Certaine briefe notes vpon a briefe apologie set out vnder the name of the priestes vnited to the archpriest. Dravvne by an vnpassionate secular prieste friend to both partyes, but more frend to the truth. VVhereunto is added à seuerall ansvveare vnto the particularites obiected against certaine persons

CHAP. IX. (Book 9)

TOuching the imprisonnemēt of the 2. Priests in Rome, of the vvhich all the 9. chapt. al∣most dooth treat, I haue put dovvne my Iudgemēt befo∣ré. onely this I add: that all the principall men vvhome you notifie to haue vvritten against them, vveare such men as all the vvorld knoweth to be in this cause too too much affected to the Fathers, * 1.1 and by af∣fection vtterly blinded in the state and que∣stion of the Controuersie, that is betvveene the Priests novv, and the Archpriest and Ie∣suits. I knovve them all both by face and af∣fection, and therefore may be the bolder to say it.

The first man you name is M.D. * 1.2 Staple∣ton vvhome his Hol. purposed to preferre to higher dignitie. if he vvere nowe aliue he vvould tell another tale against those that hindred him

from that higher dignitie, and that told him a tale in his eare, when he vvas ready to put his foote into his litter and made him staie at ho∣me, and loose that higher dignitie. * 1.3 the storie (of like) if you contynue your Apologies vvill comme out one day. Well! but vvhat sayth D. Stapleton to the matter? dooth he exhort or defire his Hol. to chastise by impri∣sonnement These tvvo Priests? Nihil minus. * 1.4 He neuer dreamed of it, and yet is he made the foreman af the quest to condemne them, beinge dead himselfe by your ovvne confes∣sion before the Priests came to Rome. What kinde of vvritinge is this to saie that a dead man gaue his verdite after he vvas buryed? And vvhy? because (vvhen he vvas senceles) he agreed in sense and Iudgement vvith other princi∣pall men that vvret (after his death) to Rome.

Next to the fore man of the quest that gaue his verdite after his death ther march seventeene hands of the principall of ovvr Nation in Flanders, When wrote they? some monethes before they (the Priests) came out of Englande. But to whom vvrote they? I praye you? forsouth to the generall of the Iesuits, the head of those, against vvhom the Priests vvere in cō∣tention. But vvhat doe they desyre? Impri∣sonement? Nothinge lesse. onelye to doe Justice, * 1.5 and so to make peace. A Iust and reasonable re∣quest. I see not to what end you put dovvne a peece of their lettre here. Who would not

request Iustite to be done? Why? did not the Priests them selues goe to Rome to aske Iu∣stice? that is: If they were founde faultye: to be punished: If innocent? to haue their Iust requests graunted. Doe these 17. principall men request the generall to get them Impri∣soned before they were heard? No. Neyther if they had requested it (I deeme) should they haue bene heard. Howsoeuer he was after∣vvards brought by one mans persuasion to consent thereto. for I thinke Fa. Parsons durst not haue gone with the Popes Officer to appre hended them, ād to imprisone them in the Colledge vvithout the Generall his knowledge and Consent. And so by this mea∣nes the Generall hath his part also in this vniust and vnaequitable action of their im∣prisonement, before they were heard, For be∣sydes his consentinge to their apprehension by permitting one of his order to be present and cheife actor in it, this memoriall of these 17. sent to him, was also by him to be presen∣ted to the Pope as you insinuate.

After this, * 1.6 follovve the letters of the Zea∣lous men, the former vvere principall men, these are but zealous, although it be the president and the Doctors of the seminarye. In my ty∣me, such men vvere counted amongst the principall of owr Nation but it vvas then, vvhen they vvere their owne maisters, not subiect and pinned to others, and directed by

others, as they are novve, * 1.7 the more is the pi∣tye, and it is the great hinderance of doinge good in owr Countrey. But to vvhom vvro∣te these zealous men? forsooth to the prote∣ctor. and not to his holynes? And vvhat do they request? to haue them imprisoned befo∣re they vvere heard? (for therein consisteth the iniurye and the Indignitye of the fact.) not a vvord thereof. onely they thinke it good, * 1.8 that some example of severe correction should he vsed vpon them, to hold others in dutye. Novve if these three Doctors vvhich are yet livinge and subscribed to that lettere vvere exami∣ned on their Consciences, vvhether they meant these Priests should be imprisoned before they vvere heard, or that they meant to haue thē punished, being found factious, and comming vvith no matter of importan∣ce, but onelye to trouble his holynes: I am assured they vvould ansvvere, they meant not the first, for tvvo of them being Doctors of lavve should othervvyse speake against their ovvne knovvledge skyll and practyse. And some of thē I beleeue haue bitten their singers since, for subscribinge against their will, to please and Content others. Well then these foure zealous Doctors though not before, yet nowe counted amongst the principall men of ovvr Clergie proue but litle your Intention. * 1.9

In the fourth place is set dovvne a letter,

(M. * 1.10 President) vvherein he iudgeth them to be repressed vvith some severitye? ergo saie these men, he vvrote to haue them impriso∣ned, before they vvere heard vvhat they had to saie, or to impart and vtter vvhat they came for, comming as appellannts to the see Apostolique, this they saie, or els they saie nothing. and for profe thereof they haue printed the letter. I am assured that that vvas not his meaning, vvhat soeuer els he meant by severitye. But by these my notes he may see, hovvmuch he and others vvere deceived that thought them Culpable and seditious, because they vvithstoode the Archpriest, so vnlavvfullye and disorderlye set vp, by the Protectors letters. as also his predecessor with his 3. Doctors that Confes∣sed this subordination to be most vviselye and vvholsomelye instituted. I speake not against the subordination, neither do I mis∣lyke of it, but of the maner of instituting of it at the first, vvhich vvas against all lavve and reason, as those zealous Doctors might haue seene, if they had but turned ouer their Common lawe.

After your letter, * 1.11 there are 3. Doctors brought in, and albeit they saie nothing, yet vve must beleeue, that they vvrot most ear∣neslye and grauely to the same effect. although (as I haue said) they said neuer a word to the sane effect. What! to be imprisoned before they

vvere heard vvhat they had to said, to iusti∣fye their comming to Rome? Lansweare, if I vveare with some of thē, they vvould saie, that you abuse their names and credit, to ma∣ke men beleeue they vvere so vniust, eruell, and vncharitable men, as to vvyshe the im∣prisonement of innocent men. For vntill they be Iudiciallye conuinced of some cri∣me or fault, they are presumed innocent, as before I haue proued.

In the end you sett dovvne M. * 1.12 Licentiat ƲVrigts (my old and deare frends) letter. Who albeit he speaketh as a zealous frend of the Fathers, as he euer hath beene since I haue knowne him, yet not a vvord in the let∣tere of the tvvo Priests at all, nor of punis∣hing them, much lesse of requesting them to∣be imprisoned before the vvere heard. * 1.13 By all these letters I see no iust cause, vvhy the Pro∣tector should incite the Pope, or his holynes be moued iustlye to resolue to restrayne thē (as you saye) or to imprison them (as they saie) at their arrivall or some 20. dayes after, being as yet neyther heard nor examined vvhat they brought or had to saie. * 1.14 Surelye vvhether Fa. Parsons procured these letters or no, these letters do not discharge him frō their accusation, that he vvas the cheife pro∣curer of their imprisonement (I doe not saie he vvas) but I saie these letters which speake never avvord of their imprisonment is not

a sufficient argument (as the thinke) to dis∣charge Fa. Par. of the suspition they haue of him.

At lenghe after your long trauayle in set∣ting dovvne letters that make nothing to your purpose, * 1.15 in vvrangling vvith your ad∣uersaries, and not ansvvearing their reasons: in talking of factions in Paris and Flannders and of the last troubles in the Romaine Col∣ledge, after all these great travailes (I saie) you begin to make your selfe merrye, and to en∣riche your Apologie vvith M. Watsons com∣mon vvealth. and haning first disgraced him for not being a scholler of the Colledge for a god vvhile, * 1.16 but a seruant to make M. Boasts bed and dresse vp his chāber. If this be a disgrace vn∣to him to haue bene a poore scholler in the Seminarie, then is it not onely a disgrace to some of the subfcribers of the former letters, vvhich yet you saie to haue bene the princi∣pallest men of our Natiō, * 1.17 but to a great num∣ber of your selues (my vnited bretheren) and to some of the Fathers also in England, that haue bene also poore schollers and seruants before they vvere schollers of the Colledge. If you vrge me in your next I will name thē noman knowing thē better then I, as having liued manie a yeare in the seminarie, yea euen from the first setting vp of it. A poore schol∣ler is a principall man vvhen you list if he hold with the Iesuits: but if he be against

them, then it shal be laid in his dishe I vvar∣rant you. What man having anie Iudgment cann think, * 1.18 that vnited Priests vvrot this A∣pologie? Hovv can they vvith honeslye and conscience obiect to another as a disgrace and in contempt the state vvherein diuers of them also liued. If it were abiect, and M. Wat∣son to be counted abiect therefore, yet the same Iudgmēt is to be giuen of a great num∣ber of you your selues, that liued also in that estate, except by holding with the Fathers you are restituti in integrū, vvashed cleane frō that spot, the others still remaining all to be smyred thervvith. * 1.19 But vvhy (I praie you) might not M. Watson a secular Priest, make a common vvealth for Ecclesiasticall gouerne∣ment, so well as a Religious man (as it is re∣ported) make a common vvealth hovv En∣gland shalbe gouerned both in Ecclesiasticall and temperal matters. vvhat priuiledge hath this man mote then the other? the vvhich (if it vvere put in print) perhapps vvould make the reader as merrye as this doth. But you ha∣ue set it downe at large in recompence of the setting dovvne af Fa. Listers booke, * 1.20 ad longū sine require. I would to god his booke had do∣ne no more hurt then M. Watsons common wealth. For this maketh men merrye, that maketh men grone, this stirreth vp laughter, that breedeth melancholy this reioyceth the readers hart after the reading of so manie te∣dious

and vndeacent letters ād matters that maketh manie a man bleede at the veriehart throughe greife and sorow. this derogateth but a little the credit of a ordinarye Priest but that doth blemish not onelye the name and fame of the writer, hertofore held for a verie pious, modest and a great learned man: but somvvhat also of the societie it selfe. I knowe manie a Father in these coasts, that byte the lipp, so soone as they heare anie mentiō ma∣de therof. And you yourselues that vvill not talke of it, but are soerye that euer it vvas mentioned, for the greife you haue concei∣ued of it, cann yet make your selues merrie vvith M. Watsons common vvealth. Cettes your vocation and grauitye might haue ad∣uertised you to haue spent your tyme better then in these follyes, and to haue studied to ansvveare your aduersaries Reasons and ar∣gumentes and to haue filled vp your booke vvith sound Reasons, rather then vvith these flymflams. But vvhy do I speake to you, whé I knovv you are not the Authors, he hath discouered himselfe (as vvyse as he thinketh himselfe to be) as in place you maie vnder∣stande Bonus quandoque dormitat Homerus, even so in this booke he hath ouershot himselfe, and discharged you of all blame, but onely of lending your names vvillinglye to the disgra∣ce, contempt and abasement of your order ad vocation, as I haue often warned you. If this

