THis question should passe vntouched, were it not that I hold it meete, to en­counter the opinion conceyued of the Quilibet, as well for the rarenes of his wit, as for his dexterity to discourse of any questionable subiect, specially such as is of State or Religion. VVith which conceite it may probably be presumed that himselfe concurreth, considering how gloriously he rufleth in words and sentences: and with what contempt he censureth, not the Ie­suits alone, agaynst whome chiefly in his Quodlibets hee pretendeth hostility, but the Professors of the Gospell also: who in the account of this Secular Priest, are pe­remptorily held for Grossum caputs, and to haue not one learned man amongst them. It shall not be amisse therefore to take a view [Page 4] of his sufficiency, and to examine how well he is qualified for the office of a Censor, and this seruice of Booke-making, where­in he is imployed. I hold it for cleere and confessed, that such as are fit for imploy­ments of this nature, are of a discerning and iudicious spirit, able to deliuer theyr apprehensions by weight & measure, with­out being subiect to palpable and ridicu­lous ouersights, specially in a short dis­course. Where the worke groweth large, the Artificer findeth pardon, though som­time he slumber or sleepe, while he fashio­neth the same, hauing had care to pollish and grace the first members thereof. But this Priesting Quilibet, howsoeuer he rest admired by some of his faction, or others who haue hitherto beheld him with a care­les and partial eye, yet being seriously exa­mined, will be found liable in al reasonable construction, to the imputation of extra­ordinary defects in iudgement: his pro­ceeding being such in the very front of his booke, and in an argument easie and of few pages, as is without salt, and vnworthy the least regard. To iustifie my charging of him in this behalfe, I will be bold to sift and lay open the workmanship of his pre­face: [Page 5] which being weighed in the true and indifferent balance of reason, will appeare to be such as I haue sayd. His preface is of two parts: the one, a comprehension of certayne principles: the other, an aduer­tisement of the motiues, inducing the Quilibet to deliuer his Decacordon by way of a quodlibeticall method, and to publish the same.

The principles are in number fiue, col­lected and reserued by him (as it seemeth) for some fit oportunity, whereby to giue taste, vnto the world of the excellency of his knowledge, without purpose to per­forme any seruice by them, as shall ap­peare. I will in this place repeate them: though in fewer tearmes then some of thē are deliuered, yet such as expresse the full and entire sense they carry in the Preface. They are as followeth.

1 That a foole or dulhead may by shew of argument be forced to acknowledge the cleerest ax [...]om in Diuinitie or other pro­fession to be false.

2 That there are as many examples for vice, as for vertue: for heresie, as for Re­ligion.

[Page 6] 3 That there is no inuention, but anothers wit can equall it by inuenting the same: which hee prooues out of Eccles. chap. 1. vers. 9.

4 That all things on earth are subiect to mutation and downefall.

5 That the generation of one is the corrup­tion of another.

Now before they be brought into mu­ster by the Priest, hee doth honour them with a remarkeable and very worthy pre­amble. Hauing sayde that experience ma­keth the case cleere, touching the inexpug­nable condition and nature of them, hee addeth that it doth so in all artes and pro­fessions,

Let vs examine how learnedly he doth here acquit himselfe. He sayth, that the wit of man sheweth the soules excellency by inuention, morall coniecture, and the wit of man: and so maketh the wit of man in this worke, both a principall efficient, and yet a secondary and different meane from it [Page 7] selfe. If it were sayd by any, that Secular Priesthood conuerteth soules by auricular confession, by a deuout Masse, and by Se­cular Priesthood: I thinke you would hold such a speech, to proceed from some craze in the brayne. He affirmeth also that the wit of man sheweth the soules excellency, by inuention in the apprehension, discourse and iudgement of things: as if there were a pos­sibility in inuention, to be a meane in this behalfe. When the thing is once inuen­ted and disclosed, the faculty and act of in­uention doth forthwith determine, with­out yeelding any addresse for directing the wit in iudging: God hauing so boun­ded and distinguished the faculties of na­turall reason, that they cannot in theyr se­uerall and proper works conferre the one to the other, any reciprocall furtherance. VVhen the builder hath singled out and made choyse of his stone and timber: the practise of this particular skill, doth toge­ther with the choyse immediatly cease and expire: it being not able to assist and guide him in the artificial structure of the house.

Further, he addeth that the wit of man sheweth the soules excellency by morall coniecture. Why not also by Mathema­ticall [Page 8] or Physicall demonstration? As hee doth ouermuch abridge the subiect, wher­in humane capacity doth make knowne the dignity of the soule, it being not shut vp within the compasse of things iudi­ciable, but extended to inuenting likewise, and therefore of an equall reach with the faculty of naturall reason: so falleth hee short in the account of the meanes, where­by the surpassing worth of the soule is de­ciphered. For besides inuention and morall coniecture (of which the one is generall, the other a particular iudging restrayned to some speciall kinde of obiect) there are to doe this seruice vnto the soule, as well o­ther transcendent meanes, whereby the trueth, consequence, and order of things with theyr contraries is discerned, as in each speciall Art and profession other par­ticular actions in great varietie.

You see now the preamble to the prin­ciples and the credit of wit he hath gained by it. It remayneth to examine the prin­ciples themselues. Hee that should reade them in the Quilibet, and consider both the multiplicitie of words wherein they are comprised, and the honorable recom­mendation yeelded vnto them: would [Page 9] take them for such as are vnmatchable, and rather inspired into this Priest, then obserued by him. But if againe hee shall consider, that the two first are childish, and vnworthie so great a title: that the third is expugnable, or at least doubtfull, and so no principle: that foure of them, if not all fiue, are produced and mustered without sense and scope, other then to serue as mock-chimnies doe in a large house: that the demonstration of them is defectiue and friuolous: hee cannot but wonder out of what idle conceit it pro­ceeded, that they should in the front and eminentest part of his Decacordon be exhi­bited and represented to the world.

That the third principle may iustly be excepted against, may appeare by the te­stimonie yeelded from holy and prophane histories to some persons for singularitie of wit and knowledge. Here of the Quili­bet doth minister vnto me an instance pag. 216: where hee reporteth that Salo­mon had the rarest and chiefest gift that euer was giuen to man His meaning here­in I take to be agreeable with that which in the third and fourth chapter of the first of the Kings▪ is by the holy Ghost recor­ded [Page 10] of the said King, touching his excel­ling in wisedome aboue all other of prece­dent, present and future ages. VVherupon I deduce this conclusion: that if no man euer did or shall equall Salomon in wise­dome, then might hee inuent something which cannot possibly fall within the reach of any other mans inuention. But how then shall we answere that diuine sentence of the same King? who saith that there is nothing new vnder the Sun. Salomon giueth vs hereby to vnderstand, that for as much as al things which haue come to their pe­riod, doe by generation or other meanes returne, though not in particular, yet vn­der the title and subsistence of their com­mon nature, wee must in that regard ac­count nothing for new or different from that which hath bin. Whereupon I inferre that the Priest cannot without wrong al­leage the said sentēce for cleering his third principle, which speakes of inuenting the selfesame thing in particularitie and not in the generall.

That these principles are idly and with­out drift alleadged, I make it euident hereby. Whatsoeuer is comprised in this preface besides the said principles & their [Page 11] illustration, concerneth the motiues indu­cing the Priest to deliuer his Decacordon by a quodlibeticall method and to publish the same: so as these worthie principles must either be imploved to this seruice of perswading the choise of the said method, and of notifying the end for which the De­cacordon is published, or els be inferred to no purpose. If the citing of them be to im­ploy them in those two seruices: then haue they some logicall coherence with them: and so shall it be no absurditie or inconse­quence to say:

Or thus.

[Page 12] If these deductiōs be warrantable in cō ­mon sense: thē the consequence from Han­nibal ad portas vnto Mille meaesiculis errant in montibus agnae shall goe for logicall and currant. But if they shall passe vnder cen­sure for such as grow from a debilitie in the braine: I hope the Quilibet will dis­claime the allegation of them for the im­ployment aboue mentioned: and rather confesse the presenting of them in publike to be without all intent of vsing them, then expose his wit and priesthood to an imputation of that nature. But he may happily pleade for his defence in this be­halfe the marginall note, whereby we are certified that the author in all these fiue principles doth cleerely conuince the Ie­suits faction of many grosse errors. Is it fit­ting with the reputation of a quodlibetical Doctor to range and muster principles in a text which haue no correspondence with any member thereof, and afterward to a­dresse the reader to the margent, there to be informed of the imployment whereto they are destined? And yet the margent doth not here satisfie. It tels vs that the author conuinceth the Iesuits by them: which being supposed, yet can it not be in­ferred, [Page 13] that therefore they were transpor­ted into the text to that end. But how doth he skirmish with them against a Ie­suit? The Iesuit holdeth rules opposite to these, viz. That their generall with his pro­uincials cannot erre: and that their order is a state of most perfection. Whereupon it fol­loweth that either the Priest in his prin­ciples, or the Iesuite in his opposite rules, aberreth from truth. Howsoeuer the Iesuit dote in his maxims: yet if the Priest dis­charge against them no other shot but his principles, he will not be able to giue them the defeate and route: the opposition being not such, as that in the encounter the one must of necessitie supplant the o­ther. Besides, if the later maxime of the Iesuite be repugnant to the said principles: how commeth it that the Quilibet holdeth the like? pag. 6. of his pref. ver. 4. and 5.

Now concerning the Demonstration of them: It hath pleased the Quilibet to single out the fift principle onely, and to grace it with his painfull endeuours: the rather (I thinke) for that he borrowed it from Ari­stotle against the Philosophers will: and would hereby giue satisfaction for the in­dignitie offered by him to the said prin­ciple. [Page 14] The Demonstration is drawne from an induction, and stands chargeable with an vnsutable applying of particulars: with vntruth in some part: and beside with in­termixed absurdities.

That the application in some members of the induction is impertinent: the first period of the second page of the preface will testifie with me. For there propoun­ding vnto himselfe a proofe of the fift principle, hee falleth through a defect in iudgement to such a course of exemplify­ing, as naturally serueth to cleere and con­clude the fourth. Excellencies (saith hee) complexions, Maiesties, powers, foundations, Commonwealths, Societies, Corporations and states are subiect to decay and fall. Hereupō it followeth, that each thing and person (ta­king the induction in the sense of a part for the whole) is subiect to a decay & fall: which is absolutely the fourth principle: and thus by accident besides the Quilibets purpose concluded. If vpon the Antecedent you would inferre that principle of Aristotle: there wil appeare a disproportion betwixt the argument and the conclusion. For the argument mentioneth not a generation of the particulars with a precedent or con­current [Page 15] corruption of some other thing, (which it should haue performed in case the proceeding had been sutable to the Question) but onely a [...]all and dissolution of them.

As through this and some other imper­tinencies, which I doe with regard t [...] bre­uitie forbeare to debate, the induction hal­teth: so doth it offer vnto vs an vntruth in that particular of Moses law: the genera­tion whereof is by the Quilibet made to be the plaine corruption of the law natu­rall, pag. 4. As if when men beheld that knowledge diuulged and set foorth to the eye as it were in characters of gold, which before rested secret and confined within the vnsearchable cabinet of their hearts, they were then occasioned the rather to stumble, hauing a double direction and light to guide them in the traine of their life. Wee may with greater probabilitie thinke that the Lord of heauen discerning the law, which hee had imprinted in the heart of man, to bee defaced first through the defection of Adam, and after by an irrespectiue and dislimited cariage of life in his descendants, did out of wisedome to preuent the totall abolition thereof, and [Page 16] out of mercie to reclaime his people to a course of dutie, resolue vpon a new and second impression of the said law: which vpon the mount Sinai hee accordingly performed. But let vs see how he handleth this question. I will doe him the credit to spend a little time in vnfolding the frame of his dispute herein. He reasoneth thus:

If by infidelitie he note the state of de­prauation or the originall and roote of all inconformitie to the law: the proposition may passe as blamelesse: whereas if vnder that terme he conceiue a distinct and par­ticular sinne, and such as is a branch it self: then may we charge the proposition with inconsequence. For mans freedome for a time from some two or moe speciall cor­ruptions, [Page 17] doth not proue his freedome frō al other during the same time. Dauid could not be taxed with the crime of blood and adultery till the time of his defiling the bed of Vria: if hereupon it should be con­cluded that Dauid till the said time had obserued the Morall lawe: I thinke the Quilibet would not endure so loose a se­quell.

Touching the assumption: howsoeuer hee interpret the word of Infidelity, hee cannot iustifie the sense thereof: it being contradictory to the Author of all truth, who in the sixt of Genesis mentioneth a visible malignant Synagogue, distingui­shing it from the trew Church. Now where there is a Synagogue of that quality, their infidelity, which is as it were the very life and forme thereof, must necessarily rest and beare sway. The same Spirit also in the said chapter setting downe the corruption of the heart of man before the flood, and thereby discouering with what disobedi­ence and rebellion to the law of nature he had demeaned himselfe till that vniuersall deluge, auoucheth that the heart is depra­ [...]ed and wicked, not in some thoughts, but in euery thought whatsoeuer: not in some [Page 18] particle of it selfe, and of his thoughts, but in euery part & particle. not at some time, but without intermission continually. If then the hearts of the people that liued before the flood, were such as they are de­scribed in the said chapter: it followeth of necessity that they were fallen to infide­lity. For if they beleeued the promises and comminations of their Creator: then were their hearts at some time in some appre­hensions and parts of duty free from that touch of corruption afore mentioned. Be­sides in the 24. of Matthew, Christ him­selfe chargeth them with an exceeding car­nall security, & particularly with ignorance of the inundation to come, till they beheld it with their eyes Whereupon I infer, that if No [...] fayled not in the denunciation ther­of, and his ministery of calling them to re­pentance, they grew thus carnally secure and ignorant vpon a resolued disbeliefe and contempt of the worde of the Lorde▪ This infidelity of that people, is noted also in the 11. to the Hebr. and by the Apostle Peter in the third of his first epistle.

Further, that infidelity and idolatry raigned in the world many yeeres before the promulgation of the law of Moses, ap­peareth [Page 19] by the 24. chapter of Iosuah, where it is recorded that the ancestors and pre­decessors of Abraham worshipped strange Gods. And in the one and thirtith of Ge­ne [...]s, Labaa is reported to haue had his Idols and marmon [...]ets. Now if in those fa­milies, where God intertained his church, idolatry and vnbeliefe found approbation and place: what shall wee iudge of the na­tions and people extract from the line of Ch [...]n? or of those which issued and bran­ched out of the stocke of Iapheth? The wic­kednes of Sodome and G [...]r: the Gods of the Egyptians and their Sorcerers in the time of the Israelites pilgrimage there: the full measure of Atheisme and other strange iniquities in the land of Canaan, before the Lorde would proceede to dis­plant and extirpate the inhabitants there­of, will testifie against the assumption of this syllogisme, and eu [...]t that infidelity and idolatry did not then begin to ad­uance themselues in publique, when Moses vpon the mount Sinai, receiued from the hand of the Lord the Morall law.

But the Quilibet finding his assumption subiect to question, hath thought meete to yeelde it this proofe:

For answere to the proposition, it must bee remēb [...]ed that the effect and the cause or occasion therof do not alwaies concur in time▪ it being cleere both in reason and ex­perience, that where the occasion and the euent haue a coherence not of nature and necessity, but dependant on accident and the will of man, the one may a long time precede the other. And so in this case of the aboue named distinction, though it be supposed to haue taken beginning not be­fore the inacting and deliuery of the lawe Mosaicall▪ yet might the occasion thereof, namely the fall to infidelity and idolatry, be of some growth many yeeres before.

The assumption is of a more apparant vntruth. For howsoeuer the name of Iew and Gentill was not of so great antiquity and note: yet the thing it selfe was in [...]ss [...] [Page 21] and nature long before the flood: and so, many hundreds of yeeres before the pub­lishing of the Decalogue. There is in the sixt chapter of Genesis a record deliuered in expresse tearmes of two visible and di­stinct Churches: the one of the Sonnes of God: the other of the Sonnes of men. Further, in the 17. chap. of Genesis, the said distinction betwixt the trew and the false Church, is by a publique act and ordi­nance of the Lord diuulged and famed to all the world. For to the couenant made with his people, which could not bee vn­knowne euen to the inconfederate, he ad­ded Circumcision as it were the broade seale of his fauour, and to bee likewise a notorious and distinguent marke of his Church: So as now the world rested di­uided into the Circumcised and vncircum­cised: both aspectable and conspicuous to the eye. Besides, as if Circumcision were not on the behalfe of his people a sufficient badge of distinction: the same Lord in the third of Exodus doth renounce and dis­clayme all other nations, with this publike profession that he is not the God of them, but the God of the Hebrewes: the God of Abraham, Isaac and Iacob: and that this [Page 20] [...] [Page 21] [...] [Page 22] shall be his name. And this much Moses must proclayme and no [...]ie before Pha­rao. Here then the Lorde by this his pro­fession and proclamation, as well before Pharao and the Aegyptians, as in the eare of his select Israell, doth set out and publish a very speciall and eminent difference be­twixt his Church & all other Synagogues whatsoeuer. Hereby therefore it appea­reth, that before the publication of the De­calogue, the distinction of Gods Church from the prophane and reiected assemblies of the world, did exist both in nature and in common acknowledgement.

As this is incontroulable, so can it not be denyed that there passed at least 400. yeeres after the said publication vpon the Mount Sinai, before the distinction of the trew Church from the rest of the nations was made publique and acknowledged vn­der this tearme and title of the Iew. For if the whole Church was so intitled and styled, then all the tribes receiued deno­mination from the Tribe of Iuda, within the compasse of the yeeres aboue mentio­ned. But this is conuinced by the holy hi­story: wherein wee finde that each Tribe did first for a long time communicate in [Page 23] the appel [...]ation of Israel: and then after the defection in the time of Rehoboam, that as they were ranged vnder the obedience of seuerall Princes, so they were seuered and distinguished in title: the ten Tribes re­teyning the common name of Israel: the other the title of Iuda, which was proper to the Tribe. Had there been within the said time a reall & known communication of this title in generall with all the Tribes, then the occasion of calling them answe­rably thereto being so frequent, it is more then probable that the holy Ghost the in­diter of the history, would not in euer [...] passage haue omitted it: And then likewise in the case of this communication▪ Ierobo­am and his successors should haue been in­titled Kings of the Iewes: and so that me­morable difference of name betwixt the Kings of Iuda and Israel, obserued in the history with speciall regard, by this confu­sion of titles vtterly abolished.

