THE JUDGEMENT OF A CATHOLIC ENGLISHMAN, LIVING IN BANISHMENT FOR HIS RELIGION: Written to his private friend in England. Concerning A late BOOK set forth, and entitled; Triplici nodo, triplex cuneus, Or, An Apology for the Oath of Allegiance. Against two BREVES of Pope PAULUS V. to the Catholics of England; & a Letter of Cardinal BELLARMINE to M. GEORGE BLACKWELL Archpriest. Wherein, the said Oath is showed to be unlawful unto a Catholic Conscience; for so much, as it containeth sundry clauses repugnant to his Religion.  S. Hieron. Comment. in Cap. 4. Hierem. Let an Oath have these companions, Truth, judgement, and justice; for if these be wanting, it shall not be an Oath, but Perjury. 
¶ Permissu Superiorum. ANNO 1608.   

THE GENERAL Contents of this ensuing Letter, divided into three Paragraphes.  

1. THE first paragraph handleth matters concerning the substance of the Oath, which in the Apology are spoken by way, as it were, of Preface, before the setting down of the Pope's Breves.  
2. THE second, considereth the said two Breves, & impugnation thereof by the Apologer; and how sufficiently, or insufficiently, the same is performed by him.  
3. THE third, discusseth the Answer made to Cardinal Bellarmynes Letter; & divers points of moment therein contained, but weakly impugned by the Apologer, as the Author of this Letter judgeth.    

To the Reader.  
THIS Letter coming to my hands (gentle Reader) some days past, from my learned friend beyond the seas, and having imparted the same privately unto sundry of mine acquaintance, who desired to read somewhat, concerning the Argument in hand; they were very earnest with me to yield to the printing thereof, for eschewing so great labour, time, and expenses, as would be necessary for the copying it out, to so many, as desired the view thereof: which I entreat thee to take in good part, and use it to thy benefit. And so to CHRIST JESUS I commit thee, with wish of all felicity, both in this life, and the next.   

PARTICULER chief points handled in this Letter.  

In the first Paragraph.  
1. WHo is thought to be the true Author of this Triplex cuneus, or Apology: and upon what reasons, & arguments. Num. 2. 3. 4. etc.  
2. The contents of the Oath; and how the lawfulness of taking it, was consulted with learned men, both at home, and abroad. num. 14. 15. etc.  
3. Whether this Oath do contain matters of only mere Civil, and Temporal Obedience, and not any of Religion, as is p●●●●●ded. num. 20. 21. etc.  
4. What full and perfect Obedience, and dutiful Allegiance, Catholic Subjects do acknowledge themselves to owe, and offer unto his Matie in all Temporal affairs, as much as ever any English Subjects from the beginning, until K. Henry the eight his time; and as any foreign Subject doth to any Catholic Emperor, King, or Prince at this day. num. 25. 26. etc.  
5. How contradictory it is in itself. That Catholics must swear to take the Oath, freely & without coaction, notwithstanding the penalty of Praemunire, if they refuse it. num. 29. etc.  
6. Concerning a petition to his Matie for exposition of the said Oath, for avoiding of needles vexations. num. 32. 33. etc.  
7. That nothing is gained, but much lost to his Matie, by overmuch urging the said Oath. num. 34. 35. etc.   

In the Second Paragraph.  
THe sum of the two Breves of Paulus V. and whether1. he had reason to complain of Catholics sufferance, or no? num. 1. 2. 3. etc.  
Whether Q. Elizabeth did persecute Catholicks,2. and whether she were so happy in her life, and government, as some do make her. num. 5. 6. 7. etc.  
That it is not height of pride in Catholics, to desire liberty of3. Conscience, as the Apologer saith. num. 25. 26. 27. etc.  
That clemency is no cause of desperate attempts, as this Apologer4. insinuateth, but rather the contrary, to wit, cruelty. num. 32. 33. etc.  
In what points, and why this Oath is held to be unlawful for5. Catholic men to take: with the examination of Scriptures, Fathers, and Counsels about the same. num. 41. 42. etc.  
How the Apologer wittingly mistaking the State of the Question,6. goeth forward, impugning only his own devices. num. 61. 62.   

In the third Paragraph.  
Cardinal Bellarmyne is wrongfully charged to mistake1. the State of the Controversy, and to impugn the Oath of Supremacy, instead of the Oath of Allegiance. num. 4. 5. etc.  
Why the Apologer changeth the old Title of Supreme Head2. of the Church, established by Statute under K. Henry the 8. and K. Edward the 6. unto Supreme Governor. num. 6. 7. etc.  
3. The ancient Counsels of Toledo, how untruly they are alleged, for prescribing this form of Oath now exacted. num. 11. 12. 13. etc.  
4. Clauses of belief, or not belief proved to be in this Oath, contrary to the Apologers assertion. num. 26. 27. etc.  
5. An eleven Contradictions objected out of Cardinal Bellarmynes works, but no one can be verified. num. 35. 36. 37. etc.  
6. The authorities of sundry Fathers examined, whether they make to the purpose, for which Bellarmyne doth allege them in his Epistle. num. 58. 59  
7. Great variety of calum●●ious dealing against the Cardinal, for disgracing him. num. 74. 75. etc.  
8. How Kings and Princes are truly servants of their Subjects; and how their Authority is mediately, and not immediately from God. num. 78. 79. 83. etc.    
THE JUDGEMENT OF A CATHOLIC MAN, TO HIS FRIEND in England, Concerning the Apology, for the new Oath of Allegiance.  

Paragr. I.  
I CANNOT but yield you hearty thanks (my loving friend) for the new Book you sent me over by Gun●ar, at his last passage: For albeit, I have determined with myself in this my banishment, to spend my time in other studies, more profitable, then in contention about controversies: yet must I needs accept kindly of your good will, in making me partaker of your news there. And more glad should I have been, if you had advertised me, what your, and other men's opinion, was of the Book in your parts, then that you request me to write our men's judgement from hence. And yet, for so much, as you requeist so earnestly at my hands, and that the party is to return presently, I shall say somewhat with the greatest brevity that I can: Albeit I do not doubt, but that the parties, that are principally interessed therein, will answer the same much more largely.  
II. First then for the Author, for so much as he setteth not down his Name, 
About the Author of the Apology.  it seemeth not so easy to guess; yet the more general opinion in these parts is, that as, that odious Discovery of Roman Doctrine, and practices, which of late you have seen answered, was cast forth against the Catholics, under the cyrred name of T. M. with direction (as he said) from Superiors, 
Tho. Morton.  the Author being in deed but an inferior Minister; so divers think it to be probable, that this other Book also, cometh from some other T. M. of like condition, 
Tho. Montag●e.  though in respect of his office, somewhat nearer to his majesty, to whom, perhaps, he might show the same (●s the other dedicated his) and thereupon might presume to set it forth Authoritate Regiâ, as in the first front of the Book is set down, somewhat different from other books, and cause it to be printed by Barker his Maties Printer, and adorned in the second page with the King's Arms, and other like devices, wherein our English Ministers, do grow now, to be very bold, & do hope to have, in time, the hand, which Scot●ish Ministers once had. But I most certainly do persuade myself, that his Matie never read advisedly all, that in this Book is contained: For that I take him to be of such judgement and honour, as he would never have let pass sundry things, that here are published, contrary to them both.  
III. As for example, his highness great judgement would presently have discovered, that the State of the Question, 
What his majesties great judgement would have discovered, if he had read the Apology.  is twice or thrice changed in this Apology, and that thing proved by allegations of Scriptures, Fathers and Counsels, which the adverse part denieth not, as after in due place I shall show. And again he would never have let pass, so manifest an oversight, as is the charging of Card. all Bellarmine with eleven several places of contradiction to himself in his works, whereas, in the true nature of a contradiction or contrariety, no one of them can be proved, or maintained, as every man that understandeth the Latyn tongue, and will but look upon Bellarmine himself will presently find.  
IV. Nay some of them are so palpable, as every man of common sense, even without Latyn, or learning, will espy the same: as namely, the very first, where it is said, That Card. all Bellarmine writeth in his fifth Book of justification: 
Cap. 7.  That, for the uncertainty of our own proper righteousness, and for avoiding of vain glory, it is most sure and safe to repose our whole confidence in the alone mercy and goodness of God. Which proposition (saith the Apology) is directly contrary to the whole discourse and currant of all his five books De justificatione. But every m●n out of common reason, will 〈◊〉, that the opposition between one place, and five books, is very gen●●●▪ and uncertain to the Reader. He should have cited some one or two, or more places, out of those five books, which in true sense, and words had been contrary to the former place, to the end that judgement might have been made thereof: and this in credit he ought to have done, to convince so great a man of contradiction to himself.  
V. Again, it is alleged for a manifest contradiction in Bellarmine, for that in one place he saith: That, the end of the world can not be known: and in an other, That within 25. days after antichrist's death, the world shall have an end. But what man is so simple, or sil●y, that will not presently demand, how we shall know the certainty, when Antichrist is to come? For thereupon dependeth the whole controversy.  
VI In like manner whereas his Matie is known to be a Prince of most honourable respects in treaty, and usage of others, especially men of honour and dignity, it is to be thought, that he would never have consented, if he had but seen the Book, with any attention, that those phrases of contempt, not only against the Pope (at least as a temporal Prince) but neither against the Cardinal, calling him by the name of M. Bellarmine, 
What his Majesty in honour would have misliked.  should have passed; For so much, as both the Emperor, and greatest Kings of Christendom, do name that dignity with honour. And it seemeth no less dissonant, to call a Cardinal, Master, then if a man should call the chiefest dignities of our Crown by that name, as M. chancellor, M. Treasurer, M. Duke, M. Earl, M. Archbishop, M. Bancroft, which I assure myself, his Matie would in law of honour condemn, if any external Subject or Prince, should use to men of that State in our Country, though he were of different Religion. Wherefore I rest most assured, that this proceeded, either out of the Ministers lack of modesty, or charity: and that if his Matie had had the perusal of the Book, before it came forth, he would presently have given a dash of his pen over it, with effectual order to remedy such oversightes of incivility.  
VII. Furthermore that general assertive note given against Card. all Bellarmine, that, Whensoever he is pressed with any difficult argument of his Adversary, he careth not to contradict himself, so he may decline thereby the present storm, I can hardly believe that his Matie would have passed over with approbation. For so much, as it is so general, as I said, and would require an induction of many particular examples, to infer the same; whereof no one is here alleged, that can be stood unto, and proved to be a true contradiction in deed. That other injurious and stinging conclusion also, that, There is no greater difference between God and Belial, light and darkness, heaven and hell, then there is between the doctrine of the Scriptures, and Card. all Bellarmine's works, concerrning the dignity of temporal Princes, I can not imagine that the equity, and gravity of his Matie would ever allow of it, being apparently a passionate exaggeration, and refuted every where by Bellarmine himself, 
Vide lib. de Laicis, maximè ca 10. 11. etc.  where he teacheth, that temporal Princes have their Authority from God, are God's substitutes and Vicars, in all temporal affairs of their States and Kingdoms, are for such to be obeyed, not only, out of fear to avoid punishment, but of conscience under pains of damnation: so as, wherein this great and absolute opposition of Scriptures to Beauties' works, about the Authority and dignity of temporal Princes doth consist, I see not. And if his books had been so derogatory to Princely Authority, as here is said, it is very like, that so many other monarchs, Princes, and great States, would never have permitted them to have been printed in their Dominions, as they have done, and do daily. Wherefore, neither this also, do I suppose, that the great wisdom of his Matie would have allowed.  
VIII. This then remaineth most firm in my persuasion, that his Matie had nothing to do with the Book, but only, perhaps, the allowance thereof in general terms, before it was published: and this you will easily see by the substance thereof, which consisteth (such as it is) of three principal points or parts. 
Three parts of the Apology.  The first, conteynng, as it were, a preamble to the Breves, concerning the nature of the Oath exacted, and circumstances thereof. The second, touching the contents of the said Breves, & the Pope's manner of proceeding therein. The third, the examination of Card. all Bellarmine's letter to M. Blackwell the Archpriest: of all which, I do promise you, but a small taste, as I said; for I have very little time, and I should offer injury to others, to whom it belongeth to make a more full answer, if I should detain myself long therein.  
IX. The preamble beginneth with, The monstrous, rare, nay never-heard of treacherous, famous, and infamous attempt, plotted within these few years here in England (of the powder-treason) infinite in cruelty, 
Pag. 1. & 2.  singular from all example, crying loudly for vengeance from heaven, etc. All which Eplthetes for due detestation of so rash and heinous an attempt, Catholics, no less than Protestants, do willingly admit; though for singularity from all examples, if we respect Speciem, & non Indi●●du●m, that cannot be like to an other in all points, there be recounted in Histories, many attempts of the same kind, and some also by Protestants, in our days: as that of them, who in Antwerp placed a whole bark of powder in the vaulted great street of that City, where the Prince of Parma, with his nobility, was to pass: and that of him in H●ge▪ that would have blown up the who●e Counsel of Holland, upon private revenge: as also that of 〈◊〉 in Scotland, where the like 〈◊〉 of powder was laid for the cruel murder of his Maties Father, which not succeeding, his death was achieved by an other, no less bloody, and barbarous, violence.  
X. But why (I pray you) is this woeful attempt of those unfortunate Gentlemen, 
The odious and often repetition of the powder treason.  so often brought in again, and repeated almost in every corner of this Book? Are they not executed, that were culpable thereof? And are not other Catholics delivered from the guilt thereof, by the long, and diligent search of justice made thereabout? The Minister himself confesseth in his very next lines, The equity of his Matie to be such, as he professed in his Proclamation, & Parlament-speach, that be would not use other Catholics the worse for that, whereof it followeth that he held them for guytlesse; & that all those pressures both of cosciences & external affliction which since that time they have suffered, and do at this present, were designed before that, and begun also to be put in execution (as indeed they were) and that the powder-treason was not a cause of these afflictions, but an effect rather: 
The powder treason not so much a cause, as an effect of catholics tribulation.  that is to say, that those Gentlemen foreseing or knowing the course that was designed to be taken, and partly also put in practice, resolved upon that miserable Medium, to their own destruction, and public calamity.  
XI. But alas, is there no end of exprobration against the Innocent for the Nocent? No compassion? No commiseration? If the clemency of his Matie in his gracious Proclamation (as here is confessed) gave security, that, notwithstanding that headlong action of those few catholic Gentlemen, None of the profession should be the worse used for that cause; how cometh it to pass, that so many aggrievances have been heaped upon them ever since, and are daily, both by infamous libels published against them, as appear by the former T. M. his slanderous Discovery, 
In the treatise of Mitigation in the preface  and others mentioned in the Answer thereunto; as also by the new Oath, devised for the utter overthrow, both in soul, if they take it against their conscience, and of body, goods, and estimation, if they refuse it? How come so many searches of their houses, spoil of their goods, apprehensions of their persons, afflictions of their tenants, servants & friends, so many citations, attachments, vexations, and molestations, that daily do flow upon them, as if they were the only malefactors of the Land?  
XII. And now I pray you let us see, how this second T. M. (if he be Author of the Book, as he is presumed) doth speak of this Oath, as of a thing of no pressure & prejudice at all. For having spoken of the former asseveration of his Matie, 
Apologia pag. 2. lin. ult.  That none of that profession should be worse used for that cause, he adjoineth presently: Only (saith he) at the next sitting down again of Parliament a form of Oath was framed to be taken by all his Maties Subjects, whereby they should make clear profession of their Resolution, faithfully to persist in his Maties Obedience, according to their natural allegiance: 
Pag. 3.  To the end, that hereby his Matie might make a separation of his Subjects etc. by which exception of (Only) a man may well perceive, that this Minister maketh little account of taking, or not taking this Oath, 
The agrievance of this Oath.  for so much as he supposeth Catholic people to have received no hard usage thereby, though they be brought into such extremities, as either they must swear against their own judgements, & conscience in divers points, appertaining to their Religion, or endure his Maties heavy displeasure, with loss of all, that in this ly●e is dearest unto them: which no Catholic man can avoid now in England, but he that maketh no scruple to sweat or unswear whatsoever turneth him best to his commodity, or Superior Authority doth impose upon him.  
XIII. But against this, you will say, that two things here are alleged, and avouched in his majesties behalf, by the Author of this Pamphlet: the one, that, He intendeth no persecution against Catholics for conscience cause, 
Pag. 4.  but only desireth to be secured of them for Civil Obedience: Which if it be so, I see not, but that the matter may quickly be ended: for that I presume no Catholic in England, will deny to swear all civil obedience that he oweth to his Majesty, or that any subject hath ever in former Catholic times sworn to their liege Lords or Princes, or do in other countries at this day. The other is, That very many (saith he) of his majesties subjects that were Popishly affected, as well Priests as Laycks have freely taken the same Oath, whereby they both gave his Majesty occasion to think the better of their fidelity & likewise freed themselves of that heavy slander. So he. And then followeth immediately that his Majesty punisheth none for Conscience cause, so they exhibit civil Obedience. And why then are men kept in prison, after they have taken this Oath? Why are M. Blackwell, and M. Charnocke detained still by the L. of Canterbury? Why are Recusants punished, & fined for Recusancy, though they take the Oath of Allegiance? Is not recusancy a cause of Conscience? Do you see how these things do hold together.  
XIIII. To return then to this Book, the writer saith, That the devil could not have devised a more malicious trick, for interrupting this so calm and clement a course, then by sending hither and publishing a Breve of the Pope, countermaunding all them of his profession, to take this Oath, thereby sowing new seeds of jealousy between his Majesty and his Popish Subjects. etc. But what was the calm & clement course before, all men know. For first men were vexed, spoiled, & imprisoned for Recusancy; then was the Oath devised to afflict their Consciences: and in these afflictions what should Catholics do? They first consulted the case which Learned men at home; then also abroad: And albeit at home, 
The Oath consulted, both at home and abroad.  some were moved in respect of the compassion they had of the present peril, if it were refused, to think that in some sense the Oath might be taken: yet none abroad were of that mind: For that they allowed not of any sort of Equivocation in matters touching faith & religion. And in these, I hear say that the Jesuits were among the chief & most forward, as here also is confessed: who notwithstanding before were most accused, baited and exagitated, both in Books, Pulpits, and Tribunals, for allowing, in some points, the lawful use of Equivocation.  
XV. About this doubt, Catholics, according to their rule of Subordination, and spiritual Obedience in such affairs, referring the matter to the judgement and consultation of their Supreme Pastor, whom by the principles of their Religion they believe, that our Saviour giveth assistance, for the direction of men's souls; they received from him, after due deliberation, this answer, 
See the Breve 10. Kal. Octo. 1606.  That the whole Oath, as it lay, could not be admitted with the integrity of the Catholic Faith. For that albeit divers parts thereof were lawful, to wit, all such clauses, as appertained to the promise of Civil and Temporal Obedience: yet other things, being interlaced and mixed therewith, which do detract from the spiritual Authority of their said highest Pastor (at leastwise indirectly) the whole Oath, as it lieth, was made thereby unlawful.  
XVI. And this I understand to be the substance of the Pope's Resolution and answer, though all these particularities be not set down in his Breves, but only the Oath declared to be unlawful in conscience to Catholic men, as it lieth, without distinction. And what malicious trick of the Devil them, this may be thought, where sheep do make recourse to their spiritual Pastor, in so great and important occasions of their souls, as these are, I see not. Do English Catholics any other thing in this, then that which all English Subjects, both great and small, learned and unlearned have done, and practised from our first Christian kings, until the time of King Henry the eight, upon the point of a thousand years? 
See Answer cap. 6.  Let the Answer to Sir Edward Cook's book of Reports lately set forth, be examined; whether it doth not show, that in all those Ages, recourse was ever made to the Sea Apostolic, in like occasions, without prejudice of Subjects temporal duties to their temporal Princes.  
XVII. No one English Christian King (though they were many) did ever absolutely deny recourse to Rome in spiritual things (notwithstanding in some other civil, 
Recourse to Rome ever usual from our first Christianity.  or mixed matters, upon different occasions, some restraints were some times made) from our first king Ethelbert to king Henry the eight, as by the said discourse & Answer is evidently proved: & much more throughout the noble rank of the Christian kings of Scotland, his Maties progenitors, until his most renowned Progenitrix (by whom, and from whom he hath his royal right of both Crowns) who is known & reputed throughout Christendom, 
Q. Mary of Scotland.  to have died for defence of this Catholic doctrine: For so much, as if she would have abandoned that, there had been little doubt of making her away. And the like may be said of all other great Christian and Catholic Princes of our days, as the Emperor himself, the Potent Kings, and monarchs of Spain, France, Polonia, and other States, commonwealths, and Potentates, do not think it any disgrace, diminution of honour, peril or injury unto them, that their Subjects, for matters of Conscience, do make recourse to the Sea Apostolic, or that, which is consequent thereof, the said Sea, or general Pastor do interpose his judgement, declaration, or decision in such affairs.  
XVIII. This is the Catholic doctrine and practice: this hath been in use throughout Christendom from all antiquity, & no where more than in our Realms of England and Scotland, as hath been said. In this belief and practice, 
catholics do hold & practice what all their Ancestors have done.  lived and died all our forefathers, that were Subjects, all our noble Kings, that were our Sovereigns, all our Bishops and Prelates, that were our Pastors, all our great counsellors and Lawyers, that by their wisdom and learning governed the land, all our Nobility, Gentry, Priests and laity: So as if now this be holden for a malicious trick of the devil, dishonourable and prejudicial to his Matie, his Sovereignty, Crown, dignity and security, as here is insinuated, it must needs be, for that the devil indeed hath made some change in other men, and matters, by altering of opinions and apprehensions. For the Catholics are the same that they were wont to be, and do think the same, believe the same, teach the same, and practise the same, that all their predecessors have done before them.  
XIX. But to return to the Apology. Two mislikes are consequently set down, after the former words: The first, 
Apol. pa. 6.  that the Pope did mittere falcem in alienam messem, by intermeddling between his Matie and his Subjects, especially in matters that merely and only concern civil Obedience. The other, that he refuted not particularly, what special words he quarreled in that Oath; which if he had done (saith the Apology) it might have been, that his Matie for the Fatherly care he hath, 
Ibid. pag. 7.  not to put any of his Subjects to a needle's extremity, might have been contented, in some sort, to have reform, or interpreted those words with his own Catholics, and so had they been thereby fully eased in that business; or at leastwise, some appearance or shadow of excuse, might have been left unto them for refusing the same, upon scrupulous tenderness of Conscience, etc. Thus writeth he. Which if he do bona fide, and have besides any inkling or insight in his Maties meaning indeed that way, for the ease or comfort of his afflicted Catholic people; I doubt not, but that full satisfaction may be given to his Royal Highness, in these two points that here are set down.  
XX. For first, about putting the Pope's hook in another man's harvest, supposing, as we do, that we treat of Catholic people only, 
English catholics not Messis aliena to the Sea Apostolic.  and according to Catholic doctrine, and in matters belonging to Catholic men's souls and consciences; it cannot be called Messis aliena, an other man's harvest, that the Pope dealeth in England, with such kind of people, and in such causes, as well as in Spain, France, Flanders, Italy, Germany, Polonia, and other States and Kingdoms; for that they are no less appertaining to his flock, care, charge, and harvest, than the rest. Neither doth the material separation of our Island, separate us from the union of one body, nor of one Obedience to one & the self same general Head and Pastor, no more, than it doth from the union of one belief, and of one number and form of Sacraments, of one manner of service, and other like points, belonging to the internal and external unity of Catholic Religion.  
XXI. But the Apology saith, 
Ibid. pag. 6.  that, His meddling about this Oath, is in matters, that merely and only concern civil Obedience: and the same he repeateth in divers other parts and passages of this Book; which if it be true, I will easily grant that his Matie hath cause of just mislike. But if this prove not so, and that the matters refused in the Oath, are points appertaining in deed to Religion, than I hope, that by answering fully this point, we shall satisfy also the second, why it was not needful for the Pope to set down any particular confutation in his Breves, but only to say (as he doth) in general, that, The integrity of Catholic Religion permitteth them not to take such an Oath, in which, both civil and Ecclesiastical points are couched, and conjoined craftily together, with no small prejudice of the said Catholic Religion.  
XXII. And how then shall we clear this important matter, Whether there be any points in this Oath belonging to religion, besides civil Obedience? Very easily: by four several, and distinct ways. The first whereof shall be taken from the plain express words, sense, and drift of the Oath itself: That besides the acknowledgement of our Sovereign to be true King, and rightful Lord over all his dominions, and that, I will be a true loyal Subject unto him, and other such like clauses, whereat no man sticketh or maketh difficulty; the said Oath containeth further, that, I must swear in like manner some points concerning the limitation of the Pope's authority, 
That the Oath containeth points against Catholic Religion.  to wit, what he cannot do towards his Matie or his Successors in any case whatsoever. Which question being brought from the particular Hypothesis, to the general Thesis, concerning all Kings (for the like reason is also in others) both in the one & the other; it toucheth a point of doctrine and Catholic belief, concerning the sufficiency of Pastoral authority, left by our Saviour in his Church unto S. Peter and his successors, for redressing of all inconveniences that may fall out, which I (being a Catholic) cannot in my Conscience forswear, without peril of everlasting damnation. And this is one way of cleared the question.  
XXIII. An other is, to look upon the Pope's words in his Breves, whereby will appear, what his meaning was of the contents of the Oath. 
