that which is more, the honor and glory of God. And he which cannot take presently armes in hand, nor declare himselfe by reason of the tyrannie of the heretikes, shall be(y) admitted from the enemies camp, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 passe to the catholike part in some skirmish or battell: or if he cannot, he shall flie before we come to the(z) last encounter. In testimonie of all which, I haue com∣manded to dispatch these presents, confirmed with my hand, sealed with the seale of mine armes, and refirmed by the secre∣tary vnderwritten.

This being the Adelantadoes proclamation anno 1598. let the world iudge of the impudencie of Parsons, that lyeth wittingly, and saith, the alarme was false. Thereby it may appeare also, what maner of man Parsons is, that bringeth forreine enemies vpon his countrey, and is consorted with them, and yet faceth all downe that shall say the contrarie.

In his Epistle likewise he saith, that the Ward word com∣ming abroade, the newes was in most mens mouthes, that the Knight disauowed the Watchword, attributing the same to certaine Ministers. Where, me thinkes, I heare Thraso say, Metuebant omnes me: All stood in dread of me. But that is not the fault that I meane here to touch. For it is his egre∣gious lying, that we are here to talke of. Let him therefore either name these most men that he mentioneth, or at the least some honest man, that gaue out this report as from sir Francis his mouth, or else we must say, that this lie came out of his owne foule mouth, that is now become a foun∣taine of lies. He must shew also how Sir Francis could disa∣uow a treatise subscribed and published by himselfe, or else it will be said, that this report of Parsons is a lie, without shew or probabilitie.

Afterward he affirmeth, that a certaine Minister wrote in supply of the Knights defence. And againe, fol. 1. he telleth, how I perusing the reply of Sir Francis, thought in mine owne opinion to make a better defence. But how can he proue that I perused the Knights answere,

or once saw it? And whence doth he gather, what opinion I had of mine owne doings? If he proue nothing, then will it be an easie matter to gather, that he hath made two impro∣bable lies. The same is proued also, for that my reply was made before the Knights Apologie was published or seene of me. For if I had seene it first, my labour might well haue bin spared, the same being more then sufficient for the refu∣tation of such a banglers babling discourse.

In his obseruations vpon my preface, fol. 11. b. he sayth, My proiect and purpose of writing, is to irritate and stir vp her Maiesty, and the Councel, to ingulfe themselues in Catholikes bloud, and to spoile their goods, that I and my crew might come to haue a share. But first it is most false, that Papists are Catholikes. Secondly, no one word can he alleage out of my whole book, wherby it may be gathered, that I would haue any rigour vsed against such simple Papists, that are not factious nor mutinous. For all the harme I wish them, is, that they were wel instructed. Thirdly, if he meane those traitors, that either came or meant to ioyne with the Ade∣lantado against their prince and countrey: then are they no Catholikes, nor true subiects. The same may be said also of Parsons his consorts. Finally, it is a shamelesse vntruth to say, we desire either blood or spoile; all our actions tending onely to resist forrein enemies, and wicked traitors, which séeke to shed their countrimens blood like water, and to sa∣crifice it to the Pope, and to giue the spoile of their country to the Spaniards, as the factious Masse-priests and the Pa∣pists their consorts haue done diuers times, and namely an. 1588. and 1598. and since.

In his obseruations vpon Sir Francis his Epistle, fol. 6. He obiecteth (saith Parsons) that I seeke the ruine both of church and common wealth by my exhortation to peace, at∣tonement, and mitigation in religion. A notorious lie, refu∣ted by reading of Sir Francis his Apology, where there is no one word sounding that way. Neither do we blame any ho∣nest man that talketh of peace, but scorne, that traitors that haue warre in their hearts, should talke of peace, and that

idolaters and heretikes should prate and talke of religion, when they meane nothing but to erect idolatrie, and to esta∣blish popish errors and superstition.

Fol. 16. speaking of me, He blusheth not (saith he) to affirme that which all his fellowes haue denied. And what is this, trow you? Forsooth, that blasphemous and scandalous dog∣matizing heretikes may be put to death. But where he saith, that all my fellows haue denied this, he sheweth him selfe a shamelesse lying companion, and the diuels fellow in forging lies. For none of my fellowes euer denied that which I affirme, but only wold not haue ignorant, & peace∣able, and simple heretikes, that neither blaspheme, nor dog∣matise, nor are offensiue to the State, punished with death. Likewise they condemne the cruell and bloody Papists, that burne & massacre men, women and children, for denying or contradicting any one point of their filthy, abominable, and erronious doctrine.

Fol. 18. he saith, The Emperour in a certaine edict begin∣ning, reddentes: Cod. de sum. Trin. & fid. Cath. professeth his due 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and of all his empire to the church of Rome: which is a notorious and an impudent ly. For in that law there is no one word to be found, that importeth subiection either of the Emperour, or of the Empire to the Church of Rome, much lesse to the Pope of Rome. Nay, at that time the citie of Rome belonged to the Emperour, which lately the Pope hath vsurped, excluding the Emperour from thence. But were there any thing contained in that law, which may séeme spoken in fauour of the Romane Bishop, yet is the same proued counterfet in my late treatise concerning falsi∣ties of the Romish synagogue.

