The hope of peace By laying open such doubts and manifest vntruthes as are divulged by the Arch-priest in his letter or answere to the bookes which were published by the priestes.

IN theſe Letters of the Archprieſt are ſo many, and daungerous rockes againſt which not altogether ſenceleſſe people waſte themſelues, as it cannot be deemed a labor blame-worthie ſo to diſcouer them, as ſuch as will may perceiue them before their caſe become deſperate. Let his fatherlie loue, and care of his deare brethren (as he termeth vs) be meaſured by his carriage toward vs. For our maintaining of our ſelues not to be ſchiſmatikes (a matter of opinion not worthie (as here in his anſwere to the fourth point he confeſſeth) to make a matter of contention which part ſoeuer was true), how many hath he ſuſpended, bereaued of their faculties, yea and interdicted, for which he hath no colour to ſhew anie authoritie but thoſe words in the Cardinals firſt Letters Poſt debitas admonitiones ac reprehenſiones fraterna charitate praemiſſas liceat etiam paenis coercere Eccleſiaſticis, It ſhall be lawfull for you after due admonition & warning in brotherly charitie to puniſh with Eccleſiaſticall penalties. Which ſentence is preſently limited by the words immediatly following, Oblatione nimirum facultatum vel ſuſpenſione, By taking away faculties or ſuſpending? How many haue herevpon bene diſturbed out of their places of reſidence? how many cleane abandoned of their friends? how many haue bene laid open to moſt wicked detractious tongues? how many in daunger to periſh by famine hauing no other meanes to liue thē by the charitie of ſuch as to whom they do miniſter the Sacraments? and for what? for maintaining an opinion which were it true or falſe were no matter worthie to make contention as M. Blackwell here confeſſeth. Quis ex vobis patrem petit panē nūquid lapidem dabit illi, Luk. 11. &c. If any of you (ſaith our Sauiour) aſketh bread of his father, will he giue him a ſtone? Or if he aſke him for fiſh, in place of a fiſh will he giue him a ſerpent? Or if he ſhall aſke for an egge, will he reach him a ſcorpion? If no father would doo this, how dooth M. Blackwell ſay that hee hath ſought by all fatherly meanes to win and reduce vs to vnitie, hauing ſought by the aforeſaid meanes to driue vs to ſay againſt our owne ſoules that we were ſchiſmatikes, and to ſuffer others without any contradiction to lay it euery day in our teeth, for defending that which (as himſelfe here confeſſeth) was not worthy to make a matter of contention, which part ſoeuer was true?

But to come to that which he thinketh great reaſon, that is, that a thing propounded to the Pope his holineſſe, ſhould not firſt haue bin divulged to all ſorts of people, before it could poſſibly come to his ſight, and cenſure. What if this were ſo litle againſt reaſon, as the contrary had bene great folly? for who knoweth not, that the Ieſuites do lie ſo in waight to intercept what paſſeth too and fro, that a ſmall Letter can hardly and that very ſeldome eſcape them? how then ſhould this booke by any ſecret cōueyance ſoeuer haue gone without danger of being at their deuotions, before it could come to the Pope his viewe and cenſure? It might therefore with great reaſon haue bene at the firſt propounded to all ſorts of people, that thereby ſome one Copie or other might come to his holineſſe his view; and if this courſe had beene taken in the divulging of theſe bookes, what reaſon hath M. Blackwell to ſay that perhaps it was neuer meant to be ſhewed to his holineſſe? Could the Prieſts be ſo fooliſh in M. Blackwells conceit, that they would make a diſcourſe of their miſeries with petition to be relieued by his holineſſe, dedicate the booke vnto him, and publiſh it in that maner, and neuer meane that it ſhould bee preſented vnto him? how could M. Blackwell frame his imaginatiō to this, who could not but knowe long ſince, that of the 10. which were ſent ouer for Rome, ſome of his friendes tooke the tythe where it was not due? What if that booke which M. Blackwell or his friend ſeiſed on were the booke that was meant to haue bene preſented to the Pope, who were they then that perhaps neuer meant the booke ſhould be preſented to him? But the other 9. being ſafely deliuered, as long ſince we vnderſtood from Paris whether they were ſent, perhaps his holineſſe hath had the view of one; and if M. Blackwel do know any thing to the contrary, we will yeeld him moſt heartie thankes to make the meanes to haue it come to his holineſſe his reading, for we doo aſſure him and all other who haue made doubt thereof, that it is our ſpeeciall deſire, as in time it will wel be ſeene, and the more griefe his holineſſe ſhall take thereat, the leſſe thankes will they haue who haue ſo long a time deluded him with falſe informations, and no doubt will prouide in ſome better ſort for a true and vnfeined peace to continue among vs. And therefore feare we the leſſe that hereby wee may bee charged to giue any ſcandall to our friends, or ioy to our aduerſaries, no man beeing to be accounted a friend which ſhould take offence where no cauſe is giuen, or eſteemed our aduerſarie who would ioy at our good, or the furtherance of any honeſt cauſe, how contrary ſoeuer he may bee to truth in ſome other kinde. Praeceptor vidimus quendā in nomine tuo eijcientem daemonia, &c. Maiſter (ſaith Saint Iohn to our Sauiour, Luk. 9.) we ſawe one caſt out diuels in thy name and we forbid him it becauſe he is not of our company, and Ieſus ſaid vnto him, doo not forbid him, for he who is not againſt you is with you. Shall we then call them aduerſaries, who ſhall reioyce at their reliefe, who are vniuſtly oppreſſed, and not rather pray vt iuſtificentur adhuc and thinke our ſelues much bound vnto them, whoſoeuer they be who ſhall fauour or further vs in our iuſt cauſe? It cannot be liked of (ſaith M. Blackwell) that we ſhould write one againſt an other. How ſhall wee conſter this? was not and vnto this day is not the Ieſuits libell againſt the Prieſts liked, wherein the Prieſts are called Rebells, Schiſmatikes, fallen from the Church and ſpouſe of Chriſt, excommunicated, irregular, infamous, diſobedient to Chriſt and his Vicar, factious, nothing better then ſouthſayers, and Idollaters, as Ethnicks and Publicans? Dooth not M. Blackwell in his anſwere to the fourth point heere write abroad that he retaineth his opinion ſtill that we were ſchiſmatikes, and commendeth this rayling Libell of the Ieſuits for a learned diſcourſe, and cenſure? And can the purging of vs Catholique Prieſts from theſe wicked defamations (being bound therevnto both for the defence of our good names, which vnleſſe we will be accounted cruell to our • e •••• , we cannot let lie bleeding to the death, & for their comfort whoſe ſoules haue a long time bin vnder our charge) be diſliked by any honeſt man? Is it to be thought that Gods cauſe can ſuffer diſhonour in any courſe, which is neceſſarie for the recouery of his Prieſts their honour, and doth he not well deſerue to be robbed of all that he hath, yea and baſted vntill all his bones do rattell in his skinne who vpon enuie that an aduerſary ſhould ioy, would omit a neceſſarie defence for his own reliefe? would there not be as many houters as hearers of one perſwading an other rather to let a third take away all his landes and goods then bring it to a publike triall vnder colour of a thing not to be liked that one ſhould plead openly againſt an other? would theeues deſire to meete with better copeſmates when they would enrich themſelues, or refuſe a triall where ſuch Iudges ſhould ſit vpon the bench? It falleth out many times that with leſſe daunger a man may take a Beare by the tooth then awake a ſleeping dogge. Had not other meanes bene before in vaine attempted for the remedie of what we haue felt, or were not the preſent extremities ouer great into whiche wee are brought by the trump of euerie looſe tongue where before they were poſſeſſed with this ſpirite butter would not haue melted, we might haue bin blamed for our publiſhing in this ſort & laying open thereby to the whole worlde who they are that diſturbe the peace, which ought to haue bene mainteined amōg vs. And if any doubt hereof ſhal grow in any, our deſire is, as alſo M. Blackwell deſireth, that all do thinke well of their ſuperiors, and ſuſpend their iudgements vntil they heare the ful deciding of the cauſe, which, howſoeuer the deſire of ſome be therein ſatisfied, is not to withdrawe their charitie from the reliefe of Prieſts who want, for this is not to ſuſpēd their iudgment, but their charitie, and not only to iudge but to puniſh alſo, much leſſe do they ſuſpend their iudgements who turne Prieſts out of their houſen, or exclaime day and night againſt them, ſhut them from the ſeruice of God, and diuide themſelues frō them and their Catholike friends in praier and communication of Sacraments vpon an opiniō which was not worthie to make a matter of contention, which part were true as M. Blackwel affirmeth in his anſwere here to the fourth point. I wiſh the ignorance were ſuch as it might excuſe, but I feare it is too much affected, where vnder pretence of obedience it muſt not be ſeen where ſuperiors haue not done ſo well as they might haue done, and how thoſe who are condemned generally as diſobedient & factious againſt their ſuperiours haue behaued themſelues in all dutifull manner to all ſuperiors, which they knew, and how farre they were bounde to ſhewe obedience. And if the Prieſts haue bene compelled to this hard choyce as either they muſt ſuſtaine infinite iniuries, and obloquies, or redeeme themſelues in this ſort from ſo vndeſerued an oppreſſion, no ſuperiour in the world can iuſtly finde himſelfe touched in credit, but ſuch whom the Apoſtle calleth Principes & poteſtates mundi rectores tenebrarum harum. Epheſ. 6.