vayne of vvryting goforvvard as it hath be∣gun, * 1.21 credit me there are tales and stories in store, that will make some men blush (if they haue anie blood in their bodie) vvhen they shall be set out in print. Maie I not for these your follyes better crye out then you doo. Good lord, to vvhat vanitye are these owr vnited bre∣thren grovvne by contention that they cann lose their tyme in filling their booke vp with these toyes! * 1.22 whee∣re is the spirit of charitye? vvhere is the vertue of modestie become? is this fit for designed Martyrs, or for good Confessors? to disgrace and deface a man of their ovvne coate and vocation, to make him a mocking stock to the readers without iust occation: his vvords ād vvritings nothing at all appertayning to the matter inquestion? But dravvne as it vvere vvith a cart rope to make your selues merrie? one daie you vvill ansvveare for this Idle tyme so scandalou slye spent. Doe you designed Martyrs giue your sheepe such edification? Doo you good con∣fessors instruct your flocke vvith such stuffe and exhortations? hath contention and mali∣ce so blinded you, that you forget the hono∣rable state and vocatiou you are in? Yes true∣lye, els vvould you neuer commit the absur∣dityes you doo, and espetiallye about the cō∣tempte of men of your ovvne coate and vo∣cation, Amend, amend it is highe tyme. * 1.23 Who I praie you sent the common vvealth vnto Rome to be Cōmunicated to the Cardinalls that laughed so hartilie at it? who translated

it into Italien or Latin, or vvho did explicat it to the Cardinalls to make them so mertye? (for I suppose it vvas written in English for anie thing I can perceiue in this Apologie to the Contrarye.) vvho but the Author and vvriter of this Apologie, to vvhō it vvas sent from England to Rome. Me thinkes I see hovv he laughed whē first he did read it. And then hovv he hasted to Communicate the sa∣me to the said Cardinalls to make them mer∣rye, and then vvhat discourses there vvere of the insufficientie, vnlearnednes, and ambitiō of these Priests that stood against the Archp. because this commō wealth maker vvas one of them. vanitas vanitatum that Religious men vvho should spend their tyme in studie and contemplation, do take their greatest plea∣sure, delite, and contentement in vvriting ād receiving packets of nevves from all coasts ād cuntreyes, making that their vvhole stu∣die ād trauaile. Would to god they would cō∣tent thēselues vvith such packets as are di∣rected to thē, ād not forestalle, and take vp, other mens that appertayne not vnto them.

We are come at last to the Question that standeth in this vvhich part hath broken the pea∣ce, * 1.24 that vvas made by the comming and sigth of his Holines bull. You saie they did by a nevv deuise they shortlye after cast out, that satisfaction must be made to them for some former hard speaches vsed and vvrytten against them in the tyme of contention, &c. this you saie but doo

not tell vvho began, vvhich vvaie, in vvhat place and at vvhat tyme and this you proue onelye by cui bono. They saie the breach be∣gan on the Archp. his side when they had for∣giuen and forgottē all the foresaide hard spe∣aches and iniuries done vnto them (so farre were they from requiring satisfactiō for thē) ād this they proue in both their Latin booke, * 1.25 by putting downe the Arch. letters, vherein he saith he had receiued from the mother ci∣tie a resolution that the detractors of the pro∣tectors authoritie were schismatickes, and that he would not absolue anie that made not a conscience of it. Beside they put downe a forme of recantacion or satisfaction which is to be made by such as held against his institu∣tion before they could be absolued. * 1.26 * 1.27 These are better and more substantialle proofes then, cui bono, that this pitious breache began on the Archpriests side, and not on your discon∣tented brethrens syde. the vvhich I beleeue to be true, because you answeare not one word therto in this Apologie, neither goe you about to cleare the Archp. of it. For this being the cheefe cause they pretend of this conten∣tion, and affirminge so oft as they doe that the Archp. renewed the old quarrel of schis∣me, in all wyse mens iudgment you should haue spent your labour in proouing the con∣trarie and in discharging the Archp. from this fowle fault. the tyme, (I saie) inke, and pa∣per spent in setting downe M. Watsons com∣mon

wealth, had bene much better imployed in controling your aduersaries of an vn∣truth, by laying the breach of the peace vniu∣stlye vpon the Archp. and his coūsellours but fortis est veritas, the truth carrieth such a ma∣iestie with it, that the verie aduersaries them selues dare not approche it, much lesse impu∣gne it. And to prooue they broke the peace made after the comming of the breue you al∣ledge an Appeale made by 3. of those priests from the Archpriest before the comming of the said breue. Wiselye, but yet according to your custome throughout your booke, * 1.28 where you put still quid pro quo, and the cart before the horse. The question is, Who bra∣ke the peace after the comming of the breue? And you prooue they brake it, bicause some of them appealed before the breue came downe. * 1.29

Where you obiect the one was made a do∣ctor of Diuinitie, and the other a Bacheler in Paris, against an expresse Breue that forbad the same in all Englishmen. I maruell that this Author the procurer of that Breue is so for∣getfull, as to saie, it is forbidden to all Englis∣men to take the degree of a Bacheler, where as Doctorship is onelye forbidden. You maie correct the fault in your next, * 1.30 as that also, in calling the Appeale made by M. Charnocke verie ridiculous, for he proued in his letter to the Cardinall Burghesius which is put dovv∣ne in their booke to the inquisition and that

authoritie of the learnedst Canonists, that it vvas a lavvfull and not a ridiculous appeale. you should haue ansvveared his auctorityes, and them haue termed it ridiculous. But lea∣uing his authors vntoucht you shevve your selues to be verie ridiculous people, that would haue men beleeue you vpon your ba∣re vvords, and not beleeue those that bring good stuffe and authorities for them.

Touching the speciall point (you saie) to be noted that they haue not procured anie one of their Appeales to be presented or prosecuted in Rome. the note is easily to be ansvveared, * 1.31 be∣cause the place is not tutus sure for them, ha∣uing experimented it first in ther messengers, * 1.32 and next hauing Fat. Parsons in the tovvne, vvhom you confesse they take to be their cheefest aduersarie, and vvho for his creditt (you saie) in the Romaine court dooth great lye lett and hinder their designemens. ād this their saying vvas not manie monethes since confirmed by one of his ovvne coate passing by this vvaie, vvho said: fa. Parsons could doe vvhat he vvould vvith the Pope. Iudge if such a place be sure for your brethren to persecu∣te their appeale. And vvhere you adde, that they ought to haue prosecuted it vvith in cer¦taine monethes, vnder payne that all is voyd if it be not doon: you talke like diuynes and not lyke lavviers, as I haue shevved els vvhe∣re before.

And vvhere you saie that the Archpri him∣selfe presented their appellation to his Hollines. * 1.33 If he haue presentēd that appeale vvhich they have put in the end of their Latyn bookes Certes, either the appellants are egregious. lyers and shamels men, or els the Atchp. had a brasen face: they shameles to exhibit to his Holynes, and to all the vvorld such faulsityes and vntruthes against their lavvfull superior: but if they be truthes and not forged, then had the Archp. a brasen face to exhibit or cau∣se to be presented to his Holines such true, but yet vnvvorthye stuffe against him selfe.

If they had kept themselues vvith in the compasse of their matter, * 1.34 the booke vvritten after the appeale, had neither beene libelles (as you tearme them) neither yet vnduelye printed. Why should they not informe his Holynes, and giue notice to all all the vvorld hovv vniustlye and vnchristianlye they vvere dealt vvith all before the coming of the bre∣ue, to be called, counted, and by vvriten boo¦kes prooued Schismaticks, for not admitting an exorbitant dignitie vpon a Card. bare let∣ters. And againe after the comminge of the bull. and their acceptatiō of that dignitie, the same crvme to be renevved, and so horrible a cryme to be imputed to them againe. If you iustlye accuse them for imputing far lister faults to Fa. Pars. and others, and take them vp egerlye for the same? hovv can you finde fault

with them for defending and clearing them selues from so horrible a sinne, next cosyn to Heresie? and worse then soothsaying and I∣dolatrie it selfe they wrote then both for the defence of their good name and fame, which is iust and naturall, and to aduertyse his Holy∣nes of their vsage, requesting him either to quit, or condemne them by his sentence. To this end they published their booke, as they affirme, and you selues cannot well denie. the which sentēce of his Hol. which (you saie) you expect, is come out alreadie (as I haue heard) and if I be not deceaued I haue read it also. In the which he condemneth expressely fat. Li∣sters booke of schisme, and theirs also com∣manding silence and forbidding anie more writing. the which yet you (that so often ob∣iect contempt of his Holynes and his doings to others) doe neyther obserue nor obey. * 1.35

The first of the 5. or 6. abuses which yov fin de with the title of the latyn booke is. Becau∣they make the strife to be betweene them ād the Iesuites and the Archp. fauoring them. this to be false and that their strife is cheiflye with M. Blackwell, whom they make in their title but an Appendix, you proove, because the Appellation is made against M. * 1.36 Blackewell But they shew, and your selues elswhere con¦fesse that their cheifest strife is with far. Pars. for giuing false informatiōs for this subordi∣nation, and With Fath. Lister for writing his

booke of schisme, and fa. Garnet for the ap∣prouing thereof. Yet was their first falling out with fat. Weston and the others before named, manie a daie, yea some yeares be∣fore they appealed and therefore it is playne truth and not falsehod, that they put the Ie∣suits in the first place and M. Blackw. in these cond. For much strife and contentiō had they with the Iesuits long before M. Blackw. vvas made Archepriest.

Your second fault also is faultles in them. * 1.37 for had they said: and all the Seminarie priests, thē had they lyed in deed. but saying onely and the Seminarie priests, they said true, for they are Seminarie priests, but you saye this vvas but a poore faulte and therefore passed it o∣uer lightlye.