The Priest not contented to haue pro­posed a bare affirmation of this assumption nitherto refelled, hath out of the grauity of his iudgement supplied it with the strength of this argument:

That there was before the said publica­tion vpon the Mount Sinai, a currant and knowne distinction of the trew Church from the false, hath been already cleered: so as one clause of the Antecedent prohi­bited vnto vs, needs no further discussing. That all men liued vnder the lawe of na­ture till the time of Moses, is refelled by that, whereby the existence of Gods Church, and the distinction thereof from the contrary long before the reprinting of the Morall law, hath been proued and iu­stified For if there were an holy Church, then was their faith in the Messias: and so consequently the Gospell: vnder which as a supernaturall grace, and not only vn­der the guidance of the lawe naturall, the faithfull since the fall of Adam in all times liued. The promise made to our first Pa­rents: the Sacrifice of Abel: the walking of Enoch with God: the preaching of re­pentance by Noe: his offering of burnt of­ferings after the flood: the couenant made [Page] with Abraham and the promise of the blessed seede: the repetition and ratifying thereof with Isaac and Iacob: their carefull endeuours for the instruction of their chil­dren: all these particularities doe testifie that they had for direction of their life not onely an addresse from nature, but some diuine and extraordinarie informations from the Lord.

Thus much concerning that member of the Induction, drawne from the generatiō of the law Mosaicall, and the corruption of the law naturall supposed to ensue there­upon.

The like vntruth is presented vnto vs pag. 7. in the exception there made of the Popish priesthood, against that principle of the certaine decay of all things. For the said priesthood being a meere forgerie and of direct contradiction to the doctrine of the Gospel, as it hath alreadie receiued an irrecouerable wound by the sword of the Spirit, so must it to the incredible comfort of the true Church, deliuer in the Lords good time the last gaspe. But the Quilibet [...]reameth vpon an eternitie of this priest­ [...]ood: and concludeth it out of 110. Psal. thus:

Here the Quodlibeticall Doctor discoue­reth both his ignorance and an act of blas­phemie. For what the spirit of God by th [...] mouth of Dauid deliuereth of that omni potent King Christ Iesus as his preroga­tiue proper and incommunicable, the sam [...] this inconsiderate Priest doth interp [...] and apply as meant not only of that gra [...] Dagon the Pope of Rome, but of euer base and mercenary sacrificule. That Da­uid, or rather God the Father by Dauid speaketh it of Christ: Christ himselfe [...] the 22 chapter of Matth. doth expresse [...] testifie: That the said prerogatiue is pec [...] ­liar to Christ, and without possibilitie deriuation to any other, may appear by that excellent discourse thereof in [...] Epistle to the Hebr. chap. 7. out of whi [...] chapter wee may thus conclude for [...] most holy priesthood of Christ, agai [...] that Antichristian rasure of all iug [...] Masse-babiers:

This may suffice to diseternize and shor­ [...]n the Popish Priesthood: to the establi­ [...]ing whereof to drawe a logicall conse­ [...]ence from the Priesthood of Christ, is [...] lesse impossible then for some lame [...]ephibosheth, to aduance himselfe by one [...] leape from Dan to Beershebab.

There remaine associated with the in­ [...]tion certaine absurdities, of lesse mo­ [...]ent I confesse then the vntruths before [...]uted, yet such as serue to deto [...]t the in­ [...]fficiency of the Quilibet. To omit the [...]ference he maketh betwixt a ground in [Page 28] diuinity and an article of our fayth: his ascribing of paradoxes vnto Orators: his senseles comparison of Societies, that they haue their fates with a no lesse fearefull eclipse of their former same, then a notable diminu­tion of their wo [...]ted glorie: Can it proceede from iudgement, to affirme that the whole body mystical of Christ consisteth of three estates. Ecclesiasticall, Temporall and Mona­sticall? pag. 4. It shoulde seeme that the party from whom the Quilibet borrowed this distribution of Christs mysticall body, lent it the poore Priest by way of disport, and to expose him to the derision & taunt of others. For what stayne or ridiculous imperfection may befall vnto a partition, with the same this distribution is defor­med. First, the partes of it are vnsortable with the whole. For the body of Christ▪ which is the entire company of the Sainte [...] in heauen and earth that are chosen in him to eternall life, being spirituall, and far re­mo [...]ed from the eye, in case it bee distin­guished into parts, must haue such as an of the same quality and nature with th [...] whole not such as are corporall & visible there being no affinity betwixt things my­sticall and sensible, spirituall, and carnall [Page 29] Now the parts of the distribution in hand, are materiall and subiect to sense: and con­sequently of an vnsutable and opposite quality to the totall diuided. And there­fore an impossibility in the totall to be di­stributed vnto them. Secondly, whereas it may be pleaded that howsoeuer the bo­dy of Christ, so farre forth as it is mysti­call and spirituall, bee incapable of the sayd parts, yet so farre as it is visible on earth, it may be diuided into them: I must except against this plea as incompetent: it being an extrauagancy from the matter in que­stion, which is of the whole body of Christ, and not of one member thereof: of a thing mysticall, not of any visible subiect. Be­sides, it being supposed and set down for a distribution of the trew Church on earth: yet shall it not be warrantable, but offend through a grosse impropriety. For where­as by the lawe of distribution, the partes ought to carry a proper and reciprocall af­fection to the whole: here in the case pro­pounded, the parts are of too large a com­passe and reach, they being not peculiar to the Church of God, but common to hea­thenish and prophane Synagogues, Pharao in Aegypt, the Philistins in Palestina, the [Page 28] [...] [Page 29] [...] [Page 30] old Romanes and Grecians in their seue­rall countries, had in former times, as like­wise the Turkes and other infidels at this day, not only estates temporal, but degrees also and orders Ecclesiasticall. Thirdly, though againe supposed that these partes doe agree onely with the [...]rew Church: yet because they are not of a reall cohe­rence with each church at the same time, or with the same church at all times: the distribution into them is friuolous. Fourth­ly, we may with no lesse iustice charge the sayde distribution with redundancy of parts. For the estate Monasticall, is either of no vse to Gods Church; or of some vse and seruice thereto. If of no vse, yea, ra­ther an impediment and bar to the per­formance of dueties to God and man in publique societies: then being repugnant to the law naturall & moral, it cannot hold the place and office of a part in the body or church of Christ. If it bee of some vse and seruice: the same is Ecclesiasticall or ciuill▪ so as this Monasticall condition shall not bee a different member from the for­mer estates, but comprised vnder the one or the other. Fiftly, as if he had not already in the said distribution folded vp a suffici­ent [Page 31] number of absurdities, it pleaseth him to make it not only redundant, but halting also and defectiue. For the estate of Popes and Cardinals, being not purely Ecclesia­sticall or temporall, but raysed out of the mixture & vnion of both swordes, cannot be raunged distinctly and seuerally vnder any one of the estates specified, but must of necessity make a fourth order or de­gree in the church, or rest sequestred from the same.

With these his Priestly disputes, I will couple the disgraciue and vnworthy con­ceit hee hath of our most worthy Coun­trey. For deliuering his opinion by whom the honors poynt for martiall exploytes these later yeeres hath been kept, hee be­stoweth the garland vpon the Spanyards, partly out of partiality and affection to them, whome in his Quodlibets he preten­deth to hate, and partly out of malice to the Religion of such, who to the incredible honor o [...] her Maiesty and this State, haue managed the principall charges of Military employments amongst vs. I will not de­rogate from the Spanyard: but I cannot yeelde him the precedence herein. For whether we call into comparison the suffi­ciency [Page 32] of the Commaunders, the quality of the seruice vndertaken by them, the poli­tique cariage and resolute execution ther­of, or lastly the successe that hath ensued: we shall find that the Spanyard is equalled in all these particulars, and in some of them exceeded as well by our Generals of most honourable ranke and State, as by our Commaunders of inferiour place and dig­nity. But I will not further insist vpon this comparison: it hauing beene of late very accurately handled.

Hitherto haue wee examined the prin­ciples, and such their incidents as are se [...] downe by the Quilibet. Wee are now to consider the moriues, which haue induce [...] him to deliuer his Decacordon by a quodli­beticall method, and to publish the same Hee doth impart with vs the speciall in­ducements to the choyce of this method in a period that offends not in shortnes [...] being a comprehension but of fifty larg [...] lines, parenthesed not oftner then in seu [...] places. To facilitate the vnderstandin [...] whereof, I hold it not amisse to couch it this compendious forme: ‘Because al things and persons here on e [...] are subiect to a change and downf [...] [Page 33] hereupon there arising so many thousand absurdities, which cannot be set downe in a positiue discourse without losse of labour: I haue therefore thought vpon this easiest method of Quodlibets, where­by to deliuer my Decacordon: not doubting but it will satisfie all well af­fected parties, and preuent as well iust occasion of complaint, as any euasion or meanes to escape from disclosing our knowledge. pag. 7. 8. of his pref.’

My purpose is not to spend time in weighing each particular motiue. I will onely dispute the chiefest: it being one of [...]is fiue principles: which why he hath cul­ed out and imployed rather then the rest [...]o this seruice, they being in this behalfe [...]ll alike seruiceable, cannot well be discer­ [...]ed. But let vs enquire into the seruice [...]erformed by it: whereof wee may take [...]nowledge by this his course of reasoning:

He might well haue spared his principle, [...]nd reserued it for some other imploy­ment, [Page 34] sith the seruice of consequences which it yeeldeth in this syllogisticall acti­on, though it be drawne euen from the vt­most limits of the earth, is yet so strange and exorbitant. For if the alterable con­dition of all things and persons on earth doth iustly occasion the choyse of this method: then the consideration hereof (the said method being supposed to be the best of all other) should haue forced all writers both auncient and moderne, Ec­clesiastic and prophane, howsoeuer the matters deduced by them were qualified, to a continuall vse of it: all things and per­sons on earth in the time of each seuerall writer being of the like mutable constitu­tion and nature they are now of: so as ei­ther this respect of mutability and decay in all things is insufficient to perswade the practise of this waye in the frame of dis­courses, or the authors who haue omit­ted it, stand chargeable with a speciall ouer­sight. But to fortifie the consequence, the Quilibet pretendeth that the brittle stat [...] of things doth, in the case he hath in hand breede so many thousand absurdities no [...] disposeable in a positiue discourse withou [...] losse of labour, as that he is for such regar [...] [Page 35] moued to thinke vpon this method by way of Quodlibets. For answere whereto: first, it is not vnknowne that absurdity doth originally grow out of the disposing of such notions or tearmes in a sentence as yeeld a falshood: (truth and absurdity be­ing incompatible) which being subscribed vnto, there issueth from thence an infinity of absurdities and disagreements to com­mon sense and reason. If then the roote, [...]rom whence they spring, bee other then [...]he decayable constitution of thinges on [...]arth: the sayd consequence receiueth no [...]trength from this plea. Secondly, it is [...]ot the multiplicity of different cases that [...]isableth a positiue discourse to compre­ [...]end them, but an insufficiency in vs to [...]ispute and order them. For if wee shall [...]ote out and distinguish each particular [...]ubiect offered to bee treated on, then [...] it by the light of pregnant & sound [...]uidence, and lastly, marshall in their pro­ [...]er rankes and places, all and singular the [...]uestions & seuerall illustrations of them: [...]e shall not neede to fetch from the consi­ [...]eration of the nature and state of things [...]n heauen and earth, any inducement to [...]he intertayning of this or that method: it [Page 36] being not materiall, so as our preceding in discourse bee such as I haue spoken of, whether the case presented to demur on be propounded by way of interrogati­on, with freedome left for pro & contra, or set downe without the circumstance of interrogatorie termes, with libertie not­withstanding to debate and resolue al dif­ficulties and scruples that shall occurre.

There belongeth to this generall que­stion of the method chosen by the Quili­bt, a iustificatiō in particular of his quod­libetical distemper and brabble against the Iesuits. Which because it discouers not on­ly the weaknes of his iudgement in an or­dinary and cleere position of theology, but his colourable pretext also of drawing in­to dispute her Maiesties proceedings and and other matters of like nature and mo­ment, I iudge it meete to bring it vnder triall and examination. The argument [...] sed by him to iustifie this his reuerend and priestly brablation against the Iesuites, is drawne from the greater to the lesse, and is thus concluded:

How this syllogisme will relish with a Iesuite, I know not. It may be vpon taste thereof, he will approue it, as being guiltie of the Quilibets drift herein, or at least rea­die to hallow in & concur with him in the same vpon notice giuen: as the manifold pamphlets diuulged by that viperous pro­genie, which cā breathe nought els but ca­lumniations & proiects of treason against Princes, doe sufficiently testifie. But lea­uing the Iesuite in this behalfe to his li­king, I will deliuer my conceit of the ar­gument proposed. I doe therefore except against the Assumption, as containing not onely matter of vntruth, but of impietie also: and doe hold the inference depen­ding thereon very preiudiciall to the State of Princes. That it is of a manifest false­hood and repugnancie to the law of God, may appeare by calling into consideration the maine scope of the third Commande­ment, [Page 38] which is, that all mention of God should bee honourable and worthie his Maiestie. Now to dispute pro & contra of God, whether hee or the Diuell be to be honoured, cannot stand with that honour and reuerence which is due to so glorious and fearfull a Maiestie. For by this course of dispute wee are drawne to auouch and prooue that mightie Lord, at whose name euery knee should bow, and at whose words euery heart should tremble, to bee destitute of those diuine attributes of ho­lines, eternitie, omnipotencie, wisedome, iustice, mercy, & to ascribe them vnto the Diuell. How the Priest will free this pro­ceeding from scandal and blasphemy, I can not discerne. He will happily alleage that as it doth lay reproch and dishonor vpon God, to depriue him (out of opinion or affection) in our disputes of his diuine and essentiall attributes, and to appropriat [...] them vnto Satan, so if it be done vpon a good and warrantable intent, it cannot then fall vnder the title of blasphemie. For answere whereto, let it be remembred that no action, which in it selfe and in the na­ture thereof is a meere sinne, can by any good intent of the Actor be made a con­formitie [Page 39] to the law of God. For were a good intent thus qualified, as that it could alter and rectifie in the sight of God the meanes subordinate thereto: then should humane deuice take place in the true wor­ship of the Lord, and in the case of so rea­die an apology and pretence, as this of good intention, few would be found who would not stand vpon peremptory termes of iustifying their courses before the tri­bunall of Christ. Now if any man shall thinke it questionable whether the vndei­fying of that eternal and omnipotent Spi­rit, and the crowning of Satan with the glorie and maiestie of the Godhead, be an action in it selfe, and in the nature thereof contradictorie to the will and statutes of the immortall King and lawgiuer: he may with like reason doubt whether an ac­knowledgement of the true Iehoua for our God only, and a cariage with all reuerence and honour towards him on our part, be conmaunded in the Decalogue. If then the said action be originally an aberration from the law, how can it receiue from any intent of man, though neuer so good, this pr [...]rogatiue of being made correspondent to the same? whereas it is a principle [Page 40] knowne and vndeniable, that ill is not to be done, that good may grow thereof in case the intention of the Agent could pri­uiledge and dispense with the pollution of our actions, the said principle should con­taine an idle direction or restraint of our proceedings. Further, if the act in question be not in it selfe a disobedience to the law, but of a nature indifferent and newterall: then some transferring of the Deity from the true God vnto the Diuell, and some premeditate mention of his most blessed name accompanied with termes of the highest blasphemie, shall finde in the De­calogue no prohibition. Then likewise are we not commaunded, without calling into question and doubt, to beleeue and rest perswaded by testimonie of the word and Spirit that Iehoua only is our God, and he onely to bee worshipped. But if both the one and the other be in theologie a great incongruitie: then the said act can in no sort partake of newtralitie. But let vs [...]e­bate a little what should bee the int [...]nt and end of disputing against God. There is in all probable discourse but this [...]ne ground and cause thereof that beare a shew of lawfulnes: namely, an inten to [Page 41] confirme our iudgement in the truth vp­on sight and conference of the weake ar­guments concluded against God, with such as are alleaged for him. But this pur­pose of reenforcing our iudgement in the truth, cannot warrant any dispute in this behalfe. For our iudgement touching the diuine nature and actions of God, and the honour due vnto him, hauing already re­ceiued the greatest confirmation that may be from the voyce of God himselfe in the Scriptures, from the publique and constant testimony of the Church, from the inward perswasion of the holy Ghost, from the e­uidence yeelded and proclaymed by the creation of Heauen and earth: the intend­ment and indeauour of this crooked and left-handed proofe, whereof wee speake, must [...] the presence of so excellent a brightnes, as the demonstration specified doth affoord, vtterly quaile and rest in the same account, as a poore silly candle doth, that for enlarging and better cleering the surpassing lustre of the Sunne, is lighted at noone day. Besides, why should the sight of a leane mishapen argument, inuented and alleaged against God, rather confirme the disputers iudgement in the truth, then [Page 42] giue him cause to accuse the dulnes of his wit, that could not inuent a better? May hee not apprehend also, that others of a deeper reach and knowledge then him­selfe, are able to disclose some proofes of strength, and such as hee cannot answere, and so rest doubtfull and no whit confir­med? Nay, may not the disputer himselfe, in the search of allegations against God, stumble on an argument of such constitu­tion and temper, as neither himselfe nor some others can resolue? In which case this course wil be so farre from confirming the iudgement in the truth, that on the contrary it will rather occasion the suspec­ting of it, and serue to strengthen erroni­ous conceites of God. Experience hath made it cleere, that this course of disputing against God, is of a daungerous conse­quence, and as it were a bridge for Athe­isme and other impieties to passe into the opinion and life of man. The quodlibet propounded by the Serpent, to our grane and prime mother, against the most iust and holy proceedings of our Creator with her and Adam, thereby to rayse in her ap­prehensions of Soueraynty, and a desire of equality with God, shee being ready to [Page 43] giue eare thereto, and either not willing or vnprouided how to resolue and an­swere the same, proued in the issue of the disputation, a quodlibet of vnspeakeable losse and infelicity to either of them and their posterity, and not otherwise satisfi­able, then by the most precious blood of the eternall Sonne of God.