The Pope's words in his Breve.  We have heard (saith he) how you are compelled by most grievous punishments set before you, to go to the Churches of Heretics, to frequent their Assemblies, to be present at their Sermons, etc. Whereby we are moved by the Zeal of our Pastoral Office, and by the Paternal solicitude which we have for the salvation of your souls, to warn, & pray you, in no sort, to go to the said Churches, nor to hear their Sermons, nor to communicate with them in any external rites, lest you do incur the wrath of God thereby. For that, it is not lawful for you to do these things without detriment of God's service, and of your own salvation: as also you may not, without most evident, and grievous injury of God's honour, bind yourself with the Oath, which in like manner to our great grief, we have heard, to be administered unto you, of the tenor under written, etc. And then after the whole form of the Oath set down, he writeth thus. Which things being so, it ought to be clear, unto you, by the words themselves, that such an Oath can not be taken without damage to the Catholic faith, and health of your souls: for that it conte●eth many things against the said Catholic saith, and health of your souls.  
XXIV. By these words of the Breve, we may see plainly, that as the matter of going Church, Assemblies, and Sermons of those o● a contrary Religion, are forbidden by him, as spiritual matters, and acts of a fa●● Religion: so is the taking of the Oath, not in regard of Temporal & Cyuil● Obedience to his Matie (which by a ●ormer Breve his predecessor had permitted, and recommended to an Catholics soon after his highness entrance unto the Crown; but for the admixture of other causes, appertaining to some points of Religion as before hath bynamed.  
XXV. The third proof may be taken out of the ensuing ●etter of Card. all Bellarmine, who having diligently considered with other learned men, of the nature of this Oath, doth therefore hold it to be unlawful, for that it is so compounded by artificial joining together of Temporal and Spiritual things, civil Obedience, and forswearing the Pope's authority, 
Cardinal Bellarmine's judgement of the contents of the Oath.  as (to use his words) No man can profess his Cyail● Subjection, and detest treason and conspiracy (by this Oath:) but he must be forced also to renounce the Primacy of the Sea Apostolic. And therefore he compareth it to the crafty composition, and commixture of Images of the Emperor julian, & of the Paynim Gods, so coupled and combined together in his Imperial banner, as dutiful Subjects that were Christians, & desired to perform their Temporal duty & civil honour to their Sovereign, could not bow down to his Picture, as the fashion was, but must seem also to do the same to the heathen Idols: which rather then they would do, they were content to suffer cruel death. So as in this case such as denied to obey in that point, did it not for lack of reverence, and loyal affection to their Emperor, as odiously it was objected and amplified against them: but by reason of the mixture of things unlawful, with those that were lawful: And the like plainly is here in this case, where Catholics are wrongfully accused to deny their acknowledgement of civil Obedience contained in this Oath, for that they refuse to take the same: whereas their refusal is not for this, but for other clauses pertaining to their Religion.  
XXVI. Fourthly then, for a more full, and final cleared of this matter, I can think of no better, nor more forcible mean, then to make this real offer, on the behalf of every English Catholic, 
A loyal offer of civil Obedience, made by catholics to his Majesty.  for better satisfaction of his Matie in this point, so much urged of their civil & Temporal Obedience. First that he will swear, and acknowledge most willingly, all those parts, and clauses of the Oath, that do any way appertain to the Civil, and Temporal Obedience due to his Matie, whom he acknowledgeth for his true and lawful king and Sovereign over all his Dominions, and that he will swear unto him, as much loyalty, as ever any Catholic Subject of England, did unto their lawful King in former times, and ages, before the change of king Henry the eight: or that any foreign Subject oweth, or aught to swear to any Catholic Prince whatsoever at this day.  
XXVII. Secondly that for the Pope, who, by the force of Catholic Religion, is the Supreme Pastor of his soul, he hopeth in God's goodness, that he will never attempt any thing in prejudice of his Matie, nor will he ever procure, of his part, that he do: but rather will seek to stay, or let the same, as much as shall lie in his power; praying heartily for them both. But for so much, as the Question of his Authority, what he might do, in certain urgent cases, for the preservation of any Country, and for the universal good of God's Church, is a matter belonging to doctrine & Religion, he cannot with safety of his Conscience swear unto the Articles and branches of the Oath touching that point.  
XXVIII. here than we see that all Civil Obedience, 
Apol. pag. 4.  and humble acknowledgement of all Temporal Duty is offered to his Majesty by his Catholic Subjects, in most ample manner, that can be devised, or that is offered to any Christian Catholic Prince living. And if this be not accepted, then is it evident, that more is required, then mere and only Civil Obedience, as here is often avouched.  
XXIX. And now, for so much as it is said here in like manner, That very many of his Maties Subjects, that were Popishly affected, as well Priests as Laycks, did freely take the same Oath (which he calleth A blessed success from God of this godly and wise intent, in devising and proposing the same:) I shall be forced also to say somewhat of this matter, 
Whether the taking of this Oath by Catholics be a blessing from God.  before I pass any further. And first of all, concerning the freedom, whereby it is here said, That priests and Laycks did freely take the same; no man, I think, will deny, but that the taking of this Oath is proposed by the Statute itself under pain of the loss of all goods and lands, and perpetual imprisonment to him, that shall refuse it: which is the very same freedom, 
Statu●. 3. 〈◊〉. obi Reg. cap. 4.  and no other that a merchant hath in a tempest, either to cast out his goods into the sea, for lightning his ship, or to be drowned himself. 
2. Ethic. c. 2.  And though Aristotle in his Ethics do seem to hold it to be Simpliciter involuntarium, simply against the will of the doer, and Catholic Devynes, That it is Inuoluntarium secundum quid, 
D. Thom. 1. 2. q. 6. art. 6. & Va●etia, Vasquez, etc. met●m locum.  in part involuntary and simply voluntary, for that, all circumstances considered, he resolveth finally to be the best to cast out his goods and save himself: yet all agree in this, that freedom is taken away by this constraint of the passion of fear: For that freedom requireth full liberty to both extremes or objects, that are proposed; which is not in our case. For that the displeasure of the Prince, 
How freely the Oath is taken.  the loss of goods and liberty, the ruin of his family, the terror and persuasion of his friends, are heavy poises, and do mightily preponderate on the one side: and consequently the mention of this freedom, might have been pretermitted, for so much, as no constraint of human will can be greater, than this. And yet is it said in the Oath, that he must do it, both willingly and heartily, and as he believeth in Conscience. Let the discreet Reader consider what coherence there is in their tale.  
XXX. Secondly, as for that multitude of Priests, & Laycks, which he sayeth, Have freely taken this Oath; as their freedom was that, which now I have mentioned, and a principal motive (as may be presumed) the desire they had, to give his Matie satisfaction, and deliver themselves, and others so much as lay in them, from that inference of disloyal meaning, which upon the denial thereof, some do use to make: so I cannot, but in charity assure myself, that they being Catholics took the said Oath (for so much as concerneth the Pope's authority in dealing with temporal Princes) in some such lawful sense, 
The sense & meaning of Catholics, that took the Oath.  and interpretation, as (being by them expressed, and accepted by the Magistrate) may stand with the integrity, and sincerity of true Catholic doctrine, and faith: To wit, that the Pope hath not Authority without just cause, to proceed against them: Quia illud possumus, quod iure possumus, saith the law: Our authority is limited by justice. Directly also the Pope may be denied to have such authority against Princes, but indirectly only, in ordine ad spiritualia, and when certain great, important, & urgent cases, concerning Christian religion fall out, which we hope will never be, between our Sovereign, and the Sea Apostolic; for so much as they have passed already, many years (though in different Religions) in peace, and quietness even since his Matie began first to reign.  
XXXI. But concerning the general Question, to deny simply and absolutely, That the Pope is supreme Pastor of the Catholic Church, hath any authority left him by Christ, either directly or indirectly, with cause, or without cause, in never so great a necessity, or for never so great and public an utility of the Christian Religion, to proceed against any Prince whatsoever temporally, for his restraint or amendment, or to permit other Princes to do the same: this, I suppose, was never their meaning that took the Oath; for that they should thereby contradict the general consent of all Catholic Divines, and confess, that God's providence, for the conservation, and preservation of his Church, and Kingdom upon earth, had been defectuous, for that he should have left no lawful remedy, for so great and excessive an evil, as that way might fail out.  
XXXII. Wherefore, for so much as some such moderate meaning, must needs be presumed, to have been in those that took the Oath, for safeguard of their Consciences; if it might please his Majesty to like well, and allow of this moderation, and favourable interpretation, as all foreign Catholic Kings and Monarches do, 
An humble petition to his Majesty for exposition of the Oath.  without any prejudice at all of their safety, dignity, or Imperial pre-eminence: I doubt not but he should find most ready conformity in all his said English Catholic Subjects, to take the said Oath, who now have great scruple & repugnance o● Conscience therein: both for that the chiefest learned men of their Church, do hold the same for utterly unlawful, being mixed and compounded, as it is, and the voice o● their chief Pastor, to whom by the rules of their Religion, they think themselves bound to hearken in like c●ses, hath utterly condemned the same: and the very tenor of the Oath itself, and last lines thereof are, That every one shall swear without any Equivocation, or mental reservation at all, that is to say, heartily, willingly, & truly upon the true faith of a Christian. Which being so, they see not how they may take the said Oath in truth of Conscience: for so much, as they find no such willingness in their hearts, nor can they induce themselves in a matter so nearly concerning the Confession of their faith, to Equivocate or swear in any other sense, then from his Majesty is proposed: and therefore do think it less hurt to deny plainly, and sincerely to swear, then by swearing, neither to give satisfaction to God, nor to his Majesty, nor to themselves, nor to their neighbours. And so much of this point.  
XXXIII. There followeth an other, which is the third, about this matter, where this Apology saith, That God did bless this godly devise and intent (of making and urging this Oath) by the admittance thereof by so many Priests & Laics: etc. Which blessing (if it be a blessing) must concern either the takers, or the exhibitours, or both. But for the takers, what inward blessing of comfort in conscience they may have received thereby, I know not; But for outward blessing, I see small, for they remain, either in prisons, or under pressures still, as hath been said. But for others of the same Religion that cannot frame their Consciences to take the said Oath, and yet would gladly give his Royal Majesty contentment & satisfaction, 
The urging of the Oath, how heavy a pressure to Catholics of tender consciences.  so far as they might, without offending God; I can assure you, that it is the greatest affliction of mind, among other pressures, that ever fell unto them. For that no violence, is like to that, which is laid upon men's Consciences; for so much, as it lieth in a man's own will & resolution, to bear all other oppressions whatsoever, whether it be loss of goods, honours, dignities, yea● of life itself: but the oppression of the Conscience, no man may bear patiently, though he would never so fain. For if he yield therein, he offendeth God, and loseth his soul: neither doth Metus cadens in constantem virum, fear that may terrify even a constant man, excuse in this behalf, as appeareth by the example of the ancient Martyrs, who were forced, under pain of damnation, to stand out to death against all humane power, vexations, torments, and highest violence, rather than to do, say, or swear any thing against their Conscience. To all these men then, which are thousands in our Country, that never thought otherwise then to be good Subjects to his Majesty, the devising of this new Oath, was no blessing, but an unspeakable affliction, and angariation of mind.  
XXXIV. To the exhibitours also, I see not what blessing it could be, or can be, so extremely to vex other men without any profit, or emolument to themselves, or to his majesties service, 
Nothing gained at all by enforcing the Oath, but much lost.  which herein they would pretend to advance. For if there be any cause of doubt, of loyal good will in them, that are forced to swear against their consciences: much more cause and reason may there be of like doubt, after they have so sworn, then before. For that the grief of their new wound of conscience remaining full within them, and stirring them to more aversion of heart, for the injury received, must needs work contrary effects to that which is pretended. And whosoever will not stick to swear against his conscience for fear, favour, or some other like passion, may be presumed, that he will as easily break his Oath, after he hath sworn, upon like motives, if occasions do move him. And among all other passions, none is more strong, then that of revenge for oppressions received: So as we read of the whole Monarchy of Spain overthrown, and given to the Moors, 
R●der. To let●m. lib. 3 〈…〉 cap. 18.  for one passion of Count julian, whereby he desired to be revenged of his King ●oderiquez. Nothing then is gotten in this behalf of loyal good will, by such extreme pressures, but much rather lost.  
XXXV. But besides all this, is the grievous sin which they commit, who force, & press other men to swear against their consciences, than which, almost nothing can be imagined more heinous: for it is to thrust men headlong (especially such as are fearful) into the very precipitation and downfall of hell itself. For it is the highest degree of scandal active, so much condemned and detested in Scriptures, 
1. Cor. 8. Rom. 14. Matth. 18.  and so dreadfully threatened by our Saviour, to be severely punished in the life to come: for that scandalising properly, is nothing else, but laying a stumbling-block for other men to fall, and break their necks. And such a one is this formal Oath, which containeth divers things lawful for a Catholic to swear and other things unlawful: and he is forced by terror to pass over, and swallow down the one with the other, without distinction, with manifest repugnance of his Conscience; which repugnance to him, is always a sin, & damnable in such a public and weighty action, though the matter were lawful in itself, and consequently also unto them, that force him to the same, either knowing or suspecting his said repugnance of Conscience. 
How grievous a sin it is to force men to swear against their consciences.  For he that should force a jew, or Turk to swear, that there were a blessed Trinity, either knowing or suspecting that they would do it against their Conscience, should sin grievously, by forcing them to commit that sin. This is Catholic doctrine, which I also think the learned Protestants themselves will not deny.  
XXXVI. Here if any man object, that among us also men are urged to take Oaths, and to abjure their opinions in the tribunals of Inquisitions, and the like; and consequently in this Oath they may be forced under punishment to abjure the Pope's Temporal Authority in dealing with Kings: I answer first, that if any Heretic, or other should be forced to abjure his opinions, with repugnance of conscience, it should be a sin to the enforcers, if they knew it, or suspected it. Neither is it practised or permitted ●n any Catholic Court, that ever I knew. But you will reply, that if he do it not, he shall be punished by death, 
Objections answered.  or otherwise, as the crime requireth, and Canons appoint, and consequently the like may be used towards Catholics, that will not renounce their old opinions of the Pope's Authority: but here is a great difference; for that the Catholic Church hath Ius acquisitum, ancient right over Heretics, as her due Subjects, for that by their Baptism, they were made her Subjects, and left her afterward, and went out of her; and she useth but her ancient manner of proceeding against them, as against all other of their kind and quality from the beginning. But the Protestant Church of England hath Nullum Ius acquisitum upon Catholics, that were in possession before them, for many hundred years, as is evident. Neither was there ever any such Oath exacted at their hands, by any of their Kings, in former Catholic times: Neither is there, by any Catholic foreign Monarch, now living upon earth, and consequently, by no reason or right at all, can English Catholic men, be either forced or pressed to this Oath against their Conscience, or be punished, beaten, or destroyed, if for their Conscience they refuse to take the same: humbly offering notwithstanding to their Sovereign, to give him all other dutiful satisfaction, for their Temporal Obedience and Allegiance, which of loyal Catholic Subjects may be exacted. And this shall suffice for this first point, concerning the contents and nature of the Oath. Now shall We pass to say somewhat of the Breves, and answer made thereunto.   

CONCERNING THE POPE'S TWO BREVES, AGAINST The receiving of the Oath.  
Paragr. II.  
THE sum of the Pope's two Breves the first of the 21. of September, Anno 1606. the second of the 21. of August the next year following, is this: That whereas he had heard, that the Catholics of England, were very sorely pressed with a new devised Oath, against their Consciences, concerning certain points, appertaining to the Authority of the Sea Apostolic, 
The sum of the two Breves.  in some cases; he wrote the first Breve, to admonish, comfort, and direct them; signifying his hearty sorry for their long continued afflictions, and exhorting them to patience, and constancy in defence of the integrity of Catholic faith, and the purity of their own consciences. And after this setting down verbatim the whole Oath, as it lieth in the Statute, he condemneth the taking thereof, as unlawful unto a Catholic man, in regard of divers clauses therein contained, contrary to the said integrity of Catholic faith, and health of souls; though in particular, he descendeth not to dispute, or discuss the reasons, or points, thereof, as became not a judge: especially seeing (as he saith) the matters themselves be evident by the words of the Breve. And whereas this first Breve was soon after called into question by some, as not proceeding from the Popes own motion, and intention: his second Breve was set forth to approve, ratify, and confirm the former; assuring all Catholics, that both the one, and the other came from him directly, sincerely, & upon due deliberation, and consequently▪ that they were to be acknowledged, and obeyed by all true Catholic people. This is the sum of what the Pope wrote: now let us see, what advantage is taken by the Apologer against the same.  
II. First of all he felleth at the Pope's sorrow for Catholics afflictions, making them to be none at all: and whereas the late Q. Elizabeth is not so much as named in either of these Breves, this man will needs bring her in perforce, and justify her actions against Catholic people, thereby the more to animate his Matie to follow her example, setting down this notorious fa●se position concerning her, and her doings, 
Ap●●g. pag. 16.  That according to his own knowledge, her Matie never punished any Papist for Religion. Which how he can justify, or by what Equivocation maintain, I know not. But being not content with this, he passeth further, and rageth exceedingly against those innocent Priests, Students, and others, that only for the profession of their Religion, gave up their lives under her, as by their inditements, and arraignments in public record doth appear, and concludeth finally both of her, and them, thus: This Gracious Princess was as free from persecution, 
See Stows Chronicle in the death of M. Maine anno 1577. of M. M●●son anno 1578. Of M. Sh●rwood anno 1578. of M. 〈◊〉 1581. etc. Apol. Pag. 18.  as these hellish Instruments from the honour of Martyrdom. And yet further, very profanely: Having now sacrificed, as I may say (quoth he) to the Manes of my defunct Sovereign, as well for the discharge of my particular duty, as love of verity; I must next perform my duty also to his Matie present, etc.  
III. Whereunto a man might answer, that if he perform it with no more verity to his present Sovereign, than he hath done to his defunct Sovereign passed; he will gain little grace (I suppose) with his Matie whom I hold to be of that noble nature, and magnanimity, as that he taketh such grosse-lying-flattery, father for injury, than obsequy. But as for his heathen, profane sacrificing to the Manes or Hob-gob-lins of his late Lady; 
Q. Elizabeth her Manes.  I confess, that it is an office fitter for a Protestant-Minister, that thinketh it unlawful to pray for her soul, to deal with her Manes or Infernal spirits, then with Celestial, by praying for her to Saints. But would God these Manes might now have licence to appear, and talk with him, and relate what passeth with her after all this ioylity, and ruff in this world; I doubt not but they would cool his excessive vain of flattering vanity. For if all the old platform of Saints lives, prescribed in Scriptures and practised by servants of God, were not erroneous & vain, as much fasting, continual prayer, daily mortification, frequent recollection, diligent chastisement of their bodies, humble and fervent devotion, labouring and working salvation in fear and trembling, abundant almsdeeds, haircloth and ashes, contrition, sorrow and sobbing for sins: If these things (I say) were the ancient ways to life, and to everlasting salvation: then must the paths of Q. Elizabeth, which are known by most men, to have been, either wholly different, or most opposite to these, lead to an other opposite end, Quia unusquisque recipiet, secundum opera sua.  
IV. But not to enter into these melancholic matters of her Manes, or of the other world, to make any certain judgement thereof, before we arrive thither: I will only speak a word or two of the world present, and this with protestation, that it is wholly against my will, and against the general inclination (as I take it) of all Catholic people, who would in charity be content, that the memory of her actions, & injuries against them, being never so many, & injurious, were buried with her body; as may well appear by their long silence therein since her death. But the continual egging of the adversary is such, as forceth us to say somewhat, for our own defence, and for cleared the cause, and men, by her so eagerly and injuriously pursued.  
V. This Minister then, as in part you have heard, maketh her, 
Apol. pag. 16.  The most mild, dol●e, patient, and clement Princess in the world, even unto Catholics, whose blood she shed so abundantly, both at home, & abroad, during all the time of her reign: nay, That her Matie never punished any Papist for religion: And, That she was most free from all persecution: That she never meddled with hard punishment of any Catholic, nor made any rigorous laws against them before the excommunication of Pope Pius Quintus, that was in the eleventh year of her reign: 
See Sanders lib. 7. de Ecclesiastica Monarchia: who setteth down the particular persons.  And yet is it known, and cannot be denied, but that the most grievous law, & Oath of Supremacy, & rigorous penal Statute against saying, or hearing Mass, were made long before that time: And that all the Bishops, Prelates, Religious, & chief Ecclesiastical men were deprived, spoiled, imprisoned, or forced into banishment: and this before the Pope used any Censure against her at all: so exact, & punctual is the truth of this Minister's narration. And not content with this, he doth prosecute odious comparisons, between the Pope, & her, laying all the origen of hurts and wickedness to him, and merit of virtue, and innocency to her, which is the very same, that is mentioned by the Prophet, 
Isa. 5.  to call evil good, & good evil.  
VI Nor is he alone in this devise, but that all Ministers commonly, and Ministers mates of later days have taken up this Common place, to celebrate her high praises, for disgrace of Catholics. And one among the rest, that for his place, should have more equity and discretion, hath declaimed upon this matter in public Audience more than once, especially upon the occasion of certain words in Pope Clements Breve, where she is named Misera Foemina, a miserable woman (in respect no doubt of the miseries of her soul, little respected by her:) upon which words the Orator triumpheth thus, What miserable? 
Lo. Cook in the book of the late arraignments fol. 63.  It is said, That, Miseria constat ex duobus contrariis, copia & inopia, copia tribulationis, & inopla consolationis, Misery consisteth of two contraries, of abundance, and penury, abundance of tribulation, & penury of consolation. And then he showeth in what abundance of consolations Q. Elizabeth lived in all her life, & without want of all tribulations: which if it were true; yet is it but the argument which the worldlings used in the Psalm, to prove their felicity, that their cellars are full, their sheep fertile, their kine fat, they suffer no loss: and then, 
Psalm. 143.  Beatum dixerunt populum cui haec sunt; Happy did they call the people that had these things. But the Holy Ghost scorneth them, and so may all men do our Orator, that useth and urgeth so base an argument, in so high a matter.  
VII. And as for his definition of Misery, by Copia and Inopia, store and want, it is a miserable one indeed, and never heard of before, I think, to come from any man's mouth, but his own: it being ridiculous in Philosophy, and fit to be applied to any thing that hath either store or want: As a wise man in this sort may be defined to be him, that hath store of wit, and want of folly; and a fool to be him, that hath store of folly, and want of wit; and so a rich man is he that hath store of riches and want of beggary, and a poor man is he, that hath store of beggary, and penury of riches. And are not these goodly definitions (think you) for so great and grave a man to produce?  
VIII. But to return to the matter itself of Q. Elizabeth her store of consolations, 
Cook ib. pag. 64.  and penury of desolations in this life, Who (saith this our Orator) was so miraculously protected by God, so strengthened and fortified, as she did beat her most potent enemy, did set up a King in his kingdom, de●ended nations, harboured distressed people, and the like. Supposing all this were true, that she had such temporal felicity in this life, and were so miraculously protected, strengthened, and fortified by God as here is said: yea and that it were evident, that God had chosen her for his elected servant (which yet doth not appear) and given her that title and power, to afflict the Catholics: yet had that been no more, than we read in the Scriptures to have been given to divers Pagan Princes, and namely to Nabuchodonosor, of whom jeremy the prophet testifieth in sundry places of his Prophecy, That God chose him, called him his servant, and gave him special power, favour, & protection to afflict his people. 
Hier. 27. 6.  Ego dedi omnes terras istas in manu Nabuchodonosor Regis Babylonis servi mei, saith God: I have given all these Countries into the hands of Nabuchodonosor King of Babylon my servant, and all nations shall serve him, & yield obedience to him, and to his Son, and Sons some: And what soever nation shall not serve him, & bow his neck under his yoke, I will visit that nation with the sword, with famine, and with plague, till I have consumed them by his hand. 
Hier. 25. 9  And again in an other place: I will choose unto me my servant Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon, & will bring him upon this Land, and upon all the inhabitants thereof, and upon all nations round about etc. And yet further God said unto jeremy: Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, I shall take unto me my servant Nabuchodonosor, and shall place his throne upon these stones etc.  
IX. By all which is evident that Sir Edward Cook's argument is worth nothing: 
How Nabuchodonosor was the servant of God.  that for so much as God so miraculously protected Q. Elizabeth, (if it were miraculous,) so strengthened, and fortified her, as she did beat her most potent enemy, & did set up an other King in his Kingdom (〈◊〉 any such thing were:) yet this did not make her happy. As neither it did Nabuchodonosor, of whom God said in the same place, that when he had served his turn of him, and wrought his will by his hand, and people, for the purging or his own elect; he would visit upon him also, and his Country, and that in a ●arre more grievous sort: 
Hier. 25. 11.  Ponam i●am in solitudines sempiternas, & reddam eis secundum opera eorum, & secundum facta manuum suarum: I shall make that Country, all ever a●●ng wilderness, and shall restore to them (that afflicted my people) according to their works, and to the deeds of their own hands against my people. This than was his felicity to be a scourge to others, and finally also to himself most of all.  
X. And the like. I doubt not, may be said of Q. Elizabeths ●licity against Catholics, it we knew all, that in the last day or judgement will appear, and whereof her lamentable end may give great presage to them that are wise. For that for a woman of so long and large a life, as horse was, to pass hence to eternity with so small sense or 〈◊〉 of God, as never so much, as to name him, nor to suffer 
* Archb. of Can●erb.  others to bring in any speech thereof, as they attempted to do, is so pitiful an end, as can lightly said to a Christian soul: The story or which upshot o●hers, I have read written by a person of much credit that was present at all her last sickness, combats, and death, and relateth all that passed as an eye witness, which I pass over for brevity and modesties sake; but it will remain to posterity, as a dreadful pattern of a miserable end, after a life of so much jollity.  