M. Archprieſt gathereth ſixe principall points which he ſaith are touched, and maketh anſwere to euery one in order as he putteth them downe.

The firſt is the diuiſion at Wisbich, to which hee ſaith that it was long ſince ended with great aedification, and by the meanes principally of thoſe, which are moſt condemned. But he doth neither name the parties, nor giue to vnderſtand who they are which condemne them. He vſed ſilence perchaunce in this, becauſe he muſt haue named either thoſe whom he would not, or thoſe whom he ſhould not; for it is ſo well knowne as none without great want of modeſtie can deny that M. Iohn Muſh and M. Richard Dudly two Prieſts now condemned by the Archprieſt Ieſuites and their adherents came out of the North to their great paines, and charge to Wisbich, and from thence to London, where after that they had bene often mocked by the head of the Ieſuites, at the laſt with maruellous importunitie wroong from him certaine Letters to his fellow Ieſuites at Wisbich, vpon the ſight whereof there was a peace made, ſuch as it was, it might haue bene much better, and ſpeedier (as by this it ſeemeth) if it had before ſo pleaſed the head of the Ieſuites to haue enterpoſed himſelfe as charitie would he ſhould haue done, the head of the Faction at Wisbich being at his commaund, and one who rather then ſo great a ſcandall ſhould haue riſen for his cauſe ſhould haue ſuffered himſelfe to haue bin caſt ouer the Caſtle wall, which in thoſe tumults hee affirmed ſome would doo rather then the matter of his preferment ouer all the ſecular Prieſts there and fellow priſoners ſhould not goe forward. At an other time M. Alb. Dolman ſhould haue made peace, but the Ieſuite who ſhould haue bene the Superiour there vnder the tytle of an Agent vnderſtanding of ſome cōditiōs, which he liked not, a litle before that all ſhould haue bene cōcluded found the meanes to rid him away. And I do verily thinke that there are fewe who thinke, and none who know that the diuiſiō is as yet ended, which is no great aedificatiō, God pardon them who are the cauſe thereof. And moſt vnworthily are thoſe ſcandalous proceedings at Wiſbich compared with the ſodalitie which was to be procured abroad. For the firſt foundation of them vvere detractious, & infamous ſpeeches againſt ſuch as in all times among Chriſtians haue bene had in great reuerence, & their faults (if they had any) vvere concealed, not publiſhed abroad to the vvorld, much leſſe vvas it liked that any ſhould be falſly obiected againſt them, for no ſuch courſe vvas iudged in thoſe dayes to ſtand vvith the glory of God. The drift of thoſe proceedings vvas to make a Ieſuite Superiour ouer the ſecular Prieſts, or to maintaine that ſcandalous diuiſion which hath euen to this day followed theron, vpon ſome other ground doubtleſſe thē that which their fauourites doo moſt ſeriouſly vrge, to wit that ſome of that ſocietie haue bene the maiſters or trainers vp of ſome of the ſecular Prieſts beyond the ſeas, for by this argument euery one whoſoeuer is no Schoolemaiſter or trayner vp of youth, yea all Princes muſt yeeld themſelues to be vnder the gouernmēt not only of thoſe who were ſometime their Schoolemaiſters, but of euery pettie Schoolemaiſter becauſe once they haue bene trained vp by ſome of that profeſſiō; and ſuch as haue much greater knowledge, & facility in teaching or training muſt humble thēſelues to euery Punie becauſe they thēſelues had once maiſters of that profeſſion of which this Punie is: & perchance no leſſe abſurditie thē this was that in Wisbich, when many graue, wiſe, and learned men were to become ſubiect to a Ieſuite, becauſe forſooth (as theſe fauourites of the Ieſuits alledge) the Ieſuits haue the bringing vp of ſome Prieſts beyōd the ſeas. The ſodalitie which was to be procured abroad was for ſuch as voluntarily would ioyne themſelues to liue vnder rules, and ſuperiors to be choſen by themſelues with the priuitie of his holineſſe, and without any ſchiſme or faction againſt thoſe who would not be of the Sodalitie. So that the difference was very great betweene the humour of the Ieſuites in that diuiſion at Wisbich, and the peaceable endeuours of the Prieſts abroad, to which the Ieſuites hauing no very good liking, laboured to effect what before they had miſſed with a peece of more cunning, and by ſiniſter meanes procured a ſuperiour ouer the Prieſts, who vpō peril of being euery day to be put downe, muſt like whatſoeuer they ſhould lay before him, and in the mean while they muſt be of his priuy coū cell in matters of greateſt waight, and allow of none but ſuch as are devoted vnto them for his ordinarie aſſiſtants.