Fol. 19. a. speaking of the Emperors, They professed (saith he) the Bishops of Rome to be the heads and chiefe leaders of this vniuersall and visible Catholicke Church: as before hath bene shewed by the examples of Gratian, Valentinian and Theodosius to Pope 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and of Arcadius, Ho∣norius and Theodosius the second, and of Saint Augustine to Pope Innocentius primus, and of Iustinian to Pope Iohn the first.

This he saith boldly. But in these few words, a cluster of lies is packed vp close together. For neither do Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodsius write to Damasus, as the title of the law, cunctos populos Cod. de sum. trinit. doth shew, nor 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they say, that Damasus was head and leader of the vniuer∣sall visible Church. Nor do Arcadius, Honorius, and Theo∣dosus the second talke of any such matter to be due to Inno∣centius the first. Nor can it be proued out of Augustine, or Iustinians decrée, inter 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Cod. de sum. trinit. that this ti∣tle was giuen to Innocentius the first, or Iohn the first, or second. For beside that the law inter claras, is counterfeit, the interpreter doth corruptly translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, the head of all priests, the head of all Churches. Nay hardly will Parsons be able to shew, that any of these did speake of the vniuersall visible Church, where they speake of the bishops of Romes authoritie. These therefore are pal∣pable, if not visible lies. And that which he saith of Iohn the first, is a ridiculous lye. For he was dead, as Chronicles teach, before Iustinians reigne.

He thinketh it lawfull to lie all manner of lies of Caluin. And therefore boldly saith, He was a priest, and that he sayd masse. Both which are denyed by those which wrote his life, which say he departed out of France before he receiued any orders. The same may be proued, for that his name is found in no bishops records, and for that he begunne to write his Institutions before 24. yeares of age. Of which we gather, that he hated the popish priesthood, before he was of yeares to be made priest.

Fol. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. b. he maketh Sir Francis to say, that we haue changed old religion into Protestancy: not changing there∣in his old fashion of cogging and lying. For neither doth he, nor any of vs acknowledge popish religion to be aunci∣ent, nor do we call our religion protestancy: although his dealing giueth vs oft occasion to protest against his wicked and false dealing.

Fol. 23. a. he affirmeth, that Sir Francis talketh of no∣thing but feares, frights and terrors. But he might doe well

to cease talking, if he tell nothing but lies. In the place mentioned Sir Francis talketh neither of feares, frights, nor terrors. Nor doth it follow, because Parsons and his con∣sorts are still packing vnderhand, and dealing with the Spaniards, that we are terrified. For we haue neither cause to feare treason, nor publike force, vnlesse we will trust traytors, and wilfully throw away our armes. Nei∣ther haue Papists cause to begin to stirre, vnlesse they be weary of their liues, of peace, of ease, and of their natiue countrey.

Fol. 25. a. he boldly auoucheth, that I count it a blessing, to haue Catholike rites and seruice abolished: whereas in truth I desire nothing more, then that Catholike religion may be restored, and speake onely against the filthy abo∣minations of popish masse, the idolatrous worship of saints and idols, the tyranny of the Pope, and such like: which none but the slaues of Antichrist can endure, and wil affirme to be Catholike.

That Iouinian and Vigilantius held some errors, we will not deny. But that Hierome called them heretikes for the same points that wee hold, concerning virginitie, prayers to saints, and lights at martyrs tombes, as Parsons fol. 27. affirmeth most falsly, will not be proued. For Hie∣rome doth rather excuse those, that lighted candels at noone day, then condeinne those that thought contrary. Neither did he euer place perfection in forced virginity, or teach prayers to saints, or allow those, that worshipped false relikes, as the papists do. This therefore which Par∣sons sayth, is to be scored vp among the relikes of his lea∣sings.

In the same leafe he addeth another grosse lye, saying, That Iewell (writing) against Harding, and Fulke against Allen and Bristow, do often call Saint Hierome borne pa∣pist and scolding doctor. For neither the one terme, nor the other is found in their writings. Nay we should great∣ly wrong Saint Hierome, if we should call him either papist, or borne papist, séeing that in his time neither the monster

of the masse, nor other popish abominations, were either borne, or conceiued. Unlesse therefore he quote B. Iewels, and M. Fulkes words; as he was borne a bastard, so we will hold him by condition for a lying accuser, and a scol∣ding companion, and a fellow borne to tell lyes.