XI. And thus much for spiritual infelicities, reaching to the next world, and life or death to come. But if we would rest ourselves only upon vain & brickle felicities of this world, they were not (alas) so great in Queen Elizabeth, 
Queen Elizabeth her felicities mingled with infelicities.  but that they were mingled and interlaced with many, and great infelicities in like manner, and these such, as did even in the eyes of worldly men, overpoise the other, especially with them that repute honour and dishonour among human felicities, & infelicities. For what more dishonourable infelicity can there be, then that which standeth in Capito Libri of Q. Elizabeth's life? To wit, the public solemn Statute, and Act of Parliament, made within few days after she was borne, upon the 28. year of King Henry's reign, and yet extant in Print, wherein it is declared, not only by the judgement of the King, and of a●l that Parliament, but by the judicial sentence also of Archbishop Cranmer, 
Q. Eli. her dishonourable birth an. 28. Stat. Cap. 7.  she was pronounced, to be unlawfully borne, and that her mother was never King Henry's lawful wife: whereupon the said statute useth these words: That it was against all honour, equity, and good conscience, that the said Elizabeth should succeed in the Imperial Crown of England. And could there be any greater worldly infelicity thenthiss.  
XII. I let pass many other infelicities, which happened by her occasion to sundry, as well under the reign of King Edward, as the ruin of the Seymers upon the admirals falling in love with her, and making away his former wife Queen Catherine Parr to enjoy her; as also under Queen Marie, when so many rebellions of Wiat, Courtney, Carews, Stafford, & others, were made for her. But her own reign had most infelicities for her, if they were well considered: and I could touch many, but modesty forbiddeth. And lest I should seem to speak out of revenge, let this one consideration serve for all; That after all her afflicting Catholics, and by that exercise, upon the egging of others, more than of her own propension, she was drawn into continual suspicions, ●eares, and frights of her mind and spirit, even in the midst or all these sensual delights, & contentments (admired so much by her Attorney) which drove her to a point, whereunto by nature she was not thought much inclined, and by profession and protestations, she most condemned in others, to wit, Cruelty, which in effect was such, out of the foresaid fears, 
The infelicity of Cruelty.  towards Catholic Religion, as never perhaps (yea without perhaps) were so many several laws, & punishments devised by any one persecutor, nor many put together, as are extant of hers in Print, against the professors of that Religion, whereof herself had been one, and in secret or private speeches also would not deny, to be in sundry points, even to her dying day. And was not this a great in felicity? When strangers do read & behold her Edicts & Statutes, wherein not only the whole use of Catholic Religion is condemned, and under grievous punishment prohibited: but men are forced also, by rigorous penal laws to go to the Churches of a contrary Religion, to communicate with them, to do acts, and swear against their own Religion, faith and Consciences: that there are severe punishments, of loss of goods and lands, for receiving an Agnus Dei, 
Q Elizab. her cruel persecutions  or a Medal, or Crucifix: grievous punishments, for keeping of a Catholic servant, or Schoolmaster to teach and bring up their children, or to send them over seas to Catholic Schools: yea, that it is the pain of death itself to be reconciled, by confessing his sins to the Roman Church, or to the union of ●aith, with the Head thereof, or to persuade another to be a Catholic, or do the same: When they read these things (I say) and many others, which for brevity I pretermitt, and that all this notwithstanding, she would not have it said, That she persecuted any for Religion (which in manner this Apologer sticketh not to avouch) nor put any Priest to death for that cause in deed, whereas notwithstanding she shed the blood of above one hundred and thirty, that might have had their lives even at the last cast, if in this one point of Religion they would have yielded never so little. All this (I say) being read and considered, seemeth unto foreigners a strange infelicity both of body and soul.  
XIII Especially when it is considered to what perpetual jealousy at length she was brought unto, of all sorts of people, Puritan, Papists, yea of her own dearest, as the death of the Earl of Essex, and his followers, doth easily declare. Neither was there any week lightly, but that she had some new fears, of some Priest or jesuit, or Catholic soldiers sent from Flanders, France, or Italy to kill her by violence, others from Spain, and other Countries to poison her, or at at least, her 
* The fiction of Squire an. 1598.  Chair. And uponsuch fancies, men must be made away for greater terror; yea jews must be brought in also in this kind of pretended poisoning, as the case of Doctor Lopez well declareth. 
Q. Eliz. her dealing towards her cozen of Scotland.  Nay further this griping passion of fear and jealousy did so vex & consume her inwardly, as she was never well, until she had made away, against all law of Nature and Nations, the nearest unto her in Royal blood, that lived upon earth, and coequal with her in dignity, if in sundry respects not Superior, I mean his Maties noble renowned Mother, Queen of France & Scotland, that by force of the former Statute, which declared this other for illegitimate and incapable of the Crown (as now you have heard) should have enjoyed the Crown of England presently after the death of Q. Marry, & consequently his Matie had enjoyed the same 38. years at least, before he came unto it after her death, who of all other living Creatures, is known most heartily to have hated that issue & succession. And as she went about to disenable the same in the very root & fountain itself, by seeking the disgrace of the offspring, by dishonour of the origen: so never ceased she afterward to continue practices against them both, until she had wracked the one, and brought the other also to great probability thereof, if she might have lived to her will, or have died with such use of senses and judgement, as might have made way to her bad affections in that behalf.  
XIV. Well then, all this I have been enforced to speak upon this occasion: first to repress somewhat thereby the insultation of our foresaid Orator, in calling her, 
Lo. Cook in his Charge at Norwich. 4. August. 1606.  The happy Queen, the blessed Queen, whose unmatched wisdom, and unconquered prowess (to use his words) crowned her the peerless wonder of her sex. All which tendeth to the exprobration of Catholics, for having had so happy & peerless a persecutor; and to the insultation also over the Pope, for calling her in his Breve, as he saith, Miseram Foeminam, a miserable woman: which how true or false it is, I leave to the prudent Reader out of the former discourse, about her birth, youth, age and end, to censure.  
XV. Secondly I do herein but imitate the first ancient Fathers, that wrote for defence of those holy Martyrs, that died for Christian Religion in the Primitive Church, 
What manner of Persecutor Q. Elizabeth was.  as namely, justinus Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and others, who to comfort the afflicted, and to honour more their cause, did put them in mind what manner of people their first persecutors were; as namely Nero and Domitian, what life they led, what end they made, and the like; And that indeed they were fit instruments, to be the first, in such a work. And the like we may say to Catholics of Q. Elizabeth, that she being the strangest woman that ever was borne for divers circumstances, now partly touched, and the first absolutely of that sex, either Christian or created, that took upon her Supreme power in Spiritual and Ecclesiastical matters; it must needs be some comfort to Catholic people, that God chose such an instrument to be their first scourge, out of all woman kind.  
XVI. And lastly, for that this Apologer will needs take upon him, to sacrifice to her Manes: I thought myself obliged to offer some incense in like manner to the same, for mitigating the evil sent, which that notorious untrue assertion must needs import, to the senses of all understanding Readers: That, Queen Elizabeth never punished any Papist for Religion, Nor made any rigorous law against them, before Pius Quintus his Excommunication, nor since that time, but upon private plots, machinations, etc. For clear confutation whereof, I remit those of the elder sort that live in England, to their own eyes, ears, and other external senses, and those of younger age, to the books of Statutes, of Q. Elizabeth's time, john Stows Chronicle, and other such public Records. And so much of this point.  
XVII. Next after these exaggerations of the clemency and indulgence of Q. Elizabeth towards Catholics, this Apologer passeth on to bestow some of his adulation, and oleum peccatoris, upon his Matie in like manner that now reigneth, telling us, That his kindness and benefits bestowed upon that sort of people, have been far greater than those of Q. Elizabeth; which may easily be, as, by that, which hath been touched, may appear. Yet do we verily persuade ourselves, that if his Highness had been left to himself, and to his own Royal nature, and noble disposition in this point (as 
* See Answer. to Sir Edward Cook ca 15.  Q. Elizabeth was wont to say of her disposition in religion) we had tasted, indeed, much of this his great humanity, and so we began, for some time: but being prevented and diverted by the subtle workings of this, and other such Ministers, as desired to draw blood, and to incite his Majesty against us, 
His majesties mild disposition diverted.  we having no place to speak for ourselves, no admittance to be heard, no effectual intercessor to interpose his mediation for us; no marvel though we were cast of, and do endure the smart.  
XVIII. And I do name this Minister (T. M. the younger) in the first place among the rest, for that it is commonly said, that his whole exercise is Sycophancy and calumniation against men of our profession, 
The exercise of the Minister Th. Mont.  be they strangers, or domestical: and that among other devices, he hath this; That every time his Matie is to take his repast, he is ready, either with some tale, jest, scoff, or other bitter lance to wound us absent, and that he hath ever lightly, some book and page thereof, ready to read to his Highness, somewhat framed by his art to incense or avert his Matie more, either in judgement, or affection, or both; and thereby to draw from him some hard speeches, which being published afterward by himself, and others, do serve to no other end, but to ga●l and alienate minds, and to afflict them, that are not suffered to give reason for themselves. And that is the service he doth his Matie in this exercise.  
XIX. And as for the places themselves, which he useth to bring forth with his wet finger, as is said, we are to imagine, that they are no better, nor more fitly applied, than such as he hath set forth against us in this book, & perhaps somewhat worse, for that he might probably think, that this book would be examined, coming forth with so great pretence of authority, as it doth: And therefore if here you find him to use calumniation, & most impertinent citation of Authors, and authorities, either wholly making against himself, or nothing for his purpose, or against us: then may you think what liberty he will take to himself there in speech, where no man is like to contradict him, but all applause is expected from the standers by.  
XX. Let us hear, if you please, one exaggeration of his, concerning his Maties mildness unto us, and our ingratitude in abusing the same to pride. 
Apol. pag. 18.  His Maties government (saith he) over them hath so far exceeded that of Q. Elizabeth, in mercy and clemency, as the Papists themselves grew to that height of pride, in confidence to his mildness, as they did directly expect, and assuredly promise to themselves liberty of Conscience, and equality with us in all things, that are his best, and faithful Subjects etc. Do you see what a height of pride this was? And what an abuse of his majesties mercy and clemency, to expect liberty of Conscience? Why had he not objected in like manner, 
Liberty of Conscience.  that they expected the liberty of breathing, and using the common air, as well as Protestants? For that neither breathing, nor the use of common air, is more due unto them, or common to all, then ought to be liberty of Conscience to Christian men, whereby each one liveth to God, and to himself, and without which he struggleth with the torment of a continual lingering death.  
XXI. And surely, I cannot but wonder, that this Minister was not ashamed to call this the height of pride, which is generally found in all Protestants never so humble: yea the more humble, and underlings they are, the more earnest are they both in books, speeches, and preachings, to prove that liberty of Conscience is most conform to God's law, and that wresting, or forcing of Consciences, is the highest Tyranny, that can be exercised upon man. And this we may see first, in all M. Fox his History, especially during the time of the three King Henries, 4. 5. and 6. and afterward, when those that were called Lollards, and Wickcliffians, who as M. Fox saith, were indeed good Protestants, being pressed somewhat about their Religion, did continually beat upon this argument of liberty of Conscience, and when they obtained it not, they set up public schedles upon the Church doors of London, and made those famous conspiracies of kill K. Henry the 5. and all his family, 
In vita Hēri●i quinti.  which are recounted by Walsingham, Stow, Fox, and other English Historiographers.  
XXII. In this our age also, the first opposition of Protestant Princes in Germany, against their Emperor Charles the 5. both at Smalcald, Austburgh, and other meetings; as afterwards also the fierce and perilous wars by the Duke of Saxony, Marquis of Brandeburge, and other Protestant Princes, and their people, against the same Emperor, begun in the very same year that our K. Henry died. 
Anno 1546  Were they not all for liberty of Conscience? so pretended, so printed, so published, so divulged to the world? The first Supplications, Memorials, and declarations in like manner, which the Protestants of France set forth in print: 
Liberty of conscience demanded by all Protestants.  as also they of Holland, & Zealand in time of the governments, as well of the Duchess of Parma, Duke of Alva, Commendador Mayor, and other Governors: did they not all expressly profess, that their principal griefs were, about liberty of Conscience restrained. And did not they city many places of Scriptures, to prove the equity & necessity thereof? And do not all Protestants the like at this day, in all places, where they are, both in Polonia, Austria, Hungaria, Bohemia, Styria, and else where? And how then is jordanis conversus retrorsum, with this Minister? How is his voice contrary to the voice & sense of all the rest? How, & with what reason, may he call it the height of pride in English Catholics, to have but hope thereof, which is so ordinary a doctrine & practice of all his brethren in foreign nations, to wit, for us to expect liberty of Conscience, at the first entrance of our new King, of so noble, and royal a mind before that time, as he was never known to be given to cruelty, or persecution in his former reign? The Son of such a Mother, as held herself much beholden to English Catholics? And himself in his little Golden 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Book to his Son the Prince, had confessed that he had ever found the Catholic party most trusty unto him, and thereupon had done sundry favours to divers of them, and given no small hope of greater unto others?  
XXIII. From this King (I say) whom they so much loved, and honoured, received so gladly, and with universal joy, meant to serve faithfully; & trusted that as he had united the two Kingdoms in one Obedience by his Succession: 
Height of pride, and in whom it may be said to be.  so would he by his liberality, unite and conjoin the hearts of all his Subjects, in bearing a sweet and equal hand towards them all: From such a King (I sa●) or us to expect liberty of Conscience, and equality with other Subjects (in this point at least of freedom of soul) what height of pride may it be called? May it not rather seem height of pride in this Minister, & his ●ellowes, that having bind o●d enemies, and always borne a hard, & hate unhand, and tongue against his Matie both in their Sermons, Books, Speeches, all the time of the late Queen's reign; now upon the sudden sine ullis meri is praecede●●ious, will needs be so privileged, & assume unto themselves such a confident presumption of his Maties special favour, as to suffer no man to stand by them, but to hold it for height of pride in us, to hope ●or any freedom and liberty o● our Conscience at al●? What is height of pride and so●l●, i● this be not?  
XXIV. But his Matie is wise, & will, as we hope, according to his prudence, in time, look into this sort o●men, and manner of proceeding. And to return to the Apologer, he reckoneth up (thereby to exaggerate the more our ingratitude) the particular favours his Matie did unto us, at his first entrance, as, That he did honour divers Catholics with Knighthood, 
Apol. pag. 19  being open Recusants: That, he gave audiece indifferently to both sides: bestowed equally favours and honours upon both professions: gave free continual access to all ranks, and degrees of Papists in his Court and company: freeing Recusantes from their ordinary payments: gave order to his judges with his own mouth, 
Exprobration of his majesties benefits towards catholics.  to spare execution of all Priests, though they were convicted: gave liberty by his gracious Proclamation to all Priests not taken, to go out of the Country by such a day, and all Priests that were taken, were sent over, and set at liberty: and many other gracious favours & benefits: Which (saith he) time and paper would fail me if I would make enumeration of them all: in recounting whereof every scrape of my pen (so use his words) would serve but for a blot of the Pope's ingratitude, and injustice in meating his Matie with so hard a measure for the same. So as I think (quoth he) I have sufficiently wiped of the tears from the Pope's eyes, for complaining upon such persecution etc.  
XXV. Thus writeth this man, who, in naming the Pope's ingratitude, must much more include ours, that are Catholics; for that these benefits, such as they were, appertained nothing to the Pope, but only in Christian charity, as a common spiritual Father and Pastor, he being otherwise a stranger unto us in blood, and for other worldly respects. And as for Catholics, they accept gratefully, 
catholics dutiful demeanour to his Majesty.  whatsoever lest favour hath been, or is done unto them: and do not doubt, but that if his Matie had not been prevented by sinister information, & persuasion of others, they had tasted of much greater, as due unto them, in that they are natural borne Subjects of the Realm, most loyal in heart & affection, & never meaning otherwise, but to live in most orderly and dutiful Subjection and Obedience to his Highness, as to their liege Lord and Sovereign.  
XXVI. And whereas this man, for proof of the contrary, nameth the powder-treason of a few, thereby to discredit the whole, though this calumniation have been answered before: yet now I add further, as one said, Distingue tempora, & scripturam concordabis, If there had been no persecution before that treason, this might have been assigned for some probable cause of the subsequent tribulations: but all England knoweth, that this is not so, but that his Maties sweet & mild aspect towards Catholics at his first entrance, was soon, by art of their enemies, averted long before the conspiracy fell out. For that, not only all the most cruel Statutes and penal Laws made by Q. Elizabeth were renewed and confirmed before this, 
Anno 1. jacobi Regis.  with addition of others, tending to no less rigour & acerbity: but also the exaction of the same was put in practice with great severity; & namely the payment of the twenty pounds a month, or two parts of their goods and lands for Recusants (once remitted by his Matie as here is confessed) were not only recalled again: but the arrearages thereof in like manner exacted; and for levying whereof, throughout sundry shires of the Realm (especially in the North) there was such ransacking of men's houses, such driving away of their cattle from their grounds, such straining of their Rents, such vexing of their tenants (not known perhaps to his Matie) as if the whole Country had been given over to spoil & desolation.  
XXVII. Nor were men's goods and persons only afflicted, but the lives also of sundry taken away for cause of their Religion before this powder-treason fell out: which desperate treason, to ascribe as an effect and fruit of too much clemency in his Matie (as this Minister doth) is a strange assertion, 
Apol. pag. 19  no doubt: for so much, as such effects do not proceed, but of exasperated minds; which clemency worketh not, either in men or beasts. Neither did ever any learned Philosopher, 
Clemency no cause of desperate attempts.  that wrote of the good institution of any Common wealth, or of the security of any Prince in his Government, put such effects for fruits of clemency, but rather of the contrary manner of proceeding. And if all the disastrous ends of the most unfortunate Princes, that ever have been destroyed, should be laid together, and the causes thereof exactly inquired, it would be found so: and consequently that this Minister is no good Counsellor to his Matie in this so great & weighty affair. And we hope that Almighty God, by the mercy of his dearest Son our Saviour, and through the prayers of his Maties good Mother, and other holy Princes of his Royal blood now in heaven, will never suffer him, at the egging of such exasperating people, to follow so violent, troublesome, and dangerous a course, and so contrary to theirs, whiles they lived upon earth, and so alienate from his own sweet nature and Princely disposition.  
XXVIII. But to proceed a little further in the narration of some points of heavy persecution, that ensued soon after his Maties being in England, much before the powder-treason was attempted: Who doth not know what afflictions were laid upon Catholics, even in the very first year of his Maties reign, especially towards the end thereof, & much more throughout all the second year, before the said powder-treason fell out. For than not only in the Shires and Provinces abroad: but even in London it sel●e, and in the eyes of the Court, the violence, and insolency of continual searches grew to be such, as was intolerable; no night passing commonly, 
The cruelty of searches.  but that Soldiers, & Catchpoles broke into quiet men's houses, when they were asleep, and not only carried away their persons unto prisons at their pleasure, except they would bribe them excessively, but whatsoever liked them best besides in the house, either of Books, Cups, Chalices, or other furniture, that might any ways seem, or be pretended to belong to Religion, was taken for a prey, and seized on. And among others, I remember, that one friend of mine, had a drinking Cup of silver taken from him, for that it had the name of JESUS engraven upon it, though otherwise the form thereof did well show, that it was but a Cup, & no Chalice. And these searches were made with such violence, and insolency, as divers gentlewomen were drawn or forced out of their beds, to see whether they had any sacred thing, or matter belonging to the use of Catholic Religion, either about them, or under their beds.  
XXIX. What shall I speak of the casting into prisons, & condemnation to death of many Catholics for the same cause, in every corner lightly of the Country, as namely in London of M. Hill the Priest, and this only for his function, and for coming into England against the Statutes of Queen Elizabeth to the contrary? Of M. Sugar also an other Priest in Warwick, that was not only condemned, but 
* Anno 1604. mense August.  executed withal rigour in that City for the same cause, and a lay man with him named Robert Grysold, for receiving him into his house? At Oxford also four Priests being taken at that time whose names were M. green, Tichborne, Smith, and Brisco, all had sentence of death passed upon them; though after many afflictions suffered in the prison there, which made them desire much the speedy execution of the sentence given against them, they had instead of this one death, many deaths laid upon them, by sending them prisoners to the Castle of Wisbich, where they received such cruel usage both in their diet, lodging & other treaty, as made even divers Protestants to take compassion of them. And why was all this, but for their Religion?  
XXX. I let pass the condemnation to death of a poor man in Oxford named Shitell, for that the Priest M. green had fled into his house, when he was pursued by the searchers, through which condemnation, & perpetual imprisonment thereupon ensuing, were brought to extreme misery & calamity, his poor wife and children, most lamentable to behold, or hear recounted. And upon like occasion was apprehended, imprisoned, condemned, & executed in York, about the same time, an other Lay-man named Thomas Wylborne, only for that he had used some words of persuasion to a certain woman to be a Catholic, notwithstanding the prohibition of her husband, who followed so hotly the matter against him, as he caused him to be put to death. 
divers examples of severe persecution.  I pretermit M.ris Shelley a Gentlewoman of good Worship, cast into the common jail at Worcester for that the Priest M. Hassells, was found in her house. The apprehension in like manner, & condemning to death of M. Edward Tempest Priest and Gentleman in London at the same tyme. I pass over the cruel sentence of cutting of the ears, of so ancient & venerable a Gentlemam, as is M. Tho. Pound, that had lived above thirty years in sundry prisons only for being a Catholic, and now last in his old age, had that honour from God, as to be sentenced to lose his ears and stand on the Pillory in divers markets, for complaining of hard measure, & injust execution, used against Catholics, contrary (as he presumed) to his Maties intention.  
XXXI. And finally I pass over what was practised in Herefordshire, Lancashire, & other places in this kind of persecution, and particularly concerning the new angariation and pressure, than first brought up, that men should be bound to pay for their wives, that were Recusants, a thing never before exacted in the former Queens tyme. I pretermit also to mention, how his Matie before this, had rejected the common, & humble supplication of Catholics, exhibited in writing for some toleration, & mitigation of the calamities: the which supplication was answered with contempt & insultation by a Minister, and put in print. His Matie in like manner had given public audience both to Protestants & Puritans for three days together, concerning the differences of their Religion: but to Catholics he never yielded to give any at all. And how then can this Apologer talk so much of equality used in all favours? How can he say, that there was no persecution before the powder-treason?  
XXXII. But let us go forward yet somewhat further: his Majesty had before this time upon other men's importunity, confirmed, and ratified by his Letters Patents, all that heap of Constitutions, and Canons, (being in number above an hundred & forty) which the BB. of London & Canterbury, had devised, & set forth against Catholics, for their greater vexation, & affliction. Out of which hath flowed since a huge sea of molestations and exagitations, by search, spoils citations, apprehensions, excommunications, and other violences, upon innocent and quiet people, by the ravenous hungry Pursuivants of those Prelates, and other their Catchpoles, without respect, either of justice, or hope of remedy, for injuries by them offered. There had passed also before this, the speech of the L. Chancellor in the star-chamber, 
The B. of London's Sermon 5. August. 1605.  and the Sermon of the B. of London at Paules-Crosse, both of them tending to take all hope from Catholics of any least favour, that might be expected, and the former expressly charging the judges in his Maties name, to use all severity in seeking out and punishing them. Which things being seen, and far worse feared, yea designed also and threatened, as those Gentlemen apprehended it, (especially at the next Parliament) cast them into that woeful impatience, and precipitation, which the event declared.  
XXXIII. All this than which the Apologer here telleth us, of Catholics ingratitude for so many benefits received, 
Apol. pag. 21.  during his Maties reign, and, That it is a main untruth (to use his words) and can never be proved, that any persecution hath been in his said Ma.ties government, or that any were, or are put to death or punished for cause of Conscience, is such a kind of speech, as if it were told in the Indies, many thousand miles of, where nothing is known of our countries affairs, might perhaps find some hearers that would believe it: 
Increase of persecution since the powden-treason.  but in England to avouch such a thing in Print, where all men's outward senses, eyes & ears are witnesses of the contrary, is a strange boldness. For as for persecution in goods and lands, as also of men's bodies by imprisonment, and other vexations, who can deny the same, that will not shut his said eyes, or ears, 
Statut. 4. & 5. Anno 3. jacobi Reg.  from seeing and hearing that which daily passeth within the Realm. And when nothing else were: Yet those two several and most memorable Statutes, to wit, the 4. and 5. made in the third year of this King's reign, containing more several heads of affliction, and angariation against Catholicke-Recusants for their mere Conscience, than ever, perhaps, in the world were seen extant, against any one sort of wicked men, or malefactors before; do easily convince the untruth of this asseveration about freedom from persecution. And as for death, 
Lond. 26. Febr. 1607. York. 21. Mar. 1608. Lond. 11. Apr. 1608.  which is less grievous to many than those other persecutions, the late example of M. Robert Drury, and now again these last months past, of M. Matthew Flathers, & M. Geruis Priests (to omit others) that died expressly for refusing this late devised Oath, since the powder-treason, cannot, I think, be answered, except he will say, that this Oath hath no matter of Conscience in it for a Catholic man to receive: the contrary whereof we have evidently showed before, by many demonstrations.  
XXXIV. Wherefore, that which he addeth immediately, insinuating, and expressly threatening, that as there hath been no persecution, or putting to death before (which is not true as I have showed:) so now forsomuch as the Pope hath interposed his Authority, 
Pag. 21.  and forbidden the Oath as unlawful, there may chance be greater persecution, and more abundant shedding of blood, which (as he saith) must light upon the Pope's head, for this his prohibition: All this (I say) is so spoken as each man may see, whither it tendeth: to wit, to incite his Matie by such devices, to engulf himself into the effusion of Catholics blood, casting on the pretence, and veil of the Pope's intermeddling, as cause thereof: which is an ancient Art of deceit, to give Non causam, pro causa: for that no injury is ever offered under the name of injury, but of justice or merit. And our Saviour was crucified as a deceiver of the people, 
Luc. 23. & Matth. ult. Act. 24.  & disloyal to Caesar: and S. Paul pursued as a disturber of the Wealpublicke and peace. And no suffering is so honourable, as that which cometh with a dishonourable title: so as English Catholics must not be dismayed when they suffer for the false imputation of Civil Disloyalty to their Temporal Prince, being witting to themselves, that it is indeed for their Religion, and loyalty to God, their eternal Prince, and supreme King. And this only shall suffice for this matter. For if Catholics further affliction be determined by their Adversaries, and permitted by God, pretences will not want how to do it. The proverb is already known, Facile invenies baculum, ut canem caedas, as also the fable of Aesop, that the lamb must be slain, for that drinking far beneath the well, he was pretended not withstanding, to have troubled the fountain. Catholics must be beaten, for that the Pope hath resolved a case of Conscience, that men may not swear against their own Religion. All be to the glory of God, and then finally will they lose nothing thereby, which is the only comfort in such manner of sufferings.  