The ſecond poynt concerneth the ſuperiours there, whoſe authoritie (he ſaith) is moſt grieuouſly, and moſt dangerouſly contemned: hee might iuſtly be accounted wiſe who ſhould diuine a right that which is meant hereby. There haue beene as many viſitations on the behalfe of the Students, as of the Ieſuites; and as for the ſuperiours, I haue ſeene a Letter of Fa. Parſons own penning, dated the 5. of April 1599. wherein he ſaith that perhaps ſome one mans actions in the gouernmēt of the Colledge at Rome, in ſome certaine points were not ſo much to Cardinal Allane his liking, and without perhaps the orders, which were miſliked, were by F. Par. contrary to his owne promiſe brought into the Seminary of Rome; where indeed there are new buildings but they were not at the charge of the Ieſuites, but of the Colledge, and if it be richer in chābers, it is poorer in vineyards, and in this new building there are very few more thē halfe ſo manie ſtudents as were before the new buildings were erected, and theſe fewe are ſo ſtraungely diuided, and debarred each others comfort, as howſoeuer the Ieſuites gaine therby, or ioy therat themſelues, the ſtudents may iuſtly ſay vnto them for all this great boaſt of buildings, Nec multiplicaſtis gentem nec magnificaſtis laetitiam. That Colledge was firſt an Hoſpitall founded by our Princes for the reliefe of ſuch as went on pilgrimage to thoſe holie places, afterward it was endewed with an Abbacie by Pope Gregorie of happie memorie the 13. of that name, and Doctor Lewis Biſhop of Caſſana bore the name to be the erector of it as a Colledge, as Cardinal Allane did of the Colledge at Rhemes now tranſlated to Doway: and no diſpraiſe to anie, thoſe two Seminaries and their founders were thoſe who brought England to that paſſe, that as wel the Laitie as the Cleargie therof were admired throughout all Chriſtendome for their fortitude in Gods cauſe and faithfulneſſe in all their temporall affaires. And it is well knowne that theſe two were of thoſe who complained. The one at the verie firſt beginning as one well acquainted with the Ieſuites courſes, and had ſerued that mirror of pietie and wiſedome Cardinall Boromeo Archbiſhop of Millane, who diſcharged them of the gouernment of his Seminaries. The other ſomewhat with the lateſt, but yet in ſuch ſort as Doctor Haddock who pretendeth that he was the Cardinals Nephew moued in ſpirit after the Cardinalls death writ vnto a worſhipfull Knight in Spaine theſe words to my remembrance, Profecto bene mortuus eſt ſi enim vixiſſet & ſibi & patriae ſuae maximū dedecus peperiſſet. He is dead in a good time, for if he had liued he had moſt greatly diſhonoured himſelfe and his Country. And why maſt. Doctor? forſooth he was carried away againſt the Ieſuites by his Nephew M. Hesket, M. Throckmorton, M. Fitzherbert, & all the Gentlemen of our nation who were then at Rome, but eſpecially by my Lord of Caſſana through whoſe meanes M. Doctor Haddock was diſcarded, as one that was factious againſt the ſtudents in the behalfe of the Ieſuites, and loſt thereby as he ſaid himſelfe a Nephewes part, which he had bene promiſed often by the Cardinall and he moſt certainly expected. The Seminaries in Spaine haue bene builded by the Ieſuites meanes with no ſmall ſummes of mony, which perchance would haue bene much better and with far more merit imployed in the reliefe of poore afflicted Catholikes as well of the Laitie, as the Clergie, who liued in exile, either in Colledges, which for want were many times in ieopardie to haue bene diſſolued, or elſewhere abroad and famiſhed, but the yce was broken, and the way made by ſecular Prieſts before any Ieſuites attempted it, as in all honeſt matters it fareth, & F. Parſons entered into their worke, and brought it indeed to this paſſe at which now it is by making the ſtudents do that of which ſince they repent themſelues and he hath no great cauſe to glorie in, as the ſubſcribing to the title of the Infant, and what elſe hee would, hauing gotten their names to three ſeuerall blankes. But theſe Prieſts, who were in this ſort the founders of the Seminaries in Spaine, although not the ſtorers for lyme and ſtone, were knowen very well to haue bene of thoſe who did complaine whē they liued, and the ſuruiuer is to this day one of them who do complaine. Neither is this to diſcouer more then needeth (although no doubt it be more then the Ieſuites and their fauourites would haue talked abroad the matter is ſo honeſt) for what Letters are written, and publiſhed by them in all places wherein themſelues and their aſſociates to winne Engliſh Catholickes inſert not their building of Seminaries, which the Catholickes might haue built with more eaſe & leſſe charge, if they conſider what they are put to by reaſon of thoſe plots, by which the Seminaries haue bene built, and the often attempts made againſt our Countrey vpon the fooliſh hopes, which ſome haue had vpon thoſe plots? ſome likewiſe take exceptions that theſe matters are touched ſomewhat in the cenſure vpon F. Parſons Letter, but they conſider not that F. Parſons draue vs to it by laying to our charge, that we were not ſo much hated of the Councell of England as the Ieſuites, and Archprieſt. His guiltie conſcience gaue him what he and his aſſociates had deſerued, although he thought it pollicie to conceale the cauſe thereof, and to leaue ſuch an obloquie (as it could not be taken for other) to euery man to ſcan theron, and to ſeeke ſome cauſe for that, which if they would they might ſee daily was voyd of all truth, the greateſt part without compariſon of thoſe who ſuffered hauing beene ſuch as were not of the faction of the Ieſuites, and ſhall we be blamed if we ſolue thoſe aenigmes which F. Parſons, and his fellowes needleſly propoſe againſt vs, and leaue to the worſt ſence which may be made of them?