Thirdlye they saye from the death of Card. Allen. you adde that this sturre against the fa∣thers vvas begonne in England in his dayes. If in his dayes? then might it be continued from his death. you looke verie narrovvlye to sin∣de hoales, vvhere none are, they doe not saie the troubles beganne but from his death, but that haue rysen from his death. that is, haue beene increased. And here by your ovvne vvords is prooued that vvhich I said before: * 1.38 that these priests vvere in trouble and concē∣tion vvith the Iesuits some yeares before the Instituting of the Archpr. for your saie: That the contentions against the Iesuites vvere

begonne in England euen in Card. Allens daies. by consequence then, they committed noe abuse to put the Iesuits before M. Blackvvell and much lesse is it then a playne falshood. * 1.39

Fourthly, they say: Ad S. D. N. Clementē octauum exhibita ab ipsis sacerdotibus, that this declaration vvas exhibited by the Priests them selues to our most holie father Pope Clemēt the 8. I see not to vvhat purpose you put this dovvne, you do not acknovvledge it your sel¦ues to be an abuse. What matter is it I praye you (so it be exhibited to his Holines) vvhe∣ther it be exhibited by them selues or somme other therir frend or foe? as it vvas exhibited by the Archp. as you saie before. For the ap∣peale and the booke being printed and boūd together, I cannot see hovv the one could be presented vvithout the other. except the Ar∣ch. did cut of the booke, and send the appea∣le onely. What matter (I saie) maketh it, so it come at lēgh to the Popes knowledge (which is the scope of their vvriting) as it did come indeed, the vvhich maie appeare by the bre∣ue he sent dovvne, to condemne both theirs, and Fa. Listers booke also.

Neither is this vvord exhibit, to be taken so strittly, as you seeme to take it, that is: to deliuer vp into the Popes hands, but in his vs∣uall and common signification: vvhich is to set abroad for euerie man to behold, or to offer and she vve a thing to another. But why

did you not put dovvne all their vvords at lenght vvithout nipping of the latter vvords vvere you afraid of somme buggs? * 1.40 or did your consciences accuse you for the former iniurie of schisme laid against them? of the vvhich you talke not vvillingly: and are sorie to heare of it. Why did you not speake out ād saie as they doe: ab ipsis sacerdotibus qui schi∣smatis aliorumque criminum sunt insimulati. exhibited by those priests that vvere vnduely ac∣cused and appeached of schisme and others cri∣mes. * 1.41 I cannot blame you if you abhorre the vvorde schisme. because the vniust, vncharita∣ble, and vnlearned accusation of your brethrē of this schisme vvas ihe springe and fountaine of this trouble, your consciences doe testifie as much, and therefore you nipped of these vvords vvhich declare the cause of their vvri∣ting ād exhibiting their latin booke to his Ho¦lynes. And besides in this vvhole booke you neuer enter into speech of this matter, albeit the same be the ground of all this contention but vvith other to yes and flymflamms, you turne your readers eyes and intention from marking this point.

As for the 5. * 1.42 abuse vvhich you gather by the application of the verse of the Psalme to their booke: I passe ouer being no diuyne ād therefore cannot iudge vvhether they or you explicate it most aptlye.

You 6. reprehension is verie foolish: the

which as for saying: * 1.43 their booke vvas printed at Roan in the hovvse of Iames Molens, and you confesse you knovve not vvhether there be aine such signe or man dvvelling in Roan or no. If you cannot precisely saie their is no such mā, why doe you finde fault with thē for say∣ing there is such a man. You should haue doō well if you had followed the same counsell which you gaue them a litle before, to send a letter to Rome to his Hol. his nephewe or some other frend to know whether the Car. instituted the Archp. by his Hol. consent or no. So might you with lesse cost and charges, haue sent from Flaundres (where this booke was printed) to Roan, to knowe vvhether their be such a printer so named or no, If not? then you might haue precisely said, there is none such, and as precisely taxe them: but if you had found such a printer there. Then might you haue saued this labor. but you are lyke to such as can giue good connsell to o∣thers, but will followe, none them selues.

Well then, seeing that all yours. * 1.44 absurditi∣es, be neither absurdities, shifts, nor falshoods, but that you haue committed a manifest fals∣hood in nipping of these words. * 1.45 ab ipsis sa∣cerdotibus qui schismatis aliorumque crimi∣num sunt insimulati, to which one shift &c. falshood, all their 6. are not comparable, al∣beit they vvere shiftes and falshoods novve your readers maye imagine vvhat stuffe the

Remnant will be. And if we maie presume (as the lawe saith a praeteritis de futuris) by that which you haue alreadie said, of that which you are like hereafter to saie: then sure I am, that you will not saie much to the matter, nor come neere the question. nor yet ansvveare there reasons, for as yet you haue done nei∣ther of the three.

To their 2. * 1.46 reasons that caused them to print their bookes. * 1.47 The first: They could not haue copies inough in vvritten hand: You ansvvere is: That manie copies vvas not needfull, if they vvere onelye for his Holines information as they pretend. Indeed if they were onelye for his Holynes information so manie copies nee∣ded not: but where doe they pretēd that they wrote for his Holynes onelye information? their intention was not onelye to informe his Holynes, but also to defend their innocē∣cie, fame, and good name, that was blotted & blemished, both at home, and in forraine cō∣treyes by Fa. Listers booke, the copies vvhe∣re of flewe ouer into strange countreyes, sent and dispersed euerie where by the Fathers. And this is the third reason, wich they giue in that place in the margent, which you willing∣lye omit.

The seconde reason. * 1.48 To get their good na∣mes againe in forraine nations taken avvaye by the Iesuits wherto you answere, that in your opinion it vvill fall out quite contrarye: to witte

vvhere before they vvere not infamous nor yet knovvne: novv they shalbe both by their infa∣matorie vvritinge. * 1.49 This is perchaunce but your owne opinion. Howsoeuer it will fall out vvith them, my opinion is, yea I am full sure of it, that somme others that haue beene medlers herein, especiallye the writer and the consirmer of the booke of schisme against them, haue lost much of their credit alreadie by the devulgating of these bookes, and that their best frends hould downe their heads for shame when it cometh in talke. And as litle credite I beleeue, you will get (by the∣se your Apologies) both at home and abroa∣de, as you deeme maye happe to them for theire bookes.

From the 164. * 1.50 lease of your booke to the 168. you rune ouer their latin booke and doe duly reprehend them for their writting a∣gainst certaine reuerēd and vertuous parsōs. * 1.51 But yet I marke, you willingly omitt and ne∣glecte their quarrel against some Iesuits and specially Father Lister, for writting against them and Father Garnet for approuinge the same. This is, as I haue often repeted the grownde of theis troubles and contentions. Hinc fundi nostricalamitas. Here you should either haue defended Father Lister or haue condemned him (as in your conscience you doe) but you are of that veine, that if you should condemne or dislike of any thinge in

one Iesuit, you thinke it would denigrat the praises you attribute to thothers. * 1.52 But for all this, you being priestes and confefessors should speake the truth and shame the deuil and lay the fault, vvhere it is. You knovv vvho said: Amicus Plato, Amicus Socrates, sed magis amica veritas. But vvith you, the Fathers and their praise are more respected, then the truth it self.

They goe about (say you) to shevve that the Archpriest hard proceeding with them, * 1.53 vvas cause of their nevve contentions and sturres. This you prooue by 2. Marginall no∣tes of theirs. But vvhy did you not put dow∣ne the text also? Why did you not sett downe the Arcpriest his epistle renevving the woun∣de of schisme and coūting them schismaticks? Why? bicause you loue not to talk of the mat∣ter. albeit the same be the chiefist pointe in the controuersie. * 1.54 That is: Whither they be Schismatickes for vvistanding the Card. let∣ter? But bicause you will not talk of it, and that you are loath to heare of it, and especial∣ly for that I would inculcate into the memo∣ry of the reader the true cause of theis con∣tentions, and call to his mynde, What you should haue handled, I doe so much the ofte∣ner and vvillinger repete it. But is not this a prettie trik? You alleage the page vvhere the epist. is, you knovv that the Arch. ouer shott him self in it, and yet you come in with, But

suppose he ouershott himself, and then, * 1.55 vvas this a sufficient cause for priests, &c. Yea fors∣ooth, and for monkes toe, to defend their good name and same, and especially to ac∣quitt them selues of so hainous a crime as schi sme is in that contrey, * 1.56 in time of persecution for the satisfaction of their spirituall childrē, and contentment of all that knevve them. for had they held their peace, they should haue beene iudged and holden for such in deed, and that worthily our Sauiour him selfs gaue them example to defend their fame. * 1.57 For whē the Ievves had said to him. Samaritanus es tu & Daemonium habes. He ansvvered: ego De∣monium non habeo. And so defended his good name. What man of reason or religion vvill not allowe of this? Who will say (With you) that these mē are out of the right or true path of priestly proceeding, vvho doe but that vvhich god ād nature permitt thē to doe: that is to defend their good name against slaunde∣rous and exorbitant calumnies. * 1.58 Lett euery indifferent reader consider well vvhat you do in this place, and they shall find, * 1.59 that you make your selues a man of clovvtes to fight against, and then you rune furiously at him vvith hedd hand and feet, but for all that, you hurt him not. * 1.60 No more doe you any thing at all heere touching the matter your take in hand, vvhich is to confute your aduersaries

booke. For if you vvould haue confuted it, you should haue shevved and proued that, that the epistle of the Archp. vvas not his, or that that epistle did not giue the first cause of this breach, after the comming of the Po∣pes breue. But vvhat (I pray you) doe you herein? Nothinge, but Suppose it vvas his Epistle, and then you rage at their tvvo notes in the margent. They say: the be∣gynning of nevve contentions vvas a violent Epistle of the Archpristes and that the Arch∣priest renevved the vvarres. And this they proued by producing of this Epistle. But you What? Mary But suppose he ouershott himself. Well, Suppose he fovvly ouershott him self in calling them Schismaticks, yet say you Priestes that professe modestie, obedience, and mortificacion &c. * 1.61 should suffre it. Are they more modest obedient and mortified then Saint Augustine? Saying: Proinde quis∣quis à criminibus flagitiorum atque facino∣rum vitam suam custodit, sibi bene facit: quisquis autem famam: & in alios misericors est. Nobis enim necessaria est vita nostra, aliis fama nostra. Therfore vvho soeuer keapeth him self from synning and offen∣ding greuously, he doth good to him self, but vvho soeuer doth keap his good name is mercifull to others. * 1.62 For our life is ne∣cessarie to vs, our same to others. And the same Doctour againe. Conscientia ne∣cessaria

est tibi, fama proximo tuo. Qui fi∣dens conscientiae sua negligit famam, crudelis est, Thy conscience (that thov liuest well) is necessary to thee thy self: but they fame (that thovv liuest vvell) is necessary in re∣spect of thy neighbour. He therfore that trusteth to his conscience and neglecteth his fame, is cruell. Are they more modest and mortified then our Sauiour? Who (as I haue said) ansvvered his calumniators, * 1.63 that he had not the deuill? And Salomon commandeth vs, Curam habere de bono no∣mine. To haue care of our good name. And S. Paule defendeth his good name. Good and iust cause then had these Priestes by reasons and examples alledged, to defend them selues, from so haynous a crime, put vpon them by the Arehpriest in his let∣ter or Epistle. Which you vvill not see, but only suppose at it. To conclud this pointe notvvithstanding your bigg and lo∣ftie vvords of Scandalous tumults, * 1.64 exorbi∣tant passions, and furious rages (very vn∣fitt termes for such Priests, as you are that professe modestie and mortification, and that are in Ingland, not only to suffre, but also to dye for Christian Religion) with which you vvould make babies afraide. * 1.65 They had very iust cause to appeale from so vniust a iudg charging them both falslye