The second Part of this Paragraph.  
ONE other point only is handled by the Apologer in this Paragraph, which is a large insultation against the Pope, for that he saith in his Breve, 
Apol. pag. 21.  as here is alleged, That the Oath cannot be taken with safety of the Catholic faith, and of their soul's health; since it containeth many things, that are plainly, & directly contrary to their faith and salvation. And albeit the word (directly) be conveyed in here, which is not in the Pope's Breve, & is of no small moment, as all Divines know in this matter, and therefore ought not to have been thrust in, as the Pope's word, in a different distinct letter: yet not to stand upon that, but upon more grosser points, and more injurious, he presently useth the speech, which is reported to have been of Averroes the Mahometan Philosopher against Moses' Lawgiver of the jews, 
Vixit An. 1150.  Multa dicit, sed pauca probat, he saith much but proveth little, and presently passeth to this insultation, 
Pag. 22.  How the natural allegiance of Subjects to their Prince, can be directly opposite (mark how he serveth himself of his own word shifted into the text) to the faith and salvation of souls, is far beyond my simple reading in divinity, as I must it a strange and new assertion to proceed out of the mouth of that pretended general Pastor of Christian souls.  
XXXVI. here now what abuse is offered to the words and meaning of the Breve, every simple Reader will see, without any explication from me: for that the Pope doth not prohibit natural Obedience in things lawful; nor doth say, that such natural, or civil Obedience is opposite to faith or salvation of souls; nor that the Oath is unlawful, 
The Oath why it is unlawful.  for exhibiting such natural, or civil Obedience: but for that, besides this exaction of natural Obedience, which is lawful, it containeth divers other points also, concerning matters of Catholic Religion: which points being so conjoined, and couched with the other, as the one cannot be sworn without those other, do make the whole Oath unlawful, as it lieth, without distinction, as before hath been declared. So as this charge is now proved, to be but a mere cavil, and calumniation, & voluntary mistaking of the question and controversy in hand.  
XXXVII. And yet doth he so insist in it, and so dilateth himself upon this false surmised principle (that civil Obedience is denied) as though all his Discourse and Treatise depended only of this (as indeed it doth,) and therefore he entereth into the confutation thereof with a great flourish of Scriptures, Fathers, and councils (wherein he and his do abound, when they say the same that we do, but otherwise are altogether barren) as though in earnest we did deny it: which thing never so much as passed through our cogitations, but do hold and teach that Subjects are bound to obey their Temporal Princes in all things lawful, and those not only good Princes, but bad also: and not only out of fear or flattery, but out of Conscience, as the Apostle teacheth propter Conscientiam, 
Rom. 13.  for Conscience sake, but not contra Conscientiam, against Conscience. Which being so; all is merely impertinent, that is alleged here by the Apologer, out of Scriptures, Fathers, and Counsels, to prove, that which we grant without proof, & never denied: which is, that temporal Princes are duly to be obeyed for Conscience sake, so long as they command nothing against Conscience. But let them show but one only Authority, sentence, example or testimony out of any of these three kind of witnesses, Scriptures, Fathers, or councils, that we must obey Princes against our Conscience, or Religion, and I will grant he saith somewhat to the purpose, otherwise he doth but lose time, and abuse his Reader in making him believe, that he saith somewhat when he saith nothing. Let us examine therefore some of his examples if you please.  
XXXVIII. He allegeth for examples out of the Scriptures, 
Apol. pag. 22.  That the children of Israel obeyed the King of Babylon, 
Hier. 27. 12.  as also they exhibited temporal Obedience unto King Pharaoh of Egypt; 
Exod. 5. 1.  as in like manner to Cyrus' King of Persia: 
Esdr. 1. 3.  All which examples we grant to be true, and could add many more, both of the jews, and Christians that lived peaceably under Infidel Princes in those days. But let one example (as I said) be brought forth, wherein they obeyed them in points contrary to their Conscience or Religion, and it shall be sufficient. 
Dan. 3. 12.  We read in the prophesy of Daniel, that those three famous jews, Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago, were most trusty unto King Nabuchodonosor in temporal affairs, and so much esteemed by him, as he made them his universal Governors over all the works of the Region of Babylon, saith the Scripture: and yet when it came to the point, 
No obedience against God & a man's Conscience.  that he would have them for his honour and pleasure, and upon his commandment, adore the golden Statue, which he had set up; they forsook him flatly, and said to him in the presence oh all his Nobility assembled together, that they were not so much as to answer him in that Commandment, nor would they do, as he had appointed them.  
XXXIX. The like in effect did the ancienter jews do with King Pharaoh of Egypt; for that albeit in temporal affairs they obeyed him, even in that time when he oppressed, and persecuted them most: yet in that he would have had them stay and sacrifice in Egypt, and not follow Moses their Spiritual Superior into the desert (notwithstanding that the King had some cause perhaps to suspect their temporal Allegiance, also by that departure, they being a potent multitude of people:) yet would they not obey him, nor do as he would have them, when they persuaded themselves that God would have the contrary.  
XL. I let pass how Daniel and his fellows would not eat the meats of the King of Babylon, 
Dan. 1.  nor Toby those of the Asyrians, 
Tob. 1.  & much less would he leave of to bury the dead, though it were forbidden by Proclamation under pain of death, The Maccabees in like manner obeyed King Antiochus so long, 
1. Macha. 1.  as he commanded nothing against their Law and Conscience: but when he went about to force them to sacrifice, and to eat swines-flesh, and other things against their Law and Conscience, they refused openly to perform that Obedience. So as these places of Scriptures alleged by the Apologer, do prove nothing for him at all, but are rather flat against him, and for us, as you have seen.  
XLI. And much more do make against him, 
authorities of ancient Fathers.  his authorities alleged out of the ancient Fathers, for that they go about to prove the very same point that we here hold, that in temporal & civil affairs we must obey dutifully our temporal Princes, though Infidels or Pagans: but not in matters concerning God, our Religion, or Conscience. And his very first example out of S. Augustine is such, as I marvel much, that he would city the same, but that somewhat for show must be alleged: For it maketh so clearly & directly against him, as if it had been written purposely to confute him in this our case. But let us hear what it is. agreeable to the Scriptures (saith he) did the Fathers teach. 
Apol. pag. 23.  Augustine speaking of julian, 
August. in Psal. 124.  saith thus: julian was an unbelieving Emperor, was he not an Apostata? an oppressor, and an idolater? Christian soldiers served that unbelieving Emperor: when they came to the cause of Christ, they would acknowledge no Lord, but him that is in heaven: when he would have them worship Idols & sacrifice, they preferred God before him: but when he said, go forth to fight, invade such a nation, they presently obeyed: they distinguished their eternal Lord from their temporal, and yet were they subject even unto their temporal Lord, for his sake, that was their eternal Lord and Master. Thus he.  
XLII. And can any thing be spoken more clearly for us, 
How far we are bound to our temporal Prince.  and for our cause, than this? For even thus do we offer to our King & Sovereign: we will serve him: we will obey him: we will go to war with him: we will fight for him: and we will do all other offices belonging to temporal duty: but when the cause of Christ cometh in hand, who is Lord of our Consciences, or any matter concerning the same, or our Religion; there we do, as S. Augustine here appointeth us, prefer our eternal King, before our Temporal.  
XLIII. And like to these are all the other places of Fathers cited by him, who distinguish expressly between the Temporal honour and Allegiance due to the Emperor, and the other of our Religion, & Conscience, belonging only to God. 
Apol. pag. 23.  And to that plain sense are Tertullians' words cited by the Apologer: 
Tertull. ad Scap.  We honour the Emperor in such sort as is lawful for us, and expedient for him▪ as a man second after God, and as having received from God, whatsoever he is, and only less than God. And will not the Catholics of England use this speech also unto their King? Or will the Apologer himself deny that Tertullian here meant nothing else, but in temporal affairs, for much as the Emperor at that time were Heathen & Gentiles, and consequently were not to be obeyed in any point against Christian faith or Religion?  
XLIV. The like plain doctrine have the words of justinus Martyr to the Emperor himself, cited here in the third place, 
just. Apol. 2. ad Anto. Imperat.  to wit: We only adore God, and in all other things we cheerfully perform service to you, professing you to be Emperors, and Princes of men. And do not all English catholics say the same at this day, that in all other things, that concern not God & his Obedience, by rule of Catholic Religion, they offer cheerfully to serve his Matie, acknowledging him to be their liege Lord and King, & inferior only to god in his Temporal Government? And how then are these, and such other places brought in for witness, as though they had somewhat to say against us?  
XLV. The other two sentences, in like manner cited out of Optatus, 
Optat. contra Parmen. li. 3. Ambros. Orat. contra Auxent. de Basilicis non trad. lib. s. Epist.  and S. Ambrose, the first saying: That over the Emperor there is none, but only God, that made the Emperor. And the other, That tears were his weapons against the arms, & soldiers of the Emperors: That he neither aught, or could resist: Neither of them do make any thing against us, or for the Apologer, even as they are here nakedly cited, without declaration of the circumstances: for that in temporal affairs the King or Emperor is Supreme, next under God. And when the Emperor will use secular ●orces against the Priests of his dominion, they, being no soldiers, must fall to prayers, and tears, which are Priestly weapons. But what? Did S. Ambrose by this acknowledge that the Emperor had higher Authority, than he, in Church-matters? Or that if he had offered him an Oath, repugnant to his Religion, or Conscience, in those matters he would have obeyed, or acknowledged his Superiority? No truly. For in three several occasions that fell out, he flatly denied the same, which this Apologer craftily dissembleth, 
Three occasions in which S. Ambrose resisted the Emperor his temporal Sovereign.  and saith not a word thereof.  
XLVI. The first was, when he was cited by Dalmatius the Iribune, bringing with him a public Notary to testify the same, in the name of the Emperor Valentinian the younger, to come and confer, or dispute with the heretical Bishop Auxentius, in the presence of his Matie and other of his Nobility and Counsel, which point S. Ambrose refused utterly to do, telling the Emperor plainly by a letter, written unto him; That in matters of faith and Religion Bishops must judge of Emperors, 
Libellus. Ambros. epist. 32.  and not Emperors of Bishops. And divers other doctrines, by this occasion, he taught him to that effect, as is to be seen in the same Epistle.  
XLVII. The second occasion fell out the very next year after in Milane, 
Amb. l. 1. epist. 33.  when the said Emperor, by suit of the Arrians, and favour of justina the Empress on their behalf, made a Decree that a certain Church of that City should be delivered to the said Arrians: which Decree S. Ambrose the Bishop refused to obey. And when the emperors Officers coming with arms, urged greatly to give possession of the Church, he fled to his former weapons of weeping and praying: Ego Missam facere caepi etc. I began to say Mass, and when the temporal Magistrate urged still, that the Emperor used but his own right, in appointing that Church to be delivered, S. Ambrose answered, Quae divina sunt, Imperatoriae Potestati non esse subiecta: That such things as belong to God, are not subject to the Imperial power. And thus answered S. Ambrose about the giving up of a material Church. What would he have said in greater matters.  
XLVIII. The third occasion was, when the Emperor sent his Tribunes, and other Officers to require certain Vessels belonging to the Church to be delivered, which S. Ambrose constantly denied to do, saying: That in this, he could not obey: And further adding, That if the Emperor did love himself, 
Amb. Ibid.  he should abstain from offering such injury unto Christ. And in another place, handling the same more at large, 
Ambros. Contion. de Basililcis non tradendis haer. to. 5.  he saith: That he gave to Cesar that which was Caesar's, and to God that which belonged to God: but that the Temple of God could not be the right of Cesar, which we speak (saith he) to the emperors honour. For what is more honourable unto him, then that he being an Emperor, be called a Child of the Church, for that a good Emperor is within the Church, but not above the Church. So S. Ambrose. What would he have done, or said, if he had been pressed with an Oath against his Conscience, or any least point of his Religion?  
IL. Neither doth the last place cited out of S. Gregory the Great to the Emperor Mauritius make any thing more for our Apologers purpose of taking Oaths against Conscience. For albeit the same Father do greatly complain in divers places of the oppression of the Church by the Kingly power of Mauritius, 
Apol. pag. 24.  whom (though otherwise a Catholic Emperor) he compareth in that point to Nero and Dioclesian, saying: Quid Nero? 
How S. Gregory agreed to the publishing of the law of the Emperor Mauritius.  quid Dioclesianus? quid denique iste, quihoc tempore Ecclesiam persequitur? Nunquid non omnes portae Inferi? What was Nero? what was Dioclesian? what is he who at this time, doth persecute the Church? Are they not all gates of Hell? Yet in this place alleged by the Apologer, he yielded to publish & send abroad into divers Countries and Provinces, a certain unjust law of the said Emperors, that prohibited Soldiers, and such as had been employed in matters of public accounts of the Common Wealth, to make themselves Monks: which law, though S. Gregory did greatly mislike, 
Greg. lib. 2. Epistol. 65. Indict. 11.  and wrote sharply against it, to the Emperor himself: yet to show his due respect in temporal things unto him, and for that indeed the law was not absolutely so evil, but that in some good sense, it might be tolerated, to wit, that Soldiers sworn to the Emperor's wars, might not (during the said Oath & obligation) be received into monasteries, but with the Prince's licence: yet for that it tended to the abridgement of Ecclesiastical freedom, in taking that course or state of life, which each man chooseth for the good of his soul; S. Gregory misliked the same, and dealt earnestly with the Emperor to relinquish it, or to suffer it to be so moderated, as it might stand without prejudice of Christian liberty: whereunto the Emperor at length yielded, and so S. Gregory sent the same abroad unto divers Primates and archbishops of sundry Kingdoms mentioned by him, but corrected first and reduced by himself, as supreme Pastor, to a reasonable lawfulness, and temperate moderation: to wit, That those who had borne offices of charge in the Common wealth, and after desired to be admitted to Religious life in monasteries, should not be received, until they had given up their full accounts, & had obtained public discharge for the same. And that soldiers which demanded the like admittance, should be exactly tried, and not admitted unto monastical habit, but after they had lived three years in their lay apparel, under probation.  
L. This determineth S. Gregory in his Epistle, 
Greg. lib. 7. Epist. 11. Indict. 1.  beginning, Greg●ri●s 〈◊〉 Thessalo●consi, Vrbicio Dirachitano, etc. adding further in the same Epistle, as hath been said, De qua re, Seren●inus & Christanissimus Imperator omnimdo pl●ca●●r: About which matter our most Clement and Christian Emperor is wholly pleased and content. So as in this S. Gregory showed his pastoral care and power, in limiting and moderating the emperors law, according to the law of God, though in temporal respects he showed him the Obedience, that was due unto him. But what is this unto our Oath? May we think that S. Gregory, that would not pass a temporal law of the Emperor, without reprehension of the unlawfulness thereof to the Emperor himself, and correction thereon in the publication, for that indirectly it did intringe the liberty of Religious life, when men were called thereunto, that he would not have much more resisted the admission of an Oath, about such affairs, if it had been proposed? No man, I think, in reason can imagine the contrary.  
LI. The last thing then that is cited without purpose by this Apologer, are certain Counsels, which are said to have submitted themselves to Emperors, as that of Arles in France unto Charles the Great their King for that in the last words of the said Council, the bishops there gathered together presenting the same to the same Charles write thus: Hae sub brevitate, quae emendatione digna perspeximus, 
Con●. Arel. sub Carol. Can. 26.  etc. These things briefly which we have seen worthy of reformation, we have noted & deemed to be presented to our Lord the Emperor, beseeching his Clemency if any thing be wanting to supply it by his wisdom; and if any thing be otherwise done then reason requireth, it be amended by his judgement; and if any thing be reasonably censured, it may be perfected by his help, and by the Clemency of Almighty God. So the Council. And hereof would the Apologer infer that this Council of Bishops submitted itself to the Emperor.  
LII. But I would ask him wherein? To take any Oath that the Emperor Charles should propose unto them? We see no Oath offered, nor mentioned, and so nothing here to our purpose. Wherein then, or why are they said to have submitted themselves? For that, perhaps, it is said in the Preface of the Council, that they were gathered together by order, and commandment of the said Emperor. Surely it was hard, that so many Bishops, & Archbishops should be assembled together without his liking, and Order. But that the consent, direction, and chief Commission for the same, came from the Bishop of Rome, may easily be gathered: for that in the first Council that he caused to be celebrated in his Dominions, 
Vide in Capitularibus Pranc. li. 6. c. 285. de Con●ilio Wormac.  which was that of Worms in the year of Christ 770. it was left registered in these words: Auctoritas Ecclesiastica, atque Canonica docet, non debere, absque sententia Romani Pontificis, Concilia celebrari. Ecclesiastical and Canonical Authority teacheth, that Counsels may not be held, without the allowance of the Bishop of Rome.  
LIII. And wherein then? Or why is this submission made? For approbation of matters concerning faith? No, for that you have heard before out of S. Ambrose, that therein Emperors are not judges of Bishops, but Bishops of Emperors. Wherein then, or why is this submission, or rather remission to the Emperor, and his judgement? It was, for that this Council was made only for reformation of manners and matters, at the religious instance of the good Emperor, 
Wherein the Council of Arles did submit itself to the Emperor.  the effectuating whereof did depend principally of his good will and assistance, and so after the first Canon, where briefly is set down the Confession of the Christian faith, all the other 25. Canons (for there are only 26. in all) are about reformation of matters amiss: as for more diligence in daily prayer for the emperors person, and his children, to wit, that 
a Can. 2.  Masses and Litanies be said daily for them, by all Bishops, Abbots, Monks, and Priests. 
b Can. 3.  That Bishops and Priests study more diligently, and teach the people, both by lessons and preachings: 
c Can. 4.  That lay men may not put out Priests of their benefices, without the sentence of the Bishop, nor that they take money of them for collation of the said benefices: 
d Can. 7. & 8.  That none be admitted to enter into the monasteries of Virgins, either to say Mass●, or otherwise, but such as be o● approved virtue: 
e Can. 13.  How peace is to be held between Bishops, Earls, and other Great men, especially in execution of justice: 
f Can. 15. & 16.  That weights and measures be just and equal, and that none work upon holy days: 
g Can. 20. 22. 23.  That all Tithes be paid, all ancient possessions maintained to the Churches: That no secular courts be held in Churches, or Church porches: That no Earls, or other Great men do fraudulently buy poor men's goods, etc.  
LIV. These than were the points of Reformation, decreed in that Council of Arles, 
The zeal of Charles the Great to have manners reform by the authority of Bishops.  at the instance of Charles the Great, who was so zealous a Prince in this behalf, as he caused five several councils to be celebrated in divers Parts of his Dominions, within one year, to wit, this of Arles, an other at Towers, a third at Chalons, a fourth at Mentz, the fifth at Rheims, and another the year before (which was the fixed) Ad Theodonis Villam, which is a town in Luxemburge. All which Provincial Synods are extant in the third Tome of councils, together, with the Canons and Decrees, which are such as could not be put in execution, but by the temporal favour, authority, and approbation of the Emperor in such matters, as concerned his temporal Kingdom and jurisdiction. Wherefore if for these respects, the Council did present unto the Emperor these Canons to be considered of by his wisdom, whether any thing were to be added, altered, or taken away, for the public good of the Common Wealth (no Controversy of faith being treated therein) what is this to prove, either, that the Emperor in spiritual matters was superior to the said Bishops, or that if he had proposed unto them any such Oath, as this is, wherein by professing their temporal Allegiance, they must also have impugned some point of their faith, that they would have obeyed him? And so much of this Council.  
LV. And for that, all the other authorities of other Counsels here cited, do tend only to this end of proving Temporal Obedience, which we deny not, but do offer the same most willingly: we shall not stand to answer or examine any more of them, but shall ●nd this Paragraph, with laying down the insultation of this Apologer against the Pope, upon his own voluntary mistaking the Question. I read (saith he) in the Scriptures, 
joan. 18. 36. Mat. 22. 21. Apol. pag. 26. & 27.  that Christ said, His Kingdom was not of this world, bidding us to give to Cesar that which was Caesar's, and to God that which was Gods: and I ever held it for an infallible Maxim in divinity, That temporal Obedience to a temporal Magistrate, did nothing repugn to matters o● faith o● salvation of souls. But that ever Temporal Obedience was against faith and salvation of souls, as in this Breve is alleged, was never before heard or read of in the Christian Church; and therefore, I would have wished the Pope, be●ore he had set down this Commandment to all Papists here, That since in him is the Power, by the infallibility of his spirit, to make new Articles of faith, when ever it shall please him; That he had first set it down for an Article of faith, before he had commanded all Catholics to believe, and obey it. So he.  
LVI. And I marvel, that a man professing learning, would ever so trifle, or rather wrangle, and wrongfully charge his Adversary: for that I find no such thing in the Breve at all, as that Temporal Obedience is against faith and salvation of souls: nor doth the Breve forbid it: 
Neither the Pope or Church can make any new Articles of Faith.  nor doth any learned Catholic affirm, that the Pope hath power to make new Articles of Faith: nay rather it is the full consent of all Catholic Divines, that the Pope, and all the Church together, cannot make any one new Article of belief, that was not truth before, though they may explain what points are to be held for matters of faith, & what not, upon any new heresies or doubts arising: Which articles so declared, though they be more particularly, and perspicuously known now for points of faith, and so to be believed, after the declaration of the Church then before: yet had they before the self same truth in themselves, that now they have. Nor hath the said Church added any thing to them, but this declaration only. 
3. Reg. 3.  As for example, when Solomon declared the true Mother of the child that was in doubt, he made her not the true mother thereby, nor added any thing to the truth of her being the mother: but only the declaration. Wherefore this also of ascribing power to the Pope of making new Articles of faith, is a mere calumniation amongst the rest.  
LVII. There followeth his conclusion: I will then conclude (saith he) my answer to this point in a Dilemma: Either it is lawful to obey the Sovereign in temporal things or not. If it be lawful, as I never heard or read it doubted of: then why is the Pope so unjust and cruel towards his own Catholics, as to command them to disobey their Sovereign's lawful commandment? If it be unlawful, why hath he not expressed any one cause or reason thereof? But this Dilemma is easily dissolved, or rather falleth of itself, both his pillars being but broken reeds, framed out of false suppositions: For that the Pope neither denieth it, 
Wilful mistaking of the controversy.  to be lawful, to obey the Sovereign in civil and Temporal things nor doth he command Catholics to disobey their Prince his lawful commandments: but only where they be unlawful to be performed, as he supposeth them to be in the taking of this Oath. Whereof he expresseth sundry causes, and reasons, I mean, so many as the Oath itself containeth points concerning Religion: to which end, he setteth down the whole Oath, as it lieth, with intimation, that those points cannot be sworn with integrity of Catholic Religion, & good conscience: which is sufficient for a judge, who disputeth not, but determineth. So as, hereupon to make illation of the Pope's unjust, and cruel dealing towards Catholics, by this his decision, as though he forbad Civil Obedience; is to build upon a voluntary false ground, supposing, or rather imposing the Pope to say, that which he doth not, and then to refute him, as though he had said it indeed. And is this good dealing?  
LVIII. But yet he goeth forward upon the same false ground to build more accusations against the Pope, saying: That if the foundation of his exhorting Catholics to bear patiently their tribulations, be false (as this Apologer avoucheth it to be) than it can work no other effect, then to make him guilty of the blood of so many of his sheep, whom he doth thus wilfully cast away, not only to the needle's loss of their lives, and ruin of their families: but even to the laying on of a perpetual slander upon all Papists. As it no zealous Papist could be a true Subject to his Prince: and that Religion, and the Temporal Obedience to the civil Magistrate, were two things incompatible and repugnant in themselves. Thus he.  
LIX. But who doth not see that these be all injurious inferences, enforced upon the former false suppositions, to wit, That Catholics suffer nothing for their Conscience, That there is no persecution at all in England, That there is nothing exacted by this last oath, but only and merely civil Obedience, and that in this, the Pope exhorteth them to disobey the Temporal Prince in Temporal duties, and thereby giveth just occasion to the Prince to use his sword against them, and consequently that he is cause of the effusion of their blood, and of the infamy of Catholic Religion: as though no Catholic by his Religion could be a true Subject to his Temporal Prince. All which suppositions being utterly mistaken, and not true, the more often they are repeated, the more exorbitant seemeth the oversight of the writer. And in my opinion, the very same might have been objected unto S. Cyprian and other Fathers of the Primitive Church, 
See S. Cyprian Exhort. ad Martyr.  that they were guilty of so many Martyr's blood, wilfully cast away, and of the ruin of their families, and other inconveniences, by exhorting them not to do against their Consciences, nor to yield to their Temporal Prince's Commandments against God and their Religion: no not for any torments that might be laid upon them, nor for any losses that might fall unto them, of goods, life, honour, same, friends, wife, children, or the like, which were ordinary exhortations in those days of persecution, as by their Books yet extant doth appear.  