As this quodlibeticall method serued amongst other furtherances, as a speciall meane to draw our first parents to a defec­tion from their Creator: so if wee should inquire into the occasions of Atheisme, of heresie, of disloyalty and treason in their descendants: we shall finde that it hath in sundry ages giuen life and nourishment to the same. But I will not insist vpon particularities herein: what hath been al­ready sayd, I hope will suffice for conuin­cing the Assumption in question of im­ [...]y.

The inference that is necessarily dedu­ced thereupon, and which is of preiudyce to the state of Princes, is a liberty of dis­puting against their persons, their title and interest to their Crownes, their resoluti­ons and proceedings. For if wee holde it for lawfull to call God into question, to [Page 44] arraigne him as it were at the barre, and to deuest him of his prerogatiues royall: then is it much more allowable to frame in our disputes, a bill of an inditement a­gainst the Monarches of this worlde, to heape personall imputations and scandals vpon them, to proue a nullity in their titles, to iustifie the excommunications thundred out against them and the absol­uing of Subiects from their alleageances to auouch it for an honourable and meri­torious act, to remoue them from their thrones by publique armes, or indirect practises, to traduce and proclayme to the world their proceedings for such, as exceed for tyranny and cruelty, the actions of the most barbarous tyrant that euer had Scep­ter in his hand. Now howsoeuer the Qui­libet disguiseth with vs, as if he had for no other intent made choyse of this method, then to bandy a Iesuit too and fro: a [...] redly his principall scope, was the hauing of some pretext and colour to deliuer his spleene against her Maiesties proceedings: which hee hath in his Quodlibets formally done: and yet so, as hee would haue it in­terpreted, that they are thus branded and depraued not by himselfe, but by the in­temperate [Page 45] tongue and pen of others. But it is neither his good intent, nor the pre­rogatiue of a quodlibeticall method, that will procure him a discharge in a court of iustice and impunity in this behalfe. If he or any for him should pleade that opposits marshalled directly in opposition one to the other, doe so much the more cleere and notifie themselues: it will be remem­bred vnto him, that this maxim holdeth trew, not when the one is proued to be the other, but when each of them is seuerally in his proper nature and colours presen­ted vnto vs, and so a conference made of the one with the other: as her Maiesties most honorable, iust, and temperate pro­ceedings with those tyrannous and barba­rous massacers that haue beene in other Countries violently and often performed against the trew Professors of the Gospell.

I would here giue end to this quodli­bet of the Quilibets insufficiency, were there not offered vnto me for some fur­ther blasing thereof, one extraordinary particular and fruite of his wit. pag. 138. of his Quodlibets, where he thus speaketh: ‘The doctrine of the Catholique Church con­sists of three speciall causes: the one is [Page 46] Fayth, which is the matter thereof: the other, Charity, which is the forme or efficient: and the third, Hope, which is the finall end thereof, &c.’

Whether this peece of learning had his originall from the Priest, or were furni­shed vnto him by his friends, I know not. Sure I am it will not make for the credit of his wit, as shall appeare First, he deli­uers for essentiall causes of the whole di­stributed, such things as are consequents thereof, and seuered in place from it. For fayth and charity, which he sets downe for particular vertues infused and resident in each trew Christian, receiue their concep­tion and birth from the doctrine of the Gospell, accompanied with the effectuall operation of the holy Ghost: so as in re­gard of priority in nature and time, which the sayd doctrine hath of the existence it yeeldeth vnto them, by the ordinance [...] God, of the separation in place it holdeth from them, they cannot be essentiall cau­ses of the same. Secondly, whereas fayth is the roote, from which charity and hope doe spring and braunch: is it not beside all sense, to make the roote the matter of the sayd doctrine, and of the two braunches, [Page 47] the one the forme or efficient thereof, the other the finall end of the same? If he had conceiued that the matter of this holy do­ctrine did in part consist in the precepts and documents of these infused vertues comprised in the Scripture, his speech had fauoured of learning But suppose fayth to be the matter of it. That it should runne in account for the whole matter of the do­ctrine professed by the Church, is impos­sible: there being so many other different particularities recorded therein, which will challenge place in the matter thereof. To make it a part onely of the matter, is con­trarv to the intention of the Quilibet: who speaking of the whole doctrine, and with­all describing the generall forme and end of it, will out of common wisedome note vnto vs a matter proportionable thereto. Further, if favth as it is a vertue residing in the heart of man, be the matter where­of the holy Scriptures consist: then as faith doth determine with the person of the beleeuer, so doth the matter also of the sacred Scripture proportionably. And con­sequently, if that which supplies the place of this matter bee the fayth of all Gods children: then for as much as the greatest [Page 48] part of them is already retyred into para­dise, and their fayth vpon the instant of their departure abolished, it must of ne­cessitie follow that the matter wherof the Scripture is consisting, is for the greatest part thereof already wasted and extinct. Or if the fayth of some only be the sayde matter: let him note out the persons vn­to vs, and render a reason, why the fayth of one rather then of another, should haue this preheminence: or why the other ver­tues mentioned should be excluded.

Touching charity, hee cannot resolue whether it be the efficient or forme of the sayd doctrine. Is he a Priest of such rare parts, and of that expedition in deciding of Quodlibets, and yet can be not satisfie vs in so vulgar a Quodlibet? Beside the argument already in generall deliuered, whereby these Theologicals are conuin­ced to be effects and no essentiall causes in the case propounded: let him call to mind by whom the doctrine of the Scripture was inspired and indited. I trust he will not ascribe the performance of this most holy and admirable seruice to the vertue of charity, that harbours in the breast of man, and so depriue God of the honour [Page 49] due vnto him in this behalf. As God him­selfe is the author and efficient of that do­ctrine, and not charity: so neither can cha­rity be the forme thereof, vnlesse we make imperfection the forme of perfection, and that which is apt to receiue diminution and encrease the forme of that which is immutable and free from such alteration. If in the latter age of the world charity shall grow cold, and fayth almost to an vt­ter decay: and yet the one rest the forme of the written word, the other the matter thereof: the said worde must necessarily fall into very hard termes, vpon the endu­ring of so great an eclipse both of matter and forme.

The finall end of the doctrine professed by the Catholike Church he affirmeth to be hope. True it is that fayth in the Mes­sias [...]d consequently hope of eternal hap­p [...]s through his bloud, is an end where­ [...] the said doctrine doth looke and ayme: and yet but an end subordinate to that mayne and soueraigne end of the maiesty and glory of God shining in the saluation of his children. So as whether he take hope [...]o be the onely or principall end, he fayles [...]n either.

[Page 50] There are in this text of his three speciall causes, whereof the doctrine of the Church consisteth, other phantastick incō ­gruities, as, that charity should therefore giue the Crowne to King and Queene, be­cause she is the forme and efficient of the sayd doctrine: and that faith should be the gate of entrance into the Church, because it is sayd, Hebr. 11. Accedent [...]m ad D [...]um oportet credere. But I will no longer stand vpon the refelling of such dreames.

HAuing in the former chapter discoue­red the insufficiency of the Quilibe [...] which by sundrie particularities of his dis­course appeareth to be such, as where out of conceit and partiality he infranchizeth professors of the Gospell, into the compa­nie of grossum caputs and men vnlearned himselfe may vpon iust desert challenge the freedome and priuiledge of the same [Page 51] will now proceede to take view of his Quodlibets: which being many in number and contayning variety of matter, I will draw into question onely such points of them, of which it doth specially import vs to be informed: least in this seede time of Romish proiects and treacheries for sup­planting the Gospell, our ignorance in this behalfe be abused in the qualitie of an instrument and meane to aduance the growth thereof. And because in all pro­ceedings of moment, the end wherto they are directed, is a matter considerable and worthy of note: I will in the first place ex­amine and dispute the mayne and princi­pall scope of the Decacordon: which I take to be the restoring of the soueraigne inte­rest and authoritie of the Pope within her Maiest [...]s dominions, and consequently the fall of her royall Scepter and the Gos­pell professed amongst vs. The grounds or verifying this assertion, we shall finde dispersed and deliuered in seuerall passages of his Quodlibets. In his preamble there­to, imparting with vs some other collate­rall ends of diuulging the same, hee doth with solemnitie protest and auerre his in­tent herein also to bee the giuing vnto the [Page 52] Romish Church her due. Now that which he supposeth to be due vnto the said church, is a regall and vnlimited power in the Pope the head thereof, to guide, dispose, and reforme all persons and causes Eccle­siastick, hauing withall annexed thereto the prerogatiue of superiority aboue the Prince, as he doth couertly insinuate pag. 221. where making the Ecclesiasticall state, the first and principall of the two members in a body politicall: and holding it for an infallible axiom that in the Pope absolutely resideth the supreme headship and soueraignty ouer the sayde State: he cannot hereupon deduce other conclusion then that, as the state of the Church hath an eminency and precedence aboue the Ciuill, so the supreme head of the same state, shall hold the like proportion of su­periority ouer the soueraigne Comman­der of the Ciuill, which is with vs, her a­cred Maiesty. If then this regality ouer both States, be the due he would by pub­lication of his Quodlibets, restore and re­inuest in the head of the Romish Church▪ I wrong him not in charging him with this drift and intendment of exalting in this land, that purple pontificall Antichrist of [Page 53] Rome, with the fall of her Maiesty and the Gospell. If he shall pleade that his giuing vnto the Sea of Rome her due, is no more the capitall end propounded to his Deca­cordon, then his freeing of the ignorant from error, and his endeauour to make knowne what loyalty ought to bee in euery Subiect towardes his Prince and Countrey: we may iustly except against this plea, as being of no validity. For sith the pamphlets which passed the presse, be­fore this Decacordon was tendered vnto vs, doe labour to satisfie the Reader, partly in the matter of difference betwixt the Se­cular and the Iesuit, partly in the poyntes of duty owing from the Catholique sub­iect to the Prince: the pretences mentio­ned here by the Quilibet cannot be allow­ed for sufficient: vnlesse both the text in hand for informing herein the Readers [...]nowledge and conscience be so obscure, and the Reader likewise so dull of conceit, as the one and the other require an itera­tion and supplie of quodlibeticall disputes. Besides, the question of the Subiects loy­altie to his Prince is so coldly and vnskil­fully debated, as in regarde of the insuffi­ciency thereof to perswade, it cannot be in [Page 54] common sense conceiued that the instruc­tion of the Catholike Subiect in his ca­riage and affection to her Maiestie was specially intended by the Decacordon. Wherein if hee had proceeded with pur­pose to informe and rectifie the iudgem̄et of misguided Catholikes: hee should by light of argument out of the holy word of God haue cleered it vnto them, that the alleageáce due from a subiect to his prince is of that nature and temper, as in the case of any communication thereof with a for­raine potentate, whether in causes Eccle­siastick or Ciuil, it ceaseth to be sincere and vnblemished. This course being professed­ly omitted by him, and the contrary infor­ced, it is dotage or delusion to pretend the directing of Catholikes in the way of true and vndiuided obedience to her Maie­stie.

But howsoeuer hee shall with comple­ment and formality of speech, colour the intent of his Decacordon: yet that it is such as I charge him with, may further appeare by calling into consideration, not onely his patheticall and often protestati­ons of indisguised obedience to the Pope, euen to death, accompanied with an hum­ble [Page 55] submittance of all his actions and dis­courses to the censure of his venerable Holines, and with a profession of vowed and most carefull endeauours on his part, for conuersion of this Realme to the Sea Apostolique: but especially, the course he holdeth of winning fauour and reputation to his side, by a palpable soothing and ad­miring of her Maiestie, by extolling (con­trary to all former custome and humor in Romanists) her Highnes proceedings, by offer vnto her of all duty and seruice on the part of the Catholiques, and likewise, as well by infaming the Iesuits, and disco­uery of their plots, as by purging his fel­low Seculars from all imputation of dis­loyalty and Treason. Can hee holde this course, and yet propound vnto himselfe no speciall end and employment of the grace and fauour he would obtayne? Or can there be in discourse of reason, other end and vse thereof, then the fortifying and aduauncement of the faction whereof he is? And can this aduauncement suc­ceede and take place without the suppres­sion of the Gospell? The opposition of it, and Popery being such, that the one labo­reth the subuersion of the other. I do [...] [Page 56] therefore vpon his holding of the sayde course, inferre that he intends thereby the reuiuing and erection of that forraine and Antichristian soueraynty ouer vs.

Moreouer, if his deseigne and intent were other then is charged, he would not so affectionately meditate and presse the procurement and graunt of such meanes, whereby the estate of her Maiesty might bee perilled, and the proceedings of the holy Ministery established amongst vs, impeached. That hee doth insist here­upon, and veremently affect the compas­sing thereof, his Decacordon will giue testi­mony with me. For in it he pleadeth for a repeale or mitigation of such penall Sta­tutes as were enacted to secure her Maie­sties royall person, and the state of Religi­on, against all attempts and practises, as well of the Secular Priest as the Iesuit. In it he vrgeth a toleration of the publique exercise of Popery, as well in some Col­ledges of the Vniuersities, to bee allotted to this seuerall vse and profession, as in o­ther partes and diuisions of the Realme. And lastly, in it vnder that odious name of Puritans, hee doth with an extraordi­nary passion and rhetorique, solicit an vt­ter [Page 57] extirpation of many thousands, both as sound professors of the Gospell, and as loyall subiects to her Maiesty, as euer li­ued vnder the Sunne. As the due execu­tion of the sayde Statutes, the suppression of Romish seducements in opinion and af­fection, the multitude and loue of the subiects to her Maiesty, with the sole in­tertainment of the Religion already au­thorised, are capitall and infallible meanes of strength and surety to her Highnesse person, and the sacred truth professed in her Kingdomes: so vpon the withdrawing and fayling of them, both the one and the other must quaile and determine. But hee will deny the abolition of these meanes, to be of so dangerous a sequell, especially to her Maiesty, considering that vpon the graunt of the repeale and toleration desi­red, it is intended she should be against all tre [...]s [...]nable attempts secured by sufficient caution. Were not Romish Catholiques in a dreame, or had they any politique sense, or in case they did honourably ap­prehend of her Maiesties wisdome, they would neuer propound so silly an ex [...] ­dient for preuention of perill in this be­halfe. First, there is an impossibility of [Page 58] such caution: there being nothing that this or any forraine nation can yeelde, which could be in valew satisfactory and answerable to her Maiesties life. Secondly, a possibility herein supposed: yet cautions of what nature soeuer, will be found ex­posed to so many incertainties, as that they cannot serue for groundes of assurance in the case of so precious and inestimable a iewell. Obligation of othe is with Roma­nists dispensable: Ostages subiect to mor­tality and other accidents: pledges in the nature of lands or chattels, decayable: caution of townes from forraine Catho­liques, full of difficulties and inconueni­ents. Thirdly, vpon the succeeding of an attempt against her Soueraigne and vn­ualuable person, how shall we in so great a confusion and astonishment, either reteyne in our hands without present daunger, the caution giuen, or pursue the recouery of satisfaction if we be not seazed thereof▪ Speech therefore in the case proposed of caution is senseles.

But he hath happely some better ground for displanting and extermination of Pu­ritans. Howsoeuer it pleaseth him in shew to distinguish betwixt such, as agreeing in [Page 59] the opinion of doctrine against the church of Rome, doe notwithstanding differ in some honourable additions and circum­stances of discipline: yet in truth, and in the secret account of his popish heart, who­soeuer acknowledgeth not the soueraigne­ty of Peters chayre, or standeth in opposi­tion of iudgement to the Counsell of Trent [...] is vnto him and to all of his stampe a Puritan: and shall in that day of Iubiley, which they haue so long attended, passe as conuict of heresie to the faggot or sworde. In those times of Queene Mary, when the Pope swayed the Scepter in this land, it was not enough to pleade a concurrence with them in opinion, touching the go­uernement of the state Ecclesiasticke by Bishops and other subordinate officers of the Clergy. It was neither the Episcopall Roc [...]et, nor the ornament of Typpet, nor the squarenes of a Cap, nor the mustring in Cope or Surplice, that could then pri­uiledge a Protestant against the Clinke, or the Purgatory of Smithfield. And doe we thinke, if then euery Professor of the Gospell, from the Archbishoppe, to the poore Curate, and from the person of Honour to the Cobler were drawne into [Page 60] question of life, that any hereafter shall for respect of his Typpit or Rochet, finde fauour and impunity? I doubt not but there haue beene many of each sorte and quality in France, Germany, the lowe Countries, and else where, who shoulde haue beene spared from the hard measure and extremity offered vnto them, if their liking of the auncient dignities, and out­ward formalities in the Churche, could haue procured them regarde and grace. It were against common sense, to conceiue that they will persecute the refusing of the Surplice, and leaue vncensured the con­tempt of the Masse: punish all inconfor­mity to externall ceremonies, and beare with contradiction to the Popes Supre­macy. As to the Duke of Medina, if in 88. hee had preuayled in his attempt against vs, each Catholique would haue seem [...]d: Protestant, his sworde not discerning the one from the other, but resolutely procee­ding on to make roome for the King his Master: So, if the Lorde in his iustice should abandon this sinfull Land to the mercy of the Secular Priest and Iesuit then to smooth the way and passage for S. Peters Vicar, euery Protestant should [Page 61] be adiudged a Puritan. Whereas there­fore hee pretendeth in word the ruine of the Puritans, I hold it for certaine he in­tendeth in deede the generall dispatch of all Protestants. For what else can we pro­bably conceiue to be his drift herein? It is cleere, that his heaping of so many scanda­lous indignities vpon them, and his char­ging them not only in generall, with en­deauours to pull downe Kings and Prin­ces, but in particular, with practise to kill her Maiesty, and to subuert all other Pro­testants, cannot haue other scope then the raysing and nourishing of perpetuall ie­lousies, great feares, and bloody hatreds, not onely betwixt the Protestant and the supposed Puritan, but specially betwixt her royall selfe, and many thousands her faythfull subiects, and consequently, the absolute depriuing her of their ready and dutifull seruices. If then he labour to de­stitute and strip his Prince of the loyall affection and seruice, which an infinite multitude woulde tender and performe vnto her: if hee would likewise stirre the flame of ciuill contention amongst all the Protestant subiects of this State: doth he not thereby ayme at some fearefull eclip­sing [Page 62] of her Maiesties power and strength: Doth he not prepare and fashion an ouer­ture to a desolation and change of State? Either Religion and peace with the loue, seruice, and multitude of people on the one part, and the reciprocall fauour and respect from the Prince on the other part, are not the true foundations and pillars of the stand and greatnes of Monarches within their seuerall dominions: or if they be, then he that shall employ the whole force of his wit and affection, as well to the expugnation of Religion, and the mutuall amity amongst compatriots, as to disarme his Soueraigne of the loue, ser­uice, and multitude of his subiects, and to worke in him a reiection likewise on his part, of all Princely and respectiue conceit towardes them, cannot but stand in the iudgement of vnpartial men, iustly charge­able with the imputation of a trayterous heart to his Prince and Countrey. As therefore the vrged repeale of the sayde Statutes, and the toleration of Popery is of a pernicious consequence: so would he through the side of the Puritan, wound both Prince and Subiect, both Bishop and Curate.

