ALTHOVGH your skill in Phy­sike make you write thatLetter to M. T. H. pag. 10. much fasting causeth a vertigo, or giddines of the braine, yet could I haue wish­ed that you had read fasting those few lines of my Treatise which cō ­cerne your selfe; perhaps that which now you mi­stake as vttered to your reproach, would haue seemed spoken rather in your Honour. For you might haue perceaued that in my short Censure you so much re­pine [Page 2] at, I did deuide the three degrees of comparision betwixt your three most cōmendable qualities, Va­lour, Learning, Wit. I gaue the positiue to your Va­lour, which I did suppose was famous, though not being acquainted with your particuler exploites, I could not inlarge my selfe in your military praises. The comparatiue I did assigne to your Pen, which is better knowne vnto me, and seeming to deserue precedence, I termed more famous, praising your curious stile, which though ouer light for a graue Deuine, I was willing to winke thereat, thinking such a gaudy attire might beseme a courtly Writer. To your Wit I did reserue the superlatiue degree, whose high pitch, with an allusion to your name I did ex­presse vnder the metaphor of a soaring Byrd. Nei­ther did my dull capacity then mark how nigh a kin to a Buzzard the soaring Byrd was I did allude vnto. My conceipt, which you acknowledg to be simple, did without any fraud sincerly ayme at your praise. If I did prefer your Wit and Learning, before your Valour, you haue no iust cause of offence; for I prai­sed in you those things most, which are most proper to men, giuing you Excellency before some men in those qualities, by which all men exceed brute beastes: which apprehension of your Witt, if it did extenuate in my thoughts the iust value of your courage, I might excuse my error with a verse of Cato, Ingenio pollet cui vim na­tura nega­uit. with which kind of stuffe you fill your margent.

2. But now your Counter-snarle maketh me fall into the account, and find the true cause why so mild a censure might driue you into so great fitts of cholar: your ambitious thoughts soare so high in the conceipt [Page 3] of your owne Worth, that meane commendations cannot reach them. You must haueCoun­tersn. p. 3. Pandora's box with all guifts in the superlatiue degree bequeathed vnto you. You say, you will notpag. 20. vndertake to be so cunning a star-gazer as to determine whether Mars or Mercurie had the predominance in your natiuity, which also may be the cause that you say I cannot distinguish betwixt a Helmet and a Couentrie Cap, because I did crowne you rather with Mercuries Hat, then Mars his Helmet. Though you speake much against prai­sing ones selfe both in text and margent, where you cite a verse of Cato against that folly, Nec te collaudes, nec te culpaueris ipse; yet you are so vnmindfull of the very next verse, Hoc faciunt stulti, quos gloria vexat inanis, that you play Miles gloriosus almost in euery page of your Pamphlet. Your skill in Logicke hath made as pa. 60. tall Logitians as my selfe to scratch the best poule they had for an answer. Your cōceipt is so exquisit that you can vnderstandpag. 58. not only the argument, but euen the most artificiall conueyance of the best writers; your memory is so miraculous, that you are ablepag. 59. to cyte more then a peece of S. Austen at the table without a prompter, insinuating that you haue the larg volumes of that learned Father without booke. Your martiall valour hath madepa. 20. your enemies feele the sharpnes of your sword, though such hath bene your happines, that your enemies haue bene few. I confesse my pen, though desirous to spread it selfe in your praise within the compasse of truth, durst not reach the high pitch of this your self-flattering flight.

3. And now seing you prouoke me therunto, though I be loath to meddle with your Mars, yet thus [Page 4] much I will adde, that your Letter wherin I found token of Wit, gaue me iust cause to suspect your Va­lour. First because therin you declare what a most dis­mall terrour of death hath possessed your thoughts, in prudēt contempt wherof Fortitude doth consist. You confesseLetter to M. T. H. pag. 3. that the horrour of the gun-powder plot doth still liuely represēt before you, euen in my dreams (say you) and imprint in my most serious thoughts that furious blast, which I my selfe, my poore selfe, should haue sensibly felt. Had you detested that wicked treason, as a bloudy massacre of so many worthy Peeres of the Realme, had you trembled therat as at anConters. 67. Eryn­nicall attempt against his sacred Maiesty & his Royall issue, with a moderate feeling of your priuate danger, such a fit might haue beseemed a Knight. Now the only cause of your tears and fears are, I, poore I, which II's had that powder put out, the common wealth had not lost any whit of her sight.

4. No lesse want of Nobility and Valour doe you shew in desiring, that the most superlatiue seuerity, and sharpest research may be prosecuted against Ca­tholicks, especiallyLetter pag. 4. Priests and Iesuites, whom you terme the Viperous brood of those mercilesse hell-hounds, Quibus, say you, ipsa misericordia me viuo numquam ignosceret, whom mercie it self should be thought cruell euer to forgiue. Executiō in these cases were better then disputation. How gladly I would see the one may ap­peare by my forward attempt of the other. And in your margent you make a verse that excedeth no lesse in fury then in feet, stulta est clementia perituro parcere funi. Thus we may be sure, that as long as your Pa­trimonie lasteth, ropes shall not want to hang vs; yea [Page 5] rather then the mercie of the Prince should spare vs, you seeme ready to play the executioner your selfe. Can any noble bloud harbour in that hart, that is so greedy of their innocēt bloud who detest that bloudy plott, more, and for higher respects then your self? TheCorpo­ra magna­nimo satis est pro­strasse le­oni. Lyon spareth his prostrate enemy, wherasAt lupus & turpes in­stant mo­rientibus vrsi. you long to teare out our harts, in which you cannot find any sinne, besides an ouer feruent desire to help you to heauen.

5. Which my charitie and respect towards you the world will more admire, seeing you protest in that LetterLett. p. 5. to detest irreconciliably all the incendiaries of the Romish forge, so your snarling stile pleaseth to tearme vs according to your manner, not ourQui­busdam canibus innatum est, vt ex sola con­suetudine latrent. me­rit. You will reckon it, you say, amongstpag. 4. your ca­pitall and dreadfull sinnes, if you doe not your best both by sword and pen to reueng that treason, signifying, that you mean with these two weapons to make hauock both of our soules & bodyes, working our temporall death by the one, our eternall by the other. If this be your meaning, I do not meruaile that in your Kitish affection you directed vnto Catholick ladyes a Let­ter fraught with falshood, and prophane arguments against truth, which preuayling might haue caused the death of their soules. You thought such rare Crea­tures as you tearme them, an easy and obuious prey, being for the most part vnlearned, not knowing that they had learned of Christ to ioyneMat. 10. the wisdome of the serpent, with the simplicitie of the doue. That you had that cruell intent, you giue me iust cause to think by the vow which you are ready to makepag. [...]. neuer to forgiue vs (did not your protestant Charitie giue you a re­straint) [Page 6] vntill you heare our pardon pronounced by the mouth of the most supreme Iudg, when forsooth we shall haue great need of your pardon. But though you were restrained in your text, you take liberty in your margent, [...]. saying in Greeke, you will forgiue vs neither in this world, nor in the world to come, & in a Latin verse, Ante leues ergo pascētur in aethere cerui; Staggs in the ayre shall sooner fly and feed. Let him make the case his owne that cēsureth me for ouer much bitternes. Thus you.

6. Can there be greater cruelty then the desire of our eternall perdition, to vow it with your mouth, and seeke it with your penne? You say in your excuse, that the diuell could not deny pellem pro pelle, but your Protestant Charitie seemeth to ex­ceed the diuells cruelty, not content to haue had the skins of those that would haue had yours: you seeke also that their soules, yea the soules of others that professe the same faith may be damned for the sinnes of those few. Is this Protestant charitie? Tantae ne animis caelestibus irae? I cannot beleiue that indeed such barbarous desires lodge in your brest. I thinke your passionate pen exceeded your angrie wishes: yet you cannot deny, but it was charity in me to wink at such vnworthy writing, and, notwithstanding your protested irreconciliable hatred against vs, to vse you with all due respect, not laying the blemishes to your Valour and Nobility, which I might; yea I let both your sword and your penne, our professed enimies, passe without touch, yea rather with praise.

7 Another tokē could I alledg that you want knight­ly Prowesse, namely your singuler dexterity in the vse of the feminine weapon. A barking curre seldome [Page 7] bites; scarce shall you find one valiant of his hands, that doth delight to skirmish with words; he semeth to want the courage of valiant Hector to fight in his owne defence, that like snarling Hecuba seekes verball reuenge. You cannot deny your barking language, which as you shame not to professe in the title: so lik­wise you fayle not to performe in your Treatise: the first Paragraph wherof not able to number threescore lines chargeth the Church of Rome with all these re­proaches, Her artificiall shaddowes, vgly shape, counterfet colours, wrinkled deformities, bainfull lust, forging and forcing the countenance of Antiquitie, impious positions, whorish practises, vsurping impudency, impudent vsurpa­tion, a shrewish, distracted, malecontent in her franticke mood, pulling, hailing, spurning, scratching, & tearing all that stands in her way, though neuer so noble by descent, eminent in place, profound in Iudgment, famous for [...]rning, skilfull in tongues, that if they refuse to daunce a round in her Orgious Anticke, she wil be sure they shal not passe without a broken head or blacke eie. Her suborned Pandars, whifling Agents, venemous crudities, maleuo­lous aspersions, surfeyted stomakes, infectious dregs, and Hellish drugs cast out of her sulphurious pit.

8. These and other snarles you sound out within the compasse of few lines; if (as you say)Coun­ters. p. 24. he which bringeth a great army into the feild without victuals or munition, is like to goe by the worst, you that muster an army of reproaches against the Church without the munition of any proofe, without any bit of reason to maintaine and make them good, what may you expect? I feare you will goe by the worst title that men of your Order haue, to be thought a taller [Page 6] [...] [Page 7] [...] [Page 8] man of your tougne then of your hands. You make a long discourse of the pag. 19. bushells of salt you eate in forrē countries, Enumerat miles vul­nera. which made you so wise, that you neuer ran on the pikes of needlesse dangers: you speake much of your warres, but litle of your wounds; the cause wherof I do thinke was indeed your Heedines, which I doe commend,p. 68. Periti bel­latoris est non minùs scire fugien­di artem quàm pug­nandi. and allow that principle of valour you set downe in latin (u) that a good souldier should know as well how to runn away, as to fight, which I meane to practise if you challenge me to the field, as the Poesy of your Snarle, Comitātur praelia praelum, may seeme to threaten.

9. I cannot think that your not being giuen to quarells is the reason you sleep in a sound skin, except feare make your tongue lesse vnruly then your pen. You are ready to giue me the lye in defence of a Hang-man,pag. 16. because I said he put a Priest to death in Oxford: you quarrell with me about a crabb:pag. 39. Doth he not deserue, say you of me, the wood of the crabb, that is angry with the crabb of the wood? I know not what should make such sowre stuffe so sweet to your mouth, that you are iealous it should come nigh vnto mine, that you seeme ready to giue me the basti­nado for only naming the Crabb after you, without adding any syllable of mine owne. Well, you see that I was sparing in my censure both of your witt and valour, your Knighthood keeping my pen in awe that he who shall peruse my lines which you tra­duce as respectlesse, will find I did not vtter one word without due regard of that Honorable Order. I did forbeare to thrust at you because you were a Knight, though you came on my pen, still seeking [Page 9] some Minister on whome I might lay the wound of your inexcusable vntruthes.

10. One thing you cannot brooke (which I will not deny I spake, as I well might without any disgrace to your Knight-hood or iniury vnto truth) that I termed your Cursory lines (so you name your elucubrations, that you say smell of the lampe p. 62. an vnlearned Letter. You appeale top. 10. Parnassus, and would wash away this staine with Helicons water: you take Sanctuary amongst the sacred Sisters of vvhose familiarity you bragge that were it not that infirmity doth suppresse the virility of your spirit, you could perhaps readily shew as many of their fauours, as I can, though I seeke and search all the corners of my deske. I will not contend with you about Parnassus, ney­ther do I enuy your familiarity with the Poe­ticall Sisters of Apollo his quire, vnto whome (though in my childehood I knew them, yet) since I could number thrice fiue yeares of my lyfe I haue bene a stranger, my tyme hath bene spent and my delight settled in more worthy and grauer studdy of Philoso­phicall and Theologicall verities; want of which in your cursory lines (as you tearme them) made me call them an vnlearned Letter: and your appealing to Parnassus and bragging of the many fauours affoarded vnto you by the Sacred Systers, cannot proue your said Let­ter to be learned in such sense as I tearmed it vnlearned.

11. I would be loath to be so full as you [Page 10] seeme to be of those waters which flowe so fast from your penne, as they ouerrun your paper, your marginall verses drowning the truth of your text. Sobrietie might smile to see the Poe­trie of the one, snarle at the Prose of the other; though sometymes euen when they iarre most, a man shall find truth in neyther. The first sen­tence of your Snarle shalbe witnesse thereof, which may serue as a perspectiue vnto the rest: there you say, that heresie in all ages hath con­triued artificiall shaddowes, which your margi­nall muse gain-sayeth in a Latin verse.

Importing, that witty impiety wanteth art: A manifest vntruth as the world knoweth, yet no lesse notoriously false is your Prose, that the countenance of venerable Antiquitie is the artificiall colour wherewith Heresie doth paint herselfe. For that Heresie in former ages still disclaymed from venerable Antiquity, still refused to stand to the Tradition of Ancestours, still varnished her wrincled deformityes with faire places of Scripture, as is your Protestant practice, you would not now be to learne, were your knowledge in Eccle­siasticall Hystoryes equall to your skill in Poeticall fables. Thus you fight with your text against your margent, with your margent against your text, with both against the truth, nay sometymes your Muse is so madde that in a Poeticall fury, she not only crosseth your text, but also woundeth your honour. Such are the verses you bestow on your Indian weed.

which verses may giue a shrewd suspition that you who haue byn a great friend therof, are tainted with that infamous disease.

12. But Syr the Learning with want wherof I charged your Letter, is neyther Parnassian, nor Poe­ticall, nor prophane, but sacred, holy, diuine, which not Apollo but Christ teacheth, water which not Helicon, but Scripture yieldeth, gotten not by light familiarity with sacred sisters, but by diligent & exact reading of Holy Fathers, in whose writings what a strāger you are, this my Letter will sufficiētly discouer. It will appeare that you reuile the learned muses of the Christian Church, whome you neuer read: the doctrines which they most clearly deliuer you dare affirme were not taught but by Heathens & Hobgoblius; the interpretations they deriue from the fōtaine of Scripture you say were fecht from the pit of Hell. These things shallbe made cleare in the Chapters that follow: now to dispach all your toyes, before we enter into more serious matter, I will shew the vanity of your weake assaults against my Treatise, which you seeke to disgrace, that the comparison of your pouerty, with my pag. 11. nullity, may purchase you the title of mediocrity. You tearme my booke apag. 5. little pretty Pigmey; yet like one besi­eging a stronge fortresse you ride thrice about it, seeking where you may make a breach to enter, bat­tering the lines therof first with flies, then with fyes, finally with lyes.

13. First you search how often I haue named [Page 12] the fly or spider, pag. 12. noting in your margent that those two creatures one with the other haue beene forteene tymes put into my whole treatise, together charging the same with soloecismes, incongruities of speach, iesting at a parenthesis which you call iobbing in my first sentence, that many a good mans dogge, say you, hath broken his leg ouer a lesse stile. I must confesse sir I doe not bumbast my bookes with your fustian phrases, nor builde my stile as you do of strange trees cut from forraine forrests; that sure I am, none will acknowledge your language to be English, except you get a Parliament to naturalize it. My drift in writing is not to bee admired, but vnder­stood, which makes mee not sticke to vtter my mind rather in a crabbed then a new created phrase thinking it lesse harme that a cauelling curre pricke his foote, then any learned man breake his head. To climbe vnto my meaning I am more curious that my doctrine bee true, then my speach smooth, thinking the booke written in a stile good inough, when wordes are so laide in order, & lines drawne in such compasse that they keep iust proportion with their center, to wit truth, towardes which I did presuppose the hartes of those worthy Gentlemen vnto whome I wrote did so mainly incline, that the thornes of my phrases had it beene more crabbed thē one iobbing parenthesis can make it, would not hold them backe from perusing my Treatise. Neyther can I say, that therein I haue beene deceiued of my hope.

14. But I haue bene, you say (h) for want of a good mydwife fiue yeares in trauaile with my lisping Pigmey: wheras you whelped in few months your snarling [Page 13] puppye: to which I might answere that a hastie bich bringeth forth blind whelps. The seeliest birds are soonest flushSancti­us his ani­mal men­tis (que) capa­cius altae.. Natures perfectest worke in many yeares arriueth vnto mature ripenes; Minerua's, fruit­full plant is long a growing, wheras many barren trees spring vp a pace.

My fortune is not like yours, to haue still a good midwyfe at hand: the smoake of your chimney in­uiting learned Ministers to your table, who, as you seeme to confesse,p. 61. lend you their helping-hand in the prompt deliuerie of your Impes. Wherin you compare your selfe to Iupiter, who was faine to send for Vulcan & his hatchet, before Pallas could come into the world; without the help of these Vulcās & their sharp hatchets, that hewed it out of your head, you might perchance haue bene more yeares in building your faire Pallas, then I spent on my litle Pinnace, though those that know me, can tell, that after I seriously vndertook the task, I was not about it so many months as yow name yeares. In busines of this na­ture I desire to make no more hast, then good speed, Sat citò, si sat bene. The thing is dispatched soone that is perfourmed well. None are more subiect to shamefull falles, then such as ride post, as your cursorie lines seeme to doe in the slippery veyne of writing.

15. I know the Fathers eye is a partiall [...]udge in the beautie of his owne Childe, yet you giue me good hope that my Creatures will not seeme deformed, where learning with indifferencie shall passe her censure, seeing your [Page 14] curious and carping sight, which the least flye could not escape, hath not bene able to shew therin any true fault. Were not Canon-shot wanting to batter the sides of my Pinnace, the substance of my discourse, yourpuerilis sane & au­gusti pe­ctoris re­prehensio. Arnob. l. 1. con. gentes childish squibbs would not flye so fast at the saile of my stile: you that accuse me of leaden art, could you haue found in my answere, leaden sentences to haue made bulletts against me, you would not haue sought to cracke my credit with fourteen flyes, with solaecismes, & incongruities of speach. Sure I am the most iudicious Censurers esteeme some few such seeming faults not to bevt facit factem nae­uus, quod dicitur, venustiorē: sic vitia quaedam orationis audiunt fi­gurae & ornamenta. blemishes but rather ornaments in the purest writers, both of the Latin and Grecian language. The stile is childish which still feareth the rod, not daring to depart one sillable from the rules of Grammar: neither would you be so sollicitous about a Solaecisme were not the terrour of Eaton schoole still fresh in your memorie. As in a consort of sweet voyces a discord now and then doth make the musick more pleasing; so thesolaecis­mi sunt a­pud poli­tissimos v­truis (que) l [...]nguae. worthyest writers haue left some iobbs passe in their workes, which do rather delight then offend a Iudicious reader. Thus might I defend solaecismes and incongruities of speach, which yet you obiect without any proofe. Truly Syr, these trifling cauills force me to confesse, that you had reason to call me Buzzard, pag. 21. for comparing you to a soaring bird of the Eagle-kind, who thus houer ouer my booke to catch flyes, that one cannot so soone light one my paper, but you haue it straight in your margent. This then is your first assault or batterie to my phrase with flyes.

[Page 15]16. No lesse vaine is your second assault with fyes. For hauing wrong the necke of the first word in my Treatise backward, & made a fye of an if, you runne defying the pious practice of Gods Church proued by me, without any reason in the world a­gainst them. You criepag. 11. fye vpon my genericall and accidentall christening of Bells, and relatiue honour of Images. The first of which practises that it may seeme to deserue your squeamish fye, your snarler in the cō ­ueyance therof into your booke slauereth it with his false mouth. For where doe you find that Bells are christened, either generically or accidentally, in my booke, or in any Catholick writer? I say, that the Blessing of Bells hath some genericall similitude with the christening of a child, which may be found betwixt things of very different name and nature. A geniricall christening I did not tearme it: neither would you infer it, had your nullitie of iudg­ment any mediocritie of logick. I brought an exam­ple of a Wether, which hath many conueniences with a man, yet is not a man, nor may be so termed. And I meruaile that in the first place you would but at the bramble-bush of this sottish slander, where M. Crashaw his Wether stuck by the Hornes. A Hoby to giue you a domesticall exāple, hath generi­call cōuenience with the Bird & Beast, whence me­taphors are drawne, to reproach want of witt vnto men, yet he may be thought worthy of those meta­phors, who should thence infer, that an Hoby is either an accidentall Buzzard, or a genericall Asse.

Nec vitulum tauro, nec equum committis onagro. Indeed I am indebted vnto your curious Printer [Page 16] for the last syllable of Razias, which he solemnly calling the world to witnes, bestowed one me and my heires for euer, togeather with the rich Iewell of your latin marginall note. ‘Numquam ego hominem magis Asinum vidi.’ When we shall here you shift of your grosse cor­ruptions of S. Augustines sayings vnto the mispression of the printer, you will giue me iust occasion to re­pay the man that sallyble in good and lawfull money, with all the reuenues and arrerages therof, euen to the last asse. Which now to discharge by your Lo­gicke out of genericall conueniences inforcing the specificall name, were counterfait coyne, and a signe that such a Logitian doth still retaine the sense of that sillable to himselfe, the sound whereof he giueth away to another. Thus the first fye returnes on your owne falshood, seing the phrase of christened Bells did neuer ring in our Church, nor perchance in the world before, witting or foolish mispression made them gingle at the heeles of a Hoby, whence such witlesse cauils may be thought to proceed, rather then from the head.

16. Secondly you cannot conceiue nor your stomacke disgest my relatiue honour of Images, yet I doe much feare you often practice relatiue loue of the Images of those fayre creatures you keepe in your Chamber, referring your inward affections vnto liuing obiects, whilest your eyes behold senselesse Pictures. I wounder any man should be so dull as not to vnderstand that which euen children con­ceiue, that honour done to the Images is no iniurie to the Person, or that a Christiā will denie to Christ [Page 17] in his Image, what any honorable personage may challenge vnto his. You that crie fie of the relatiue honour of our Sauiour in his Crosse, how would you haue snarled at theHieron Epist. 170. noble Ladies of the Primitiue Church, that did licke with their religious tongues the dust of that thrice venerable relique. Happie was that glorious Matrone Paula, that wonder of Sancti­ty, and miracle of Contempt of the world; highly esteemed by S. Hierome,Epist. 127. Epi­taph. Pau­lae. Prostrata ante Crucé quasi pen­dentem dominum cer­neret ado­rabat. that when she did vse to lie prostrate before the Crosse, therin with a liuely faith adoring Christ, your curst curre was not present. He would haue distracted her deuotions by biting her by the great toe, as Acts and Mo­num. in the life of Cranmer. Franc-Mason of Consecrat. p. 68. another Protestant dogg did the Pope, or at least by yolping at her in an impure lang­uage, that she prostrated her selfe to the Antichristian Beast, stained herselfe with her owne workes, went a whoring after her owne inuentions: in which foule language you snarle at our CatholickIn your Epist. to the Collap­sed Ladys. Ladies.

17. I hoped that in my answere to M. Cra­shawes eight wound, that practise was so declared, that none could haue mistaken or misliked the same, that should peruse that discourse, yet now I find my selfe deceaued in you: perhaps because I did not ex­emplify in some obiect that came within the reach of your Tobacco-pipe. Wherfore now to satisfie your sensualitie, tell me I beseech you, what you think of that relatiue honour, which oneI. D. of your fellow Tobaccaean writers did vse to practise towards the picture of his Mistresse; which he kept in his Chamber, with this prayer vnto it, Illumina tene­bras m [...]s Lightē my darke­nes deare Lady., before which he did not omitt to doe morning and euening deuotions, prostrate on the [Page 18] ground? was that prayer made to the dumbe Image, and not to his louing Mistres? Did his thoughts a­dore the dead colours of the picture and not her fresh rosie cheeks which therein he did behold? O glori­ous cause which by such Epicureans is impugned who worship Bacchus or Cupid in their chambers, yet against vs professe themselues graue Cinicks, Doggish, and Diogenicall writers! They cannot, forfooth, vnderstand the relatiue honour of Christ his Image, yet before Images of Venus they can di­rect their humble duty and harty affection vnto Queanes, which is nothing els but their relatiue ho­nour of foule pictures. Certainely they could neuer misconster or mislike the pious directing of diuine honour to Christ before his sacred Image, were not their witts as dull in diuine matters, as they are sharpe in sensual obiects, were they not a kin to the creature of Dunne colour, or to that monster whose head is as blockish as his body swinishCui caput est Asini, cete­ra mem­bra Suis.. If this discourse seem to you sharpe, remember the cause you haue giuen, who runn rayling at ancient doctrines, and pious practises of the Church, declared in my Treatise, without bringing any sillable of new proofe against them.

18. In this squeamish veyne you caste a Fye vpon my saying, that by Metaphore God may be sayd to haue deuided his Kingdome with the Virgin. What if I had said, God had giuē her his whole King­dome Ego dispono vo­bis regnū sicut dispo­suit mihi Pater. Luc. 23. v. 9., his Throne, Vin­centi dabo sedere in throno meo Apoc. 2.27. and Scepter, Reget gentes in virga fer­rea ibid. 27. that Christ in person did waite on her, sitting at the table of glory? Faciet illos dis­cumbere & tranfiens ministrabit illis. Luc. 22. v. 37. How would your Curr haue bene mad at these metaphors, and haue broken his teeth against these [Page 19] stones, which yet [...] of di­uine Scripture, [...] [...]ith God doth vse to exagg [...] [...] of meaner Saints then his Bles [...] [...] [...]ink that you haue brought me to a [...] force me to cō ­fesse that our Church-hy [...] [...] [...]re figuratiue poëms pag. 15., & you feare out of your loue towards me, that my fooles coate will be well clawed by my Superiours: but I much feare, that you make Ministers proud in wearing their liuerie, who laugh I am sure in their sleeue at the follies you vtter in their defence, though per­chance they speak you faire to your face. For are not the Psalmes of Dauid the chiefest hymnes of God his Church? and are not those Poëmes full of figuratiue speaches much more then that ancient Hymne of Sedulius you glance at? yet what prayers more excellent, more deuout then those? Or more forcible to rayse a mans Spirits from Earth, to settle his affections on Heauen, to moue him to powre out his hart, at his eyes, like water in the sight of God? Yea Rhetoricall figures, Poëticall flowers wherwith that garden of the soule is stored, togeather with the grace of God, effectually concur to bring forth those com­fortable effects? why then may not a Theologicall in­uocation be vttered in a figuratiue speach? Why should you thinkepag. 12. the exclamatiō of Esay was not a religious prayer to God, though by a Rhetori­call figure seemingly directed to the cloudes? It is lost labour I preceiue to beate flyes from HonieQuid prodest muscas op [...] rofis pelle­re flagris?, they will be drowned sooner therein then driuen away. Your Church feedeth vpon falshood, the bread of vntruth is sweet to her tast; lett vs beate flyes, and [Page 20] lyes fro [...] [...] so lowde clapps, the noy [...] [...] but they swarme thither ag [...] [...] M. Crashaws vn­truths, that [...] deuide Gods King­dome with the [...] pray vnto Images, though you vse a [...] [...]ch seemeth to you finer, because it is stra [...] [...]alling them supersti­tious obsecrations directed to a wodden Crosse.

19. With as litle care of truth you charge me to defendpag. 14. lying storyes painted in our Chappels. The stories you meane I proued were trueIn the preface p. 29. naming the places where, and the time when, those cruelties were executed on Catholike professours. I added, that such false deuises and pictures had they byn vsed, might be no lesse colourably excused then Iohn Fox his lying Pageants, wherwith he painteth his fabu­lous Martyrologe to delude fools, of whom liuing he was Father. Is this an honourable defence of deui­sing painters to rank them in the same predicament with your lying Martyr-maker.

20. More impudent is your other chargep. 14 that when we are charged with an Idolatorus appeale from God to the Virgin, and the like absurdities, I shift them off to the Poets pen. For the Authour on whom M. Crashaw did father that blasphemie was no Poet, but a Preacher. Neither did I shift it of to his pen, but sent it backe to the head from whence it first sprange, to wit your poeticall preachers brayne. I shewedOuer­trhrow. p. 2. c. 1. p. 164. 165. that with incredible impudency he cor­rupted the [...]ext, put this whole sentence into the Au­thour, Imò & à Deo: one may appeale euen from God himself, to make him sound out that blasphemie, [Page 12] to which you haue [...] [...]uly you add new vntruths [...] [...]ere that slaunder, but doe [...] [...]en. Did not that Bachelour [...] [...] I that the very words by him [...] in all copies both new and old? [...] [...]ontest against him they were found in neither: If I did him wronge why do you not shew it? If I sayd truth, may you not be thought (to vse your owne metaphor,p. 74. seing you snarle at mine) to haue customarily crept on your face, yea to haue Cornes on your forehead, which is so hard that you cry fy vpon doctrines you cannot impugne, and repeate clearly-confuted slaunders without new proofe?

21. The defyling mine owne nest, reuiling my Countrey, for which you crypag. 12. fye vpon me, is an impudent slaunder; my booke by you cited for wit­nes, proclaimeth against it; yet seing I may not without your offence, lay it on some lying Minister rather then giue a Knight the lye, I will shift it of to your Poets pen, giuing your Reader warning when he readeth your bookes to be mindfull of the verse, ‘Admiranda canunt, sed non credenda poetae.’

The truth wheron you rayse the fable, is, that out of a carefull respect of my Countries honour, I didPre­face p. 36. seuerly taxe the vnrestrained liberty of some Mi­nisters pennes, who in hatred of Catholike religiō vse to vtter such open vntruthes, as might deriue an infamie vpon our Nation, & put Crete in daunger to loose her infamous syrname. Amōgst which I did reckō M. Crashawes slaūder, that the gunpowder trea­sō was hatched at Rome by Pope Clement 8. vpon [Page 22] the death [...] [...]lizabeth: were all English writers as [...] [...]elour, might not our Ile (thinke [...] Crete?

22. I d [...] [...] [...]e same lying Lecturer to keepe within [...]he [...],Prae­face p. 36. if not of his teeth, yet at the least of our seas, [...] Foule language where­with he doth vse to reuile other Nations, not blu­shing to auouch that Italians (some priuie Protestants excepted) were Atheists or fooles, which seemed to my eares so rude and vnciuill a censure, that I did grieue his Sermon was extant in Latin, that, that noble and religious Nation should see the grosse­nes of an English Minister, fearing they might im­pute it to the northern climate, accounting him, ‘Veruecum in patria, Crasso (que) sub aere natum.’ Did not fumes of anger vniustly conceiued against me dimme the light of your reason, I could be con­tent to make you Iudge in this cause, whether they doe rather defile their owne nests, that vtter re­proachfull falshoods which deserue the hatred of all ciuill Nations, then I, who only sought for a re­straint of such vnruly pennes.

23. Here endeth the peale of your fyes. Now remaineth your last batterie of my booke with Lyes, which you let fly almost at euery storie I re­port. You cannot beleiuepag. 16. that a gentleman of Honour, from my Lord De la Wares owne mouth brought me such newes as England knowes to be true, that he could not get out of your Vniuersities more then one Minister to goe the Euangelicall voyage of Virginia. You seeme ready to fightibid. for the Minister that eate vp the pease-pottage, whilest [Page 23] his fellowes fought with the Sau [...] [...]wet if you will Wade into that matter, you [...] London the author of my report to [...] [...]otestant we haue no reason to thi [...] [...] Minister of his owne religion. You [...] ofp. 27. the roa­ring rake-hill of Cambrige, [...] your preacher estee­med as an Angell, crying Crashaw, Crashaw, goe to Geneua, though the voice was so loud, as the whole Vniuersity did ring of his folly.

24. You that wonder I should say, that a Coun­selour did refusepa. 15. to patronize your Lecturers Ser­mō, you cānot deny but the lower house of Parliamēt wherof your selfe were one, did discard his Iesuits Ghospell. Neither durst you raise against me a slee­ping witnes the late Earle of Salisburie, but that you know he now is in case that he cannot speake. That Counsellour (Syr Edward) was more politicke then you may be presumed to be: he would looke before he leaped into such a dunghill of vntruthes, as I proued that Sermon was. You in your credulous vanitie, rashly cast your selfe into that labyrinth of lies, com­mending the same as a thingLett. to M. T. H. pag. 55. vnanswerable: but now ashamed of your folly, you will take noe notice therof. Your dull capacity you writeCoun­tersnarle pag. 25. cannot con­ceiue what I meane to say, that you flutter in a web of weake slaunders. You can tell how oft I doe re­peat spider and cobweb, where I doe clearely de­clare that M. Crashaw was the spider, his Sermon a web of slaunders, wherin you did flutter; which truly expounded was no reproach, but rather a prayse of your ingenuous disposition, that did easily belieue being voyd of fraud your selfe (as I then thought [Page 24] you were) the great and deep protestations of that deluding Preacher [...] I feare you are sicke of the di­sease, which [...] pag. 52. Mulier ni­hil scit nisi quod ipsa cupit. woman-kind with, to vnderstād no [...] please, as now you are plea­sed to take no [...] singular cōmendations of that Sermon.

25. Then you name the feature of that daughter of Babel, the twentie particulers, wherein he accused vs to degenerat from Antiquitie, An. 1607. 1608. 13. of Februar. the yeare of our Lord, the day of the moneth it was preached and printed, that we may think you Godfather to the Childe. Whereas now finding by the perusall of my Treatise that she hath neither oyle in her lampe, nor wit in her head, although she knock at your dore for helpe, you cast her off with, I know you not, M. T. D. as a foolish Virgin. Let the Courtier your friend whom you describepag. 16. as hauing noe more witt then your selfe, make you smile with his frownes & fond lookes, yet I doe not doubt but that the Printer of that Sermon will auer as much as I wrote, that when that Sermō flew abroad vnder the aforesayd Counsailours name, the same was stayed till the Epistle dedicatorie was altered.

26. You would faine also stinge mepa. 17. with an imputation to be a slanderer of Queene Elizabeth, that I take vpon me to determine, with what consorts her glorious Ghost is accompained, laying (say you) a heauy censure on the blessed soule of so worthy a Saint: What Consortes did I giue her? Were they night-ghosts? Why doe you not name them? Was the company appointed her by me any other then her princely FatherOuer­thr. pag. 104.? Why should his company seeme [Page 25] dishonorable, or a blemish, and heauy censure to that Saint? Doe you feare he may marrie with his daughter in that world, [...] [...]ported he did in this? Or doe you glaunce [...] [...]oubtfulnes of her bloud, that perchance no [...] [...]he King, but some other put to death with her mother, was indeed her true Father? Durst you haue cast such snarling surmises whilst she liued? Or in time of his ragine haue sent him to Hell, to canonize his daughter? for in Hell he must needes be, if he be not in Heauen with her, seing you acknowledg no third place. But I per­ceiue your malicious meaning. You know many gentlemen still affect the memorie of that Princesse: you would put a ielousy into their heads, as if my Treatise had married her Ghost to some Hobgoblin in Hell. Noe, she shall not receiue her doome by my pen, before I heare it pronounced by the supreme Iudges mouth. I could not say she inioyed the cōpany of her Catholick Ancestors, yet did I not deny it. Though she seemed to die in a cōtrary faith to theirs, yet will I not diue into Gods vnsearchable secrets.