The third point he ſaith is cleare by his holineſſe Breue. Who calleth this in queſtion? or how doth this prooue that no leſſe could be done thē to accept the authoritie, and to accept it when it came at the firſt, which was a whole year before the Breue came, and without not only a confirmation from his holineſſe, but alſo without ſufficient teſtimony to binde vs to accept thereof being to ſo great a preiudice to many, in which caſe a Cardinals teſtimony doth not binde any to beleeue that which is affirmed by him, much leſſe if it euidently containe falſhood, and ſuppoſe nothing elſe but falſhood for the foundation? But neither was it ſo cleare perchance as he thinketh, for a Breue may come from diuers places, and be called an Apoſtolicall Breue, and his holineſſe no w •• t acquainted therewith, and there was no ſmall cauſe to ſuſpect ſo much of this, not only for that it was a confirmation of a thing done vpon ſo falſe a ſuggeſtion (to wit a diuiſion betweene the Seminary Prieſts in England and the Catholickes) as the contrary might very eaſily haue bene knowne if any but vnhoneſt men had bene asked the queſtion, but alſo for that it is a confirmation of certaine Letters Patents which we neuer ſawe, although the Archprieſt hath ſhewed two ſeuerall Letters (if our memories faile vs not) of the inſtitution of his authoritie. For this Breue is a confirmation of certaine Letters Patents by which M. George Blackwell is deputed by the Cardinall Caietane an Archprieſt of Engliſh Catholikes, for the better gouernment and vnion of the Catholiques of the kingdomes of England and Scotland: and thoſe Letters which M. Blackwell did obey ſo readily did onely depute him Arch-prieſt of the Seminary Prieſts which are or ſhall be in England and Scotland, for remedy of a diſſentiō ſuggeſted to be between the Seminary Prieſts & Catholikes in England, wherein who will may perceiue a very great difference. But to returne to M. Blackwell his acknowledging himſelf how vnfit he was to haue ſo great a charge, or his readineſſe to depoſe it for the loue of God, no man is to enter into his inward motions, but doubtleſſe he did not long after taunt thoſe Prieſtes, who were about the procuring of the ſodallitie, of which wee ſpake before, and in a triumphing maner writ abroad that theyr endeuours were by this his authoritie brought to ruine. We could alſo prooue that thoſe Letters of the Cardinals were not warme in his hāds before hee thought vpon the vſe of his authoritie againſt ſome in particular: yea & other who were appointed to be of his priuie councell letted not to vtter at that time that there were ſuch courſes to be taken againſt ſome, that they doubted whether they would continue Catholique. M. Blackwell addeth here alſo that his authoritie was not publiſhed at any time with vntruths. In the Bookes printed, and ſent abroad, it is ſaid that he did not only publiſh his authoritie with vntruthes, but being taken in the maner confeſſed as much, and that M. Collington and M. Charnocke are readie to iuſtifie it before God, and the world vpon their oaths. And if they were both dead his owne Letters of the 2. of March following will proue it euidently enough, in which he hath theſe words.

Laſtly you quarrell againſt the Archpreſbyter, and gladly you would bruſe his credit vpon the roaring noyſe of an angrie man, clouded in his vnderſtanding, if not cloyed about his hart with two many fumes of ambition. Vpon his detractiue informatiō you publiſh that ye Archpreſbyter ſhould report that he had authoritie to excommunicate & to commaund to the Court of Rome, which now vpō better ſcanning his authoritie he goes from. Againe ſhewing his inſtructions ſaid they were made at Rome, and by the contents being conuinced they were made in England, could not denie it. Sir, the Archpreſbyter hath to doo about excommunications, and the ſending to the court of Rome: for by his Commiſſion he is charged to ſpecifie all ſuche rebellions and contumacies as are too familiar with you, if they cannot be ſuppreſſed with his authoritie at home, and to intimate the ſame to the Lord Protector his grace, and ſo by his meanes to procure excommunication or the ſending for to Rome for the redreſſe of ſuch licentiouſneſſe. And for the particular inſtructions he neuer ſaid they were all made at Rome, but that his inſtructions made at Rome gaue him authoritie to ſet downe rules about all particular matters, and caſes of ſuch qualitie. And ſo thoſe inſtructions which troubled the eares of your ſurly, and froward Father, may be ſaide in reſpect of their authoritie to haue proceeded from Rome. And thus the Archpreſbyter whoſe name you put downe in plaine Letters, that euery bodie might view how you haue graced him, Ipſe liberatus eſt a laqueo venantium & a verbo aſpero, he hath auoyded your ſnare, and the ſharpneſſe of your ſlaunderous ſpéech. The iniquitie of proud perſons hath bene multiplied ouer him, but he hoping in our Lord hath not bene weakened. Thus farre M. Blackwell.

How many orders hath M. Blackwell taken at Rome, when he hath taken ſeuen by authoritie from Rome? Some inſtructions are confeſſed to haue bene ſhewed which were not made at Rome any otherwiſe then M. Blackwell may be ſaid to haue bene made Prieſt at Rome, or elſe what were thoſe which troubled the eares of the ſurly, and froward Father, and were then abſolutely propoſed among others as inſtructions annexed to his Commiſſiō, but ſo palpably inſerted, as he confeſſed that they were of his owne, notwithſtanding he pretended to ſhew ſuch as the Commiſſion ſpake of to be annexed vnto it? at that time this ſhift was not deuiſed, that he had authoritie frō Rome to make rules, and therefore might propoſe what he would, and ſay it was made at Rome. But the plaudite in the end with a Pſalme might haue bene vſed vpon ſome greater victorie then this poore ſhift was, that inſtructions might be ſaid to haue bin made at Rome, becauſe they might be ſaid to haue bin made by authoritie which came from Rome, and that the Archprieſt could excommunicate, becauſe he could write to thoſe who could. But to ſay the truth what but vntruth is to be expected in the maintenance of that, which was begotten, bred, brought forth and nurſed with vntruth? M. Iames Standiſh a ſecular Prieſt in ſhewe, a Ieſuit by promiſe, went as a ſecular Prieſt in the name of the ſecular Prieſts who neuer ſent him, and dealt with his holines in this matter, fayning the conſent of the ſecular Prieſts thereto, which after his returne in the hearing of diuers Prieſtes, he ſaid was but an interpretatiue conſent, and that he preſumed that they would giue their cōſent. The matter being thus broached, as falſe a ſuggeſtion was made for the furtherance thereof, to wit, a dangerous and ſcandalous diuiſion in Englande among the Seminarie Prieſts and Catholickes (as it is euidently to be ſeene in the Cardinall Caietanes Letters to M. Blackwell). The maner how it was propoſed, is in ſome part ſhewed before, and the poore ſhifts which were afterward made to ſalue the vntruthes then vſed. What falſe aduiſoes were ſent into England by Fa. Parſons and M. Mar. Array about the handling thereof at Rome are diſcouered in the Engliſh booke; to which one more may bee added to ſhewe how in all places the ſureſt Anker of theſe proceedings hath beene falſhood. Fa. William Baldwin among other aduiſoes which hee ſent from Flaunders to Paris, 25. Februa. 1599. writ to his friend that the two Prieſts firſt requeſted that there might bee no ſubordination. A pretie conceit when all their Letters which they carried with them to his holineſſe demaunded a ſubordination. Secondly, that if needs there muſt bee a ſubordination, then ſome one which fauoured them might be created Biſhop; for which they named D. Gifford, Bagſhaw, Collington, or Biſhop. Is it likely that M. Biſhop would name himſelfe to bee made a Biſhop? Fa. Parſons laboured M. Charnock to name ſome of theſe or ſome other which might haue fitted ſuch a turne, but bicauſe he could not obtaine of him to name any of theſe before he ſhould ſee the names of M. D. Barret and M. Doctor Ely, he cauſed M. D. Barrets name to be blotted out againe which was written in hope, and would not ſuffer M. D. Ely his name to be written, nor any thing elſe concerning that interrogatorie: which manner of carriage conferred with F. Baldwins Letter diſcouereth a good wil that F. Baldwin ſhould haue written the truth in this point. Thirdly he affirmeth in the ſame Letters that the two Prieſtes ſhould ſay that experience would teach if they had not their requeſt Quod indignabitur libertas ſi prematur theſe were their wordes ſaieth F. Baldwin. Can any man thinke that they would ſo forget themſelues as to threaten the Pope to his teeth, if hee would not graunt them what they would haue? but if F. Bald. writ doubtleſſe as he was enformed by Fa. Parſons, the greater is the confirmation of that which here we intend to ſhewe, that is how it hath from time to time bene lulled a ſleepe with falſhood, and therefore that the leſſe this wonder is now that it is auouched by M. Blackwell neuer to haue bene propoſed with vntruthes.