LX. Neither is it sufficient to say, that those times and ours are different, for that the things then demanded were apparently unlawful, but these not: for that, to us that are Catholics, these things are as unlawful now, as those other were then to them, for that they are no less against our Consciences in matters of Religion. For why should it be more damnable then, and indispensible to deliver up a Bible, or new Testament, for example's sake, when the Emperor commanded it, than now to swear an Oath against our Conscience and Religion, when our Temporal Prince exacteth it? For that this, perhaps, is called the Oath of Allegiance? Who knoweth not, that the fairest title is put upon the foulest matter, when it is to be persuaded or exacted? And he that shall read the Histories of that time, and of those ancient afflictions, shall see that Act also to have been required, 
See Euseb. lib. 8. ca 4. & Aug. de Bap. lib. 7. cap. 2. & lib. 7. contra Cresc. cap. 27. & Arnob. contra Gentes lib 4. in fine.  as of Obedience and Allegiance, and not of Religion, being only the delivery up of material books: and yet did the whole Church of God condemn them for it, that delivered the same, and held for true Martyrs, all those that died for denying thereof, for that they would not do an Act against their Consciences.  
LXI. Well then, to draw to an end of this second paragraph about the two Breves of Paulus Quintus, two things more writeth this Apologer, whereunto I must in like manner say somewhat. The first is, That Pope Clemens Octaws sent into England, two Breves immediately before the late Queen's death, for debarring of his Majesty, our now Sovereign, of the Crown, or any other, that either would profess, or any way tolerate the professors of our Religion, contrary (saith he) to his manifold vows, and protestations, simul & eodem tempore, and, as it were, delivered, uno & eodem Spiritu, to divers of his majesties Ministers abroad, professing all kindness, and showing all forwardness to advance him to this Crown, etc. Wherein still I find the same vain of exaggeration, and calumniation continued by the Apologer. For having procured some knowledge of those two Breves, 
Touching the two Breves of Clemens octaws. Anno Domini 1600. & 1603.  I find them not sent into England together, nor immediately before the late Queen's death, but the one divers years before she died, and the other after her death, and this to different effects. For in the first, the Pope being consulted, what Catholics were bound to do in conscience, for admitting a new Prince after the Queen should be dead, for so much as some of different Religions, were, or might be, pretenders; he determined that a Catholic was to be preferred, not thinking (as may be presumed) to prejudice therein his Majesty that now is, of whom, upon the relations, and earnest asseverations of those his majesties Ministers abroad, who here are mentioned, he had conceived firm hope, that his Highness was not far from being a Catholic, or at least wise not altogether so alienate from that Religion, or professors thereof, as reasonable hope might not be conceived of his conversion: though in regard of not prejudicing his Title in England, the said Ministers avouched, that it was not thought expedient at that time to make declaration thereof.  
LXII. This was averred then, how truly or falsely I know not. But many letters and testifications are extant hereof, which were the cause of those demonstrations of Clemens Octaws, to favour his Maties Title, which he did so heartily and effectually, as when he, after the Queen's death, understood that he was called for into England, he wrote presently the second Breve, exhorting all Catholics to receive and obey him willingly, hoping that at leastwise they should be permitted to live peaceably under him. And this is the very truth of those two Breves: nor was there in the former any one word against his Majesty then of Scotland; and much less that he was therein called the Scottish Heretic, 
In his Charge at Norwich 4. August. anno 1606.  as Sir Edward Cook hath devised since, and falsely uttered in print without shame or conscience. Nor was there any such words, as here are alleged, against any that would but tolerate the Professors of Protestants Religion: nor was there any such double dealing or dissimulation in Pope Clement his speeches, or doings, concerning his Ma. tie as here are set down. But the truth is, that he loved his person most heartily, and always spoke honourably of him, treated kindly all those of his nation, that said they came from him, or any ways belonged unto him: and often times used more liberality that way, upon divers occasions, then is convenient, perhaps, for me to utter here: caused special prayer to be made for his Majesty, whereof, I suppose, his Highness cannot altogether be ignorant, and much less can so noble a nature be ingrate for the same, which assureth me, that those things uttered by this Apologer, so far from the truth, could not be conferred with his Majesty, but uttered by the Author thereof, upon his own spleen, against the Pope, and such as are of his Religion.  
LXIII. The second and last point affirmed by the Apologer in this Paragraph, 
To the last point.  is, that the first of these two Breves of Paulus Quintus was judged to be far against divinity, Policy, and natural sense, by sundry Catholics, not of the simpler sort, but of the best account both for learning and experience among them, whereof the Archpriest was one, and consequently, that it was held but for a counterfeit libel, devised in hatred of the Pope. etc. All this (I say) hath much calumniation in it, and little truth. For albeit some might doubt, perhaps, whether it came immediately from the Pope, Ex motu proprio, or only from the Congregation of the Inquisition, upon defectuous information of the State of the question in England (of which doubt, notwithstanding, if any were, there could be little ground:) yet no Catholic of judgement or piety, would ever pass so far, as to judge it contrary to divinity, Policy, or natural sense, and much less, to be a libel devised in hatred of the Pope. These are but devices of the Minister-Apologer: and he offereth much injury to so Reverend a man as the Archpriest is, to name him in so odious a matter, but that his end therein is well known. And if there were any such doubt, or might be before, of the lawfulness of the first Breve, now is the matter cleared by the second; and so all men see thereby, what is the sentence of the Sea Apostolic therein, which is sufficient for Catholic men, that have learned to obey, and to submit their judgements to those, whom God hath appointed for the declaration, and decision of such doubts. And thus much about those two Breves. Now let us see what is said to Cardinal Bellarmyne, for writing to M. Blackwell in this affair.    

ABOUT CARDINAL BELLARMINE'S LETTER TO Mr. BLACKWELL: And answer given thereunto, by the Apologer.  
Paragr. III.  
THE last Part of this Apology concerneth a letter written by Cardinal Bellarmine in Rome, unto George Blackwell Archpriest in England: 
Apolog. pag. 36. 37. etc.  which letter, as appear by the argument thereof, was written out of this occasion: That whereas upon the coming forth of the forenamed new Oath, entitled, Of Allegiance, there were found divers points combined together, some appertaining manifestly to Civil Allegiance, whereat no man made scruple, some other seeming to include other matters, contrary to some part of the Catholic faith, at least in the common sense as they lie; there arose a doubt whether the said Oath might be taken simply and wholly, by a Catholic man, as it is there proposed without any further distinction, or explication thereof. Whereupon some learned men at home being different in opinions, 
The State of the controversy with Card. Bellarmine  the case was consulted abroad, where all agreed (as before hath been showed) that it could not be taken wholly with safety of conscience, and so also the Pope declared the case by two several Breves.  
II. In the mean space it happened, that M. Blackwell being taken, was committed to prison, and soon after, as he had been of opinion before, that the said Oath might be taken as it lay in a certain sense; so it being offered unto him, he took it himself. Which thing being noised abroad, and the fact generally misliked by all sorts of Catholic people in other Realms, as offensive, and scandalous in regard of his place, and person, so much respected by them: Cardinal Bellarmine, as having had some old acquaintance with him in former years, as it may seem, resolved out of his particular love, & zeal to the Common cause of Religion, and special affection to his person, to write a letter unto him, thereby to let him know what reports, and judgement there was made of his fact, throughout those parts of Christendom where he remained, 
Ca Pellar. his opinion of taking the Oath.  together with his own opinion also, which consisted in two points, the one that the Oath, as it stood, compounded of different clauses, some lawful, & some unlawful, could not be taken with safety of Conscience: the other, that he being in the dignity he was of Prelacy, and Pastoral Charge, aught to stand firm and constant for example of others, & rather to suffer any kind of danger or damage, then to yield to any unlawful thing, such as the Cardinal held this Oath to be.  
III. This Letter was written upon the 28. day of September 1607. and it was subscribed thus in Latyn; Admodum R. dae Dom. is Vae. Frater & servus in Christo. Robertus Card. Bellarminus. Which our Apologer translateth, Your very Reverend Brother: whereas the word very Reverend in the letter, 
Pag. 44.  is given to the Archpriest, 
A Cavil.  and not to Card. Bellarmine, which the interpreter knew well enough, but that wanting other matter, would take occasion of cavilling by a wilful mistaking of his own, as often he doth throughout this Answer to Bellarmine, as in part will appear by the few notes which here I am to set down, leaving the moreful Answer to the Cardinal himself, or some other by his appointment, which I doubt not, but will yield very ample satisfaction in that behalf. For that, in truth, I find, that great advantage is given unto him, for the defence of his said Epistle, and that the exceptions taken there against it, be very weak and light, and as easy to be dissolved by him, and his pen, as a thin mist by the beams of the sun.  
FOUR As for example, the first exception is (which no doubt were great, 
Pag. 46.  if it were true in such a man as Cardinal Bellarmine is) that he hath mistaken the whole State of the Question, in his writing to M. Blackwell, going about to impugn only the old Oath of Supremacy, 
Whether Bellar. mistaketh the state of the Question.  in steed of this new Oath, entitled, Of Allegiance: but this is most clearly refuted by the very first lines almost of the letter itself. For that telling M. Blackwell, how sorry he was upon the report, that he had taken illicitum juramentum, an unlafull Oath, he expoundeth presently, what Oath he meaneth, saying: Not therefore (dear Brother) is that Oath lawful, for that it is offered somewhat tempered & modified, etc. Which is evidently meant of the new Oath of Allegiance, not only tempered with divers lawful clauses of Civil Obedience, as hath been showed, but interlaced also with other members, that reach to Religion: whereas the old Oath of Supremacy, hath no such mixture, but is plainly, and simply set down, for absolute excluding the Pope's Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical, and for making the King supreme Head of the Church in the same causes: all which is most evident by the Statutes made about the same, from the 25 year of King Henry the 8. unto the end of the reign of King Edward the sixth.  
V. Only I do here note by the way, 
The title of Supremacy.  that the Apologer in setting down the form of the Oath of Supremacy saith: ay A. B. do utterly testify, and declare in my Conscience, that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governor, as well in all causes spiritual as temporal, whereas in the Statute of 26. of K. Henry the 8. 
Stat. 26.  where the title of Supremacy is enacted, the words are these: 
Henr. 8. c. 1.  Be it enacted by this present Parliament, that the King our Sovereign, his heirs and successors, shallbe taken, accepted, and reputed the only Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England, called Ecclesia Anglicana, and shall have, & enjoy, annexed, and united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, as well the title and style thereof, as all honours, dignities, authorities, annuities, profitis, and commodities to the said Dignity of Supreme Head of the said Church, belonging etc.  
VI And further, whereas two years after, an Oath was devised for confirmation hereof in Parliament, the words of the Oath are set down: 
Stat. 28. H. 8. cap. 10.  That he shall swear to renounce utterly, and relinquish the Bishop of Rome, and his Authority, power, and jurisdiction etc. And that from hence forth, he shall accept, repute, and take the Kings Matie to be the only Supreme Head in earth of the Church of England etc. And that the refusers of this Oath, shall be reputed traitors and suffer the pains of death etc. And in other Statutes it is decreed, that it shall be treason to deny this title of headship to the King. And by like Decree of Parliament, it is declared under King Edward, 
Stat. 1. Edo. 6. cap. 2.  what this Authority of headshipp is, when they say: For so much as all Authority of jurisdiction spiritual, and temporal is derived, & deduced from the Kings Matie as Supreme Head of these Churches, & Realms of England and Ireland etc.  
VII. This was wont to be the doctrine of Supremacy in the times of King Henry, and King Edward, and it was death to deny this title, or not to swear the same: now our Apologer thinketh it not good to give it any longer to his Matie that now is, but calleth him only Supreme Governor, which is a new devise taken from john Reynolds, & other his fellows, who above twenty years gone, being pressed by his Adversary M. Hart, about calling Q. Elizabeth, 
Conference in the Tower. cap. 1. diuis. 1. pa. 90.  Head of the Church, he denieth flatly, that they called her so, but only Supreme Governess, which I had thought they had done in regard of her sex, that is not permitted to speak in the Church. But now I perceive they have passed the same also over to his Matie not permitting him to inherit the titles, either of King Edward, or King Henry; which misliketh not us at all, for that so far they may pass herein, as we may come to agree. For if they will understand by supreme Governor, the temporal Princes Supreme Authority over all persons of his dominions, both Ecclesiastical, and Temporal, in temporal matters, excepting only Spiritual (wherein as you have heard a little before S. Ambrose told the Christian Emperors of his time, that being Lay-men, they could not rightly meddle:) I see no great difficulty, which in this affair would remain between us.  
VIII. To return then to the Charge of oversight, and gross mistaking (to use the Apologers words) laid by him to Cardinal Bellarmine, for impugning the ancienter Oath of Supremacy, instead of this later called, Of Allegiance, & Of giving the child a wrong name (as he saith,) I see not by what least colour, or show of reason, it may stand against him. For besides that which we have said before, of the temperament, & modification mentioned by him to be craftily couched in this later Oath, which by his letter he refuteth (I mean of lawful, 
Apolog. pag. 37.  and unlawful clauses) which must needs be understood of the second Oath; he adjoineth presently the confutation of those modifications, saying: For you know that those kind of modifications, are nothing else, but sleights & subtilities of Satan, that the Catholic faith, touching the Primacy of the Sea Apostolic, might either secretly, or openly be shot at. Lo here he mentioneth both the Oaths, the one which shooteth secretly at the Primacy of the Sea Apostolic (which is the later Of Allegiance) & the other that impugneth it openly, which is the first of the Supremacy. And as he nameth the second in the first place, so doth he principally prosecute the same, & proveth the unlawfulness thereof, mentioning the other but only as by the way, for that it is as Totum ad Parten to the former, as a man can hardly speak of particular members of a body, without naming also the said body (as when S. james invegheth against the tongue, 
jac. 3.  he saith, That it inflameth the whole body:) so Card. all Bellarmine could hardly reprove the particular branches of the Oath of Allegiance, tending against sundry parts of the Pope's Primacy, without mentioning the general Oath of Supremacy, though it were not his purpose chiefly to impugn that, but the other. Which later Oath, albeit the Apologer sticketh not to say, that it toucheth not any part of the Pope's Spiritual Supremacy: yet in the very next period, he contradicteth & overthroweth himself therein. For so much, as dividing the said Oath of Allegiance into 14. 
The Oath divided into 14. parts.  several parts or parcels, twelve of them, at least, do touch the said Supremacy one way or other, as by examination you will find, and we shall have occasion after to declare more at large.  
IX. As for example, 
Apolog. pag. 49.  he writeth thus: And that the Injustice (saith he) as well as the error of Bellarmine his gross mistaking in this point, may yet be more clearly discovered; I have thought good to insert here immediately the contrary conclusions to all the points and Articles, whereof this other late Oath doth consist, whereby it may appear, what unreasonable and rebellious points he would drive his Maties Subjects unto, by refusing the whole body of that Oath, as it is conceived. For he that shall refuse to take this Oath, must of necessity hold these propositions following: First that our Soueraign● Lord King james is not the lawful King of this Kingdom, and of all other his Maties Dominions. Secondly that the Pope by his own authority may depose, etc. But who doth not see what a simple fallacy this is, which the Logicians do call A composito ad divisa, from denying of a compound, to infer the denial of all the parcels therein contained. As if some would say, that Plato was a man borne in Greece, of an excellent wit, skilful in the Greek language, most excellent of all other Philosophers, and would require this to be confirmed by an Oath, some Platonist, perhaps, would be content to swear it: but if some Stoic, or Peripatetic, or Professor of some other Sect in Philosophy, should refuse the said Oath, in respect of the last clause, might a man infer against him in all the other clauses also, Ergò he denieth Plato to be a Man? He denieth him to be borne in Greece, he denieth him to be of an excellent wit, he denieth him to be skilful in the Greek tongue, etc. Were not this a bad kind of arguing?  
X. So in like manner, if an Arrian, or Pelagian Prince, should exact an Oath at his subjects hands, 
Bad kind of arguing.  concerning divers articles of Religion, that were believed by them both, and in the end, or middle thereof, should insert some clauses, sounding to the favour of their own sect, for which the Subject should refuse the whole body of that Oath, as it was conceived; could the other in justice accuse him, for denying all the several articles of his own Religion also, which therein are mentioned? Who seeth not the injustice of this manner of dealing? And yet this is that which our Apologer useth here with Catholics, affirming in good earnest, that he which refuseth the whole body of this Oath, as it is conceived (in respect of some clauses thereof that stand against his Conscience, about matters of Religion) refuseth consequently every point and parcel thereof, and must of necessity hold (in the first place) that our Sovereign Lord King james is not the lawful King of this Kingdom, and of all other his Maties Dominions. The contrary whereof all Catholics do both confess, and profess: & consequently it is a mere calumniation that they deny this. But let us see, how he goeth, forward in proving this whole Oath to be lawful to a Catholic man's Conscience.  
XI. And that the world (saith he) may yet further see, 
Apol. pag. 52.  his Maties and whole States setting down of this Oath, did not proceed from any new invention of theirs, but as it is warranted by the word of God: 
The Oath of Allegiance confirmed by the authority of Counsels.  So doth it take the example from an Oath of Allegiance, decreed a thousand years agone, which a famons Council then, together with divers other Counsels, were so far from condemning (as the Pope now hath done this Oath) as I have thought good to set down their own words here in that purpose; whereby it may appear, that his Matie craveth nothing now of his Subjects in this Oath, which was not expressly, and carefully commanded them by the Counsels to be obeyed, without exception of persons. Nay not in the very particular point of Equivocation, which his Matie in this Oath is so careful to have eschewed: but you shall here see the said Counsels in their Decrees, as careful to provide for the eschewing of the same; 
The difference between the ancient Counsels, and the Pope's counseling of the catholics.  so as, almost every point of that Action, and this if ours, shall be found to have relation, and agreeance one with the other, save only in this; that those old Counsels were careful, and strait in commanding the taking of the same; whereas by the contrary, he, that now vaunteth himself to be Head of all councils, is as careful and straight in the prohibition of all men, from the taking of this Oath of Allegiance. So he.  
XII. And I have alleged his discourse at large, to the end you may better see his fraudulent manner of proceeding. He saith, That the example of this Oath is taken from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand years agone in the Counsels of Toledo, but especially the fourth, 
Conc. Tole. 4. can. 74.  which provided also for the particular point of Equivocation: But let any man read those Counsels, which are 13. in number, and if he find either any form of an Oath prescribed, or any mention of Equivocation, but only of flat lying and perfidious dealing; let him discredit all the rest that I do write. And if he find none at all, as most certainly he shall not; then let him consider of the bad cause of this Apologer, that driveth him to such manner of dealing, as to avouch, Every point of that Action to have agreeance with the offering of this Oath.  
XIII. True it is that those Counsels of Toledo, upon certain occasions, which presently we shall declare, do recommend much to the subjects of Spain, both Goths and Spaniards; that they do observe their Oath of fidelity made unto their Kings, 
The occasion of gathering the 4. Council of Toledo.  especially unto Sisenandus, for whose cause principally this matter was first treated in the fourth Council of Toledo, but no special form is prescribed by the said Council: nor is Equivocation so much as named therein, but only (as hath been said) jurare mendaciter▪ to swear falsely, as the words of the Council are. Which how far it is from the true nature of Equivocation hath been lately and largely demonstrated as you know.  
XIV. The cause of the treaty of this matter in the 4. Council of Toledo, was, for that one Sisenandus a Noble man of the blood of the Goths, and a great Captain, taking opportunity of the evil life of his King S●intila, whom he had served, did by some violence (as most of the 
* See Rode. Tolet. lib. 2. dereb. His. c. 19 Santius par. 2. hist. Hisp. c. 27. loan. Vasaus in Chron. His. num. 631.  Spanish Historiographers write, though confirmed afterward by the Commonwealth, and proved a very good King) and, as Paulus Aemilius in his French History recordeth, by help of Dagobert King of France, put out the said Suintila: and fearing lest the same people that had made defection to him, might by the same means fall from him again, he procured in the third year of his reign, this fourth Council of Toledo, to be celebrated of 70. Prelates, as some say, and as others, of 68 hoping by their means, that his safety in the Crown should be confirmed. Whereupon it is set down, in the Preface of the said Council, that coming into the same, accompanied with many noble and honourable persons of his train; 
Conc. Tole. 4. in Praefat.  Coram sacerdotivus Dei humi prostratus, cum lachrymis, & gemitibus pro se interueniedum postulavit: He prostrate on the ground before the Priests of God, with tears and sobs, besought them to make intercession unto God for him. And after that, religiously exhorted the Synod to be mindful of the Father's Decrees, for confirmation of Ecclesiastical rites etc. Whereupon after seventy and three Decrees made, about Ecclesiastical matters, which whosoever will read, shall find them wholly against the Protestants, 
Anno Domini 633.  as setting down, & describing the whole use of the Catholic Church then in Spain (which concurred with our first Primitive Church of England conform to that which now also is seen there) they in the last Canon, which was the 74. turned themselves to treat in like manner of matters of the Common wealth, appointing the order how their Kings for the time to come, should be established: Defuncto in pace Principe, Primates Gen. is cum Sacerdotibus, successorem Regni, consilio communi, constituant. The Prince being dead in peace, let the Nobility of the Nation, together with the Priests, by common counsel, appoint a successor in the kingdom etc.  
XV. And then next to this, 
The care of the Council for Civil Fidelity to be observed to the King.  they do excommunicate all those, that shall attempt the destruction of the present King, or shall break their Oath of Fidelity made unto him: Aut si quis praesumptione Tyrannica Regni ●as●i ium usurpaverit: or if any shall, by Tyrann. call presumption, usurp the dignity of the Crown, aut Sacramentum fidei suae, quod pro Patriae, Gentisque Gothorum sta●u, vel conservation Regiae salutis pollicitus est, 
Can. 74.  violaverit, aut Regem neci attrectauerit: If any man shall violate the Oath of his fidelity, which he hath promised for the state, or conservation of his Country, and Gothish Nation, and of the King's safety, or shall attempt the King's death etc. Let him be accursed (say they) in the sight of God the Father, and of his Angels, and cast out from the Catholic Church, which by his perjury he hath profaned; and let him be separated from all Society of Christians, together with all his associates in such attempts. And this curse they do renew and repeat divers times in that Canon; Vt haec tremenda, & toties iterata sententia, nullum ex nobis praesenti atque aeterno condemnet judicio; that this dreadful and often iterated sentence of excommunication, do not condemn any of us with judgement present, and everlasting also, if we incur the same.  
XVI. This than was the great care which those ancient Fathers (whereof the holy and learned man S. Isidorus, 
No form of Oath prescribed by the Council.  Archbishop of Seville was the first that subscribed) had of the dutiful obedience, & fidelity of subjects towards their Princes, unto whom they had once sworn the same. But as for any particular form of Oath there prescribed, whereby this new Oath now required of Allegiance may be framed, that hath so many clauses therein of scruple of conscience to the receiver, I find none at all. And no doubt, but if this King Sisenandus should have exacted of any of these Bishops, or other his subjects, such an Oath of Allegiance, as should have been mixed with any clauses prejudicial to any of those points of Ecclesiastical affairs, which are handled and decreed by them, in the said 73. precedent Canons of this Council, or others contrary to their Conscience or judgement in Religion: they would have been so far of from yielding thereunto, as they would rather have given their lives, than their consents to such an Oath.  
XVII. But to go forward, and speak a word or two more of this Council of Toledo. After those 70. Fathers had taken this order for the temporal safety of their Prince, and Gothish Nation (for that was a principal point that none should be admitted to the Crown, but of that race) they turn their speech to the present King Sisenandus, 
What the Council demanded at K. Sisenandus his hands towards his people.  and to his successors, making this exhortation unto him. Te quoquè praesentem Regem, ac ●uturos aetatum sequentium Principes, humilitate, qua debemus, deposcimus, ut moderati & mites erga subiec●os existentes etc. We with due humility, do require at your hands also that are our present King, and at the hands of those that shall ensue in future times, that you be moderate and mild towards your subjects, and do rule your people committed unto you by God, in justice and piety; and do yield to Christ, the giver of all your power, good correspondence by reigning over them, in humility of heart, and endeavour of good works etc. And we do promulgate here against all Kings to come this sentence; Vt si quis ex eyes, contra reverentiam legum, superba dominatione, & fastu Regio in flagitiis crudelissimam potestatem in populis exercuerit, Anathematis sententia à Christo Domino condemnetur. etc. That if any of them shall against the reverence of the laws, by proud domination, and Kingly haughtiness, exercise wickedness, and cruel power upon the people committed to their charge, let him be condemned of Christ, by the sentence of curse; and let him have his separation, and judgement from God himself.  
XVIII. After this, for better establishment of the said present King Sisenandus, 
The deposition of K Suintila confirmed by the Council.  they do confirm the deposition and expulsion, from the Crown, of the foresaid King Suintila, (which by error of the print, is called in the Book of councils, Semithilana) pronouncing both him his wife, and their brother, to be justly expulsed for their wickedness: though the foresaid S. Isidorus, then living, and writing the History of Spain, dedicated to this King Sisenandus, doth speak much good of the 
* See Chro. Vasaei nu. 631.  former part of the other King his life and reign. And finally some five years after this again in the sixth Council of Toledo, being gathered together in the same Church of S. Leocadia, the said Bishops, together with the Nobility, did make this law, and prescribed this form of Oath to all Kings of that nation, Vt quisquis succedentium, 
Conc. Tol. 6. ca 3:  temporum Regni sortitus suerit apicem, non anteà conscendat Regiam Sedem, quam inter reliquas conditiones, Sacramento pollicitus fuerit, hanc se Catholicam non permissurum eos violare fidem. That whatsoever future King, 
An Oath prescribed by the Council to Kings.  shall obtain the height of this Kingdom, he shall not be permitted to ascend to the Royal seat thereof, until he have sworn, among other conditions, that, he will never suffer his subjects to violate this Catholic faith, Mark that he saith (this) which was the Catholic faith then held in Spain, and explicated in those Counsels of Toledo; the particulars whereof do easily show, that they were as opposite to the Protestant faith, as we are now.  