27. You call her a worthy Saint of the Ghospell, which should I expresse in a Catholicke phrase,In his ser­mon at the Court on the 5. of Nouember. would seeme a hard censure. I am not angrie that Doctour King sing of her to them that sought her in Hell, what the Angles sayd of Christ to the woman that sought him in the Graue, Surrexit, non est hic, she is risen, she is not heere: and though I could obiect, if she were neuer in Hell, how rose she from thence? If she were once in Hell, how got she out? Yet I will be content that your new Orpheus be thought able to haue wrought such a wonder [Page 26] and fetch her out of Hell with his Fiddle. Thus you may see, that my heauie-heeled learning (so you phrase it) with [...] weight of truth and reason cru­sheth the serpent [...] head of your snarling malice a­gainst it. Though you say, without proofe, that my booke hathp. 68. 69. lame and goutie arguments, neither whole head, good foot, nor sound hart, yet if I could be perswaded, that any great force eyther of witt, iudgement, or true learning were in you, I might thinke the same more invulnerable then Achilles, seing your forked shaftes, discharged out of so strong a desire to disgrace me, are not able to pierce so much as into the heele thereof.

28. But I am not so fonde as to measure the strength of my Treatise, by the weakenes of your impugnations, nor to thinke my Pigmie inuincible, though it haue put a craking Crane to flight. Sure I am the truth I defend, isMe in mea causa defiaēte at­ (que) prostrae­to, victrix erit causa, cui seruio. Aug. cont. lit. Petil. c. 1. Gould, howsoeuer the lear­ning may be Lead, wherewith I defend it. Noe worldly respect either of honour or profit wonne me to vndergo these combatts: neyther doe I re­garde the priuate woundes, wherwith you seeke to disgrace my person, so the sheild of faith and do­ctrine wherewith I defend my ghostly Coūtry, the Church of Christ be safe and sound. Were the shad­dow of humane glory the marke I ayme at in wri­ting, I would not let my name be buried in two let­ters in the frontispice of these bookes, wherin you i­magin I dreame to eternize my memory. I should not match my selfe with cōtēptible aduersarys by whose ouerthrow, profit, & that eternall, may accrew vnto them, small praise redound to my selfe, by the con­quest [Page 27] of scoulding and feminine writersNullum aut memo­rabile no­men, Foe­minea in paena est..

29. That the Ladies liberall purse-promises hired me to write, is so base a surmise, and doth so smell of the trencher, that if I may without your displea­sure, I will rather thinke it the suggestion of some hungrie minister or mercinarie Lecturer, then the conceipt of a Knight. If I finde no greater stoppe in my race to heauen, then the gathering vpp of goulden-apples, I shall not need much to feare the loo­sing of the goale. I am sure, if you know me well, you would be loth the mony you lately made of your woods, should haue no more watchfull custody then my thoughts would affoard euen vnto greater summes, which education hath made ouer proud to stoope to such base cares. Manie that haue more conuersed with me, then you haue done, will thinke some of your Ministers more skilfull in taking o­ther mens purses, then I am in keeping my owne. I am content with the inexhaust treasure of his Prouidence, who feedeth the Birds of the ayre, and clotheth the Lillies of the fielde, which doth assure me I shall not want, when perhaps yourpag. 65. competent pa­trimonie may be wasted.

30. The Lady you glance at, as giuing me first encouragement p. 22. to write, I neuer saw her, nor receiued message from her, nor was a pennie richer by her, whilst she liued, or poorer by her death, who died in the Catholike faith, as I expected, as I haue heard a Knight, though Protestāt yet of better credit then your selfe, that was present with her not many houres before her death, auouch; though your Snarling Cerberus seemeth to barke at her ghost, [Page 28] as if without Purgatorie it had gone to your Prote­stāt heauen. But the short is, your conscience is so tender, as you blot out your owne coniectures, both against the quick and dead, without any care of truth, or feare of sinne.

NOvv hauing stopped the mouth of your rayling Cerberus, I may the more boldly suruey your Hell, or Letter against Purgatory, to feare me from the discouery of the folly and falshood, wherof your Counter-snarle was written. You braggepag. 27. that a­mongst [Page 30] all you wrote in an hundreth and fourteene pages, I haue only a spite at one leafe, which lyes in the heart of the letter; Lyes in the hart. Against what should truth & the friēd of truth beare greater hatred? speci­aly those lyes being grosse and inexcusable corruptions of the most learned of the auncient Fathers, cōcerning a point of highest importance, to wit, the Canoni­call Authority of the booke of Machabees, where Pur­gatory and other pointes of Catholyke doctrine, which you peremptorily deny, are clearely proued? If lying killeth the soule (as the Holy-Ghost saith)Sap. 1. Os quod mentitur occidit ani­mam. your leaues that haue lyes in their heart, what are they but a dead letter?

2. Wherefore I will begin the examination of your letter with that leafe you tearme the hart ther­of. Which I proued in my Treatise most false and rotten, not conteyning so much as one true lyne, whereof I wrote in this sort:Ouer­throw. p. 133. And here by occa­sion of S. Augustine, and the booke of Machabees, I must giue M. Crashaw warning, that in proofe of his assertion, he bring not such testimonies as are the three Syr Edward Hoby alledgeth out of S. Augustine, to proue that he reiected the Machabees, ignorantly and impudently corrupted, not by Syr Edward himselfe (I cannot thinke so dishonorably of men of his calling) but by his Trencher-school-maister, or some mercinarie lecturer, perchance euen by M. Crashaw himselfe, who is great in the bookes of this credulous Knight, whome they make flye hoodwinkd to catch flyes: which if I pull off, that he may see, how they abuse him, I hope he will take it in good part.

3. These were my words then: which shew a double falshood of your Snarler, first it is false, that [Page 31] I absolutly accused M. Crashaw, as the Authour of those corruptiōs which yet you auouch,pag. 56. insteed of perhaps by M. Crashaw, making me say, yea by M. Cra­shaw himself: for though I did as I might specially sus­pect him whose desire to deceaue was well knowne vnto me, yet I neither did, nor durst so peremp­torily affirme, knowing that manie others besides him, may vse that coolening art. Secondly you say, that I tearmed you notorious falsificatour pag. 32., which was farre from my thoughts, and further from my pen. wherwith I did fence your head from that blow. The truth is, your vnsauourie Letter is so sweet to your tast [...], distempered with selfe-conceipt, that out of feare some ministers should lurch you, you gree­dily put euerie sillable therof into your owne mouth, though it be dressed in the sower sawce of manifest falshood: rather will you be thought a false corrup­ter of soe graue a Father, then not the true father of that false brat. Had it bene any discredit to haue confessed those quotations were by some minister suggested vnto you. Your valiant Writer and Deane D. Morton, was he not driuen by his aduersarie to acknowledg, that he had taken some corrupted testimonies of our Authours,Vide his paramble to a fur­ther En­counter. vpon the credit of Io. Stocke, or R. C? Why should that, taking authoritys in grosse, be thought a blemish in a Knight, which was esteemed tolerable, yea laudable in a Doctour? Or why should you snarle at me, for deuising in your defence, such an honorable excuse, that had you stood vnto it, you might both haue layd your fal­shoods vpon another (as that Doctour did) and yet haue bene ranked as he is, amongst your Protestāts [Page 32] famous authours, the marke your ambitious penne aymed at.

4. Let it be whose it please, a Ministers, or a Minstrells Child, in the defence therof you vtter so manie new fooleries and falshoods, that I make no doubt, but the Reader of this my letter (if those corruptions were yours) will confesse, that you haue greater strength of malice to beget falshood, then store of witt to mantaine it. You say,p. 27. that like a Spider-catcher, I trauaise my ground with a goodly florish, as if I meant with the weake Goddesses to bind Iupiter: but if I bring not some Briareus to assist me, it will not be long, before I be out of breath. This is so mystily spoken, as I vnderstand it not. I dare not say it is an high my­sterie, or a soaring Birde, least you flout me, with well flowen Buzzardp. 21.. If by Iupiter you meane your selfe, and by weake Goddesses, the corruptions of S. Augustine I layd to your charge, the examinatiōs of your excuses will shew, that you sticke soe fast in those bryars, that neither Briareus with an hun­dred hands can drawe, nor all your Vulcans with their hatches cut you out.

5. Let vs come to the particulers: the first testimony which Ministers make the Knight bring to proue the Machabees not to be Canonicall, is (said IOuer­throw pag 233.) out of the booke de Mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae, which he, by their direction, citeth as S. Augustines, though all learned men, by vniforme consent discard it from that number, as a booke of no account: which Cen­sure was made of this booke manie hundreth yeares before Syr Edward was borne, S. Tho. [...]. p. q. 45. [...]. 3. ad 2. or his Church either, whose antiquity he doth say truly the Ladies are not able to [Page 33] conceiue, though they may easilie conceaue her noueltye, seeing some Ladies may yet liue that are elder then his Church, and manie are yet not very old, whose parents were some yeares before Luther her first Father. But as for that pretended booke of S. Augustine, he that hath perused the same, and can thinke it to be worthie either of the witt or learning, or to sauour of the stile of that learned Father, he hath I dare say more skill of trenchers then of Authours, specially seeing the Authour himselfe in the fourth Chapter of his second booke, doth say in ex­presse tearmes, that he wrote the sayd booke in the yeare of our Lord 627. almost 200. yeares after that S. Au­gustine was dead. And was not Syr Edward thinke you heere bobbed by the Bachelour or some Lecturer?

6. This was my charge: to which you answere with great admiratiō saying, Would any pag 28. man belieue that I should father that booke de mirabilibus sacrae scrip­turae vpon Augustine? As who should say it is an in­credible thing; & marke the force of your sentence, consisting in the I: which, did not ouerweening blinde, would perceaue his owne follie: for are you indeed so singularlie learned, that you can with a wet finger find out all the true works of this Father? If you be soe cunning, is also this your owne skill so notorious to mankind, that it may seeme incredible to anie man, that you should cite anie booke vnder his name, which is not his? Rabshacheh, say you, auer's that: where, to my eare, your penne meeteth with such a iobbe, as I feare your good dogge hath brokē his legge: Rabshacheh auer's that. Surely I was much to blame to accuse soe learned a Knight of such in­credible mistaking. Varius ait, say you, in the mar­gent, [Page 34] Scaurus negat, you deny it, a man forsooth of such credit as your bare word must be takē against the proofes of such a Varius as my selfe. But let vs cōpare the sayings of your Letter & Counter-snarle togeather, then will it appeare, who is Varius, who doth varie from, and contradict himselfe, you or I.

7. Your letter to proue that the Machabees were Canonicall in S. Augustines iudgment, saith in this sort.p. 60. It is not our surmise that S. Augustine seemeth to signifie so much, who elswhere (to wit in the booke de mi­rabilibus Sacrae Scripturae) doth plainely determinately say, that they are not of the diuine Canon. Thus did your Letter then sing, resolutly fathering as your wordes witnesse that booke on S. Augustine. Now perceiuing by my accusation, that to be grosse ignorance, your Snarler barketh in another tunegag. 29.. Fynding, say you, that booke in their coppies ranked with those other bookes, that goe vnder the title of S. Augustine, loath to trouble the margent with any circumlocutiō, I only noted where it might be found: marke I pray you that only, which is one of the things that are most disgracefull in a Knight: did you only note in the margent where that booke and sentence might be found, and not also auer in your text, that it was plainely and de­terminatly S. Augustines saying? Who doth not see, that your two bookes snarle at ech-other, that you play Scaurus in the one, and Rabshacheh in the other, peremptorily denying in your Snarle, what you did constantly affirme in your letter? This is to be Varius indeed, and truly Rabshacheh, which signifieth in Hebrew, multùm Ebrius, a man much giuen to drinke, [Page 35] which title, whether it rather agree to me, then to your selfe, I am content any indifferent man be Iudge, that knoweth vs both.

8. And not only is your Snarler forced to eate vp the wordes you spake in your Letter, but you doe adde further a new vntruth, that you omitted to note the ambiguitie of the author of that booke, out of loathnes to trouble your margent with any circumlocu­tion: which idle excuse you likewise repeate in your answere to the third falsification,p. 42. that you ioyned two places of S. Augustine in one, forbearing to note the place, where either might be found, not to be te­dious forsooth to the reader with long quotations. A man that hath cast his eye though but once on your booke, may perceiue the vanity of this your fig­leafe, wherewith you would hide this your falshood. For the margent to whose purity you would seeme to beare respect, you feare not to defile with hebrew Characters, with vulgar sentences both Greeke and French, with triuiall verses out of Cato and such childish authors, with ridiculous phrases, which serue only to wast ynke and blur paper. If you name me, your margent must also speake Numquam ego hominem magis asinum vidi p. 27.. If you see my pinnace a far off, nec operam, nec oleum sapit pag. 59.. You sweare vpon your life, I haue beene a notorious truant in my dayes, pag. 58. and straight a verse redoundes on your booke side, sic vos non vobis. Your inkehorne hath no sooner deui­sed a new Erynnicall word to bestow on a libell, but Virgil versifieth vpon itp. 67.:

[Page 36] You accuse me with soloecismes, referring me to your latin Notation,pag. 11. Si ego indignus hac contumelia, tu tamen indignus qui faceres, which is soe heauie and leaden a loade, to be layd vpon soloecismes, which I neuer obiected to you, that the same had reason to crie O. with which letter you marke them,

9. Your owne mediocritie is named in your text, the Echo thereof soundeth in the Margent to your praise, Mediocria firma, p. 11. you say, that it is art inough for you, to please your selfe, whome you note with a T. in the forehead, as though you were an humble penitent, yet in the Margent you versifie in this sortpag. 39.: ‘Quem penes arbitrium est, & ius & forma loquendi.’ Which proud verse signifies, that by T. you meane Throne, where you meane to sit as M. Controuller. I omit many other of your impertinent and ridicu­lous Annotations; these few may suffice to shew, that you neuer leaue your margent white, without notes, but when your head is blank without matter. Whence it is cleere, that the cause why you did not censure the booke De Mirabilibus, as the supposed issue of S. Augustine, was not your loathnes to trouble your Margent with circumlocutions, but either ignorance that indeed you thought that booke was his, which I thinke probable; or els fraude, which made you vtter, what you knew was false, to deceaue your Reader; which imputation you would haue laid vpon you rather then ignorance.

10. But if one demaund of you, why you did cite that booke for S. Augustines, saying, that it was his, against your conscience and knowledg, as you [Page 37] now confesse? You answere in this manner:p. 29, As neere as I can remember (say you) I thus argued with my self, If they graunt that S. Augustines penne did discard those bookes, the matter wilbe soone at an end; if they denie that booke to be his, then how will they ex­cuse their Church, that hath playd many such lewd pran­kes? Or how will they answere antiquitie, which distingui­shed these bookes? Thus you argued with your selfe, which doth argue, that your false Ministers teach you to vse reseruations and equiuocations in your writings, about matters of religion, to deceaue your lesse-wary Readers. You said in your Letter then, that the booke de mirabilibus was determinatly S. Augustines, which I proued apparently to be false. Now you confesse that it is indeed false, yea that you knew it was false, euen when you wrot it, but you had forsooth a reserued discourse that might make the same true, to wit, that, that booke de mira­bilibus is S. Austines, or else the Church of Rome hath played manie false trickes, or els how will they answere An­tiquitie? Is not this wicked & fraudulēt proceeding?

11. To make the same dealing more apparent and sensible to you, I will vse an example that may touch you neere. Suppose I should write, that a Protestant Knight in England hath children by a Black-more, namely a Girle, in the margent citing Syr Edw. Hoby, that you proue it to be a lewd slāder, accusing me of iniurious falshood against you. My answere is like to yours, Will any man think I fathered those children on Syr Edward Hoby indeed, not kno­wing to whose charge I might lay them, loth to trouble my margent with circumlocutions, I noting the [Page 38] house, where such a mother is found? I knew Syr Edward was not the Father of those bratts, but I thus argued with my selfe, If he grant those children to be his, the matter is at an end: if he deny them, then how will he answere his Protestant brethrē, that ac­cuse him of such lewd prankes? Were this procee­ding, Syr Edward, iustifiable, to vtter slaunderous vn­truthes, which I know are false, excusing them by mentall and reserued discourses? I am sure, you would detest this manner of dealing in me against your selfe, which yet you approue in your selfe a­gainst the Church of Rome.

12. Moreouer I add, that your mentall reser­uation which you now vtter, is also false, to witt, that the booke de mirabilibus, in our copies is placed in equall ranke with those other that goe vnder the name of S. Augustine; and that it is still continued by vs, a­mongst his goulden workes, which you tearme a lewd pranke, and say, that none can read anie Fathers in our Editiōs, but he is in danger to catch a snake for an eele, except he read Thomas Aquinas before. Vidi Ope­ra August. à Theolog. Louaniens. edita, ann. 1571. ex officina Plantini­ [...]na. This you speak, which is as grosse an vntruth as the former. For in out latter Editiōs, this book is not ranked amongst the whole bookes of S. Augustine, but in an Appen­dix after them, in a different letter, with title of Anonymi cuiusdam: the Treatise of a namelesse Authour. In the elder Editions these bookes go printed a­mongst his in the same letter, but with this Censure in the beginning and head therof, nec stilo nec inge­nio Augustinum sapit; This Treatise doth neither sa­uour of the conceipt, nor stile of S. Augustine. Could the Church of Rome shew greater sinceritie [Page 38] then this?

13. Doe you in your owne Bible ranke the Apo­chriphall bookes (as you esteeme them) Tobias, Iudith, Machabees, with those of the diuine Scripture cheeke by ioule (to vse your owne phrase) both in elder and newest Editions of your Bible? Do not Canonicall Scriptures excell the Apochriphall, more then S. Augustine doth any other Father, that liued after him? Why should you tearme it a lewd pranke, to coople togeather the second in the same volume which goeth for Augustines, if it be a holy practise in your Church, to ioyne together the first in your Bible, that goeth vnder the name of Gods booke?

14. Now in the custodie of these workes of Antiquitie, the Church of Rome hath bene so Reli­gious, that you chaleng those Charters for your do­ctrine, which you cānot deny, but haue byn for 1000. yeares at least in her only keeping. If the bookes of the Ancient Fathers, should be Pupills or Wards of your Church but for one age, that you might vncon­trolledly cut downe, what trees please you not in their groundes, we might afterwards haue as great difficultie, to find a booke or sentence in their writings (which we now plentifully alleadge) for our doctrines,pag. 40. as I should haue to find you Indiā vapour, if that be true (as you say) that it is long since flowen out of my sight: yea which doth clere­ly iustifie the Roman Churches sinceritie, the bastard­lie boughes, as you tearme them, more then any true branches of S. Augustine, make for your doctrine and now doth the booke de mirabilibus for your He­brew [Page 40] Canon, which is a manifest [...]signe, that these bookes were not fradulently by her ioyned with that Fathers, to giue credit vnto them, because they fauour her cause, as you imagine.

15. To conclude you are forced to grant as much as I desired, to witt, that the booke de mirabi­libus ys not S. Augustines, as you cited it, but that it is altogeather impertinent to proue your intent, that the Machabees are not Canonicall in his iudgment. Youpag. 31. bragg that you haue quit your hands of the first falshood; which is so true, that whereas I accused you of ignorance and not of falshood, not to seeme to haue writtē in ignorance, you haue vttered foure falshoods. First that you did not cite the sentence out of the booke de mirabilibus for S. Augustines; the contrarie whereof is extant vnder your owne hand in your letter, which you wish might be ingrauen in marble p. 62.. The second that you did not note the Au­thour of that booke was doubtfull, out of respect to your margent, fearing to trouble the same with a learned annotation, which you lode euery where with all manner of impertinent stuffe. Thirdly, you vse mentall reseruations in your writings, putting that which you know was false into your paper, kee­ping that which you did imagine might make the same true in your thoughts. Finally you slaunder the Church of Rome, for lewd prankes, about the Fathers volumes, wherein I haue proued her practise to be most syncere: so that if poore mens purses be neuer more quit of mony, then your penne is now of falshood, when they are poorest they will not lack a groate: yet I thinke my second accusation of [Page 41] your falshood will cleaue faster to your fingers, that to cleere your selfe, you will be forced to rubb them rudlye on your Printers head.

16. The second place you brought out of S. Augustine against the booke of Machabees, was a sen­tence in his booke against the Epistle to Gaudentius, l. 2. c. 51. in these very wordes. Machabaeorum Scriptura recepta est ab Ecclesia non inutiliter, si sobrie legatur, vel audia­tur, maximè propter ipsos Martyres Machabaeos; Sed ob hanc causam in Canone morum, non fidei censeri posset: Signifying (said you) that there must be great sobriety vsed in hearing and reading of those bookes, and that they are in the Canon of Manners, and not of faith. My ac­cusation was that your minister had added the last sentence, conteyning the substance of the matter, vnto S. Augustine, Sed ob hanc causam in Canone mo­rum, non fidei censeri posset. But for this cause that booke may be put in the Canon of manners not of faith: Will Syr Edward (said I) suffer himselfe to be thus bobbed & his credit blowne vp? wil he not set such a frowne on his trencher-ministers, as may make thē vanish out of sight? Can any staine to his Knighthood be greater, then to be thought a notorious falsifier of so great and learned a Fa­ther, euen in print? Thus I wrote in my Treatise, which you terme lame and goutie: let vs see how nimble-footed you are in your excuse.

17. This last clause, say you, I wōder how it should passe my sight, in the reuiew: for perusing my first draught I find go, written short in another Letter, to distinguish my inference, from Augustines proofe. It seemeth eyther my Manuaries hast, or the Printers mispression hath turned go, into sed, as if the same had bene contiuned: which [Page 34] former errour made thē omit (consequētly) in the English redditio. Thus you write cōfessing as much as I accu­sed you of, to wit, that the last clause was not S. Au­gustines, but the Ministers or your owne. Now that there was a short Goe in your first draught, seemes not very probable, but rather that your Vulcanes haue hāmered it out of your head to excuse your fal­shood. First, what likenesse is there betwixt go and sed, that your Manuarie, or Printer should take the one for the other? what probability, that he should so consequently corrupt the text, as to leaue out consequently vpon the former errour? Secon­dly why should you make your inference in Latine writing in English? What English Author doth vse that idle manner of writing but your self? neither doe you vse it your self but only in this place, which maketh it more then probable, that in truth you thought not therof. But now you say you vsed it, ha­uing noe better cloak then this short go to couer so notorious a fraud. Thirdly for what purpose, doth this iuggling togeather of your sentences, both in Latin and English with S. Augustines serue, but only that the simple Reader may not distinguish the gray-hound from the hare? the doue from the kyte? Finally may not a man printe whole sentences of his owne as S. Augustines or any other Fathers, and being accused of falshood haue the like excuse to yours at his fingers ends, that in the draught there was a go, which the Printer let goe.

18. But you had, you saypag. 33. S. Hieromes au­thority for that inferēce, though you quoted him not, who saythHier. praefat. in l. Salom. that the Church doth not receiue the booke [Page 43] of Machabees, adding: legat ad aedificationem plebis, non ad authoritatē dogmatum Ecclesiasticorum confirmandā, which wordes, say you, amount to no lesse summe, then that those bookes are in Canone morum non fidei censendi. I answere first, this is nothing to the purpose, to proue S. Augustine did reiect them, who might be contrarie to S. Hierome in this point, not being then defined by any generall Coūcell, though S. Hierome may seeme to speake according to the opinion of the Hebrews as he vseth to doeVide prafat. in Daniel. & Apol. ad­uers. Ruf­fin., not in his owne. Secondly I say, that those wordes of S. Hierome, come short of your summe, and that neither in S. Hierome, nor any Ancient Father, can be found, your Protestant distinction of the Canon of Māners and Canon of Faith. Euerie booke that may be reade for edification in the Church, may not be tearmed a Canō or Rule of Manners, as manie books may edifie Faith which doe not rule it; so some Au­thours may edifie the Church in good life, though their workes be not the rule of manners. A rule must be right, so that a thing conformable to it cannot be crooked. As what soeuer is agreable to the Rule of Faith, is infallibly true, soe what is iust with the Rule of Manners is certainely good. But actions accor­ding to these bookes we speake of, you grant may be wicked, how then can they be the Canon and Rule of Manners? To kill himselfe for example is a thing vnlawfull, yet it is conformable to those ac­tions, that you say are praised in the Machabees, which bookes you accept as a Rule of Manners. If a booke, that alloweth some thinges against good Manners, may be with a litle Caution (as you saypa. 37.) [Page 44] the Canon of vertuous life, I see not why a booke teaching false doctrine in some points, may not with like caution be the Canon of Faith? you see that your distinction neither grounded vpon reason, nor Fa­thers, nor Scriptures, is iustlie a beame in my eye. Neither doth Caietan whome you cite, iumpe al­togeather with your conceipt, and though he did, his sayings are not Oracles with vs.

19. The third testimonie you alledged out of S. Augustine against the Machabees was this sentence.Aug. de ciuit l. 1. c. 20. In the holy Canonicall Bookes there is no diuine precept or permission to be found, that we may, eyther to gaine immortality, or to escape any peril or mischiefe, make away with our selues, vt Razis seipsum occidens laudatur, as Razis did kill himselfe, and is therefore commended in the booke of Machabees. This last clause, said Ipag. 135. 136. wherein the force of the testimony consisteth is added, both in latin and in English to S. Augustines wordes, to make him seeme an enemy of the bookes of the Machabees. But in­deed that Father doth not say, that Razias (for that is his name, and not Razis) was praysed for killing himselfe, but denies it expressely, l. 2. cont. Epist. Gaud. c. 31. saying, that the Scripture did report, what had bene done, not praise his death, as a thing that should haue bene done. Can any corruptiō, said I be greater then this? I would wish Syr Edward for his creditts sake, to lay the matter of his pāphlet on the Mini­ster that was the true Father therof, only chalēging to himselfe the stile and phrase, which may well beseeme a Knight, and is to rich & goulden to cloth the foule bratt of a Ministers braine.

20 Thus I wrote: in answere whereof, first you say, I shew my selfe a kind aduersarie, by quoting [Page 45] the place of S. Augustine in my margent, and adding the wordes which were wanting in your quotation, & the latin sentence, for want thereof lame without sense. I will not requite him, say you, with the Prouerbe, That profered ser­uice meritts small thankes, but in lieu of his labour, I will more fullie aduertise him of my scope. My purpose was from a ground out of S. Augustine, to proue, that the booke of Machabees is not Canonicall: my Maior is S. Au­gustines, as well knowne as the begger knows his dish, that in holy Scripture, there is no precept or permission, to make away with our selues, but Razias mentioned in the Ma­chabees is commended for a fact of this kind, Ergo, those bookes are not Canonicall. This syllogisme I had a desire to contract. Thankes be to God. My treatise hath wrought a miracle, making your contracted syllo­gisme stretch out his sinewes, and walke on both legges. Now your birde spreads abroad her winges which before were so couched vnder S. Augustine, that a man might haue sworne on your Booke, that the whole argument both Maior and Minor had bene his. I dare say Aristotle himselfe, with whome, you saie, you are well acquainted, pag. 10. would not haue per­ceiued a sylogisme in your quotatiō, but haue thought one particle thereof as well as the other S. Austines.

21. But haue not yo^r Ministers deuised sōe excuse or other of this yo^r cūning cōtracting of syllogismes to deceiue the simple? yes a very goodly one, w^ch you vtter in thes words: Artis est artē dissimulare, It is a poīt of art to dissēble artp. 42.. He is a simple painter that is driuē to write Goose or Woodcock ouerhead, that people may know what feature he hath drawne vnderneath Neither do Rhetoriciās vse to distinguish their propositiōs by name, [Page 44] [...] [Page 45] [...] [Page 46] leauing worke for the Logicall Analysis, to set euerie part in their proper place. Thus you. Lord what tricks Diuells and their foulers haue to hide their art? What mistes doe they cast on their netts to catch Wood­cocks? How do they impe their sory feathers into the Fathers-Eagle winges? Sell their owne greene goslings for white and hoary swannes? when their falshood is discouered they tell vs very grauely, that they must not write ouer head Goose or Woodcock, that people may know the feature they haue drawne vn­derneath. And they haue reason. For should people perceiue the featour of their writings, soone would a Christian stomack loath them.

22. Plaine dealing, Syr Edward, might best haue suted with your pen, who professe your selfe the Ladies Writer, pag. 65. hoping that the report of the worthines of the Author might happily induce those rare creatures to the reading of your lines. But how cā they that haue not studied Logick, make a Logicall Resolution of your Rhetoricall syllogismes? How shall they that haue not read, nor perchanee can read S. Augustine, know which wordes are yours, which his, setting euery thing in his proper place, which a learned man may easely do by placing the Maior, that Scripture doth neuer commaund nor commend kil­ling ones selfe, an Eagle & worthy saying in S. Augu­stines workes, where indeed it is found but the minor that Razias is praysed in the Machabees for killing him­selfe, l. 1. de Ciuitat. c. 20. a Goose or Woodcoke in your braine, whence and not out of this Fathers booke it came into your Letter.

23. Another excuse you haue which you rather [Page 47] insinuate then stand vpon, perhaps ashamed to goe still a begging to your Printer, to maintaine the credit of your poore brat. You will not haue your words to be, vt Razis seipsū occidēs laudatur, as he prin­ted & I cited thē, but At Razias seipsū occidēs laudatur, Coun­ters. p, 43. & so you still repeat thē, signifying that the Printer changed (At) the note of a syllogisticall subsūption into (Vt). And truely (gentle Reader) that mayst happily looke into his letter, there is so little differēce betwixt (Vt) and (At) as my hart did much incline to pardon this errour of the Printer. But when loo­king into the English reditionLett. p. 61. I found, As Razis, in­steed of but Razias, and that he made As the head of the name, wherof it is the last part, remembring al­so that he had giuē meCoun­ters. p. [...]8. that last syllable of Razias, against law, not first cutting off the intaile therof on Syr Edw. bookes: These things considered I say, I tho­ught my selfe bound in iustice to returne the (As) to the right place, and entaile the last syllable of Ra­zias on the Printer to hould it in Capite of Syr Ed­ward Hoby, and his bookes for euer. Shall he hereafter presume to print anie of the Knights bookes, who still returnes his falshoods vpon his Printer, with­out taking paines to peruse the Authours he citeth? he shall haue for his wages the whole word of Lazy­as. So that now I may call the world to witnesse, I am not in his Printers debt, for any syllable or letter of Razias, except the R. which being a snarling letter he cannot expect from me, that saith I write a lis­ping language.

24. Now Syr Edward, let vs retourne to you, who perceiuing the vanity of this first excuse, you [Page 28] deuise another, which yet in the end will proue lesse to your credit. You say your Assumption also, to wit that Razias is praysed in the Machabees for killing him­self, which I auerred was not S. Augustines, is also the the very sentence of that Father, though not in that place, where your proposition is found, yet in ano­ther, which not to be tedious (forsooth) to your Reader, with long quotations you then omitted in p. 42. your letter Yf you now pay vs in currant mony, we will for­giue you the interest of so long forbearance: if you cannot, as I am sure you will neuer be able to doe it, your vanitie is admirable, who out of feare to be thought ignorant, vndertake to shew thinges that are not.

25. You leaue S. Augustine: loath you are to make him at odds with himselfe p. 43.: you runne vnto Lyra, you seeke by that instrument to make S. Au­gustines doctrine seeme to iarre with it selfe. Lyra, say you, vpon the 24. Chapter of the second of Machabees doth deliuer two cases, wherein the Iewes hould it not only lawfull, but also meritorious for a man to kill himselfe. First, ne subditus fieret peccatoribus. Secondly, ne in con­temptum Dei Caeli, eius vita in ludibrio traheretur. He concludes, Some thinke S. Augustines saying which here followeth in the glosse, is thus to be vnderstood. Thus writ you, not very sincerely relating Lira's doctrine; but because it is not to the purpose I omit to discouer you. At the naming of S. Augustines saying, drea­ming that it must needs be your Goose or Woodcock, your teeth water to haue it in your mouth: O, say you, that I could meet with the saying of Augustine that I omitted to cite! doth Lira say, it followeth here in [Page 49] the glosse, then will I presume so farre vpon your patience as to write it out. Thus you tune your instrument be­fore you play. Take heed Sir, you abuse not those worthy Gentlemens patience, whom you inuite to be your hearers after all these preambles, if you sound at last the harsh Hebrew harp of Lyra for the sweet latin Lute of S. Augustine you will giue them iust cause to laugh at your folly.

26. The saying you cite for S. Augustines out of Lyra in 2. Mach. c. 14. is this: Vnde & scriptura huius libri, quae recepta est ab Ecclesia ad legendum pro informatione morum, non videtur sic Raziam arguere; sed commendare, de suiipsius interfectione: si autem praedicta non sufficiant ad eius ex­cusationem, dici potest, quòd hoc fecit per specialem in­stinctum Spiritus sancti. Whereupon the Scripture of this book, which is receaued by the Church to be read for information of manners, doth not seeme here to reproue Razias, but rather to commend him for killing of himself: and if the aforesaid excuse, do not suffice, it may be said he did that fact, by spe­ciall instinct of the holy Ghost. Thus you write calling me Sophister and dizzi-braynd Ismaelite, for saying that it was far from S. Augustines grauity to read the Machabees, with so little sobriety, as to think that Razias was praised for killing himself, yet, say you, whether S. Augustine was of this mind or no, let it lye vpon Lyra's report.

27. Noe Syr, this false report, will lye vpon your selfe, except you will confesse the truth, that some Minister suggested this lye vnto you to disgrace S. Augustine: you haue couched such falshood and follie togeather, that I know not, which I should [Page 50] first and most accuse. But with your patience I will touch them both, but your folly first. For if this be S. Augustines sentence, who doth not see that your ar­gument, to proue the Machabees not to be Scripture, is not worth a rush? For if Canonicall Scripture, giue leaue to a man to kill himselfe, by the especiall commaund and instinct of the holy Ghost: if Razias killed himselfe by such a speciall precept, what did he against Canonicall Scripture? Why should not the booke of the Machabees be sacred though they praise Razias for this fact, as well as the booke of Iudges where Sampson is praised who did the like? Spiritus latenter hoc iusserat, sayth S. Augustine l. 1. de Ciuit. c. 21. qui per eum miracula faciebat. The spirit that did Miracles by Sampson, secretlie commaunded him to kill himselfe. Let vs put your sillogisme into forme as you desire, this it is. Noe Canonicall booke doth cōmaund or praise killing ones selfe, without speciall instinct of the holy Ghost. But Razias killed himself by that speciall in­stinct, and for this respect is praised in the booke of Machabees, ergo the booke of Machabees is not Ca­nonicall Scripture. I dare say, you need not write Goose or Woodcock, ouer the head of this argumēt euery one wil perceaue the feature you haue drawne, though vnderneath you say nothing.

28. This is your ignorance, but now your Mi­nisters falshood is yet more notorious & admirable, for you skip ouer the true sentence of S. Augustine which Lyra citeth, which is also cited in the Glosse, & indeed found in his workes, and you bring Lira's owne words and illations, which stand many lines after, for the verie saying of this Father. Thus Lyra [Page 51] writeth in that place: Some say, that the saying of S. Augustine, which is found in the Glosse, is thus to be vn­derstood. Doe you long Syr Edward for S Augustines saying; Harken vnto Lyra which doth sound it,Au­gust. l. 1. de ciuit. c. 21. His exceptis, quae lex generaliter iusta, & ipse fons iustitiae Deus specialiter iubet occidi, quisquis hominum vel seipsū, vel quemlibet alium occiderit, homicidij crimine innecti­tur. Those excepted, whom iust lawes in generall, or God the fountaine of iustice doth specially com­maund to be killed, what man soeuer doth make a­way with himself or any other is guiltie of the crime of murther. This is S Augustines saying, which you may finde also verbatim in the Glosse, in that very page. And this saying some did vnderstand, that when one killeth himselfe to the end that he may not be drawne by torments to an Idolatrous religion, or not be mocked to skorne in contempt of his God, that he sinneth not, because Iustice in such cases did allow of it.