and vncharitably, with so hainous a crime as schisme is. And that men iustlye defending their honor and fame, do nothing at all dy∣minishe, eitherof their modestie, mortificatiō or obedience, neither haue they stepped for that, out of the path of Christian Religion, or priestly proceading, as you would make not your wise but passionate and affected reader here beleeue. * 1.66 And thus much you ha∣ue said of the Latine booke. A short horse is soone curried. * 1.67 If you can answere whole boo∣kes so briefly, you nead no more large Apol. you are men of dispatch, I see wel, but no marwell: many hands make light work, you are many vnited priestes together, and ther∣fore you haue the soener done. And yet as brief as you are, you haue spoken more then, at the beginning you thought to say in this pla∣ce, Truly if at the beginning you thought not to say so much, you thought to say ve∣ry litle o•• nothing. * 1.68 For touching the princi∣pall pointes of the booke, ād the matters the reof in controuersie, you haue yet said no∣thing at all in this chapt. I know not what you will doe here after. Now to the English booke for as for the third booke vvritten to the Inquisition, * 1.69 you touch it not, bicause they keapt close to the matter, and did not fling out at the Iesuits and specially at Fa. Persons as in th' other they doe, ād so doing gaue you

no occation of vvritting. * 1.70 If the thad bene as modest in their book to his Holl. vve had lost the notable peece of vvork of this A∣pologie. Dixit Piger, leo est in via. * 1.71 The slouth full excuse them selues sayinge, there is a lion in thewaie. What soeuer they meane by it, or hovv soeuer you interpret it of ouer thro∣vving all that stand in their way, Superioritie, Reason, Religion, and S. Peters koies, &c. * 1.72 I may vvell applie it to this Apologie of yours. For you are so slouthfull or so fearefull of the lion that lieth in the vvay, that is, to co∣me neare the points in question or to handle any one of them, as you ought to haue done, that for feare of that lion or of the iustice of their cause you dare not put out your head so much as once to looke them in the fa∣ce. You vvent veryneare in deed, * 1.73 yea so nea∣re as the margent, but you durst not looke ouer into the text, for there lay the lion. that is, the Archpriests epistle, vvhich was the ori∣ginall and foundamentall cause of these last controuersies, and writting of these bookes. If you had not bene slouth full covvards you should haue caught that lion by the eares, and plucked him out of his denme. * 1.74 and if you had foūd him to haue had venyme ād no hony in his mouth, you should haue torne him in sonder as Sampson did: that is, haue freely confessed the truth, and blamed your Archp. for such an vncharitable act. other∣wise

if you had found him a vvolfe in a lious skine, you should haue pluckt the skin ouer his eares: that is if you had found that it vvas not M. Blackvvels letter, then you should haue discovered their falsehood and impo∣sture by fathering that vpon him that vvas none of his. But it was in deed a lion and nei∣ther wolf, fox or beare, and therfore you lett him alone, and durst not come neare him. So that this sentence man vvell be applied to the fashion of your writting. hovv you dare not come neare the lion, * 1.75 that is, examine the true question of this controuersie.

Why do you vvrong your bretherne by saying, That they taking vpon them in the place (of their English booke) to the Reader to sett dovvne the true state of the question, putt it dovvne vvholly to the contrarye. Lett vs see, * 1.76 if you be true men of your vvorde, There are handled in their bookes 2. contro∣uersies (the vvhich being lions, you shonne and feare so much that you dare not come neare vnto them) The first is: that the Arch∣priest was not orderly instituted, by the Card. letters and them selues vniustly called schis∣maticks for not receauing him vpon those letters. * 1.77 The second. That after the Bull came and all had submitted them selues thereto, the Archpriest sett abroch the old matter of schisme, and as schismaticks forbad (by his letters) them to be absolued of any Priest ex∣cept

they acknowleged their Schisme and disobedience. The first they sett downe in the said preface thus.

The striefe and dissen∣tion at this day too great and scandalous in Ingland is maynteined by the Archpriest the Iesuits ād their adherents against those Prie∣stes vvho did forbeare to subiect them selues vnto the Archpriest constituted in authori∣tie ouer all the Seminarie Priestes in Inglād and Scotland by a Cardinall who was Prote∣ctor of the English colleag at Rome and af∣terwards honored vvith the title of Prote∣ctor of Ingland, for the which forbearing to subiect thē selues at the first making know∣ne of this auctoritye, the Priests were accu∣sed of schisme, sedition, faction, rebellion, &c. Doe you putt downe the question in cō∣trouersie so simplie and plainly in your first chapt.

as you make your Readers beleeue by your title you would doe? Nothing lesse. Let any man reade ouer that chapt. and he shall find no case or state of the questiō proposed. You fly it, as it were from a lion. * 1.78 There you shall find a ragmans roole of all the conten∣tions and factions that hath bene in Fraunce, * 1.79 Italy and Flanders for many yeres. Fa. Parsons retorne from Spaigne to Rome, mention of a nevv association, of Fishers confession, of Fa. Parsons information, and of the conclu∣sion taken to make an Archpriest rather thē a Bishopp, and that he should rather be in∣stituted

by the Card. letters then by the Po∣pes bulls: * 1.80 of a great nombre of letters, of D. Bishopp, and M. Charnoks examination, of the new Breue, of Fa. Parsons letters to M. Collington ād to M. Mushe, of appeales wit∣hout prosecution, of M. Charn. letter to Card, Burghesius, of the Archpriest being ma∣de Prothonotarius Apostolicus, and so the ende.

Wheare is the state of the present controuersie in question, * 1.81 that you theare promised. Lett the vvorld iudge, who are rather to be beleaved, they that goe plainly and simply to work, and that sett downe the questiō truly ād nakedly without pompe or florish of words? or you that promise mountaines, and do not giue vs so much as mowlehills? that make men beleue by the title of your chapter, you will goe plainly to vvorke, but in the end serue them vvith title tatle and nothing els. What appertaine all theis things recovvnted vpp before, to the controuersie in question? and yet you say nothinge els. If I haue least out any substantiall point of your first chapter chardg me hardly in your next, if it be right∣fully, I will ask forgiuennes, if vniustly, I will haue my right. The first cause thē of all theis troubles, is, for that the Iesuits wrott, taught and auovved that the Priests that refused to obay the Archp. and to take him for their Superior, being only instituted by a Card.

letters vvithout the Popes Bulles, vveare Schismaticks seditious, factious and rebel∣lious, &c. but of this you will not heare. Leo est in via. You dare not come neare it.

This you confesse also your selues in say∣ing. you vvill not talk of it: * 1.82 that is as much to say, you vvill not meadle vvith the pointe in controuersie, but vvil rune at Random, and discourse and talk of vvhat matter you list, thoughe it come not noe nearer the questiō then Barwick comes to London.

The second controuersie they put downe in the same preface in theise vvords: * 1.83 A peace was made to the great confort of all Catho∣licks, vvhen his Holl. breue vvas presented to them. But this peace vvas soone after bro∣ken by the meanes of the Iesuits, who revi∣ved the same calumniation against the Priests and by the Archpriest vvho did not only a∣verre the assertions of the Iesuits, but publis∣hed also that he had receved a resollution frō the mother Cittie (to vse his termes) which avowed that the refusers of the auctoritye vvere schismaticks.

The cause then of this deuision is not for any resistaunce of the Priestes against the Archpriest but for that the Priestes vvill not acknowledg that in the time of their forbe∣arance to subscribe to the auctoritye they vvere factious, seditious rebellious schisma∣ticks, enormously disobedient, in continuall

mortall sinne, practising their functions in irrigularitye, &c. Loe hovv plainly simply and truly (for any thing you say to the con∣trary) they putt downe the case. You say it is sett dovvne vvholly to the contrarye, you proue it not. * 1.84 We must beleaue you, bicause you are vnited stedfastly in this, neuer to touch the question, but to evacuate the say∣ing and disgrace the persones of your bre∣therne all you may. You say in putting theis cases, they debase the Archpriest and the Pro∣tector: but you tell vs not vvherein. You are men of vvonder full auctoritie that you must be beleaved vpon your word. * 1.85 I haue proued to you before, that a Card. is not to be belea∣ued vpon his bare word in an other mans pre∣iudice: ād why shall we beleaue you in sclaun∣derīg your bretherne vvithout cause? Shewe me in your next by vvh'atwords in theis 2. cases by thē proposed, they haue debazed the persones by you named. for vntill then, you haue lost your credit with me. They haue sett it downe (you say) wholy to the cōtrary. Why are you in such hast, that you cannot stay to tell vs wherein? What Asse vvill geue credit to your bookes, vvritting so negligently and so fondly, that you are not able to shevve one reason of your negatiue doctrine. You add that in the end they lay a foundation to all disobedēi∣ce. But you tell vs not in which end, either of the preface or of the book: for in the 2. cases

proposed, there is not the least surmise the∣rof. But peraduenture you meane theis ends you lay dovvne, in the vvhich, * 1.86 th••one Thirsteth the good of his Reader and th'other biddeth you Fare vvell. * 1.87 In deed theise be your impertinent discourses, as you note vvell in the margent, and I add to the text foolish also. No no, S. * 1.88 (say you) you may see more noted before in the se∣cond chapter. Well in Gods name. Let vs goe back againce thither. What shall I see theare? That they haue put downe the state of the question vvholy to the cōtrary. Is it true? that vvould I faine see. Fiat voluntas tua. * 1.89 for so you begine, and the Sermon contineweth vntill Card. Allens letters sent to M. * 1.90 Mushe inter∣rupted the prechear and Card. Sega his visi∣tation. * 1.91 You thirst (by all liklihood) the good of your Readers that begine so devoutly, ād goe on so honorably vvith 2. Cardinalls in the fore frōt. But bevvaire (Maisters) of your geese when the tox precheth. Then after the Cardinals march the Popes speeches sent in∣to Ingland Exhorting and chardging men to liue in vnitie. Next to his Hol. marcheth Fi∣shers memoriall against the Iesuits, being one of the most exorbitant disorderly fello∣wes in the Romaine sturrs, and yet thought a fitt man by you to be put in your booke. Next to his Hol. after Fisher in stead of a Trumpettor marcheeh. No alas, * 1.92 is this the ver∣tue of obedience? is this humilitie? is this, &c.