XIX. So as, all this is against the Apologer: for that in these councils no particular form of any Oath was set down, or exhibited at all to Subjects, that we can read of, but only in general, it is commanded, That all do keep their Oath of Allegiance sworn to their Princes, at their first entrance, or afterward. Which thing, no Pope did ever forbid, and all English Catholics at this day do offer willingly to perform the same to this Matie; and consequently, all that ostentation made by the Minister before, That this Oath is no new invention: That it doth take the example from an Oath of Allegiance decreed a thousand years gone, by a famous Council: That the Council provided in particular for the points of Equivocation: That almost every point of that action hath agreeance with this of ours, saving only in this, that the Council was careful, & strait in commanding the taking of the same, and Pope Paulus careful and straight in the prohibition etc.  
XX. All this, I say, falleth by itself to the ground: for so much, as neither that Council commanded the taking of any Oath, nor prescribed any form to Subjects, nor Pope Paulus prohibiteth this, so far as it concerneth Temporal, and Civil Obedience, as hath been declared. And whatsoever the Apologer citeth more out of these Counsels, the meanest Reader, by looking upon it, will easily espy, that it maketh nothing at all for him, or against us, and consequently the entering into the narration of this matter, with so great ostentation, as, That the world may see, that it proceeded not of any new invention, but is warranted by the word of God, authorized by so ancient a Council, and the like: All this (I say) was needles; for so much, as nothing is found in this Council that agreeth with our case, but only the naming and recommending of an Oath of fidelity, wherein we also fully agree and consent with our Adversary.  

The second Part of this Paragraph.  
NOw then to come to the particular Answer of our Apologer to the Cardinal's Letter, 
Contradictions objected to the Cardinal.  he doth for divers leaves together, as it were, dally with him, picking quarrels here and there, until he come to the main charge of contradiction of himself, to himself, not only in this Letter, but throughout all his works. And albeit I doubt not, but that the Card.ll or some other by his appointment, will discuss all these matters largely and sufficiently: yet for so much, as I have promised to give you my judgement of all, I shall briefly in like manner lay forth what I have observed about these pointe●.  
XXII. Page 57 of his Apology he writeth thus: That some of such Priests, and jesuits, as were the greatest traitors, and fomentors of the greatest conspiracies, against her late Majesty, gave up F. Robert Bellarmyne, for one of their greatest authorities, and Oracles. And for proof he citeth in the margin Campian and heart: 
Card. Bellar. Wrongfully charged with conspiracies.  See the Conference in the Tower. By which I discover a greater abuse than I could have imagined, would ever have come from a man careful of his credit: for I have seen and perused the Conference of Mr. D. john Reynolds with M. john Hart in the Tower, upon the year 1583. two years after the death of F. Campian, and there it appeareth indeed that the said M. Hart allegeth divers times the opinions and proofs of F. Robert Bellarmyne, then public Reader of Controversies in Rome, but always about matters of divinity and Controversies, and never about Treasons or Conspiracies. And as for F. Campian, he is never read to mention him, either in the one or the other. Consider then the deceitful equivocation here used, that for so much, as M. Hart alleged F. Robert Bellarmine sometimes in matters of Controversy in that conference, therefore both he & F. Campian alleged him for an Author and Oracle of Conspiracy against the Queen. And how can these things be defended with any show or probability of truth?  
XXIII. Page 60. he frameth a great reprehension against the Card.ll for that in his letter he saith, that this Oath is not therefore lawful, for that it is offered as tempered and modified. Whereupon the Apologer plieth, and insulteth, as though the Card.ll had reprehended the temperate speech therein used, adding, That in Luther and others of the Protestant writers, we mislike their bold & free speaking, as coming from the devils instinct. And now if we speak (saith he) moderately, and temperately, it must be termed the devils craft, and therefore we may justly complain with Christ, That when we mourn, they will not lament, and when we pipe they will not dance. And neither john Baptist his severity, nor Christ his meekness can please them, who build but to their own Monarchy, upon the ground of their own Traditions, and not to Christ, etc. Thus he, and much more exprobration to this effect, that we mislike the temperate style and speech used in this Oath of Allegiance. But all is quite mistaken, and the Apologer hath just cause to blush at this error, if it were error and not wilful mistaking. For that Bellarmyne doth not say, that this Oath is temperate in words, but tempered in matter, aliquo modo temperatum & modificatum: in a certain sort tempered and modified by the offerers, in setting down some clauses lawful, touching civil Obedience, and adjoining others unlawful, that concern Conscience, and Religion. Which meaning of Bellarmyne is evident by the example, which he allegeth, of the Ensigns of the Emperor julian, out of S. Gregory Nazianzen, to wit; That the images of Pagan Gods were mingled, and combined together with the emperors picture, & thereby so tempered, and modified, as a man could not adore the one, 
A voluntary mistaking of temperate for tempered.  without the other. Which being so, let the indifferent Reader consider what abuse is offered to Card. all Bellarmyne, in charging him to mislike temperate speech in the form of this Oath, which of likely hood he never thought on, and yet thereon to found so great an inference, as to accuse him to build thereby to a Monarchy, and not to Christ. Is this a token of want of better matter, or no?  
XXIV. Page 62. the Apologer having said with great vehemency of asseveration, That heaven and earth are no further asunder, than the profession of a Temporal Obedience, to a Temporal King, is different from any thing belonging to the Catholic faith, or Supremacy of S. Peter (which we grant also, if it be mere Temporal Obedience without mixture of other clauses:) 
Two questions proposed and solved.  he proposeth presently two questions for application of this to his purpose. First this: As for the Catholic Religion (saith he) can there be one word found in all this Oath, tending to matter of Religion? The second thus: Doth he that taketh it, promise to believe, or not to believe any article of Religion? Whereunto I answer first to the first, and then to the second. To the first, that if it be granted, that power, and authority of the Pope, and Sea Apostolic left by Christ, for governing his Church in all occasions & necessities, be any point belonging to Religion among Catholics, them is there not only some one word, but many sentences, yea ten or twelve articles, or branches therein, tending and sounding that way as before hath been showed.  
XXV. To the second question may make answer every clause in effect of the Oath itself. As for example the very first: 
Clauses of belief or not belief in the Oath.  ay A. B. do truly, and sincerely acknowledge, profess, testify, & declare in my Conscience, that the Pope neither of himself, nor by any authority of the Sea or Church of Rome, hath any power & authority to etc. doth not this include either belief, or unbelief? Again: I do further so ear, that I do from my heart abhor, detest, & abjure, as impious, & heretical, that damnable doctrine, & position, That Princes which be excommunicated, and deprived by the Pope, may be deposed etc. Doth not here the swearer promise, not to believe that doctrine which he so much detesteth? How then doth the Apologer so grossly forget, and contradict himself, even then, when he goeth about to prove contradictions in his Adversary?  
XXVI. It followeth consequently in the Oath: And I do believe, 
Pag. 12.  and in Conscience am resolved, That neither the Pope, nor any person whatsoever, hath power to absolve me from this Oath, or any part thereof. These words are plain as you see. And what will the Apologer say here? Is nothing promised in those words to be believed, or not to be believed?  
XXVII. But now we come to the contradictions of Cardinal Bellarmyne, whereof the Apologer taketh occasion to treat, for that the Cardinal affirmeth in one part of his letter, That neither his Majesty of England, nor any Prince else, hath cause to fear violence from the Pope; for that it was never heard of, from the Church's infancy, until this day, that any Pope did command, 
Apolog. 38. & 64.  That any Prince, though an Heretic, though an Ethnic, though a Persecutor, should be murdered, or did allow the murder, when it was done by an other. 
Bell. lib. s. de Pon. c. 8. & lib. 3. cap. 16.  Which assertion, the Apologer to improve, bringeth in examples first of doctrine, that Bellarmyne himself doth hold, That Princes upon just causes may be deposed by Popes: and then of facts, That divers Emperors have been deposed, and great wars raised against them, by Popes, as Bellarmyne in his works doth confess, and cannot deny, and consequently doth contradict himself. But surely this seemeth to me a very simple opposition or contradiction. For who doth not see, that these things may well stand together, are not opposite, and may be both true; That Popes upon just causes, have waged wars against divers Princes, and Potentates; and yet never caused any to be unlawfully made away, murdered, or allowed of their murders committed by others. For, may not we say justly, that warlike Princes are no murderers, though in the Acts of wars themselves, many have been slain, by their authority and commandment? Or may not we deliver our judges of England, from the crime of murder, though many men's deaths have proceeded from them, by way of justice? No man (I think) will deny it.  
XXVIII. And so if some Popes have had just wars with some Princes, Kings or Emperors, or have persuaded themselves, that they were just, in respect of some supposed disorders of the said Princes (as here is mentioned the war, and other hostile proceedings of Pope Gregory the seventh against the Emperor Henry the fourth) this is not contrary to the saying of Cardinal Bellarmyne, 
Touching Henry the 4.  That no Pope ever commanded any Prince to be murdered, or allowed thereof, after it was done by an other. For as for that which here is affirmed by the Apologer, That the Pope was enraged at the Emperor Henry the 5. 
Pag. 65. 66. Platin. & Cusp. in vita Henrici 4.  for giving burial to his Father's dead corpse, after the Pope had stirred him up against his Father, and procured his ruin, neither proveth the matter, nor is altogether true, as here it is alleged. Not the first: for this proveth not, that the Pope either commanded or procured this death, which Bellarmyne denied. Not the second: for that the two Authors by him cited in his margin, to wit, Platina and Cuspinian, do not aver the same. For in Platina I find no such thing at all; and Cuspinian his words are plain to the contrary: 
Cusp. in Henrico quarto.  That when Henry the Father was dead, and buried in a Monastery at Liege, his Son would not make peace with the Bishop of that place, called 
* See Naucler. part. 2. gen. 37. in anno 1106. & Crantz. lib. 5. Saxo. cap. 24.  Otbert, except the dead body were pulled out of the grave again, as it was, and so remained for five years.  
XXIX. And again Cuspinian writeth, That the report was, that Gregory the 7. did before his death absolve the Emperor; but that his Son Henry the 5. and his followers never left to solicit the succeeding Popes until he was excommunicated again, 
Cuspin. in Henrico 4.  & thereupon had afterward this Christian burial denied him. And how then, is all this ascribed to the Pope, which proceeded from the Some against his Father? Our Apologer saith, That he was set on by the Pope to rebel against him, but this his witnesses affirm not. For Cuspinian saith that it was, Suasu Marchionis Theobaldi, Berengarij Comitis Noricorum, & Ottonis sibi ex materna s●irpe cognati. And in this commonly agree all other Authors, as 
a Vrspergensis in anno 1106.  Vrspergensis, who then lived, 
b Crantz. in Saxo. lib. 5. cap. 17.  Crantzius, 
c Sigon. de regno Italiae lib. 9 in anno 1105.  Sigonius, 
d Nauclerus part. 2. gen. 37. in anno 1105. & alij.  Nauclerus, and others. And why then is this so unjustly laid upon the Pope? What Author can he bring for it, that avoucheth the same? Why is it covertly cast in, as though this matter appertained to Gregory the seventh, who in his life had wars with Henry the fourth, but yet died before him? here than nothing is so apparent, as the desire to say much against Popes, with never so little occasion, and less proof. But let us go forward.  
XXX. In the second place he produceth the approbation of the slaughter of the late King of France by Pope Sixtus in his speech in the Consistory: But no record of credit, either in Rome or elsewhere, can be found to testify, that any such speech ever was had by Pope Sixtus. 
Apolog. pag. 66.  And I understand that divers Cardinals are yet living, who were then present in the first Consistory, after that news arrived, who deny that Sixtus ever uttered any such words, as of the allowance of that horrible fact, though he might, and did highly admire the strange providence of God, in chastising by so unexpected a way, so foul and impious a murder, as that King had committed upon a Prince, Bishop, and Cardinal (and those nearest of blood unto his Majesty of England) without any form of judgement at all. And that a spectacle hereby of God's justice was proposed unto Princes, 
The example of K. Henry the 3. of France his death.  to be moderate in their power, and passions: for that in the midst of his great and Royal army, and corporal guards, he was strangely slain by a simple unarmed man, when nothing was less expected, or feared. Nor can any thing be more improbable or ridiculous to be imagined, then that which is here affirmed by our Apologer (and yet, he saith, he is sure thereof) That this friar, which killed the King, should have been canonised for the fact, if some Cardinals, out of their wisdom, had not resisted the same. No such thing being ever so much as imagined, or consulted of, as many do testify who were then in Rome. So as nothing is more common here, then bold assertions without witnesses.  
XXXI. And the like may be said to his third example of the late Queen of England, against whose life (he saith) that so many practices, and attempts were made, and directly enjoined to those traitors, by their Confessors, and plainly authorized by the Pope's allowance. 
Apolog. pag. 67.  So he saith. But if a man would ask him, how he can prove, that those things were so directly enjoined, and plainly authorized, what answer will he make? You shall hear it in his own words, for he hath but one: For verification (saith he) there needeth no more proof, then that never Pope, either then or since, called any Churchman in question, formedling in those treasonable conspiracies. And needeth no more (Sir) but this, 
Priests put to death for feigned conspiracies.  to condemn both Confessors and Popes of conspiring the last Queen's death, That no Pope hath called in question, or punished any Cleargy-man for such like attempts? What i● he never knew of any such attempt? What if he never heard of any Clergyman to be accused thereof, except such as were put to death by the Queen herself, either culpable or not culpable? What if he saw some such ridiculous false devices, made against some Priests to make their whole company and cause odious, as justly discredited with him all their other clamours and calumnious accusations in that behalf? As that of Squier, induced (as was said) by Fa. Walpole in Spain to poison the Queen's chair, 
An. 1598.  or the Earl of Essex his saddle, which was so monstrous a fiction, and so plainly proved for such in foreign Countries (and so confessed by the miserable fellow at his death) as took all credit from like devices in these attempts, of holding the Queen in perpetual frights, to the end, she should never attend to the true way of remedy.  
XXXII. And with what little care of sincerity. or of punctual truth, all these things are here, and elsewhere, cast out at random, to make a sound and noise in the Readers ears, 
Facility & custom of overlashing.  appeareth sufficiently in the very next sequent words, wherein speaking of Doctor Sanders he saith: That whosoever will look upon his Books, will find them filled with no other Doctrine than this. And will any man think it probable or possible that so many books as Doctor Sanders hath written, both in Latyn and English, and of so different arguments concerning Religion, have no other Doctrine in them, but this of killing, and murdering of Princes? And that other assertion also, that ensueth within very few lines after, against Cardinal Bellarmynes whole Works, That all his large and great Volumes are filled with contradictions, whereof we are to treat more presently. Now only I do note the facility, and custom of overlashing in this Apologer.  
XXXIII. To conclude then about Queen Elizabeth. Albeit Pius Quintus, and some other Popes did excommunicate her, and cut her of from the body of the Catholic Church by Ecclesiastical Censures, in regard of her persecuting Catholic Religion: yet did I never know it hitherto proved, that any Pope procured or consented to any private violence against her person: albeit, if the forealleged Statute of the 28. year of King Henry the 8. be true, wherein it is determined both by the King himself, his Counsel, and whole Parliament, as by the Archbishop Cranmer, with his Doctors, in his judicial Seat of the Arches, that Lady Elizabeth was not legitimate, nor that her mother was ever King Henry's true wife (which once being true, could never afterward by any human power be made untrue, or amended to the prejudice of a third, rightly by due succession interessed therein:) & if, 
Statut. an. 28. H. 8. c. 7  as the whole Parliament testified, it should be Against all honour, equity, reason, and good conscience, that the said La. Elizabeth, should at any time possess the said Crown, than the said Popes, 
Q. Elizab. against conscience held the Crown from his majesties Mother 44. years.  respecting in their said sentence (as it is certain they did) the actual right of the Queen of France and Scotland, and of her noble issue his Matie that now is, they might proceed, as they did, against the other, for her removal (whom they held for an usurper) in favour of the true inheritors oppressed by her, not only by spiritual, but temporal arms also, as against a public Malefactor and intruder contrary to right and conscience. And I cannot see, how this fawning Apologer, can either without open untruth, or manifest injury to his Majesty, aver the contrary. Which being true, doth greatly justify the endeavours and desires of all good Catholic people, both at home and abroad against her, their principal meaning being ever known to have been the deliverance, & preferment of the true Heir, most wrongfully kept out, & injustly persecuted for righteousness sake.  
XXXIIII. This then being so, and nothing proved at all against Popes for their murdering attempts against Princes, which Cardinal Bellarmyne denied: yet this Apologer, as if he had proved much against him, in this point of contradicting himself, he writeth thus: But who can wonder at this contradiction of himself in this point, when his own great Volumes are so filled with contradictions, which when either he, or any other shall ever be able to reconcile, I will then believe that he may easily reconcile this impudent strong denial of his, in his letter, of any Pope's meddling against Kings. Wherein is to be noted first, that whereas Card.ll Bellarmine doth deny any Pope's murdering of Princes, 
Unjust dealing against the Cardinal.  this man calleth it, An impudent strong denial of any Pope's meddling against Kings, as though meddling, and murdering were all one. Is not this good dealing? Truly if the Card.ll had denied, that ever any Pope had dealt, or meddled against any King, or Prince, upon any occasion whatsoever, it had been a strong denial indeed: but for so much, as he saith no such thing, I marvel of the Apologers proceeding in this behalf, for with the word impudent I will not meddle. But let us hear him yet further. 
Ibid.   
XXXV. And that I may not seem (saith he) to imitate him, in affirming boldly that, which I no ways can prove, I will therefore send the Reader, to look for witnesses of his contradictions in such places here mentioned in his own book. Thus he, very confidently, as you see, And verily I cannot but marvel, that he knowing how many men of learning would look upon the places themselves, (for I understand now also that the book is out in latin) would not be ashamed in himself, to suffer their judgement of him and his doings in this behalf: albeit he had not respected the Cardinal's answer, which must needs be with exceeding advantage against him, such as, in truth, I am ashamed for Country sake, that strangers should laugh us to scorn for such manner of writing. For if I do understand any thing, and that mine own eyes, and judgement do not deceive me, this Apologer will remain under, in all & every one of these oppositions, no one of them being defensible in the nature of a true contradiction, 
Card. Bellarmynes Volumes much justified by these objected contradictions.  and consequently Cardinal Bellarmynes great volumes of Controversies, will not only, not be proved full of Contradictions by this taste here given, as is pretended: but will rather be infinitely justified; that in so many great Volumes, this Author hath not been able to pick out any better contradictions than these. Whereof again, I must say and avouch, that no one seemeth to me any contradiction at all, if they be well examined.  
XXXVI. And though I mean not to discuss them all in this place, nor the greater part of them, they being eleven in number, as hath been said, both for brevities sake, and not to pervent the Cardinals own Answer, and satisfaction therein (which I doubt not but will be very sufficient, and learned:) yet three or four I shall touch only, for example's sake, thereby to give the Reader matter to make conjecture of the rest. This than he beginneth his list of eleven contradictions against the said Cardinal.  
XXXVII. First in his books of justification (saith he) Bellarmyne affirmeth, 
The first supposed contradiction.  that for the uncertainty of our own proper righteousness, and for avoiding of vain glory, it is most sure and safe, to repose our whole confidence in the alone mercy and goodness of God: 
Bellar. de justify. lib. 5. cap. 7. Apol. 68  which proposition of his, is directly contrary to the discourse, & current of all his five books De justificatione, wherein the same is contained etc. Of this 〈◊〉 contradiction we have said somewhat before, to wit, That it is strange, that five whole books should be brought in, as contradictory to one proposition. For how shall the Reader try the truth of this objection? Shall he be bound to read all Bellarmynes five books, to see whether it be true or no? Had it not been more plain dealing to have alleged some one sentence, or conclusion contradictory to the other? But now shall we show, that there can be no such contradiction betwixt the sentence of one part of his said Book of justification, & the whole discourse or current of the rest: for that Bellarmyne doth make all the matter clear, by soiling three several Questions in one Chapter, which is the seventh of the fifth Book here cited.  
XXXVIII. The three Questions are these, 
Three Questions about Confidence in merits answered by Bellarmine.  about Fiducia, quae in meritis collocari possit, what hope and confidence, may be placed, by a Christian man, in his good works, and merits. The first Question is, whether good works, in a Christian man, do increase hope and confidence by their own nature, and the promise of reward made unto them? And Bellarmyne answereth that they do: and proveth it by many places of Scriptures, as that of Toby the 4. where it is said: That almsdeeds shall give great confidence, and hope to the doers thereof in the sight of God. 
Tob. 4.  And job sayeth: That he which liveth justly, 
job. 11.  shall have great confidence, and hope, and shall sleep securely. And S. Paul to Timothy saith: That whosoever shall minister well, 
1. Tim. 3.  shall have great confidence, etc. And I omit divers other plain places of Scriptures, and Fathers there alleged by him, which the Reader may there peruse to his comfort, showing evidently, that the conscience of a virtuous life, and good works, doth give great confidence to a Christian man, both while he liveth, and especially when he cometh to die.  
XXXIX. The second Question is, whether this being so, a man may place any confidence wittingly in his own merits, or virtuous life. And it is answered, That he may; so it be with due circumstances of humility, for avoiding pride, and presumption. For that a man feeling the effect of God's grace in himself, whereby he hath been directed to live well, may also hope, that God will crown his gifts in him, as S. Augustine's words are. And many examples of Scriptures are alleged there by Card.ll Bellarmyne of sundry holy Saints, Prophets and Apostles, that upon just occasion mentioned their own merits, as g●●ts from God that gave them hope and confidence of his merciful reward: and namely that saying of S. Paul: I have fought a good fight, I have consummated my course, I have kept my faith, etc. and then addeth, 
2. Tim. 4.  that in regard hereof, Reposita est mihi Corona justitiae, A crown of justice is laid up for me, which God the just judge shall restore unto me.  
XL. The third Question is (supposing the sore said determinations) what counsel were to be given: Whether it be good to put confidence in a man's own merits or no? whereunto Card.ll Bellarmyne answereth, in the words set down by the Apologer, That for the uncertainty of our own proper justice, and for avoiding the peril of vain glory, the surest way is to repose all our confidence in the only mercy and benignity of God; 
The sum of Cardinal Bellarmynes discourse and Answer.  from whom and from whose grace our merits proceed. So as albeit Card.ll Bellarmyne doth confess, that good life, and virtuous acts do give hope, and confidence of themselves, and that it is lawful also by the example of ancient Saints, for good men to comfort themselves with that hope and confidence: yet the surest way is to repose all in the benignity and mercy of almighty God, who giveth all, and is the Author, as well of the grace, as of the merits, and fruits of good works that eusue thereof. And thus hath Cardinal Bellarmyne fully explicated his mind in this one Chapter, about Confidence in good works, by solving the foresaid three different Questions, whereof the one is not contrary to the other, but may all three stand together. And how then is it likely, that the foresaid proposition, of reposing our Confidence in the mercy of God, should be contradictory, as this man saith, to the whole discourse and current of all his five Books of justification? Let one only sentence be brought forth, out of all these five Books that is truly contradictory, and I shall say he hath reason in all the rest of his overlashing.  
XLI. His second objected contradiction is as good as this, 
The second supposed contradiction about Moraliter.  which he setteth down in these words. 
a Bellar. de amiss. great. & stat. peccat. l. 2. c. 13.  God (saith Bellarmine) doth not incline a man to evil, either naturally or morally: and presently after he affirmeth the contrary, saying: 
b Ibid. paul● post.  That God doth not incline to evil naturally but morally. But this is a plain fallacy of the Apologer, for that the word morally is taken here in two different senses, which himself could not but see. For first Card.ll Bellarmyne having set down the former proposition, That God doth not incline a man to evil, either Physicè vel Moraliter, naturally or morally, he expoundeth what is understood by each of these terms, to wit, That Natural or Physical concurrence is, when God concurreth to the substance of the action, as moving or impelling a man's will: but Moral concurrence is, when he doth command or ordain any sin to be done. As for example, If a great man should concur to the murder of another, he may do it in two manners, either Naturally or Phisically, concurring to the action itself of poisoning, strangling, or the like: or Morally, by counseling or commanding the same to be done, which is properly called Moral concurrence. And by none of these two ways, God doth concur to the committing of a sin.  
XLII. But there is a third way of concurring, 
Occasional concurrence to a sin what it is.  termed Occasionalicer, occasionally, or by giving occasion, which improperly also may be called Moral: and this is, When God seeing an evil man evill-disposed, to do this or that sin, though he do not concur thereunto by any of the foresaid two ways, of assisting or commanding the action to be done: yet doth he, by his divine providence, and goodness, make occasions so to fall our, as this sin, and not that, is committed; and consequently it may be said, That almighty God, without any fault of his, or concurrence in any o● the foresaid two ways, hath been the Occasional cause of this sin. 
Gen. 37.  As for example, we read in Genesis, That when the brethren of joseph were obstinately bend to kill him, God, by the pulling by of certain I smaelites, Merchants of Galaad, gave occasion of his selling into Egypt; so as he was hereby some Occasional, or Moral cause of this lesser sin, for eschewing the greater, but not in the former sense of Moral concurrence, which includeth also commandment.  
XLIII. This Occasional concurrence then, though in some large sense, it may be called also Moral: yet is it much different from the former, and consequently, the one may be affirmed, and the other denied, without any contradiction at all. And so this second observation against Cardinal Bellarmyne, is wholly impertinent: for that Contradictio must be in eodem, respectu eiusdem, which here is not verified. For that when the Cardinal saith in the first place, That God doth not concur Morally to sin, he meaneth by commanding or counseling the same: & when in the later place, he granteth, That God doth concur sometimes Morally, he meaneth by giving occasion only for this sin to be committed, rather than that, which is a plain different thing.  