Fol. 28. b. he telleth loud lies of Panormitane, saying, That he in the chap. licet. de electione, expounding these words of Hostiensis, Cum idem sit Christiatque Papae consistori∣um, quasiomnia potest facere Papa, quae Christus, excepto peccato: sheweth the meaning to be, that in matters of iurisdiction, and spirituall authoritie, for gouernment of his Church vpon earth, Christ hath left so great power vnto his substitute Saint Peters successor, as he may do thereby, and in his name and vertue, whatsoeuer his master & Lord might do in his Church, if he were now conuersant among vs vpon earth. This I say, is a loudlye, consisting of two or thrée branches. For nei∣ther doth Panormitan expound the words of Hostiensis: nor doth he affirme, that which Parsons writeth in his name. Nor is he so shamelesse to write that which Parsons affir∣meth. A second lye is also auouched by the forger of lyes Parsons, where he sayth, That all both diuines & canonists do agree, that all Christs power of gouernment is left to the Pope, except onely his power of excellency, according to that great commission in Saint Matthew, I will giue vnto thee, the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, &c. For neither all, nor any ancient father doth agrée to this conclusion, albeit we may boldly call them better diuines then the schoolemen: nor do all, or most of the Canouists speake of this power of excellencie; nor do the words, Mat. 16. belong to the Pope, or conteine any such commission as is pretended. And that without alleaging further proofes, the Popes owne doctors will confesse. For Bellarmine lib. 1. de Pontif. Rom. c. 10. sheweth, that Peter had nothing granted in the 16. of Matth. but promised onely. And with him also diuers others are consorted. But suppose any thing had bene granted to saint Peter; what maketh this to Clement the 8. and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Popes that are liker to Nero and Heliogabalus, then to S. Peter?

Likewise fol. 29. b. he sayth, That Panormitan and Hosti∣ensis vttering these words, Papa potest facere quasi omnia 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christus, excepto peccato, do explicate the comparison of Christ, not as he is God, but as he is man. Which sheweth that Par∣sons taketh pleasure in lying. For else why should he say, that they explicate the comparison of Christ, not as he is God, but as he is man, when they haue not one word soun∣ding this way?

In the same leafe, he belyeth the same man againe, tel∣ling vs, That Panormitan, de electione c. venerabilem, saith, that Hostiensis founded his doctrine vpon the commission gi∣uen to the Pope, Matth. 16. Whereas Panormitan hath no such words, nor doth in that place mention Christs words, Matth. 16. nor hath one word of any commission giuen to the Pope by Christ.

Fol. 36. b. speaking of Cromwell and bishop Cranmer: The first of them, sayth he, was principally employed in the sayd Queenes condemnation and death, as appeareth yet by publike records, and the second was vsed for her defamation after her death, as is extant at this day in the foresayd statute it selfe, where Cranmers sentence is recorded iudicially giuen by him. This saith he, but so impudently and falsly, as the same may conuince him of most shamelesse lying. For first there is no such sentence, as is here mentioned, recorded in the act, as any man may see, that listeth to reade it. Second∣ly, what needeth a sentence of diuorce against her, that was now put to death, that diuorceth all marriages? Thirdly, no man euer grieued more at this act, and at that Quéenes death, then the Lord Cromwell. So farre was he off from being a stickler in it. Finally, not onely printed statutes, but the acts of the tower also do conuince this fel∣lowes most shamelesse reports. Do you then thinke that he blusheth to say any thing, that is not ashamed to lye a∣gainst publike acts and records?

Fol. 37. a. he saith, Cranmer carried about with him his woman in a trunke. An impudent popish fiction, for the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the inuenter and reporter deserueth to be cased in a

clokebag. The truth is, that the reuerend bishop fearing the Kings displeasure, about the time of the sixe articles, sent his wife away into Germanie vnto her kinred. But if he had bene disposed to haue kept her with him; yet nothing is more ridiculous or improbable, then that she should be ca∣ried about in a trunke. And if Parsons were to be put in a trunk, he would say it were impossible to liue in it. He saith also, that for gaine of liuing or fauour, or quietly enioying his liuing, Cranmer would say or vnsay any thing: and for proofe he quoteth Sanders de schismate. But lawyers may tell him, that such domesticall witnesses are not worth a rush. Hie∣rome also saith, That the testimonie of friends or fellowes is not to be accepted. Si amicus pro te dixerit (saith he) non testis aut iudex, sed fautor putabitur. This Sanders was a railing traitor, like to Parsons, and both of them hired to speake shame against the professors of the truth. If then a théese is not to be credited, speaking for his fellow 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nor a trai∣tor testifying for traitors: then let vs heare no more of this renegate rascall traitor, that died in action against his countrey, consorting himselfe with the rebellious and thée∣uish Irish.

Fol. 40. They are wont to say (saith he) that S. Bernard was no flatterer. But because the man is wont to lie, no man will beléeue him, vnlesse he bring forth the parties that haue so said. For to call the Pope Abraham, théese, and Christ, as Bernard doth, sauoureth of the flattery and darknesse of those times.

The fourth, fifth, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chapters of Parsons his first encounter, are nothing else but a packe of lies, either recei∣ued frō others, or deuised & cogged by himself. He affirmeth first, that Carolstadius, Oecolampadius, and Zuinglius were Lu∣thers scholers. Secondly, that they were opposite to Luther. Thirdly, that there were infinite opinions among them that denied the reall presence. 4. That the Anabaptists rose out of Luthers doctrine. 5. That there was a potent diuision betwixt Melancthon and Illyricus. 6. That Caluin and Beza issued from Zuinglius. 7. That Seruetus was Caluins collegue, and that