Next follovveth that vvhich I haue before confuted, so that I cann see nothing in that chapter, that proveth They haue putt the state of the question wholly to the contrary, and yet I promise you I did read it ouer with my Spectacles vvherfore I beseech some of you, that haue a cleerer sight then I haue, and that can see more vvith tvvoe eies them I can do vvith foure, to note me the leafe whe∣re I may see more noted in that chapter. * 1.93 You did vvell to send your Readers from the 11. chapt. to the second, to seek for that, vvhich they shall neuer find there, and that vvhich you should haue shovvne them in this place, if you could. * 1.94 But Leo est in via. Truth lay in your vvaye, vvhich is more impregnable thē a lion, and more immovable then a Rock. If you had had a desire to instruct your Reader in good sooth, ād not to haue him deceaued: you vvould not, or at least should not, haue sent him to rune ouer a longe chapter to se∣arch that vvhich vvas not to be found, but for his more ease to haue quoted the leafe of your booke vvherin he might haue found it. * 1.95 But your intention vvas if not to deceiue him, yet to deliurer your self by that shifte from shevving and prouing that they put the question vvholly to the contrary. Theis fovvle shiefts may for a time hold some fooles in suspence, * 1.96 but in the end it vvill turne to the shame of the Authors.

You answered the Latine book bricflie, * 1.97 as before, but here you ansvvere tvvo vvhole disconrses Maruaillous Lacoanically ād very merrely. The one, with, he thirsteth the good of the Readers, th'other with Fare yov vvell. This in sooth is to play vvith your Readers nose ād shew your selues to be mo∣re like Scorners then graue Priestes. Fare you vvell, and vvhy did you not add, ād I ack shall haue Gill. You are counning men that can answere twoe treatisses vvith tvvoe vvords. You should haue much a doe to ansvvere M. Watsons common vvealth, (vvhich yet is not so long as theise 2. treatisses) vvith such Scholasticall or rather sophisticall brevitie. It should seame, that either you haue great cō∣fidence in your cause, vvhen you may be ad∣mitted to ansvvere your aduersaries reasons vvith a fare vvell, or els that you do not gre∣atly thirst the good of your Readers ād much lesse care for their satisfaction, * 1.98 that expected from graue vnited Priestes the confutatiō of Reasons laid dovvne in those discourses, and not a Iest of vvil Sommars budgett. Who is so blinded, that doth not see their Reasons to stand firme and solide, vvhich are sett dovvne both in the letter, that thirsteth the good of the Reader, as also in th'other that biddeth you Fare vvell: for all that you haue said ei∣ther here, or in the second chapter noted in your margent. For of 5. considerations putt

dovvne in the letter that thirsteth the good of the Reader, you seeme in your 2. chapt. to answere one vvhich is of the Premunire as for th'other 4. * 1.99 your bidd them fare vvell. And so great is the thirst you haue of the Readers good, * 1.100 that it is your custome through out your Apologie, to ansvvere some one argu∣ment or reason, and then make him beleue you haue ansvvered them all, and so he must content him self vvith a peece, either that, or none at all.

And albeit you ansvvere nothing here to the Reasons of your namelesse frende Fa∣re you vvell, yet afterwards leaping (accor∣ding to your custome) disorderly from one thing to another: and after a flinge at M. Chā∣peneis letter, * 1.101 you leape back to Fare you vvell againe to ansvvere to the ostentation of their Canon so often cited. * 1.102 I know not hovv often they cited it, but suer I am, you cited, it once before, and their vvordes false∣ly, as I haue there noated. You ansvvere not the Canon there. * 1.103 But now after you haue ta∣ken your breath ād bethought your self bet∣ter, you vvill answere it (I trovve) very suffi∣ciently: bicause any man of meane learning way dis∣couer hovv litle this maketh for them. If this be true then no doubt but mē of your learning vvill discouer to vs, hovv litle this maketh for their purpose. vvhich if you performe, then will I bidd them and you both Fare well

and meadle no further in this matter, but thirst my ovvne rest and quietnes. Well on then Maisters myne.

After you haue shevved your skill in au∣tiquitie and of diuers meanes of constituting and appointing Bishopps, at last. * 1.104 You thinck your bretherne vvill not denie the preeminent aucto∣ritye of the Sea Apostolicke in all theis elections, and aboue all that he might, and hath lawfully chan∣ged the same. I ansvvere for them, they vvill not denie this. But vvhat then? Mary If his Holl. can alter election in ordinary Bishopps, much more he may appoint an extraordinary Prelat as the Archpriest is, with vvhat Iurisdiction he thimketh expedient. Transeat, and therfore so much to vrge this, is great presumption to call it no vvorse. haue you said? Then say I, * 1.105 your ansvvere is but a meere folly to call it no vvorse. for they talk of chease ād you giue them chalke. They tal∣ke, speake and meane of the ordinary and ac∣customable meanes of election, * 1.106 constituted and appointed by the Canons and decrees of the Sea Apostolick, * 1.107 and you talk of the su∣pereminent povver or plenitudine potestatis that his Holl. hath ouer all benefices and Iu∣risdictions to giue them to vvhom he will ād by vvhat meanes and order it pleaseth him. If you thinck your brethern are not ignorant of this, you might haue leaft it out, * 1.108 for it ans∣vvereth not their Canon that talketh of the ordinarie meanes by election. And so their

Canon standeth still for them. Note heare that you your selues call this auctoritye of the Archpriest extraordinarie and that he is an extraordinary Prelate. * 1.109 Why then are you so rash I vvill not say impudēt to make your reader beleaue, your bretherne speak very con∣temptuously of the dignitie, and Archpriest, bicause they call it a nevv and extraordinary auctoritye well either you speake contemptuously here in calling his dignitie extraordinary, and so fall into the same fault your bretherne did, or els if you do not, * 1.110 you must ask them forgiuenes for slaundering them vniustlye vvith con∣tempt for saying that the Archpriest dignitie and Iurisdiction is extraordinary. This is a rule of nature quod tibi fieri non vis, alterine fa∣cias. You vvould be loath to be counted to speake this in contempt, so then must you iudg of them, that they did not speake it in contempt, as in deed they did not, and ther∣fore be vniustly taunted ād noted of contēpt by you for it. * 1.111 The glosse you alleadg theare is against you. for it vndrestandeth of ordina∣ry election vvherein the nomber of voices carrieth it avvay, and so if the greater parte choose one to be a Bishoppe and the lesser part or fevver in nomber choose him not, he shalbe their Bishopp against their vvills, bicause he vvas canonically elected viz by the greter nomber of those that had right to choose him. So that your contradicting

brethern nor none els comming to the ele∣ction are not condempned, neither are they the lesser parte, vvhere vvas no part at all. Mary, if it had come to the election and 200. Priestes had choosen M. Blackvvell, and your contradicting bretherne vvith an hundred moe on their side had chosen an other: M. Blackwell had bine their superior against their vvills, as chosen by the greater nomber. * 1.112 And yet this lesser nombre had not bene cō∣dempned by the Canon as you say, but by the glosse, neither yet absolutlie by the glos∣se. For if the lesser part (saith he) hath iustam causam contradicendi. iust cause to vvithstād the election. A Bishopp cannot beginen to them against their vvills. Your glosse then talketh of the ordinary way of election, and you of the extraordinary povver, and Iurisdi∣ction of his Holl. you haue allvvaies good luck to alleadge lawe against your selues, as those accustomedly doe, * 1.113 that impugne a truth as you doe. But here by the waye I must a little note your ignorance in that you say that his Holl. Legates and Nuncios often be neither Bishopps nor Archbishopps: I am suer the eldest of you all neuer savve or hard of any of the Popes Nuncios, but they vvere Bishoppes. Neither doth his Hol. make any, at least Nuncios, but such as are Bishopps. And as for Legates, for some hundreth yeres, theare hath bene neither Bishopp nor Arch∣bishopp

but alwaies Cardinalls vvhich are called Legati a Latere, per excellentiam quia sem∣per mittuntur a latere Pontificis. The siege Apo∣stolicke sendeth no other Legates but Car∣dinalls, nor none other there is, but such as vve call Legatinati, * 1.114 such as is the Archbis∣hopp of Canturbury in Ingland, And as his Holl. giueth more ample or more strickt au∣thoritie and Iurisdiction to his Nuncios, so doth he allvvaies restraine the Iurisdiction of his Legats: for if he did not, they had de iure almost as great as he him self hath. I once saw an indult giuen to a Legat a latere vvhe∣rin vvere but 4. things reserued from his povver and Iurisdiction. The first that he had no auctoritye to alienat the patrimonie of S. Peter. The second he had no povver to alienat the goods of the churches vnder his Legation. The 3. he had no Iurisdiction to conferre Bishopprickes. The 4. I do not remenbre. You may then see by this that so lardg is the Iurisdiction of a Legat a Latere, that the Pope doth dyminish his Iurisdictiō, rather then amplyfie or extend it. And so good reader fare well for we must back agai∣ne to M. Champ letter, to see vvhat he can say for him self.

If he be as fond and childish, * 1.115 as the former dis∣courses, the vvhich you neither haue nor can answere, but by a farewell. thē were you chil∣dish to putt them dovvne, and by your not

answering him, vtter your childishnes to the vvorld.