29. Which interpretation is both false and a­gainst the minde of S. Augustine, who doth often teach and largly proue, against the Circumcellians, that in such cases, killing ones selfe is vnlawfullQuicū ­ (que) hoc in seipsis per­petraue­rūt animi magnitu­dine, for­tasse mi­randi, non sapientiae sanitate laudandi sunt. l. 1. de Ciuit. c. 22., that Razias was not cōmēdable for that fact, which the Scripture did report, not praise. Looke into the Glosse vpon that place, which is taken out of S. Augustine, this peece whereof Lyra citeth, you shall not find so much as a word in defence of Razias. How can this corruption be excused from witting falshood, to passe ouer S. Augustines saying so obui­ous that lay in the way? Was he not a nimble foxeIlla le­ui velox superabat deuia cur­su; sūma­ (que) transi­bat posita­rum lina plagarum., that could fetch such a leape ouer a marble piller, [Page 52] into a long peece of ground? But to whose charge shall I lay it? Your Printer is all readie loaden, your Minister I must not meddle with; if I touch your Person, I shall heare you rage,pag. 2. that like a shrewish distracted male-content, I scrach, kicke, spurne, hale, teare men noble by discent, eminent in places, profound in iudgment, skilfull in tongues, famous for learning, vertue, and experience in trauailes, by which periphrases you seeme to discribe your selfe. What shall I doe but follow an ancient custome, which was to beat the Minstrell when the Cooke did amisseTibi­cen vapu­lat.. You compare your selfe topag. 61. Gracchus, who came not at any time (say you) to make an Oration without a Minstrell, who by the sound of his Pipe did set him a right and iust Key. Wherefore let your Minstrell, whosoeuer he was, that piped you this Key, to sing and play S. Augustines doctrine vpon Lyra's ditties, let him haue the reward your ridiculous excuse doth deserue, to be thought Asinus ad Lyram.

30. And truely this Father, doth so often cleerly and peremptorily auouch the Charter of the Macha­bees, which confirmeth Purgatory to be sacred, that I wonder any man that had read his workes (as you would seeme to haue done) could vndertake to proue the contrary: which attempt would haue no other issue, then you haue brought yours vnto, Shame and Contempt. When he makes the Catalogue of Canonicall bookes, l. 2. de Doctrin. Christian. c. 8. doth he not ranke these with the rest? That no man can thinke them, by his list, lesse Canonicall then the other? did not this Father subscribe to the Councell of Carthage where those bookes were canonized, as euen M. Crashaw doth [Page 53] graunt,Serm. p. 80. with whome I might ioyne Doctor Field, Reynolds, Perkins and many other Protestants,See the Protest. Apolog. tract. 1. sect. 10. subdiuis. 11. who yield vnto these bookes the warrāt of the Coun­cell, for their Sacred authority.

31. I can but pittie you, who write your learned lynes, with Ministers notes before you, whose lyes, when they are once in your bookes, you will be angrie they be not thought yours: such is your assertionLett. pag. 63. opposit to your best Authors, that the Councell of Carthage did not admit the Machabees into the Canon, in proofe whereof you say, that our owne Canus doth confesse, that had they beene so ra­tified, it had bene neyther for Gregory, nor for any other to haue afterwards doubted of them. Shall I tell you the plaine truth. This is not the testimonie of Canus that learned Diuine, but of Canis, your Snarling Curre. Canus hath, in that place, two sayings so mainely opposite to both yours, as no Logitian can deuise more perfect contradiction by the rules of Art.

32. First he saith expresly,l. 2. de loc. Theol, c. 9. hanc nostram conclusionem docet Concilium tertium Carthaginense. This Conclusion (that the Machabees are Canonicall) is taught by the third Councell of Carthage, which, saith he, though but a Prouinciall Councell, was confirmed by Leo the fourth, and by the Councell of Trullum. This is contradictorie to your first assertion, that the Coun­cell did not admit those bookes: and against your other, that had they admitted them, our Gregory might not haue doubted of their Authority, in that very place and paragraph you cite, he sayth: (b) Id modò in dubium vocare non licet, quod D. Gregorio, Eusebio & reliquis licuit aliquando dubitare. It was lawfull for [Page 54] Gregorie, Eusebius, and others to doubt therof (that being but a Prouinciall Councell) but now we may not doubt therof, after a Generall indubitate definition of the Church. Can East be more opposite to West, light vnto darknes, then the sayings of Canus found in his booke, vnto those you report as his? Do you thinke to win creditt by your Cur, that gredily licks vp all manner of foule and false stuffe from Mi­nisters trenchers? And whereas your Snarler saithpag. 36. that S. Augustine, granting the Iewes did not admit the Machabees, held it small reason, for after-Ages to intertaine them in highest esteeme, I wonder (if that be true you say) that you can cite S. Augustine with­out a Prompter, that you had not in promptu, at your fingers end, the known saying of that Father, wher­with he knockes this puppie on the head: not the Iewes but Church of Christ (saith he) libros Machabaeorum pro Canonicis habet; l. 18. de Ciuit. c. 36. doth intertaine the Machabees for Canonicall bookes, which is the highest esteeme any writings can haue.

33. The same doth S. Augustine teach, in the testimony by you cited in his bookes against the Epistle of Gaudentius, l. 1. c. 31. which I said in my Treatise made against you. His wordes are these, The Iewes do not admit the booke of Machabees, as they do the Law, Prophetts, and the Psalmes, yet is it profitablie intertayned by the Church if it be read and heard soberlie. These wordes (saydOuerth. pag. 135. I) signifie that the Christian Church admitteth these bookes as Canonicall, euen as the Lawe and Prophets were Canonicall with the Iewes. And though this my inference, doth so displease you, that you say, no sober setled braine, will stumble [Page 55] vpon such a sense pag. 35., yet truly, I see no reason why any man should thinke you were sober that stumble vpon such a Censure. For by that testimony it ap­peareth, that the Christians gaue that Authority to those bookes, which the Iewes did not grant vnto them, that the Church did set them vp in the throne, from which the Synagogue had kept them, which was the Imperiall throne of Sacred Authority: o­therwise S. Augustines opposition, the Iewes did not, but the Church doth, were vaine. For the Iewes did admit the Machabees into the number of Hagiogra­phicall bookes, which were read for edification of the People. So that, if the Christian Church doth admit them into higher Authorities then the Iewes, that must needes be the highest of all; seeing euen the Iewes did place them in the degree next the hi­ghest.

34. You rage sayingpag. 35., that I infer S. Au­gustine to speake against his mynde, who neuer meant, that Canonicall Scripture is receaued with a Si, which is necessarie to be acknowledged, though it fall out by de­fault to be Sapor mortis ad mortem. But neither did I, nor S. Augustine say, that the bookes are receiued with a Si, but that the bookes receaued are pro­fitable to them that read them with a Si. The bookes (saith he) are receaued profitably, if soberlie they be read. So that the receauing of the bookes is absolute, but the books absolutely receaued, do not profit the Readers, without a Si sobriè, except they be read with sobrietie. Had you read S. Augustines wordes, with S. Augustines Si, you would not so grossely haue missed the finger of his, and my meaning. [Page 56] Are not thinges most diuine and heauenlie, taken without a Si, very dangerous and hurtfull? The most sacred Sacrament of the Altar, the fountaine of grace, doth not benefite the soule without a Si dignè, except it be worthilie taken; which wanting, it is Sapor Mortis ad Mortem.

35. And if when a man is vnworthie of that Celestiall food, the Church may keep the same from him, why may she not also keep the Scriptures, translated into vulgar tongues from People, whome she doth prudently thinke will not make benefit thereof: Nor haue stomack to digest so strong and solid meat, except it be first masticated by the Preachers mouth. Why may she not examine their sufficiencie for the one, as she doth their worthines for the other; yet you say,pag. 35. that S. Augustine neuer dreamed of such a drunken Church, as ours seemes to be, by eloyning the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, from common people, least it should hurt thē. I might wonder, that you should call a Church so Ancient, Famous, and Catho­like as the Roman is, Drunken, for a practice so full of wisdome and circumspection as this is, did I not know, that the custome of men that are tipled, is, when they stagger themselues, to thinke that Chur­ches, and the very heauens reele about them. I will not say you wrote in darke, seeing you affirme that like Demosthenes you endighted by the lampe pa. 62.: Ra­ther will I thinke that your single lampe, doubled in your eye, which happeneth to them that loue wine when they haue their Cup in their hand,

[Page 57]36. In this case perchance you were, when you wrotelet. pag. 42. that Purgatorie is backed, neither by any expresse testimonie of holy Writ, nor any exemplarie proofe besides Hobgoblins, Rawheades, Bloudybones, & Night-ghostes, which the world many yeares since hath forgot­ten to belieue. And againe with as litle sobrietie you saylet. p. 79. vnto vs: had it not bene for your Grand Patri­arkes S. Homer, S. Plato, S. Virgil, you would neuer haue knowne how to haue set your Compasse for the dis­couerie of your new-fond land. Can your Church be thought sober that permitteth you to pen such stag­gering and staring exaggerations as these? For to say nothing of S. Cyril, S. Chrysostome, S. Damas­cene, S. Gregorie, S. Bernard, & other Fathers cited for Purgatorie in that learned Treatise, which you would seeme to answere, whose plaine testimonies for this doctrine may seeme to haue bene Nightghosts in your way, which so scarred you as you durst not come nigh them with an answere, I hope your pen is not so farre past Modestie, as you dare tearme the Doctors & marble-pillers of Gods Church Rawheads, Hobgoblins, or Heathens. How happie were Queene Elizabeths Ghost, might she enioy the euerlasting companie of those Blessed, and neuer see your Hea­thenish Saints Theseus, Aristides, Plato, Hercules, and others,Zuinglius tom 2 pecc. origin fol. 118. et in exposit. fi­dei Christi­an. fol. 159. whom your great Patriarke Zwinglius admitteth into your Protestant heauen.

37. To omit I say this proofe by Fathers, which noe learned deuine will denie to be exemplar, what say you to the Machabees, and the whole Church of God, in those daies, that did practice prayers for soules in Purgatorie? Is not he a Rawhead that condēneth [Page 58] soe manie Saintes both before and after the cōming of Christ into Hell? That dareth call that the do­ctrine of Diuells, which is taught in bookes indigh­ted by the holy Ghost, if we beleeue S. Augustine? With whom I could ioyne other Fathers noe lesse auncient then he, canonizing the same bookes, would the shortnesse of this Letter permit me. But his testimonie may suffice alone, which bringeth with it, the authoritie of the Church in his dayes. For how would he intertaine the Machabees, wherof some Fathers doubted, but vpon the warrant of the Church, without whose word he doth professe, that he would not beleeue any of the Ghospellsl. contr. Epist. Fun­dam. c. 5.? And seeing ancient Councells do curse and say Anathema Si quis dixerit ali­as Scri­pturas, praeter eas quas Ec­clesia Ca­tholica re­cipit, in au­thoritate habendas, anathema fit. Cōcil. To­letan 7. in confess. fidei. to any that shall belieue any booke to be Scripture besides those that ar admitted by the Catholick Church, seeing also that to intertaine bookes as Canonicall, which indeed are not, is more daūgerous & preiudi­ciall to the Church, then to reiect those that are truly sacred: this supposed, who that hath any reuerēd cō ­ceipt of this learned Father, will doubt but he had for the Canon he citeth the warrant of the Catholike Church? Is it not credible that some Fathers who de­ny these bookes, were ignorant of the Churches warrant, rather then S. Augustine, so rash and pre­sumptuous, as to Canonize them without it? For how can he be excused from great temeritie if herin he erred? Yea doth he not deserue to be thought a deluder of the Church, if she did not indeed inter­taine those bookes, which he doth constantly a­vouch she did? From which imputation the blessed Saint was so free, as euen Caluin l. 3 in­stit. c. 3 §. 10. & l. 4. c. 14. §. 26. doth allow him [Page 59] the stile of the best, and most faithfull witnesse of Anti­quitie.

38. You grieue and deplore your hard hapCoun­ters. p. 28., that I should endight you for the least wrong done to that Marble-piller, that glorious Saint, that euer-ad­mired Augustine, to whose heauenly Meditations, sweet sayings, and learned discourses, I owe (say you) more then halfe of my selfe. Did you owe indeed to this Father one inch of your life, you would not scornefully re­iect his authoritie as you doe else-where, saying: As if our saith were to be pinned on Augustines sleeue Lett. pag. 71.: you would not make that the doctrine of Diuells, which he did depose, was written by a pen ledd by the hand of infallible Truth; you would not tearme Purgatorie, which you cannot deny but he taught, a Satanicall Figment Lett. 75. euacuating the Crosse of Christ.

39. As for Wrong offered to this Saint, none perchance euer did him greater, then you haue done in your Letter, writing in this manner of him:Lett. pag. 70. We find, say you, that the entyre loue of his mother Monica, and other his deare friends, made him somewhat too forward in this point. And why may not this be one of these things of which he speaketh ad Ianuariū,Epist. 119. c. 19. There are many things, which I dare not reprooue as I would? Thus you wrote, where you first contradict what now you write in your Snarle, calling him glorious & euer-admired marble Pillar, whom your former words make a wauering Reed, beaten with light blastes, either of feare or of affection, into damnable and dia­bolicall errours. Secondly, you make him guilty of that fault which your Cato tearmeth shamefull Turpe est auctori cum culpa redarguat ipsum. of sharply reprehēding in others the sinne of superstitious [Page 60] deuotion to the dead, wherein he was, you say, to for­ward himself. Thirdly, you offer this Saint intollera­ble wrong, in saying that he did dislike indeed the custome of praying for the dead, but durst not reproue it out of feare to Prop­ter non­nullarum vel sancta­rum tur­bulentarū personarū scandala deuitanda. offend and giue scandall. For how could this his forbearance not be damnable, if the custome of praying for the soules in Purgatory, be in­iurious to Christes blood, as you say it is.

40. And suppose that feare of men might dimi­nish the sinfulnes of his omission, in not reprouing so wicked a custome, yet no excuse can couer his impiety, in defending and allowing, as he did, the doctrine which you call the diuells, except this your Censure be irreligious. For what feare of God could be in his hart, if for feare of Men, he did not only forbeare to reprehend, but also teach, and striue to proue, what he knew was against truth, against Christs bloud, against Gods glory, peruerting and dissipating the Christian faith, as you sayLett. p. 74. 75. the doctrine of Purgatory doth. With this grosse feare do you charge him, and yet you thinke much I should endight you of the least wrong done vnto him, yea you would haue me thinke, you owe to him more then halfe of your self, whose head, hart, and tongue, are no more like his, then your go was like the sed the Printer turned it vnto, your conceit doth not sauour of his wit, nor your pen of his learning, nor your Stile of his modesty, nor your hart of his Feare of God, and Reuerence to the Church. This sentence of yours may suffice alone to giue any iudicious Reader, to vnderstand your opposition with S. August. & how much reason I had to tearme your Letter Lett. p. [...]1. vnlear­ned, [Page 61] you laying togeather on an heape the points of Catholike doctrine you mislike, whereof you think Purgatory the ground-worke in this sort. 1. Merites, 2. Satisfactions, 3. Perfections, 4. Supererogatiōs, 5. Masses, 6. Vigills, 7. Superaltaries, 8. Nooneday Lampes, 9. Dir­ges, 10. Christening & Buriall Lampes, 11. Oblations, 12. Roodes, 13. Images, 14. Crosse-creepings, 15. Beads 16. Crucifixes, 17. Pictures, 18. Graines, 19. Incense, 20. Hollowed Cemiteries, 21. Holywater, 22. Oyle, 23. Salt, 24. Spittle, 25. Couents, 26. Professions, 27. Pilgrima­ges, 28. Reliques, 29. Stewish Pardons, 30. Indulgences, this Riffraff, iuggling, trash, & Babies sports haue not only mutuall reference, but fundamentall dependance on Pur­gatory.

41. Is not this a learned enumeration and censure of the articles of our faith? Can you imagin that any man of Iudgement, will thinke your penne sober, that went thus tumbling from one point to another, without any discretion or order? Many of which doctrines by you related, I dare say haue no more connexion with Purgatorie, then hath one part of your discourse with another, which is, com­monly, none at all. What hath Salt, Oyle, Spittle to doe with Purgatorie? Or Beads, Crucifixes, Pictures, Reliques, Images, Cross-creepings, that they may be sayd to be built vpon it? Though Purgatorie should be ouerthrowne, I see not why the former things, as also Merits, Perfections, Supererogations, Crosses, Vi­gills, Superaltaries, Noonday-lampes, Christning and Buriall-tapers, might not remaine, and be vsed as now they are. Much lesse can I perceiue any sobrie­tie in terming the points of doctrine, which you set [Page 62] downe Riffraffe, Iuggling, Trash, and Babies sportes most of which I thinke you dare not for shame, I am sure you cannot with truth, deny to haue bene most expresly taught by S. Augustine, to omit the pregnant testimonies of other ancient Fathers.

42. For to speake only of Meritts, which you set in the first place; Can you deny, that S. Augustine taught our Catholike doctrine cōcerning this point? doth not he say,Epist. 105. ad Sixtum. that as the wages due to sinne is death, soe the wages due to righteousnes is life eternall? And againe:De mo­rib. Eccles. c. 25. the reward cannot goe before Meritts, nor be giuen before a man be worthie therof. YeaL. 3. in Iulian. c. 3., that God should be vniust, if he that is truly iust, be not admitted into his kingdome? Doth, or can any Catho­like speake more plainly then he doth of merits? And the same might be proued in most of the rest of the doctrines and practises you score vp for Iuggling trickes, and Babies sports, which had you any medio­crity of knowledg in S. Augustine, you could not be ignorāt that they are his most expresse assertions. You desire me to naturalizeCoun­ters. p. 59. your lines, which I dare say, if you are not bound vnto some Minister for them, may be, for S. Augustine, or any interest his learned sayings, or sweet meditations may chalenge in them, as free as the colt of the wild Asse Iob. 11. quasi pullū Onagri se liberū na­tum putat., which freedome you take to vse wild phrases, saying, it is for seruile pennes, such as mine is, to write in mood and figure, for you it is inough you please your selfe.

p. 39.43. But to returne to our purpose, if S. Au­gustine be a glorious Saint, as you say he is, in what a wretched and damnable estate are you, that im­pugne him, in most points of the Faith, by which [Page 63] he attained vnto glorie? If he be an euer-admired Doctour of Gods Church, doth not your blasphe­mie deserue eternall hatred, who make that doctrine the Diuells, which he reacheth to be Gods? Is not Pur­gatories Victorie ouer your lying Letter ingrauen in a Marble-piller, seing you cannot giue that title to that Doctour, in whose learned workes this point of Catholike doctrine, in most cleere and indeleble characters, is indelebly written?

THE Second Enemie which Pur­gatory hath in your Letter, and which makes you a mortall enemy to this Doctrine, isLett. to M. T. H. p. 26. & sequent. a proude conceipt of your learning, and of the Logick you got, haunting Par­uies in Oxford, by the principles whereof, you vn­dertake to tripp vp the heeles of Purgatorie (to vse your owne phrase) standing vpon the ground of sacred [Page 65] Scripture. Christ in the twelfth of S. Matth. vers. 32. saith of Synne against the holy Ghost, that it shalbe forgiuenMath. 12. vers. 32. neither in this world, nor in the world to come: Whence Catholikes infer, that some kind of synnes may be pardoned in the next worlde. For this text conteyneth both a distinction of two sortes of synnes, some Remissible others Irremissible, and of two places where Remission may be had, namely this present world, and the world to come: Signifying that some sinnes may be remitted in the one place, some in the other, but Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost in neither. Whence followeth, seeing the next world is the time of Iustice, that God doth not there remitt sinnes, without exacting and inflicting the due pu­nishment vnto the Authours, which is the Purgato­rie the Catholike Church doth, and hath euer taught.

2. This exposition noe sooner soundeth in your eare, but your tongue waggeth in this sort(c), I protest I thought as much, you haue turned vp Nodie, dic sodes, deale plainely with your freindes, came this Carde out of the Stocke? Is there any such clause in the text? Or any other expresse Scripture to iustifie this asser­tion? A young Gamster may see, it is but a bad sequele. Here is old packing, but I will discouer you. Thus you did discourse, more like a Carpet Knight, then a sober deuine, shewing more skill at Cardes then of Scrip­tures. But this Chapter, I make noe doubt, will discouer your ridiculous vanity, and make you feele the lumpish weight of your heauy-heeled pride, that your Logike, wherof you bragg extreamly, wilbe made a laughing stock euen to children.

[Page 66]3. And first you cannot deny, but this our inference and exposition of the foresayd place, is taught by fyue or sixe ancient and holy doctours, which thatp. 4. 5. 6. Treatise citeth; will your wisdome tearme them Nodies? S. Bernard the mirrour of lear­ning and Sanctity in his age, Venerable Bede, the prin­cipall ornament of our Nation, S. Isidore, the most eminent and ancient Doctour, and ouerthrower of Arianisme in Spaine? Shall these learned Fathers be put in the nūber of Nodies? Shall one find such a doa­ting Iustice of Peace againe in a Coūtrey, as will cast such Doctours into stockes, or shut them vp as you doe in Bedlam? Take heed, as Diogenes warned a wanton youth, least casting your reproches against heauen,De quibꝰ­dam leui­bus culpis esse ante iudicium purgato­rius ignis credendus est, pro eo quod Veritas dicit, Si quis &c. In qua sentē ­tia datur intelligi, quasdam culpas in hoc saecu­lo, quas­dam in fu­turo posse laxari. you strike not your owne Father. If you be an English Christian, you cānot deny S. Gregorie to be your Father, by whose care, meanes, and indu­strie the English Nation was conuerted vnto Christ, as in the sixth Chapter of this booke shalbe proued.

4. Heare what he saith:l. 4. Dial. c. 39. VVe must belieue, that for some light faultes, there is a Purgatorie-fyre, before the daye of Iudgment, because the Truth doth say, If any shall vtter blasphemie against the holy Ghost, it shal not be forgiuen, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. In which saying we are giuen to vnderstand, that some synnes may be forgiuen in this world, and some in the next. For what is denyed of one, it is cleere that conse­quently it is graunted of the other. Thus didst thou write Blessed Saint, a thousād yeares agoe, euen whē thy hart was fullest of cōfort for the Cōuersiō of our Country. It would not a little haue alayd thy ioy, hadst thou foreseene, that heresie in this vnhappie [Page 67] age, should bring back againe that barbarous and blasphemous language, which thou didst banish by the Preachers thou sentest vs. Perchance thou didst then little thinke, that one of that Nation, which in the bowells of thy charitie thou didst aboue all other cherish, to bring them forth the children of God, should presume and be permitted to terme thy Expositions of Scriptures (though not thine alone, but common to thee with other Fathers) Nodies! especially contayning that faith, which by the ouer­throw of Paganisme, thou didst plant in this land! But Syr Edward, what thinke you of that Father, whome you named a Marble Piller, a glorious Saint the euer-admired Augustine, to whome owing more then half your self, if you lay on his exposition the former reproach of Noddie, you may iustly be thought more then half out of your self.

5. Thus S. Augustine writeth vpon our place of Scripture;Ne (que) enim de quibus­dam vera­citer dice­retur, quòd non eis remit­tetur, ne (que) in futuro, nisi essent, quibus etsi nō in isto tamē remitte­tur in fu­turo Aug. l. 21. de Ciuit. c. 24. It could not be truly said of some men, that their synnes should not be forgiuen in this world, nor in the world to come, vnlesse there should be some men, who though they are not pardoned in this world, yet they should be pardoned in the world to come. So he▪ I confesse that this Father is more bound vnto you then the rest, for you seekeLett. p. 46, 47. to exempt him (which you do not so much as attempt in their behalf) from the companie of Nodies, with a writt vnder Viues hand, that the aforecited wordes are not in any our knowne coppies to be founde, adding that not to do vs wrong, yow will not suppresse that Viues goeth a stepp further, saying, Perhaps other im­pressions haue them, So that, say you, the Interpre­tation [Page 68] of S. Augustine, as also that Fathers Iudgmen concerning Purgatory hangeth on a weake thred vpon (forsan, Perhaps) which is as good as a new-nothing to hang vpon your sleeue. Thus you: heere is old and new packing vp of truthes and vntruthes togeather, which I will discouer and make apparent, that some old Gamester, and new Ghospeller hath taught you his iugling tryckes.

6. First Viues Com­mentar. in illude. In antiquis libris Bru­gensi & Coloniensi. doth not say, that the foresaid wordes are wanting in all our knowne Copies, which Carde you deale as his, but only in some ancient Manuscripts of Bruges and Cullen, and in the latter Edition at Friburge, besides which many other knowne Copies and Editions are to be found. Secondly he saith, that in all copies, these wordes are extant, Pro quibusdam defunctis &c. For some deceased the Prayer either of the Church, or other par­ticular pious Christians is heard, but for such as being borne anew in Christ, Neque in exemplari­bus Eri­burgi ex­cusis. their life in their body was neither soe bad as they were vnworthy, nor yet altogeather soe perfect that they had noe need of such mercy. These wordes doe cleerly containe our Catholike do­ctrine of Purgatorie, which wordes Viues doth ac­knowledg to be S. Augustines, without any (forsan.) How then doe you say, that the iudgmēt of this Father concerning Purgatorie, hangeth on a weake thred in Vi­ues iudgment?

7. Thirdly Viues doth indeed say, that the former exposition of S. Matthewes wordes by me ci­ted, is wanting in some Copies, but he addeth; Tamen stylus non abhorret ab Augustiniano, the stile dissenteth not from S. Augustines stile. This is som­what [Page 69] more then a meere Perhaps; yea the sole sauour of soe graue a Fathers stile, might haue stopped your pen from reproaching the doctrine therof, especially with so foule a censure as Nody, had not the same bene a Snarler. Finally, saith Viues, Either in other copies of S. Augustine, the former wordes are found, or taken from some other worke of this Father, they were here inserted. Behould Viues doth graunt this expo­sition to be certainely S. Augustines, without any perhaps, though he doubt whether he did repeate the same in this place. And that S. Augustine in other places giueth indeed our exposition of the wordes, he is a meere stranger in his writings that will deny.l. 21. c. 13. For in this very booke de Ciuitate Dei, not aboue ten Chapters before this, thus he writteth, Temporall punishments, saith he, some suffer in this life only, some in the next, some both now & there, yet before the last most rigorous day of doome. All that after death suffer tempo­rall payne, doe not fall into eternall punishment, which after Iudgment is for some. For to some, what is not for­giuen in this world, is forgiuē in the world to come, that they may not be afflicted with eternall torments. Thus he. Now is S. Augustine doubtfull either of Purga­torie, or of the exposition of this place, for pardon in the next world? Hath this Doctour in his vn­foulding the words of Christ turned vp Nody? Or rather your Minister that dealt your Cardes, vsing foure false and deceiptfull trickes, concerning this testimony of Viues, may he not be thought to haue turned vp for you all the Nodies and Knaues in the bunch?

8. But this your gaming Metaphore is not so in­iurious [Page 70] to these Blessed Saintes, as it is blasphemous against the holy Ghost, whose thrice venerable wri­tings, did you reuerence in your hart, more then the follies of your owne braine, your pen would haue trembled, to haue called that exposition Nody, which so many graue Fathers, without the contradiction of any, do peremptorily affirme to containe his mea­ning. What can be sacred and certaine amongst Christians, if an vnlearned Knight may be permit­ted to deride that which the most famous Deuines, and Fathers of former ages do deliuer, as an vndoub­ted verity, and Gods infallible word? It is true, that Fathers, to proue this or that Catholike verity, may sometimes bring places of Scripture, that haue other sense, yea perhaps the sense that one or other doth giue, may not be the best, although the doctrine therby proued be true, which is to erre according to the Analogy of the Place not of Faith. A distinction you vnderstand not, yet when many Fathers of the Church agree in the same exposition of Scripture, without the Contradiction of any, the same is to be thought the vndeniable sense of that place. For which cause Caluin cannot be excused of hereticall rashnes:Caluin comment. in c. 10. Io. who dareth expound this Text of Scripture Ego et Pater vnum sumus, I and the Father are one, of vnity of Consent and Will, not of nature▪ and substance adding, that the Ancients did abuse the same, to proue the Consubstantiality of the Sonne of God. Happily the text cannot be so strongly vrged, but Caluin [...] Arria­nizing wit, may find some plausible euasion to es­cape the force therof. Yet seing the vniforme con­sents of Fathers, haue canonized that meaning of [Page 71] the wordes, he can not be a true Christian that will not (neyther was Caluin that did not) submit his Iudgment therunto. For the vniforme consent of Fathers doth not require, that euery one, none excepted, should expresly teach the same do­ctrine (for then scarse in any point, could this vni­forme consent be proued, seeing all write not of the same point) but it sufficeth, that many haue taught it in diuers ages, without contradiction of the rest, and such is the exposition of this place for Purgatory and for the dead in the next world. Neither is S. Chrysostomes exposition you broughtLett. p. 41. contrary vn­to this, that the synne against the holy Ghost, shall not be forgiuen in this world, nor in the world to come, that is, Non effugient poenam, they shall surely be punished in this wold, and in the world to come. For first it is not sure and certayne, that vniuersally all such synners are punished in this world. Many tymes they florish, prosper, and spend their whole liues in great worldly ioylity, as diuers Persecutors, Sodomites, Apostata's haue done, which you name as synnes irremissible, and call their Authors Synners in grayne. Besides synne, neuer to be remitted; is more then to be punished in this world, and in the next. For as you heard S. Augustine say, some endure temporall punishments in this life only, and some in the next life only, some in both, so that one may be punished both in this, and in the world to come, and yet haue his sinne forgiuen at last. The mea­ning then of S. Chrysostome is, they shalbe punished in this world without pardon, and in the next like­wise without remissiion. Whence it doth follow, [Page 72] some may be punished in the next, with Purgatory Clemency as Boaethius speaketh.Lib. 4: praef. 4. So that this exposi­tion, as I said, though it be not taught expresly by euery Father, yet is it not contradicted by any. These things Syr you should consider, before you speake: you should wipe away Tobacco smoke from your eyes when a Card is turned vp, before you cry Nody, least often, as now you haue done, you lay the foule Epithete on the holy Ghost, indeed that true King of Harts, who moued those Fathers to expound the wordes of Christ, for the remission of sinnes in the world to come.

9. You oppose against our Catholike expositiō, another deuised by your self or your Ministers, wher­in you do greatly delight. You will grant sinnes par­doned in the next world, and yet not yield one penny to our Purgatory box. In this world, say you Lett. pag. 50. 51. sinnes are fully pardoned, quoad remissionis applicationem, by the application of pardon vnto them, and the selfe same sinnes may, and shalbe pardoned in the next, per remissio­nis promulgationem, by the proclamation of pardon. This distinction you thinke is thep. 32. fiue fingers, which you imagin will carry away the Set from the Fathers, yet I dare say a man that hath bin conuer­sant in Scriptures will iudge it no better then Nody. First because it is a new deuise not backed by the authority of any Father, which therfore may iustly be suspected. For Scriptures are to be expounded, ac­cording to the traditions of our ancestors, not by our owne fancies, as the Goulden paire of Grecian Doctors Basil and Gregory did, who durst neuer fol­low therin their owne iudgments, as Ruffinus (o) re­cordeth: [Page 73] neither would you,Scriptura­rū intelli­gentiam, non ex propria praesump­tione, sed ex maiorū scriptis & authorita­te seque­bantur. whose wit and lear­ning is not to be paralelled with theirs, were you as humbly conceited of your self, as you haue cause. Se­condly because you neither do nor can bring any ex­presse testimony of Scripture to confirme this your new fancy, nor any text, that may giue the least co­lour or probability vnto it. You cite the words of S. Iohn, that the vnbelieuer is already condemned, yet say you, he must come to a second doome: so is it with the belieuer. Albeit he hath full remission granted, c. 3. v 18 and his pardon sealed in this life, yet he must haue the same pro­claimed at the generall Goal-deliuery in the world to come, in which sense he may as truly be said to haue his sinnes pardoned, as the other, his condemned.

10. Thus you preach very learnedly as you think though God knowes to little purpose. For first you neither do, nor can tel, what is the first doome the vn­belieuer vndergoeth, by which he is damned in this world, and after which he must come to a second. The ancient Fathers expound that place, not that he is indeed sentenced in this world, but is said to be condemned and iudged, because the cause of his con­demnation is so cleare, that no doubt or question can be made of the sentence he shall receaueMore propheti­co, quia certissima est nō cre­dentium damnatio, dicuntur iam iudi­cati. Aug. apud To­letum An­not. 27. in c. 3. Ioan. So we vse to say of a Malefactor, whose crime is no­torious, that he is a condemned, or dead man, euen before the execution and verdict of the Iury,Sicut qui homi­cidium cōmittit, iam iudi­catus dici­tur, quia lege mor­ti est addi­ctus. Chrysost. in hunc lo­cum. were he not a Nody, that would thēce infer that he must be tryed twice, or dy two deathes? Yet you infer vpon the same ground, that the vnbelieuer must passe two doomes. Besides, if all sinnes must haue double pardon, one in this world, another in the next, [Page 74] why should not all sinners also haue a double con­demnation, one in this world, another in the next? You seeme indeed to grant this sequele, but Christ seemeth expresly to contradict it, making it the spe­ciall cause of Infidells to be already condemned in this world, and not of euery sinner.

11. Thirdly you mistake your Card, and seeme not to know the very principles of Christian diuini­ty, to wit, the true opposition betwixt the iust and the wicked, in the day of Iudgment. For the diffe­rence is not, that the sinnes of the one shalbe pardo­ned, and not the sinnes of the other, as you dreame, but that the workes of the iust shalbe rewarded, the deedes of the Infidels punished, their faith shal receiue a crowne of Iustice, the others Infidelity an eternitie of tormēts. That is not the day of Mercy but of Iusti­ce,2. Tim. 4. to giue to euery one according to his workes, not to forgiue any mā hisMatth. 16. wicked works. That shal not be the General Goale deliuery, as you surmise, but rather thē shalbe the general filling of the Goale, with all sinners, to be locked vp in misery euerlasting. But the Pardon which the sinners in this life got of their sinnes, by their harty pennance, through the merits of Christ shalbe then proclaimed; I grant it: but that shalbe the proclamation of Pardon they haue already gottē, not new getting of Pardō. Neither may it be ter­med a Pardō, but rather a triūph & victory ouer sinne. If the bare Proclamatiō of Pardō, may be termed Par­dō, I see not why the Proclamation of Baptisme may not be called Baptisme; so that by this y^r sēsles phrase, one might say, y^t y^e Saints shalbe baptized & washed frō their sinnes at the day of Iudgmēt, because their [Page 75] Baptisme and sanctification shalbe there proclaimed.

12. Some may obiect, that one absolued in the Court of Conscience may afterwards be pardoned in the exteriour Court, by vndergoing publicke pennance and humiliation in the face of the Church, for a sinne already forgiuē: I answere, those sinnes were not fully forgiuen, the penalty of this disgrace being still reserued. But the sinnes of the Iust, be­fore the day of doome are fully pardoned; noe pe­nalty of disgrace or other payne is reserued; they are purged in this life or in the next, that they may be vnspotted without wrinckle of the least sinne or guilt, at that day appearing. They shall not then appeare as humble penitents, which were requisite, did they expect pardon; but as triumphers, as sitting in Iudg­ment vpon sinners, and as punishers of the wicked, not as needing any further remission of sinne them­selues. Soe that your exposition crosseth the whole course of Scripture not hauing any congruity with the phrase thereof.

13. As for the former exposition, to the end you may the better conceaue your precipitation in your censuring it as Nody, and the force of our ar­gument may more appeare, I will particulerly ex­amine your cauills as the former deduction, and the many windinges and turnings your Ministers haue taught you, to elude the force of Christs wordes. Your first assault is by examples: A Kentish Gentlman, say youLett. p. 33., who not purposing to make his heire a great Clark, saith, This my eldest sonne shall neuer be student in Oxford or Cambridg: were he not an excellent Arteist that should thence inferre, ergo, some of his sonnes shall [Page 76] goe to Cambridg? Or if he should say, as without ridicu­lous absurditie he may, my sonne shall neither be Scholler in Eaton, or fellow in Kings-colledg, were he not out of his witts, that would here conclude, ergo, a man may be fel­low of Kings-colledg, that was neuer Scholler of Eaton, that being against the first foundation? These are your goodly instances, by which you would conclude, that the Fathers expounding the wordes of Christ as we doe, were out of their witts. Where you doe shew your selfe such an excellent Arteist, that you bring examples that make against your purpose, as shall appeare. For your Kentish Gentlemans speach, that his eldest sonne shall not be student in Oxford or Cambridg, nor scholler in Eaton, nor fellow of Kings-colledg, though it do not import, that either his se­cond, or third, or fourth Sonne shalbe student in Cambridg, or fellow of Kings-colledg: yet this doth follow (except his speach be ridiculously absurd) that some youthes may, & vse to be students in Cam­bridg, some men fellowes of Kings-colledg, else it were foolish to make that speciall exception against his first Sonne, which is generall vnto all other mens children.