XLIIII. And of the same quality is the third Contradiction, 
The third supposed contradiction, about Bishops succeeding of the Apostles.  set down by the Apologer in these words: All the Fathers teach constantly (saith Bellarmyne) that Bishops do succeed the Apostles, and Priests the seventy disciples. And then in another part of his works, he affirmeth the contrary: That Bishops do not properly succeed the Apostles. But whosoever shall look upon the places here quoted, 
Bellarm. de Cler. lib. 1. cap. 14.  shall find this to be spoken in divers senses, to wit, that they succeed them in power of Episcopal Order, and not in power of jurisdiction, and other extraordinary privileges: 
Lib. 4. de Pontif. c. 25.  so as both those do well stand together. And the like I say of the 4. contradiction objected, which is, That judas did not believe: & yet in an other place, 
The 4. contradiction about judas.  That judas was just, and certainly good: which is no contradiction at all, if we respect the two several times, whereof Cardinal Bellarmyne doth speak, 
Lib. 1. de Pontif. c. 12. Lib. 3. de justif. cap. 14. Io. in. 6.  proving first, out of S. john's Gospel, by the interpretation of S. Hierome, that judas at the beginning was good, and did believe; and then by other words of Christ in the same Evangelist, uttered a good while after the Apostles vocation, That he was a devil. and believed not. And who but our Apologer, would found a contradiction against so learned a man as Bellarmyne is, upon a manifest Equivocation of times, whereby he may no less argue with Bellarmyne for calling S. Paul an Apostle and persecutor, and Nicolaus an elect of the holy Ghost, and yet an Heretic, for that the one was a Persecutor first, and then an Apostle, and the other first a chosen Deacon by the holy Ghost, and afterward an Heretic, possessed by the devil, as most do hold.  
XLV. But I should do injury (as before I said) both unto Cardinal Bellarmyne and myself, if I should go about to answer these supposed contradictions at length. To the Cardinal, in preventing him, that will do it much better. Unto myself, in spending time in a needle's labour, for so much as every one of mean judgement, that will but look upon the books, and places themselves here cited, will discover the weakness of these objections, and that they have more will, than ability to disgrace Cardinal Bellarmyne.  
XLVI. After the objecting then of these devised contradictions, our Apologer returneth again to exagitate yet further the foresaid saying of Bellarmyne, 
The Apologer returneth to calumniate Popes.  That neither his Majesty, nor other King hath need to fear any danger to his Royal Person, by acknowledging the Pope's spiritual authority in his Kingdom, more than other Christians, and monarchs have done heretofore, or do now in other Kingdoms round about him, who admit the same Authority and have done even from the beginning of their Christianity, without any such dangers of murder incurred thereby. Whereupon this Apologer maketh a large new excursion, numbering up a great Catalogue of contentions, that have fallen out, between some Popes and Emperors, & the said Emperors received hurts, damages, and dangers thereby, and consequently had cause to fear, contrary to that which Bellarmyne writeth.  
XLVII. And in this enumeration the Apologer bringeth in the example of the Emperor Henry the 4. brought to do penance at the Castle of Canusium, 
Examples objected of Princes molested by Popes.  by Pope Gregory the seventh; as also of the Emperor Frederick the first, forced by Pope Alexander the third to lie agroofe (as his word is) on his belly, and suffer the other to tread on his neck: Of the Emperor Philip, that is said to have been slain by Otho at the Pope's motion; and that in respect thereof, 
Apolog. pag. 72. 73.  the said Otho going to Rome, was made Emperor, though afterward the Pope deposed him also: Of the Emperor Frederick the second, excommunicated, and deprived by Pope Innocentius the fourth, who in Apulia corrupted one to give him poison, and this not taking effect, hired one Manfredus to poison him, whereof he died: That Pope Alexander the third wrote to the Soldan to murder the Emperor, & sent him his picture to that effect: That Pope Alexander the sixth, caused the brother of Baiazetes the Turkish Emperor, named Gemen, to be poisoned at his brother's request, and had two hundred thousand crowns for the same: That our King Henry the second, besides his going barefooted in pilgrimage, was whipped up and down the Chapterhowse, like a schoolboy, and glad to escape so too: That the Father of the modern King of France, was deprived by the Pope of the Kingdom of Navarre, and himself (I mean this King of France) forced to beg so submissively the relaxation of his excommunication, as he was content to suffer his Ambassador to be whipped at Rome for penance.  
XLVIII. All these examples are heaped together to make a muster of witnesses, for proof of the dangers wherein Princes persons are, or may be, by acknowledging the Pope's Supreme Authority. But first in perusing of these, I find such a heap indeed of exaggerations, additions, wrest, and other unsincere dealings, as would require a particular Book to refute them at large. And the very last here mentioned of the present King of France, may show what credit is to be given to all the rest, to wit, That he suffered his Ambassador to be whipped at Rome, & the latin Interpreter turneth it, Vt Legatum suum Romae virgis caesum passus sit: as though he had been scourged with rods upon the bare flesh, or whipped up and down Rome; whereas so many hundreds being yet alive that saw that Ceremony (which was no more, but the laying on, or touching of the said Ambassadors shoulder with a long white wand upon his apparel, in token of submitting himself to Ecclesiastical discipline) it maketh them both to wonder, and laugh at such monstrous assertions, coming out in print: and with the same estimation of punctual fidelity do they measure other things here avouched.  
IXL. As for example, 
Touching K. Henry the second.  that our King Henry the second was whipped up and down the Chapterhouse, & glad that he could escape so too, for which he citeth Hoveden, and this he insinuateth to be, 
Houed. pa. 303.  by order of the Pope: in respect whereof (he saith) the King had just cause to be afraid. But the Author doth plainly show the contrary, first setting down the Charter of the King's absolution, 
Ibi. pa. 308.  where no such penance is appointed: & secondly after that again in relating the voluntary penances which the King did at the Sepulchre of S. Thomas, 
See Baron. in an. 1177. subfinem.  for being some occasion of his death, doth refute thereby this narration, as fraudulent, and unsincere, that the King was whipped like a schoolboy by order of the Pope, as though it had not come from his own free choice, and devotion.  
L. That other instance of the Emperor, that lay agroofe on his belly (which I suppose he meaneth of Frederick the first) and suffered Pope Alexander the third to tread on his neck, is a great exaggeration, and refuted, as fabulous, by many reasons, and authorities of Baronius, to whom I remit me. The other in like manner of Celestinus the Pope, that should with his foot beat of the Crown from the head of Henry the sixth Emperor, being only mentioned first of all others by Hoveden an English Author, and from him taken by Ranulph of Chester, no other writer of other nations, either present at his Coronation as Godesridus Viterbiensis his Secretary, or others afterward as 
a In vita Celestini  Platina, 
b part. 2. gen. 40. in anno 1190.  Nauclerus, 
c Tom. 2. Ennead. li. 5  Sabellicus, 
d in anno 1190.  Blondus, 
e Lib. 15. in Henrico 6.  Sigonius, 
f Lib. 7. Saxon. cap. 3. & alij.  Crantzius, so much as mentioning the same, though yet they write of his Coronation, 
Vrspergensis pag. 310. Sigonius li. 15. in fine c. 13. Crantzius in sua Saxonia li. 7. cap. 28. Nauclerus. part. 2. gen. 41. in An. 1208. idem Cuspinianus, Crusius & alij.  maketh it improbable, and no less incredible than the former.  
LI. That also of the Emperor Philip, affirmed to be slain by Otho his opposite Emperor, at the incitation of Pope Innocentius the third, is a mere slander. For that, according to all histories, not Otho the Emperor, but an other Otho named of Witilispack▪ a private man & one of his own Court, upon a private grudge, did slay him. And albeit Vrspergensis, that followed the faction of the Emperors against the Popes, do write, that he had heard related by some the speech here set down, that Innocentius should lay, That he would take the Crown from Philip, or Philip should take the Mitre from him: yet he saith expressly, Quod non erat credendum, that it was not to be believed. And yet is it cited here, by our Apologer, as an undoubted truth, upon the only authority of Vrspergensis in the margin.  
LII. The like may be said of the tale of Frederick the second, attempted to have been poisoned, first in Apulia by Pope Innocentius the 4. and afterward effectuated by one Mansredus, as hired by the Pope: which is a very tale in deed, and a malicious tale. For that he which shall read all the Authors that write of his life, or death, as 
1 In vita Innoc●̄tij 4  Platina (whom the Protestants hold for free in speaking evil of divers Popes) 
2 Li. 2. Decad. lib. 7.  Blondus, 
3 Tomo 2. Enne. 9 l. 6. non longè ante finem.  Sabellicus, 
4 part 2. gen. 41. an. 1247.  Nauclerus, 
5 Lib. 8. ca 18. si●e Saxoniae.  Crantzius, 
6 In fine lib. 18.  Sigonius, & others, shall find, that as they write very wicked things committed by him in his life: so talking of his first danger in Apulia by grievous sickness, they make for the most part no mention of poison at all, and much less as procured by the Pope Innocentius, praised 
* Blond. ubi supra.  for a very holy man, and to have proceeded justly against Frederick. And secondly for his death, they agree all, that it was not by poison, but by stopping his breath and stifling him in his bed with a pillow, by Mansredus his own bastard Son, to whom he had given the Princedom of Tarentum, for fear lest he should take it from him again, and bestow it upon Conradus his other soon. But that the Pope was privy to this, or hired him to do the fact, as our Apologer affirmeth; there is no one word or syllable in these Authors thereof.  
LIII. But you will say, that he citeth one Petrus de Vineis in his margin, 
Petrus de Vineis lib. 2. epist. 2. & Cusp. in vita Frederici 2.  and Cuspinian in the life of Frederick, both which are but one Author; for that Cuspinian professeth to take what he saith, out of Petrus de Vineis, which Petrus was a servant to Frederick, and a professed enemy to the Pope, and wrote so partially of this contention, as Pope Innocentius himself wrote Libros Apologeticos (as Blondus recordeth) Apologetical Books to coniute the lies of this Petrus de Vineis in his life time: 
Blondus Ibid.  And yet you must note, that he avoucheth not all that our Apologer doth, nor with so much stomach, or affirmative assertion. For thus relateth Cuspinian the matter, out of Petrus de Vineis: Non potuit cavere, etc. The Emperor could not avoid, but when he returned into Apulia he perished with poison, the 37. year of his reign, and 57 of his age, on the very same day that he was made Emperor. For whereas at the town of Florenzola in Apulia, having received poison he was dangerously sick, and at length, by diligence of Physicians, had overcome the same, he was stifled by Mansredus his bastard son, begotten of a noble woman his Concubine, with a pillow thrust into his mouth, whether it were, that Mansredus did it, as corrupted by his enemies, or by the Pope, or for that he did aspire to the Kingdom of Sicilia. So he.  
LIV. And albeit, as you see, he saith more herein against the Pope, than any of the other Authors before mentioned, 
Enforcing of matters against the Pope.  for that he desired to cast some suspicions upon him: yet doth he it not with that bold asseveration, that our Apologer doth, saying: That both his first sickness was by poison, of the Pope's procurement, and his murdering afterward by hiring of Manfredus to poison him again: whereas the other ascribeth not the first poisoning to the Pope (if he were poisoned) neither doth so much as mention the second poison, but only the stifling, and finally leaveth it doubtful, whether the same proceeded from the emperors enemies, or from the Pope, or from his Sons own ambition, and emulation against his brother.  
LV. To the other objection, or rather calumniation out of Paulus iovius, 
Apolog. pag. 73.  that Alexander the third did write to the Soldan, That if he would live quietly, he should procure the murder of the Emperor, sending him his picture to that end: It is answered, that no such thing is found in that second book of iovius, by him here cited, nor elsewhere in that History, so far as by some diligence used I can find: and it is not likely, it should be found in him, for so much as he beginneth his History with matters only of our time, some hundreds of years after Alexander the third his death.  
LVI. So as the only chief accusation, 
About the death of Gemen or Sizimus brother to the great Turk.  that may seem to have some ground against any Pope, in this catalogue, for procuring the death of any Prince, is that which he allegeth out of Cuspinian, that Alexander the sixth took two hundred thousand Crowns of Baiazetes Emperor of the Turks, to cause his brother Gemen to be put to death, whom he held captive at Rome, which he performed (saith our Apologer) by poison, and had his pay; this I say, hath most appearance: for that some other Authors also beside do relate the same, affirming, That albeit Prince Gemen the Turk, when he died, either at Caieta, or Naples, or Capua, (for in this they differ) was not the Pope's prisoner, but in the hands of Charles the 8. King of France, who took him from Rome with him, when he passed that way with his army: yet that the common fame or rumour was, that Pope Alexander the sixth, had part therein, or, as Cuspinias' words are, Pontifice non ignorant, the Pope not unwitting thereof. 
Lib. 2. hist.  The reason of which report Guicciardine allegeth to be this, to wit, That the evil nature and condition of Pope Alexander, which was hateful to all men, made any iniquity to be believed of him. 
a In vita Alexand. sexti.  Onuphrius Panuinus writeth that he died in Capua of a bloody flux without any mention of poison. And 
b Ennead. 10. lib. 9  Sabellicus before him again, relateth the matter doubtfully saying; Fuerunt qui crederent, eum veneno sublatum, etc. There were some that believed, that he was made away by poison, and that Alexander the Pope was not ignorant thereof; for that he was so alienate in mind from the Frenchmen, that he was loath they should take any good by him: Thus we see, that the matter is but doubtfully and suspiciously related only, and the Frenchmen being angry for his death, by whom they hoped great matters, might easily brute abroad a false rumour, for their own defence in that behalf.  
LVII. But as for the two hundred thousand crowns, though iovius do say, that they were offered by Bajazet, as also Vestis inconsutilis Christi, The garment of our Saviour without seam: yet doth he not say, that they were received, either the one, or the other. So as whatsoever evil is mentioned of any Pope, our Apologer maketh it certain: and when it is but little, he will enlarge it to make it more: and when it is spoken doubtfully, he will affirm it for a certainty: wherein he discovereth his own humour against Popes, and thereby limiteth the Readers faith in believing him; though we do not take upon us to defend the lives and facts of all particular Popes, but their faith and authority; being forewarned by our Saviour, that upon the Chair of Moses shall fit Scribes and Pharisees, whom we must obey, in that they teach, and not follow or imitate, in that they do. And this shall serve for this point: Card.ll Bellarmyne, I doubt not, will be more large. If a man would go about to discredit Kingly authority, by all the misdeeds of particular Kings that have been registered by Historiographers, since the time that Popes began, he should find, no doubt, abundant matter, and such, as could not be defended by any probability. And yet doth this prejudicate nothing to Princely power or dignity, and much less in our case, where the facts themselves objected, are either exaggerated, increased, wrested, or altogether falsified.   

The third Part of this Paragraph.  
THERE remaineth the last part of this impugnation of the cardinals letter, 
Apolog. pag. 78.  which consisteth in the examining all the authorities and Sentences of ancient Fathers, alleged by him in the same. As first of all, the comparison of the art, and deceit used by julian the Emperor, 
Nazian. orat. 1. in julian.  surnamed Apostata, and recounted by S. Gregory Nazianzen, in placing, and inserting the images of his false Gods, into the pictures of the Emperor, in his Imperial banner: so, as no man could bow down, 
The example of julians' banner examined.  or reverence the emperors picture, (as then was the custom) but that he must adore also the images of the false Gods. Which art of temperament, the Cardinal doth compare unto this mixture & combination of clauses lawful, and unlawful, civil, and Ecclesiastical in the Oath proposed; so as a man can not swear the one, but he must swear also the other. Which similitude, although it do express most fitly the matter in hand; yet the Apologer being sorely pressed therewith seeketh many evasions to evacuate the same, by searching out dissimilitudes, and saying; That albeit a similitude may be admitted claudicare uno pede, to limp, or halt on one foot: yet this (saith he) is lame, both of feet & hands, and every member of the body: And then he taketh upon him to set down at length the diversities that may be picked out. As first, that julian was an Apostata, but our Sovereign is a Christian: he changed the Religion which he once professed, but our King not: he became an Ethnic, or an Atheist, our King is not ashamed of his profession: julian dealt against Christians, but his Matie dealeth only to make a distinction between true subjects, and falsehearted traitors. And so he goeth forward to weary his Reader with many more like diversities, which must needs be loathsome to every man of mean judgement, who know that a similitude requireth not parity in all points (for then it should be idem, and not simile) but only in the point wherein the comparison is made, as here in the compounding and couching together of lawful and unlawful things in the Oath, as the other did in his banner.  
LIX. For if a man would trifle, as our Apologer doth, and seek out differences between things, that are compared together, as like in some certain points, 
Similitudes hold not in all.  but unlike in other; we should overthrow all similitudes whatsoever, and consequently we should enervate many most heavenly speeches of our Saviour in the Gospel, that stand upon similitudes. As for example: Be you wise as Serpents, and simple as Doves. What enemy of Christian Religion might not cavil, 
Matth. 10.  and calumniate this? seeking out diversities betwixt a serpent and a man, and between the malicious craft of that malignant creature, and the wisdom that ought to be in a prudent man. But it is sufficient that the similitude do hold in that particular point, wherein Christ made the comparison. And so again, When our Saviour maketh the comparison between the Kingdom of heaven, and the little grain of mustardseed; who cannot find out infinite differences between the one and the other, 
Matth. 13.  making the similitude to halt and limp in many more parts, 
Mar. 4.  than it can go upright. But it is sufficient, 
Luc. 13.  that it stand, and halt not in that one point, wherein the comparison is made.  
LX. I pass over many other like similitudes, 
Ibid.  as that the Kingdom of heaven, is like to a man that soweth good seed in his field: As also it is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened: It is like also to a treasure hid in the ground; and to a Merchant man, that seeketh good margarites, and precious stones: And unto a net cast into the sea, and gathering together of all kind of fishes. Who cannot (I say) find out differences and diversities, if he would study for them in all these similitudes used by our Saviour. For as for the last of the net, that gathereth together perforce, good and bad fish in the sea, seemeth hard to be applied to the Kingdom of heaven, whether we understand it, either of God's Kingdom in the next world, or of the Church in this; for that in the next world good & bad are not admitted; and in this world, the Church of Christ gathereth none perforce, as the net doth. But yet in the point itself, wherein Christ our Saviour made the comparison, the similitude doth hold; and that is sufficient to show the impertinent endeavour of this Apologer here, to seek out diversities, that appertain not to the point wherein the comparison is made.  
LXI. The next example which our Apologer seeketh to avoid or evacuate in the cardinals letter, is that of old Eleazar in the book of Maccabees, who rather than he would do a thing unlawful, and against his own conscience, 
2. Mach. 6.  or that might be scandalous to others, he refused not to suffer all kind of torments; which the Cardinal applieth to the taking of this unlawful Oath, 
About the example of Eleazar.  by such as are Catholics, but especially by the Archpriest, head of the Clergy in England, whose case he presumeth to be more like to that of Eleazar, for his age, estimation, and authority above the rest. To which example the Apologer answereth thus: 
Apol. pag. 81.  That if the Archpriests ground of refusing this Oath were as good as Eleazar's was, for refusing to eat of the swines-flesh that was proposed, and urged unto him, it might not unfitly be applied to his purpose: But the ground failing, (saith he) the building cannot stand. But this is an escape much like the former, that runneth quite from the matter: for that the Cardinal supposeth a Catholic conscience in him to whom he writeth, to which conscience it is as repugnant to swear any thing, sounding against any point of Catholic Religion or Doctrine, as it was to Eleazar to eat swines-flesh, against the law of Moses. Which supposition being made, and that in the cardinals judgement, this Oath containeth divers clauses prejudicial to some points of the said catholic belief and doctrine concerning the authority of the Sea Apostolic, and that the taking thereof would not only be hurtful to the taker, but offensive also, and scandalous to many other of that Religion, both at home and abroad; the application of this example of Eleazar was most fit and effectual. Let us see what ensueth of the rest of the authorities.  
LXII. The third example is of S. Basill surnamed for his rare learning and holiness, The great, who being most earnestly exhorted (as Theodoret recounteth the story) by Modestus the deputy of Valens the Arrian Emperor, 
Apol. pag. 84.  sent of purpose to that effect, that he should accommodate himself to the said Emperors will, 
Theodoret lib. 4. c. 19  & present time, and not suffer so many great Churches to be abandoned (for that all such bishops, 
The tentation of S. Basil by the Deputy Modestus.  as would not accommodate themselves were sent into banishment) for a little needle's subtlety of doctrines, not so much to be esteemed: offering him also, the friendship of the Emperor, and many other great benefits to ensue, both to him and others, if he would in this point show himself conformable. But this holy and prudent man (saith the Cardinal) answered, That it was not to be endured, that any one syllable of 
* divinorum dogmatum.  divine doctrines, should be corrupted, or neglected; but rather, that for the defence thereof, all kind of torment was to be embraced. Out of which example the Cardinal doth gather, how strict and wary a good man must be, in yielding to any thing never so little, that is prejudicial to the integrity of Catholic doctrine: and it seemeth very fit to the purpose, and the cases somewhat like.  
LXIII. Yet doth our Apologer by all means possible seek to wipe of, or weaken all that can be inferred out of this example. 
Pag. 84.  And first of all, he beginneth with a mere calumniation thus: First I must observe (saith he) that if the Cardinal would leave a common and ordinary trick of his, 
A cavil against Bellarmyne.  in all citations, which is, to take what makes for him, and leave out what makes against him, & would city the Author's sense, as well as the sentence; we should not be so much troubled with answering the Ancients which he allegeth. And to instance it in this very place, if he had continued his allegation but one line further; he should have found this place of Theodoret, of more force, to have moved Blackwell to take the Oath, then to have dissuaded him from it. For in the very next words it followeth (in S. Basils' speech:) I do esteem greatly the emperors friendship, if it be joined with piety, but without it, I hold it for pernicious. So he.  
LXIV. And do these words last adjoined make any thing at all for our Apologer? Or rather agree they not fitly to the purpose of the Cardinal's exhortation, though for brevities sake he left them out? How then is their omission brought in for a proof of A common & ordinary trick of the Cardinals, in all his citations, to take only that which is for him, & leave out what makes against him? How is this against him? Or how doth this show any such ordinary trick of falsehood in the Cardinal, not in one or two, but in all his citations? Doth this man care what he saith? This then is one shift, to answer this Ancient, or rather Antic, as here he is made. Let us see an other.  
LXV. His second is by taking advantage of translation out of the Greek, 
Another shift against S. Basils' testimony.  in which Theodoret wrote his story, or rather by perverting the same in some points to his purpose. For which cause he repeateth again the substance of the history in these words: But that it may appear (saith he) whether of us hath greater right to this place (of Theodoret about S. Basil) I will in few words show the Authous drift. 
Aplo. Pag. 84. & 85.  The Emperor Valens being an Arrian, at the persuasion of his wife, when he had deprived all the Churches of their Pastors, came to Caesarea, where S. 
* Theodoret lib. 4. cap. 19 graecè. latinè cap. 17.  Basil was then Bishop; who, as the story reporteth, was the light of the world. Before he came, he sent his Deputy to work it, that S. Basil should hold fellowship with Eudoxius (which Eudoxius was Bishop of Constantinople and the principal of the Arrian faction) or if he would not, that he should put him to banishment. Now when the emperors Deputy came to Caesarea, 
Compare this to our times.  he sent for Basil, entreated him honourably, spoke pleasingly unto him, desired he would give way to the time, neither that he would hazard the good of so many Churches tenui exquisitione dogmatis, promised him the emperors favour, and himself to be Mediator for his good. But S. Basil answered, These enticing speeches were fit to be used to children, that use to gape after such things. But for them that were thoroughly instructed in God's word, they could never suffer any syllable thereof to be corrupted. Nay, if need required, they would for the maintenance thereof, refuse no kind of death. In deed the love of the Emperor ought to be greatly esteemed with Piety; but Piety taken away, it was pernicious.  
LXVI. This is the truth of the story (saith he:) & I have laid down at length his declaration, to the end that his sleights may the better appear in eluding the force of this Answer of S. Basil, as though he had said only, that no syllable of God's word was to be suffered to be corrupted, whereas his meaning was, not only of God's word, or of Scriptures alone, but, Ne unam quidem syllabam divinorum dogmatum, 
Crafty conveyance in translating.  not any one syllable of divine doctrine, taught by the Catholic Church, and so much import his words in greek, which are guylfully here translated: for that instead of the forealleadged sentence, wherein consisteth the substance of the said answer, to wit: That for them that are thoroughly instructed in God's word, they can never suffer any syllable thereof to be corrupted, he should have said: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  That they that have been brought up & nourished in sacred learning, cannot suffer any one syllable of divine doctrines (of the Church) to be violated, which is conform also to S. Basils' purpose in hand. For that the controversy, which he and other Catholic Bishops had with the Arrian Doctors in those days, was not only, nor immediately about the Scriptures out of which the Arrians alleged more abundantly than their adversaries, but about certain doctrines determined by the Church, especially by the Council of Nice, as namely about the use of the words and doctrines of hom●sion, or consubstantiality, hypostasis, substance, person, trinity, and other the like; and whether they should say Gloria Patriet Filio, or Gloria Patri cum Filio; or in Filio, & such other differences, which unto the Deputy Modestus, seemed but small matters and subtilities of doctrine, but to S. Basil matters of great moment: for so much as they were now determined by the Church, and thereby made Divina dogmata, divine doctrines, though they were not all expressly found in Scriptures. So as this sleight in translating S. Basils' answer, That such as were thoroughly instructed in God's word could never suffer any syllable thereof to be corrupted (as though he had meant only of Scriptures) is not sincere, neither agreeable either unto the letter of the Greek text, or meaning of S. Basill.  