he and Valentinus Gentilis and other heretikes came from Cal∣uin and Beza. 8. That we admit no iudge of controuersies, and laugh at Councels. 9. That Zuinglius was condemned in a synod. 10. That out of our synods at Marpurge, Suabach, and Smalcald we departed with lesse agreement then before, as Lauater and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 testifie. 11. That Melancthon to proue the Zuinglians to be obstinate heretikes, gathered together the sentences of the ancient fathers for the reall presence. 12. That Zuinglius died in rebellion against his countrey. 13. That Oecolampadius was found dead in bed by his wiues side, strang∣led by the deuill, as Luther holdeth, lib. de priuata missa, or kil∣led by his wife. 14. That great warres arose betweene Lu∣therans and Zuinglians, as he calleth them. 15. That Luther was the first father of our Gospell; which he calleth, new. 16. That Stankare was a protestant, as he calleth him. 17. That Chemnitius in a letter to the Elector of Brandeburg, doth censure the Queene of England, and the religion here profes∣sed. 18. That there are warres and dissentions in England in most principall points of religion. He doth also rehearse di∣uers other points, which are all vtterly false and vntrue. For first, Oecolampadius and Zuinglius were learned men, aswell as Luther, and taught truth before they knew him. Carolstadius also taught matters neuer learned of him. Secondly, except in the exposition of the words of the Lords supper, in which the Papists do differ more then any others, all consented with Luther in most things, and in this did modestly dissent from him. Thirdly, those ima∣gined different opinions among them that dissallow the reall presence cannot be proued. Let Parsons shew, where they are now maintained, and by whom. 4. It is appa∣rent, that Luther taught alwayes contrary to the Anabap∣tists, as his writings shew. 5. It cannot be shewed, that either Melancthon condemned Illyricus, or contrariwise. 6. Caluin and Beza had their doctrine from the Apostles, and not from Zuinglius. 7. Seruetus was a Spaniard, and a Papist, and an heretike, and no collegue of Caluin. Nay by his meanes his heresies were first detected and refuted, and

he punished. 8. It is ridiculous to say, that we admit no Judge, and laugh at generall Councels. For we esteeme them highly, and admit the censure of any iudge procéeding by the canon of scriptures. 9. The condemnation of Zuinglius in a synode, is a méere fiction. The 10. lye is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by Lauater and Sleidan. Sleidan saith, they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at Marpurge, That seeing they consented in the chiefe points, after that they should absteine from all contention. Quando∣quidem in praecipuis omnibus dogmatis idem sentirent, abstinendum esse deinceps ab omni contentione. The 11. lie is refuted by Melancthons whole workes: where it is not found, that euer he called his brethren heretikes, or went about to proue them so. Nay, his principall study was vnitie and peace. 12. Zuinglius died accompanying his countrimen of Zuricke in the battel against other Cantons of Suizzerland: and standing for his country, not against his countrey. 13. Oecolampadius died in peace, neither did Luther euer write of him, that which the Papists haue reported. 14. The names of Lutherans and Zuinglians we haue detested: and if any contention were betwixt those, that fauoured Luther or Zuinglius, yet was it rather priuat then publike. 15. Our religion we claime from the Apostles, and not from Luther, and so do other reformed Churches. 16. Stankare we condemne, as an heretike. 17. The letter supposed to be written by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, is too ridiculous to procéed from him. The same doth rather sauour of the blackesmiths forge of papists. 18. In Eng∣land there are no publike contentions; nor do priuate men, such specially as are reputed among vs as brethren, con∣tend about matters of saluation. As for those contentions, that haue bene about ceremonies, they by the kings wise∣dome are ended, to the great griefe of Parsons, and other enemies of our peace. Wherefore vnlesse Parsons can bring better proofes then Rescius, Stancarus, Staphylus, and such like barking curres of his owne kennell; both he and they will be taken for wicked and shamelesse forgers of lyes and slanders.

Hauing belyed vs before, in the seuenth chapter of his first encounter he telleth lies also of himselfe, and of his owne consorts. First he saith, If Papists were idolaters, that this error was vniuersally receiued among them. But that followeth not. For all Papists haue not one opinion of Saints, of relikes, of images of Saints. The second, Nicene councell denieth, That Latria is due to images, or that the images of the godhead are to be made by Christians. Some hold, that not the image, but the thing signified is to be worshipped: many hold contrary. All giue not diuine worship to the crosse, nor pray to it in one sort. Finally, Bellarmine in his bookes, de imaginibus, and de Sanctis, doth confesse, that there are many different opinions among the worshippers of images. Secondly, Parsons denyeth, that Papists are idolaters. But Lactantius lib. 1. instit. diuin. c. 19. and other fathers shew, that all are idolaters, that giue the worship of God to creatures, as the Papists do, hono∣ring the sacrament, the crosse, and images of the Trinitie with diuine worship. This point is also fully proued a∣gainst the Papists in my last challenge, chap. 5. Thirdly, he sayth most falsly, That all Friers and Monkes professed one faith without any difference in any one article of beliefe. The falshood of his assertion I haue shewed by diuerse in∣stances heretofore. Fourthly, he sayth, The Papists may haue a ministeriall head of the Church, as well as we haue a woman for the head. But it is a greater matter to be head of the vniuersall Church, then of one Realme. Againe, we call the King supreme gouernour, for no other cause, then for that he is the chiefe man of his Realme, and chiefe disposer of externall matters. But they giue one consistory to Christ and the Pope. Furthermore, in matters of faith, we say, all princes ought to submit themselues to the Apo∣stles, and their doctrine. The Pope will be equall to them, if not aboue them, and determine matters of faith, as ab∣solutely, as Christ Iesus. Finally, he sayth; Difference of ha∣bites or particular manner of life breaketh not vnitie of reli∣gion. But the Apostle reproueth those, that sayd, I hold of

Paul, I of Apollo, I of Cephas. And Hierome sayth; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 you shall heare at any time those which are called Christians, to take their names of any but our Lord Iesus, as for example, the Marcionists & Valentinians, know that they are not the Church of Christ, but the synagogue of Antichrist. This therefore is direct against the Dominicans, Franciscans, Benedictines and Ignatians. And proueth, Ignatian Parsons, a lying per∣son.