[Page 63] Besides, to yeelde vnto the mayne question in hand some further light, let it be considered what doctrine he deliuereth in his Quodlibets, of State and Succession, for resolution and direction of the Sub­iect, in case of the Popes excommunica­tion. The regarde of the time, and the present affliction indured by Catholiques, makes him (as hee sayth) vnwilling to maintaine positions odious to the State: but yet hee is bolde to enforme the Sub­iects of their duty herein. First, therefore hee giues them to vnderstand, that it is lawfull for his Popeship to excommuni­cate Princes, and lawfull also for the Sub­iects to put in execution the sentence of such excommunication. Secondly, he doth aduertise them, that howsoeuer both the one and the other be lawfull, yet in regard of the manifold inconueniencies insuing thereof, it is not expedient so to proceede. Thirdly, because the question of expedi­ency should not vpon occasion offered, for aduauncement of their religion, either intangle scrupulous and nice consciences, or minister discouragement to the for­ward and hotspirited Catholique, he clea­reth it, and directeth them when they are [Page 64] to refuse their allegeance vnto their Soue­raigne, and take armes against him for execution of the sayd sentence. Hee doth therefore (the Bull and the denouncia­tion thereof being supposed to bee of sufficient validity) teach and instruct [...]g. 255. r 256. them, that when they may without any notable hurt or losse vnto themselues, withdrawe their obedience from their Prince, and doe otherwise finde them­selues inabled for the prosecution of this seruice, they doe then stand bound to see the say de Bull executed. Now whereto is the publication of this seditious and trea­sonable doctrine addressed? Is it not to resolue, prepare, and direct the hearts of all Catholique Subiects, to a most disloyall attempt, for displacing her Maiesty from her Imperiall throne, with a finall extinc­tion of the light of the Gospell? Might he preuayle in his mediation, for liberty to reconcile whome he could, to obedience vnto the Sea Apostolique, and for the ride dance of so many thousands her Highnes most affectionate seruants and Subiects, as hee so often brandeth with the odious title of Puritans: then would hee no lon­ger dispute this question of expediency, [Page 65] but found the alarum to the fielde. And whereas now vpon consideration of the punishments iustly inflicted on the Catho­liques, for enterprising the execution of excommunications against her Maiesty, he doth with all bitternes censure and re­proue both the procurers and actors ther­of: had their vnnaturall and detestable proceedings for [...]ed to effect: then would he haue chaunted io poean, and composed Panegyricks in their honour: then should you neuer haue receiued from him any Satyres against the Iesuit. But sith these Papalb censures haue in issue beene preiu­diciall vnto them, and occasioned question of their liues, liberties, and goods: now out of pollicy to amusevs, and to masque the cariage of their disseignes, vnder the credit of the Seculars loyalty: they must taxe the Pope himselfe with credulity and indiscretion, his Bulls with inualidity, the denounciation of them with insufficiency, the plotters, abetters, and actors, with trea­son and rebellion: the lesuits who contri­ued the tragedy, must be capitall enemyes to her Maiesty, and the Secular Priestes who acted it, louing and faythfull subiects.

I will end the question of the Quilibets [Page 66] mayne ende, with an argument drawne from the consideration of the pretended difference betwixt the Iesuit and the Se­cular. If the say'd difference which is [...]pil­ried in shew on the part of this Priest, as well with all violence of spleene and dete­station towards the Iesuit, and with [...] small preiudice and dishonour to the Pope and Spanyard, as with profession of extraordinary duty and alleageance to her Maiesty and the State, bee notwithstan­ding a matter only of colour and disguise­ment: I hope the Seculars themselues will acknowledge (considering the correspon­dence held betwixt them and the heads of their faction in all proceedings of moment and consequence such as this is) theyr in­tent and drift in this Decacordon too bee principally, an endeauour of furthering the Pope to a recouery of the interest and tytle hee challengeth in the Soue­raignety ouer the Churche of England, and consequently, of transferring the Crowne Imperiall, from that sacred and most Princely head, whereon it now re­steth. For what else can they intend and ayme at, in the course taken by them for gayning of fauour and reputation to theyr [Page 67] side, in theyr intercession for a repeale of the sayde penall Statutes, in theyr media­tion for the free exercise of labouring the conuersion of the Realme vnto the Popes obedience, in theyr vrging the vtter ex­tirpation of all Protestants vnder the name of Puritans, in theyr publishing of doctrines, whereby to resolue and direct all Romish subiects in the question of executing those barbarous and Satanicall Bulls? Howsoeuer the consecution de­duced in this proposition here layd down, may happely passe without controule­ment: I doubt not, but my assuming, that the sayd difference is onely a coun­terfeyte and politique scolding, will re­ceiue speciall opposition. This assump­tion therefore I am to cleere: which be­cause it is a question of importance, shall bee debated seuerally, and by it selfe, in the next chapter, and so serue to furnish an whole Antiquodlibet.

IF I seeme in this question to impugne a knowne and currant trueth: it may please the Reader to spare his censure till hee haue perused the whole discourse thereof: and then also, to make iudge­ment of the same, not by one single ar­gument, but out of the ioynt conside­ration of all the particular presumpti­ons. And let not in the meane tyme ey­ther any detection already perfourmed by the Seculars, of practises against the State, or theyr present profession of fu­ture discoueries, moue him to appre­hend the sayde contention to bee vnfey­ned. For there haue beene euer some a­mongst them, in the tyme of theyr best [Page 69] agreement and peace, who haue giuen in­telligence of the treasonable disseignes and attempts against her Maiesty: and therefore this disclosing of them on the part of the Priestes, no argument of so pe­remptory and violent a quarrell betwixt them and the Iesuits. Besides, what will these Seculars reueale other then such pro­iects and deuises, as are of purpose con­tryued to delude vs? Or if they shall at any tyme detect some secret practizes in­terteyned really, and out of a malicious intent agaynst the State, it will bee with purpose onely to winne credit, and opor­tunity to deceiue in matters of like or greater moment. And for detections of this nature and seruice, they haue vn­doubtedly receyued dispensation, accor­ding to the course held with theyr prede­cessors: with whom it was ordinary, and answerably to theyr commission, to pre­tend and performe also the disclosing of Secrets. But let vs proceede to cleere the position in hand.

If the say de contention being such as is pretended, would frustrate the plots and courses embraced for the publique inte­rest and good of the Romish Churche: [Page 70] And if for that regard there haue beene alwayes had a carefull and vigilant eye on the part of the Pope and his faction, to preuent and moderate all accidents that might trouble the common peace of the best Catholiques, and empeach theyr disseignements for aduauncing the au­thoryty of Saint Peters Chayre: then eyther the Seculars entertayne not the sayde contention, or in case they doe they renounce all respect of giuing fur­therance and support to theyr com­mon cause. That theyr difference being of the nature and reach as is supposed, will disappoynt the proceedings helde for the publique good of the Romish Church, may appeare first by this, in that it is accompanyed with a profession to re­ueale all treasonable courses against the State, whether open hostilities, or secret conspyracies. Now all the practises for re­establishing the Soueraygnty of the Pope ouer the Church of this land, fall within the compasse of treasons: so as if the Se­culars doe effectually answere this theyr profession, the State may vpon notice giuen of them, take sufficient order for theyr preuention. Againe, as they pro­fesse [Page 71] this discouery, so they pretend also a peremptory resolution to oppose perso­nally against all attempts of this nature, and further to draw vnto an actuall corre­spondence with them herein all Catho­liques, with whome they shall bee able to preuayle. Moreouer, not reason onely, but experience of all tymes hath taught, that the disunion of confederates▪ though followed on the one part onely with the extremity of malice, neuer fayleth eyther to worke and rayse impediments to the common cause, or to seeke the weake­ning and suppression of the aduerse party. Further, whereas it is affirmed, that there hath beene a carefull course held to pre­uent the disturbance of theyr common peace, and of their disseignes, the trueth hereof will be testified, by the directions they receyue ordinarily from theyr Supe­riors, how to carry themselues in matters of weight, by the order and discipline e­stablished amongst them, to encounter and remedy scandalous accidents, by the entercourse of intelligence that is betwixt them and the Commaunders of theyr faction, by theyr watchfulnes and conti­nuall preparation to take aduantage of all [Page 72] occurrents and tymes fitting theyr in­tents. Hereupon it is, that they want not theyr Catalogues of the number in each Shire and City, deuoted to theyr side, and how they are furnished with armes, munitions, and other abilityes. Wherefore vppon the considerations a­boue remembred, I doe inferre, that eyther theyr quarrell is colourable, and entertay­ned of pollicy, or they instrumentes of hinderance to the aduauncement intended vnto the publique cause of the Sea Apo­stolique. If any shall in this place outof the obiection aboue mentioned, reply that theyr profession to discouer and oppose against all treacheries, whether in plot or action, doth cleere the pretended dif­ference from the imputation of disguising and fraude: Igraunt it doth so, in case it be really and sincerely vpon all occasions performed, what is verbally professed But in doing hereof, they shall bee found guilty of high Treason against the autho­rity of the Romane Church, whose cause by this course of detection and oppo­sition, they doe wilfully betray. But a­gainst this later, they doe contest and o­penly professe all readinesse to shed each [Page 73] droppe of theyr best blood, for the pub­lique good and honour of Saint Peters Chayre. What therefore can we conceyue and conclude other then this, that both the pretended contention and the sayd profession, accompaning the same, is counterfeyte?

Besides, for a further proofe hereof, let vs drawe into examination the vehement protestation tendered by the Seculars of all sincere and dutifull alleageance to her Maiesty, and likewise of all detestation to­wards the Spanyard and his title. If the protestation both of the one and the other proceede not from any found affection, but from a fraudulent intention of the heart: wee may then with good reason charge them with want of loyal and fayth­full meaning in their pretended difference. For of these three, namely theyr zeale to her Maiesty, theyr hatred to the Spany­ard, theyr quarrell with the Iesuites, there is originally the same ground and ende, viz. the aduauncement and good of theyr common cause: and the two first are made the motiues of the latter. For out of a zeale to the surety of her Maiesties state, and vpon hatred of the Spanyard and his [Page 74] tytle, they pretend a capitall abhorring of the Iesuits, whose complots tend to the destruction of the one, and to the aduan­tage of the other: so as of what quality and tincture the two former are, of the same wee are to iudge that to bee which groweth from them. But the question is of this protestation whether it be feyned. First, that it is so in that part thereof which is of duty and alleageance to her Maiesty, I haue these presumptions to perswade me. Where the same opinion in Religion, the same obligation of dutifull respect and obedience to the Pope, the same endea­uours of supplanting the Gospell and ad­uauncing Popery, the same distrust and feare of her Maiesty infinitly wronged and dishonoured by them, the same ap­prehension of supposed vexations and tyrannies executed vpon them, and in ge­nerall, where the same cause of malice and hatred to her royall person and the State doth remayne, there in all likelyhood can be no change of affection. For the dispo­sing of a malicious and trayterous heart to duty and fidelity, must proceede from a surcease of those causes which gaue life and breath to malice and treachery. As [Page 75] they nourish in heart the originall and spring of theyr disloyalty and malice: so is there no probability of theyr inclination to alter and remoue it, theyr meanes be­ing as great as heretofore, theyr confede­rates as many and strong, theyr aduaunta­ges agaynst vs encreased: as may appeare by theyr glorious vauntes of fauour in Court and Countrey, theyr inlarged hopes and insolency, theyr conceyt and reporte of desperate hostility betwixt Protestants and Puritans. Besides, were they out of a grieued heart, for theyr former rebellious cariage sincerely affected to the safety and preseruation of her Highnesse, would they perswade the graunt of such meanes, as threaten a present and an ineuitable daun­ger to her person and the state? They prease a repeale of the Statutes which se­cure her Crowne and dignity: they soli­cit a tolleration of theyr religion, that they might without perill and controulement employ theyr seruice in effecting recon­cilements to the Pope: they direct catho­lique subiects when to proceede to the execution of most Antichristian censures and Bulls, for deposition of our Soue­raigne: lastly, they labour a finall disunion [Page 76] and diuision, first, betwixt her Maiesty and her Subiects, and then betwixt Subiect and Subiect: and so consequently, the subuer­sion both of Prince and people. Can they solicit and labour the ruine of her Maie­sty, and yet be reputed sincere and vnfey­ned in theyr profession of allegeance and fidelity vnto her? Againe, were they re­solutely and soundly deuoted to performe loyalty and duety vnto her in all such poyntes of seruice as concerne her honour and safety, and particularly in detection of treacherous disseignements, in recouery of disaffected subiects from the Pope to her obedience, in aduenturing theyr per­sons and goods agaynst all forraine at­tempts: then would the Pope and Spany­ard surcease theyr plots and practises a­gainst this State, vpon feare of theyr disco­uery, defection of Catholiques from them, and dispayre of preuayling. To conceyue, that the inuadors will come furnished out of theyr owne sufficiency, and so stand ab­solutely vpon theyr domestical and proper strength, not looking to finde the helpe and succour of a faction amongst vs, is idle: or to thinke they shall bee able to preuayle, notwithstanding the discouery [Page 77] made of theyr proiects and attempts, were to hold vs for accessary to our own ruine, in leauing to the inuadors the helpes they attend and hope for, and in fayling to fur­nish all due meanes on our part for resi­stance. If then vpon seasonable aduertise­ment giuen of theyr intended enterprises, we shall disappoynt them of the strength and supplies they expect, and inable our selues in euery respect, with preparations of all natures fitting an honourable and as­sured defence: they grounding theyr at­tempt partly vpon our weakenes and de­fect of preparing, partly vpon hope of a faction and all needfull supplyes amongst vs, and finding a frustration of their hopes in this behalfe, will in all probable discourse lay aside theyr thoughts and intents of proceeding agaynst vs. If it shall bee ob­iected that the surcease of attempting a­boue mentioned, is already performed on the part of the Pope and the Spanyard: theyr late combination and practise for the conquest of Ireland and Ostend, the present courses held for reconciling vnto the Pope, the directions giuen and secretly executed for winning a party vnto the in­fanta, or to the King regnāt, wil sufficiently [Page 78] answere and conuince this doubt. But for a further inforcement of the Seculars pro­testation in this particular of theyr allea­geance, and to win credit thereto, it will be anouched, that the auncienter sort of them euer misliked this course, of restoring re­ligion by treason and inuasion. If they al­wayes disliked it, why did they not detect it, and so preuent (as much as rested in them) the perill intended to her Maiesty and the State? They answere, That the respect of theyr common cause, and the hope they had, the politicall Fathers would [...] growne more moderate in theyr disseignements against our Soueraigne, moued them to bee si­lent in this behalfe. Which is in effect, as if they should say, the hope conceyued that theyr sayde disseignements would in the meane tyme haue preuayled, moued them to this silence. VVere they touched with so simple and light a regard of her Maie­sties life, that they had rather she should in her person receyue a mortall wound, th [...] themselues vtter a word to preuent it? Is it in the imminent daunger of the Church and State, which by theyr disclosing might bee diuerted, a sufficient iustification of theyr silence herein, in that they hoped [Page 79] the contriuers of the perill would haue re­claymed themselues? If the issue had an­swered your desires, then would you haue honoured the Machiauillian Fathers with a crowne of glory, whome now in shewe you pursue with the greatest infamies and indignities. If then in the tyme of so pre­sent an hazard, you refused (notwithstan­ding your pretended fidelity and mislike of the course in hand) to affoord so much as one syllable from your Priestly lips, for preseruing the life of your Soueraigne: there is no probability, that hereafter in the like case of attempt and hope of suc­cesse on your side, you reteyning the same dutifull respect to the Pope and your common cause, rather in an higher degree of affection then heretofore, you will fall to a ready performance of the loyall ser­uice, whereof you make so often professi­on. But what is it that drew you to a mis­like of the practises interteined by the Ie­suiticall Fathers, for executing the Popes sentence? It cannot be the consideration of any vnlawfulnes in them. For howsoeuer you finde it against the reason of expedi­ency, that eyther the Pope should excom­municate, or the catholique subiect exe­cute [Page 80] the sentence denounced, till the pro­ceeding thereto might be without notable hurt and preiudice: yet you hold both the one and the other to be lawfull. Neyther can it bee the inconuenience and trouble which befell vnto your persons, vpon the issue of the sayd practises, that moued you to detest them. For in the question of ad­uauncing the honour and good of the Ro­mane Church, you hold no account of li­berty or life: the glory of your supposed martyrdome, doth weigh more with you then any worldly respect: you are not ey­ther so vnwise as to esteeme of the resolu­tions and courses by the euent, or so ena­moured with your selues, as to prefer your particular before the generall. Besides the sayd course being not onely warrantable de iure in your opinion, but de facto, plot­ted with all politique foresight, out of due consideration of the meanes, for prosecu­tion and compassing thereof, out of the best intelligence that could bee procured, and with speciall regard to the good of the Seculars: what ground of iust exception can they haue against it? If there were imperfection in the cariage of it: the blame must rest vpon the Actors, and not [Page 81] vpon the plot. Agayne, whereas the suc­cesse of the courses held, became also pre­iudiciall to the Iesuits, why doe not those Fathers indite Satyrs agaynst the Secu­lars? Why doe not they who had theyr part in contriuing of them, discharge theyr spleene agaynst the Seculars, who had a principall hand in acting them? Or why doe not both Iesuit and Secular, publish theyr detestation of the Pope, by whose warrant and authority they proceeded, both to the plotting of theyr courses, and the execution of them? If then the Secu­lars hatred of Iesuiticall practises, cannot probably grow from the ground and cause pretended by them: it cannot runne in o­ther account then of forgery: and there­fore theyr protesting of shewing loyalty to her Maiesty, in opposing agaynst the sayd practises, must needes receyue the like [...]and and censure. But let vs graunt vnto them that, whereof they would haue vs to rest perswaded: viz. that the enac­ting of penall lawes, the restraynt of theyr persons, and in some the losse of life and goods occasioned by the sayde practises, did draw them to a dislike of the same. First, in this confession they contradict [Page 82] themselues: this theyr pretended dislike being a censuring of the sayde courses for detestable treasons: and so are they styled by them in sundry passages. Now if they partake in nature with treasons: how can they be reputed lawfull? But you allowe them for lawfull: and giue direction when they may bee executed. Secondly, if the sayde inconuenience to your persons and goods, were the principall motiue of your hatred to the sayde courses: then did you approue them considered in themselues, and so far forth as they intended her Maie­sties destruction. And this latter would you haue well disgested, in that her pro­ceeding agaynst you, was adiudged by you to bee a tyrannous persecution and oppression. You neuer notified your mis­like of those courses, till experience ac­quainted you with the danger of them to your persons ▪ you betooke your sel [...]es to your beades, solicited al your Saints, plyed the mumbling of Masses, perswaded others to theyr particular deuotions for the hap­py successe of the same: and were ready also to bee imployed personally in some part of the appoynted seruice. If then the disseignes in question (they being consi­dered [Page 83] in themselues, and for such, as by warrant from the Pope, did intend the ad­uauncement of the Sea Apostolique, with the suppression of her Maiesty) were al­lowed by you: and if the supposed perse­cution onely, occasioned by the issue of them, moued you to mislike thereof, and to an hatred of her Maiesty, as may ap­peare by your infamous discourses and libels: what are we to apprehend of your professed allegeance? which growes not from conscience of duty, nor from perswa­sion of vnlawfulnes in the sayd disseignes, nor yet from consideration of the pre­tended hurts you haue receiued by them.