14. This will appeare by other examples. Should this Gentleman say; My eldest sonne shall not be a Vniuersitie scholler neither in Oxford, nor in Queene-burrow Castle, were not his speach absurd? Why I pray you, but because Queē-burrow is no Vniuersity? Should he say, my sonne shall not be scholler in Eaton nor Pope in Christs Colledg, who would not laugh at his speach? The reason is, because the fellowes of that Colledg are not Popes. Should he say, my sonne [Page 77] shall not learne his Grammar in Eaton, nor in Oxford, might not one gather (vnlesse his speach be sense­lesse) that some vse, or may learne their Grammar in Oxford? Now to our purpose and place of Scrip­ture: These examples shew that except there be some remission of sinnes in the world to come, the speach of Christ should be senselesse, and absurd against one sinne, that it shall be remitted, neyther in this world nor in the next, except some sinnes may be remitted in the world to come. For he should seeme to make, not remission in the world to come, a speciall circumstance of this one sinne, which were a gene­rall circumstance of all, and euery one, if your do­ctrine be true; by which it is no more, that a sinne be remitted neyther in this world nor in the next, then meerely not to be forgiuen in this world. So that the particle nor in the world to come were idle, without sense, which may not be thought of the world of Wisdome. Wherefore to make the speach of Christ discreet and wise, we must needs graunt, that some synnes are pardoned in the world to come.

15. Whence we further inferre, that those synnes were not fully and perfectly pardoned in this life. For the synnes that were wholy pardoned in this life, need no remission in the next, and if any be remitted in the next, such they are, as were not, at least fully pardoned in this. And this is the dif­ference betwixt being a Scholler in Eaton, and a fellow in Christs-Colledg, and Remission of synne in this world, and Pardon thereof in the next; be­cause to be a scholler in Eaton doth not repugne with [Page 78] being afterward fellow of Christs-Colledg; whereas full Remission of synne in this life, doth not agree with Remission in the next. For how shall that be truly forgiuen, that is wholy forgiuen before? So that, though one may not inferre he was fellow of Christs-Colledg, ergo he was not before Scholler in Eaton, yet we may and must inferre, this synne is remitted in the next world, ergo the same was not formally, fully, and perfectly forgiuen in this present life. Thus your owne examples discouer your igno­rance, thus you are hampered in your owne snare.

16. No lesse vaine is your other logicall assault, where you thinke you put vs to a plunge, by retur­ning our Paralogisme as you tearme it vpon vs. Thus you dispute.Lett. p. 34. The sinne of the Holy Ghost shall neuer be remitted, quoad poenam aut quoad culpam, in this world, nor in the world to come, which is (say you) repugnant to the position of our owne sect, recorded by Suarez, whose wordes you citeTom. 4. d. 45. §. [...]. p. [...]57.. Thus you returne argu­ments as children vse to do stones they are not able well to lift, which they let fall on there head or foote. First it is not against the doctrine of our Church, that some sinnes are forgiuen in the world to come & quoad Culpam & Poenam, both according to the guilt of sinne, and according to the guilt of paine, yea Catholike Deuines commonly teach, that veniall sinnes are re­mitted in the next world according to both guilts, namely Suarez in that very place you cited, though of mortall sinnes he saith, that remissio mortalium, the remission of mortall sinne in the next world, cannot be vnderstood, quoad Culpam, according to the sinne, but only quoad poenam, according to some penaltie due to it. [Page 79] Behold how well you vnderstand the Authors you name. You had greate reason, doubtlesse, to saie, that you vnderstand the most artificiall conueiance of the best of our workes, Coun­ters. p. 58. who cannot read, without mi­staking, six lynes of a Scholasticall Author.

17. Secondly your Retortion is of no force against that Position, did we hold it. For out of the former text of Scripture, is gathered clerly, that some sinnes are remitted in the world to come, but what those sinnes be, veniall or mortall, likewise the māner of the pardon, whether it be according to the sinne or penaltie only, or both, cannot hence be proued, but out of other passages of Gods word these verities are to be searched. To make this cleare by your example; Should your Gentleman saie, my sonne shall goe to schoole either at Eaton or Oxford, one may inferre, that in eyther of these places, some kind of learning is taught, but not that Grammar is taught in Oxford & Logik in Eaton, or è contra. Should a young gentleman saie, that he will neyther study in the Innes of Court, nor in the Vniuersities, one may in­ferre, except the speach be senselesse, that in both places studies are professed, but he that would in­ferre, that common lawe is studied in Oxford, or di­uinity professed in London, were he not absurd? Soe likewise the speach of Christ doth only signifie in generall Remission in the world to come, not distin­ctly explicate the manner thereof, nor the qualitie of the sinnes that are there purged.

17. Fayne would you find some Paralell in Scripture to this speach of our Sauiour, that may seeme no lesse senselesse and idle, then is this sensed [Page 80] in your manner. For want of better you bring that speach of S. Matthew, c. 1. concerning Ioseph, that he knew her not, vntill she had brought forth her first-borne Sonne. If out of this place (say you) Lett. pag. 39. we should come vpon you, ergo, he knew her after she had borne him, you would thinke that Blessed & holy Virgin most irrecōpē ­sably disparaged, and yet [...] seemeth to imply the same. Thus you discourse, thinking this hereticall and Heluidian inference, not vnlike to that of the Fa­thers, we stand vpon. Yea, say you, Non ouum ouo similius, one egg is not more like another▪ But if euer I be so happy as to be at your table to which you seeme to inuite me, I should be loath you be my caruer, you are so apt to mistake and cōfound things which doe mainly differ, as I might easily haue a Scorpion layd on my trencher insteed of an Egge. The speach you bring out of S. Matthew, He knew her not vntill she had brought forth her first-borne Sonne, doth only expresse a truth, that Ioseph did not know the Virgin till that time, neither is any thing wāting or superfluous in this speach, but in the other speach, this sinne shalbe fōrgiuen neither in this world, nor in the world to come, the last clause therof is superflu­ous & senslesse, signifying no more then the former if there be no remission in the world to come, as hath bene proued.

19. Moreouer the denyall of some action, vn­till a certaine time, doth not imply any necessary consequence therof afterward, which may be proued by familiar examples in our commō speach, As if one say, he neuer yielded vnto sinne til death, it is cōse­quēt that after death he yielded vnto sinne. The same [Page 81] may be shewed in a thousand places of Scripture. God the Father saith to Christ, Sit on my right hand vntill I make thine enemies a foote-stoole to thy feet Psal. 109., when this is done, shall Christ loose his seat at his Fa­thers right hand? Noe. So his Mother, that was vntouched vntill she brought him forth, ceased not to be a Virgin after her Childbirth. Now noe ex­āple can be brought out of the Scripture, of a speach distinctiue, that is, that hath two partes or members, where one of those particles is idle, the second part implying noe more then the first. Neither doth cō ­mon sense or discretion, practice, or allowe, such senseles pratling, which may yet be further confir­med by diuers examples, but one other shall suffice by which any iudicious Reader will easily perceiue a maine difference betwixt the Heluidian inference and Catholike deductiō from Scripture. What thinke you, Syr Edward, of this speach? The Virgin neuer committed mortall sinne from the first moment of her life, vntill the very last thereof; doth this speach sound vncouthly in a Christian eare? Shall one infer Ergo after life she committed mortall sinne, were not such an inference ridiculous and absurd? you see then that [...], vntill, doth not imply consequence of the action afterward. Now should one say of the blessed Mother, she neuer committed sinne either in this life or after her death, would not this speach seem to a Iudicious hearer absurd? Might not one thinke the last clause therof senseles, except sinne may be committed in the next world? I appeale to the Iudg­ment of any Christian eare, whether there be not a maine difference betwixt those two kind of speaches, [Page 82] which you would haue like. Soe that still on your head doth light, the scornefull Epithete where­with you reiect the Fathers iudicious inference out of our Sauiours sentence

20. Yet you haue one shift more, which is a rule of logick, whereof you write in this sort:Lett. p. 33. 34. I am sure it was a rule when I first haunted Paruies, Quod de vno negatur, non semper de diuersis affirmatur, & è contra. My reason, say you, is, Potest idem praedica­tum de diuersis subiectis praedicari, as thus, Eos qui foris sunt Deus iudicabit, and this is true: eos qui foris sunt iudicabit Deus, when subiectum doth differ, the prae­dicatum being all one. Neyther may we argue thus: They are to be iudged of God. Ergo, not by the Magistrate; and yet you stick not to say, This sinne is not remitted in this world, nor in the next world, ergo, some sinnes shalbe forgiuen in the next. Thus you talke like a great Do­ctor, when you haue an ignorant Reader, though any man that hath the least skil in Logick doth se you haue turned vp a notorious Nody. For is he not a Nody-Logician and a young gamster in that art, that cannot distinguish betwixt Praedicatum and Sub­iectum, but taketh the one for the other? I am sure, one that had studied logick but three dayes, would not haue committed such a grosse errour as you doe, who braggLett. p. 6 of being a Maister of Art, and Seniour of the Act, Absit, say you, inuidia verbo. Truly some foole may perchāce enuy the word, or Title of Seniour or Maister of Arts, but the logick to which that title was giuen, I cannot thinke an obiect of enuie, you so childishly erre in the first principles thereof.

12. For the Praedicatum in your two propositiōs, is [Page 83] not the same, the subiect being different as you say, but the contrarie, to wit, two different Praedicates are spoken of the same Subiect, Praedicatum is the thing which is spoken, Subiectum that whereof that thing is spoken. Who doth not se, that in these propositions the thing spoken is Iudge of those without, Iudge of those within, which are diuers titles, praedicates or properties, the thing of which, that is spoken, is God, one and the selfe same Subiect, on whome both these titles light. And seing Subiectum in a speach is that which goeth before the verbe Praedicatum, that which followeth, the Boyes of Eaton may serue to laugh you out of your witlesse bragging that you can breake tall mens heades with your Logick. I shall not need for this exployte to muster an Army of English, both horse and foote, as you do p. 37. Anglige­nae attol­lant equi­tes, pedi­tes (que) ca­chinnum. to laugh against me, pardoning them afore hand, though they laugh with­out Modesty, because I did warne you by the way not to read Lipsius of the miracles of our Blessed Lady & other Catholike bookes, as you did insinuate your custome was, taking Tabacco and rosting crabbes by the fire side: which admonition, whether it were ridicu­lous or no, and not rather necessary, I remit it to the Iudgement of them that best knew your hu­mours. This I say, had you obserued, perchance you would not haue impugned our Catholike expo­sition in the manner you haue done, to your shame, your pride falling into more then childish Ignorance, when you are prankest in the dirision of the holy Fathers. Perchance in Oxford, you spent not so much tyme in haunting Paruies, as in hunting in Parkes, or houering at Larkes, which Idlenesse were not so into­lerable [Page 84] a fault, in one borne to such land as you were, did not your Arrogancie exceed your ignorance, im­ploying your small learning against their religion whose liuing you enioy, except your family be as very an vpstart as your Faith.

22. Your logicall rule (though the examples wherwith you declare it to be childish) we deny not to be true, that, what is denied of one thing, is not ther­fore said of another. So by rigour of Logick it doth not follow, that Remission of sinne in the next world is granted of some sinnes, when it is denied vnto one kind of sinnes, yet doth the same follow by the Rules of Prudency, because otherwise such a speach, though not false, yet should be idle, and sensles against rules of wisdome. And seing it is most certaine that no sensles or idle word could proceed from the mouth of our Sauiour, we conclude neces­sarily, that the second clause of the former speach, hath some sense, which cannot be, as hath bene shewed, without remission of sinnes in the next world. Many speaches are not against Logicke, though a graue Authour will not vse them. Your ex­ample to illustrate the matter, thatLet. p. 38. a Maister shall not read you a Lecture, nor quick, nor dead, though it be not against the Logick you got in Paruies, yet would it not beseeme the mouth of wisdome: to me it seemes a spice of blasphemy, for you to bring your phrases, which you Coun­ters: p. 39. confesse are neither in mood nor figure, to declare the speach of Christ, whose words are, in number, weight, and measure.

23. Strang conclusions might we deduce from your speach, did we not thinke that their authour [Page 85] might be subiect to folly, iesting at the Miracles of the Virgin, of Iohn Swickius, who had his Nose strooke of with a bullet, for playing with the Virgins nose; you sayLet. p. 101., that he lost the best nose of his face. Had a graue writer vsed that speach, I might haue suspected that Swickius had more noses then one, but knowing you to be the authour thereof, I can thinke you might be as ignorant in the number of his noses, as you are of the biggnesse of your owne, who tell vs as a great wonder, that when you take Tobacco,Coun­ters. p. 39. your nose doth not smoke so much as your chimey. Should one haue sayd of Swickius, after that stroke, that he had on his face, neither nose of flesh nor waxe, I see not what sinne he should haue com­mitted against Logicke: yet I thinke, except some men vse to haue noses of waxe, he should haue missed the marke of graue and discret speach. This the wisdome of God could not misse; wherefore that must needs be the meaning of his words, which taken away, leaueth them in an empty sound, voyd of graue and full sense.

24. Rather then take to your self the Nody you layd on our expositions; you seeme in a manner to graunt all, to witt, that the speach of Christ was indeed senselesse, wherein you would fayne haue Maldonate ioyne with youLet. p. 38.: you cite him vpon a sentence of Christ, saying in this sort: Haec oratio hominibus absurda videtur, qui non intelligunt; Maldona­tus sup. Matth. 19.14. this speach seemeth absurd to those that vnderstand it not: why then, say you, should this prouerbiall amplification sound soe vncouthly in your eares? you would be loath I should serue you with a Non intelligis, vnder Maldonates [Page 86] seale. But Sir, I must by your leaue, serue you with Non inuenis, vnder the seale of truth. Do you con­sider, whether you may not serue your Minister, out of whose Note-bookes you copy these fal­shoods, with a Mentiris. Maldonats true words vpon the sentence of Christ,Matth. 29.24. that it is easer for a camell to passe through a needells eye, then a rich man to enter in to the kingdome of heauen, are these: Absurditas, saith he, vt videbatur, aut potiùs admirabilitas huius sententiae in causa fuit, vt quidam Cameli nomine nauticum funem, quo Anchorae alligantur, intelligerent. The absurdity as it seemeth, or rather the admirabilytie of this doctrine, caused some interprete Camelum, a Cable rope by which shippes ryde at Anker: Which wordes of Maldonatus, make not for you but rather against you. We deny not but the doctrine of Christ and his speach, may seeme absurd to carnall men, by occasion of the hei­ght and admirability of his doctrine, which the capacity of humayne vnderstanding reacheth not vnto, as Maldonatus saith; but that the speach and wordes of diuine wisdome should indeed be absurd for want of sense or mystery conteyned in them, that he should expresse a truth in a disiūctiue speach, one clause whereof is senseles, which no wise and graue man vseth to doe; this absurditie I say and superfluitie of speach, we take it a great blasphemy in you to suspect in the doctrine of Christ.

25. Hence is answered the Question you makep. 27.: It was an old prouerb, say you, when I went to schoole, Veritas non quaerit angulos; How commeth it to passe, that S.c. 3, 29. Markes exposition, to wit, that the synne against the holy ghost shall neuer be remitted, is [Page 87] such a mote in your eyes, that you are gauled to the quick, that he should decide the question? To this I reply, with another question, how commeth it to passe that the text of S. Matthew being larger in wordes then that of S. Marke, is such a beame in your eye, that you would haue the same broken in peeces till it be no greater then S. Markes mote? The reason is I feare, because the partition of Eternity into this world, and of the world to come, to be two places for remission of synnes, is a payre of spectacles, through which you must needs see Purgatory, except you willfully shut your eyes. Is not this quaerere an­gulos, to seeke corners, to leaue the open field of S. Matthewes larger sentence, seeking a Commentary in S. Marke, more retyred and concise speach. Seeing S. Matthew is more diffuse in wordes, we do him wrong denying them a more copious sense when they may beare it. S. Matthew deuideth what S. Marke confoundeth in one: the two partes of eternity which in S. Matthew are manifest, in S. Mark are hidden; how then can S. Marke be thought an expositor of S. Matthew, who fouldeth vp, what the other layeth open?

26. I hope Syr you perceaue this Catholike exposition of Christs wordes, or deduction of Pur­gatorie from them, is in it self most sutable with the wisdome of so graue an Author, specially backed with the authoritie of so many worthy Fathers, ex­pounding them with vs, against your mens fancie. If S. Augustine changedl. 6▪ cont. Iul. c. 11. vel. 23. & l. 1. retract. c. 23. his exposition of a passage of S. Paul, which he had constantly taught before, because he perceiued the same was against S. Hilary, [Page 88] Gregory, Sanctos, notosque Doctores. Ambrose, and other holy and knowne Doctors of the Church, Melioribus, saith that euer-admired doctor, & intelligentioribus cessi. I yeilded vnto those that were better and more intelligent then my selfe. How dare you so peremptorily presume vpon your new deuised exposition, contradicted by many, not warranted by any ancient Father? How did you not feare to lay vpon an exposition receaued generally for many ages in the Church, the title of Nody, yea to say, that the same is backed by noe exemplar proofe besides Hob­goblins let. p. 42.?

27. What S. Augustine said vnto Iulian the Pelagian, who branded the doctrine of original sinne with the title of a Manichean fable, may be retor­ted vpon you, that disgrace Purgatory with the style of Satanicall figment. Hauing brought six or seauen Fathers for that point of Catholike doctrine, he con­cludeth in this sort, saying vnto him:l. 1. con. Iulia. c. 2. vel 4. finding you in your writings non antelucano conuiuio temulentum, sed insano conuitio turbulentum, not so much tipled with wine taken next your hart, as distempered with senslesse ray­ling against truth, I haue not brought you into Zeno­crates schoole, where drunken Polemo was made sober, but haue summoned you vnto the quiet and venerable assembly of holy Fathers. Sancto­rum Patrū pacificum honoran­dum (que) con­sessum. Let not my labour be lost, be­hould them that looke on you, who sweetly and gently looke on you: what sonne are we, Maniches? are we Hobgoblings or Nodies? What can you answere? What eies will you lift vp against them? You will say you did accuse none of them by name of this errour. But what will you do when they shall answere, we had rather your rayling teeth should teare our name, then our fayth, by the merit wher­of [Page 89] of our names are written in heauen? What sillogismes will you frame? What will Aristotles logicke avayle you, wherein you would faine shew your selfe skilfull that you may seeme an artificiall disputer against vs? Will you dare to drawe your blade of brasse, the leaden poyniards of your arguments Tuorū argumen­torum vi­trea acies vel plum­bei pugio­nes. in their presence? What weapons will not tremble, and sheuering for feare, fall out of your hands Quae abs te, arma non fugient nudum (que) destituēt., dauntted with the maiestie of soe graue a Senate? Thus S. Augustine.

THAT short and pithy Treatise, which you sought to disgrace with froathy lynes, alleadgedl. 1. p. 1. c. 1. §. 4. for Pur­gatorie the custome of the Church to pray for the dead, and their re­liefe in the holy Sacrifice of the Al­tar; which custome he proueth was perpetuall euen from the blessed Apostles. S. Cyril Arch-bishop of [Page 91] Ierusalem liuing in Constantine the Great his time, writeth of that practice in this sortCathec. mystag. 5.. When we offer vp sacrifice, we pray for our deceased Fathers and Bishops, and finally for all men departed amongst vs, for we be­lieue that this is a great help for the soules of them, in whose behalfe we offer that holy and fearefull sacrifice, which is layd vpon the Altar. S. Chrysostome hom. 79. ad populum Antioche­num. saith as much, that it was not vnaduisedly decreed by the Apostles that in the fearefull Mysteries, there should be a comme­moration of the dead, for they knew the dead receiued great benifite & vtility therby. But most clearely S. Augustine, Serm. 42. de verbis A­postol. There is no doubt (saith he) but that by the prayers of holy Church, and by the healthfull Sacrifice, and by almes, the soules of the deceased are released, that God may deale more mercifully with them, then their sinnes haue deserued: for this, being deliuered by our Fa­thers, the vniuersall Church doth obserue.

2. Behold prayer for the reliefe of the dead, receaued from the Blessed Fathers & Apostles, practized by the vniuersall Church, in that her most florishing age, whose authoritie to impeach, is the badge of heresie, whose custome to condemne, is insolēt mad­nes. What say you to this Argument Syr Edward? Sometimes you labour to proue, that this was not an Apostolicall Tradition, nor a perpetuall and vni­uersall custome of the Church, you bringpag. 76. 77. argu­ment vpon argument, fiue or sixe one vpon the back of another, which it were lost time to set downe For when your swelling & pregnant Moun­taines come to their Childbirth, they are deliuered of a feely mouse▪ the force of your argument consi­sting in this testimony of Polydore Virgil; that, Purga­torium [Page 92] aliquando incognitum fuit, & serò cognitū Eccle­siae vniuersae, it was a great while before Purgatory was hard of, and but of late knowne to the vniuer­sall Church: I know I might pose you to finde, nay sure I am you cannot finde those wordes in Poly­dore. A signe that when you conceiue your noble and worthy lynes, you haue Ministers note-bookes be­fore you, which is the cause they are so false & foule, rather resembling a Minister then a Knight, some of that crew, as it may seeme, had summed the sub­stance as he thought of Polydors discourses in that place you citeDe inuent l. 8. c. 1., which sume you trāscribe into your Letter as Polydors owne wordes, though Polydore, in truth, speaketh not one word of his owne, con­cerning Purgatory, but meerly relateth of Roffensis, whome you also bring; such is your beggary, ma­king two distinct Authours of one.

3. Roffensis then must beare the brunt of this battayle, whome you quotepag. 77., saying, that the Greekes knew not Purgatory vnto this day. Nay further he propoundeth this chalenge, Reade he that list the ancient Greekes commentaries, and he shall finde either little or no mention at all of Purgatory. But in this your English Edition you omit that which you haue in your latin Original, Quantum opinor, as I now think or ghesse sayth that Byshop, which is lesse then a new nothing to hang on your sleeue. For though Roffenfis at that tymeart. 18. aduersus Luth. had such a thought, not hauing then so fully perused the Grecian Fathers, yet afterwards in that very booke, when he com­meth to speake of Purgatoryart. 38., he doth affirme the contrarie in expresse tearmes. Whereas Luther did [Page 93] obiectGrae­ca Ecclesiae Purgato­rium non credit ma­nens Ca­tholica., that the Greeke Church did not belieue Pur­gatorie, he maketh this answere: I take it you meane the vulgar multitude of that Nation, not the Fathers of the Grecian Church, for that the Grecian Fathers fauour Purgatorie, the workes they left behind them doe witnesse, then he bringeth diuers authorities in proofe of his Assertion. And againe Luther obiecting, that Pur­gatorie could not be proued out of Scripture, he doth re­ply, that to pray for soules in Purgatorie is a most ancient custome of the Church, addingCùm Purgato­rium à to [...] patribus tam Grae­cis quàm latinis af­firmetur. art. 38. circa prin­cipium., that seeing so many Fathers both Greeke and Latin auer Purgatorie, it is not likly, but that truth was made knowne vnto them, by sufficient proofes out of Scripture. Behold the swelling waues of your Syllogismes, which occupy a whole page of your booke, now are ended in froath in a silly surmise of Roffensis, which vpon mature and exact perusall of the ancient Fathers, he doth him­selfe peremptorily gaine-say.

4. But put case Polydore Virgil or Roffensis had said what you desire, could his words way downe in any iudicious ballance S. Augustines cōtrary asser­tion? Especially about the custome of the Church in that age, wherein this glorious Saint liued? S. Augustine against Polydors, or rather your Ministers Serò, that Purgatorie is but of late, he hath à Patrihus traditum, that it is deliuered from our Fathers, which Fathers S. Chrysostome declareth to haue bene the Apostles: against the emphasis of non vniuersae, not the vniuersall; he hath the contradictory, vni­uersa obseruat Ecclesia, the whole vniuersall Church doth practice prayer for the relief of some dead. Now you haue the whole army of the Christian Church in all [Page 94] ages set in battayle array against you, the blessed Apostles with Pykes (as I may say) of diuine Au­thoritie standing in the forefront. You sayCoun­ters. p. 24. the Apostles long since lent you a brydle to curbe the motions of swelling pride, Si quis se existmet scire aliquid, non­dum cognouit quemadmodum oporteat eum scire. This bit of sobriety, if you had it euer in your mouth, it may seeme that wine hath washed it downe, so tamquam equus sine intellectu, you runne against this glorious army. You giue a double assault; one with Iestes & Scoffs, deriding Catholikes for the reuerence they beare vnto the Churches authoritie. Secondly you bring places of Scriptures, which to your fancy seeme to condeme Purgatory, and the custome to pray for the reliefe of the deseased. First you begin (u) to iest at the saying of that Treatise, that it is insolent madnes to contradict in this sort the custome of the Church, pulchrè dictum (say you) this is your Ladies A. B. C. the Church is as much beholding to you, as was Pythagoras to his Schollers; insteed of ipse dixit, you will haue ipsa dixit. Thus you write. And truly from such a Poet as your selfe, what could we expect but such irreligious iestes; who perchance take your pen to write about Theologicall questions, when you are in the same case, your Father Enuius euer was, when he set himselfe to make Heroicall verses.

5. For what man that hath any bit either of Di­uinity in his head, or Christianity in his hart, or So­bryetie in his tongue, would haue accused Catholiks, for esteeming the Ipsa dixit of the Church, as much as the Pythagorians did the Ipse dixit of their Maister? Why should not this Ipsa, the Mother of Christians, [Page 95] the Spousesse of the Holy Ghost, this Pillar and Founda­tion of truth, this daughter of God the Father, washed with the bloud of his sonne, that she might in her do­ctrine haue no blemish of errour; Why should not her word (I say) be more esteemed of by her children, then the saying of Pythagoras a Pagan Phi­losopher was with his Schollers? I perceiue you do loue, more then belieue the Feminine Gender, per­chance you suspect in the Church, the fault you lay vpon that Sexe,Coun­ters. p. 52. with some ryme, let them say with what reason Mulier nihil scit, nisi quod ipsa cupit. This makes you loath to submit your Iudgment vnto Ipsa dixit. But you may be sure that the Dixit, or Saying of the Church, is neuervt ma­neat vo­bi cum in aeternū. Ioan. 14. without the dixit of Gods spirit her Maister. She hath the war­rant of her Spouse, that he will make her wordes good, he that heareth you, heareth me, Luc 10. to which her Commission he subscribeth with a dreadfull Curse, He that heareth not the Church, let him be to thee as an Heathen Luc. 18.. Oh what glorious Fathers and Doctors could I name, famous in former ages for Sanctity and learning, that submitted their Iudgment to the sayings of the Church! put their fingers to their mouth, when she did gaine-say that they thought true, prostrating their learned penns to be euer at the deuotion of her Censure? How highly did they esteeme her Dixit, her Iudgmēt, her Word! Let S. Au­gustine speakede Bap­tis. cont. Donatist. l. 17. c. 33. vel. 53.: I dare with the conscience of a secure voyce, affirme (saith he) what in the Gouerment of our Lord Iesus Christ is established by consent of the vniuer­sall Church. And againede Ba­ptism. cōt. Donatist. l. 4. c. 6▪, If he say something, that doth say, We follow what we receaue from the Apostles; [Page 96] how much more strongly do we say, we follow that which the Church did euer hold, what no disputation could ouer­throw, Contra epist. Fun­dam. l. 5. what a Generall or plenarie Councell hath defined. Thus S. Augustine: doe you see, what a Pythagorean Dixit, what vncontrollable Authoritie he granteth to the Church?

6. As litle Iudgment or Piety do you shew in your iest at the Ladies A. B. C, as though the au­thoritie of the Church were not the Alphabet and Christ-Crosse-Row, in which all Christiās ought, and all ancient Christians did learne to reade and belieue the Scriptures. The forenamed S. Augustine, the Phenix of witts, the Mirour of learning, did he not learne in this booke, Ego vero (saith he) Euan­gelio non crederem, nisi me Ecclesiae commoueret Aucto­ritas? Truly I would not belieue the Ghospell, did not the Churches authoritie moue me vnto it. Why should any Lady or Lord, Maister of Arts, or Doctor, disdaine to spell the Ghospell of Christ, by the same letters, such learning & sanctity vsed.

8. Shall I tell you, your protestant LadiesHas linguas qui nesci­unt & sae­pe & ne­cessariò halluci­nantur. VVhitak. de sacra scriptura. pag. 523. A. B. C? For the old Testament those Hebrew Cha­racters, now you begin to learneCoun­ters. p. 7. and the Greeke letters for the new, which if they be ignorant of, I assure them according to yourNullū nos editi­onem nisi Haebraicū in vetere, & Graecā in nouo Testamē ­to authen­ticam faci­mus. VVhitak. controu. 1. q. 2. p. 128. Churches Prin­ciples, they cannot reade so much as a sillable, that they may be certaine is Scripture. They may reade the English translation, you will say, that is Scripture. I deny the same to be Scripture except it be confor­mable to the Originall, wherof those haue no meanes to be sure, that cannot read, nor vnderstand the two aforenamed learned tongues, in which they were [Page 97] primarily written. If you say they must belieue it, vpon the word of your ChurchMulti nesciunt li­teras & ta­mēfidēsanā retinent expraedica­tione pasto­rum. Whitak. de sacra scriptura. p. 588. you bring them back vnto ipsa dixit, and make them reade the letters of Christianitie in your Ministers horne booke. Were it not better to stick to the Catholicke Ladies A. B. C. that fayre Christs-Crosse rowe, which our famous auncestors did learne? Cleaue to the authority of that Church, which begun in the Apostles, by perpetuall Succession of Bishops, is de­riued vnto this age?Illam Scripturā dicis non esse quam esse dicit vniuersa Ecclesia ab Apostoli­cis sedibus vsque ad praesentes Episcopos certa suc­cessione perducta. l. 28. cont. Faust. c. 2.

8. But suppose one would be scholler to your Church, hath she so much skill or any warrant not to erre, as we may be sure she will not teach vs a­misse? Your selues sayThe whole militant Church may erre, as euery part ther­of. Fulke in his ans­were to a Counter­fayte Cath. p. 86. that she may erre, and teach vs damnable doctrine. For which, when at the day of iudgment we shalbe called to accompt to say our lessons, we may be laughed to skorne, loose the eternall reward, and be punished for euer. As it is insolent madnes, to contradict the custome of the true ChurchAugust. Epist. 118. ad Ianuarium. so is it desperate madnes, to follow the directions of such a Church, which though we religiously belieue, exactly obserue euen vnto death, yet may we be perpetually damned. But the Ladies of your Church learne forsooth of the spirit, they trust to Ipse dixit, who will teach them which is the Scripture. They are the sheep of Christ and know his voyce, from that of strangers. These are your Ministers faire promises, yet I dare giue them my word, though they haue the best spirit that euer po­ssessed any man of your Church; notwithstanding [Page 98] they may erre damnably, mistake Scripture, think that to be true translation, which is indeed errone­ous. Had not Luther the first fruites of the Prote­stants spirit? yet he erred most grossely; that euen Zwinglius his fellow-witnes against the Pope, doth giue this testimony against him,tom. 2. l. de sacra­ment. p. 412. Thou Luther doest corrupt the word of God, thou art seene to be a manifest corrupter of the holy Scriptures.

9. What translation or spirit of your Church may your Ladyes trust, if Luther be soe corrupt, as this your faithful witnes doth depose? I see no reme­dy for them, if they meane to be saued frō the deluge of errours, but to fly to your Arke of Noe printed at Venice, Coun­ters. p. 8. wherein you were shipped when my booke came to your handes; your sheep must learne in an hebrew grammer to vnderstand their pastors; they must nibble on those rootes of Iurie which you, who haue tasted of them, compare to the fyery thunderbolts in Gelons belly, wherewith it would be great pittie that your rare creaturs should be troubled. And if this Arca cannot saue them, nor assure them, which is truly translated Scripture, let them fly to the true Arke of Noe, the Caholike Church, to which Luther did foresee, his turbulēt spirit, raysing discord amongst Christians, would force them that truly desire to be saued, finally to fly to, for rest.lib. de veritate Corpor. Christi contra Zwingliū Yf, saith he, the world continew long, the multitude of interpreta­tions will force vs to receaue againe the decrees of Coun­cells, and to fly vnto them to conserue vnity of Faith.

10. This is the Felicitie of Catholike Ladies, to be already shipped in this Arke, that by the worde of the Church, they know certainely, [Page 99] which is the letter of Scripture, which your Ladies like stray-sheep must seek on the top of craggy Moun­taines, as you termeCoun­ters. p. 7. the hebrew language, not without eminent daunger of an eternall downefall, loosing therin tyme, they might haue better spēt in works of charitie, prayer, & seruice of God. And put case w^ch is morally impossible, they find out assuredly the true Hebrew rootes, the true text of Scripture, yet would they be as much to seek, to spel & put the leters togeather, to make the true sense. What confusion is knowne to be in your Church, concerning this point, that as Irenaeus notedl. 1. c. 5. Cùm fint duo veltres deijsdem eadem non dicunt. of ancient heretikes, one shall searse fynde two, that will spell the same sense out of the same wordes. These foure words, Hoc est corpus meum, this is my body, conteyning not aboue fourteene letters, you haue deuised aboue fourtimes forty expositions200. ex­positions of those fower wordes printed ann. 1577. apud Bell. de Euchar. l. 1. c. 8., so different, as the Authors of the one, damne the fauourers of the other to Hell. What shall your poore Ladies do in this combat? they may rashly perswade thmselues, that this or that exposition is the best, but certaine of any thing they can neuer be, till they admit the Catholike Ladies A. B. C. the Churches authority, learning of her the sense of whom they tooke the text.

11. But you go on with your scoffes, Me thinks say youLett. p. 67. I see you playing Demetrius, your craft is go­ing to decay, & therfore you cry Magna Diana Ephesi­orum, or which is all one in effect, Magna Ecclesia Ro­manorum. Thus you. You need I feare the remem­brance Zeno gaue to a talker, that was often laugh­ed at for his folly, Loqui lingua in mentem intincta, to speake with your tongue dipped in wit, not in [Page 100] Wine, we do not in defence of Purgatory cry, Mag­na Diana Ephesiorum, nor only Magna Ecclesia Roma­norum, but Magna Ecclesia Christianorum, the great Church of Christians in all ages. Whē was the Church of Christ greater, and according to the Prophesies, vniuersally spread ouer the world, if not in S. Augu­stines time? When did Christian learning and piety more florish then in those daies? And yet euen thē Purgatory was vniuersally belieued, Praier for soules of the deceased practized in the whole Christian world, as you haue heard S. Augustine witnes: what is Magna Ecclesia Christianorum, if this be not?

12. But you haue a salue worse then the sore, to wit, that you take it, when we name the Church, we haue still reference to the former assertion, that the Roman Church is of more Principality then the rest. Do you call that assertion ours? did we inuent that Title think you? Former you may well tearme it; for how ancient do you take this doctrine to be? S. Irenaeus a most ancient Bishop and Martyr, who liued immediatly after the Apostles dayes, doth giue the former Stile to the Roman Church, planted by the most glorious Apostles Peter & Paul l. 3. c. 3: Ad quam propter potentiorem principalitatem, necesse est omnem cō ­uenire Ecclesiam: with which euery Church must a­gree because of her more powerfull principality, which Principality you cānot imagin what els it may be, besides the Primacy of Peter, to whom Christ did makeMatth. 16. Ioan. vlt. subiect all other Pastors and Churches: by the light of which singuler priuiledg bestowed on this Church in her first Pastor, she doth shine velut in­ter ignes Luna minores.