Fol. 66. b. he saith, That in S. Hieromes time the Romaine faith was accompted the generall Catholike faith. And that this Island hath had twise participation of the Romaine faith. Both manifest lyes. For as well might the city of Rome be called the world, as the Romaine faith, the generall Ca∣tholike faith. Againe, it is false, that in old time we recei∣ued the Romaine faith, that now is professed and declared in the conuenticle of Trent. For we receiued the Christian faith, which not these Romaines, that are a collection of the scumme of the world, but the old generouse Romaines pro∣fessed.

Fol. 69. he denyeth, that the Apostle teacheth, that pub∣like prayers should be in a knowne language: where boldly he giueth the lye to Ambrose, Chrysostome, Theophylact, and other fathers, that shew, that the Apostle speaketh of publike prayers, in a knowne tongue.

To iustifie the vse of the Latin tongue in reading of scrip∣tures, he maketh two loud lyes, as I must néedes tell him in English. First he saith, That Ioan Bourcher by reading scriptures in English, learned that Christ had not taken flesh of his mother, and that a tanner of Colchester learned, that Baptisme was worth nothing, and that others fell into here∣fies by reading scriptures. And secondly, That euery man light∣ly vnderstandeth somewhat of the Latin tongue. Both vtter∣ly vntrue. For neither do the vulgar people among the French or Italians vnderstand Latin: nor do Christians ra∣ther now fall into error by reading vulgar scriptures, then the old Gréekes and Romaines, that read scriptures in Greeke and Latin. But rather therefore did they erre, for

that they did not reade them diligently or reuerently.

Fol. 71. he saith we teach that good workes are perilous. Let him therefore name those which haue committed this fault, or else acknowledge himselfe to be a perilous lyer.

Fol. 79. he cannot be content to lie, where he talketh of matter of charge, but will néeds haue me testifie matters which I neuer thought. I might as well make him speake all villany against the Pope: but I wilt not now vse the te∣stimonie of so bad a fellow.

That which he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Popes exactions out of great benefices onely, and of his employments of mony against the Turkes, are méere leasings. For he taketh by one meanes or other both of great and litle, and rather destroyeth Christi∣ans then Turkes.

Fol. 89. he exclaimeth and sayth, What will you say to this man, that maketh all his auncestors for so many hundred yeares together, and the auncestors of her Maiestie, her father, and grandfather, and the rest meere infidels? I answer in his owne forme. What will you say to this beast, that lieth as fast as a dog can trot? My words that he setteth downe re∣fute him. For I speake not of all, but of the most part of Christians of former times: and of their ignorance I haue brought sufficient proofe. If then those that lie, deserue cud∣gelling, as he saith: it is not halfe a loade of wood that will serue for the bastonading of this brutish and senselesse beast.

Fol. 99. By which words it is euident (saith Parsons) that his rule consisteth of the consent and establishment of certain men in England, what to beleeue, which is a different matter from scriptures. But whatsoeuer he thinketh of the rule of faith, he kéepeth no rule in speaking vntruth. For albeit the rule of faith, which euery priuate man in England is to fol∣low, was established by consent of the synode of the Clergy of England: yet I say not, nor doth it follow of these words, that the consent of men is our rule of faith. For the canon of scriptures is the generall rule, that all the Church ought to

follow, and because euery priuate man vnderstandeth not all points of himselfe, therefore the Church, to helpe the weaknesse of the ignorant, hath gathered the summe of faith out of scriptures, and proposed the same as conclusi∣ons, thence deduced for priuate men to follow.

Fol. 105. like a shamelesse beast he sayth, The Emperours (in the l. cunctos. Cod. de sum. Trin. & fid. Cath.) remit them∣selues to the Romane religion, and to Damasus the Popes be∣leefe, and that they determine nothing of religion: both which assertions are matters vtterly false. For first they remit men, not to the Romane faith, or to Damasus his beléefe, but to the faith of Peter. Next they determine, that men shall follow that faith, and declare what the faith is. Cunctos populos (say they) quos 〈◊〉〈◊〉 nostrae regit imperium, in tali volumus religione versari, quam diuum Petrum Apostolum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Romanis religio vsque adhuc ab ipso insinuata declarat, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pontificem Damasum sequi claret, & Petrum Alex∣andriae Episcopum, virum Apostolicae 〈◊〉〈◊〉: hoc est, vt secun∣dùm Apostolicam disciplinam, Euangelicam{que} doctrinam, Patris, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉, & Spiritus sancti vnam deitatem sub pari maiestate, & sub pia Trinitate credamus. But were any to follow Damasus his beléefe, what is that to later Popes, that scarce beléeued in God, and are more like to the grand Turke, then to Da∣masus?