Hitherto touching that part of the Se­culars protestation, which is of allegeance to her Maiesty. Let vs consider the other, which is of detestation to the Spanyard and his tytle. And this also I holde for a me [...]e disguisement. For neyther hath the Spanyard done any acte, that can iustly incense them agaynst him, neyther is there in the opinion of Catholiques, any so choyse and meete a person besides, on whom in reason they may rely and builde theyr future hopes. If they obiect his plots and seuerall inuasions, they were so­licited [Page 84] by some of theyr owne coate and profession: and furthered by theyr ad­uertisements: they were in part for theyr aduauncement and good: they were war­ranted by the authority and commission from the Sea Apostolique: they were as­sisted not onely with contributions from the Pope, but with supplies of other qua­lity. And therefore no ground out of this obiection for theyr hatred to the Spany­ard: vnlesse they will both hate him, who was at an extraordinary cost to relieue and aduaunce them, and likewise detest the Pope who was in this action a princi­pall concurrent with him, yea themselues also who were deepely ingaged in it. If the feare of his future cruelties doth stirre this passion against him: they grounde theyr hatred vpon an incertainty and ac­cident which the Seculars should not doe, considering the experience they haue had of his fauourable inclination towards them in his publike attempts and priuate cour­ses: out of which he hath affoorded them succours and reliefe in theyr distresse and peregrinations: erected Colleges for their maintenance: allotted vnto sundry of them annuall pensions. Neither can their hatred [Page 85] vpon this originall be in that degree as is pretended. For hauing receiued at his hands sundry demōstrations of his prince­ly fauours, and neuer any disgrace or wrong of note: there cannot be any foun­dation for so great a feare and hatred of him, as they publish. And shall we thinke that they will without speciall ground and cause shew themselues so ingratefull as to hate him, who hath so often reached his hande of strength and bounty to theyr helpe? and who concurreth with them in religion and in purpose to aduance the same? whereas also in the conceit of most Catholikes, he the said Spaniard, as well in regard of his power and oportunitie of meanes, as of his resolution and readines to restore the Popedome amongst vs, is the fittest & sufficientest Prince, on whom to repose for theyr future hopes and ad­uancements: in case they abandon him to whom will they haue recourse? if to any besides him: they incounter the Popes designe and resolued furtherance of the Spanish title: they incurre the daunger of his heauy censure: they runne a course re­pugnant to theyr profession and othe of being ordered by him in all cases and ac­tions [Page 86] of this nature. To relie vpon some domesticall competitor, Dolmans censure will not permit them, they being not assu­red either of his abilities or deuotion to the Pope. And as for the Scot: how can they hope for toleration vnder a Prince of his profession, and who hath seene expe­rience in her Maiesty, in himselfe, in other States, of the aduantage and benefit grow­ing from the suppression of Popery and sufferance of the Gospell onely? The law of God therefore, the president of other Princes, the consideration of the perilous inconueniences accompanying the said to­leration, will make him a professed aduer­sary thereto. Seeing then there is rather cause of their loue vnto the Spaniard and dependance on him, then any iust pretext of hatred towards him and his title: I doe conclude that this part also of the prote­station in question is to pa [...]se in account for a fiction. If therefore this their whole protestation be in the seueral parts thereof vnsound and fraudulent: what can wee iudge their pretended quarrel with the le­suits to be, other then a plotted and deui­sed brabble? Which may further be clee­red by consideration of the gaine and ad­uantage [Page 87] that will accrew vnto the state of her Maiesty and the Gospell, in case the opposition betwixt them the said Seculars and Iesuits be serious and with a resolute intent to discouer and withstand all prac­tises and attempts intertained against her Highnes Throne and the Religion esta­blished by her. For this course of opposi­tion will serue to secure and aduance her imperiall Crowne and the sacred trueth professed within her dominions. But such meanes as are directly and effectually ser­uiceable to this vse and purpose, will not be imbraced and followed by them, who protest and offer euen vnto death the per­formance of al dutie and ready seruice for recouery of the Popes interest and soue­raigne power ouer this Church of Eng­land: it being a principle in reason and policy, that no faction or multitude will betray and [...]rustrate the aduancement of that cause, which out of conscience and hope of future benefit it doth affect: so as I may probably conclude, that one thing is pretended, and another intended by them.

Moreouer, whereas they concurre, ac­cording to theyr solemne protestation on [Page 88] this behalfe, in the same generall end for the good of the Romish Church: as diffe­rence in ends and intentions doth ordina­rily diuide confederates: so this concur­rence will hold them so farre vnited, as that they will not for particular respects expose to perill and ruine the generall cause. For in doing hereof they could not be said to concurre in the same end: so as either the Seculars fayle in this concur­rence and ayme, or if they rest constant therein, they wil not prosecute the meanes whereby to ouerthrow the said common end: and therefore not be caried in so vio­lent a course of opposition to the Iesuit, as is pretended.

Besides, it is acknowledged by them that they are resolued to continue in all faythfull obedience to the Pope euen to death, and witha [...] in word and fact to main­taine the honour and authoritie of his sword. If they stand thus affected: it is al­together improbable they will proclaime against the Iesuit a warre of that heate and fury, as shall draw them either to taxe and challenge publikely the Popes indiscre­tion, his credulitie in matters of informa­tion, his rashnes in excommunicating, the [Page 89] inualidity of his censures the insufficiencie of Commissions giuen to his Legats and ministers: or to contest openly and op­pose against him in case of his personall comming into England. For hereby they should wilfully bring S. Peters chayre, vnto which they professe all reuerence and du­ty, and to whose censure they submit all theyr actions, into publike contempt and obloquy: and themselues into an estate of present and exceeding danger, vnlesse his Hollownes should out of his fatherly com­passion be pleased to seale them an Indul­gence. VVhereas therefore out of the sharpnes of theyr humour and spleene to the Iesuit they haue entred into this course of disgrace and reproch to his Popeship: either they are serious therein: or they do it vpon a presumed dispensation to make it so much the more probable that they [...] contention with the Iesuit. But their often and vnfayned pro­testations to the contrary, doe apparantly conuince them of not being serious there­in. Whereupon I doe inferre it to be done to winne at our hands a beleefe that theyr quarrell is such as is reported. But it will be sayd, that the Popes haue been abused [Page 90] with misinformations, and so drawne to excommunicate her Maiestie and to pro­ceede accordingly. Whereto I answere, that it standeth with no likelihood that so many holy Fathers and Potentates ioy­ning with them, should not discerne the insufficiency of the suggestions presented. Pius 5. Gregory 13. Xistus 5. and the King of Spayne, with some other Princes of the same confederacy, receiued from England the best intelligence and direction for the cariage of theyr designes agaynst her Ma­iestie, that the Catholike Laity or Clergy, Nobles or Gentry, Souldiers or Mariners of the Realme could affoord: so as the ob­iected misleading through informations is not likely. And if error herein had beene committed by one of them, the matter be­ing of that consequence it would haue [...]n reformed by another.

But let vs examine the originall of this their contention, and see whether it will not yeeld some argument whereby to charge them with collusion. In the first Quodlibet the Iesuits affecting of soue­raignty ouer the Seculars, is set downe for the true originall and cause of this strife. In other places he imputeth it to the incon­ueniences [Page 91] and h [...]s which ensued vpon the practises held by y^e Iesuites against the State. Touching the superiority affected by the Iesuits: it is straunge it should be the roote of so daungerous a warre, as wherein the Pope himselfe is like in the poynt of his supremacy and in the graund cause of the Catholike Church to receyue a deadly and incurable wounde, It was granted and ordayned by his Holines, ad­uisedly no doubt and vpon due considera­tion of the necessity thereof. Could not this respect of the Popes authentical grant and ordination, be of force to temper and satisfie the Seculars, who professe all duti­full obedience and ready submittance of their actions vnto him? If it could not stay their priestly wisedomes from quarrelling and from notifying theyr ambition and pride vnto the world ▪ might it not yet haue restrayned them from proceeding to a contention in so high a degree and of such sequell, as will by discoueries secure the estate of her Maiestie and the Gospell, defeate the hope and cause of the Romane Church, cast reproch vpon the Pope and his authoritie? will they for a matter of priuate spleene run this desperate course? [Page 92] Themselues disclaime it: theyr profession of hatred to the Gospell, of theyr vowed indeuours for aduancing the good of their Church, of all reuerence and deuotion to the Pope will testifie the contrarie. If then they runne not this course of ruining their common cause: the sayd contention, tou­ching this degree and the effects thereof, is fayned: and so the sayd affected Soue­raigntie no cause of the same. Doth it then take budding and growth from the suppo­sed persecution and oppression inflicted on them, by occasion of the practises and conspiracies which the Iesuits wrought a­gaynst the State? The persecution they speake of, which was in truth no other the a iustifiable, moderate, and necessary seue­ritie in the punishment of detestable trea­sons, was for prioritie of time before the question of supe [...] betwixt them: so as either the affecting of Soueraigntie gaue not beginning to theyr pretended contention, or in case it did, then cannot the original thereof be ascribed to the sup­posed persecution: of which because there hath beene alreadie sufficient speech and proofe made, that the Seculars hatred to the Iesuit and his courses can haue no iust [Page 93] or probable foundation thereon, I will in­sist no further in this argument.

To these presumptions of dissimulation in the sayd contention, may be added the repugnancy shewed in the Quilibets affec­tion and speech. For were the quarrell of that nature and in that condition of heate and reach, as hee would make it, and the heart of the Quilibet of such sinceritie and singlenes, as becommeth the profession of priesthood: he would not breathe out and publish repugnancies in the discouerie of his intentions. He admires her Maiesties proceedings for gracious and moderate, yet calleth them an vniust vexation and heauy persecution: he professeth a perpe­tuall hatred to the Iesuit, and an infallible alleageance to her Maiesty, yet he submit­teth himselfe in this behalfe to be ordered by the Pope. He [...] all vnfayned loyaltie and duty to her Maiestie, yet in­structeth and directeth her subiects when they may take armes against her: He pro­fesseth the perfourming of all faithfull ser­uice to her Maiesty, and yet would for her ouerthrow rayse a mortall diuision and warre betwixt her and her louing subiects, as also betwixt subiect and subiect: Hee [Page 94] professeth all carefull indeuours for secu­ring her person and State, yet would [...]ee strip and depriue her of the best meanes for her preseruation and safetie; He com­mendeth the ancient Seculars for theyr mislike of treasons agaynst her Maiestie, and yet approoueth theyr concealing of them in the case of imminent daunger to her royall person and Crowne: Hee pre­tends detecting all Iesuiticall practises a­gaynst her Highnes and the State, yet la­boureth vnder hande a reconcilement of her subiects vnto the Pope: He pretends a kinde conceit and affection towards the Protestants, yet would worke a subuersion of them and their religion: He censureth for rebels all such as attempted to execute the Popes excommunication, yet alloweth the execution thereof when it may be per­fourmed without [...] and losse to the a [...] ­tors: He protesteth his deuotion and im­ployment of his person with the losse o [...] his life for the aduancement of theyr com­mon cause: and yet offereth her Maiesti [...] his seruice for discouery of the designes and meanes that tend to the said aduance­ment: He challengeth the Pope for [...] ­dulous, indiscreete, rash, partiall, and expo­seth [Page 95] his authority to contempt and oblo­quie, yet professeth all readines euen to death, to maintaine the honour and repu­tation of his holy Fatherhood: He purgeth the Seculars from the crime of disloyalty to her Maiestie, yet acknowledgeth theyr priuity and allowance of treasons: Hee protesteth a perpetuall detestation of the Spanyard and his title, yet offereth herein to be ordered by the Pope: He condem­neth Iesuites for contriuing the treason, and commendeth the Seculars who acted it. Whether these and such other repug­ [...]ancies doe not discouer in the Quilibet a double and disguising cariage of himselfe in his Quodlibets, I referre to the iudge­ment of the wise and vnpartiall reader.

Hitherto hath beene shewed that the contention betwixt the Iesuit and the Se­ [...]ular priest being of such nature and in [...]uch degree as is pretended, is counterfeit: [...]t remaines to prooue that in case it be vn­ [...]ayned on their part, yet on the part of the [...]uperiours and heads of their faction, it is [...]tertayned out of policie. The reason in­ [...]ucing me to this apprehension is this:

The sayd Superiours and heads being [...]ade acquainted with this contention, [Page 96] and particularly with the whole nature and cariage thereof, doe either politically in­tertayne the same, or labour the suppres­sion thereof: it being cleere, considering the termes wherein now it is, that it will be of aduantage or preiudice vnto such theyr designes as concerne our State: and it be­ing likewise not vnknowne, that all occur­rents and matters of moment are caried and ordered by direction of the sayd Su­periours: who are so carefull for aduan­cing the common interest and good of the Romish Church, as they wil not suffer any course to proceede that may be an impe­diment or harre to theyr proiects & prac­tises in this behalfe. Such is partly their in­considerate zeale to the Sea Apostolike, or rather Antichristian Synagogue of Rome, and partly theyr hatred to our profession, and desire of reuenge vpon many & great supposed wrongs and [...] offered by this State vnto them: so as what op­portunity and aduantage the time or i [...] expected accidents shal present for furthe­rance of theyr proceedings, they are real to imbrace it. Vpon consideration where of I take it for euident and confessed, that they will not in an accident of this impor­tance [Page 97] demeane themselues in the qualitie of neutrals or idle spectacles, but according to the vse they may make thereof to theyr common cause, they will intertayne it in policy, or suppresse it. But the suppression of the same is not laboured by them. For in case it were: then would the sayd diffe­rence betwixt them expire and determine. If, notwithstanding the endeauour and course taken to suppresse it, the prosecu­tion of the same be continued on the part of the Seculars: then the insuppression groweth eyther from want of power in the Superiours to effect what is meete in this case, or from the desperate contumacy of the parties who will not be ordred. But it is apparant that there is no defect of suf­ficient authority and power whereby to [...]ompell the sayd parties vnto order and agreement. And as for the poynt of con­ [...]umacy. they doe renounce it, and pub­ [...]kely professe an absolute submittance of [...]ll theyr actions to the censure and orde­ring of the holy Father. I conclude there­fore that in truth they labour not to sup­resse it. Besides, there is no cause that [...]ay iustly induce them to stay and end [...]e same, as may appeare by this, in that [Page 98] the cariage of the said quarrell, howsoeuer preiudiciall in shew to the Catholike cause in regard of the profession made for disco­ueries, is indeede of speciall aduantage and consequence for aduauncing the publike good of the sayd cause. For it holdeth a course of winning fauour and credit to the Seculars, in respect of theyr ancient dislike of treasons, theyr pretended detections, theyr profession of all alleageance to her Maiestie, and of opposing to the Pope himselfe: it soweth discord, and indeuou­reth a disunion betwixt her Highnes and her subiects, and betwixt subiect and sub­iect: it soliciteth a repeale of penall sta­tutes, and a toleration of the publike ex­ercise of Popery. If then the sayd conten­tion bee not suppressed, as appeareth by prosecuting the same in printed pamph­lets: and if there be neyther labouring for suppression thereof, nor any [...] prete [...] why it should bee suppressed, but speci [...] cause why it should be intertayned: I do hereupon inferre, that it is intertayned by the heads and Commanders of theyr fa [...] ­tion, out of a policy dangerous to her Ma­iesty and the State.