The 4. point is touching the matter of ſchiſme which he ſaith was according to his opinion, which euen now he doth retaine. The head of the Ieſuites ſendeth abroad his Letters, by which hee ſignifieth that he would not be aſhamed to humble himſelfe to worke a peace, can it be thought that he was not priuie to theſe Letters of the Archprieſt, whoſe counſell the Arch-prieſt in his inſtructions is willed to vſe in matters of weight? or can M. Blackwell forget that ſuch an aſſertion of F. Robert Iones the Ieſuite (being maintained by him) made a breach of the generall attonement which was made at the comming of the Breue? and muſt he needs euen while he exhorteth to peace declare now that ſuch is his opinion, as void of all learning as it hath bene & is farre from all charitie, and publiſh his want of both in the ſame moment? Is ſchiſme ſo ſmall a ſinne, as it is not worthie to make a matter of contention whether there were ſchiſme or no? or were ſchiſme ſo ſmall a matter as here it is made, is it charitie for M. Blackwell to publiſh his opinion in this ſort, knowing that the ſpeech of ſuch an opinion hath diuided men and their wiues, father and children, brothers and ſiſters, and the deareſt friendes, and hath bene the cauſe of the diuiſion among Prieſtes, and infinite ſinnes (if detraction haue not loſt the nature of a ſinne) in all ſorts of people, to the perpetuall infamy as much as lyeth in them of Catholike Prieſtes, who perchance haue deſerued much better of Gods Church then they who haue maintained ſo long the opiniō of ſchiſme againſt them? Can M. Blackwell expect any other thing of the Prieſts againſt whom hee ſtill declareth his opinion concerning this ſuppoſed ſchiſme, then to write, ſpeake, and exact ſatisfaction, hauing receiued ſo many iniuries by the like, and daily expect more? But now hee ſalueth all in ſaying, It was but an Arbitrarie matter diſcuſſed among the learned, which bringeth no loſſe of credit to ether part. I gaue them all expreſſe libertie to thinke what they would herein, for it is but a matter of opinion, and therefore not worthy to make a matter of contention which part ſoeuer was true. Is it poſſible that M. Blackwell can ſay that he gaue all expreſſe libertie to thinke what they would as in an indifferent matter, Aprill. 1599. who in ſome of his Letters calleth it a ſoare, for the which F. Liſters Treatiſe of ſchiſme was ſuch a remedie,14. March. 1600. as it muſt not be called in, vntill this ſore were healed; In other Letters, that our condemned deſerts drew theſe names vpon vs, Factious, Schiſmatikes, excommunicated perſons, Irregular, as Ethnikes and Publicanes, and nothing better then Southſayers and Idollaters. Why did he publiſh that he had receiued a reſolution from the mother Cittie, that the refuſers of the appointed authoritie were ſchiſmatikes, and that hee would not giue abſolution to any who ſhould make no conſcience thereof, and gaue direction that they ſhould make account thereof, and before they receiued the benefit of abſolution make ſatisfaction, the manner whereof hee left to the diſcretion of a ghoſtly Fa. not touched with the note of ſchiſme? Is this to giue expreſſe libertie to all to thinke what they would herein?21. Feb. 1600. Did he not alſo ſufficiently expreſſe his minde in other his Letters, where he declared his determination that hereafter whoſoeuer had faculties of him ſhould firſt be content to recall his peeuiſh opinion? did he not practiſe ſuch authoritie vpon M. Benſon when he would not giue him any faculties vnleſſe hee would renounce the ſchiſmaticall conuenticle? he declared alſo that M. Tho. Moore had written in preiudice of the Faith, whē he writ in our behalfe concerning this matter of Schiſme, wherevpon neither his ordinary ghoſtly father would adminiſter the Sacraments vnto him, nor his ghoſtly children receiue any of him, or be preſent when hee celebrated.29. May. 1600. Are not all Eccleſiaſticall perſons commaunded vnder paine of ſuſpenſion, and loſſe of faculties preſently to be incurred, and the Laitie vnder paine of being in the ſame ſort interdicted, that neither directly nor indirectly by word or writing they maintaine the cenſure of Paris, although it were giuen vpon true informatiō, becauſe it cleared vs from ſchiſme and ſinne? and can it now be iuſtified, that hee gaue expreſſe libertie to all to thinke what they would, as of a matter which was not worthie to make a matter of contention which part ſoeuer was true?