[Page 101]13. And in this respect the Roman Church may be tearmed Diana, by which is vnderstood that cleare star, whose beames do chase away the dark­nes of the night, which beames the doggesPierins in Hiero­glyph. l. 5. de Cane [...], who therby see the shadow of their vggly selues, cannot endure, but weare and wast away themselues with barking at it. Heretickes in all ages haue bin con­demned by the iudgment of the Roman Sea, by the light of her authority, they were forced to see the deformity of their hellish pride, which hath bin the cause that they haue still waged warre against her. And when with their vnited tayles, they could not bring fyre inough to burne her Temple, by which like Herostratus they thought to eternize their names, they haue not ceased, with their deuised heades and tongues to rayle and barke at her, till some of them burst. This consideration moued S. Augustine to sayDe vti­lit. cred. c. 17., that the Catholik Church de­riued from the Apostolike sea, partly by Authoritie of Councells, partly by the consent of the world, partly in the maiesty of Miracles, had obtained the height of Authori­tie, frustra circumlatrantibus haereticis, heretikes on euery syde still barking in vaine against her. In which kenell your Snarler hath not the least mouth, soe that in this age, no lesse then in former the verses are found true applyed to the Roman Church.

14 Heere may we gather, that you vnder­stand not well your selfe, when you say, that we haue [Page 102] receiued neither Scriptures nor the Creeds, nor the first foure Generall Councells; nor any foundations of faith from the Roman Church, perhaps your reason was, because these Councells, were held not in Europe but in Greece, and therefore you call them Grecian plumes. Wherein you are grossely deceaued, and litle perceaue how highly you commend the Roman Church whiles you seeke to disprayse it. For the cause why these Councells were kept in Greece and not in Rome, as it is most honorable for the Roman Church, so is it little for the credit of the Grecian. Those heresies against which such Councells were called, did spring vp in Greece, often times the chie­fest Bishops or Patriarks of the East were either Au­thours or their fautors. This was the cause, that often the Orthodoxall Bishops of Greece, in defence of truth, were forced to fly for succour to the Ro­maine, as did Athanasius, and Paulus, the one Patri­arke of Alexandria, the other of Constantinople, and othersSozom. l. 1. c. 7.. To end which dissentions by his Authori­ty, Supreme vnder God vpon Earth ouer the flock of Christ, he hid procure that Councells might be called in Greece, the discipline of the Church requi­ring that Councells meete, examine the cause, and punish offenders, where the fault was committed. Soe that the cause why those Councells were kept in Greece not in Rome, was the Purity of the one, neuer falling into Heresie, and the infelicity of the other, neuer to be without inuentours of such monsters.

15. This sinceritie likewise of Doctrine, as Ruffinus notethRuffin. in expositi­one Sym­boli. is the cause that the Church of Rome did neuer add any word or syllable to the Creed, [Page 103] but kept the same entyre without addition, which, saith he, happened not in other Churches, because other Churches hauing had heresies sprong vp within their owne bowells, did add some wordes to the Creed, to crosse and meet with such errours which the Romane neuer did, nor had need to doe, seeing no heresie had neuer beginning in it. Thus Ruffinus, wherefore seing the Roman, Church, caused those Councells to be held in Greece, confirmed the same afterwards, and their Creeds to be receaued through the whole Church, who cā de­ny but we had those foundations of Faith more princi­pally from the Roman then any other Church, the Principall Sea from whence, saithl. 4. ep 8. S. Cyprian, Priestly dignitie (one great Pillar and Foundation of Christia­nity) did flow. Vnto which Tertullian Praescr. c. 31., Irenaeus l. 3. c. 3. Optatus l. 2. cōt. Parmen., Epiphanius Haeres. 27., S. Augustine Epist. 165. being vrged by Heretikes, did fly, as vnto the head, de­riving Scriptures, Creeds, and all other Ecclesiasticall traditions from them. Wherefore I must thinke that many sick and sory feathers were in that Ministers head that caused you to call them, rather Grecian then Roman Plumes, though so light a word as Plumes, applyed to so graue matters as Scriptures, Creeds and Councells, doth sauour of the leuity of your phrase.

16. This leuity you shew in the prayses you giue to the Church, no lesse then in the reproa­ches. Thus you preach, Who is he, sayLett. p. 67. you, that saith not of the true Church with Augustine: Non parua Ecclesiae auctoritas; well doth her Modesty, well doth her fidelitie deserue honorable esteeme; she taketh not vpon her to controule the holy Scripture her Mother, from [Page 104] whom she drew her first breath, she openeth not her mouth, till her mother hath deliuered her mynde, she commeth not of her owne head with any sleeuelesse arrant. Thus you discourse, describing the Spouse of Christ and Mother of Christians, as a mannerly young Mayd brought vp in Luthers schoole. You demaund, who is he that doth not say with S. Augustine, Great is the authority of the Church? And yet you your self are the Man, who call that Authority of the Church which S. Augustine in that very sentence reueren­ceth as great and venerable, idle and sleeuelesse, like the Butcher that called for his knife he had in his mouth. These are S. Augustines wordes,De cura pro mor­tuis. c. 1. We read in the Books of Machabees, that Sacrifice was offered for the dead, but if this were no where read in the old Scriptures, yet ther is no small authoritie of the vniuersall Church, which shineth in this custome. Behold S. Au­gustine calleth Doctrines deliuered by the Church without expresse Scripture, great & shining, which you reuile, and contemne.

17. Thus you contradict the saying of S. Augustine, whilst you would seeme to applaud it: yet is not this contradiction so witlesse, as is your Assertion impious, that Doctrines and Decrees of the Church not deliuered in Scriptures are sleeuelesse, the perpetuall virginity of the B. Mother after her sa­cred birth of the Sonne of God, you seeme so to be­leeue, that you would stop your eares against any that should dispute therofLett. p. 39.: but where is this writ­ten in Scripture, what is it, but a perpetuall traditiō of Gods Church? S. Augustine saythde Bap­tism. cont. Donatist. l. 2. c. 7., that it can­not be clearly proued out of Scripture, that Heri­tikes [Page 105] returning to the Church should not be rebapti­zed, & yet the Church hath forbidden the same Shall we tearme this prohibition sleeuelesse? That these and these bookes be Canonicall, and the other Apo­criphall, where it is taught in Scripture? Now he doth not see that Scriptures are the chiefest points of our Faith, contayning the fountaine, and as it were principles of faith. Doe but read your learned Authour Hierome Zanchius, who will giue a newer tune, then that your Minister piped vnto you. That Authour famous in your Cōgregations teach­ethTom. 4. l. 1. de le­ge Dei. that diuers vnwritten traditions concerning doctrine and manners are in the Church, which are not only profitable Non solum vti­les Eccle­siae sed fe­rè necessa­riae. saith he, but in a manner necessary, which haue their beginning from the holy Ghost, which we must reuerence and obey, else we contemne the Autho­rity of the Church, which is a thing (saith he) very displeasing vnto God: how then doe you preach that the Church neuer openeth her mouth till Mother Scripture haue deliuered her mind?

18. I confesse that this your Authour goeth a step backward, saying that these vnwriten tradi­tions are not of equall authoritie with the written word,Paris authorita­tis non sunt cum verbo in sa­cris literis reuelato. but therin he doth cleerely contradict him­selfe. For the Canon of the Scripture being as he confesseth, an vnwritten tradition, how can any thing contayned in Scripture, be more certaine then some vnwritten traditions are? Can any man be more certaine of a truth proued out of Scripture, then he is, that his proofes are indeed Scripture? One may see, this doth imply in termes. Wherefore great cause had your Doctour Field Of the Church p. 238. to grant that [Page 106] Papists haue good reason to equall their Traditions to the written word, if they can proue any such vnwritten ve­rities: and his proofe is pregnant, because not the wri­ting giueth things their authoritie, but the worth and credit of him that deliuereth them, though by word and liuely voyce alone.

19. Now put these two sayings of your two Doctours togeather, and make an argument for tra­ditions: let Doctour Field giue the Maior, vnwritten verities, can they be proued, are equall to the written word, let Zanchius add the Minor, but diuers vnwrit­ten verities and traditions, profitable and in a manner necessary for the Church, both about faith & man­ners, may be proued. What doth follow, but that some vnwritten verities and traditions are found, which haue equall authoritie with diuine Scripture? Is not this argument in good forme? Are not the premisses thereof certaine, which euen our enemies doe grant? May traditions be termed sleeuelesse, for which your owne Taylors or Doctours make such glorious winges, that therby they fly vp to the throne of diuine Truth.

20. But I will not bestow on your suggesting Minister a sleeueles garment, but rather grant him a Coate with foure sleeues for his Metaphore, by which he maketh the Church, Scriptures daughter: many Churches as S. Irenaeus writethl. 3. c. 4. in his time had neuer read any word of Scripture, yet did they flourish by keeping the Tradition of Christian doctrine in their hartes. Was the Scripture the Mother of these Churches? I see not which way you will draw their pedigree from the Scripture, except in your [Page 107] next writings, you make Scripture Grandmother, who hath bin yet scarse 3. yeares a Mother. The Church of the old Testament, was some thousand yeares2000 yeares from Adam vn­to Moyses. before Scripture, the Church of the New did flourish many yeares before any Ghospell was written; who euer saw or heard a daughter borne be­fore the mother. A Sonne before the mother I haue heard of, yet he as Man, according to which Nature he was her Sonne, was not before her So that the Church, Child of Scripture, a daughter before the Mo­ther is the Pallas of your braine, which some Vulcans sharp hatchet, hath holpen you to be deliuered of. And thus much of your, no lesse ridiculous then impious iestes, against the authority of the Church.

21. After your light skirmish with Scoffes, fol­loweth a graue battery of the Churches custome, to pray for soules in Purgatory with the Canō of Scrip­turesLett. a pag. 80. vs­ (que) ad 93., by which you will proue her doctrine in this point to be a Satanicall figment, disgracefull vn­to the great mercy of God, euacuating the Crosse of Christ. The places by you alleadged are many, but either so triuiall and knowen, togeather with the Catholikes answeres, or else so ridiculously applied, wrung & wrested to your purpose, that their very sound is a­ble to breake a learned mans head, and make him scratch where it doth not itch, for want of an an­swere. To giue some few examples: What (say you:pag. 86 shall not Hel gates preuaile against vs, and shall Purga­toryes muddy wall hedg vs in? Hath the soule of Christ gon downe into the nethermost Hell, & yet made no passage through the suburbes of Hell? Hath he bound the strong Man that he should not harme vs, and will he now tor­ment [Page 108] vs himselfe? or set we know not whō to do it? Thus you. Who will not wonder, that Purgatoryes wals fall not to the ground, with the storme of these your windy interogations? shall I make the Logicall Ana­lysis of your Rhetoricall Arguments? They be three Ethymens I think. The first, the gates of hell shall not prauaile against the Church; ergo there is no Pur­gatory. The second, the soule of Christ went down to the nethermost Hell, ergo, no Purgatory can be found. The third, Christ bound the strong Man, and took his fortresse, ergo, Purgatory must vanish away.

22. I think Aristotle would be grauelled in these argu­mēts to find the Mediū to ioyne your extremes to­geather. For what force hath Christs binding the strong Man, that he may not harme his children, to proue that God may not chastize them for their sins either by himselfe, or another in this world, or in the next as he pleaseth, when they haue don amisse, and committed lesser offences, that deserue his ligh­ter displeasure? When you say, that Hell gates shall not preuaile against vs, it is hard to ghesse, who those your vsses are. Perhaps you meane the Elect▪ & Predestinate, among whom you number your selfe. Let it be so. Can you deny but many of your Prede­stinate and Elect are, for robbing and stealing, and other such crimes locked vp in London Goales? what shall not Hell-gate preuayle against them, and shall the wall of a prison mue them vp? hath the soule of Christ gon downe into the ne­thermost Hell, and made no passage through New-gates Limbo, where sometimes your elect are kept? [Page 109] Hath he bound the strong man, that he should not harme, and shall now a hangman put thē to death? You perceaue I hope the vanity of your infe­rences.

23. Let vs heare you preach againe, and build a ladder for your elect, to passe without Purgatory in­to Heauen. They that dy in the faith, say youp. 100▪ haue peace towardes God, they that haue peace towards God are iustified by Christ, they that are iustified by Christ, are free from the Law, and being free from the Law, quis accusabit? who shall lay any thing to their charge? Thus you dispute. Where I could lay both folly and fal­shood to your charge, but seing your Protestāt faith freeth you from the Law, both of Reason & consciēce, quis accusabit, who dareth accuse you, though you write neither wise nor true word? I could cast your Elect into Hell from the first step of your ladder. For they that dy in the faith haue not peace towards God except their faith be ioyned with good workes. S. Iohn Apoc. 14. giuing the reason, why the Saintes rest after life, saith, Opera enim illorum sequuntur illos, which you English, for their works follow them, euen at the heeles? But your Protestant faith is so light foo­ted or light headed rather, to belieue you shal be saued, & your charity so heauy heeled to do the good works by which men must be saued, that an eternity of torments may passe before your workes ouertake your faith.

24. I might also fling them downe from the highest step of all, where you say they are free from the Law, if you vnderstand it in Luthers senseTom. 1. Ep. Lat. ep. 3 [...]. ad Philippū., [Page 110] that though they commit whoredomes or murthers a thousand tymes aday, they need not care, the bloud of Christ freeth them from the lawe: doth not this doctrine togeather with the Authour deserue to be flung into the lowest Hell? But if you vnder­stand freedome from the law in the Catholick sense, that the spirit of Christ maketh that yoke easie and the burden light, that in the spirit of loue we may keep the law with great ease, as S. Iohn saith1. Ioan. 5., his commandemcnts are not hard, I dare say, your Prote­stants faith hath litle of that spirit that dilateth the heart to runne the way of Gods preceptsPsalm. 118. that it will neuer be able to get vp this ladder. And let thē be indeed iust, let them be Saints that keepe the law, you obiect, that against them that doth cleerely proue a Purgatorie for them in the next life. Yea, say you, but they haue some drosse to be purged. Doubtlesse, Syr Edward, the iustest man falleth seauen times a dayprou. 24., he that saith he hath no sinne, light and veniall (as S. Augustine expoundeth) is a lyar 1. Ioā. 1.: who can say that his hart is pure from vaine & impertinent thoughts? His tongue cleane from idle & vnprofitable speach? His hands not defiled at least with omissions and slouth, and negligences in Gods seruice? Doe you see your Iust cannot be in this life without Dust.

25. But you answere, indeed S. Paul saith, haec fuistis, but he addeth, sed abluti estis, but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are iustified in the name of the Lord Iesus, and by the spirit of our God. This is indeed to alleadge Scriptures for your purpose. You speake of washing and cleansing, yet except you haue wa­shed away with wine from your tongue, this foolish [Page 111] not to say impious, abusing of Gods word, I dare say, your lippes still need to be purged, which you seeldome wet (I feare) in the bath of teares and pen­nance. Are you not skillfull at Scriptures, that ap­ply that sentence which was spoken of1. Cor. 6.11., without which grosse synnes, as whoredome, theft, extorsion and the like, which the Corinthians before bap­tisme committed, & by baptisme were cleansed from them, to the daily veniall offences, without which the iust man doth not liue? But faith is, say you pag. 85. spe­randarum rerum hypostasis, the ground of thinges to be hoped for from Christ, wheras we will haue it thus, fides est ferendarum rerum [...], the ground of things that are to be suffered by our selues. Thus you. I per­ceaue your Protestant faith is very weak, we must not lay any great burden on it, of things to be suf­fered by your selues, lesse it breake; but of things to be suffered by others, as much as we will: you can easily endure that others suffer, so you be well your selues. I much feare that this your faith fainteth in the assured expectation of eternall punishments, for grieuous synnes, which cannot indure the beliefe of temporall payne for lesser offences. I do not now wonder you haue reiected Fastings, Pilgrimages, Dis­ciplines, Hayrecloathes, Lying on the ground, rysing in the night to pray and sing psalmes to God, liuing in perpetuall Chastity, wresling with the lustes of the flesh. No maruayle, I say, though you reiect these things; your faith is not a ground of pennance, nor of any mortifica­tions to be vndergon by your selues.

26. Christ must suffer all for you, you will not be partners with him in his Passion, yet you will [Page 112] share with him in his comforts, you will not by your good will, haue your finger ake for his loue, nor tast the least drop of vinager to purg your sinnefull hu­mours, yet will you be as bould as any other, ex­cept his Iustice keep you back, to put your nose into the sweet cupp of his Glory. But true faith is a groūd not only of hope, but also of feare. As it teacheth vs to expect a full reward, if we fullfill Gods commaun­dements, so likwise to be sure of heauie punishments if we contemne them. As Christ came downe from Heauen to dye for vs on the Crosse, so faith telleth vs we must take vp our crosse, a small taske of sor­row and pennance, and march after him to Heauen▪ True faith is not an idle beholder either of Heauen or Christ, but vrgeth vs to walke by good workes towards the one, and by pennance to feele some part of the passion of the other: yet is faith defined the ground of things to be hoped for, not of things to be suffered by vs, or of things suffered by Christ, because Christs sufferings for vs and ours, in loue and imatation of him, are but meanes to conduct vs to God, the blessed end hope aymeth at, for hope and faith being Theologicall vertues, haue for their obiects, not Christs sufferings, nor our owne, but God alone; other things faith and hope doth re­gard only as they are pertinent to God. These answeres Syr Edward I feare, are to graue both for your head and faith, neither will the one vnder­stand; nor the other beleeue my discourse, I la­bour in vaine either to build pennance or Purgatory on your faith, or to beate true learning and diuinity into your head.

[Page 113]27. Yet you go forward, preaching very graue­ly to leaue our bitter Purgations, and me [...]ily drinke away our sinnes, laying all on Christs back. S. Paul say youpag. 85. 86. thought it inough to know Christ, and him crucified, but he is a dullard in your Schoole, that knoweth not Purgatory, and how he must there be purged. As if the Lords Sommer-liuery of euerlasting life, were giuen vs only with this prouiso, that vnlesse we play the Taylers our selues, and make it vp by our Purgations, it must ne­uer come to our backs. Thus you. Much do you feare I see, least you be forced to play the Tayler with a discipline, to measure therwith your shoulders, and out of the broad-cloath of Christs merits, with that sharp payre of sheeres to cut out a Purgatory garment for your owne back. Yet I dare say, S. Paul was such a Tayler, who did not beate the ayre, but chastice his body 1. Cor. [...]., still carried about with him the Mortificati­on of Iesus Christ 2. Cor. 4, that he had the Markes of his Pas­sion in his flesh Gal. 6., to which participation with Christ in paine he may seeme to exhort, when he bids vs feele the same in our selues, that we see in Christ Iesus Philip. 2. who subiected himself to the death of the Crosse. What more frequent in this Blessed Apostle, then to ex­hort mē to the loue of the Crosse, to suffer for Christ, to praying, fasting, giuing of almes, and other Pe­nitentiall workes?

28. This is indeed to know, by experience, Christ crucified, wherof you talk in the ayre. I assure you that a discipline or a whipping for a quarter of an houre, would make you conceaue more deeply of Christs bitter Passion, better vnderstād the great loue he bare you in deliuering you from eternall [Page 114] payne, giue you to know your Sauiour either fa­stened to the Pillar, or to the Crosse more perfectly then euer did any Protestants Sermon you heard, or meditation you made in your life. Had you euer ta­sted any drop of the sweetnes of Christ crucified, you would neuer haue sayd, reioycing in your compe­tent Patrimony: Coun­ters. p. 65. Ditescit cui Christus dulcescit, He becometh rich, to whom Christ crucified be­commeth sweet Such sweetnes did not S. Paul feel in Christ, by whose crosse the world, to wit, riches & honour, were crucified ad Ga­lat. 6., that is, were things most hatefull to him. The sweetnes of the Crosse wrought otherwise in the blessed Apostles, who tastinge thereof, left voluntarily, and gaue all to the poore. Look vpon the Primitiue SaintsAntony, Hila­rion, Be­nedict, & others., you shall find as Christ became to them sweeter, so they became poorer. The delight they took in him, made them esteeme worldly wealth as dunge, placing their grea­test treasure in wanting all things for him.

29. Many borne to greater fortunes of the world, then you are, voluntarily made themselues so poore that their only demeanes was a wildernes, their Pal­lace a hole vnder ground, their meat fasting, their at­tyre contemptible, their musick Prayer, their bed the bare ground, on which they did bath their wasted bones, which life they did preferre before being Kings in this world, such was the sweetnes they foūd in Christ crucified, such ioy they had to feele in themselues some litle portion of that paine they be­held in him. You shall hardly perswade me, Syr Ed­ward, that these were dullards in the Schoole of Christ & Piety, that you do more see into Christ crucified, [Page 115] and more sweetly tast his Passion then they did: they did not doubt, but the garment of glory out of the broad cloath of Christs merits, was to be greater or lesser, according as they had more or lesse confor­mity with the crucified Sonne of God; neither did they belieue that God giues it to vs ready made to our owne hands, as you say, but that those momentary & light sufferings work in vs eternal weight of Glory.

30. These men vnderstood aright, the place of the Apocalips, which you so much stand vponLett. pag. 87., Blessed are those that dye in our Lord, from henceforth saith the spirit, they shall rest from their labours Apoc. 14.15.. In which sentence I wonder you liuing as you doe can thinke to haue any part; that promise belongeth to them, that neuer rest in the course of pennance, that makes the same end togeather of their laboures and their liues, whom death takes downe from the Crosse of volūtary afflictiōs. Martyrs in the first place are partakers of this promise, next after them Peni­tents, who endure, as S. Bernard sayth, a martyr­dome in perpetuall victory of themselues, not so cruell in shew as the other, but no lesse troublesome for length of tyme Bern▪ Serm. 27. in Cantica.. In which penall martyrdome, if you con­tinue vnto death in the true Catholike Church, I dare warrant you both from Hell and Purgatorie, and grant you an immediat passage vnto Heauen. For we teach not as you falsely charg vs, that no hold can be taken on Heauen, without a Purgatorie in the other life, and that, euen S. Paul must be there purged, these are not our doctrines but your slaunders. Those that dye perfectly in Christ, shall passe without Pur­gatory vnto Blisse, others who hauing Christ in the [Page 116] Foundation 1. Cor. 3., that is, his faith and charitie in their hartsAug. l. 21. de Ciuit. c. 26. Amores terrenos non dam­nabiles., doe notwithstanding set their affections vpon earthly things that alay the feruour of his loue, dye not perfectly in Christ, nor must expect to passe without Purgatory from idlenes vnto rest, from worldly pleasure vnto heauenly ioy.

31. O Syr Edward, how do I feare that you play not the Taylour aright, but cut out of Scripture, fauourable sententes for your selfe as this is, Blessed are those that dye in our Lord, that doe concerne others whose liues doe not so much suite with Diues dayly banketing as yours seemeth to do. Take heed you find not a garmēt of another suite set on your backe when your soule shall depart, more naked of good deedes out of the body, then your body of garments vnto the graue. God graunt you be not clothed with these sentences, woe to you that laugh, for you shall weepe Luc. 6., wo to you that were rich, that had in this world your comfort Ibid., wo vnto you that had rich bedds and lay wantonly in soft downe Amos [...]., you deceaue your selfe if you thinke as you sayLet. p. 81, that as in your Cre­ation you did not help your selfe, so likewise in your Redemption,As we lay no claime to haue bin any helper in the creati­on: so can not we part staks in our Redemptiō. you must not cooperate with God to the sauing of your selfe, that the whole worke must be his. He that made thee without thy self, will not saue thee without thy selfe, saith Blessed S. Augustine Looke not to weare Christs sommer-liuery in life euer­lasting, who refuse to put one his winter-suite the freeze-coate of pēnance & mortificatiō in your mor­tall state. This cloth of Christs infinit merits suite not with your short charity, no more then a Giants at­tyre can become a Pygmey: you must by your works [Page 117] and merits, Gods grace concurring, [...] out a suite for your selfe; the Nuptiall garme [...] Matth. 22. wherein you must appeare at the day of Iudgment, else you shallbe cast out naked into vtter darknes. Christs bloud purgeth all sinnes, in such as vse the due meanes, to haue the merit thereof, applyed vnto them, not in such as neglect the Sacraments he did appoint, or will not, togeather with preuenting and helping grace, seeke by penall works, to deriue his bloud vpon their soules, for their perfect cleansing.

32. This pennance you think needlesse; this ioy­ning our satisfactions with Christs you esteeme in­iurious to his Passiō, and dispute in this manner.Lett. p. 91. The soules in Purgatorie, say you, are either punished for those sinnes which Christs bloud hath wholy purged, or for those which he hath not wholy purged. If for those, which Christ hath wholy purged, then there must needs be iniustice in God, to imprison them whose debts are fully discharged; if for sinnes, that he hath not wholy purged, then it followeth, either that he is not the Lambe, that taketh away the sinnes of the world, or that mans satisfaction must goe hand in hand with Christs me­ritts. Thus you do butt against Purgatories walls with your horned arguments, which if it haue any force against Purgatorie, will also break open the gates of Hell, that the dāned may come out. For, for what sins are those wretches punisht? For what debts are they keept in prisō? Doubtles for those sinnes and debts, for which Christ did offer his pretious bloud. What? Was not that a sufficiēt Redēptiō for the sins of the world? Yes without questiō. Is God thē vniust to imprisō thē in y^t dark dūgeō for euer, for those sins [Page 118] Christ payd a full and rigorous ranson? Nor if God be vniust, to whom doth he iniury herein? Not to the sinner, who doth suffer no more then he doth deserue, neither can he chaleng to himselfe Pardon by any title of iustice. Neither is there any wrong done vnto Christ. Though his pretious death doth deserue the ranson of millions of worlds, yet as the Phylosopher saith, volenti non fit iniuria, Iniustice can not be done to one, in a thing which he is willing vnto.

33. Now it is the will of Christ that such as will not belieue in him, or not receaue the Sacrament of Baptisme, be not pardoned but punished for euer. If any sinne after Baptisme, his pleasure is, that no pardon or remissiō be giuen, except he yield humbly and penitently to confesse his sinnes: if any refuse to obey so reasonable a law, what wrong is done to Christ if such pride be sent to Hell? The wicked are condemned, not against his will, but by his order, not out of defect of his meritts, but out of their stubburnnes & malice. It is also Christs holy will, that in sinnes committed after Baptisme, the whole guilt of payne be not euer forgiuen, but sometimes he reserueth a conuenient taske of tem­porall paine, according to the measure his diuine wisdom thinketh best. For which we must endea­uour to satisfy by fasting, praying, or other volun­tary afflictions, or else with a patient acceptance of such crosses as shall be sent by the hand of God.

34. This Doctrine strikes you to the heart. You bring two principles you were taught in logick against it. First the cause, say you, taken away, the [Page 119] effect ceaseth: punishment is the effect of synne, ergo, when synne is remitted, punishments must needs cease. This your logicke if we yield vnto it, will beate out our eyes, and force vs to deny euen, what we dayly see and feele, to wit, that punishments and penalties may remaine, though the sinne be forgiuen. What are death, hunger, thirst, and other miseries of this life, but effects of originall sinne? Is not that▪ sinne forgiuen vnto Christians in baptisme? yet those that are baptized and borne anew in Christ endure the former penalties and punishments of that sinne though the same be pardoned. God pardoned Da­uids Synne,2. Reg. 12. Dominus transtulit à te peccatum tuum, God hath taken thy sinne from thee, but did all tem­porall punishment cease togeather with the sinne? No. The sinne was remitted with a, But thou shalt indure these an [...] these dreadfull afflictions, because thou hast made the name of God to be blasphemed.

35. I will not stand to confirme this truth out of Scriptures, nor out of Fathers, only because you stand vpon Athanasius, whome you call your Arbi­trator, Lett. pag. 43. and say, that he will not affoarde vs one sil­lable to saue our liues, your ignorance shall receiue doome by his sentence, euen in that very Trea­tise. Thus he writeth, There is great difference De verbis Christi, Si quis di­xerit ver­bum &c. (saith he) betwixt pennance and baptisme, he that re­penteth ceaseth to sinne, but still retayneth the skarrs of his wound, but he that is baptized, putteth of the old man, is then renevved from heauen, and as it vvere borne againe, by the spirit of grace. Doe you see Syr, how many syllables this Fathers lendeth vs to know the difference betweene baptisme, and pennance for [Page 118] [...] [Page 119] [...] [Page 120] sins cōmitted after baptisme? what are those skarrs which still remaine after pennance, but not after baptisme? You cānot say they are bad inclinations & customes, for those remaine after baptisme; nor the miseries & penalties of this mortall life, for from the necessitie & enduring such crosses baptisme doth not exempt. I see not what else can be imagined to remaine after pennance, and not after baptisme, besides the guilt of temporall paine, which we must willingly vnder­goe, to satisfy for the sins after baptisme▪ which skarrs & woūds if we heale not in this life by plaisters of pē ­nance, they must be seared in the next by Purgato­ry fire.

36. Now your logicall Axiome against this ve­rity, that the effect ceaseth, the cause being taken a­way, who doth not se that it faileth in a thousand ex­amples? The Sonne is an effect of the Father, can not he liue though his Father be dead? the fyre causeth heat, yet we see that heat doth often remaine long time after the fyre is put out. The truth is, that Prin­ciple is only true, quando Effectus pendet à Causa in esse & conseruari: when not only the first being of the effect dependeth on the cause, but also the conserua­tion therof, as the light of the Sun, which the Sun doth not only bring forth, but also cōserue, vanisheth away togeather with the same. Punishment is the e­ffect of sinne, nothing but sinne could produce that guilt in our soule, yet when it is once in the soule, the cōseruation dependeth on the will of God. It cannot cease, but when, and in what manner he will haue it cease, either remitting the whole guilt, as in Baptism, or els reseruing some part of the penalty, as he doth [Page 121] often in the sinnes we commit after Baptisme. Not that the merits of Christ be not sufficient alone with­out our pēnance and satisfaction, to do away both the eternall and temporall punishment, but for the other reasons his diuine wisdome knoweth.

37. This wisdome you would proue to be folly, by another Axiome of your Logick. Frustra fit per plura (say you)Lett. pag. 38. quod fieri potest per pauciora: It is vaine to vse many meanes, when fewer will suffice, the Iordan of Christs bloud alone sufficeth to wash away the leprosie of Naaman, what need he be bathed in Abanak of his owne pēnance? or in the Pharphar of Purgatory flames? Syr I must accuse eyther your memory or your Maister, either he did not teach you that Principle right, or els since you haue let fall some wordes therof out of your mind, to wit, aequè bene, when the thing may be done by fewer meanes altogeather as well, to multiply meanes is vaine and idle: which two wordes wanting, your Principle is false. Christ might haue redeemed the world, with one drop of his bloud, was the rest therfore shed in vaine? No, because it did serue to make his excessiue loue more manifest vnto vs. So likewise, though by the bloud of Christ, sinnes may be forgiuen fully and perfectly in Pēnance after Baptisme, as well as in Baptisme, yet the wisdome of God, hath thought it more for his owne honour and for our profit, to enable vs to do some part of this pēnance our selues by the help of his grace.

38. First that we might more deeply conceaue of the malice of sinne, and Gods hatred against it. Se­condly, that by feeling some temporall smart, our [Page 122] gratitude towardes Christ might encrease, who deli­uered vs freely from the eternall. Thirdly that we may more carefully for the time to come auoid sinne, flying from the shadow therof, as from an Adder Quasi à facie co­lubri fuge peccatū. Eccl. 21.. Fourthly that by voluntary Pēnance we might more estrange our selues,Felix necessitas quae ad meliora compellit. from the dangerous pleasures of this world and alluring sent of the sinfull flesh. Fift­ly that this happy necessity of doing of Pennance might force vs to retyrednes, where God speaketh to the hartDucā in solitu­dinem & loquar ad cor. Osee. 2.. Sixtly that by this occasion we might try (what without triall can hardly be belieued) the comfortes that are found in a penitentiall life, which are so great, that S. Augustine out of his owne exprience of both, saith, More pleasant be the teares of pēnance, then any recreation of playes Dul­ciores sūt lachri­mae poe­nitentium quàm gaudia theatro­rum. August. in Confess.. Seuenthly that to redeeme our sinnes, we might more carefully supply the necessity of the poore, purchasing vs frēds by sinfull Mammon Luc. 36., that when the soule flitteth from the body, they may receaue her into the eternall Tabernacle. Finally and principally, that hedged in by fyre, we might run with armes spread abroad to imbrace Christ crucified, and seeke to be like to the forme by which we are saued, crucifiyng our bodies with the concupiscences thereof ad Ga­lat. 5., which is one of the principall thinges, which in gratitude he requires of vs.

39. What S. Augustine said of Hell fire, vn­der paine whereof God commandeth his loue.l. 1. confess. c. 5. Quid mi­hi es? Miserere vt loquar. Quid tibisum, vt amari te iubeas à me, & nisi faci­am irascaris, & mineris ingentes miserias? Hei mihi: Paruáne est ipsa mise­ria, si non amem te? [Page 123] Lord what am I that thou shouldest command me to loue, and threaten eternall punishment if I loue thee not? Is it not misery enough of it selfe, not to loue thee? the like might we say of Purgatory, which bindeth vs to tast by imitatiō, more abundantly of Christs sweet Crosse, then else happily many would. Lord what are we, that thou wilt haue vs cōformable to the figure of thy crucified Sonne? That thou dost force vs with fire to tast of his sweetnes? Can any greater felicitie befall a man, then not to be like vnto that heauenly Patterne? To liue an idle and wanton limme of that body whose head is pierced with Thorns? Non decet sub spinoso capite membrū esse delica­tum. These me­ditations Syr Edward, were they as frequent in your minde, as are prophane iests rife in your mouth, Pē ­nance, Satisfaction, and bearing part of Christ his passion to purge sinne, would not seeme so bur­densome to your faith, neyther would you thinke such endeuours iniurious vnto Christs bloud whence they spring and take their vertue, yea perchance you would preferre our Catholik Pēnance & Pur­gatory before your Protestant pleasant life and hea­uen on earth, whereof I should conceaue greater hope, did not vaine and worldly delights hold you backe more strongly then the misapplied textes of Scripture you pretend.

THE last Squadron of the fower e­nemies your Letter mustreth against Purgatory, are prophane iestes, which sauour of Irreligion. These runne so fast from your penne, that either it preuenteth your thoughts, or your thoughts be deeply taynted with that most [Page 125] deadly corruption. I will here alledg an example or two thereof, which conteine more Atheisme then I hope you did perceiue therein, when you let them passe to the print. You are very inquisitiue to knowLett. pag. 79, in what degree of eleuation of the Pole Purga­tory is seated. How many myles from the infernall Cape. Beda's ghoast, say you, cōmeth somwhat neer the marke in his Card, who placeth it vnder the earth, in the su­burbs of Hell, yet Alcuinus may be belieued as well, who peremptorily maintayneth, that it is scituate in the Ayre. Hence you conclude, quod vbi (que) est, nullibi est: it is in so many places, that indeed it is in no place. This is the assault or onset, by which you seeke to beate Purgatorie out of the world. But the Captaine Maior of your argument repeated againe in yourpa. 17. Coun­ter-snarle, to wit, qui vbi (que) nullibi, who is euery where is indeed no where, if it be true, is able to beate God into nothing, who cannot be conceiued without immensitie, or a being euery where, if you be­lieue not the royall Prophet, who could find no place, in heauen, or earth, or hell to ly hidden from his sight and presence, Psal. 138. v. 6.7.8. perhaps you will credit your Poet, who singeth: Iouis plena sunt omnia, Sea, Earth, Ayre, Heauen, all things are full of God.