AMongst the meanes which are seruice­able to the mayne end aymed at in the Quodlibets, Toleration of Popish religion is one which yeeldeth very speciall and as­sured furtherance thereto: and therefore in foure seuerall passages cunningly per­swaded by the Quilibet. Now because the fog and mist of this perswasion standeth betwixt our eye and the light of truth: it shall not be inconuenient, to disperse and remoue the same. Hee doth insinuate, pag. 151. that the Iesuits for sundry parti­cular re [...]vued and abso­lute dislike of toleration, will imploy their best endeuours with a brace of thousand pounds to vndermine and crosse all mo­tions in that behalfe. VVherein as they should, in case of theyr serious disaffection thereto, doe a seruice more aduantageable to the state of religion, then agreeable with theyr humours and designements: so there [Page 100] being no likelihood of the least opposition in them to the same, we are vpon obserua­tion made of the disguising vsed by the Seculars herein, iustly occasioned to rayse and improoue our suspition of extraordi­nary fraud on theyr part. The Quilibet forsooth wil not directly and as from him­selfe present any motiues in this causes least hee might seeme to be caried rather with respect to the particular good of the Secu­lars and theyr faction, then with any due regard to the publike interest of her Ma­iesty and the State. And therefore to de­ceiue our eye, and so to winne fauour and approbation with vs, whom hee knoweth to be already incensed agaynst the Iesuits, he pretends y^t toleration is infinitly odious vnto them, and that in hearkening there­to we shal not so much satisfie the Secular, as distast the Iesuites and impeach theyr courses, to the inestimable benefit and se­curity of her Highnes royall Scepter an present gouernment. But let vs weigh the reasons, which hauing drawne the Ignati [...]n Fathers to so extreame an hatred of tole­ration, as that they preferre in their choise death before the same, may on the contra­ry induce her Maiesty to approoue and [Page 101] embrace it. The first is an effect procee­ding from toleration, concluded thus:

The proposition is a [...] and may not passe without checke. For howsoeuer her Maiesty may in politike reason wish all popefied persons blunted and dispirited in matters of deuice and conspiracy against her: yet can she not allow and accept of the course leading thereto. vnlesse she finde it warranted by the law of God, and stan­ding with the publike good and honour of the State. Wherein the course of tole­ration fayleth, hauing no such ground. For as the doctrine of Rome is in the worship it tendereth vnto the Lord, and in sundrie other particulars of greatest moment op­posit to the law of God: so must it needes be euen for that respect of speciall preiu­dice [Page 102] and dishonour to the State: conside­ring that the prosperitie and glorie of a kingdome proceedeth from intertayning such constitutions and decrees in religion, as God himselfe hath enacted and deliue­red. And whereas the sayd doctrine and practise thereof doth priuiledge the whole state Ecclesiasticke, agaynst the iudiciall Court of the Magistrate and in the case of ordinary contributions, and doth likewise deny vnto the Prince himselfe an absolute soueraignety within his dominions, ren­dring him subiect to a forraine power, and reputing him, whensoeuer hee shall passe vnder the censure of excommunication, a Prince de facto only, and not de iure: how can her Maiestie without apparant hurt to her honour and state, intertaine the tolera­tion of such a docttine? Besides, the prac­tises of the Ro [...]ts being uncertayne and defeaseable, whereof her Maiestie (to the praise of Gods power and mercie to­wards her selfe and her subiects) hath had often experience: it were not sitting with the quality of ordinary wisedome, much lesse with the deepe reach of a Prince to remedy vncertaine and the lesser acci­dents, by opening free passage to more as­sured [Page 103] and greater perils. The Assumption likewise must runne in the same account. For how doth it appeare that publike li­berty of conscience will make the Roma­nists vnfit for practises agaynst the State? It cannot bee sayd that they haue in this case attayned vnto theyr end, and will for that regard retire theyr thoughts from all further complots: the sayd libertie being only a step and subordinate meane to the end propounded vnto theyr designes: so as the sayd end remayning vncompas­sed, theyr desire and inducements to reco­uer it continuing the same, theyr possibili­ties greater, theyr distance from it lesse then heretofore, what hope is there they will abandon all care and study of the meanes whereby to come vnto it? The neerer we draw to our long attēded good, the more eager and sensible we are in our appe [...]es t [...]er [...]to: and the more wee doe sharpen and bestirre our conceits for the remoue of all impediments, which may disappoynt our approch and ful enioyance of the same. Neyther can it in fauour of the Assumption be alleaged that grief and trouble is inuentiue and stirring: & ther­fore such as liue vnder it more apt for [Page 104] practise and attempt. For first it is by ac­cident that it hath this effect, it being of a farre different operation in many natures, which are so altred and deiected by it, as they lay aside all apprehensions of practi­sing theyr deliuerance, specially by meanes indirect and perilous. Secondly, when trouble is accompanied with passions of feare, extreame malice and reuenge, as we finde it in the case of priesthed and Iesui­ted Romanists, then the eye of the minde and wit beholding as it were through the dimme glasse of the sayd passions such ob­iects as present themselues, must likewise be dimmed and hindred in the sight of them, and consequently fayle in discerning and iudging, if not of the thing it selfe to bee done or omitted, yet of the needfull circumstances of time, place and persons belonging thereto: whereas when the minde is in some [...]me from these passions, it is cleere and not dim of sight, mature in deliberation and adui­sed in execution. Thirdly, these Roma­nists retavning in theyr hearts, notwith­standing this release from trouble, the true and ancient causes of aptnes and readines to practise agaynst the State, namely an [Page 105] inflamed desire of reestablishing the au­thority of S. Peters chayre, together with the humours of malice and reuenge, which the said toleration agreeably to the nature of the Romish reconcilement & doctrine, will from time to time feede and nourish: how can it be true either that their resting in the condition wherein they are, is the principall cause of theyr practising, or that theyr inlargement from the same will be a meane to disable them in this behalfe?

The second argument to perswade to­lerat on is this:

The proposition is a ridi [...]ulous fanc [...] of an idle brayne. For to intertayne and esta­blish toleration of Poperie, that there might bee no pretext left to slaunder her Maiesties proceedings, were to cure an vl­cer [Page 106] by admitting a gangrene, and to reme­die a scratch of a pin by a potion of poy­son. If we compare the slanderous reports vented out agaynst the State with the to­leration solicited, and diligently consider as on the one part the authors of the sayd reports, the insufficient ground of them, and the little measure o [...] preiudice growne thereby to the honour of her Maiestie, so on the other side the ineuitable dishonor, daunger and mischiefe of the sayd tolera­tion: we shall easily discerne that the for­mer is not worthy of the least regard with vs, when there is question of the latter. It is an admonition no lesse wise then an­cient, that in matters of meane impor­tance, Non sunt ponendi rumores ante salu­tem: much lesse therefore in the case of a kingdome, and such as concernes not only the scepter of a Prince on earth, but the glory of the immorta [...] God: from the ad­uancement whereof no respect of perill o [...] obloquy ought to withdraw a Christian Magistrate. If it be replied that the said re­ports, how lightly soeuer we value them, haue wounded the honour and reputation of the State: to omit the disbeleefe and contradiction they haue encountred a­mongst [Page 107] all forrayne States and persons, who are not car [...]ed with partiality or pas­sion agaynst vs, it is cleere that her Maie­sties proceedings agaynst the Romanists, cannot in equity receiue blemish or stayne therby, vnlesse it appeare by sound proofe that they haue been vniust oppressions or tyrannous persecutions, and not moderate and iustifiable punishments vpon offences of treason. They exclayme in Courts of Princes, and blaze through all parts of Christendome by theyr malicious libels, that they indure a most barbarous and ex­treame persecution for religion: and this Iesuiticall Quilibet, howsoeuer he seemeth elswhere to admire her Maiesties clemen­cie and equity in her proceedings, being rapt into a wonder that (the occasions and circumstance of their offences considered) any Romanist should bee left aliue, doth notwi [...]a [...]ing exceedingly depraue the honourable iustice of the State, calling it an iniust vexation, & vaunting that num­bers of theyr faction haue d [...]ed of late yeeres amongst vs in the glorious condi­tion of Martyrs. For disproofe whereof, and in iustification of the proceeding held agaynst them, I will by way of a pertinent [Page 108] and allowable digression, present to the graue consideration of all wise and vnpar­tiall men this briefe dispute:

The proposition is free from all iust ex­ception: the whole scruple is touching the Assumption, which is cleered thus:

For proofe of the Assumption in this latter syllogisme, it must bee remembred that the Popes excommunication or bull is with them a matter of religion: and that they doe in generall acknowledge the same for a lawfull and iust censure, and likewise themselues bound to see the contents thereof executed in case of his commaun­dement And whereas in particular the said bull doth import and declare his Pope­ships soueraignty aboue her Maiestie, by vertue whereof he proceedes agaynst her, the ground of his proceeding, namely her defe [...]on [...]om the Romane faith, his de­priuing her from the Crowne imperiall of this Realme, his discharging her subiects from all alleageance vnto her, his charging them to disobey her and her lawes: here­upon our English Romanists out of a per­swasion of an erronious and misguided conscience, carying them according to di­rection [Page 110] giuen in that behalfe to an execu­tion of y sayd censure, haue taken boldnes to auouch their immunity and exemption from her Maiesties power ouer persons & causes ecclesiastick, to repute and adiudge her for an heretike, to deny her to be the lawfull Queene of England, being in theyr iudgement iustly depriued of all such regal title and dignity, to hold themselues abso­lutely discharged from al duty and subiec­tion to her and her lawes, to reconcile and withdraw whom they could from allea­geance to her Maiestie vnto the obedience of a forraine Potentate, thereby to fit and prepare them for courses of alteration, to plot and practise the destruction of her royall person, to solicite both domesticks and strangers to take armes for her depo­sition, to allow and iustifie home insurrec­tions, and the Popes hostile proceedings in warre against her, to giue interta [...]ment, comfort and aduice to such whose hand is in conspiracies and attempts for subuer­sion of the State, to indite and disperse se­dicious writings, whereby to rayse all con­tempt to her Maiestie, and all reuerent e­stimation and respect to the Popes bull. Now out of this, which is here set downe, I [Page 111] deduce this conclusion, which is a confir­mation of the assumption in question:

The proposition being the expresse let­ter and text of the law, falles not within the compasse of controulement: vnlesse [...]t be auerrred that the royall authoritie of her Maiestie is vsurped and vnlawfull, as some of the Priestl [...] and [...]uiticall progenie haue not blushed to publish, taking for warrant of this theyr treasonable assertion the sayd bull of Pius 5. and his successors. In refutation wherof, though vnworthy of answere, we may alleage what the Quilibet in this question of her Maiesties in depri­ued and lawfull authoritie, hath from such his authors as are of note and account [Page 112] with the Church of Rome, receiued and set downe, viz. that Princes cannot be re­moued from their scepters propter defecti [...] ­nem a fide: pag. 250. Item 293. where hee hath laboured to yeeld an ample demon­stration hereof, agreeably to that maxim of reason and law: Cuius est imperium ad­imere, [...]iusdem est conferre. But the Pope hath no warrant either from the law of God, or the particular lawes of this State to conferre, and bestow the Crowne of England. Therefore it resteth not in him to transferre it from that most princelie and sacred head, on which it is inuested and feated by God himselfe, according to the right of succession by bloud and inhe­ritance established by the lawes and sta­tutes of this land. Were it not a labour needles in so cleere [...] sunneshine of trueth▪ I would further ins [...]st vpon the illustra­tion thereof.

The assumption is a matter of authen­tical record in such Courts of iustice where the Romanists haue iudicially receyued triall and sentence: and sundry of them haue vnder theyr hands, as may yet ap­peare, confessed the actions and disloy [...]l­ties charged vpon them. Neither is it now [Page 113] a competent and iustifiable plea in behalfe of the condemned Seminaries, to affirme the proceeding agaynst them to bee for matter of Religion and conscience; when the politique lawes of the State, agreeable with the holy ordinances of the Lord, doe finde such Religion to be treason, and cen­sure such conscience for a disloyalty in [...]udgement and affection. And were the aboue named actions, which are warranted by the sayd bull, of the nature and quality that is pretended: then would there ensue [...] confusion of matter ciuill with spirituall: whereas both diuine and humane reason hath euer distinguished betwixt them: [...]olding that for matter of Religion and [...]avth, which being prescribed in the first able is a part of Gods worship, and di­ [...]ectly regardeth a future life: and that for [...]iuill, which [...]ded in the [...]cond, is not originally, and in it selfe a part of Gods spirituall worship, but may oncerne the fame and the life to come, [...]v consequent and interposition of some [...]hird thing. And therefore the savd bull, [...] farre as it importeth the deposition of Princes from theyr regalities, being in [...]uery particular article and action leading [Page 114] thereto, a direction for matters of this worlde, enioyned or prohibited in the se­cond table, and not communicating in na­ture with the spirituall seruice of the Lord, cannot fall vnder the account of a matter spirituall and of fayth. And so the poyn [...] of Supremacy being no part of the wor­ship required in the first table, but a soue­raigue power deliuered vnto Princes from the second, to see the sayde worship accor­dingly performed, must not bee reputed for other then a temporall and politiq [...] royalty or soueraignety. It is true, that by consequent, and in regard of the thing or­dered by direction from the same, it d [...] concerne fayth and Religion: but it is n [...] employment in any function or office Ec­clesiasticke. For had it been of other the of a ciuill consideration: the religion Kings of Iuda [...] in [...] medling in the same, as a matter not co [...] ­patible with theyr callings.

The summe therefore of this latter [...] ­gument is this:

The Assumption may receyue proofe hereby:

Thus much of the second argument and of the persecution implied therein, and [Page 116] charged vpon the State by the Quilibet, though indirectly.

The third not vnsutable with the se­cond, is of this sort:

First, touching the antecedent, we can­not passe our allowance thereof. For if the reiection of Popery from amongst vs were the motiue on theyr part for deliue­ring a slaunder of this nature agaynst the State: then the same Popery, notwithstan­ding the admittance of toleration, stan­ding reiected and disclaymed, as yet some remarkeable degree by the law [...] of the land, and the publique profession of hee Maiesty, and the best part of her subiects, the Iesuits will proportionably, and with respect to the degree of disgrace continu­ed vpon theyr religion, continew likewise theyr course of slaundering in this behalf [...] [Page 117] For they being resolued, as the Quilibet reporteth of them, eyther to haue a perfit and entire reformation or none at all, will not bee induced through the graunt of toleration, to an absolute surcease of theyr de [...]aming and malicious tongue. Besides, this surcease being altogether vncertaine and accidentary: it cannot be in policy a sufficient ground for the embracing of so important a matter as is in question. But if the publishing of the reproch here men­tioned, and the occasion of offering vnto the State so great a wrong, hath originally proceeded eyther from the humor of ma­lice and hatred conceyued agaynst the truth wee professe, or from some discon­tentment, in that others haue found grace and preferment before them: then what likelihood is there, that (while they shall in theyr hearts entertayne and feede the very spring of this odious proceeding held by them, which no toleration is of force to dam and stoppe) they will retyre theyr tongue or penne to a course of silence herein?

But let vs suppose a truth in the ante­cedent: yet the consequence deduced thereon, is fond and vnworthy of regard. [Page 118] For were it an acte answerable to the wis­dome of so renowmed a Prince as her Maiesty, by admitting toleration, to pre­fer the staye or preuention of a slaunder before the glory of Christ, the safety of her person, and the publique good of her most affectionate subiects? or in case po­licy could allowe the redressing of a light and vncertaine distemper in the body po­litique, by a wound in the heart, were it not yet exceedingly offensiue and against sense, to commit euill in an high degree, and of a perillous issue, that some meane and slender good may grow thereof? For the good yeelded to the State from the silence of a few seditious Fugitiues, what is it in respect of the mischiefes accompa­ning toleration?

The fourth argument followeth:

As agaynst some part of his sophistry already presented vnto vs, so agaynst the proposition of this syllogisme, I must al­leage these two maxims: the one, Non est faciendum malum vt inde preueniat bonum: the other, ex periculis minus eligendum. Now in the case proposed, toleration for the free exercise of idolatry, and for pub­lication of doctrines, whereby to displant and remooue Christ Iesus from amongest vs, being a capitall sinne, and in an high de­gree of treason agaynst the maiesty of God, and being likewise a course of more certayne perils, then in reason the hostile attempts of Catholique potentates can be: (which in that theyr cariage is open, and such whereof good intelligence may bee had, are preuentable, whereas toleration proceeding with shew of holines and duty to God and her Maiesty, may by secret and inexpected practises, without suspition taken of them surprise the State) the sayd toleration ought not vppon any such re­gard of preuenting forraine inuasion, to receyue place and entertaynement with vs: weighing with all the often experience her Maiesty hath had of Gods mighty [Page 120] protection, and manifold blessings vpon her selfe and her people during this whole tyme of her resolute and most Princely opposition thereto, which consideration may be a worthy inducement to so worthy and vnmatchable a Princesse of remayning Semper eadem.