How often heretofore hath he commended that diſcourſe of F. Liſter the Ieſuite, and euen now calleth it a learned diſcourſe & cenſure, as if the dearth of learned diſcourſes continued ſtill? and for what is it ſo highly commended? for that it prooueth a matter which were it true were it otherwiſe, was not worthy to make any contention, and proueth it very ſimply God wot, in that only hee heapeth infamous names out of his charitie vpon thoſe againſt whom it is intended. Yet leaaſt that the diſcourſe ſhould be called learned without cauſe a principall reaſon is here touched, that the authoritie was confirmed with three Letters of a Cardinall, and not only a Cardinall but a Protector, and not only a Protector of a Colledge, but a Protector of England. Let vs graunt that we ſaw three Letters of ſuch a Cardinall, although in verie deed there were but two ſhewed vnto vs (vnleſſe the altering of the firſt be accounted for one) & the one of thoſe two was to this ende that the Arch-prieſt ſhould informe of the manners & behauiours of the troubleſome (ſo it pleaſed his grace to terme thoſe who did not take his Letters for an Oracle, and yeeld themſelues before they had ſent to his holineſſe to vnderſtand his pleaſure in a matter thruſt vpon them vpon moſt wicked & falſe ſuggeſtions, and with more authoritie in ſome ſort then euer any creature had, as vnder a colour of the greater glory of God, to dcbarre or throw a Prieſt out of his place, where in time of perſecution hee had ſome morall ſecuritie for his ſafetie, as well in reſpect of a conuenient ſhelter, as for neceſſary maintenance, hauing no liuings of the Church to ſupply his wants) Let vs I ſay graunt that we ſaw three, let vs ſay 30, and ſtand to the iudgment of learned men,Gloſſ. in cap. ſicut de ſent. excom. Felinus in ca. ad eminentiam ibidem. the cauſe is ours, that is to ſay, we were not bound to giue credit to ſo exorbitant a matter, and ſo preiudiciall to many well deſeruing of Gods Church, vpon the teſtimony of a Cardinall, who alſo ſaying no otherwiſe thē that he had a commaundement from his holineſſe to imploy himſelfe to make a peace betweene the Seminary Prieſts and the Catholickes (moſt iniuriouſly belyed at Rome to haue bene at variance)Pan. in cap. quod ſuper fide inſtr. & in cap. cum a nobis de teſtibus & atteſt. Zecchius de ſtatu Ill. D. Car. num. 9. Sil. verb. degatus § 15. & verb. Teſtis § 5. and that it was the Popes will that there ſhould be a ſubornation for certaine reaſons giuē him by the Prieſts of England (which were neuer as yet knowne what they were) made all the reſt, either of himſelfe, ignorant of Engliſh matters, or by the ſuggeſtion of the Ieſuites, betweene whom and the Prieſts were all the cōtrouerſies which were in England. Neither doth it make any thing to the purpoſe, to alledge here that the Cardinall was Protector of England, for this act of his was a ſubdelegaon, as appeareth by the words of his Letter,Angel. verb. Teſtis § 14. Armill. ibid. § 7. Te deligimus cui vices noſtras pro tempore delegemus. We make choyce of you whom for the time we ſubdeligate in that charge which was committed to vs, which was to make a peace betweene the Seminary Prieſts and the Catholickes who were ſaid to be fallen out, and not an act of Protectorſhip: ſo that if it had bene knowne heere in England that he was Protector of England, yet it is as impertinently vrged in this place as the place out of Nauarre for the credite of a Protectors Letters, wherein no mention is made either of any Protector or any Letters, he ſpeaketh there of a farre different Officer which is called Conſeruator, whoſe office is otherwiſe ſet downe, Cap. fin. de officio & pot. Iudi. deleg. in ſexto, then M. Blackwell vſeth his, and if Iacob Strozz. make no more to this purpoſe then Nauarre, theſe cotations might haue bene kept for ſome other places: very probable it is that this Iacob Strozz. doth handle ſomewhat of a Conſeruator as other Canoniſts do, and perchance nothing more of Protectors thē they do. The office of a Protector ſtretcheth not it ſelf farther then the Court of Rome, as may be gathered out of thoſe words of the Breue, Nationis Anglicanae apud nos & Apostolicam ſedem Protector, Protector of the Engliſhe Nation heere with vs, Clement. ſi ſummus pontifer. de ſent excom. ſuſp. &c. and with the Sea Apoſtolicke, and this phraſe in the Breue doth not make him Protector of the Engliſh Nation, if before hee were not. But put the caſe in the beſt manner, and with the moſt aduantage. We did no otherwiſe then we might haue done if the Letters had come from his holineſſe,Cap. ſi quando. de reſcrip. gloſi ibid. cap. Cū teneamur de praebend. gloſ. ibidem. for we made no demur but with minde to giue a reaſonable cauſe thereof, which is lawfull for any man to do.

The fift point concerneth the vſage of the two Agents at Rome, which if it hath bene ſhewed to be not as of Agents but as of patients, as being caſt into priſon before they were ſuffered to doo the parts of Agenrs, examined, afterward accuſed, not heard whē they deſired the copie of their accuſation to make anſwere therevnto, at which time only they were together to ſhewe their readineſſe to doo their duties, and after 14. weekes cloſe impriſonment bidden to conſult of their matters for which they came to Rome, (three dayes after that the Breue was gotten in cōfirmation of the authoritie) and notwithſtanding they put off their Caps to this Breue, and ſent it into England that all might doo the like, they were baniſhed out of their Countrey, and confined without any allowance for their neceſſary maintenance, being men who had ſpent all their life for and in the ſeruice of Gods Church. If this I ſay haue bene ſhewed without any blame laid upon the Pope Cardinalls or Fiſcall of reformation, M. Blackwell ſhould not now to ſaue the credit of his particular Patrons, with ſcandal inſinuate that the Pope deſerued blame, for it hath alwaies bene vndoubted that the Pope was misinformed, and therevpon did what he did, the Cardinall Caietane led altogether by the Ieſuites, the other not to contradict Caietane, the Fiſcall at Caietans deuotion, and no part of any diſcourſe made heereof, can warrant M. Blackwell to ſay that either Pope, Cardinardinals or Fiſcall were priuy to all, for the Pope neuer heard them; the Cardinalls but in anſwere for themſelues when they were brought before them to be accuſed by a couple of Proctors appointed for the Arch-prieſt, who after they ſawe the two Prieſts reſolute vpon the point to anſwere their Libell or Bill of accuſatiōs, obtained of the Cardinals that it might not be deliuered vnto them, ſo that heereby it is euident alſo that the Cardinals were not priuie to all, the Fiſcall might heare or ſee their examinations or part thereof, which are not to be taken as relations of all which they could ſay, the Interrogatories beeing made at the diſcretiō of F. Parſons, and their anſwers cut off ſometime as being too lōg, ſometime as more fit for other Interrogatories pretended to be made afterward. Who then with any reaſon can ſay that theſe were priuie to all? and if furthermore the Cardinalls were nothing but Interpreters of the Popes will, may not the truth be knowne without the ſcandall of all Chriſtendom, it being a thing very poſſible that the Pope may be misinformed, & do that which afterward he may wiſh vndone?

The ſixt point is concerning his decrees, which as he ſaith were neceſſarie, for they containe nothing but prohibition of things, otherwiſe vnlawfull, and partly alſo forbidden by Cardinall Caietane. We are not heere to examine what the Cardinall did partly forbid, being dead and buried long before ſome of thē were made or could be thought upon, and was not liuing when any one of them was made. M. Blackwell proueth the neceſſitie of them by the contents as is ſhewed, but if it be proued that they were vnlawful prohibitiōs of things that were and are lawfull (although he had power to make ſuch decrees) the grounde of the neceſſitie of theſe which he hath made wil proue but a myer. The firſt Edict (made 17. Ianu. 1599. as we account) forbiddeth euery man vnder greeuous penalties ipſo facto to bee incurred to divuldge any Bookes ſet out within two yeares before, or after to be ſet out, by which his lawfull eſtate ſhould be diſturbed, or the fame of any Eccleſiaſticall perſon of the Engliſh Nation by name be harmed. The cauſe of this decree was (as is therein ſpecified) that nothing ſhould be attempted, intermedled, or publiſhed among vs, that may be offenſiue to our ſtate, or to the encreaſe of our troubles, or elſe to the detraction of our Bretheren. What if any man were ſo publikely iniured as he could not repaire his credite but by publiſhing? doth not the lawe of nature, and Nations, allow him that defence? how then did this decree containe a thing otherwiſe vnlawfull? but to come a litle nearer, was there not a Booke publiſhed and ſent into all parts of England, yea and beyond the ſeas by the Ieſuites, or their fauourites, Intituled in generall termes, Againſt the factious in the Church, but applied particularly to vs by the Archprieſt (as heere he confeſſeth in his anſwere to the fourth point) and can it be ſaid to be vnlawfull (if we had bene ſo idle) to publiſh in our owne defence againſt that ſenceleſſe, and ſinfull Libell? Senceleſſe in running vpon diſobedience to the Sea Apoſtolike, from which no Letter came to commaund any thing, nor to teſtifie that any other had authoritie giuen to commaund. Sinfull in that vpon ſo weake a ground no wickedneſſe was left vnlaid to our charge, nor any name of infamie omitted, and as now M. Blackwell better aduiſed confeſſeth in his anſwere to the fourth point in a matter of opinion, and therefore not worthie to make a matter of contention which part ſoeuer was true. This Edict thē forbad not any thing otherwiſe vnlawfull, but only (as it ſhould ſeeme) gaue libertie to any our aduerſaries to ſpread abroad any thing to the encreaſe of troubles, and detraction of the bretheren, and debarred vs only to publiſh againſt the detractious Libelling of others, howe iuſt ſoeuer our cauſe might bee.