First and formost you exagitat his example of a noble man, * 1.116 vvhich you say is no more li∣ke the case in controuersie then London is to Lincolne. And vvhy so? bicause the Prote∣ctor vvrott by the expresse commandement of his Holl. Hovv shall vve knovv, that? Ma∣ry he saith so in his letters. But I haue proved to you before that a Cardinall be he a hūdred times Protector, is not to be beleaued abso∣lutly vpon his vvorde, and letters: * 1.117 the dissi∣militude (you say) consisteth in this that the Cardinall is of the Popes Counsell, ād to him is committed all the affaires of Ingland, and so vvas not the Gentleman M. * 1.118 Champeney talketh of. Be it so, yet M. Champeney pre∣uented this your ansvvere, the which you will not see, you are so vvillfully blinde. For theise be his vvords: Tvvoe disparites paraduenture they vvill alleage in the case. First, that I putt the case in ciuill gouermēt vvhereas it ought to be in Ecclesiasticall. The secōd, that I putt the case in one that is not knovvne to haue any ordinary authoritye in theise affaires, vvheras it is contrary in our affaires, the Car∣dinall being Protector of our Nation. Loe here your answere sett dovvne for you in this chisdish lettere the vvhich he āsvvereth thus. I omitt the ansvvere to the first (as imperti∣nent to this place) the second is as frivolous. For albeit Card. Caietane vvas our Protector

and also Chamberlaine of the church of Ro∣me: yet it is euident that by neither of theis offices had he any ordinary Ecclesiasticall Iu∣risdiction (he might also very vvell haue ad∣ded nor extraordinarye Iurisdiction) by thei∣se offices) ouer our clergie especially to erect any nevv gouernement. And therfore if he had any auctoritye in this matter it must needs be delegat and extraordinary and con∣sequently, vvas as vvell to notifie to vs the sa∣me (his extraordinary auctoritye) as the Chaunceler of Ingland is to shevve his vvar∣rant, * 1.119 if he intend to take vpon him an other office, not appertayning to the Chauncellors∣hipp. Thus farre this younge man come latly from schole vvho by that he hath here said, putteth you all in sooth, so to schoole, that he maketh you all as dōbe as Fishes, not saying herevnto so much as Baff: and vvhy? bicause Leo est in via. The truth vvhich he alleageth is so stronge, that it stoppeth your mouthes, so that you cannot open your lipps against it. * 1.120 If he not the best learned amongst his fellovves be able to stopp your mowthes, so that you can∣not ansvvere him, and to make you so blinde, that you will not see this reasō. What vvould his learneder fellovves doe, especially if they were vnited to writ, as you are. How say you? Hath he not cleerly shevved, that there is no disparitye betvveene the case putt in the Car∣dinall, and the case he putt, &c. in the Gentle∣man. All those that are cleare of sight can see

ād vvill cōfesse it. And here by the vvay (you my bretherne) hauing read this, ād seeing he flattly and truly denieth the Protector to haue any ordinarie iurisdiction ouer the En∣glish clergie, why are you so impudent in all this your booke, yea in euery leafe almost, to obiect to them disobediēce to the Protector as their superior? how are you so impudent as to tearme the Protector their and your supe∣rior? yea your highest superior next his Holl. I say impudent, for if he were, and they denie it so flattly and apparently, it vvas your parte to controle them for it, and to proue the con∣trarie, that he was both theirs and your ordi∣nary superior, in that he is protector. But the thing being denied by them, and the contra∣ry not proued by you, it is extreme impuden¦cie so often to affirme it, * 1.121 and to put it downe in your booke, as a thinge vndoubtable and a knowe truth, when it is kovven to all that haue but a cromme of witt and experience, * 1.122 that it is starke false to say. That the Prote∣ctor of Ingland is Superior to any Englishmen in the vvorld, Be he clark or lay, be he in Ro∣me or in Ingland. Note beside reader, his le∣arned distinction of Iudgs. That euery iudg is either an ordinary iudge, or a iudg delegat, that is extraordinary. An ordinary iudg hath iurisdiction ordinary ouer all such as are sub∣iect to him: but a delegat iudge hath no iuris∣diction of his owne, he hath only the vse of an other mans iurisdiction, that is to say, the

iurisdiction of him that doth delegat him, and hath no more thē th'other doth giue him the vse of, neither must he passe the limites of his delegation, but obserue it diligently. But the Protector vvas not our ordinarie iudg. Ergo if he be at all, he must be our delegat iudge. But a iudg delegat (saith M. Champeney) must shevve his warrant, and the letters of his commission. But the Protector shevved no such letters. Ergo they were not bound to be∣leaue that he was a iudg delegated to institu∣te a new dignitie. In your larger Apologie, I pray you shevve your learning, * 1.123 and answere to this youngmans argument.

Where you aske vvith vvhat modestie can he say that this gouerment of the Archp. * 1.124 vvas neuer hard of before. I aske you with what bra¦sen face you dare reprehend him for it, and with vvhat front you dare say, that this gouer¦ment Was euer hard of before? * 1.125 Nay, where is your modestie and honestie to find fault with him, for saying that vvhich your selues say aftervvards? * 1.126 Where you affirme his Holl. May appoint an extraordinary Prelate as the Archp. is. If it be extraordinarie vvhere was it euer hard of it before? A desiere you haue of contradiciō hath so blinded you that you vt∣tet infinite absurdiries, and seeme to say you care not vvhat. Yes vve say some vvhat, for vve say. That it is vvel knovvne to be an aun∣cient dignitie in gods churche. In deed the offi∣ce of an Archp. is an auncient (albeit a very

lovve) office in Christes church. But o blind∣nes. Is this gouerment, I say. this, [Ansvvere ca∣thegoricè.] an auncient gouerment in gods church? Was this, I say this, (I must often repeate it, bicause you are become deafe, dombe, and blinde, this Leo in via, hath put you in such a fright) gouer∣ment vvhich the Archprist hath novv in In∣gland, an auncient dignitie in Gods church? I knovv the name is auncient, * 1.127 but this gouer∣ment he hath is nevv, and therfore in your next, recant theis vvords or giue your selues the lye, for saying it is an extraordinary Pre∣lacy in the place noted in the margent. * 1.128 And here also you confesse as much. That his or∣dinary iurisdiction did not commounly extend so farre and ouer so many as this doth. * 1.129

Commonly (quoth you) no neuer since Christes Ascension, did it extend out of the churche dores. For sauing of your honesties, and for my learning, in your next promised larger Apologie, bring one example I pray you. you fighr still with your owne shadovve, who I pray you doth not knovv so well as you vvhat the Pope may doe? How great iurisdi∣ction he may giue, and that to vvhom he ple∣aseth? Theis are fonde and childish matters in deed to treat of, and not novv in question.

We are at last comme againe to M. Champe∣ney vvho in effect addeth notinge to the 2. for∣mer discourses but certaine bold assertiōs. What need he? when you haue ansvvered no one of all the assertions conteined in these twoe dis∣courses,

But the thristing the readers good and the farevvell? Hath he added nothinge? What is that he talketh of ordinarie and extraordi∣narie iurisdiction, shewing the Protector to haue neither, * 1.130 as you haue sene before. Sure he addeth enoughe for all you vnited priestes and take to helpe you all the Iesuits in Rome and Ingland, to answere to, whiles you liue. except the Pope doe chaunge the canon and Ciuill lawes to helpe you out of the mire. His argument is this, * 1.131 all superiors haue either ordinary or extraordinarie iurisdiction. But protect. of natiōs haue neither ordinary or extraordinary iurisdiction, as they be Prote∣ctors. Ergo Card. Caietane as Protector was not the Superior to the clergie or laytie of In∣gland.

But lett vs see theis bold assertions, * 1.132 Which are 4. I sayes, and all true for any thinge you bring to the contrarye. For asweare therevn∣to, you say, He is a younge man come latly frō te schole, and not the best learned amongst his fel∣lovves. And againe, all this you say (not, bi∣cause such graue men as you that hath bene so long from schoole, doe say it:) cannot but import great presumption of Spirit, and so dis∣crete men (vppon your vvordes and credit no doubt) vvill iudge of him and his, and their cause accordingly. you haue so sufficiently an fvveared his I say with your you say, that dis∣cret mē cānot but wonder at the order ād ma∣ner

of your vvritting. That is, to put dovvne your aduersaries vvords, which containe nought but truth it self in them, and then to make such foolish discourses as aftervvards you doe, vvithout touchinge or answearing them. * 1.133 Surely euery man of any discretion in the vvorld must needs iudg of you and your cause, that loue vvith vvords to mainteine contencion and quitt your cause and abandō it vtterlye, as bringing nothing either to vp∣hold it, or to vndermyne and ouerthrovve the cause of your aduersaries. But is not this a bold or rather a false assertiō of yours to say: * 1.134 ƲƲhich (I say) so often repeted against the au∣ctoritie of his Superiors, When as the Protector (as he told your before) was not his Supe∣rior nor the Archp. at that time when he spa∣ke this, I meane before the bull came for he was no iust possessor of that dignitie, but an in¦truded parson, and so had no superioritie as I haue alreadie proued. You had nead to goe to schoole againe to learne to leaue falsifying, and to forget slandering and vniust imputing of vvords and sences to your aduersaries, or els to the nouiciat hovvse to purge you of theyse foule faults.

We haue (say you) answered such reasons as he brought sufficiently before. * 1.135 and shevved his ignorance in diuinitie and considered of the de∣cree of the Doctors of Paris. Where hare you done this doughtie deed? Mary, in the 10. ch.

of this booke, you would say the 8. chaptre. I haue ouer vewed your 10. chapt. * 1.136 Where first and foremost I find your iumbling at certaine reasons brought out of the discourse that Thristeth the good of the reader, as you terme it, * 1.137 thē at other words of theirs (as you say) for you haue not quoted the place) Iumbling (I say) as I haue proued there. Thirdly you heape vp many thīgs out of both bookes but especially the English. You note not the pla∣ces, bicause you say they are allmost in euery page. Other reasons you alleage out of the di∣scourse, which you call fare you vvell. At last in the same leafe you come to M. * 1.138 Champe∣neys epistle out of the vvich you alleage but one reason, and so you Fitton in sayinge. Such reasons as he brought whē you brought but o∣ne of his reasons to ansvvere. Where I haue shewed his reason to stand firme and his diui∣nitie not to haue bene spilt by ignorance as you say here. Where also is considered, hovv well you considered, * 1.139 of the decree of the Do∣ctors of Paris. In the end of the 8. chapt. you say: The rest vvhich he hath in this epistle shal∣be considered of aftervvards againe in a devve and conuenient place. VVhy? when you vvere in hand vvith him there, vvhy did you not dispatch him and crush him in the head, and so deliuer him at once from the paine and fe∣are he had how you would trovvnce him af∣tervvards? or vvhy doe you not ansvvere the

rest of his reasons here, seing the young man is vnder your ferule, and standeth quaking at the consideration he hath of your nōber ād grauitie, and that you are old schollers. But be of good cheare M. Champeney pluck vp your hart, they haue no more to say to you here, all is remitted to the 8. chap where they considered but one of your reasons, and that to their ovvne losse and discredit.

I noted this foule shist of yours before, * 1.140 that when you cannot ansvvere, you send your reader to an other place to seeke that vvhich he shall neuer finde. So doe you here, you sēd him to seeke your ansvvere to M. Champe∣neis reasons in the plural, vvhere they shall find but one of his reasons laid dovvne in the singuler nomber.

Thow must knovv reader, * 1.141 that beside his first reason laid dovvne by them, there fol∣lovveth a second reason handled by me befo∣re, vvherby he proueth the Card. * 1.142 had no au∣ctoritie to institute the Archpr. because he was neither their ordinarie nor their extraor∣dinary iudge. the force of the vvhich reason, I haue laied dovvne before.