Concerning the Assumption, that also is not to find credit with vs. For it is not re­ligion that hath [...]barked them in courses of hostility agaynst this land (I deny not but it hath serued in part for a pre text) but they haue beene drawne thereto, by the violent humors, partly of ambicious a­spyres to a monarchy, partly of malice and reuenge vppon supposed indignities, and partly of securing theyr owne greatnes, by impeaching theyr neighbours: so as if the trew groundes of theyr enterprising a­gaynst vs haue beene such as are mentio­ned, and not the cause of religion: why should we thinke that the graunt of popish religion, which concerneth not the sayde potentates more, then the establishment of the Gospell within theyr dominions concerneth her Maiesty, will bee of such regard with them, as to moue them to a surcease of hostility? They are not eyther [Page 121] so vnwise or so hoat in deuotion, as for the pleasuring of English Fugitiues and some our domesticall malcontents, to enter a course of infinit charge to themselues, of bloud and destruction to theyr subiects, of perpetuall quarrell with theyr neighbours, of priuation of trafficke, of ielousie and enuy abroad, of discontentments and mu­tinies at home. Howsoeuer they pretend an honourable care of restoring Religion: they will (notwithstanding a toleration admitted therof) neuer grow to peaceable tearmes and capitulations of vnfe [...]ned a­mity with this State, vntill they eyther re­ceyue satisfaction in the respects which first drew them to armes, or be compelled thereto through some extraordinary ne­cessity and disability. But let vs suppose with the Quilibet the cause of Religion to bee the ground of theyr hostile procee­dings: shall we conceyue that they will in­gage themselues in a warre for toleration, and will attempt nothing for an absolute and perfit reformation? It is this latter and not the former, that is in speciall regarde with them, if in this behalfe they haue been [...]ed at all with apprehensions of Religion. Hauing therefore in the case of toleration, [Page 122] not attayned to theyr disseignements, we cannot with probality thinke of any rea­dines on theyr part, to a surcease of hosti­lity: but they will continew the same, ey­ther publikely as before, or secretly by way of indirect practises: the oportunity and meanes for interteyning whereof, the sayd toleration will fitly minister and supply vnto them.

The fift reason to perswade toleration is this:

Here first, the Antecedent doth suppose the Iesuits in so deepe a melancholy, as to dreame of a Monarchy, not ouer the parts of Europe only, but ouer the whole globe of the ear [...]h: which is altogether impro­bable, considering the reputation they ca­ry for wisdome and discretion. Secondly, the compassing of such a monarchy, is a meere impossibily, and therefore the rea­son taken from thence of no force to per­swade. Thirdly, in case it were a matter [Page 123] possible: yet would there fall out so many yeeres betwixt the platforme and the reall existence thereof, as that wee should not need for feare of the same to shew the Se­culars the least curtesie, much lesse runne a course of speciall dishonour and preiu­dice. Fourthly, if the possibility thereof were such, as the erection of it amongst vs were not otherwise impeachable then by admittance of the sayd toleration: yet for as much as the mayne end of toleration aymed at within her Maiesties dominions, is one and the same with the scope and drift of the Iesuits, viz. the reestablishment of Antichristianity with the subuersion of the Gospell and the State: for the effec­ting whereof, the course in question would bee a fit and seruiceable instrument to the Iesuit: it were no lesse a phrensie to inter­taine toleration vpon any such respect and ground, then for preuenting the miscariage of a ship to sayle from Scilla to Charibdi [...].

But what confirmation hath the Quili­bet yeelded to the sayd Antecedent? If it be not of better strength then the in [...]e­rence depending thereon, it is not answe­rable to the credit of his reuerend priest­hood. Such as I finde it shall be presented [Page 124] to examination. In this manner then hee disputeth:

Were he not a Secular Priest, that is, a professed enemie to the Gospell and the present gouernment: I should thinke hee did in this argument collude and betray the cause he hath in hand. For if toleration draw with it into allowance within the Realme the office and iurisdiction of Po­pish Bishops: then as the authority and commission of the most reuerend Fathers and worthy Prelates of this Church will grow short and limited, they being not to deale with persons and causes subiect to this new Romish Court and Hyerarchy: so likewise will there ensue an vnsufferable incrochment vpon her Maiesties scepter and soueraignety: these new Bishops be­ing to represent and supply the person and office of the Pope, in all such affayres as [Page 125] shall concerne his supremacy. But let vs examine the Quilibets reason. The propo­sition we may iustly deny. For if the Bi­shops established, be Iesuited in affection, or otherwise commaunded by the Pope rather to giue furtherance then any impe­diment to the sayd platforme: then can it not be true that such course will furstrate the designes of Iesuits in this behalfe, and interrupt all dependency vppon them, as will serue for erection of a Popish pre­lacie.

The sixt motiue for toleration, whereto I will adde that which hee setteth downe for the eleuenth, hath this conclusion:

Hee cannot with any arte so colour the Proposition, but that the fraude thereof will forthwith appeare, if we shall examine [Page 126] it by the square or rule of the maxims a­boue remembred. For if wee may not walke in the trayne of sinne and disobedi­ence to God, that thereby some aduaun­tage may grow vnto vs in our particular: and further, if it be a grosse error in policy for the preuention of an accidentary perill, to make choyse of a certaine mischiefe: then cannot her Maiesty, for the stay of proiects and confederacies (they being in­certayne for theyr birth and cariage, as also liable to disappoyntment by the gracious prouidence of the Almighty, and such po­litique meanes, as haue formerly in like cases been vsed) allow intertaynment and place to toleration.

Neyther is there lesse deceit offered vs in the Assumption. For if the free exercise of Popery will double in Romanists, theyr alleageance and deuotion to the Pope, trebble theyr detestation to our Religion, nourish and rayse theyr desires of a full and entire reestablishment, that they may be in theyr professions and estates secured agaynst all daungers of future alteration: how can it be probable that they will, con­trary to the approbation of theyr consci­ence, and preiudicially to the publique [Page 127] good of theyr Church and theyr priuate interests, tender such aduertisements and discoueries as is pretended? Theyr exer­cises of religion being of the quality and operation as is remembred: will they, the more they malice vs and our profession, be so much the more ready to doe offices of extraordinary benefit and aduauntage to vs and it? Will they, the more they loue theyr religion and honour the Pope, so much the more indeauour to frustrate the aduauncement both of the one and the o­ther? And will they, hauing as it were, gayned the wall and places of speciall strength, in the siege of our Ierusalem, sound the retraite and proceede no fur­ther? If the Marchant or Marriner should tell vs, that after a long and tedious Naui­gation, being within ken of the port wi­shed for, hee would rest satisfied with the sight of the same a farre of, and so lay aside all purpose, and crosse all meanes of attay­ning thereto: wee could not beleeue him, nor conceyue him to be so phranticke and senseles in his apprehensions. The like o­pinion wee are to haue of the Seculars in this tale they propound vnto vs, of disco­uering practises and conspiracies.

[Page 128] Besides, it being supposed that the Se­culars and others so affected as they are, will be ready to doe seruice to the State in this poynt of discouery: yet can they per­forme no more herein, then is answerable to theyr intelligence: so as if they are too short in knowledge of disseignements (as needes they must, it being certayne, that vppon notice of theyr disposition in this behalfe, they shall not be made acquainted with any plot or practise of moment) what reason hath her Maiesty to allowe tolera­tion in regard of an aduauntage, which she shall not rece [...]ue thereby?

The seuenth inducement is of this kinde:

The Proposition hauing the same de­fect [Page 129] and imperfection that hath beene ob­serued in others aboue set downe, is to re­ceyue the like answere. For wee may not for the respect of any good, publique or particular, attempt ought that is offensiue to the highest Maiesty: neyther must we in the case of daungers, remedy an vncer­tayne perill, by another that is assured and of equall hurt and mischiefe.

The Assumption, least wee should cen­sure it for an vntruth, is thus demonstra­ted by him:

I may iustly dissent from the Quilibet, touching the proposition. For whereas Popish Princes hold all confederations no further obligatory, then may stand with the aduauncement of theyr particular de­seignes: [Page 130] and doe finde also the violation of them dispensable by the Pope, in cases importing the interest of the Romish Church: why may not the English Ro­manists, (considering withall the variety of occurrents and causes drawing Princes to faction and diuision) attend a disunion of the sayde confederats, and so bee caried into hopes of preferments vnder them, in case they preuayle in theyr attempts? Now concerning the Assumption of this latter conclusion: how doth it appeare, that vp­on graunt of toleration, there will ensue a League with forraine Princes? If hee could make it cleere, that the trew ground of theyr hostile proceedings agaynst the State, were in that hitherto toleration hath not been condescended vnto: I would ap­proue his Assumption. But it hath beene already declared, that other respects, and not this in question, haue drawne forrayne potentates to these attempts of hostility: and therefore no probability, the sayd re­spects continuing, of any confederation to ensue vpon the onely regard of the sayde graunt. Further, why should wee not ra­ther apprehend, that vpon our deniall to yeeld vnto a perfit and entire reformation [Page 131] pretended to bee sought by them in theyr courses of inuasion, they will refuse to growe to any capitulation and tearmes of alliance and peace with vs?

The eyght argument, is to this effect:

Toleration concurring with all other Iesuiticall practises and attempts agaynst her Maiesty, in the mayne drift and issue, which these Priesting perswaders thereof, propound vnto themselues: I must giue such answere to the Proposition of this syllogisme, as is formerly made to others of the same moulde: out of which hee would fashion a speciall poynt of wisdome for preuention of perils: it being according to the trayne of his perswasion in this be­halfe, no meane policy for auoyding our perishing in some other part of the Sea, to [Page 132] runne a course ouer the Goodwin San [...]s. For so should we doe in the admittance of toleration, thereby to preuent other prac­tises of daunger.

To the Assumption hee hath yeelded this proofe:

Hee doth so reason in the first sentence of this syllogisme, as if the sayde practises had originally proceeded from the desire of alteration in religion, and had reference onely thereto, as to theyr mayne ende: which being vntrue in sundry of them, which had for theyr principall ground, in the chiefe authors and contriuers, eyther malice and reuenge, or the humour of ambition for growing to an higher pitch of greatnes, or some respect for securing [Page 133] theyr states, by casting this flourishing Realme into confusion and combustion: it is likewise vntrew, that the sayd practi­ses will determine vppon the expiring and vanishing of the thoughts and hopes that tend to alteration. The second sentence also here set downe doth carry with it an euident vntruth. For hauing not attayned vnto theyr end by the grant of toleration: it is not freedome from trouble that will free theyr minds from thoughts and hopes of compassing it. They will no more rest satisfied in this behalfe, then a traueller, who hauing passed the one halfe of his way, wil not lay aside his hope and meanes of gayning the end of his iourney. The Quilibet affirmeth pag. 232. that euery man is bound to propagate and establish the religion he is of to the vttermost of his power. The Romanists therefore imploy­ing themselues with all care and diligence for the aduancement of the publike cause of theyr Church, some in one course of seruice, some in another, cannot but hope for such successe of theyr indeuours, as shal both ruine the State of the Gospell, and restore vnto the Pope his vsurped hereto­fore and now challenged soueraignety a­mongst [Page 134] vs. And can they hope for this is­sue of the toleration allowed them, and yet not hope for alteration? Further he saith, pag. 152. that many good Catholikes are loyall subiects, who yet will not reueale a­ny vnnaturall and monstrous conspiracies agaynst her Maiestie. To omit his treaso­nable description of a loy all subiect: Can the Romanists stand thus affected in the case of a most barbarous conspiracy against her Highnes royal person and scepter, and yet not conceiue hopes and thoughts tou­ching a chaunge? If they find fauour, they will in the opiniō of the Quilibet renounce all wishes and cogitations of this kind. Be­ing then scanted in theyr proportion of grace from her Maiestie, they will returne vnto them. Further, if wee consider the quality of the doctrines and multiplicy of Iesuiticall instructions, they are in this seed time of toleration to sow and disperse in each Prouince, City, Village, and corner of this kingdom: and shall with all remem­ber that they are to proceede in this hus­bandrie according to direction from the Pope and his subordinate officers: we shall then easily discerne, that as some funda­mentall poynts of theyr Romish doctrine [Page 135] or capitall treasons agaynst her Maiesty and this State, so howsoeuer they pretend a disclayming of the sayde hopes and thoughts, they labour notwithstanding and attend no other euent then an absolute alteration of the present religion and go­uernment.

The ninth argument.

Touching the proposition: first the readines he supposeth in the English to as­sist the Spanyard in his sayd attempts, is a matter improbable: considering that resti­tution of Religion, which must be the ground of this readines, is not the scope and end the Spanyard herein propoun­deth vnto himself, as may hereby appeare. For what should moue him to vndertake a seruice of this nature, whereto he stands [Page 136] no more bound, then her Maiestie to the planting of y^e Gospel in Spayne? Is it any spirit of zeale to the glory of Christ? An vnlikly affection in a Prince trayned vp in pleasures, so little regarding the extirpa­tion of Atheisme, and morall enormities within his owne kingdomes, serued also by such who measure religion by the line of policie. Is it any direction or perswasion from the Pope? He is not so base as to be imployed as a vassall and instrument at the appetite of a Priest. Is it the importu­nate solicitation of our English and a com­passionate regarde of them? It is neither zeale in himselfe, nor instigation of the Pope, nor any respect to fugitiues, or to the supposed distresse of others of theyr faction, that can draw a Prince of his wise­dome to an enterprise of such difficultie and streames of bloud, of so vnmeasurable expence, of so infinit hatred and quarrel, of so little aduantage to his particular. For hauing performed the restitution inten­ded, what hath he gayned thereby? If you say a kingdom, or the spoyle of a rich and furnished Countrey, with a disabling of vs to impeach him in his estate, or the benefit of confederation and alliance agaynst his [Page 137] enemies, or a reuenge of the dishonors and iniuries offered him: the answere is friuo­lous and importing the end of this action to bee other then the restitution of Reli­gion: whereto only if he directed the ayme of his attempts, hauing compassed his de­signe, hee is answerably thereto to retyre his forces from hence. But let vs graunt that he intendeth the restoring of Popery: as I thinke hee doth accidentally and by a collaterall intent: it being credible that hauing seazed vpon the imperiall Crowne and soueraignty of this kingdome, he will erect, as Ieroboam did, certaine golden calues, whereby to draw the people from all thoughts of the Lords house in Iuda. Yet may we iustly presume, that (his prin­cipall disseigne, being to satisfic his ambi­tion in the scepter, and his malice in re­uenge) the due consideration of the infi­nite, both publique and priuat indignities and calamities that will accompany the Spanyards attempt in this behalfe, will re­straine the better and wiser sort from com­ [...]ining with him. They will call to minde [...]he experience and records of his procee­dings elsewhere: and apprehend they can­not [Page 138] receiue better measure from him; then the Portingals in theyr cities and villages, the Italians in Millan and Naples, the Ne­therlanders in the Low Countries. They will remember the speech of the Duke of Medina: and thereupon conceyue that he will not bring with him, an eye to discerne betwixt a Papist and a Protestant. They cannot but reteyne in theyr conscience some remorse of duety to theyr Soue­raigne, some sparkes of piety to theyr na­tiue Countrey, some feare of insolency and oppression to bee offered on the part of the Spanyard. They will weigh with themselues, that a stranger, and the same a Spanyard, cannot be caried with that ten­der affection towards them, as her Maie­sty theyr naturall Prince: vnder whose gracious and sweete gouernement they may enioy the priuat liberty of theyr con­science, the comfort of Wife and Children, the solace of their houses, lands and goods, the entercourse of kindenesse with theyr friendes, and all priuiledges of a Subiect, vppon theyr outward conformity to her Highnesse lawes: whereas, in case they fall vnder the authority and scepter of the [Page 139] Spanyard, howsoeuer they may happely be allowed the publique and free exercise of that idolatrous Masse, yet must they be content to lye exposed in themselues, in the persons of theyr Wiues and Children, in theyr houses, lands and goods, to the vnbridled appetite and villany of euery Dom Diego. They will then finde that de­parting from her Maiesty to the Spany­ard, they haue exchanged a Salomon for a Rehoboam: whose little finger will exceede in weight, the whole strength of her Ma­iesties body. I doubt not, but these and other like regards will bee to all English Romanists, no meane inducements for re­strayning them from all correspondence with the Spanyard in his enterprise a­gaynst this State, at least during her Ma­iesties life.

But let vs with the Quilibet suppose in the English Catholiques, a readines to ioyne with the Spanyard in his sayde at­tempt. Should her Maiesty, for preuen­ting thereof, intertayne toleration? First, why rather at this present then hereto­fore? Are not her meanes for an hono­rable resistance in a most worthy cause, [Page 140] agaynst an vnprincely and irreligious at­tempt, as great and accomplished as for­merly they haue been? Are not her people as many, faithfull, and valiant? Is not the prouidence and fauour of God the same towards her? Secondly, are there not be­sides toleration, other as effectuall and suf­ficient meanes to disappoynt theyr cōcur­rence with him in this so vniust an action? Thirdly, is not toleration as ready an ad­dresse and instrument for the reestablish­ing of Popery as the Spanyards attempt? in admitting whereof, thereby to preuent all confederation with him, what should her Maiestie else doe, then amongst diffe­rent wayes to the vtter desolation of her kingdome, make choyse of that which will soonest direct & bring her vnto the same? wherein she should also proceede disa­greeably to the law of God by commit­ting a sinfull act, that some good may grow thereby. Hitherto of the Quilibets suppo­sition and consequence included in the proposition of this latter syllogisme.