The ſecond Edict or Decree made the 29. of May, 1600. forbiddeth vnder penalties ipſo facto to be incurred, that no man directly or indirectly maintaine or defend in word or in writing the cenſure of the Vniuerſitie of Paris, (which had cleared vs from ſchiſme and ſinne, in our forbearing for a time to accept him in that authoritie vpon cauſes there ſet downe) whether it were truly giuen or forged, whether vpon true information or otherwiſe. Can it be iudged by any of reaſon to be a thing vnlawful in it ſelfe to defend a cenſure of the moſt famous Vniuerſitie in the world, being giuen vpō true information as heare he ſuppoſeth it might be? the preſumption is ſo great in this prohibition, and the decree ſo euidently conuinced to bee of a thing not vnlawfull, as wee need not heere to ſtay any longer vpon it.

The third Decree, dated the 18. of Octob. 1600. conteineth many prohibitions, but that which M. Blackwell ſeemeth here moſt to vrge, is the prohibition that no man ſhould ask an other or giue his owne name to any thing, with which he or two of his aſſiſtants were not firſt made acquainted. And I incline to thinke that hee meaneth this rather then the reſt, for that conformably to his aſſertion in this place, he ſaid (a litle after this Edict was made) that the Cardinall Caietane did meane heereby that they who would giue their names to any thing, ſhould not only acquaint the Archprieſt therewith, but alſo get his conſent therevnto: ſo that if the Prieſts would by common ſuffrage haue any thing amended in him, or any of thoſe, whom he thinketh to be his friends, or ſhould attempt any thing neceſſary to be done in ſuch place, where a bedroll of names ouerpeaſe (as they haue found by experience) be the cauſe neuer ſo iuſt, they cannot giue their names vnto it without his conſent. Now do I appeale to any honeſt man, whether it be a thing in it ſelfe vnlawfull for any to giue their names, or demaund others to any thing, which in reaſon they may thinke neceſſary for the common good of Gods Church, or reliefe of their owne miſeries? and if in ſuch a caſe it be not a thing vnlawfull, howe is this true, which Maiſter Blackwell heere affirmeth, that his decrees containe nothing but prohibition of things otherwiſe vnlawful? Now that we haue ſhewed that the things prohibited were not vnlawfull, but rather his prohibitions, and conſequently his firſt reaſon of the neceſſitie of his Decrees of no force, let vs ſee how the euent prooueth the neceſſitie of them. Some who carry graie haires, (and if they would keepe ſilence might goe for verie graue men, and thought fit to be Councellours) diſcouer their want too much of that wiſedome, and learning which they might haue, and vpon theſe decrees blunder it out (ſo as Will Sommers might finde them) that who ſo readeth the Bookes ſet out by the Prieſts (by warrant of all iuſt lawes) in the defence of their good name, and fame moſt iniuriouſly taken from them by the ſeditious Libell of F. Liſter, and the ſinfull vſe of others their tongues, is excommunicated. Had any excommunication bene threatned (although the Archprieſt could not doo it) or had any prohibition bene made in the decrees that no man ſhould read any of our bookes, ſuch graue mē might haue dreamed of ſuch matters as they talke on, but there being no mentiō either of the one, or the other in any edicts, how cōmeth Grauity (where litle time, hath bin or is ſpēt in other ſtudies) to make ſuch a cō iunctiō of Nownes & Verbes, It is excommunication to read any of theſe bookes? Some are alſo ſaid to be excommunicated for bringing a Prieſt a Breuiary to ſay his houres. Some carry ſcrowles about of ſuch Prieſtes names as muſt not be dealt withall. Some will not heare their confeſſions. Some teach that it is excommunicatiō to be preſent at their maſſe. And for what? forſooth for maintaining an opinion which was not worthie to make a matter of cōtentiō which part ſoeuer is true: and ſeeking by lawfull appeale to the Sea Apoſtolike to haue the controuerſie fully decided?