In the same leafe he telleth also many other grosse lies: as for example, That the Romane religion was receiued by Peter: whereas the Emperours in the former law, say, that Peter deliuered Christian religion to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Romanes. Se∣condly, that the Emperors law declareth the Pope of Rome to be the chiefe gouernor of Christian religion, and that the Emperours accompted him for their head. And thirdly, that Siluester confirmed the decrees of the Councel of Nice. Mat∣ters most sottish, and bluntly and falsly affirmed. For in that law there is nothing of the Popes generall headship. Neither néeded the acts of the Nicene Councell any confir∣mation of Siluester.

In his second encounter chap. 2. it séemeth he hath put on

his vizour of impudency, telling lies vpon reports without all shame or proofe. In King Henry the eight his dayes, he saith, that a certaine Catholike man in Louth in Lincolnshire was put to death, being baited in a beares skin, and that the fame thereof is yet fresh in Louth. Matters very false, as all the old men in Louth wil testifie vpon their othes. Further the same is so improbable, as nothing more. For neither can the partie that was so put to death, nor the iudges, or executioners, or parties present be named. Nay it cannot be proued, that any was put to death at Louth at that time: albeit some of Louth were in danger for the rebellion, as is yet remembred. Parsons also must tell, how any durst put men to death contrary to law, & who they were, knowing y^e the very rebels were not executed without trial. Another like lie he fathereth vpō Sir Edw. Carew brother to the Lord Chamberlaine, who is said to haue reported, That certaine Nobles or Gentlemen baited a certaine cacolike man with spaniels. But what if the Lord Chamberlaine had no bro∣ther called Sir Edward Carew? What if none of his brothers euer said any such thing? Againe, what if none was euer baited with spaniels? Doeth not Robert Parsons deserue to be baited by all the dogs in Rome, for telling vs such fables? In the meane while, how doeth this agrée with Verstegan, that telleth, how in Douer certaine cacolikes were baited with bandogs? And in what case are the Papists, that wor∣ship Saints baited in beares skins, that neuer were in the world? A third lie he would father vpon Thomas of Wal∣singham. But it cannot be gathered out of him, that either the lying Friers in king Richard the second his time were fol∣lowers of Wicleffe, or that any corruption of manners grew in his doctrine: although Robert Parsons boldly auoucheth both these lies.

In the second encounter, cap. 3. he saith, Thomas Arundell permitted and appointed vulgar translations of scriptures. But the truth is, he forbad them. The rubrike of the consti∣tutiō, Statuimus de magistris, is this, Scriptura sacra non trans∣feratur. And if it be translated (which he appointeth not, nor

permitteth) he forbiddeth all exposition of it, vntill it be 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Let Parsons then shew, where he appointed or per∣mitted vulgar translations of scriptures, if he wil not shew himselfe a lyar.

In the same encounter, in setting downe the state of the controuersie, in reporting the acts against Husse, the procee∣dings of Luther, Grinaeus, and Bezaes disputations, he doth nothing but cog and lie. And for his witnesses he citeth Aeneas Syluius, Dubrauius, Cochlcus, Genebrard, Surius, Claudius de Sainctes, and a rabble of other lying rascals, not worth a cockle shell. What then doth he deserue, but a crowne of foxe tailes, counterpointed with whetstones for his labour? Popelliniere in is seuenth booke of the historie of France, sheweth, that the Papists could neuer be brought to ioyne issue, do they of the religion what they could: which is quite contrary to his shamelesse narration.

2. encounter, fol. 39. he saith, The Councell of Trent gaue libertie to all protestants (so he calleth our Doctors) to dispute their fill. A most notorious vntruth. For two onely going thither, escaped hardly with their liues, and were peremp∣torily denied licence to dispute publikely, albeit they desired to be heard.

2. encount. c. 9. he denieth that the Papists meant to kéep their Indexes expurgatorie secret, and sayth, that they were deuised to purge bookes corrupted by heretikes. But experi∣ence doth proue both to be lies. For vnder this colour, they haue corrupted the fathers: and this deceit was not found, vntill by Gods prouidence one copie came to Iunius his hands. And this God willing shal be proued by particulars if God grant vs life.

Fol. 93. he telleth a storie, as he saith, or rather diuers lies of Monkes making hatchets to swim, raising dead men to life, multiplying milke, and talking of monkes mules, and doing other strange miracles. Which if Parsons do compare with the miracles of the prophets and Apostles, he blasphemeth, if he beléeue as well as the miracles of the Bible: he addeth no credit to monkish miracles, but most wickedly maketh

legends and fables comparable to holy scripture.

Fol. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. he sayth, Sixtus 4. did leaue it free for euery one to thinke what he would. viz. in the article of the conception of our Lady in originall sinne. But that this is false, it appea∣reth, first, in that he did excommunicate all those that spoke against the feast of our Ladies conception. And secondly, for that he gaue indulgences to such as prayed to her, as borne of Anna without originall sinne.