Thirdly, This yong man more resolute being come latly from the schoole, vrgeth you yet further, * 1.143 and presupposeth the mightest obie∣ction you haue against your discontented bre¦therne (the vvhich in deed you haue, if not in euery page, yet in euery leafe allmost of

your book, vvhich he also ansvvereth foure∣foldly) and the vvhich he termeth your A∣chilles viz: that to deeme or doubt of that vvhich the Card affirmeth is to call his credit in questiō vvhose authoritie ought to be sufficient testimo∣nie for vvhatsoeuer he saieth. and shevveth that it concludeth not. If these vnited people had any desiere to opē the truth to the world and not to deceive their readers, ād still vval∣lovve in contencion they should in steed of this (I say) haue taken his ansvveres made to the chiefe piller of their cause, and haue con∣futed them, and so by learning and authoritie haue rebarred this youge scholler that gauleth thē so much, and shevved to the vvorld that he vvas not the best learned of his fellovves. But alas? they durst not, for Leo est in via. the roaring lion of truth made them take their heeles and rune avvaie. * 1.144 Truth is so terrible to those that main¦taine a false cause (as these vnited bretherne doe) that they dare not behold it.

After this, this young man more resolut and more peremptorie goeth forvvards vvith secondly, * 1.145 thirdly, and fourthly. you lett him goe, for he being younge is toe quick of foote for you el∣der fellovves: pursuing his matter he putteth dovvne 3. other reasones, of his not accep∣ting the Archpriest. * 1.146 And albeit you promi∣sed to consider of the rest of his reasons, as be¦fore you haue touched but one and so haue broken your promise and deceiued your rea∣der

that expected a greater matter at your hands, bicause omnis promissio honesta est ob∣seruanda. and we Canonists doe hold that nu∣dum pactum producat aectionem, so that I, and other your readers may take an action against you, and call you into lavve to make you pro forme that which you haue promised vs, * 1.147 that is: to consider of the rest of this yong scholers reasons, or els we shalbe driuē to beleue him, and bid you fare vvell, as the second disconr∣ser said to his frend.

This yong scholler is so resolute and peremp∣torie, that he doth that, * 1.148 which you dare not talk of, and for the vvhich you are sorrie, that euer any mention vvas made of it. What is that? Mary, to sett downe simply, * 1.149 plainly and wit∣hout shifte or fiction, the cause of this last cō∣tention, and the occasion of his and others vvritting. What is that? forsooth that the Ie∣suits or Archp. renevved as it should seeme the slaūder of schisme in more intollerable maner then before: for novv they sayd, that vve vvere not only schismatiks but that vvho soeuer should dogmatizando say the contrary: should incurre the cēsures of the holy church, &c. ād a litle af∣ter vvhē therfore vve perceiued our late cōposed peace cōtrary to all expectatiō to be thus quick∣ly broken, and that our good names be gane to bleed a freash, the old gaules being not yet firm∣ly cured, vve requested the Archp. &c. Hovv say you (my vnited bretherne) is this true or

false he saith? If true? hovv can you in consci∣ence defend so vniust and ruynous a cause? If false? * 1.150 Why doe you not confute it? Why is then not one worde at all of this in your boo∣ke? No. And vvhy? bicause your conscience doth prick you Conscientia mille testes, You confesse it you selues, for you say, you vvill not talk of it, you are sorry it vvas euer mentioned. Hovv say you, had not your penne papier and inck bene better bestowed in cōfuting this, if it be false, then in setting dovvne his. I say it is no sinne, &c. you should haue bene better occupied also in confuting, as false the six cō∣ditions and articles (he saith) vveare on their side offred and proposed to make peace and vni∣tie, * 1.151 and by your side reiected: Then in setting dovvne either M. VVatsons common wealth Fishers memoriall and examinations, or the trouble of the Romaine colleage vvith the fa¦ctions in Paris and Flanders, vvhich come as neare to this controuersie as London to Lin∣colne.

You quitt M. Champeney for troublinge him or his reasons any more, bicause by all liklyhood you foūd his first to be hard of dis∣gestion: and you will visitr M. I. B. his censu∣res vpon Fa. Parsons letter to M. D. Bishopp. Course him lustely, I vvill not lett you. But where you talk according to your custome of this controuersie vndevvly, I vvilbe bold to rencountre you. As I must neades ask one

question of you. * 1.152 VVhy you doe so vvillingly and Franckly lett passe the 21. reasons vvhich the Censurer hath laid together by distinct nōbers to discredit the Protectors letters vvhich his Hol. confirmed. You ansvveare. ƲVe haue spo¦ken of it before. I ask you vvhere? here you ha¦ue forgotten your old custome, vvhich vvas to send your reader to an other chapter. For you haue noted nothing in the margent but pag. 48. for vvhat cause or end, god kno∣vveth, neither can I, or any man els iudge? but yet in th'end vvith much searching I haue found this before in the 2. chapt. and 18. leafe where thus you say: * 1.153 as in one place of their boo∣ke, they goe about to shevve it to be voide and of no force by 21. fond reasons deuised by thē sel∣ues vvherof no one hath any force at all. This is your spoke, and therto you add, that you are ashamed here to lay open the vanitie by more par¦ticulars. then you haue by like done already. * 1.154 this then is your ansvveare to 21 reasōs which you in your margent call Cauillations in stead of reasōs. you are well come to the butts, hovv came this qualme ouer your stomack, as to take so great pittie of your aduersaries as to be ashamed to lay open the vanitie (of their rea∣sōs) by more particulars. you mey be ashamed if you haue any shame in you, * 1.155 of so shamefull an answeare: and these tvvoe ansvveares are, th'one here, th'other in the 18. leafe. And why? vvhat, did you thinck that none but

beastes and dizards should read your bookes. I thinck so, or els you would neuer haue han∣dled the matter so shamefullye. Truly (my vnited bretherne) the Protector and the Ar∣chp. * 1.156 are to giue you but litle thanckes, that taking in hand to defend them, their causeād doings, are not able to ansvveare one reason of 21. being as you say your selues, but fond, And that not one hath any force at all: truly then the more easye to he answeared. * 1.157 But like matter like Procters. The matter you ha∣ue to defend is nothing vvorth and you de∣fend it accordingly I am sure that the simplest man or vvoman that shall read theis places, Will stay here and vvonder at your necligen∣ce or ignorance, that vvill not or cannot an∣svvere one of 21. fond reasons of no Force at all, being laied together by order and distinction. yea they are laid together to discredit the Protectors letters, and yet you will not do so muche for the Protectors credit, as to answeare one of them. O follie, to thinck any man so madd as to imagine you to haue a good cause in hād that cannot or dare not answere one of so ma¦ny reasons that are brought against you. * 1.158 Here in dead Leo est in via. But who saieth so? Dicit piger. yf euer there was any slouthfull and ne∣cligent writter. you may therin beare the bel.

Well? * 1.159 his Holl. aftervvards (say you) con∣firmed the Protectors letters, and therefore you lett passe the said reasons. you haue rea∣son.

If his Holl. confirmed them, then they vveare of no force before, and so you pleade for your discontented brethern, For regularly that vvhich is confirmed, vvas be∣bore of no force or valewe. For if it had, it should not haue neaded any confirmacion. You conclude very substantially that one one¦ly reason of humilitie modestie and obedience, * 1.160 would haue gotten them more credit then all theise 21. reasons of disobedience against their Superiors. I willingly yeld vnto you, * 1.161 if the Protector had bene their Superior? Or that you could haue proued him so. He then not being their Superior, you haue lost an hum∣ble and modest conclusion and their 21. rea∣sons remaine still firme and stable.

Theise cockish, schollers haue me thincks so troubled your vnited heads and braines that you writt neither rithme nor reason: * 1.162 ād they haue so affrighted you vvith their rea∣sons, that you knovv not well on vvhich side to turne you. Here you should haue laboured and sweat to haue ouerthrovvne not one, but all all their fond reasons, and to haue proued the Cardinall to haue had sufficient auctori∣tie to institute the Archp. Here you should hauc employed all your eloquence and pow∣red out your skill, learning and knovvledg, in diuinitie, lawe, histories, and what els, to haue proued them if not schismaticks, yet disobedient and rebellious to god and their

superiors. * 1.163 Proued (I say) not by a bold and badd••••tatle, as you endevour, but by good & solid arguments and reasons. But alas? and welladay? you yeld vp your armes, and hauing taken the foile, you giue them the victorie. For (as I haue said) seing you are not able to confute any one of their reasons, all reasona∣ble readers will iudge them to haue had good reason to withstand the Institucion of the Ar∣chp. by the Card. letters: and you your sel∣ues against all reason (not being able to ans∣were to one of their 21. Reasons) to fill their eares and feed their eies with bare words only without any reason. I haue often warned you and put you in mynde that this is the chief & principall pointe of this controuersie, and if you touch not this stringe, you labor in vai∣ne, to persuade men that your discontented bretherne doe defend an evell cause, and that they be the beginners of this diuision and cō∣tenciō. What a shame is it for you, to fill your booke vvith so much impertinent matter as you doe? and vvhē you come, where you hould close Witth your aduersarie, then yovv turne your back and flye, Fy, fy vppon it.

I am also ashamed (and so may all your frends and vvell willers be) to see an nomber of vertuous priestes (if you be the Authors of this Apologie) daily fighting against the en∣nemies of God and his espouse for the defen∣ce of the infallible truth, so much to forgett them selues and their vocation, and to be ei∣ther

so blinded vvith mallice against their bretherne, or to be carried away with inordi∣nat affection to their parte and faction, as to committ here such an exorbitant falshood as you doe in this place saying: * 1.164 vvherin for that there is nothing singular from those reasones vvhich his fellovves haue alleaged before, and by vs in diuerse partes of this Apologie haue be∣ne examined and shevved to be either false or feeble, vve passe them ouer in this place. * 1.165 You will gaine the wheatstone I see well. and tru∣ly I vvill leaue it vvith you, till you shewe me where, in this Apologie, you haue examined his fellovves reasons, and where you haue she∣vved them to be either false or feeble. This is your third passe ouer or retyring when you should stand firme and stable. But as often as you mention their reasons, you passe away in such post hast, as in the 18. leafe, then in the 176. ād lastly here in the 177. leafe, as that with in the compasse of one leafe, you make 2. pas∣se ouers. Such hast you make to the 12. chapt. there to defend F. Parsons from the iniurie done vnto him by your bretherne. I am con∣tent you goe, and if you had need of myne ai∣de also, I would willinglie helpe you. For I protest I doe as much mislike that kinde of writting as any man can doe: And in truth am glade and reioyce, when you paie them ho∣me for it.