2. But taking your Proposition in the best sense, to wit, that the thing might be iustly thought, not to be, which learned men cannot tell certainely and determinatly where it is, yet is the impiety ther­of exceeding great. For do not Deuines both Catho­liks and Protestants disagree about the place of the soule after separation from the body? About the part of the world, wherein God sheweth himselfe to his [Page 126] Saints? May one thence inferr, quod vbi (que) nullibi? That the soule after her diuorcement from the body is in so many places, that she is indeed in no place? Doe not learned Christians likewise dissent about the situation of Hell? Some say Diuells and Men are punished in the Ayre, others vnder Earth? In so much as S. Augustine saythLib. 20. de Ciuit. c. 6.: In qua mundi parte sit futurus infernus hominum, arbitror scire neminem, nisi fortè cui spiritus diuinus ostendit. In what coast of the world Hell is placed, I thinke no mortall man can tell, except perchance the spirit of God hath reuea­led it to some? will any true Christian argue in your forme? Hell is in so many places, that it is indeed noe where? I think not. Neither would you bring the doubtfullnes of Purgatories distance frō the infernall Cape, as a reason to make away with it, did you not want either Religion in your hart or true diuinitie in your Cape.

3. Another example of prophanesse and want of Religion, you giue in your perpetuall Ie­sting at Miracles, which confirme any point of Reli­gion, especially this of Purgatorie, which Miracles you tearmeLett. p. 40. 41. such graue Miracles, that it would make a horse breake his haulter to see them. And in the mar­gent you say, yea Bellarmins deuout Marc, which your wanton Hobby named only to beget a foole on her, thought you might better haue turned him loose to Balaams Num. 22. prudent Asse, where perchance he might haue learned this point of wisdome, that there is a God, whom euen bruit beastes feel, and in their manner serue and adore, who is able when he plea­seth to make thē bray more wisely thē you do speak.

[Page 127]4. But no where do you shew your prophanesse more, then in scoffing at the miracles of our B. Lady of Hall, registred by Lipsius, which you deride in so rude a manner, as it may wel seeme, you did both read Lipsius his story and write your owne letterLett. pag. 102. rosting crabbs by the fire side. A Miracle cōcerning a Faulk­ner, deliuered from death, by her mercifull inter­cession, Lipsius c. 8. doth elegantly and religiously re­late, which you or your Minister marre with reeling and tottering phrases. His Lord, say you, swore by no beggers, that he would make him look through a halter, if he found not the Falcon, within the cōpasse of forty days. As the fellow was going to this geere, the Executioner be­ing aduanced, his eies mufled, with harty sighes, he implores that B. Ladies help. And marke you me now, the noise of the belles began to gingle in the ayre (a sweet melody you must think to a drooping hart) & he doubled his prayers to that Ladies Shrine, and behold that which is most strange, the Falcon came sousing out of the ayre, and without any lure, in the sight of all the standers by, did light vpon his shoulder, who for her escape was now tyed to a new pearch. Here is a Miracle of the maker, say you, Tush, this is nothing to what that Lady hath done. She hath driuen out euill spirits, asswadged terrible tempests, fetcht a child that was found stark dead, with the heeles vpward in a muddy ditch. Another that was drowned, another that was strangled: nay a stil-borne child there dayes buried to rise againe. I cannot stand to tell how she made Iohn Swickius (an Heretick, that swore he would cut off her Pictures nose) loose the best nose in his face: Nor how Philip Cluuius filed his chaines asunder with an oxe-bone. Thus you play the Summist of Lipsius.

[Page 128]5. Yet I wonder you omitted a story which followed in the same Chapterc. 7. p. 24. with Iohn Swickius, to wit, about another Protestant swaggerer Iohn Rysselman, who reuiling that B. Lady, swearing that he would take her Towne & burne her Picture pub­likely in Bruxells, stroken with a bullet, lost the best tongue in his head, the best chinne in his face, and not long after yeilded vp (though a very bad one) yet the best soule in his body. You perhaps were scarred with this stroake, fearing to loose the instru­ment, wherwith you loue both to bibble and bab­ble. You dare play with that B. Ladyes nose, not fea­ring so much the losse of your owne, wherof you haue not such vse, since you cast away your Tobac­co-pipe. Yet I much doubt, whether the forena­med Risselman, or that famous Nestorius an Arch-ene­my of Gods Mother, which both miraculously lost their tonguesEuagr. l. 1. c. 7. Nicephor. l. 14. c. 26. for blasphemy against her, did more deserue that penall forfeiture should be inflicted v­pon them, then you haue done, who stick not to tearme the glorious Queene of Angels, whose Mi­racles Lipsius doth professe to write, the Mother of God, as her Picture with the King of the world in her armes doth witnesse, a kind wench, good at a dead lift Lett. pag. 100. which soundeth of a more foule blasphemy, then euer any Heretick before dreamed of.

6. Who that is sober, will not thinke that I did honour you much in saying, the matter of your Let­ter was not your owne, shifting off these blasphemies rather to your Ministers pen, which you seeme to confesse, I might haue done to your Minstrels PipeCoun­ters. p. 61.. And how could I better haue excused his impi­ety, [Page 129] then thinking he did suggest vnto you those conceipts, rosting crabs by the fire side, making those blasphemies, but the smoakes of Tobacco, or fumes of Bacchus, giuing him the best excuse, a soul­diar, reuiling Pyrrhus, could find, by which he ob­tained his pardon, confessing, that had he taken in more wine, he might haue spoken worse. Mercifull Lord in what a drunken age do we liue, that such foule blasphemies against Gods Mother, may passe to the Print! that such witnessed testimonies of Gods infi­nite power (which had they byn done in Tyrus and Sidon, would perhaps haue ioyned them to haue done pennance in sakcloath) may be blasphemed, deri­ded, and reiected, euen in Print, as lewd lyes, incredi­ble falshood Coun­ters. p. 38▪ without any sillable of proofe or rea­son in the world, but only because they list not to be­lieue them.

7. But to the end that Purgatory may get the con­quest also of this your prophanesse, and purge you of this damnable humour, if it may be; I will seeke to shew briefly two things. First the credit of the forsaid Histories you deride as fables. Secondly how wicked your Maisters are, that granting the stories, make the Miracles to be the Diuels wordes I will present you with a most medicinable hearb, which may seeme like the hearb called our Ladies gloues. These Miracles adorne her v [...]rginall handes, signes they are of her wedding to the eternall King, and of her being crowned Queene of Heauen and Earth. Which gloues of our Ladie may serue also to defend the memory of deceased Lipsius, whom you revile,pa. 31▪ who like the Swan, whose dying notes are sweetest, [Page 130] crowned his famous writings with a history of her miraculous stories, and hung vp before her Altar his renownedc. 36. pag. 80. pen, the wing of his wit, the flight wherof made him admirable in this age.

8. Among many deuises, the enemy of man­kind hath set abroach, in this age, to infect the world with Irreligion and Atheisme, none seemeth to me, more potent then the deniall of Miracles, to­geather with those shifts, which heresy hath inuen­ted, to discard those both of ancient and fresh me­mory, which please not their taste: she hath taught prophane and impious witts to call in question for­mer Miracles, though neuer so famously reported and written by most graue authors: she bidds them not belieue the wonders which in these dayes God doth worke aboue the course of Nature; to shut their eies against theClausis oculis ne­gare fa­ctum esse quod no­lunt. Hier. Dialog. contra Io­uin. c. 17. light, and stoutly to deny what they list not to belieue. And when the light is so great that euen the blind see it, rather then yield due glory to God, she giueth to the Diuell power to worke true wonders, which things shalbe made cleare by the insuing discourse.

9. As no age since the Creation hath bene without prophane fellowes, prone to deny Gods prouidence ouer mankind, to iest and scoffe at his seruants, so likewise the same prouidence hath not permitted any ageSee Io­docus Coc­cius Tom. 1. art. vlt. And Prot. Apologie tract. 2. c 3. sect. 7. subd 3. 4. 5. to passe without Miracles and markes of his power, keeping the impious in awe [Page 131] by punishments, miraculously inflicted vpon their mates, and comforting his true worshippers, with extraordinary fauours and benefitts bestowed on them aboue natures reach. And though such curbes of the prophanesse of the one, and spurres of pietie vnto the other, neuer fayled as I sayd, yet doth his diuine wisdome dispence them in Number, Weight and Measure, that neither Scarsity breed Infidelitie, nor Multitude take away Necessitie of a constant faith. That both the wicked may enioy the freedome of their Nature, with due feare of their authour, and the iust haue sufficient comfort in miserie, with no losse of their merit. Should God still punish the wicked as they offend, their libertie would be in a manner extinct; should God still miraculously help his distressed seruants, the constancy of their faith, would want scope to deserue glorious rewards.

10. Now in what age, since the comming of Christ, hath either piety more needed a spur, or impiety a curb, then in this we liue in? The wolfe is saydBartho­lom. An­glicus. l. 17., to be so stifnecked and greedy of his prey, that he neuer looketh back, but when thunderclaps from heauen afright him. When did such a troupe of stifnecked wolues, voyd of conscience and feare of God, range so vncontrouledly ouer the Christian world, as now they doe, though in the clothing of sheep, vested with the name of Christians? Why then should we bynd the hands of God, that he may not send downe Miracles vpon the world, which doth so need them? That he may not scarre rauenous wolues with thunderboltes from heauen in these dayes, as well as in former ages? Strike terrour into [Page 132] their harts, causing them to looke back, and con­sider their wicked courses, ne fortè sit Deus, least per­chance there be a God, whose Iustice followeth thē at the heeles, ready to strike them with a dreadfull death when they least imagine? The stifest-necked wolues, the prophanest heretikes, when they heare the Miracles done in the Church so great and so wit­nessed, as those we stand vpon are, I make noe doubt, but sometimes they tremble, and though they set a good face on the matter, yet their harts pant in their brests.

11. These Syr Edward perchance may be the Melancholy fitts, that Lipsius his story, caused in your harte, which to driue away, you read his booke rosting crabbs, by the fyre side, with a pipe of To­bacco in your hand, still calling for more wine, till your sobrietie being wholy spent, you breake forth into the former ridiculous Narration of Miracles, which sobrietie it selfe, say you, would smile to see Lip­sius so seriously tell. I would wish, Syr, when your smiling sobriety hath gotten a more stayed counte­nance, you would in sober sadnes set downe, what conditions or witnesses are required to make a historie credible? Which of the conditions do fayle in Lipsius relations? In what other histories they are found, if they want in his?

12. Lipsius dothPraefat. ad Lectorē. Acta & Regesta le­gimus; ex ij [...] selegi­mus quae dignissima videbantur protest, that he read the gests and records, out of which he chose those which he iudged most worthy of the print, will not men, sayth he, belieue these things, done in the sight of many, cōfirmed by sworne witnesses, oftentymes by the Magistrats seales, and that which is chiefest, such stories as our re­ligious [Page 133] Ancestors recorded, before this doctrine, which contemneth the worship of Saints, was sprong vp. If they will not take my word, let them send and inquire that they may belieue. They will find more then I haue written. [...]. And though they be (to speake with Plato) as hard as horne, yet they will become soft and yield, stroken with the maiesty of Miracles, which, as S. Augustine saith, are introductions vnto faith. But if any man, after such inquiry, be not moued to belieue such credible histo­ries, I may apply that vnto him of Homer,

Thou hast eares to heare, that wants both wit & shame. And in his other Treatise of the Miracles of Sichem, he doth alledg yet more authenticall witnesses, to proue the credibilitie of his relations, protesting that he wrot relations most diligently sifted and inquired into, things done Virgo Aspric. c. [...] In oculis & uribusa omnium nostrum gesta, con­cursu, plau­su, fructu gentium celebratae., saith he, in the eyes and eares of vs all, famous, not by report only, but by the concourse and applause of Countries, by help and redresse of miserable multitudes, that found fauour in that sacred Chappell, what certainety can there be in humane things, if these histories be not certaine? thus he.

13 If bare deniall without proofe, stubburn incredulity without reason, prophane iesting with­out sobriety, may make histories witnessed by the consent of learned, iudicious, and pious Nations; what place will be left for humane history, or diuine faith or religious piety in humane kind? Haue not heathens in former times, may they not at this pre­sent, ouerthrow the credit of the Miracles of Christ by these engins? What can be said within the com­passe of humane credibility for the certainty of those stories, wherein Christianity is grounded, which [Page 134] may not most clearly be proued in defence of these? That these were don openly, that whole multitudes did behould them? so were these. That many times those were wrought, his enemies being present? the like did happen in many of these Miracles, which the enemies of the Church did see with their eies, and somtimes feele in their bodies. That those were writ­ten with such circumstances, naming the time, the persons, the places and other particularities, that it had bin most easie for Christes enemies, who then liued to haue controlled such miracles had they bin false? with the like particularities doth Lipsius report the Miracles of our Lady, that if they were faygned, our aduersaries might haue easily conuinced them of falshood, which they neuer did, nor will euer be able to do.

14. The story of Iohn Swickius, who lost his best Nose, could any falshood be more conspicuous, if he still kept a good nose on his face? Lipsius tellethVirg. Hall. c. 7. the yeare of our Lord whē the same did happē, not thirty three yeares since, within your remēbrance, the place where he liued in Brussells, Souldiar vnder Captaine Oliuer Temple, famous for his Military skill, who did twice in vaine assault the Towne of Hall: that story was so knowne, that this Swickius was often derided by his fellowes, who in merriment would send him to our Lady of Hall for his nose. How easy would it be to trace the steppes of this story, and find the fal­shood thereof, were it a fable? So that this iesting at Miracles done in our Church so credibly reported, ouerthroweth the bulwarke of humane authority, which Christianity doth presuppose, and openeth a [Page 135] wide gapp for Atheisme and Infidelity to enter, and trample vnder feet the Miracles of Christ and miste­ries of our faith.

15. And that our aduersaries either Infidelity or impudency, or folly in this point, may the better appeare, consider I pray you, that by this dealing, they so crack the credit of all humane relations, that they haue left no meanes to themselues to make any history, they can tell, credible, as I will seek to make plaine vnto you by a late example. Your friend M. Crashaw hath lately written or turned into English,Printed anno 1613. the life of Galeasius Marques of Vico, whom he would faine canonize for a great Saint of your Ghospell, which Treatise came to my hāds togither with yours. There I finde the poore BachelourIn his second E­pistle dedi­catory. much vexed to answere an obiection, which we might make, re­quiring a reason, why that story may be thought of more credit then ours, & that it is not a faigned thing, deuised by your selues, to allure and entice the peoples minde, and to set a florish on your Religion, with which kind of dealing you perpetually charg the stories of our Church. I answere first in generall (saith he) farre be it from vs and our religion to vse such meanes, either for our selues or against our aduersaries. No, we are con­tent the Church of Rome haue the glorie of that garland. Popery being a sandy, and a shaken, a rotten, and totte­ring building, needes such propps to vnderset it, but truth dare shew her face and feare no colours: thus he.

16. Is not this wisely and valiantly spoken? You sayCoun­ters. p. 9., that he hath strong powders in store, to batter my Pinnace, which I belieue and thinke they are such powders, as smoke, and make an empty noyse, [Page 136] fearefull to the simple, ridiculous to the learned. Neither doe I vnderstand, what he meaneth to say, that truth feares no colours. Perchance the seely Bache­lour would say, needs no colours, cōtēt with y^e shew of her natiue beauty, which we confesse to be most certaine of our Catholike truth, not sandy, but groū ­ded on theTues Petrus & super hanc petram &c. Matt. 16. Rock, neuer shaken, but against which all heretikes rushing haue bene broken, not rotten though ancient, yet neuer decaying, the truth of God euer remaining. Finally not tottering but most con­stant and not to be moued, which her strength, none more then her enemies feele. Nulli magis Petrae durities quàm ferientibus nota est, this Bachelour pro­misethIn his first Epist. dedicatory. large volumes to stop the mouthes of wicked­nes. But if his discourse be no more substantiall then this is, I see not what better vse the learned can make of his booke, then to stop the mouthes of mustard-potts.

17. This in generall, but for the particular, saith he, I answere, cunning lyars, as many monkes were, fra­med their tales of men that liued long agoe, and places a far off, that so the reports might not so easily be brought to triall: but in this case, it is far otherwise, the circum­stances are notorious, the persons and places famousely knowne, Vicum, Naples, Italy, Geneua are places well knowne, Calātonius his Father, Charles the fift his Lord & maister, Pope Paul the fourth his vncle, are persons well knowne. Examine either persons or places, and spare none, truth seekes no corners. Thus M. Crashaw discourseth for the historie of his wiuingHe ma­ried a secōd wife his first being aliue. Saint, which we likewise vse for the defence of the Miracles of the Virgin Mother. The places and persons named, in [Page 137] most of Lipsius his stories are famous, Flanders, Bruxells, Louaine, let them examine persons and places, we desire no fauour, truth seeks no corners: for example, the famous Miracle of Iohn Clement Lip. D. V. Sichem c. 45., that he was lame from his Natiuity, and of a mon­strous composition of body, his thighes and feet contracted, and turned towards the forepart of his brest, so as his knees did grow and stick thereto, his body was round, or in a manner sphericall, vnfit to stand, lye, or walke, this the whole Citty of Bruxells can witnes. Being carryed to our Blessed Ladies Chappell at Sichem in a waggon, and hauing con­fessed his sinnes, and receaued the Blessed Sacra­ment, he did in the end, find his contracted and bound feet to be loosed and stretched forth with such strength, that his dublet that stayd them was broken in peeces, so as presently he stood on his feet him­selfe, the behoulders being amazed therat. These things were seene to whole troupes both at Louaine and Bruxells, which knew him when he was lame, and who did not run (saith Lipsius) to feed his eies with the sight of so great a wonder? I heard principall Phisitians (sayth he) and those not rash, nor ready to belieue Mira­cles, affirme that this was indeed the strength and hand of God. Thus Lipsius.

18. Behold Syr Edward, a Miracle. Can you say of the Maker? you cannot with any truth, except you meane the maker of mankynd, who by the Interce­ssion of his Mother, reformed this monstrous error of nature, Examine places and persons, disproue the story who can, we craue no sparing, neither is the tyme so far past, scarce ten yeares since, it may be soone exa­mined. [Page 138] I haue heard that those potent, pious, and prudent Princes, whom you so commend,Lett. pag. 105. did shew this miraculous creature and monument of Gods infinite power and goodnes, to that noble Personage The Earle of Hart-ford you wayted on in his Embassage, assuring him vpon their knowledg, who knew the party both before and after the cure, that the Miracle was most vn­doubted, at which sight it is very probable you were present. This may be the cause that you scoffe at our Lady of Hall, not daring to meddle with Sichem, the remembrāce of which place could affoard you small comfort to driue away your melancholy fitts. The Miracles growing from that tree, sweet repast to a religious mynd, are sower Crabbs to an Atheisticall tast, which no fyre can make soft, nor any sack and suger sweet. So that notwithstanding your iests and skoffes, I may conclude, that the Mi­racles of our B. Lady, written by Lipsius, are as vn­doubted as any historyes, which in the compasse of humane certainty can be.

19. Neither can I wonder ynough at the mi­raculous impudencie of your Ministers, who hauing accused such famous Miracles as ours are for false, dare set to sale their owne toyes and trifles, as most credible things. I will not serue you in the mold-ea­ten miracle of Iohn Nicholls, See the Discouery of Iohn Nicolls & the acts & monumēts of Fox. that a bird muted on a Catholikes beard, who dyed by the sent thereof, A seelie fellow that out of want of wit to saue his life, by cutting of his beard, gaue a sweet miracle to the Protestants Church.

20. Ioseph Hall a more mannerly Minister, brings you in a more fresh dish of meate, a miracu­lous [Page 139] tongue which he got in his trauailes in the low Countries. A Graphiere tould himDec. 1. ex 5. that a certaine heretike being condemned to be burned, went sing­ing to the stake, for which the Magistrate caused his tongue to be cut out, and in punishment hereof, the Magistrats sonne that was borne afterwards, had his tongue hanging downe vpon his chinne, like a Deere after long chase. This Miracle putteth so much tongue into the Minister, that he cryeth out, goe now Lipsius and write the historie of thy Goddesse, and con­firme Superstition by strang euents: iudg you that haue seen euer the Chappell, if Hall or Sichem haue yielded out more memorable things. Thus he. How would these hennes cackle, could they lay an egg worth the fin­ding, that thus bragg of a shell full of wind? First, he cannot tell of what Religion that Sectary was, whom he taketh vp for his martyr. It is likely he was an Arian or Anabaptist, who are not wanting in these parts, and runne as desperatly to the stake, & sing as sweetly in the fyre as any Protestant euer did. The wonder also doth not surpasse the power of Nature, much lesse of the diuel, whose delight is to worke Miracles, that may disfigure and mishape men, in whom he hateth the image of God. But what is this story, were it true, to the Miracles Lip­sius relateth of our Blessed Lady, surpassing all power of nature, not taken from a Graphyere whispering into a Ministers eare, but witnessed by the consent of Townes, Cities, Princes, and whole Countries? Wherfore though those children held out their ton­gues lik calues, yet more caluish tōgue was the Mini­sters, that hauing derided Lipsius relatiōs, as fables, could [Page 140] tell this tale as a credible storie.

20. If you loath Iohn Nicholls dung, or can­not belieue Ioseph Halls tongue, Iohn Fox brings you a dayntie and rare dish, Cranmers owne hart, which in the fyre, his whole body being consumed into ashes, was found whole and entire: which wonder seemeth to me the greater, in regard of the tender­nes of that your Martyrs hart, more flexible the waxe to any Religion which the Prince would haue him bend vnto. He changed withSee Act. and Monum. the life of Cram. King Henry, and a­gaine in King Edwards raigne, and not many dayes before his death he recanted and subscribed to the Ca­tholik Religiō Acts. vbi supra. for feare of Queene Mary, wher­in he continued so long as he had hope to liue, but when he saw his other treasons had shut the gates of the Queens mercy against him, he went in a rage to the fyre, which being to reueng his heresie, con­sumed his body which professed that crime, yet spared his hart, where it found neither heresie nor a­ny Religion, besides an indifferency to all faiths. Wherfore I wonder that M. Francis Mason Consec. of the Bi­shops. p. 73. in his new booke would lymme, or rather lyme that relique with these verses:

22. But was that hart found perfect and whole in the fire? By whom I pray you? by Catholikes? Why are they not named? By Protestants? Why did [Page 141] they not take it vp? Did they feare to scorch their Protestant fingers in the ashes of that fire that spared a Protestant hart? If they took it vp, what is becom of it? Where is it kept? Who did euer see it in Queen Elizabeths raigne? Either their impudency is great, so constantly to relate a miracle, which none of them saw, or els their negligence was extreme, that haue permitted such a monumēt of Gods power, Miracle of their Ghospell, and pledg of their faith to perish. I dare not vrge M. Mason too farre, least he bring me the next tyme he writeth as authenticall Records for the cōseruatiō of Cranmers hart in Lam­beth Chappel, as he hath printed now at last, when such are dead as might controle them, which their importunity could neuer obtaine in their life, for the ordinations of his Bishops in the same place. One thing Syr Edward let me warne you, though happily M. Masō might find out a true Register for that mira­culous hart, yet be not ouer greedy to feed on it, lest perchāce you meet with poison: you are not ignorāt I thinke that Germanicus his hart was found whole & vncōsumed in the fire, asIn vi­ta Caligu­lae. c. 1. Suetonius writeth, the cause whereof was through a certayne poyson his enemies had giuen him. Whether your Martyr, who being so ready to haue changed his faith vpon hope of life seemeth to haue had a very weake faith of an­other life, besides this present, tooke poyson to pre­uent the payne of fyre, specially not thinking to haue gone soe soone to the stakeMason vbi supra., I will not de­fine. Only this I say, it is not wisdome for any mans fayth to feed ouer hastely vpon so dangerous a dish of meate.

[Page 142]23. This Miracle you see is great, yet M. Crashaw in his late history of his S. Marques of Vico hath a Mi­racle of more esteeme, to wit two Maydes not bur­ned nor scorched in a great fyre. For he telleth vs, how this Neapolitan liuing in Genua, not to be at the charges of a man, kept only two maid-seruants in the house, for his dayly seruice and attendance, who yet remayned stil maydes, though the Marques did so ex­treamly burne, that he could not be kept back from taking a new wife before his formerLife of Gal. c. 16. were dead. Your holy Caluin did tell him of great scandall that thereby might accrew to your Ghospell, how the wicked would laugh their wiuing Religion to scorne. But the Gentleman (saith M. Crashaw) replyed, that the case was with him so, that he could not abstaine, and participated with Reuerend Caluin a secret reason for which he affirmed, he had a necessity to marry. This not­withstanding you must belieue that fire did abstaine from scorching of flaxe, which so many yeares to­geather did domestically conuerse with him. This is the greatest miracle your ghospell did euer beget, greater then the not burning of Cranmers heart in materiall fyre, yet a man may know Vicum, Naples, Italy, Genua, and search there long inough, before he find the certainty therof. Caluin would perchance say most of this matter, to whome he participated those secret reasons; but because they were secrets, we will not sift into them, so that I am content M. Crashaw take vp this priuie Miracle of his Italian Professour for his priuie Protestants in Italy.

24. I thinke Syr you doe see that your writers cannot be well excused from impudency, who with [Page 143] the same breath wherwith they explode our witnes­sed histories vent their owne tales, as things deseruing belief. You had reason to sayLett. pag. 102. though presuming too much on your Ministers modesty you did erre in saying, that you are not ashamed to confesse that you haue no other miracles then those which were wrought by Christ, the Prophets, and Apostles, which were, you say, seales of the very same truth you hould. Wherin you daunce the ordinary galliard your Ministers pipe vn­to you, who still begge the question in hand, that yours is the same truth that Christ, & his Apostles taught. Which we proue cannot be, because you doe not worke Miracles, as Christ did, who saith, he that belieueth in me shall doe the works I doe and greater Io. 14.12. which wordes as your English translations on the bibleprinted 1576. expound, signify, that the gift of working Miracles, goeth still with the true faith, and shineth for euer in the Church, which confessedly wanting in yours, you haue no great cause to vaunt that yours is the Apostolicall faith.

25. Some of your writers, seeing our Relatiōs to be authenticall, as none can be more, haue not brasen faces to deny the storyes, yet their hart and tongue is no lesse impious, not fearing to affirme that these Miracles, are Miracles of the Diuell, and An­tichrists lying wonders. Which phansy though I find it not in your book, yet I will seek to confute it, kno­wing it to be one of the false Notes your Ministers often sing vnto you. Six arguments occurr vnto me, which shew the vanity of that conceipt, and how in­excusable Protestants are, who reiect our Miracles vpon this seely phansy. The first is, the vncertainty [Page 144] of the doctrine, that the Pope is Antichrist, which Gabriel Powel. de Antichri­sto pag. 2. though some, who togeather with their Religiō haue lost their witts, do set downe as an Article of your Protestant Creed, no lesse certaine among you thē that God is, yet many of your more learned Doctors do reiect the same, as a fable. The most graue and iudicious that hold it, vrge it no further, then as a coniectureHis Maiestyes premoni­tory Epist. pag. 106.. Now be you iudg, whether one may with a safe conscience vpon a phansy, or vpon a con­fessed vncertayne coniecture, deny the broad seale of God, despise his hand writing, which the eyes and all senses of the body testify to be his. A Subiect that should condemne the Kings warrant or his commaund, vnder the broad seale what Iury would acquit him vpon the Plea, that he had a phansy or a coniecture that it was counterfait? To giue to the Diuell the workes that sense and reason iudg to be Gods, is the most heinous sinne that may be, which the Iewes did commit,Atha­nas. tract. in illud, Si quis di­xerit ver­bum. when they said of Christ, in Beelzebub the Prince of Diuels doth he cast out Diuells Matth. 13.. A sinne neuer to be pardoned in this world, nor in the next. Is it wisdome to venture to commit such a sinne vpon a coniecture? If coniectures might suffice, the Pharisies could haue alleadged diuers for their blas­phemy against Christ. Reason teacheth that such smokes must vanish away at the shyning of cleere truth, that feareful surmises yield vnto the euidēce of sense: this then is the first reason to proue them in­excusable, that they haue but a coniecturall defense of so haynous a crime.

26. The second reason is, that Protestants haue no more reason to condemne these as Anti­christs [Page 145] wōders, then the Miracles reported by anci­ent Authors long before Antichrist appeared, ac­cording to their owne account, for those ancient Miracles are thunderclapps that shake the founda­tions of your Ghospell, no lesse then ours of this pre­sent age. Call to mynd the points of our fayth, you most impugne in your Letter, you shall find most famous Miracles to confirme them, recorded by most graue and learned Fathers. What Lipsius of Lo­uaine did euer write wonders, either more for num­ber or greater for quantity, done at the shrine of any Saint, then those that S. Augustine in his 22. booke of the Cittie of God, hath registred as most certain­ly wrought by the Reliques of S. Stephen Plurimi conficiendi sunt libri, nec tamen omnia col­ligi pote­runt. l. 22. de Ciuit. c. 8.? Read that booke Syr, & I dare say, you will there find either Miracles that may conuert your hart to some feare of God, or els matter for senselesse infidelity, to driue a way melancholy fitts with loud laughing. You may behould Histories as incredible to humane rea­son, and yet no lesse seriously tould by S. Augustine then those are of our B. Ladyes in both her Chappells which Lipsius doth recount

27. You cannot indure the adoration of the diuine Sacrament, which you blasphemously call aLett. pag. 54. breaden Idol in a shauelings hand. S. Chrysostome writethlib. 6. de Sacerd. c. 4. Senem quendam admirabi­lem, cui re­uelationū mysteria multa di­uinitùs fuissent de­tecta,, that a certaine venerable old man, to whom many mysteries were reuealed,—tould, that in the tyme of Sacrifice he once beheld a multitude of Angells, with shi­ning garments, compassing the wonderfull table round a­bout, who with reuerence in honour of him that lyeth thereon, bowed their heads, as Souldiours do in presence of their King. And though these blessed spirits [Page 146] be not euer seene, yet the Maiesty of him, that is dayly sacrificed is such Quod credere a­bundè licet, vel ex tan­to illo Sa­crificio quod tum peragitur. saith S. Chrysostome, that we may belieue, they are in this humble manner continually present. Now Syr Edward you may send your Mini­sters to preach to these Papists, and bid them as you bid vs very grauely,Lett. pag. 106. leaue their ducks and tucks and apish toyes, and serue God in spirit and truth.

28. The sight of the bleeding wafer-cake at Bruxells, seemeth to haue made your eares glowLett. pag. 106., but what stories of the like Miracles might you read, were you conuersant in ancient Ecclesiastical histo­ries? A Miracle done by S. Basil in this kind, to omit others, a graueCyrus Theodorus Prodro­mus, who liued an. 440. in Epigra. D. Basil. Authour, aboue twelue hundreth yeares agoe wrote in verse, which one thus turned into English,

Our Miracles, that concerne the keeping of Christs Image with honorable esteeme, seemeth to you to cō ­firme Idolatrie: but what say you of that Miracle, which Eusebius reportethlib. 3. Hist. c. 14. of the Image of Christ erected by the woman that was cured of her flux, by the touch of his garmēt, vnder which a strang herbe growing, as soone as it touched the hemme of the garment of the Image, it had vertue to cure all di­seases? No lesse wonderfull, is the Miracle recorded by S. Athanasius De pas­sione Imaginis Sal­uatoris in Berito. alleadged by the 2. Conc. Ni­cen. act. 4. and byl. 1 de gloria Mart. c. 22. Gregorius Turonensis of two Images of Christ, which vpon violence of­fered by the Iewes vnto thē, did miraculously bleed. [Page 147] These and innumerable other most authenticall Mi­racles, wrought and written for the confirmation of the chiefest points of our Catholike faith, before the supposed Anti-christ was in the world, doe manifestly confute the wicked blasphemy, by which you would make our Catholike Miracles to be his.

29. And hence is declared a third reason, that your spite against our Miracles, forceth your Doctors to ioyne against ancient Christians, and Catholike Fathers, with Infidels and Heretickes, and to deny and deride the same Miracles they did. Your Osian­der saythCent. 4. p. 326. Diaboli fi­mulata fu­ga volue­runt vulgi Superstiti­onem con­firmare. that the Diuells vanishing away at the name of Christ, and signe of the Crosse, made by Iulian, frighted by his suddaine appearance in a fear­full shape, was counterfaite, to bring in the supersti­tious worship of the same, as though it had force to driue away Diuells, wherein he doth shake handes with Iulians Magitians, who likewise would haue it a voluntary, not forced flight, of that memorable Miracle of the buried corps of the Martyr Babilas, and of the Diuels forced confession, that he could not giue answere in his Idoll, by reason of Babilas being so neere, which S. Chrysostome l. 4. cōt. Gentiles. so much vr­geth against Infidels. The same Author (with whō your Centuristes ioyneCent. 4. col. 1446. sayth,Cent. 4. p. 377. Responsū haud du­biè à Sata­na ideo datum, vt paula­tim cultū Idololatri cū Reli­quiarū in Ecclesiam inueheret. that it was an an­swere giuen by the Diuell without doubt, to bring into the Church the idolatrous worship of Reliques.

30. But what need I speak of particuler Miracles in general of all the Miracles done at the Reliques, & by the Intercession of Martyrs, which were so many, as Theodoret writethl. 8. aduersus Graecos. their Tēples ouer the world, no [Page 148] lesse in the primitiue Church then now, were full of tables & pictures of handes, feet, eyes, heads & other partes of the body, hung vp, as tokens of miraculous cures obteyned by the Martyrs intercessions. These Miracles Theodoret vrgeth against Infidelles, wherof S. Chrysostome saithSentē ­tiae nostrae abundè fidem fa­ciūt quo tidiana quae à Martyri­bus edun­tur Mira­cula. lib. 4. cont. Gentes., that the Miracles done by Mar­tyrs abundantly suffice to witnes the truth of Chri­stianity. Of those Miracles I say, M. Robert Abbots De­monstr. 1. Antichr. c. 11. pag. 223. Plané su­perstitio­sum est, & non nisi spuma veteris Ecclesiae. blusheth not to write, that the primitiue practice was su­perstitious, and those Miracles the froath of the ancient Church, of which, sayth he, the Babiloniā Venus was bred, that afterward brake forth into all manner of abhomina­ble fornication. Thus they reiect the Miracles, by which Christianity was bred in mens hartes, many Countryes conuerted to Christ, the Church of God enlarged ouer the Earth, which Church they must grant was a Venus, bred of foame and froath. What writing is intemperate, if this be sober? What can be blasphemy against the holy Ghost, if this be not? To assigne the Miracles, by which the world was made Christian, to the Diuell, making his foame and froath the seed of Christianity.

31. The fourth reason is the impiety of this de­uise, which I touched before. For this conceipt doth much impaire both the loue of God in his seruantes, and his feare in his enemies, seing neyther the one may expect from him miraculous helpes, nor the o­ther dread extraordinary punishments. The Diuell only in this age must rule the rost, and be thought the Author of all wonders. If God when Hereticks blaspheme his Mother, and play with her nose, strike their tongues out of their heades, and their best noses [Page 149] from their faces, Heresy teacheth them to turne their hartes that want tongue, & their faces without noses against heauen, and call the Authour of that mi­racle, Diuell. So that if Atheists can keep themselues friendes with the Diuell, they need not by this do­ctrine greatly feare Gods miraculous power. Our aduersaryes themselues namely M. Crashaw Iesuits Ghospell▪, do con­fesse, that such is the Atheisme and prophanes of men, that neuer since the plāting of the Ghospell, Miracles were more needfull, might they be expected. Why may they not be expected, if they be so needfull? is Gods power or his loue lesse towards mākind since Luthers preaching? If his prouidence neuer faileth his children in so weighty affaire as marriage, as the same M. Crashaw Life of Galeatius c. 21. sayth, why should they thinke the same defectiue in wor­king Miracles, so necessary to maintaine Religion against prophanesse? Why should God be bound, vn­der paine of being thought Anti-Christ not to work Miracles?