Fol. 103. he denieth that Sixtus Quintus compared the exe∣crable murder of the French king Henry the third, to the my∣steries of Christ his incarnation and resurrection. But the Cardinals that were in y^e Consistory, when first the newes were brought to Rome, can conuince him of lying and im∣pudencie. Likewise a French Papist, that wrote a discourse against Sixtus Quintus, called La Fulminante, will testifie a∣gainst him. Speaking in an apostrophe to Pope Sixtus, Tu appelles (saith he) ceste trahison vn oeuure grand de Dieu, vn pur exploit de sa prouidence, & la compares aux plus excellens my∣steres de son incarnation, & de sa resurrection. He chargeth him further, That he accounted this murder as a miracle, and honored Iames Clement as a martyr. Dieu, quelle pieté, qu'un suiect, qui tue son Roy, est à Rome vn martyr, & son assassinat vn miracle! Parsons séemeth also to denie that Henry the third was excommunicate, and will not acknowledge that the same was cause of his death: both which points are testified in the discourse, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, La Fulminante, which Parsons not séeing, roueth he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not at what. Tu as proclamé (saith he, speaking to Sixtus Quintus) vn ban sur la vie, & conuié tous ies parricides à sa mort. How then can these words vttered by a papist, inueying against Sixtus Quintus, with any pro∣babilitie be denied?

Fol. 104. he chargeth vs with setting forward the Gospell, which he calleth New, with forcible attempts. But if he shew not where we haue taken armes for this purpose, these words will testifie against him, that he setteth forth lies, and is a lying companion, whose mouth is full of slan∣der. In France 〈◊〉〈◊〉 men haue bene forced to take armes

for defence of their liues against the Popes ministers, but they neuer sought the life or hurt of their King, as the rebel∣lious leaguers did, who trecherously murdred their soue∣raine Lord and King.

Fol. 105. 2. encount. c. 12. he denieth, that papists hold it sacrilege to dispute of the Popes doings. And fol. 107. That al∣beit the Pope leade innumerable soules to hell, yet no man may say to him, Sir why do you so? The first lie is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by Baldus in l. sacrilegij. Cod. de crimine sacrilegij. where in plain termes he affrmeth, that it is sacrilege to dispute of the Popes power. The second is conuinced by the words of the chap∣ter, si Papa, dist. 40. where it is said, That although the Pope cary with him innumerable soules to hell, yet no man may re∣proue him for his faults. The words are plaine: Huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nemo. The same words al∣so which Parsons denieth, are found in diuers Canonists, and that not vnderstood in beneficiary causes onely, as he would insinuate, but absolutely. Per omnia potest facere, & di∣cere quicquid placet (saith Durand) auferendo etiam ius suum cui vult, quia non est, qui ei dicat, cur it a facis? There also citing his author, he saith, Vicem non puri hominis. sed veri Deigerit in ter∣ris. Likewise dist. 3. de poenit. c. quamuis, where the text sayth, Quis audeat dicere 〈◊〉〈◊〉 quare &c. parcis? The Glosse sayth, Vel Deo, vel Papae. The like sayings are found in Baldus in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. fend. Col. 12, & in l. fin. Col. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. extr. cod. sent. rescind. Iason consil. 145. c. 2. v. 2. Aemil. Mar. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cap. ad Apcsto∣latus de concess. praebend. 'extr. 〈◊◊◊〉〈◊◊◊〉. in verbo conti∣netur.

Fol. 106. he sayth, That many of vs and other our friends do make princes so absolute in temporal and spiritual affaires, as they may not be iudged by any mortall man. And to this purpose he citeth Bellay. But first, Bellay is none of our friends. And next, he cannot shew any of vs that teacheth this doctrine. Let him name the parties, or else we wil name him, and all will take him for a cogging companion. For neither do we make Kings aboue generall Councels, nor exempt them from all censures: although not to that effect,

as the Romanists teach.

Fol. 113. 2. encount. c. 14. he affirmeth boldly and blindly that the grieuances of the Germain nation, was a complaint of princes called protestants, and that it was endited by Lu∣ther, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against the Popes pardons at a Councell at Noremberg. But therein he lappeth vp diuers foule lies. First, the matter of the Popes pardons was but one mat∣ter of many, and therefore not the sole subiect of their com∣plaints, as Parsons pretendeth. Secondly, if they had not bene Papists, they would neuer haue fled to the Pope for reformation, nor giuē him such reuerent termes as they do. Thirdly, it was neuer heard of till now, that Luther was the enditer of these grieuances exhibited to the Popes legat anno 1522. Finally, this méeting at Noremberg an. 1522. was no Councell, but a diet, wherein the princes desired re∣formation rather of abuses, then the dissolution of the Popes authoritie.

He denieth also, that any pardon is sold for murder of chil∣dren, fornication, adultery, incest, and such abominations. But let him looke once more vpon the penitentiary taxe printed at Paris, wherein the price of the pardon for euery one of these offences is set downe. If he find not these mat∣ters in the penitentiaries taxe, let him looke the fées for the Popes buls, for euery of these points in the Popes Chance∣ry. He shal also find in my treatise against 〈◊〉〈◊〉, proofe for the sale of pardons. Let him therfore either search more diligently, or lie lesse confidently, or heare himself taxed pa∣tiently.