And as for theise faults of yours vvhich I

haue here noted: * 1.166 I take god to wittnes, I haue not done it either of Spleen or mallice, nor for that I am more on their side then on your or more their frend then yours, but being indifferent betvveene both I thought friend∣ly to admonish you thus much, that hereby you may amend the faults. or giue me and other you frends satisfaction in shewing the to be no saults. If you take it in euell parre, I would be full sorry for it, myne intention be∣ing by this aduertisment to deturne you ra∣ther frō the old troubles ād contenciōs, thē to giue any occasion of new sturres. Consider your states ād qualities. remenbre where you are, wherefore you are there, and amongest whom your are, and for gods sake, and the sa∣ke of the honorrble quarrel you fight for, ād for his sake vnder whose banner you fight, ād at whose hands you looke for revvarde and recompence: for theis considerations (I say) to forgiue and forgett all that is past, ioyne in vnitie vvith your bretherne, liue in loue and peace with them, gaine them by lenitie and charitable conuersation: and then god allmi∣ghtie will blesse all your actiōs. To the which I pray God bring you, your bretherne, all our frends and me my self also, Amen.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Affection of blindeth men.
• * 1.2

  D. Stapleton proueth not your intention.
• * 1.3

  He vvas be∣reeued of his higher dignity.
• * 1.4

  A dead man fo∣re man of the quest. Fol. 173. b.
• * 1.5

  The 17. princi∣pall men of ovvr Nation did not require their imprisonement.
• * 1.6

  Fol. 12. b.
• * 1.7

  The president and his three Doctors desyre not their impri∣sonement.
• * 1.8

  Fol. 125.
• * 1.9

  Fol. ibidem b.
• * 1.10

  D. ƲVorthing∣ton novv presi∣dent desyred not their imprisone∣ment.
• * 1.11

  The names of 3. Doctors abu∣sed or borro∣vved.
• * 1.12

  No vvord at all in M. Licen∣tiat VVrights letter of the tvvo Priests.
• * 1.13

  Fol. 127.
• * 1.14

  These letters do not discharge Fa. Par.
• * 1.15

  Fol. 136.
• * 1.16

  ••f. VVatson disgraced for being a poore scholler.
• * 1.17

  Manie of you vnited Priests, some Iesuits, and some of them vvhom you call the prin∣cip allest men, vvere poore schollers in the seminarie.
• * 1.18

  VVant of hone∣stie and con∣science.
• * 1.19

  A question to be ansvveared.
• * 1.20

  A comparison betvveene Fa. L. Booke and M. VVatsons common vvealth if that be his vvhich the auctor of the Apologye Fa∣thereth vpon him.
• * 1.21

  Manie merrye tales are kept in store.
• * 1.22

  Fol. 138.
• * 1.23

  Fol. 139.
• * 1.24

  VVhich side broke the peace after the com∣ming of the bull.
• * 1.25

  Pag. 65. in the one and 60. in the other.
• * 1.26

  Pag. 120.
• * 1.27

  This breache crediblie beg∣on the Archpr, syde.
• * 1.28

  The vnited put stil quid pro quo
• * 1.29

  Fol. 154.
• * 1.30

  Fol. ibi. in mar. Pag. 91.
• * 1.31

  Fol. 159. b ƲVhy the priest did not prosecu∣te their apeales.
• * 1.32

  Fol. 137.
• * 1.33

  Fol. 160.
• * 1.34

  Fol. ibidem. The cause vvhy the priests prin∣ted their bookes.
• * 1.35

  Fol. 162. Of the 6. abuses you finde in the title of their la∣tyn beoke.
• * 1.36

  The cheise strife is vvith the Je∣suits.
• * 1.37

  The second fault is faultes.
• * 1.38

  your ovvne vvords against you. Fol. 162.
• * 1.39

  The fourth is no abuse.
• * 1.40

  Nippers.
• * 1.41

  The vnited doe iustlye abhorre the vvord schis∣me.
• * 1.42

  Fol. 162. b
• * 1.43

  The 6. is a foo∣lysch reprehēsion 163.
• * 1.44

  Fol. 163. and 164
• * 1.45

  Their 6. faults if they vvere such not comparable to your ovvne fault.
• * 1.46

  Pag. 5.
• * 1.47

  Fol. 164. The first reason for printing their booke is good.
• * 1.48

  Pog. 5. The secād rea••e. Fol. 164,
• * 1.49

  Take heed this prophecie fall not vpon your selues.
• * 1.50

  you repre••end them iustly.
• * 1.51

  VVilling omis∣sion.
• * 1.52

  Speak truth.
• * 1.53

  Vneuē dealing.
• * 1.54

  Markstill the question in con∣trsuersie.
• * 1.55

  Foolish suppos∣alls.
• * 1.56

  The pestes vve∣re bound to de∣fend their good name.
• * 1.57

  By the example of our Sauiour.
• * 1.58

  Fol. 167. b
• * 1.59

  a mā of clovvtes
• * 1.60

  VVhat the vni∣ted people shold haue doone.
• * 1.61

  Can. Non sunt. 11. q. 3. S. August. bjd∣deth them to de∣fend their fame.
• * 1.62

  Can. Nolo 12. q. 1.
• * 1.63

  Salomon vvil∣leth them to doe the same. Eccl. 41. S. Paule defen∣ded his fame. 2. Cor. 12.
• * 1.64

  Fol. 168.
• * 1.65

  The Priests had iust cause to ap∣peale.
• * 1.66

  Fol. 169.
• * 1.67

  A vvhole boo∣ke briefely an∣svvered
• * 1.68

  Thouchinge the pridcipall you haue as yet said nothinge.
• * 1.69

  You touch not nor mention their booke to the Inquisitors.
• * 1.70

  Fol. 172.
• * 1.71

  Prouerb. 26.
• * 1.72

  This peec of scripture inter∣preted against the vnited.
• * 1.73

  Fol. 167. b.
• * 1.74

  Such as vvrit vvith conscience should haue done this.
• * 1.75

  Fol. 172. An vncharita∣ble vvronge.
• * 1.76

  The first con∣trouersie.
• * 1.77

  The second con∣trouersie.
• * 1.78

  From fol. 2. to b.
• * 1.79

  Fol. 6. b. and 7. Fol. 7. b.
• * 1.80

  Fol. 8. b. Fol. 9. Fol. 10.
• * 1.81

  You promise much, but par∣forme nothing.
• * 1.82

  You vvill not meadle vvith the point in controuersie.
• * 1.83

  Pag. 3.
• * 1.84

  Vnited you are neuer ••otouch the question.
• * 1.85

  Marke.
• * 1.86

  Fol. 172. b.
• * 1.87

  A foolish toye.
• * 1.88

  You send vs to a chapt. that hath no such thing in it.
• * 1.89

  Fol. 10. b.
• * 1.90

  Fol. 11.
• * 1.91

  Fol. 12.
• * 1.92

  Fol. 13.
• * 1.93

  A suttle sen∣ding.
• * 1.94

  The force of truth.
• * 1.95

  And vndecent shiefte for vni∣ted people.
• * 1.96

  Fol. 168. Fol. 172.
• * 1.97

  Tvvoe discourses ansvverd vvith tvvo•• vvords.
• * 1.98

  You should haue esnfuted the Reasons that ba in those discour∣ses.
• * 1.99

  Fol. 15.
• * 1.100

  A notable cu∣stome.
• * 1.101

  Fol. 174.
• * 1.102

  Dist 63. can. 12. Dist. 61. can. 13.
• * 1.103

  Fol. 18 b.
• * 1.104

  Fol. 174.
• * 1.105

  A foolish ans∣vveare.
• * 1.106

  Distingo.
• * 1.107

  C. 2. de prebend. in 6. & Clem. 1. vt lite pen∣dens, &c.
• * 1.108

  The Canon is not ansvered.
• * 1.109

  Fol. 14. Rash reprehen∣sion.
• * 1.110

  The vnited are bound to ask their brethern forgivennes.
• * 1.111

  Gloss. 1. ad can. 13. dist. 61. The glosse is a∣gainst you also.
• * 1.112

  Your error.
• * 1.113

  Ignorance. Fol. 174. b.
• * 1.114

  C. 1. de offi. Legati in 6. C. pen. ext. de offic. Legati.
• * 1.115

  Fol. 172. b. 173.
• * 1.116

  Fol. 173.
• * 1.117

  A false dissimi∣litud.
• * 1.118

  You ansvvere vvas prevented Pag. 24.
• * 1.119

  The younge scholler putteth you all to schole.
• * 1.120

  Fol. 173.
• * 1.121

  Note.
• * 1.122

  Tit. ext. de off. Iud. ordinar. & tit. ext de offie. delegat.
• * 1.123

  Fol. 174.
• * 1.124

  Impudency.
• * 1.125

  Fol. 174. b
• * 1.126

  Desirr of contra∣diction blindeth men.
• * 1.127

  you must recant or be counted liars.
• * 1.128

  Fol. 174. b
• * 1.129

  An Archpriest ordinary iuris∣diction goeth not out of the church dores.
• * 1.130

  M. Champeney reasones vnan∣svverable.
• * 1.131

  His argument.
• * 1.132

  Fovver true J sayes, ansvvered vvith you say.
• * 1.133

  you vnited lo∣vve to maintai∣ne contencion.
• * 1.134

  A false assertiō.
• * 1.135

  you haue not an∣svvered his rea∣sons at all. Ergo not sufficiently.
• * 1.136

  Fol. 107. b
• * 1.137

  Fol. 108. you iumble a•• theis reasons on∣ly.
• * 1.138

  Fol. 110. A fitton. Fol. 174.
• * 1.139

  Fol. 118. b VVhy did you differr to ans∣vvere him thea∣re.
• * 1.140

  A fovvle shift.
• * 1.141

  Fol. 110.
• * 1.142

  Pag. 25.
• * 1.143

  you mightest ob∣iection is ans∣vvered fourt∣souldly.
• * 1.144

  Fol. 173.
• * 1.145

  Pag. 26.
• * 1.146

  Pag. 29. The vnited broken their per∣iuis and decei∣ued their reder?
• * 1.147

  your reader shal be constrained to bidd you ffa∣re vvell.
• * 1.148

  Pag. 34. 35.
• * 1.149

  M. Champeney seteth dovvne simply the cause of this last con∣tencion.
• * 1.150

  you must confu∣te or els confesse.
• * 1.151

  Pag. 33.
• * 1.152

  Fol. 176. b Falshood.
• * 1.153

  Fol. 18.
• * 1.154

  A short ans∣vveare to 21. reasons.
• * 1.155

  A sharmfull an∣svveare.
• * 1.156

  The Protector and Archp. doe con you litle thanckes.
• * 1.157

  The broctors and the matter are a lock that is nothing vvorth
• * 1.158

  None but madd men can think you to haue a good cause.
• * 1.159

  you proue heare that the Pro••e∣ctors letters are of ••••force.
• * 1.160

  Fol. 167. b
• * 1.161

  An humble conclucion lost.
• * 1.162

  Their reasons haue troubled your vvitt.
• * 1.163

  you proffes are but title tatle.
• * 1.164

  Fol. 177. An exorbitant falshood.
• * 1.165

  The vnited ha∣ue gained the vvheatstone.
• * 1.166

  That Authors intencion.