32. Were this true, we might pardon the same M. Crashaw, for sayingIesuits Ghos. pag. 30. 31. that we allwayes paint Christ in our Churches as a child, but the Virgin like a woman, and a commanding Mother: that we say, that all the Miracles be hers, as though he being a child could not, or in the presence of his Mother would not worke Miracles. He might add with as great truth, that we say that he dare not, for shee being a shrew, would rappe him on the fingers, did he stretch out his hand to do any Myracle before her. But though these be senseles slanders, yet were your Protestant fancy, concer­ning Miracles, true, the B. Virgin might seeme to haue reason, to hold Christes handes, from doing any [Page 150] Miracles, whilst he is a Child, least you make him Antichrist when he commeth to be a Man. She is wise to worke all the Miracles her selfe, whom her Sex may warrant from being thought the man of sin. Yet B. Virgin be not ouer bould with Miracles, least they giue vs a Pope Mary to be Anti-Christ, as they haue done a Pope Ioan.

33. But is it not a Miracle thinke you, that men endued with reason, should let such lewd lies passe to the Print? Do we neuer paint Christ as a perfect Man, redeeming the world vpon the Crosse, and Iudging the same by fyre? Are not these pictures fre­quent in our Churches? And when Christ is repre­sented in the Virgins armes, she is painted not as a commaunding, but as a Mother adoring her Son, that by her countenance one may see, that whilst her brests gaue him suck, her hart did offer him the fran­kencense of prayer as to her God. Do we not make the Miracles of our Church rather his thē hers, done at her request, but by his power? Which Miracles she doth aske, not for her owne honour, but for his, to establish in mens harts, that faythMira­cula Mar­tyres faci­unt, vel potiùs illis orantibus Deus, vt fides illa proficiat, qua eos non Deos esse No­stros, sed Vnum Deum no­biscum habere credimus Aug. l. 22 de Ciuit. c. 10. which doth be­lieue that not she but he is God, and she only honora­ble for his sake, and saued by his blood, holy by his grace, glorious by his mercy, powerfull by his hand. Why should we not thinke, that the Diuell doth hate this faith? How can any Christian thinke, that the Diuells do Miracles to confirme so pious do­ctrine?

34. And this is my fifth Argument to proue our Miracles true, that they are beneficiall both to the body and soule of men, which therefore without [Page 151] blasphemy may not be giuen from God to the Diuel. Those wicked spirits do seeke in their workes to make themselues Mirabiles, non vtiles, as S. Augu­stine sayth, wonderfull, not beneficiall vnto men: they desire to amaze and astonish rather then help and relieue mens senses. Such are Miracles, which An­tichrist shall worke, as making the picture of a beast speak, bringing downe fire from heauen, faygning himself dead and rising againe. For neither is the Diuel so curteous towards mankind, that he will bestow benefits on their bodies, nor God so hard, as to let him entrap their soules by so strang illusions as multitudes of such Miraculous helpes and benefits are. Now the Miracles of the B. Virgin and other, wherewith God doth dayly adorne our Churches, are sutable to such as Christ wrought, and haue still bene done by Saints in all ages since, as casting out of Diuells, healing of incurable diseases, de­liuering from dreadfull dangers and the like, which either deforme or afflict mankind, some punishments layd on blasphemers excepted, which are so few, as they may seeme a drop or two of gall in a sea of hony, which is a signe, they proceed from a boundles oceā of goodnes, through the sweet conduct of the inter­cession of his B. Mother. Yet the benefits, which by these Miracles come to mens soules are greater, whē by them some are conuerted from heresie, others re­claimed from bad life, many perswaded to frequent Sacramentes, to make sorowfull Confession of their sinnes, restore things vniustly taken, satisfy for wronges offered, spend much time in praier, to be bountifull to the poore, finally to giue themselues [Page 152] to heroicall exercise of Christian vertues. Which thinges with great ioy Catholikes do dayly behould, and haue cause therin to glorify God.

35. But a greater fruit reaped from our Miracles and a clearer signe that they are of God, is the Con­uersion of Infidels. Many Countryes partly by these meanes, partly by the good life of our Religious Preachers of Gods word, haue byn in this age, wone to Christ to the increase of the Christiā name. These Miracles haue bin so clear, & the fruit of thē so mani­fest, that some learned ProtestantsPhlip. Nicolai de Regno Christ. l. 1. pag. 312. 313. 314. Iesuitae licèt Idolo latrae sint, tamē pos­sunt per Nomen Christi magnas virtutes cōdere a­pud In­dos. herein not vn­like to the Magicians of Egipt acknowledged, both in the Miracles and conuersion, the finger of God. But they add, that such MiraclesIesuitae in prima Indorum Conuer­sione sese Luthera­nos siue Euāgelicos praebent. Ibid p. 53., are done in the confirmation of the Protestant Ghospell, which the Ie­suites preach in those Countryes. I thinke sobriety will smile at the Protestants felicity in this point, who may sit by the fire side, or ly quiet in their warme beds whilest the Iesuites go into barbarous Countries to worke Miracles, to proue, forsooth their Ghospell that Fryars may marry Nunnes, and be saued in idle life by sole faith. I should thinke it more probable that Luther in his nights conference with the Diuell De Mis­sa Angu­lari. did conuert and make him a friend vnto Christ, that now he will be content to work Miracles to glo­rify and extoll his name.

36. My sixt and last reason is the prouidence of God, most desirous of the saluation of mankind, not permitting them to be tempted aboue their power 1. Cor. 10.. Much lesse will he lend his infinit power vnto Sathā to temptIacob. 1. Deus intenta­tor malo­rum. men, that they may be damned. Some few toyes and trifles God doth permit to try the [Page 153] constancy of his faithfull, as were the Miracles the Donatists did bragg ofAug. de vnit. Eccles. c. 16, strang visions that their sacred Sisters saw sleeping, or dreamed of waking. Those which Antichrist shall worke are greater, yet the vanity of such signes, a constant faith with competent diligence may easily discouer: but the Ca­tholike miracles are many, great, and most witnessed as hath bene proued. Such I say they are, that our aduersaries in the end are forced to grant, that they are true miracles done by Gods owne hand, which no power vnder his oronipotency can worke.

37. Now their last refuge is, that which your great Champion M. Whitaker betakesVVhi­tak. de Eccles. pag. 348. Nō igno­ro vera miracula, non nisi diuina vi fieri posse himselfe vnto, to wit, that true Mirarcles, which none but God can doe, though knowne to be suchEx neu­tro genere miraculo­rum suffi­ciens te­stimoniū aut certū argumen­tum colli­gitur., doe not demonstrate the truth of religion. He giueth this despe­rate reason, to wit,Con­stat Deum nō modò veris sed & falsis Doctori­bus vim tribuere huiusmo­di Mira­cula faciē ­di, non tamen, quò con­firmet eo­rum falsa dogmata, sed quo tentet eos, ad quos mittantur. that God doth giue power to worke true Miracles vnto false teachers, not to confirme their false opinions, saith he, but to tempt those vnto whom they are sent. Can any doctrine be more dread­full or harsh in a Christians eare then this? How can any man know that God doth not allow that do­ctrine, which false prophets say he doth allow, and shew his broad seale for their saying? But this M. Whitaker cannot deny, but that Catholikes at the day of Iudgment may haue that plea, which a lear­ned and ancient Father thought inuincible, which he setts downe for our comfort in these wordsRich. de S. Vict. l. 1. de Trinit. c. 2. Domine si error est, quod credimus, à te de­ceptisumus.: O Lord, if it be an errour which we belieue, we are [Page 154] deceaued by thee, for thou hast confirmed these thinges to vs, with such signes and wonders, which could not be done but by thee! Protestants will grant, that we are deceaued by God, by the wonders & Miracles which our teachers said that he wrought, & worketh by thē to cōfirme this truth: yet say they we must be dāned. The best is, we firmely belieue God is not Sathan nor a tempter of men, much lesse will he worke Miracles to deceaue them, least of all lend the Diuell his omnipotency, to draw such as desire to serue and loue him for euer to Hell. This is our comfort grounded vpon an infinite goodnes, which is so great, that we cannot enuy you the mirth you take in reading our Miracles and roasting your crabbs by the fire side, to driue away your me­lancholy fits. God send you greater comfort in the next world, and that you may not there eate sower crabs and worse meateCaput aspidum suget. Iob. 20. with Infidells, deriding the Miracles of Christ, at that dreadfull fire that hath no end.

38. Here I might end Purgatories Triumph o­uer your Hell, but that in your Counter-snarle you quarrell with me about the first conuersion of the English Nation, vnto the Christian religion, which I sayd in my Treatise, was performed by S. Gregory and those holy Monks he sent: you spend two Pa­ragraphsThe 13. and 14. in confutation of what I said, which discourse you terme the pulling of a Crow,pag. 46. being indeed a heap of vntruths, pluckt out of M. Io. White of Eccles his booke, a Minister not so white in name as black for his false dealing, as may partly appeare by what shalbe discouered in the next Chapter, you [Page 155] hauing copied in a manner all you haue written a­bout this matter out of himVVay to the Church. digess. 49., with little varietie either in sense or words: where also Purgatory shalbe freed from the imputations of an heathnish super­stition, & licentious doctrine you charge vpon it, Lett. pag. 79. and 42. seeing that in the confessed chief Patron therof S. Gregory, it triumphed ouer the Paganisme of our Nation, and brought them not only to the knowledg of the true God, but also to the profession of most holy life, as shalbe proued.

THE Occasion of this Encounter, was an insulting Reprehension I found in your Letterpa. 92. & did suppose was suggested vnto you by some Minister against vs, that in hand­ling Controuersies, we are willfully peruerse, that we still persist in our former opinions, [Page 357] notwithstanding your strong Protestant arguments that haue bin brought against them. You giue ex­ample, concerning the first Conuersion of our Country into the Christian faith, which I did except against in my Treatise, as offering vs therin exceeding great wrong. And because you indighted me of fraudCoun­ters. p. 55. that I coniure your words togeather to raise my owne sense, I will first set downe what you writ, and I obiected a­gainst you, that the Reader may see, whether I chā ­ged your meaning or no.

2. Hauing ended your scripturall arguments against Purgatory, you insult ouer vs in this māner: Lettr. p. 91. 92. Why should I hope to satisfie you in this? as if I could vrge that, which hath not bin long since propounded to this purpose? What is it that can gayne assent in those that are willfully peruerse? To giue you one instance for all, how often hath it bin demonstratiuely proued, that setting some friuolous cerimonies aside, our Country of Britany was no whit behoulding to proud and insolent Augustine, your Great Gregoryes Delegate, for any matter of faith. Gil­das his testimony hath bin vrged, who liued before Augu­stines comming, that the Brittans receiued the Christian faith from the beginning. Baronius hath tould you, that S. Peter was here, Theodoret that S. Paul, Nicephorus that Simon Zelotes, and some, that Ioseph of Arimathia did plant the faith amongst vs. Many forcible inducemēts haue bin produced, that euen in the primitiue Church, Christianity harboured in this isle. These instances and many more, haue bin againe and againe renewed, with­out any verified contradiction, and yet as if it had bin a matter which you neuer heard of before, you would (as in all other pointes) make vs in this follow you vp and downe, [Page 158] wearying the world with a Circular discusse, bobbing your credulous Ladyes with these Syrenicall insinuations. These are your true wordes, which I excepting against, complained of your trencher-Minister, in this sort.

3. They makeOuer­throw. part. 2. c. 8 p. 318. 319. the credulous Knight say, that when we speake of the conuersion of England by S. Gregories meanes,

6. This I then wrote, to which you make this answere: First should I (say youpag. 47.) graunt all, that I neuer read that maister-worke of the three Conuer­sions, I see not what inconuenience will ensue. Is there no better imployment of my time, then the perusall of that Arch-fugitiues lines? Or hath none besides of their faction beaten this bush, or harped on the same string? Or am I in conscience bound to put the seale of my assent to whatsoeuer F. Persons did write? Thus you: but who doth not see that this your answere is imperti­nent, and your lynes fugitiues from the matter in hand. I did not accuse you, for not reading F. Per­sons lynes, nor for otherwise imploying your tyme, nor for not giuing assent to what he wrote I charged your Letter with belying and slaundering his, and our manner of proceeding in that point of controuersy concerning the conuersion of the English. I won­dred at your saying that we deale in this matter, as if we had neuer so much as heard of the conuersion of the Brittons in the Apostles tyme, which I proued our Authors, namely, the three Conuersions, to make most particuler mention of. I did presuppose that had you perused that booke, you would not haue vttered so notorious an vntruth, nor haue termed that Treatise, where this point is so substantially handled, not any instance you could mention being omitted therin, a circular discusse, or a guilding of old [Page 161] weather-beaten obiections, with new glistring wordes.

7. I know it is to be inexcusable rashnes, for one to giue a proud and peremptory Censure of bookes he neuer perused: to excuse you from which imputation, I sought to make your Minister the au­thour therof, to the end both to lay your errours before your eies in the least offensiue manner, as also because I did, and might very probably thinke that some Minister had had his finger in your Pye, his hart and hand in that falshood, I could not acknow­ledg that, that accusatiō was indeed originally yours, without charging you either with palpable rashnes or wilfull falshood: Neyther can you, now you haue taken the matter vpon you, quit your hands handsomely therof. For either you perused our Trea­tises concerning this matter or no. If not, your rashnes is euident to censure what you neuer read, to make your selfe Iudg, and condemne a multitude of learned men in a matter you are wholy ignorant ofIudi­cant mul­ti priusquā legerunt, priusquam inspexerūt quidem. Lips. de vesta. ad Lector.: what greater presumption then this? But if you did diligētly peruse our authors, principaly those that thought were to haue handled this controuersie most exactly, then your insincerity is inexcusable, in slaundering them of proceeding, as if they had ne­uer heard of your learned Instances, which they do most largly and particulerly handle, as you cannot deny. I confesse (sayp. 48. you) that he (F. Persons, in the three Conuersions) acknowledged that S Peter was here in England: he mentioneth also, perhaps vpon greater probabilities, the comming of S. Paul, Symon Zelotes, Aristobulus, and Ioseph of Arimathia. Did you know these things Syr? How then could your hart [Page 162] choose but giue your pen the ly, when you write we deale peruersly with you about this point, as though the Conuersions of the Britons by the fore­named Apostle and Apostolicall men, were a matter we neuer had heard of.

8. But you demand, where do I say (say you) that they weary the world, and bob their credulous Ladies, as if they had neuer heard of Gildas his testimony, I ne­uer named their author, nor questioned the matter, howso­euer it pleaseth him to ioyne the peeces of two sentences, which are almost a whole page distant, and to fetch his marginall note nintie and two pages off. This is the great iniury I haue done you, wherof you so grieuously complayne. This is my coniuring your wordes to make my owne sense. You would haue the Ladies like so many Hecuba's take violent reueng vpon me, for this my caus­lesse, as you say, traducing of a Knight, to whome their honour is no lesse deare then his owne p. 55.. How deare their honour is to you, the vnknightly phrases wherewith you honour them, in your Epistle, may sufficiently shew, to omit the foule Popinians wher­with you charg them in your Snarle. Which iniuries, were they disposed to reuenge out of a worldly sto­mack, rather then pardon out of Christian charitie, they should need, like frantike Hecuba's (by which comparison you seek to disgrace them) to fly them­selues in your face. They want not their Hectors who in defence of their Mothers honour, would make you practice that point of prowesse you much commend,p. 68. to run away as well as fight.

9. To returne to your accusation of me, for falsifying the meaning of your letter, the particulers [Page 163] are so ridiculous and idle, that I am loath to spend tyme in the discouery of thē. I fetch, you say, my mar­ginall note 92. pages off: a great fault doubtlesse, what if I had fetcht it 2000. myles off? I pray you what matter is it how farre of marginall notes are fetcht, so they be true and fitt for the purpose for which they are brought: which you neither doe, nor can deny, that mine was? I said, that you seemed to com­plaine that the booke of the three Conuersions lay vpō the Ladies cushions, to which I cited in my margent a sen­tence out of your Epistle to them; where reprouing them for being ouer busy with the Antiquity of your Church, which they cannot conceiue, you say, quid quòd libri Stoici inter sericos valere puluillos ament? This saying directed against our bookes, that discouer the greene yeares of your Mother-Church, and the perpe­tuall traditiō of the Romā, seemed to me to ayme spe­cially at the three Conuersions that treateth of that subiect, which was then very famous and plausible in the hands of many: in which opinion I am now more confirmed, in preceauing you tooke your dis­course out of M. Whites Church verbatim who citeth that authour in the margent.

10. But, I ioyned the peeces of two sentences to­geather, which in your Letter, are almost a whole page di­stant. This accusation is no lesse vaine then the other. I did not professe to recite your wordes, but to set downe your meaning, which I might doe, though I did put those wordes first which you placed last: you set downe many instances to proue a Conuersion of our Country, before S. Augustine, and then say, as if we had neuer heard of that matter, we bob our credu­lous [Page 164] Ladies. I begyn with this last part, & say that you wrot that we bob our credulous Ladies, as if we had neuer heard of your instances, which I particulerly did relate, being indeed the matter which you would haue men think we neuer take notice of in our Tre­atises of that subiect. What difference in sense betwixt these two sayings, as if they had neuer heard of the mat­ter, they bob their credulous Ladies, which is your in your Letter, or they bob their credulous Ladies, as if they had neuer heard of these & these thinges, which containe that matter; what doth it import that bob­bing of Ladies be the first clause or the last? Yea but Gildas was no part of that matter you questioned. Let any man peruse your words, he will cleerly per­ceaue both that Gildas his testimony, was one, yea the first of the Instances, the principall part of the matter you accused vs to make our selues wilfully i­gnorant of, and that these your exceptions are eyther idle and impertinent, as a transposition of wordes without change of sense, or else false, denying that to be part of your matter, which he that lookes on it will find to be the very head therof. But these parti­culers, you say, were not by you alleadged, as if we denied them. Neither did I accuse you to haue said, that we denyed them, but that we make no mention of them, that we deale as though it were a matter we neuer heard of.

11. But to what end then did you bring them? To proue, say you, from our acknowledgment, that we had therefore little reason to magnify the entrance of that Delegate with the glorious Style of the Conuersion of the English Nation. No Syr: your intention was to proue [Page 165] we are willfully peruerse, that we take no notice of these matters wherin your Ministers Falshood is ap­parant. Your other Authors indeed bring them to discredit the conuersion of our Country by S. Gre­goryes meanes, wherein I sayd in my Treatise, they shew themselues willfully peruerse, still comming forth with wether-beaten obiections, either impertinent, or euidēt­ly false. For if they, or you meane that the former Authours doe write, that before S. Augustines com­ming the British Nation was Christian, you speak truth, but nothing to the purpose. For why might not S. Augustine conuert the English vnto Christ, though the Brittons were Christians before? And if by his en­trance, and preaching he did cōuert them, why should not the same be styled the Conuersion of the English Nation? The impertinency both of your argument, and accusation of our Authors shalbe made clear by this example. Suppose an Authour writing an English history, say there is no fayre Citty in Wales, some trencher-schoole-maister, or other taking the matter in snuffe, seeketh to confute it, by naming diuers faire Citties in England, as London, Yorke, Lin­colne, Norwich, complayning that these Citties haue often byn named, and painted, printed, and reprin­ted, and yet that Historian, as if he had neuer heard of the matter, dareth write, that there is not any Citty in Wales, bobbing his Reader with Syrenycall insinua­tions. Now if it should be proued, that, that Author maketh full and honorable mention of the former Citties, and of all the rest that are in England, extol­ling their greatnesse and magnificence, more then any Historian before him, would not that Pedants ac­cusation [Page 166] be thought no lesse false and iniurious, then his proofes therof childish and ridiculous; If I be not deceaued, Syr Edward, your self would set such a frowne on him, as might make him vanish out of your sight.

12.. Now lay your hand on your brest, whome this Parable toucheth, laying open your vniust pro­ceeding and witlesse arguing against our Authors. They say that our English Nation was not Christiā before S. Gregoryes tyme, that S. Augustine was the first that planted Christian Religion amongst the English; you snuffe, or snarle therat; you bring out of Gildas, Baronius, Theodoret, Nicephorus, diuers plan­tations of the Faith amongst the Brittons, by some Apostles or their Disciples; you cry out vpon vs, that we are wilfully peruerse; that we make as if we had neuer heard of the Instances you bring. When matters come to tryall, you are forced to confesse, that indeed they graunt those former Conuersions of the British Nation; they adorne and set them out more then any other before them. Yea their owne Historians reckon our Treatise vpon this Subiect, among the worthy Monuments of our Countries Anti­quity The History of Great Bri­tany prin­ted anno 1606. p. 302.. But how doe the Allegations impugne what they auer? What repugnance hath that Origi­nall Conuersion of the Brittons by the Apostles, with the Plantatiō of Christianity by S. Gregories meanes among the English? The Brittons were Christians when S. Augustine came; doth it therfore follow, that the Saxons were not Heathens? The Moun­taines vnto which the Brittons retyred, were full of Christian Churches, might not the rest of the Land [Page 167] be full of Idols? Is not both the falshood and folly of your argument apparent? So that, as I said, the Conuersions named by you, truly vnderstood of Brittans only, are impertinently brought to proue, that S. Gregory, and S. Augustine his Delegate were not the Authors of Christianity amongst the English.

13. But if you meane, as you seeme to doe, that before Augustines arriuall, the Saxons, some of them at least, were Christians, your Assertion as I said, is euidently false, against all Histories: nei­ther doe you bring any probable reason thereof, only with a list of idle Interrogations, you fill al­most a whole page of your Snarle pag. 50. 51.. I demaund say you, whether S. Augustine found not in Brittaine, at his arriuall amongst the English Saxons, seauen Bishops and an Archbishop, who were not only Professors, but also Preachers of the Christian faith? Were there not at that tyme in the Monastery of Bangor two thousand Monkes? Was not Queen Aldiberga a good Christian before she came into Kent? or had the Bishop her Chaplaine no faith at all? Will he not belieue Bede, who writeth that be­fore Augustines cōming, the Brittons were infested with Arianisme and Pelagianisme? Thus you play the Iustice of Peace, wasting paper in friuolous questi­ons. Had your better imployments of your tyme, to witt in laughing & sleeping pa. 68 [...] permitted vnto you the perusall of F. Persons booke, perhaps you would not haue fallen into this vanity, for which in that Trea­tise he doth sharply reproue another Ministeriall Knight. What if some Brittons were Arians or Pela­gians before S. Augustines ariuall, must therefore [Page 168] the English needs be Christans and Catholiks at his cōming? Queen Aldiberga and her Chaplaine who were French, had faith when he came, could not therefore the whole English Nation want Christian faith? Suppose the 2000. of Bangor had been a Mil­lion of Monkes, yet being Brittons, quid ad Rombum? may he not be iustly thought a Bāgoring disputant that doth thence infer, that at that time the Saxons were not Heathens?

14. Augustine found an Arch-Bishop and seauen Bishops, but were those Professors and Preachers of Christian fayth among the English Saxons, as you seeme to auerr? No, they neither preached vnto thē nor liued amongst them, as S. Gregory doth expresly say in his Epistle to S. Augustine. apud Bedam lib. 1. Histor. c. 27. In Anglorum gen­te tu solum Episcopus, thou art the only Bishop among the English. Will not you Syr Edward belieue S. Bede who writeth that the Brittons could by no meanes be brought to preach the fayth of Christ vnto the Saxons? Yet God, saith hel. 1. c. 21. forsooke not his people whom he had chosen, but sent vnto the forenamed Nation, more worthy preachers of the truth, to wit, S. Augustine, and his holy company of Monkes. But the Authour of the three Conuersions will teach me, you sayp. 51. that which you belieue I wilbe scarse willing to heare; viz, Three Conuersiōs part. 1. c. 9. n. 1. That from the time of King Lucius, vntill the comming of Au­gustine, which was some hundreth yeares and more, they, the Brittons, did not alter their faith, but it remained amongst them when he entred. Why should not I be willing to heare this saying? or rather why are not you ashamed to dispute thus absurdly, and then in­sult, demaunding what is now become of your good­ly [Page 169] Conuersion? Why should the true Christianity and Religion of the Brittons, when S. Augustine en­tred, hinder or ouerthrow, the beliefe of that goodly and godly Conuersion of the English, effected by his entrance.

15. I confesse I cannot conceaue how heerein you speake to the purpose, yet you proceed daring me to a triall by the booke of the three Conuersions. Dares he (say you) let this witnes be examined any fur­ther? that fayth, saith he, which Augustine brought, and that which the Britons had before, must needs be one and the self same in all materiall and substantiall pointes. Vpon which euidence you make the Iury giue ver­dict, that, Gregories was a superficiall and not a sub­stantiall Conuersion, and triumph ouer me, saying, hath he not now brought his hoggs to a faire market? hath he read the booke of the three Conuersions? The case is cleare now that his Ladies shalbe able to conceaue it. Thus you: would a man in his senses discourse in this sort? I do not wonder, that when you disputed in Oxford, men put their handes to their heades, which you do interpret, scratching their poules for an answere. Such babling as this, cannot but make learned mens heads ake. This is your argument. Augustine conuerted the English Saxons, to the same faith in all substantiall pointes, that the Brittons had before, as the three Conuersions saith, Ergo he did not substantially, but superficially conuert them. Is not this a goodly ar­gument? Is any man so seely as not to perceaue your Consequent to be ridiculous? that it hath no greater connexion with your Antecedent, then hath a Racket with a Ramshorn. Yea the Contradictory of your Con­clusion [Page 166] [...] [Page 167] [...] [Page 168] [...] [Page 169] [...] [Page 170] may from your Antecedent be euidently deduced in this Sillogisme, vnto which I dare say you will ne­uer be able to make a cleere answere:

Haue you not brought your Hoggs to a faire market, that send such doting discourses and grosse stuffe vn­to Ladies, whose writer you vndertake to be? Yet your imbecillity and weake arguing deserueth some pardon.

16. As the draught can hardly be fayrer then the patterne, so neither your discourses more learned then those Ministers bookes, whence you copied them. He is a good Archer that hitteth the white, when the white is deplaced: it is not his fault though he shoot wide of the marke. Your aime in this dis­course at your White Minister, whose digression a­bout this point, partly in your letter, partly in your Snarle you haue translated as your owne, in a man­ner verbatim, as I said before, where likewise the said Minister hath another ridiculous discourse about this [Page 171] point, which you did wisely note to copie out into your learned Snarle. It is obiected, saith he, that the faith thus planted at the first in our Country, was extin­guished againe by Paganisme and Heresie, in that part of the Land, which was inhabited by the English Saxons, whom Austine conuerted. This is indeed our obiection. M. White let vs heare how substantially you make answere vnto it. I VVay to the Church p. 356. answere, saith he, three thinges. First if Religion were among the Brittans and exting­shed no where but in Kent, where Austine arriued, then he conuerted not the Land, but one poore country of it, and must be called no longer the Apostle of England, but of Kent.

11. Do you not see how ridiculously this Mi­nister runneth out of Christendome into Kent, as though this had bin then the complete diuision of our Country, and that he that was not Christian, was a Kentishman in those dayes! How doth it fol­low, that if religion were amongst the Brittons, it was no where extinct but in Ken? or that if S. Augu­stine conuerted not the Brittons, he conuerted only one poore Coūtry? Had the Saxons only taken Kent? did they not possesse the rest of the Lād, beside some Mountaines, as Camden notethIn his Brinitana? I might also mer­uaile why this Minister of Eccles▪ should tearm Kent a poore Country, specially in those dayes, when the King therof had the rest of the Kinges of the Isle in subiection vnto him, did I not know, that these men care not how true it be they say, so it may disgrace that charitable and happy enterprize of the Romaine Bishop; to make which seeme of lesse esteeme, he termeth Kent poore.

[Page 176]18. Let vs heare his second Answere. Next, sayth he, the busiest aduersaries we haue in this matter, Three Conuers. p. 1. c. 11 n. 4. & inde ad 12. say, that all the Land, conteyning seauen kingdomes was conuerted, within sixty yeare of that time, as well as Kent, so that it should seeme, they would haue the faith to be extinct, not in Kent alone, but in all the Land besides, which is vntrue. Thus he. Where you may note Syr Edward, a notable false trick of your Mini­ster, who maketh his aduersary say, what he doth expresly deny, that he may more plausibly seeme to impugne him. For where I pray you, M. Minister, doth the Author of the three Conuersions, whom you quote in your Margent as your busiest aduersary, say, that Religion was extinct in all the Land? Yea he saith the contrary in that very place you alleadge. The Dominion, saith he, of the Saxons in those dayes, which was all the Land, except Scotland, and that other part now called Wales, was deuided into seauen seuerall States. So clearly doth the Authour say, that the sea­uen Kingdomes of the Saxons, conuerted by messē ­gers sent from Rome, were not all the Land; wheras you charge him with the contrary, and then say it is vntrue, bringing an army of Bangor Monkes, Brit­tish Bishops, Arian and Pelagian hereticks, to reco­uer Wales, out of the dominion of the Saxons, whom those holy Monkes conuerted vnto Christ.

19. Let vs heare M. Whites third answere, whether it contains more substance and soliditie, then the two former. Hauing beaten S. Augustine, from tne rest of the Land into Kent, to be the con­uerter of that poore Country, he would faine driue him thence also. Thirdly touching Kent, satih he, [Page 173] where Augustine ariued, Bede saith, that the Queen ther­of was a French woman called Bertha, or as S. Gregory calleth her Aldiberga, a good Christian, and had a Chri­stian Bishop euen at that tyme when Augustine came. Thus he writeth, to what purpose I see not. He doth conclude hereupō, that Augustine brought not the faith into the Land with him, but foūd it here whē he came pa. 357.. Which inference if he meane no more, but that Christian religion was in the Brittons, and in two French persons at his ariuall, we neuer denied it, nor made question thereof. That which we affirme is, that in the English Nation Christianity neuer was, before God by S. Gregoryes prayers & Augustines prea­ching planted the same in their harts. Perchance M. White had a further intention, then he durst vt­ter, he layd the Cockes egge for M. Mason to hatch the Cocatrice, which he hath done in his Consecratiō of your BishopsFranc. Mason l. 2. c. 4. p. 57..

20. We dare not say, sath he, that they, those holy Monkes, layd the first foundation of Christianity in Kent. It is most likely that Lethardus the French man the Queenes Chaplaine, had layd some stones in the Foun­dation, before the comming of Austen. Therefore if he that layeth the first foundation of religion in a Kingdome be called an Apostle, then Austine was not the Apostle of Kent, but rather Lethardus. Thus he writeth, with­out any proofe, against all Authors of our Country, giuing a sufficient token, into what desperate ab­surdities, Malice against the Sea of Rome, will driue them. S. Bede saithl. p. [...] c. 26., expresly that the King vpon Augustines comming gaue leaue for the preaching of the Ghospell. A signe that none did nor durst [Page 174] preach, without his leaue, specially one that was so nigh about him, and so much in his sight as the Queenes Chaplaine, who therby might bring both himselfe and the Queen into danger, the King and the whole Nation being cruell & barbarous, as then they were. Besides that Bishop liuing in Court, if he conuerted any, it is most likly they were noble men, and persons of accoūt, with whom he did conuerse. Which thing could not haue been hidden from the King, if they refreyned from going to the Temples of the Idols, and offering sacrifice with the King, as being Christians, they ought to haue done. Finally had any been conuerted and secretly baptized before S. Augustines ariuall by Lethardus, doubtlesse they would haue manifested themselues at his entrance, when the King graunted vnto his subiects to imbrace and professe the Christian faith, which had been a thing verie remarkable, and would not haue been concealed by S. Bede in his history, had it been true, the rather, those being (if any were) by all likly­hood mē of reckoning about the King, as I noted, & Lethardus hauing gathered some Clusters of them, as M. Mason saith.

21. Wherefore this coniecture of Lethardus his being the Kētish Apostle is so improbable that M. Ma­son had he not been blind with malice against the Ro­maine Sea, would neuer haue thought it most liklie. Out of the same malice also the same Mason and Mi­nister (to make his Reader belieue, that Messengers from Rome did not plant Religiō among the Angles or English) dareth write in that same place, that North­umberland was conuerted in the dayes of King Oswald, [Page 175] by the Ministery of Aidan a Scot, expresly against S. Bede l 2. c 12. inde ad 18., who writeth, that Northumberland was made Christian by Paulinus one of S. Augustines As­soci [...]tes in that Apostolicall enterprize, who conuer­ted King Edwin Predecessor vnto Oswald, & brought him to throw downe the Tempels of Idolls. The people he baptized were innumerable. Once to pre­termit other particulers, being with the King and Queene, in one of their Princely houses, such a mul­titude of people flocked vnto him for Baptisme, that for thirty dayes togeather, he did not any other thing frō morning to night, but Chatechize and Christen people: what may we thinke of M. Masons consciēce so scrupulous, that he durst not say, that S. Augustine first preached Christianity in Kent, though all histo­ries auerre it? Yet so audacious, that to take the glo­ry of the first Conuersion of the Northumbers vnto Christ from Rome, he dareth write against all histo­ries, that they were conuerted by Aidan a Scot, who did not conuert them, but only perfected that con­uersion Paulinus had begun, and reconciled some, that out of feare of the Pagan King Penda had abiu­red their faith.

22. He that was so quick-sighted that he could see Clusters of Christians in Kent, gathered by Le­thardus before Austine, which neuer any Historian before him did espy, now he is so blind, that he cā ­not perceaue a whole Vintage of Christians in North­umberland, gathered by Paulinus before Aidan, wher­of yet so famous mention it made in our Stories? Is not this man thinke you to be trusted in his faithfull Allegations of Recordes and Registers, for the Con­secration [Page 176] of their first Archbishop in Lambeth, and not at the Nags-head in Cheapside,l. c. 4. as hath bin of­ten obiected to them whom it neerly concerned, who could and would haue said more of the matter, then this Mason, had that blemish in their Churches face byn colourable. They would certainely haue brought forth the Registers long since, had they byn extant in those daies. But as I said, any iudicious man will perceaue, what credit is to be giuen vnto him, about secret, concealed, and questionable Registers, whose hatred against the Pope transports him to fal­sifie our known Records so openly, where any mean historian may take him in the tricke.

23. This manner of writing is a signe that the desire not of truth, but of our disgrace is the Bias of these mens pennes and tongues, which make them not feare to speake, and write any falshood howso­euer improbable, that they thinke may serue for that purpose. This Bias doubtlesse, Sir Edward, was set to your pen, when it ranne into this maine vntruth, that our Country is not behoulding vnto proud and inso­lent Augustine, for any matter of faith, besides some fri­uolous cerimonies. Marke your wordes, Friuolous Ceri­monies only, not any matter of faith was planted by proud & insolent Augustine in the English Nation. Here you coniure indeed, calling M. Whites spirit in your letter out of his Church, who was the first (as farre as I knowe) that euer vttered that impudent falshood, out of whō you copied it & the proofes therof, with a little chāg of words. I say, quoth he, that S. Augustine conuerted not our Country at all, p. 356. besides the planting of trifling Cerimonies. And againe: His errand, as it [Page 177] may probably be thought, was about the plāting of certaine ceremonies, and the dealing with our Country-men about the Obseruation of Easter. And Gregory that sent him, about that tyme, was busy in changing the Liturgy, vsed in those westerne parts, & did thrust his new ones, vpon all the places he could. It may be this was a part of the Monkes busines vnto Kent pag. 357.. Thus writeth your Minister. Which is I dare say one of the greatest vn­truthes in matter of History, that euer durst appeare in print.