Fol. 117. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. encount. c. 15. he affirmeth, that Iames Clement conferred with no man liuing before he killed the French king Henry the third, and that he had no absolution before he committed the fact. Two lies most desperately auouched: whereof the second concerning his absolution, is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by the confession of Iaques Bourgoin his confessor executed for absoluing him, and by the common practise of Iebusites that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 such as go about such murders, as is proued in the fact of Walpoole that absolued Squire, that promised

to empoyson Quéene Elizabeth; and of Holt that did the like to Yorke and Williams, that vndertooke to murder her, and by diuers like facts of others. The second is refuted by the memorials of the league, by the author of the Iebusits Ca∣techisme, and by Iohn de Serres in his Inuentorie. In the memorials of the league, we find that the yong friar was induced by the Iesuites 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Ne furent ils complices (saith the author of the Iebusites 〈◊〉〈◊〉, page 203.) d'auec le Iacobin del assassinat du feuroy? Were not they (saith he, speaking of the Iebusites) complices to the Domini∣can frier that murdred the late King? He saith also, that the murder was suborned by the Iebusites and leaguers, and that he was drawne to it by promises of paradise, and that he was assoyled for it, and almost sainted beforehand. Iohn de Serres in his Inuentorie sayth, That Iames Cle∣ment communicated his resolution with Doctour Bourgoin prior of his conuent, to Commolet and other Iebusites, and the heads of the league, to the principall of the sixteene, and fortie of Paris, and that all encouraged him to this happie aduenture, promising him rewards in earth, and in paradise, if he should be martyred in the execution of his purpose, a place aboue the Apostles. Ainsi resolu (sayth Iohn de Serres) il communique son affaire au docteur Bourgoin prieur de son couuent, au pere Commolet, & autres Iesuites, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chefs àe la ligue, aux principaux de seize & de quarante de Pa∣ris. Tous l'encouragent à cest 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dessein. On luy promet ab∣bayes, eueschez, & s'il auient, qu'il soit martyrisè, rien moyns qu'vne place en paradis au dessus des Apostres. May we not then rightly conclude, that Parsons is a notorious and most impudent lyar, and that the Iebusites are King∣killers and notorious traitors? No question. And I doubt not but they shall be so reckened of all posteritie, not∣withstanding the barking of such dogges against such re∣ports.

I do therefore maruell, as Athanasius sayth of the Arrians, That without abomination and horrour of lying, they could vtter such lies, seeing the deuill is father of lyes, and lyars are

strangers to him that calleth himselfe truth. Miror 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sine vlla abominatione & horrore 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it a falsa, &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dicere, cùm mendacia patrem diabolum habeant, ij{que} qui men∣tiuntur, alieni sint ab 〈◊〉〈◊〉 qui 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sum veritas. And well may I conclude, That if all lyes ought to be farre remo∣ued from religion, and those positions which for re∣ligion are taught and learned, (as Saint Augustine sayth) lib. de Mendacio ad Consentium. cap. 10. That then it is not religion, that Parsons doeth maintaine with so ma∣ny lyes, nor can his lies stand with the grounds of re∣ligion. Finally, I say to the deceiued Papists, as Con∣stantine sayd to heretikes of his time: Cognoscite 〈◊〉〈◊〉 men∣dacijs vestrae doctrinae inanitas teneatur. Behold by what lyes the vanitie of your doctrine is maintained. And if they beléeue not me, let them hearken to Parsons himselfe, that in his answere to my Epistle affirmeth, That he that lyeth is not to be trusted in any thing he saith, or writeth.

Notes

• 1. Tim. 4.
• In 1. Tim. 4.
• Hierō. epist. 61
• This seemeth to be Parsons his stile.
• (a)

  Popish reli giō is neither auncient nor true.
• (b)

  Goodly pretences of leud ambitiō.
• (c)

  The Popes vaslall.
• (d)

  True tea∣chers.
• (e)

  These 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were traitors.
• (f)

  A manifest vntruth and calumniation against the truth.
• (g)

  Lurking and dissem∣bling Papists.
• (h)

  Are not Spaniards thē publike ene∣mies?
• (i)

  S. Peter and Paul did not by armes con uert men to the faith.
• (k)

  What ho∣lines can be in cutting Chri∣stian mens throtes?
• (l)

  Note that all papists are to ioyne with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ene∣mies.
• (m)

  Honest men destined to spoile and slaughter.
• (n)

  They shall be vsed as traitors.
• (o)

  The Infan∣taes title.
• (p)

  To fight a∣gainst their countrey.
• (q)

  Wo be to them that call good euill, & euill good.
• (r)

  To cutte their princes throate.
• (s)

  Note war.
• (t)

  Good words, foule purposes.
• (u)

  At the hands of e∣nemies.
• (w)

  A goodly assurance.
• (x)

  God hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it otherwise.
• (y)

  He would make the En∣glish traitors.
• (z)

  This Bra∣gadocio ne∣uer came in England, that here talketh of the last encounter.
• Fol. 20. 2.
• Lib. 7.
• Aduers. Luci∣fer.
• Encon. 1. c. 11
• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 P. 40.
• P. 42.
• Specul. de le∣gat. 6. nunc o∣stendendum nu. 89.
• Fol. 116. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• Eusebius vita Constant. lib. 3 cap. 62.