The Archprieſt inflicte • paines ipſo facto to preuent ſcandals and ſeditions, either thoſe are no ſcandals and ſeditions, which are taken for ſuch, or they are very meanly preuented. But by what authoritie are penalties inflicted ipſo facto by him who throughout his cōmiſſiō hath his order ſet downe vnto him for his proceedings, that is, to admoniſh, reprehend, and chaſtiſe alſo when néed ſhall be by abridging faculties, or if neceſſitie require by recalling the faculties. And afterward, If any ſhewe himſelfe diſobedient, vnquiet, or contumacious, h • may after due admonitions and reprehenſions made with brotherly charitie puniſh him with Eccleſiaſticall penalties; that is to ſay by taking away his faculties, or by ſuſpenſion, vntill he amend. How is this order kept in the Archprieſts proceedings, when without any reprehenſion, or brotherly admonition after a fault, he will ſcant hold his hand vntill the fault be committed, but ipſo facto the offendour is puniſhed and how by any degrees for example, by hauing his faculties abridged, and after if neceſſitie require it, by leeſing them, or after this by being ſuſpended? no ſuch matter. But all at once ipſo facto, yea and more then this, hee is interdicted, for which there is no warrant in all the Commiſſion; wherefore and alſo for that the Archprieſt did not obſerue the order preſcribed him (being but a Subdelegat vnder the Card. Caietane as appeareth in his Letters) all which hee hath done in this kinde is of it ſelfe voyd,Cap. cum dilecta de reſcriptis gloſſa ibidem. Cap. venerabili de officio & pot. iud. del. Hoſtienſis de offic. Iudicis deleg. num. 7. & 10. Innoc. in cap. praedicta. S. Antonin. p. 3. tit. 9. c. 3. § 1. & 10. Gemin. cap. Quia pontificali de off. & pot. Iud. del. in. 6. Ang. Arm. Sil. verb. Delegatus. as it is manifeſt by the rules of holie Church, and thoſe who comment thereon, and therfore no good euent (if there had bene any) could proue the lawfulnes of his decrees. But he could not wel haue the vſe of forum contentioſum, nor cyte or produce witneſſes, nor conueniently méete with euery one poſt factum. Were they who put him in authoritie ignorant that heere could not be any formall Court kept? or can M. Blackwell ſay, that he cannot meet with anie one poſt factum, either himſelfe, or by his Aſſiſtants, who in his Letters to his Aſſiſtants, giueth directions to examine ſuch, as whoſe names are to the appeale, vpon ſuch and ſuch points? If he wil denie that himſelfe hath written to particular Gentlemen to giue entertainment to ſuch a man in particular to examine the Prieſt there reſident concerning his ſubſcribing to the appeale, and concerning his puniſhment therfore, his owne Letters ſhall be brought out againſt him? ſo that if it pleaſe him, it is euident inough that he can proceed poſt factum, and therefore this is but a poore ſhift for the making of his decrees in ſuch ſort, as they are with penalties, ipſo facto to be incurred. As for the good which he hath done by theſe his cenſures, it hath bene no other thē to make ſome diſſemble for a while, becauſe they would not be ſaid to be ſuſpended, or to haue loſt their faculties. And perplexe men whether they may in this time of perſecution goe for the Sacraments. And for the execution of his decrees, he may ſay that he proceedeth vpon other cauſe then vpon the appeale, but then he muſt promiſe comfort to ſuch as heere hee taketh notice haue need thereof, vpon ſome other cauſe, then the ſubſcribing, or hauing their names put to the appeale, for this is an euident argument (whatſoeuer is pretended) that ſome haue had need of comfort for that act doing, but the words of his Letter dated 16. Aprill, 1601. to a Laie Gentleman, leaue no place for any doubt in this cauſe. This I write (ſaith he) to make you priuie of the great ſpirituall daunger, wherein you and all that receiue any Sacraments of M. Oſ. N. may be, if it be ſo that he hath ſubſcribed vnto a ſeditious Pamphlet, coloured with the name of an Appeale.

The oath of obedience exacted by the Archprieſt is beyond his Commiſſion. And the leſſe to be liſtned vnto, for that it is exacted as a ſatisfaction due to him by ſuch, as haue appealed to Rome, vpon no other cauſes, then were prooued out of his owne Letters, and others of his Councell, and are of that qualitie, that neither he nor all his complices in thoſe actions will euer be able to make condigne ſatisfaction to the Prieſts.

And here I could wiſh that mē were not ſo caried away with the ſound of authoritie, hauing had ſufficient knowledge of the Prieſts their carriage toward all lawfull authoritie by their behauiour at the comming of the Breue, and let not the name of a ſeditious booke (the leaſt point therein contained not being to be controld, but by ſecret whiſperings where it ſhall not come to the examination) put men from ſeeing how they are deluded by ſuch as meane them no good, but labour now to lull them a ſleep till they haue gotten what they would, & to this end bebarre them of all ſuch helpes, as whereby they might be enformed of the truth. The points neither confute themſelues, nor will be confuted by any. Neither are the bookes written in paſſion, but to moue all ſincere Catholikes to haue compaſſion both of themſelues, and of vs, when they ſhall ſee by theſe diſcourſes vnder whoſe hands their ſoules are, and how ſlight reckoning is made of the infamie of ſo many Prieſts for a matter not worthie to make a matter of cōtention which part ſoeuer is true.

Concerning the names to the appeale. Howſoeuer ſome doo comfort themſelues, they will hardly finde any whoſe name was there without his cōſent, for although perchance there were ſome cauſes particular to ſome, which were not knowne to the reſt, yet in the chief they all found thēſelues agreeued, and deſired remedie by way of appeale, to which they ſet to their hands, or ſent their conſent by others to haue their names ſet too, for which the Authours will be brought foorth if need require, to iuſtifie their conſents, whoſe names they cauſed to be ſubſcribed: and ſince this matter came in queſtion we haue to ſhewe the conſents of ſome vnder their owne handes, of whom the doubt was made.

But to grow to amend, all are to vnderſtand, that our deſire is to haue peace, and for peace ſake haue we publiſhed theſe bookes, knowing that there is no way ſo meet to worke an vnfained peace, as to haue the truth knowne of theſe proceedings, that thereby the ſoare may be ſearched to the quick, & not healed as it was before, and brake out againe preſently after, by the indiſcretion of F. Iones a Ieſuite, who, when all were quiet, affirmed that they incurred the cenſures of holie Church, who ſhould ſay Dogmatizando that we were not Schiſmatickes. If we were Schiſmatickes we refuſe not to ſtand to the iudgement of the Church. If we were not, we deſire it may ſo be declared, as there be no more ſtrife raiſed thereon here in England, or elſewhere. F. Garnet the head of the Ieſuites, made lately a motion for peace, which if it had come from the Archprieſt, or if hee had ioyned with F. Garnet therein, it might haue taken ſome effect, becauſe theſe controuerſies were as well with the Archprieſt, as the Ieſuits. But the Archprieſt not ioyning in this treatie which was begunne by the other, the Prieſts could not thinke that it was ſincerely meant, in which they are now confirmed, becauſe ſo ſoone as Fa. Garnet vnderſtood by M. R. B. the 27. of Iuly, that the cōditions made at the firſt attonement were not as yet performed by the Archprieſt,The recalling of M. D. Biſhop, & M. Charnock home from baniſhment and confinement. he noted for a partie in this controuerſie, and that ſomewhat was expected, to the ſame effect from the Archprieſt (whom this matter moſt concerned) he miſtooke it for a refuſall to haue a parley of peace, and ſo ſignified it to a friend of his, vpon the laſt of Iuly; beſide that in theſe Letters laſt written by the Archprieſt to his aſſiſtants in anſwere of our bookes (doubleſſe not without the priuitie of Fa. Garnet, whoſe counſell he is to haue in matters of moment) he declareth his opinion which ſtill he retaineth that we were ſchiſmatikes, in the which renewing of ſo grieuous an infamie if we ſtir, it is not without cauſe, for we lie ſtill open thereby to thoſe iniuries, and reproachfull ſpeeches which were vſed by Fa. Liſter in his libel, & are now ſo in the faſhion abroad, that the fayreſt Catholike houſen haue now the filthieſt aire, and all baſe ſcoldes who haue the moſt impudent clackes, muſt giue place to their betters.

But as the Apoſtle ſaith, Diligentibus deum omnia cooperantur in bonum: All things turne to their good, who loue God, which I hope we do, in ſeeking his glorie as F. Garnet knoweth we do, and witneſſeth as much in his Letters dated vpon Midſommer day laſt paſt, and his glorie is our content, and in him we hope to haue peace, which alſo we wiſh to thoſe who in their owne conſciences haue giuen vs the greateſt cauſe of offence, and pray for them, as we deſire the praier of all good Catholickes for vs.