24. First it is false that Gregory made a new Liturgy of his owne, forcing the same vpon the westerne Churches, as may be made cleare, by that which S. Bede writeth of thisl 2. Hist. Gent. Angl. c. 1. Pope, to wit, that he added to the Liturgy, three short petitions, viz. di­es (que) nostros in tua pace disponas, & ab aeterna damnatione nos eripe, & in electorum iubeas grege numerari. Had he changed wholy the old, or made a new Liturgie of his owne, would Bede, thinke you, who was so cu­rious to note his addition of only three words, haue omitted it? Yet suppose he then had that busines in hand, would this Minister haue vs imagine that, that matter did so wholy possesse his braine, as he could not remember to deliuer vnto S. Augustine, when he sent him, a greater and more substantiall errand? So farr was that Blessed Pope from being ab­sorpt with trifling Ceremonies, as this Minister would haue vs think, as contrariwise, saith venerable Bede l. 2. c. 1., whereas former Romanie Bishops had much giuen themselues to the building of Churches, and adorning them with gold and siluer, this Blessed Pope, totus ad animarum lucra vacabat, had all his thoughts imployed [Page 178] in the gayning of soules vnto God.

25. What more famous then his harty affectiō towards our Nation, which to conuert from Idolatrie he was comming in person, from which kept back by higher authority, when the busines or mission now lay in his hands sent preachers vnto vs? Before his Popedome, the least sound or similitude of words could raise his thoughts to think of our greatest and euerlasting happinesCamdē in Britan­nia. Beda vbi supra.. The word Angli made him wish vs the fellowship of Angells. Aelle the name of the King to desire that Alleluia should be song in our streets. Deiri (so was the people, when those youthes were brought called) to prophesie that we should be deliuered de tra Dei, from the wrath of God. Now is it probable, that sending Messengers vnto this Nation, he would send with them a message of tri­fling Cerimonies, not that faith and Religion, which only was able to redeeme thē from the wrath of God, and bring them to the fellowship of Angells? Sure I am S. Bede Bed l. 1. cap. 26. saith otherwise, that S. Augustins errand from Gregorie was more heauenly, to wit, praedicare v [...]rbum Dei genti Anglorum, to preach not trifling Cerimonies only, but the word of God to the English Nation, and when frighted with the fearce­nesse of that barbarous People, they began to looke backe, he sent them Letters exhortatorie, that tru­sting in God, they should goe forward ad opus verbi, in the worke or mysterie of the worde: in which Letters also, he doth shew, what a deepe desire of our euerlasting happines did dwell in his hart, wi­shing he might be partaker of the merit of their la­bours, and that the sight of our Conuersion might [Page 179] be part of his eternall felicity in the next world.

26. When S. Augustine did deliuer his errand to King Edelbert, I find in the same S. Bede, this tenor thereof, se venire de Roma, & nuntium ferre op­timum: that he came from Rome, and brought a most ioy­full message, which whosoeuer should obey, should haue eternall ioyes in heauen, & a perpetuall Kingdome with the true and liuing God. Will you heare S. Augustines errand and busines into Kent and England, and the ioyfull issue thereof, set downe by your famous Protestant AntiquarieBrit. pag. 125.? Augustine, saith he, com­monly named the Apostle of the English, sent hither by Gregory the great, hauing destroyed the Monsters of hea­thenish impiety, with most happy successe, planting Christ in their mynds, conuerted them vnto the Christian faith. But what stand I seriously to confute such grosse vn­truthes, full of ingratitude as these are, which Englishmen, whom heresie hath not made more sauage then those were whom that Blessed delegate found at his entrance, will wash away with teares but of this Ministers bookes. He had reason, hauing styled his booke, The way to the Church, to tearme his discourses digressions, that is, Turnings out of the way. For being so full of falshoods and those most impudent, as you haue seene these are which you copyed into your Counter-snarle, what can they be but by-wayes and crooked paths, that will conduct the credulous Reader, that walketh securely in them, into heresie, the ready downefall into Hell? I doe not meruaile Syr Edward, your children be so defor­med, which you conceaue with this foule patterne, not whiter then your Blackmore before your eies, as [Page 180] I could and would discouer, did I not feare to ex­ceed the breuity of an Epistle, yet I am in hope shortly to haue tyme and leasure to doe it more fully.

27. This only I now add, which also is perti­nent to the matter we handle, that whereas Catho­licke Religion conuerted our Country from Barbarity vnto Christianity, this Minister layeth the contrary imputation on it, that is, maketh some part of our country still sauage and barbarous, which your Pro­testant Modesty, and Religion forsooth must ciuilize. All disorders, saith he,p. 110. be most in those places amongst vs, where the people is most Pope-holy: other parishes, where the Ghospell hath byn taught, being reduced to ciui­lity, and the rest that swarue with Priests & Recusāts, remayning sauage & barbarous, that no Christian Man can indure their manners. For my owne part, hauing spent much of my tyme among them, this I haue found, that in all excesse of sinne Papists haue byn the Ringlea­ders in riotous companies, in drunkē Meetings, in sediti­ous assemblies & practises, in prophaning the Sabaoth, in Quarrells & braules, in stage-playes, Greenes, Ales, and all heathnish customes. The common sort of that peo­ple commonly burned in sinne, swearing more then can be expressed, vncleanesse, drunkenesse, perfidiousnes, wild & odious. Their familes vntaught and dissolute, their beha­uiour fierce & full of contumely, iniuiry, inhumanity, full of slaunderous reports, wilde lookes, and all vnchristian v­sage towards any not of their Religion, that I dare be bould to say, we may all cast our capps at them for Atheisme & all that naught is. Thus he. Truly, Syr Edward, though you follow your Father White a good pace, yet I think you may cast your Couentry-cap at [Page 181] him for rayling.

28. Catholicke Religiō, he saith, maketh men cruell, inhumaine, parishes sauage, & barbarous, but if we desire to find men curteous and bountifull to the poore, housekeepers, modest, ciuil, and sweet soules, whither must we repayre, but to the parish, where M. White doth purely preach the Ghospell. If any man (saith Andreas Musculus Conc. 1. Aduen­tus. Si quis vi­dere vo­let ingen­tem tur­bam nebu lonum. a famous Protestant) be desirous to see a great rabble of knaues, of persōs turbu­lent, deceitfull Coseners, vsurers, let him goe to any Citty where the Ghospell is purely preached in qua Euangeli­um puré praedica­tur. and he shalbe sure to find them there by multitudes. For it is as manifest as day light, that there were neuer amongst Heathens, Turkes and Infidells more vnbridled and vnruly persons, with whome all vertue and modesty is quite extinct, then are a­mongst the Professors of the Ghospell. Thus he. Is not this a Religious rabble, fit to ciuilize a Country thinke you? Let the Minister clap this testimony which not Malice the Authour of his Inuiectiue, but Truth did indight, to his head, least it take cold, seeing he hath cast away his horned Capp after Atheisme or Puritanisme, with which he will not appeare in Pulpit, not to fright such pure and curteous creatures as his owne wife from his Sermon. If he desire to know what Ciuilizers of people Ghospellers are, let him goe into Virginia, where he may find one of of the two or three Ministers that went thither, be­come sauage, not any Sauages made Christians by their meanes.

29. As for the Conuersion of our Country, by S. Augustines meanes, what, not Ciuilitie alone, but also sanctity, what an heauenly (not humanne [Page 192] only) kind of life, he planted amongst vs our Hi­stories doe relate, which is such, as I wonder this new Ghospell, which Ambition and Emulation, Wine and Women gaue the beginning vnto, dare boast of their Modesty, Ciuility, or Sanctity in her presence. Let your owne Antiquary, whose testimonyes I vsed before, describe that most happy age of our primitiue Church vnder S. Cam­den. Brit. pag. 98. Lond. an. 1607. Augustine. Thus he ‘writeth: Streight vpō the preaching of the name of Christ, the English did consecrate themselues vnto Christ in so feruent manner, that the diligence is incredible they vsed, in the propagation of the name of Christ, in the perfor­mance of the duties thereof, in the divulging of the Chri­stian Religion, in building of Churches, in the inriching & adorning the same, that no Prouince of Christendome, could haue numbred more Monasteries, or more richly en­dowed, then England could in Catholike tymes, and euen some Kings have preferred Religious, and Monasticall life, before Kingdomes. So many haue byn the holy men England hath brought forth, and which for their most firme profession of Christian Religion, most soūde constancy and sincere deuotion therein, haue bene put in­to the Kalendar of Saints, that in this point, it hath not bene inferiour vnto any Christian prouince whatsoeuer, yea as Brittaine was termed by Porphyrius a prophane Philosopher ferax Tirannorum prouincia, a prouince fertill of Tyrants, so likewise England may he styled Insula Sanctorum feracissima, an Iland most fruitfull of Saints.’ Thus writeth your Camden.

30. Now if the tree may be iudged by the fruit, as Christ teachethMatth. 7. Arbor bona bonos fructus facit. what a noble and worthy tree was that conuersion, from the roote whereof such [Page 193] innumerable Saints, and excellent workes of Piety in such aboundance did spring? What force to purge a Coūtry from Idolatry, heathnish Superstitiō, wic­ked and dissolute life hath our Purgatory doctrine? would you now on the other side seriously consider the thornes & thissles of Atheisme & Impiety Num­quid colli­gunt de spinis vuas? which your Protestant deformation hath brought forth, you might soone perceiue the difference, and which of these two is the vine, which yielded wine breeding Virgins Vinum germinans Virgines. Zachar. 9. eminent Saintes, that out of loue of hea­uen and delight in God, contemned the treasures and pleasures of this world. Compare the Monasteries the one builded, with those the other threw downe, the riches which the one gaue, with those the other tooke from Churches and holy vses. Let the humi­lity, Piety, feare of God, Reuerence to his Church, contempt of the world, which the one caused in great and mighty Monarkes, be paralelled with the contrary effects, your Religion bred in those Prin­ces, that first intertayned the same, in their King­domes. These things I say iudiciously weighed would shew, which of the two Religions, Catho­like or Protestant hath opera plena Apoc. 3., solide, full, and working deuotion, which is minus habens Daniel. 7. a light-headed Religion, that dreameth to be saued only by belieuing they are of the number of the elect.

31. Wherefore I cannot better end this my Purga­tory Triūph, thē in this first Conuersiō of our Country, by the Patrons & defēders therof, y^e triūphāt Chariot therof being honored with the multitude of admira­ble Saints, who by the beliefe of this Doctrine, gaue [Page 184] themselues to pennance, mortificatiō, and contempt of the world, seeking therby to satisfy in this life for their sinnes. Did these men belieue Satanicall figmentes, and doctrine of diuells? Did they disgrace Gods mercy? euacuate his Crosse? dissipate and dissolue Religion, or no? If they did not, why doe you lay those rayling, or rather blaspheming Epithe­tes vpon this article of our doctrine? If they did, why doth your owne Historiographer name them, as the true Professours of Christianity? as eminent Saints, feruent louers and propagators of the Chri­stian name, and as ornaments of our Land? And if these be saued, and Saintes in Heauen, how can you euer expect to come to the place where they walke, being so mainely opposite to their fayth in so many substantiall pointes?

32. I know (s) you say, that S. Gregory by his delegate did not plant the present Roman faith, that we now professe; which I think you say it more with your tongue, then your hart: sure I am you say it without any proofe. And no meruaile M. Whites Originall whence you drew it, doth auerre the same, without alleadging any reason in the world. Gre­gories doctrine, sayth hep. 355. was not sutable to that which now is houlden, as may be shewed by that which he hath left written against Images, the supremacy, & merit of good works, & diuers other points: thus White, after whom you snarle in this manner. If Augustine preach­ed Gregories doctrine, what will become of the Popes su­premacy, Images, merit of workes, which Gregory was so farre from countenancing with his authority, that he disclaymed them with his pen, & so consequently this ima­ginary [Page 185] supposition will bruse theyr owne pates. Truly Syr did not your eies dazle with looking vpō White, I suppose your pen would not stumble vpon such manifest falshoods as these are. Who knoweth not that S. Augustine (vpon whose honesty you presume that he did bring no other fayth then his Maister gaue him in charg) did enter into England with the banner of the holy Crosse carried before him, in the labell whereof, was a siluer Picture of our Sa­uiour, as Bede writethl. 1. c. 26.

33. You aske what will become of Images, if Gregories doctrine be admitted, I answere, first they shalbe reuerently kept & set vp in Churches, as bookes to instruct ignorant people, whence when the Bishop of Marsils in France had cast them out, as you Protestants vse to doe, S. Gregorie did seuerely reproue him for the sameGreg. lib. 9. ep. 9. ad Sere­num Mas­silien.. Secondly they shalbe carried in Processions, and the people following shall deuoutly worship and honour the persons represen­ted in them: in which sort, your owne Bale Imagi­nem Diuae Virginis circum fer­ri per misit. Bal. Act. Rom. Pon­tif. prin­ted at Ba­sil. 1558. p. 44. & sequent. doth witnes that he caused the Image of the Blessed Vir­gin to be carried in Procession about Rome, to diuert Gods anger from the Cittie then infected with PestilenceVide vitam Gregor. apud Su­rium Tom. 2.. Thirdly Christans shall goe in Pilgri­mage to the Images of Saints, namly the Blessed Virgins. Which deuotion he will stirre vp people vnto by graunting Indulgences to them Vbi supra pag. 46. Peregrinationes ad Statuas pro plebis deuotione per indulgentias confirmauit., as the Protestant Friar doth confesse. Finally people shall prostrate [Page 186] themselues before them, not as vnto God, but be­fore them shall worship and adore Christ, whome by his Image they remember, either as an Infant in his Mothers armes, or as crucified, or glorious in heauen, which manner of honouring Images by a­doring their prototype in them, this Pope doth ex­presly teachNon imaginem vt Deum colimus, nec quasi ante Diui­nitatem, ante illam prosterni­mur; sed illum ad oramus quem per imaginem recorda­mur.. What more deuotion vnto Images doe Catholikes shew then this? Is it not strange any man should auerr, that Gregorie did disclaime from our Catholike worshipping of Images, or that his doctrine lighting on Images would breake them, and their worship into peeces?

34. Secondly if Gregories doctrine be preached in England, the Popes Supremacy you say, must be gone. And why Syr I pray you? Perchance your reason is, because he did detest the tytle of Vniuersall Bishop in Iohn of Constantinople, calling it prophane, sacrilegious, antichristian Greg. l. ep. ep 32: & 36.. This I know is your common obiection, which Catholikes haue often answered. Will you belieue your owne Protestant Historian Carion in Cronico l. 4. pag. 567., that sayth that Gregorie did tragically declame against that title in Iohn of Constantinople, yet did he allow and practise himselfe the same Supremacy that title did import? Will you heare anotherAn­dreas [...]ric­cius. an excellent learned man So tear­med by Pe­ter Martyr in his com­mon places part. 4. p. 77. who giueth you our Catho­like answere, telling, that you mistake Gregories mea­ning, for that title of vniuersall Bishop lieth open vn­to a double acception. First it signifieth the sole and only Bishop of the world, in which sense, saithl. 1. de Eccles. c. 10. p. 576. this Protestant, Gregorie spake against it, amplifying & exaggerating the blasphemie contained in it. Secōd­ly vniuersall Bishop may signifie the first Bishop, [Page 187] vnto whom the other be subiect, and to whome the care of the rest and of their Churches appertaine: in this sense Gregorie did neuer say, that title did not in rigour agree to the Romā Bishop, nay he did practise that authoritie himselfe, and thought the same was com­mitted to S. Peter, yet did he not thinke, that either S. Peter or himselfe was the forerunner of Antichrist. Thus he. Shewing that you, and your Ministers may be thought willfully peruerse who stil florish with this obiection, notwithstanding so cleere an an­swere, and so many testimonies of S. Gregorie for the Primacie. For doth not he expresly teach, that the Romaine is the Head and Mother of all Churches l. 11. epist. 54. Speculatio­nem suam toti orbi indicere. a­pud Con­turiatores. Cent. 6. co­lum. 425., that it appointeth her watch ouer all Churches, that euen Constantinople it selfe is subiect to the Romaine Sea l. 7. ep. 63., that there is not any Bishop in the world, which oweth not obedience to the Romaine, which may not be reproued and punished by him if he doe amisse Si quae culpa in Episcopis inuenitur nescio quis ei Episcopus subiectus non sit? l. 7. ep. 64.? In which speach he doth, saith Caluin l. 4. institut. c. 7. sect. 12., more then any where else vaunt of the greatnes of his Primacie.

35. Now this Rock of the Romane Supre­macie, whose pate doth it bruise? whose head doth it crush in peeces, but that Serpents, which hath lately rent, as you ridiculously vantLett. p. 103., the Bishop of Romes slipper, that it hath no sound sole, whereon his triple-crowned Supremacie may tread? I should meruaile that your proud heads, should stoupe so low as the sole of the Popes slipper, did I not knowe, that it is the nature of Serpents to be byting as the heele. Sup­pose you deuoure at last this slipper with the parings of the Popes great toe Coun­ters. p. 40., whereof you seeme to say that we make great account, yet the force to bruise [Page 188] the Serpents head, being not in the shoe, but in the naked sole of the foote, as Naturalists writeRupert l. 3. de Trinit. c. 20. Perer. in cap. 3. gen. v. 15. Sinuda mulieris planta vi­uacissimum serpentis vel leuiter pressit., this bare truth alone that the Roman Churches Supremacie, was generally belieued of Christians, more then a thousand yeares agoe planted amongst the Eng­lish in their originall conuersion vnto Christ. This cleere and vndeniable verity, confessed euen by the enemies of that Sea, is able I say to strike dead the heresie of this age, which more then any other, creeping vpon the ground, and on her belly, Super pectus tu­um gradie­ris & ter­ram come­des. Gen. 3. busied in worldly and veneriall things, hisseth at this point of Catholike religion.

36. Now as for the meritts of good workes, the third point wherein you say we haue S. Gregorie against vs, your owne auhors write, that he did high­ly magnifie the workes of Supererogation, Monachisme, Satisfastions, Vowes Carion in Cronico l. 4. pag. 567., giuing too much to freewill and good workes Osian­der Cent. 6. pag. 28 [...].. This Saint saith, that in heauen there shalbe differences of dignities l. 4. Moral. c. 41. Qui ali­um me­ritò supe­rat retri­butione tra [...]scen­det. l. 2. in 1. Reg. explicans cap. 7. Ad delen­da peccata id. nea., according as in this life there is diuersitie of meritts, that the affliction of pennance is fitt and apt to blot out our sinnes, when it is enioyned by the Iudgment of the Priests. In brief it is so cleere that in all points he taught the same faith the presēt Church of Rome houldeth, as diuers learned Protestants doe confesse in expresse tearmes, that Augustine brought Poperie into England Bale centur. 1. fol. 3. Powel considerat. pag. 34., his entrance was not the Conuersion but peruersion of our Countrie Fulke against Purgat. Dan. resp. ad Bell. p. 1. p. 780.. M. Morton in his Catholike Apology placeth in his lists of Papists, and his aduersaries S. Gregorie Apol. Cathol initio., whom togeather with S. Austine M. Wilet ranketh [Page 189] amongst the first Fathers of Superstition, and ringleaders of Popish deuines Tretra­stilon p. 122, whereupon your famous Histo­rian Lucas Osiander. epitom. centur. 6. pag. 290. Haud du­biè ad in­feros des­cendit. concludeth, that Augustine subiected Eng­land to the Lust of the Romaine Antichrist, and there­fore after his death went vndoubtedly to Hell, there to receiue his reward. O vnhappy religion, the pro­fessers whereof, can find noe hope of Saluation, nor passage vnto heauen, without throwing downe into Hell most eminent Saints, and amongst them the Conuerters of Nations vnto Christ, whose Sanctitie and Charitie, when they are not pressed therewith to abiure their errours, they cannot but highly commend! O wonderfull obstinancie a­gainst truth that makes Christians that would so be thought, preferre Paganisme before the Christian faith, that ouerthrew it, yea ioyne with the open and professed enemies of their eternall Saluation, rather then with those that sought the same with eminent perill of their liues!

37. Do you remember Syr Edward the Title of proud & insolēt Delegate, which you bestowed boū ­tifully on the first Preacher of faith, vnto our En­glish Ancestors, which now you defend by bidding me before I enter into choller against you for it, to go aske counsell of the Brittish Bishop Coun­ters. pag. 53. whose Counsell had it bin followed, before S. Augustines, the whole English Nation might haue bin barbarous, Idola­trous, at this day. The chiefe reason that made this Blessed Saint to iarre with them, was their want of Christian charity towardes the English, not yeil­ding to preach Christ and Christianity vnto them. I will not follow counsell to aske counsell of them, [Page 190] but rather pray with Iacob, non veniat in consilium e­orum anima mea Gen. 51., let not my soule enter into their assembly, where perchance I might learne your Prō ­testates charity, to vow neuer to forgiue iniuries, nether in this world nor in the world to come. Lett. p. 6. But to let passe that ancient Controuersie, this I say, the ioyning with those Bishopes that hindred the Conuersion of the English against S. Augustine, that laboured in the Conuersion osthem is excesse of ingratitude & im­piety in those that are descended of those Ancestors, whom that Blessed Saint made Christians. Is it not an heynous offence in them, to iudge and condemne their owne Apostle, their Father that begot them by the Ghospell vnto Christ, of pride, and insolency, v­pon such a signe or token, as to condemne any other man by the like, were admirable rashnes?

38. You say that vultus animi Iudex, the counte­nance is a token of the hart, I confesse it is so, yet but an vncertain and fallible token, wherupon to frame a resolute & determinate iudgmēt in the condēnatiō of any is against Christs expresse commaundement, Nolite secundum faciem iudicare; Ioan▪ 7. Do not iudge accor­ding to the face, which precept S. Paul repeateth, No­lite ante tempus iudicare 1. Cor. 4.. Do not iudge before the time till our Lord come, who will discouer thinges hidden in darknes, & make manifest the secretes of hartes: in which wordes the Apostle doth condemne as rash, the iudgment of any mans hart by outward signes. How oft doe godly and discreet superiours, shew Anger, State, Grauity, and Seuerity in their coun­tenance, when their hartes are full of humility, com­passion, and meeknesse, in which, and in the sight [Page 191] of God, they preferre before themselues, euen those whom outwardly they seeme to disdaine? Which lesson no doubt but this our Apostle had learned of his MaisterGreg. in pasto­rali., who being appointed by the Pastor of the whole Church, Primate ouer the Brittan Bi­shops, if for their want of charity towardes the En­glish, and for their Schismaticall diuision from the rest of the world, in their obseruation of the feast of Ea­ster, wherein they had obstinatly persisted, he did refraine those complementes and signes of charity to­wardes them, before their yeilding vnto peace and truth, I neither see why the same may not be excused, nor how to excuse the rash condemning of so glo­rious a Saint, in so haynous a crime, vpon no grea­ter presumptions thereof, specially his miraculous sanctity and charity being such, as the light thereof might dissolue a greater mist, then this seely suspition can with any probability raise.

39. If Iosias who destroyed Idols and Idolo­try amongst the Iewes4. Reg. 23. 2. Pa­ral. 33. was to all posterity in that respect so gratefull, that the memorie of him was no lesse sweet then perfume to the sent, then hony to the mouth, then musike at a feast to the eare memo­ria Iosiae in compo­sitione o­doris qua­si mel in omni ore, & quasi musica in conuiuio vini. Eccles. 49., why should the name of this Blessed Augustine, be lesse pretious and fragrant to any English, who bestowed the same yea greater benefites and blessings on their Country? And glorious indeed was the festiuall Commemo­ration of this our Iosias, who by his most pure and Angelicall lifeVita mundissi­ma San­ctorum delectatus Beda. l. 1. c. 27. won Edilbert vnto the Christian faith Catholike, before your Religion came, whose opposition with ours in faith, hope, and charity you describe, sayingLett. 9 [...]. that your faith is wholy directed to [Page 192] Christes Merits, not looking to gaine Heauen by good workes as we doe, your hope to his merits, not doing any pennance for your sinne,, to satisfy his iustice, your charity to his deputies, the Saintes vpon earth, as who should say, your charity doth not much regard the Saints of the next world, neither those which be in Purgatory, or in Heauen, you neither care to help the necessity of the one by prayer, or to honour the memory of the other with prayses.

40. Yea that Machiauillion Maxime, Mortui non mordent, seemeth so printed in your mind, that you dare snarle at Saintes in Heauen, reuiling their glorious names with such reproaches, as I dare say your seruileCount. pag. 39. pen would trēble (not out of feare of hell) to lay them vpon any, whose power & authority you stand in awe of, towardes which your Saintes on earth, you are no lesse obsequious, then contep­tuous and blasphemous against those of Heauen Your Countersnarle yieldeth diuers examples or this base deuotionpag. 20. his Maie­sties cy­pher. p. 70. pag. 74. but one I cannot omit, con­cerning the Lord of Canterbury that now is, your Saint on earth, in whose commendation you shew your selfe no lesse light and lauish, then you were sterne and seuere in the condemnation of the first Bishop of that Sea. His praise the last thing by way of execution in your Pamphlet, may seeme to haue bin the first in your intentions, and that your long snarling at me, aymed to end in fawning on him. The cause that your dogge, hath bin so diligent in trauayling my peece of ground, was to raise some game, that your Hobby might haue a fluttering flight at his Grace. In the end after much search, you espye [Page 193] in my Riuer, the Dux of your English Clergy, which though too swift a winged foule to be caught by so seely a bird, your pen flyeth in his praise as fast as your flattering conceipts can moue it.

41. Yea but M. Crashaw, say youCoun­ters. p. 77., hath committed such an errour, as deserueth depriuation ipso facto, wote you what? In his Iesuits Ghospell he makes Dux Cleri the Popes chiefest title, which (if we belieue this Informer) was neuer giuen him by any Catholike, but rather belongs to the Lord of Canterburie. I will not be so curious to stand vpon the numbers of 666. thence collected, but set that a side, I dare say, Crux Cleri, had bene the better word for the Pope: and yet to meet him at the rebound, I hould Dux Cleri to be but part of his Graces title; who by the goodnes of his affable disposition, bountie in hospitalitie, painfullnes in preaching, and dex­teritie in the dispatch of all occurrences, hath well de­serued the stile of Lux Cleri, in being such a light in Choro, and Foro, that if a man should search like Dio­genes amongst all the Cardinalls, he should misse of his match. So that me thinkes the matter were not to be held so heynous, if he haue taken that part which my Lord might best spare, to pay the Pope more then his due. Thus you cōmēd the liuing with as little grace as you did reuile the dead, bearing true deuotion vnto neither.

42. First it is false that IOuer­throw p. 1. c. 1. p. 76. accused M. Cra­shaw for making Dux Cleri the Popes chiefest title: my accusation was, that he made it a Title proper to the Pope only, and that to make his deuise more plausible, englished it the Pastor of Pastors, or vni­uersall Bishop. Secondly I did not say, that neuer any Catholike gaue that Title to the Pope, but on­ly that it was not the ordinarie stile Catholikes did [Page 194] vse to giue him. Thirdly I neuer affirmed, that Dux Cleri did rather belong to the Lord of Canterburie then to the Pope, but only that I thought M. Cra­shaw durst not deny that Title to his Lord Bishop. Fourthly it is extreme falshood, that I stood vpon this toye of his iniuring his Lord of Canterburie or that I vrged that errour against him, as a heynous cryme deseruing depriuation ipso facto. So that it is cleere, that your intention was not, to cleere M. Crashaw. You omitt what I obiected against him, yea you charge him with that I neuer drea­med of, that vnder pretence of defending your Bachelour you might flatter your Bishop.

43. Now if I would take you at the rebound, as you doe me, I might proue by your words, what­soeuer your meaning was, that you take the stile of Antichrist from the Pope, and bestowe it on his Grace. Dux Cleri, say you, is but part of his Lordshipps Title, and that part he might best spare, which there­fore M. Crashaw might well take to pay the Pope more then his due. What did M. Crashaw pay the Pope by this Title? Was it not the number 666. the number of the beast, the marke of AntichristSee Ie­suits Gho­spell pag. 78. 79.? Now if this be more then the Popes due, doth not your Bachelour, whom you take into your protection, offer the Pope wrong, in laying on him so vild a reproch that is not his due? If Dux Cleri, wherein the number of the beast and pride of Antichrist go­eth inclosed, be part of his Lordships Title, then by this wise flatterie neither is the stile of the beast worse, nor yet so ill, as he doth deserue, nor the arro­gancie of Antichrist layd to his charge, more then is due to his Grace. What high and proud Titles doe [Page 195] you thinke due to his Lordship, seeing those that raise a man to the Throne aboue God, in your Iudgment come short of his worth? Behould how handsomely you fawne on your Lord. I thinke verily had M. Cra­shaw fidled so foolishly in his Graces prayse, he had byn beaten from his benifice and depriued ipso facto.

44. Knights and Noblemen be priuiledged, who seldome affoard your Clergie a good word, yea as one of themM. Downam in the preface to his Sermon at the Crosse. complayneth, you are loth to bestow either your Sonnes on the Ministrie, or Daughters on the Minister. They will take any thing from you in good part, and be content with your Daughters, though they haue no more grace nor wit, then haue those your houering with your pen ouer their Dux, though herein you soare, I am sure, both beyond his deserts, and your owne knowledg. For how can you so certainly tell that not any Cardinall in Rome may match him, in prayer, deuotion, and being Lux in Choro? Mee thinkes it is not very likely that your Diogenes with his Lanterne should sooner find his Grace spending the night in prayer, then any of that sacred Senate, among whome some haue bene tray­ned vp in Religion, and in the continuall exercise of deuotion from their Childhood? But as for Lux in Foro, if you meane therby any publike worke of Piety or Charity, built by his Lordship, or any o­ther Protestant Bishop, I dare say a man with a light at noone, may search long inough in London, be­fore he meet with so much as a Crux in Foro (ex­cept such as are set vp, to hang Catholike Priests) of his making: wheras diuers Churches, which are ornements of Citties & inducemēts to deuotion, haue bene built & are now a building by Cardinalls.

[Page 196]45. What you may gaine by this flattery I know not, nor what you ayme at, perchance his Graces affable disposition may afford you a frendly looke, or his largenes in hospitalitie a sumptuous Supper. Sup­posse, which is the highest marke your ambition can gaze on, that his dexteritie in dispatching all occur­rences, may aduance you to some higher place of dignitie amongst the Senators of the Realme. Alas, what are these fleeting honours gotten by deuotion to Saints on earth, compared with that you might purchase to your selfe euerlastingly, by charity, re­uerence, and deuout prayer to Saints in heauen, who sit in the same Throne with the King of Kings, ruling the world Apoc. 3.. How holy would you be, were you the Cypher Coun­ters. p. 20. of these Blessed Kings who cannot com­mand amisse? How happy were you, friend of these fauourites, not of a mortal Prince, whose glory shall turn into dung, whose Maiestie be consumed with magots, who this day glittereth in gold, Gloria eius stercus & vermis. Machab. 1. & 2. but the next may be cast into Hell Hodie est eras in clibanum mutitur. Matth 6. Luc. 12., but of the Eternall King, whose maiestie inuiolable, glorie immutable, power inuincible, goodnes incomprehensible, whose life eternitie. The Peeres & Princes of which glorious Kingdome you would not, Syr Edw. so boldly blaspheme as you do, did you indeed firmely belieue, that you must meet with them againe one day, when they shall reuenge iniuries done to them, bind Kings in fetters and their Nobles in gyues, did not your Protestāt charitie so fill your hart with Earth, that these heauēly & wholesō cogitatiōs cānot enter into it. Saints out of sight are out of mind: your Church hath no communication with thē, you pray neither for them, nor vnto them.

46. His Maiesty in the Conference of Hamp­ton-Court [Page 197] would not haue the Custome of Church­ing women after their lying in to be abrogated, though Puritans did much exclaime against it, be­cause he would not haue women that are of them­selues backward in that duty, be depriued of such an occasion, as might force them, therunto, oftner then other wise they would. Wherin as I highly commend his religious prudence, so could I wish the like might be vsed in the renewing of Catholike Cu­stome, to pray for the soules in Purgatory, and vn­to the Saints of Heauē. Men are so ready now a daies, to belieue there is no other world but this present, that all things end with this life, that the soule liueth not after the body, or at least they are so apt to for­get what shall befall them after death: so seldome do they think of the last things, to the remembrance whereof the Holy Ghost doth so often exhort vsEccle. 7 Memorare nouissima tua & in aeternum non pecca­bis. that no occasion should be omitted in procuring that so profitable a thing might be cōtinually, as much as may be in mens mindes.

47. And to this end not any thing is more for­cible then these two pointes of Catholick faith, that some soules in the next world need our help, some o­thers may help vs. This belief will not permit chari­ty to be wholy imployed vpon the Saints vpon earth, the loue of themselues wil force men often to re­member and call vpon the Saints in heauen wishing their blessed company in glory for help. And affectiō towards deceased friendes, will cause them to call to mind, & think that shortly they shalbe as their friēds are, & so procure and powre out deuotions for their relief, if happily they stād in need therof. Why should we labour to be wiser and perfecter then were the [Page 198] Apostles, who as your Zwinglius saithIn Epi­cherisi de Canone missae fol. 285. did permit prayer for the dead, exindulgentia infirmitatis humanae, out of Indulgence vnto humaine infirmity? What infir­mity in mans nature is more frequent or daunge­gerous then forgetfulnes of another life? Or when did this deadly disease more vniuersally raigne, then in this last decaying age, when a deluge of Epicuri­an humours threaten to dround in men the belief of a God?

48. Why should not we then grant this Apo­stolicall Indulgence vnto Christians, to pray for the dead, that this custome may be the remembrance of another life (if not perpetually) yet frequently in mens mindes? Specially this custome being Anciēt, practised by the Machabees, praised by the holy Ghost, a deduction from Christs words, the perpetu­all tradition of the Church, the first Christianity planted in our Kingdome, as I haue proued in this Letter. These are the fiue medicinable hearbes I made you promise of, to purg your enraged humour against Catholick and Ancient truth: the best furtherance I could affoard vnto your greatest good, the most charitable & Christian reuenge I could haue of you, heaping Purgatory-coales on your head Conge­re carbo­nes super cuput ini­mici. Rom. 12. for those re­proaches you charged on mine.

49. Your selfe allow that common prouerb, that Cani latranti praeda elabitur Coun­ters. p. 58. a snarling Curre misseth of his pray, which may giue you iust cause to expect but hungry gaine of your Countersnarle, where snapping at me, you haue caught winde, yea you haue beaten your owne choppes and bitten your tongue. You lay the vices of vulgar life vpō your ad­uersary, known to be free from the same, which euen [Page 199] (as stones cast vp into the Ayre, fall strongly to the Center) might returne heauily on your own head, did not I hould thē by force within my pen. Amōgst all your marginall Annotations, I must preferre that of your 58. page, wher you teach me this lesson: Con­uitia hominum turpium laudes puta. By the warrant of which sentence, I may bind your contumelious Pāphlet to my head, as a Diademe of honour Circū ­dabo illum vt Coronā mihi. Iob. 31. in which I hope your reproaches shall shine like pearleMatth. 6. Beati estis cùm maledixe­rit vobis homines & dixe­rint omne malum mentien­res. at that day when Purgatory and Penitentiall life that now haue got the Conquest of your Letter, shall gloriously Triumph ouer Sin and Hell.

50. What remaineth, but only that I beseech him who with fiue pretious woūds on the Crosse re­deemed the world, that these my fiue reasōs, fiue Pur­gatiue hearbs may work powerfully in you, which I will not faile to do. As your Iouiall Genius moued you to make a firme purpose neuer to reply to my an­swerepag. 68. but to spend your time in laughing and slee­ping Aut dormitabo aut ridebo: so do I feele the diuine spirit, vrging me to a contrary course, now more thē euer to imploy the rē ­nant of my life in watching & weeping Vigila­bo & flebo. praying with harty groanesPo­stulat pro nobis ge­mitibus inenarrabi­libus. Rom. 8. particulerly for your reclayming frō heresie, that doing pennāce for your sinnes, & ma­king satisfactiō in this world, you may without any Purgatory, or with a short sindge therin, passe vnto the place of euerlasting Saluatiō. From my Chamber in Hierapolis this 8. of September. 1613.