In the Assumption also he offereth vnto vs an abuse. For toleration is no more fit a remedy agaynst the combination of the [Page 141] English Romanists with the Spanyard in the case of his sayd attempt, then is a large proportion of the noblest wine agaynst a burning feauer. Such is the nature of theyr religion: such the drift of popish recon­cilement: such are the courses they holde to intertayne theyr friends in the hopes of perfit reformation: and so to fashion and prepare them for all oportunities that shal bee presented to that purpose. I cannot compare toleration more aptly then to a protection granted to the Irish rebell. For as hee doth vnder the countenance and commodity of this protection repayre vn­to the principall townes and places of his acquaintance, where hee both giueth and findeth encouragements to obstinate him­selfe and others in a rebellious disposition, with directions for performance of seruice agaynst the State: and where likewise hee recey [...]eth intelligence as well of all resolu­tions and proceedings on our part, as of the meanes and abilities thereto, together with a supply of his particular defects and wants of victuall, money, munitions: and being thus furnished in euery respect, doth immediatly renounce the benefit of his [Page 142] protection, and imploy himselfe and his followers in courses of treason and rebel­lion: So vpon graunt and opportunity of the sayde toleration, the Romanists will boldly visit each Prouince, City, and cor­ner of the Realme, where ministring to o­thers, and mutually receyuing from them some heate of encouragement they will bestow theyr best endeuours in the seruice of reconcilement vnto the Pope, in raising to an higher degree the hatred alreadie conceyued agaynst our profession, in clee­ring the doctrine and obligatory power of Popish buls and censures, in procuring in­telligence in Court and countrie, in giuing and taking directions when and how to proceede in all seruices for the Romish Church, in supplying themselues with abi­lities and furnitures of each sort and na­ture: So as the time of toleration will not prooue other then, partly a seede time as well of hopes and desires to haue an entire reestablishment of the Popes soueraignty amongst vs, as of sundry proiects tending thereto, and partly also a meane of speciall aduantage whereby to fortifie theyr side, and to inable it for the execution of the [Page 143] sayd proiects. But for that the Assump­tion may seeme questionable and doubt­full, the Quilibet yeeldeth it this light:

Albeit the proposition be subiect to que­stion: yet shall it at this time passe for a probability. But the Assumption may not finde the like fauour. For who should hin­der the procuring of a new and formall excommunication to that effect, or an ab­solute repeale of the old? Are the Seculars in greater credit and grace with the Pope then eyther the Iesuite or the King of Spayne, who is specially interessed in the cause? Will the Pope in so great a likeli­hood and oportunity of preuailing against our religion, and aduancing both his owne and the Spanish title, as toleration hath of­fered [Page 144] vnto him, forbeare to vse in furthe­rance thereof so powerfull a meane as ex­communication is held to be? The Quili­bet speakes in this assumption, if he disguise not, as if the Pope and Spanyard were at his deuotion, and would in regarde of a curtesie done to the Catholikes in the cause of toleration, disclayme theyr titles of soueraignty to England: and the nee­rer they approch to the long attended and wished issue of theyr deseignments, the more irresolute and backward they would be in seconding the same.

The tenth argument.

To iustifie the Antecedent, hee telleth vs that the collections of money, which now the Iesuites enioy, and whereby they stand inabled for the seruices here speci­fied, would be otherwise disposed of vpon the admittance of toleration. For answere whereto, first it is improbable that the Ie­suits, [Page 145] men of rare giftes, of speciall fauour with the Pope and Spanyard, of extraordi­nary care and dexterity for the aduaunce­ment of the Catholique cause, should be left vnfurnished of such contributions and meanes as may serue them in that be­halfe. Secondly, though the said contributi­ons should determine or be otherwise im­ployde: yet should they not rest destitute of instruments for broking theyr treache­ries, and many others that would side and confederate with them. For toleration would in a short tyme supply vnto them gratis, a generation fitted to theyr humors. Thirdly, notwithstanding there were a trueth in the Antecedent: yet the conse­quence implying that grosse error in piety and policy, which hath been in this dispute so often obserued, deserueth checke and reiection.

The eleuenth motiue is of no more va­lidity then the former.

[Page 146] The Quilibet so dealeth with vs, as if the nature of toleration, and the effects, accompaning the same, were vnknowne to the State. When hee telleth vs therefore, that toleration will be a meane to rayse in the hearts of Catholiques, such a detesta­tion of the Iesuites, as that they will la­bour the extermination of them and theyr confederates: wee must apprehend and interpret it as a meere delusion: be­ing not ignorant that the doctrine and di­rections, which will (during the tyme of toleration) bee sowne and dispersed, doe require the imployment of Iesuites, who in the account of the Commaunders and heads of these factions, are reputed men of best sufficiency for managing the ad­uauncement of the Romish Church. And whereas hee alleageth for the grounde of this hatred agaynst the Iesuites, that they haue beene the authors of trouble to the Catholiques: herein the Catholiques, (who knew that the plots and practises a­gaynst her Maiesty and the State, haue been intertayned, not only by the Iesuits, but by the Secular Priests likewise, yea, by the Pope himselfe and the Spanyard) may iustly censure him for calumniation [Page 147] and forgery. But it being graunted that the Catholiques would hold such procee­ding agaynst the Iesuites, yet the regarde thereof cannot bee a sufficient warrant to her Maiesty, to commit an impiety, and such as is ioyned with dishonour and perill.

Hitherto of the motiues delyuered by the Quilibet, pag. 151. Here hee ceaseth not: but soliciteth elsewhere the same cause: and namely pag. 229. where hee pleadeth thus by a twelfth argument.

The twelfth argument:

The Proposition presenteth vnto vs an inconsequence. For vnlesse the vtility and aduauntage of toleration recommen­ded therein, bee euident and of continu­ance [Page 148] also (which poyntes are not cleered by the Quilibet) it cannot in the case of so notorious a chaunge, stand with the po­licy of this State, to allow and imbrac [...] it. Besides, if it were apparant, that the say de toleration would bring with it an assured and perpetuall security to her Maiesty and her Kingdomes: yet till it appeare to be iustifiable by the lawe of God, it ought not from the Scepter of a Christian Prince to receyue allowance. Let vs examine therefore what proofe hee hath of this pretended security. The Assump­tion is to acquaint vs herewith. First, hee sheweth the security her Maiesty rea­peth thereby.

For answere to the Antecedent, and the reason thereof, it may please the Reader to allow my remittance of him, to the re­futation already set downe of the same, in the sixt and eyght argument. The con­sequence inferred thereon, is no lesse idle [Page 149] and vnworthy then the Antecedent. For hee so reasoneth, as if her Maiesties royall interest and State, did wholy and entirely rest in the safety of her Person: whereas in trueth it is in generall extendable to each particular of her Soueraignety: so as shee may bee free from daunger in her Royall Person, and yet suffer exceeding preiudice by incrochment vppon her Crowne and Supremacy, by reconcile­ment of her Subiects to the obedience of a forrayne potentate, by courses held for the ruine of the Gospell, established by her authority, by practises for discouery of her resolutions, and for betraying some parte of her dominions vnto her ene­mies. The Quilibets consequence therefore being the concluding of a generall vppon a particular, is to receyue no approbation from vs. Secondly, touching the security that is to growe to the State in generall: the grounde of his dispute is the same which is set downe in the precedent argu­ment of safety to her Highnesse Person: and therefore to receyue the same aun­swere. Thirdly, concerning the Nobility and Bishops, hee yeeldeth no proofe of se­security [Page 150] growing by toleration vnto them: as in deede he cannot: it being cleere, that they shall receyue thereby speciall preiu­dice, if not presently, yet at least, in re­gard of the proceedings likely to bee held, for vndermining the Soueraignety of her Maiesty and the State in generall, both Ecclasiasticke and Ciuill: vnlesse it bee conceyued, that they are not to communi­cate in the publique calamities and mise­ries of the Common-wealth. The Ho­nourable and Reuerend Fathers of our Churche are not (I graunt) immediatly vpon the admittance of toleration, to su­stayne any hinderance in they present in­cumbency, and the authority annexed thereto, or any abatement in theyr reue­newes. But who can warrant and assure theyr continuance in these termes for any tyme? Considering they are to haue on the part of the Catholiques sundry con­currents: who out of opinion that the honour and present interest of the places Episcopall belongeth vnto them, will ac­cordingly prepare the way for theyr fu­ture inuestiture.

For a further inducement of our al­lowance [Page 151] to toleration, hee perswadeth it pag. 271. The thirteenth motiue there­fore is this.

Concerning the Antecedent: such of them as doe scandalously and with schisme withdrawe themselues from our publique congregations, refusing there to serue the Lorde with vs in Prayer, in hearing the word preached, and receyuing the Sacra­ments, her Maiesty permitteth not, but punisheth theyr contempt and irreligious cariage, according to the lawe prouided in that behalfe. The Antecedent therefore contaynes an vntruth. The consequence also deduced from it, is no lesse exorbitant and out of square. For first, the Sectaries mentioned in the Antecedent holde not, for ought I knowe, any opinions directly opposite, eyther to the Maiesty of God, or her Highnesse Soueraignety, as the Ro­manist doth: and they were neuer found as I thinke, conuict of treasonable practi­ses agaynst her sacred Person and the [Page 152] State, as numbers haue beene of the Ro­mish faction: Secondly, if they did dis­loyally offend, both in opinion and prac­tise, yet could it stand with no policy, by admittance of Popery, to adde a multi­tude of Romanists to the sayd Sectaries, and so to suffer a multiplication and in­crease of disloyall Subiects. Thirdly, the perill from the sayde Sectaries, and the English Romanists, is not to her Maiesty and the State alike: the latter being more daungerous then the former, not onely in opinion of doctrine and vndutifull cari­age, but for theyr number and dependen­cy at home and abroade. And this is the iudgement of the State, as may appeare by the sundry penall statutes, prouided agaynst the one, and not agaynst the o­ther. So as there is not the like reason for toleration of the Romanist, as there is for permission of the Brownist and the rest. But the Quilibet fearing the weakenesse of the sayd consequence, doth thus streng­then it:

If the Brownists and the rest aboue mentioned, were as impious in opinion as the Heretiques and Idolaters permitted by the Emperour Commodus: and if the English Romanists were in the articles of religion as sound, and in the practise of o­bedience to theyr Soueraigne as loyall, as the Christians were, in whose fauour A­thenagoras tendred his apology & humble sute: I would then take no exception to the sayd consequence, but allow of it for such as were no lesse iustifiable then that of Athenagoras. But sith there appeareth a mayne difference betwixt our Romanists and the sayd Christians, these being free from iust charge of Idolatry agaynst God, and of disloyaltie towards the Emperour, whereas the sayd Romanists stand conuin­ced of both: and sith likewise the Barowists [Page 154] and Brownists doe offend in a lesse degree of error and impiety, then the Sectaries and Idolaters to whom the sayd Emperor allowed place for the exercise of their su­perstition: we must censure and reiect the Quilibets consequence in the case propo­sed for an inconsiderate poynt of sophi­strie.

The fourteenth argument.

The Quilibet being carefull to record and publish to the worlde her Maiesties proceedings agaynst some Papists, for such as exceed in barbarousnes and tyranny the acts and courses of the greatest persecuton that euer breathed vnder the Sunne, doth, not out of his owne conceit and in his own name (for hee would traduce and defan [...] [Page 155] her Highnes and the State, and yet with­out perill to himselfe) but out of the ap­prehension of others and in theyr name, deliuer at large that all former persecutors come short of her Maiestie in cruelty a­gaynst Catholikes. But in the end, least he might (notwithstanding the cariage of this trayterous imputation vnder the shadow of others) be challenged for the same: he smootheth the matter on his owne part, and as if he allowed her Maiesties procee­dings, which elsewhere hee brandeth with the title of an vniust vexation he tendreth an answere and defence in the behalfe of them. He sayth therefore that considering the English Romanists sought the death of theyr Soueraigne, the conquest of theyr natiue countrey, the subuersion of the State, the alteration of all lawes and cu­stomes, the destruction of all the ancient inhabitants of the land: it is rather to bee wondred that one Catholike should bee left aliue in England, then that theyr per­secution hath been so great. Which answer of his her Maiesty may take for a sufficient warrant for her forbearance of imitating the sayd Emperours in this particular of [Page 156] allowing Chappels and Churches for the exercise of Popery. The Christians, to whom this fauour was yeelded, were not in opinion, affection and action traytors to God and to the Emperours, as some pre­tended Catholikes haue been and are vn­to God and her Maiestie: and therefore the cause of the sayd Christians and the English Romanists being so vnlike and different, her Maiesty is not to hold the like course towards the one, as the Empe­rours held towards the other.

The fifteenth argument.

No action of a Pagan and atheall Mo­narch ought in a question of the worship and seruice of the Lord to be a president vnto a Christian Prince. Besides, such to whom the Persian and Turke allow this liberty, doe neither in opinion derogate ought from theyr soueraignty, nor in ac­tion attempt any thing agaynst the same, nor for number or other respects are able [Page 157] so to doe: whereas in the case of the Ro­manists within this kingdome it is farre o­therwise: they being for opinion aduersa­ries to her Maiesties supremacie, for loyal­tie freed by popish buls from acknow­ledgement of alleageance vnto her, for af­fection deuoted to a forrayne Potentate, for theyr carriage in plot and action here­tofore conspirators agaynst God & theyr Prince, for intention and wish aymers at alteration, for number dependency, confe­deracy as well forraine as domesticke and other correspondent abilities, strong and to be suspected. Vpon which regards I do inferre that the proceeding of the Persian and Turk in this cause of toleration, ought not to be vnto her Maiesty a direction for doing the like.

The sixteenth argument.

[Page 158] The Quilibet offereth vnto vs an [...] truth in the Antecedent. For the Princes and Gouernours of the Countries here mentioned, and all other Potentates hol­ding correspondence in religion with the Pope as they doe, haue for the most part both in plot and action imployed theyr vtmost policy and meanes to the supplan­ting and extirpation of the Gospell and the professors thereof within theyr king­domes and territories: hauing for war­rant of theyr proceedings in this behalfe the decree and resolution of the Councell of Trent, particular directions from the Pope, and the iudgement of the Prelates and Clergy within they owne dominions. It is not vnknowne how passionate and violent the Spaniard hath been now a long time for an vtter suppression of the holy truth, professed by some his subiects. His Inquisition, his secret combination with the Guisian, his armies by sea and land do testifie agaynst him. The riuers of bloud that France in the dayes of Henry the se­cond, but especially of his three sonnes suc­cessiuely hath seene in attempts and mas­sacres agaynst the Hugonots, are scarce yet [Page 159] dry. What should I speake of the courses held agaynst the Gospell in Flanders? and heretofore in Germany and England? Is there at this day any popish Prince and gouernour, who is of sufficient power to displant and subuert the profession of the same within his seuerall iurisdictions, and doth it not? If any shall alleage the tole­ration of religion at this present in France: he must consider that the sayd religion is allowed vpon the same ground of necessi­ty and dishability on the part of the Ca­tholikes to expugne and ruine it, as it was in the time of Charles the 9. and Henry the third. [...]or were they of sufficient strength to remoue or abolish it: well might the memorie and name of Hugonots remayne in theyr records: assuredly theyr persons should not hold other place and interest there, then now they do at Seuil in Spaine, or at Millan and Rome in Italy: in which places there is streight order taken to pro­ceede with al rigour agaynst them where­as if the Pope, Spanyard and other Prin­ces of like iudgement and affection in reli­gion held it the safest course to graunt li­berty of conscience, as the Quilibet vntruly [Page 160] insinuateth, they would repeale theyr E­dicts and decrees agaynst Protestants, can­cell and frustrate the power of the Inqui­sition, spare all search after theyr persons, surcease theyr confiscations and all crimi­nall processe agaynst them.

As the Antecendent deserueth no credit with vs: so the consequence inferred ther­on may iustly be censured. For, disproofe whereof, we must remember that R [...]tion [...] & legibus viuitur non exomplis. Experience hath euicted it to bee a course of perill for princes to gouerne themselues by exāples, especially where there is not a cōcurrence of the same reasons and circumstances in­ducing thereto. Now in this case of allow­ing toleration, the circumstances and rea­sons are not like: first, in the Princes themselues, of which the Emperor, the French, the Spanyard, the Polonian, [...]e for outward profession and practi [...], de­uoted Papists: whereas her Maiesty pro­fesseth the Gospell. Secondly, in the par­ticular to be graunted: they supposed to allowe the free exercise of the Gospell, a doctrine in it selfe most lawfull and holy, and which yeeldeth vnto Princes, euery [Page 161] parcell of theyr honour, and euery poynt of Soueraignety: whereas her Maiesty is solicited to the admittance of Popery, a thing in it selfe impious, and which de­nyeth vnto Princes, a Soueraigne interest and power ouer theyr Subiects, and trans­ferreth it to a forraine Potentate. Thirdly, in the ground and motiues of graunting this libertie: the sayd Princes (I meane such of them as haue yeelded herein) in­duced thereto not out of humour to gra­tifie theyr subiects, nor out of respects of security to theyr persons and States, but out of extreame necessity, as absolutely disabled to preuaile agaynst them: whereas no such violent and desperate regard doth as yet inforce her Maiesty vnto it. Lastly in the persons, to whom this fauour of to­leration is to be communicated: they, the sayd Princes allowing it to such, who re­pute and acknowledge them for their law­full Soueraignes, and who neuer plotted or attempted ought agaynst their Crowne and life: whereas her Maiesty is to impart and yeeld it to those who hold her for dis­inuested by the Popes bull of her impe­riall Crowne and regalities, who haue dis­posed [Page 162] of theyr alleageance to a forrayne Prince, who haue been interessed in pro­iects and practises agaynst her royall per­son and State, and who are ready vpon opportunity offered, and vpon direction mandatory receyued from the Vicar of Rome, to take armes for the subuersion of her scepter and the Gospell. So as the ex­amples propounded to perswade and in­force an imitation in her Maiesty, carying with them so many differences in the cir­cumstance of the persons and things in questions are not meete presidents, and such from which a sound consequence may be deduced to draw allowance from her Maiestie of the toleration solicited.

The seauenteenth Argument is in pag. 280.

[...]cerning the Antecedent: first, it is [...] and vncertaine, whether vpon [Page 163] this occasion they would surcease trans­mitting theyr youths to the sayd Semina­ryes. Secondly, if they should: yet theyr institution of discipline within the Realme, may bee the same for substance, and to the same intent and purpose, it hath beene formerly in the sayde Seminaryes: consi­dering that toleration is able to furnish vnto them instructors, and doctrines of the same quality and vse. But let vs sup­pose the contrary: should her Maiesty, to preuent theyr trayning in a schoole of treachery, giue place and intertainement to toleration? VVere not this to cure the indisposition of some members of the State, by a remedy fitted in euery respect to augment the malady, yea, to infect the whole body? Besides, to consent to an alteration of this nature and consequence, as toleration is of, were not onely agaynst the rule of piety and duty to God, but a­gaynst the law also of ordinary policie and wisedom, except in the case of deliuerance from greater and imminenter perill, and in counterchaunge of profits more impor­ting. To receiue and allow the free exer­cise [Page 164] of Poperie in the State by publike au­thoritie, were to broch a vessell of poyson and to haue the Antidote vncertaine: or to rayse a flame in a Citie, and to leaue the quenching ther­of to doubtfull pos­sibilities.