LXVII. Let us see then his third shift, 
The third shift.  to put of this matter, which is the same that before we have mentioned in the first example of julian, to wit, by seeking out differences, & disparities, between the clauses or members that are compared together, saying: That albeit Basil and the Archpriest may have some comparison; yet not our Orthodox King with an Arrian Emperor. Basil was solicited to become an Arrian: but the Archpriest, not once touched for any article of faith. And so he goeth forward with many contrapositions. But I have spoken sufficiently before of the weakness of this manner of argument. And if we remove the mentions of some persons, that may be offensive, the matters themselves will easily discover their conformity. For if you had demanded Modestus the Deputy then, in favour of what religion would he have S. Basil to conform himself & subscribe; he would have said the Orthodox, no less than the judges of England do now, that require this Oath: And yet did not S. Basil think so. 
Wherein the comparison of S. Basil and Modestus may be like in our days.  And if any man should have called that Emperor an Arrian, it would have been no less offensive, then to call a Protestant-Prince at his day, a Caluinist or Lutheran; notwithstanding that the reason of difference between the Catholics and Arrians at that day, be the same, that is between Catholics and Protestants at this day: to wit, the following, or impugning of the universal known Church, descending from Christ's time, unto Saint Basils', and from Saint Basils' to ours.  
LXVIII. There remain yet 3. or 4. other examples mentioned by the Cardinal in his Epistle to the Archpriest, whereof the first two are of S. Peter, and Marcellinus the Pope, whose fortitude and diligence in rising again, he desireth him to imitate, if perhaps he followed their infirmity in falling. The other two, are of S. Gregory, 
Three or 4. examples together.  and S. Leo, two holy and learned Popes, and for that cause both of them surnamed the Great, who do set down in divers places, the obligation that all Catholic Christian men have, to hold union and subordination with the Sea Apostolic. Unto the first two examples, as there is little said, but disparities only sought out, between Peter and Marcellinus, and the story also of Marcellinus called in question; so I leave the same to the Cardinal himself to treat more at large: for so much, as in his former books, & works, he hath handled the same sufficiently; as also the third objection, made against S. Gregory, about refusing the name of Universal Bishop. And the same I must say of the 4. also, S. Leo, whom the Apologer confesseth to be truly alleged against him, 
Apol. pag. 94.  for exalting the Authority of S. Peter, and firmity of his faith, which he putteth of with this scoff borrowed from D. john Reynolds his book of Conference in the Tower, 
Reynoldes Conference. ca 1. divis. 2. Cicero in Horten.  That as Tully said to Hortensius the Orator, when he praised immoderately eloquence, That he would lift her up to heaven, that himself might go up with her: so would S. Leo lift up S. Peter with praises to the sky, that he being his heir, might go up also, and be exalted with him.  
LXIX. And after this scorn, he picketh out divers sentences of S. Leo his works, 
The Apologers impugnation of S. Leo.  which seem somewhat odious, & to contain overmuch praise, & exaltation of S. Peter, & his Authority; all taken out of the said Reynolds Book, as Reynoldes himself had taken the greatest part of them out of M. jewel, to whom the same was very sufficiently answered before by D. Harding, and the most of them showed to be mere calumniations. The first and chief whereof is this, 
Leo Serm. 3. suae assumpt. & epistola 89. ad Episcopum Viennens.  That our Lord did take S. Peter into the fellowship of indivisible unity; which S. Leo his adversaries going about to wrest to an absurd sense, to wit, that this indivisible unity must either be in person, or nature with Christ, D. Harding showeth plainly by S. Leo his own words, sense, and drift, that he meant it only of the indivisible unity or fellowship of the high name of Rock of the Church, which Christ our Saviour the chief and fundamental Rock imparted to none, but to S. Peter, and consequently that unity of name of Rock was indivisible between them: which if either M. jewel, or M. Reynolds, or our Apologer would have equally considered, they needed not to go about to disgrace so ancient a Father with so mere a cavil: or at leastwise it being once answered, they ought not to have so often repeated it again, without some new matter, or reason for the same, or impugnation of the former answer.  
LXX. But I will not trouble you with any more at this time, albeit there ensue in the Apology divers other points that might be stood upon, not for that they contain any great substance of matter, but for that they seem to proceed out of no small aversion of mind, acerbity, and gall in the writer, against all sorts of Catholic people: which CHRIST JESUS amend and mollify, and give him light from heaven to see the truth, that he so bitterly impugneth.  
LXXI. And as he dealeth with S. Leo, so doth he much more in the same kind with D. or Sanders, and Cardinal Bellarmine, 
Great injury offered to Car. Bell. about Kingly authority.  citing out of their works, divers sentences culled and laid together, that seem less respective to the Authority of temporal Kings and Princes, and all this to incite more his Matie against them, and those of their Religion: and finally, against the Cardinal, he concludeth in these words: That God is no more contrary to Belial, light to darkness, and heaven to hell, than Bellarmine's estimation of Kings is to Gods. 
Aplo. Pag. 110.  Which is a very passionate Conclusion, if you consider it well, for that setting aside the pre-eminence for judging in matters of Religion, which in his controversies he proveth both by Scripture, and testimony of all antiquity, to appertain to Bishops and not to Princes (& so was practised for 300. years after Christ, when few, or no Kings, or Emperors were yet Christians;) in all other points he speaketh so reverently of them, and defendeth their Supreme Authority with as great respect as any Author (perhaps) hath ever done before him. And to pretermit other places, let the Reader but look over the first 16. Chapters of his Book de Laicis, and he shall find not only the Authority of Princes proved to be from God, by many Scriptures, Fathers, Counsels, Reasons, and other authorities of Saints, against Anabaptists, Atheists, and other miscreants of our time; but the quality also, and excellent power of the said Princely Authority so exalted both for making of laws, judging, condemning, waging war, and like actions of supreme power; as will easily refute this cavillation.  
LXXII. And among other propositions tending to that effect, he hath this in the beginning of his eleventh Chapter, which he proveth largely, and of purpose throughout the same; not only, That Temporal Princes are to be obeyed out of Conscience, or for Conscience sake; but also, Quod lex Civilis non minùs obligat in Conscientia, quam lex Divina: 
Lib. de Laicis cap. 11.  That the civil law of the Temporal Prince doth no less bind the Subject in Conscience, than the law that cometh immediately from God himself. And how then is Cardinal Bellarmyne said here to be no less contrary to God, 
Card. Bellarm. exalteth much Princely authority.  concerning King's Authority, then light to darkness, and heaven to hell? But especially if you consider further, that when Cardinal Bellarmyne in that book, cometh to treat of the Authority of Temporal Princes in matter of Religion, though he set down this Conclusion, That, Non pertinet ad eos judicium de Religione, The authority of judging of Religion (which is true or false) belongeth not unto them, but unto Bishops: yet, Pertinet ad eos defensio Religionis, the defence and protection of Religion appertaineth unto them: as also the civil government in civil matters over all persons, as well Ecclesiastical as Temporal, which is so much as a Catholic man can give to Caesar, reserving to God that which is Gods.  
LXXIII. And albeit this might be sufficient to show the tooth that is held against Cardinal Bellarmine, and the ardent appetite these Ministers have to disgrace him in somewhat: yet am I enforced to lay forth some few examples more, whereby, as in a clear glass, the indifferent Reader will see, behold, and wonder also, at the manner of dealing used against him to that end.  
LXXIV. And now we have already seen, what general Conclusions have been gathered against him: That he useth to contradict himself wittingly, so often as ever he is pressed with any hard argument by his Adversary: That his common trick is to tell the sentence of his Author without his sense: That he seeketh everywhere to debase Kingly authority, 
Calunnious dealing against Car. Bellar.  and the like. Which generalities, as, in truth and reason, they may not be inferred, but upon proof, and induction of many particularities: so when it cometh to trial, you have seen not so much, as any one particular sufficiently proved. Now shall you hear some more examples of calumnious dealing with him.  
LXXV. Pag. 92. the Apologer speaking of S. Gregory the Great, and going about to interpret those words of his, alleged by the Cardinal, where he calleth▪ 
Greg. li. 11. epist. 42.  the Sea Apostolic Caput fidei, the Head of faith, in regard of the direction in matters of Faith, that is to be taken from thence, as from the Head; the Apologer would have it understood, that for so much as in that place he speaketh to the Bishop of Palermo about the use of the Pall, accustomed to be given by the sea Apostolic to Archbishops, S. Gregory's meaning is, that the Sea Apostolic of Rome is head only in matters of Cerimonyes, 
Bellar. 2. de Ro. Pontif. cap. 10. & li. 2. de Christo cap. 2.  and then he inferreth thus: Which sense (saith he) if you will not admit, give me leave to say that once of one (Gregory) which Bellarmyne himself saith often of many of the Fathers, Minùs cautè locutus est: Gregory spoke not so advisedly: And the latin translation hath, Quod ille de multis, & saepe dicit, ex omni numero Patrun, That Bellarmyne saith it often, & of many, and of all sorts of Fathers; to wit, that they spoke inconsiderately: and yet when I went to examine the two places of Bellarmynes works, cited by our Apologer in the margin, I found a strange abuse, to wit, no such thing at all spoken of the Fathers, but only of one Nicolaus de Lyra, made a Christian of a jew, not much above two hundred years past, who seeming by some words of his, to hold a certain extravagant opinion, that S. Peter, & S. Paul were not put to death at Rome, but at Jerusalem, 
Lyr. come. in 24. Matth.  against the general consent of all antiquity, Cardinal Bellarmyne expoundeth first, what his true meaning was, to wit, nothing in deed differing from the Father's expositions, and namely of S. Hierome, and then addeth, Quanquam minùs cautè locutus est &c: Albeit Lyranus in his manner of speech, was not so wary, as he might have been, in giving suspicion of so absurd an opinion, and so contrary to all the ancient Fathers. here than you see, how matters are strained. That which Cardinal Bellarmyne speaketh only of Nicolaus Lyranus upon so just occasion, as this was, is extended by our Apologer, to often, many, and all sorts of Fathers. Is this good dealing? How can the Apologer defend himself in this place, from wilful exaggeration, and voluntary mistaking? In the other place cited by him lib. 2. de Christo cap. 2. there is no such matter at all. But let us see some other like examples.  
LXXVI. Pag▪ 108. he setteth down this general odious proposition-out of Bellarmyne: That Kings are rather slaves, than Lords. And may a man think this to be true or likely, that so rude a proposition should come from Bellarmine? Look upon the place by him cited lib. 3. de Laicis cap. 7. & you will marvel extremely at this manner of proceeding. For that in this very place, you shall find that the Cardinal doth most exalt, and confirm by Scriptures, Fathers, and other arguments, the dignity and authority of the civil Magistrate among Christians. And in the next precedent Chapter before this cited, he hath this beginning. The fourth reason, saith he (to prove the lawfulness and dignity of the civil Magistrate against the Anabaptists) is from the efficient cause, to wit, God the Author thereof, from whom it is certain, that civil power proceedeth, as S. Augustine proveth throughout his whole fourth, and fifth books De Civitate Dei, 
Prover. 8.  and it is evident by the Scriptures, for that God saith: By me Kings do reign etc.  
LXXVII. So Bellarmine: and then passing to the next Chapter here cited, which is the seventh, he proveth the same by another argument, which is. That in the state of Innocency, if Adam had not sinned, we should have had civil subjection and government; and consequently it cannot be thought to be evil, or brought in by sin, or for the punishment of sin, as the anabaptists affirmed, but must needs be of God, & from God. True it is (saith he) that servile, or slavish subjection, was brought in after the fall of Adam, and should not have been in the state of Innocency, but civil subjection should. And then he showeth the differences between these two sorts of government, and subjections, to wit, that the one, which is the servile, tendeth wholly to the utility and emolument of him that governeth, and nothing to them that are governed. But the other which is civil and politic, tendeth principally to the profit of them that are governed thereby. So as if there be any servitude, saith Bellarmine (but he meaneth not slavish) in this Civil principality, it falleth rather upon him, that governeth the people to their own utility, then upon the subjects that receive the said utility thereby. And so are Bishops called the servants of their flocks, and the Pope himself, The Servant of servants: and S. Augustine upon those words of our Saviour in S. Matthews Gospel (He that will be made first (or chief) among you, 
Aug. li. 19 de civitate Dei cap. 14. Matth. 20.  must be the servant of all the rest) doth prove at large, that, In Civili Principatu, magis s●ruus est, qui praeest, quam qui subest: In a Civil Principality, he is more a servant that governeth to other men's profit, than he that obeyeth, to his own.  
LXXVIII. This is all that Cardinal Bellarmyne hath about this matter: wherein he doth scarce name a King, 
How good Kings and Princes are truly servants.  as you see, but Bishops, and Popes to be servants in the governments of those, whom they govern; though he include good Kings in like manner, putting this difference between a good King, & a Tyrant, out of Aristotle; That a good king governeth to the profit of his Subjects, 
Arist. li. 8. moral. c. 10.  wherein he is their servant in effect (though not their slave, as this man odiously urgeth) and a Tyrant, that turneth all to his own utility without respect of those, whom he governeth. And is this so absurd doctrine? Or doth this justify the Apologers outrageous proposition, That Bellarmyne affirmeth Kings to be rather slaves than Lords? Who would not be ashamed of this intemperate accusation?  
LXXIX. And now there remain eleven places more of like quality, alleged by the Apologer out of Cardinal Bellarmynes works, 
Apol. pag. 108.  which being examined by the Author's words, meaning, and sense, have the same want of sincerity which the precedent had. 
Libr. 1. de Pontif. c. 7.  The second is, That Kings are not only Subjects to Popes, to Bishops, to Priests, but even to Deacons. This is a plain cavil: for the fault, if any be, falleth upon S. Chrysostome, and not upon the Cardinal, whose words are these: S. Chrysostome in his eighty and three Homily upon S. Matthewes. gospel, doth subject Kings and Princes (in Ecclesiastical matters) not only to Bishops, but also to Deacons. For thus he speaketh to his Deacon: Si Dux quispiam, si Consul, si is qui Diademate ornatur etc. If a Duke, if a Consul, if one that weareth a Crown, cometh to the Sacrament unworthily, restrain him, and forbid him, for that thou hast greater power than he. What fault hath Cardinal Bellarmine here in alleging the words, and judgement of S. Chrysostome?  
LXXX. The third place is, 
Libr. 1. de Pont. c. 7.  That an Emperor must content himself to drink, not only after a Bishop, but after a Bishop's chaplain. But these words are not found in Bellarmine, but are odiously framed by the Apologer out of a fact of S. Martin Bishop of Tewers in France, related by ancient Sulpitius in his life, 
Sulpitius in vita D. Martini.  that he sitting one day at dinner with the Emperor Maximus, and the emperors officer bringing a cup of wine to his Lord, he would not drink thereof first, but gave it to the Bishop to begin, who accepting thereof, and drinking, delivered the said cup to his Priest to drink next after him, thinking no lay-man to be preferred before a Priest, saith Sulpitius. But what doth this touch Bellarmine, that doth but relate the Story. May he, in truth, be said to ●rouch, that an Emperor must be content to drink after a Bishop's chaplain? Who seeth not this violent enforcement?  
LXXXI. His fourth place is this, 
Ibid. & de Cleri●. c. 28.  That Kings have not their Authority, nor office from God, nor his law; but from the law of Nations. Good God what desire is here descried of calumniation? Let any man read the two places here quoted, and he will bless himself, I think, to see such dealing. For in the first place his words are these: Principatus saecularis. etc. Secular Princedom is instituted by man, & is of the law of Nations; but Ecclesiastical Princedom is only from God, and by divine law, which he meaneth expressly of the first institution of those principalities, or governments: for that at the beginning God did not immediately appoint these particular and different forms of Temporal government, which now the world hath, some of Kings, some of Dukes, some of commonwealths, but appointed only, that there should be Government, leaving to each nation to take or choose what they would. But the Ecclesiastical Government by Bishops was ordained immediately by Christ himself, for which cause Bellarmine saith in the second place here alleged: That Kingdoms are not immediately instituted from God, but mediately only by means of the people; which people therefore may change their forms of government, as in many Countries we see that they have: but yet when any form of Government is established, and Governors placed therein, their authority and power is from God, and to be obeyed out of Conscience, under pain of damnation, 
How Princes authority is mediately or immediately from God.  as before I have showed out of Bellarmyne. And he that will read but from his third Chapter de Laicis unto the 13. shall find store of assertions & proofs to that effect, to omit many other places throughout his works. So as the former proposition, That Kings have not their Authority nor office from God nor his law, is very fraudulently set down. For if he understand, that their form of Principality and Office therein, is not immediately from God's institution, but by means of human laws, of succession, election, or the like; it is true. But if he mean, that their Authority is not from God, either mediate, or immediate, or induceth not obligation of Conscience in obeying them, as it seemeth he would have his Reader to think; it is most false. And the Apologer ought not to have walked in these obscurities, if he had meant uprightly.  
LXXXII. I am weary to wade any further in these objections, and yet will I not let pass to note three more, though most briefly, and almost in three words, leaving the rest to be examined by the Reader himself. The first is, That Churchmen are as far above Kings, as the soul is above the body. The other: That Obedience due to the Pope, is for Conscience sake. The third: That Obedience due to Kings, is only for certain respects of order and policy; The first and last being mere calumniations and the other not denied by us. For as for the first, though the words here mentioned be not in Bellarmyne: yet the comparison itself of Ecclesiastical and Temporal powers in the Church, unto the soul, and body, is the comparison of S. Gregory Nazianzen related only by Bellarmyne, 
Nazian. orat. ad Cives timor● pereulsos & Imperat. irasc.  and consequently it must needs follow, as the same Father also inferreth, that so much more eminent, as the soul is above the body, so much more excellent is the power Ecclesiastical above Temporal, which S. Chrisostome in like manner proveth at large in his books de Sacerdotio: So as this is not Bellarmine's comparison, but of the said two ancient Fathers, and consequently Bellarmyne is not here reprehended, but they.  
LXXXIII. The other two places, if they be two, and not one, but made two for multiplying of odious matter against us, have been so fully answered by us before, as we shall need to say no more here thereof. For as Obedience is due out of Conscience unto the Pope, & other Bishops, & Spiritual Governors, in spiritual Governments, 
Hebr. 13.  by the Apostles precept, Obedi●e Praepositis vestris, etc. Obey your Prelates, & be subject unto them; for they watch, as being to render account for your souls: So the same Apostle hath commanded also, due Obedience to Temporal Magistrates, in temporal affairs, by the same obligation of Conscience, as Cardinal Bellarmyne doth show at large, in the places by me alleged. And I marvel with what Conscience the Apologer here can deny it, citing a place for the same in his margin, which hath no such matter, as he would infer, 
Libr. de Cleric. c. 28.  That not for Conscience, but only for certain respects etc. For that treating of the obligation of Obedience to temporal laws, in temporal affairs, his second proposition is; Non sunt exempti Clerici ab obedientia legum Civilium: Clergymen are not exempted from the obedience of temporal laws. And in another place before cited; 
Libr. de Laicis c. 11.  Lex Civilis non minùs obligat in conscientia quam lex divina: The Temporal law bindeth no less in conscience, than the Divine. So as all those odious matters are but frandulently laid together to make Catholics, & their cause hateful, especially unto him, whom unto they desire most of all men under God, to yield most satisfaction for their temporal duties, and would hope also to effectuate it, if these makebate Ministers did not by their continual incitations, clamours, and false suggestions disturb the same, and renew daily iealosyes and distrusts in his Maties mind against us.   

The Conclusion.  
WHEREFORE to draw to an end of this distasteful argument, it cannot but grieve, & afflict much the hearts of all that love either Prince or Country, & look into the natural sequels of like proceedings, to see matters run daily unto such extremities as they do, & that by such instigators, as are both both less careful to foresee the hurts both private & public that may ensue, & less able to remedy than when they fall out. The principal of whom (being the first & chief motors) besides the general hatred wherein they are with both extremes of opposite in Religion, are so interessed in like manner by the spoils, & rapines which their ravenous Pursuivants daily bring home, out of their continual searches, and ransacks of innocent men's houses, goods and persons, as little moderation may be expected from them.  
LXXXV. Would God it might please his divine Matie so to enlighten and illustrate that excellent understanding of our Prince and Sovereign, as he may see the many & great inconveniences, that do & must follow upon so violent courses as these men for their own utility do suggest, & prosecute. Nothing can be more pitiful, then to see a Noble House divided in itself, & the one to beat, hunt, & pursue the other, & this to be their continual exercise, especially of Children, under the sight of their own Father, loving them all, and desiring to be beloved. Ah! what solicitude must there needs be in that Father's heart! And were it not a great sin to increase the same, by casting in oil to augment the flame?  
LXXXVI. Would God his Maties ears, and those of his wise Counsel could reach into these parts beyond the seas, and to all foreign nations of Christendom besides, to hear what is said, what is written, what is discoursed by men of best judgement in this behalf, not only in regard of justice and piety, but in reason also of State and Policy; no man being of so simple understanding, but that he must see, that so notorious differences, of Subjects for Religion, pursued with such hostility among themselves, must weaken greatly their forces, and make them less esteemed both of friends and adversaries. So as, besides internal dangers, which are ever consequent upon such inward divisions, if foreign occasions should be offered us again (as in former times they have been) by foreign wars; we should not know how to trust the one the other.  
LXXXVII. The cries & complaints of these afflictions running throughout Christendom, do give strange admiration unto men, and do work strong effects both in judgements and affections: Admiration, for that no such thing was ever expected under his majesties government, for many causes: strong effects, for that they work great alterations both in the one, and the other: In judgement, for that wise men find not any reason, either of Religion or State, why such extremities should be pursued, with such rigour at the instigation of parties interessed, to the evident danger of so great and honourable Kingdoms, who if in wills they were vinted, as they are in one Prince and Governor; their forces were both admirable and dreadful: In affections, for that the compassion which naturally doth accompany our brethren's afflictions, especially for a cause that we most esteem and love, to wit, our Religion; must needs work the contrary effect of inward aversion, both in Princes & people abroad, notwithstanding they hold external amity, and friendship for the tyme.  
LXXXVIII. I let pass the general obloquys, and murmurations that are to be heard every where, almost in Christendom, upon this manner of proceeding, and much more the public and private complaints, outcries, and prayers that are made and offered daily to heaven, throughout all Catholic Kingdoms lightly, in all particular Congregations, oratories, Chapels, & meetings of zealous men, that pray instantly to Almighty God for some remedy of these oppressions, and persecutions of English Catholics, sufficiently (as they think) declared unto them & to the whole world by the very printed Catalogues of English Statutes extant in Print against them, for profession of their Religion: for that by the view of those Statutes, they do easily conceive, what enormous effects, do, and must follow in the execution thereof; albeit they did not both hear & see daily so many lamentable precedents & spectacles therein.  
LXXXIX. As for example, there have not passed many months, since there were seen some threescore Priests more or less (to omit others) cast into banishment about one time, & wandering up and down, throughout Christendom, according as every man had occasion, or necessity for their maintenance, gave a lamentable spectacle to all nations, to see men of so good parts, amiable aspects, sweet behaviour, natural borne subjects of the Land, the most of them of very worshipful parentage, all of learned education, clear and devoid of any suspicion of crimes that could be objected unto them (for otherwise they should not have been dismissed) in the flower of their age, to be cast out of their native soil, for professing that Religion only, whereby their said Country was first made Christian, & so continued under all their noble Princes, Kings, Queens, and Sovereigns, Nobility, and Communatly, from the beginning of their Conversion, unto this our age.  
XC. This spectacle (I say) presented to the eyes of most Nations of Europe, moved men not a little, especially hearing them protest their dutiful affections to his Matie and Realm in all civil & Temporal respects, without seeking of any preferments, dignities, riches, or other emoluments by staying at home; but only the rest & use of their own Consciences in matters of Religion, which Protestant's in many other Catholic Countries are suffered to enjoy, though with far lesser reason, in regard of the ancient right & possession, which each part pretendeth for the use of their said Religion.  
XCI. And since this time again there hath been seen very lately another spectacle, not much unlike to the former (though much more markable) to wit, a like number of Noble and Gentlemen, with their followers and train, passing in very good sort through sundry Countries, being lately retired out of his Maties Kingdom of Ireland, for the self same cause of their Conscience, and Religion; which when men do behold, and hear them otherwise to speak honourably of his Matie & the State, ascribing rather their afflictions to some under Magistrates in Ireland, and Ministers that set them on; it moveth more compassion, and maketh men think and muse, what may be the end of all this, and whereunto finally it may grow? Whether the like may not be expected in time or doubted, out of other parts also of his Maties dominions, upon like angariation of Consciences: which points seem to be of no small consideration, and consequence to wise men; though those that be the immediate causes thereof, will and must make light of all: but the natural issue of such events, are not unknown. And if the occasioners thereof were guilty of no greater fault, but only to cast his Matie & the State into perpetual cares about the same (his Royal nature being inclined otherwise to sweetness, peace, and tranquillity) it were a great sin in them, and scarce sufferable.  
XCII. Nor is the remedy here attempted by our Minister-Apologer (of denying all, and saying that there is no persecution, nor hard dealing with any, for matters of Religion, no not in the late Queen's days, when so many were so racked and rent for the same) any remedy at all; but rather a doubling of the injury to the afflicted, with increase of exasperation & aversion of minds; as also a losing of all credit with others that hear it, either at home or abroad: for that facts contrary to words, do preponderate with all sober men, and prevail against the same.  
XCIII. And truly, I cannot but wonder, why this late Apology hath been so greedily published by the Apologer, both in English and Latyn to the world, for that the Pope's Breves, being but written privately to the Catholics of England, for informing their Consciences in a matter of necessary doctrine about the lawfulness, or unlawfulness of taking the Oath, and the Letter of Cardinal Bellarmyne being directed only to a private friend; both of them might have remained also private, if this attempt had not been made of publishing the same. But now being drawn by the Apologer into the Universal Theatre of the world, besides, that divers will hold themselves obliged, or at leastwise provoked to answer the same; it will follow also, that the unlawfulness of the said Oath to Catholic Consciences will more be seen, disputed, & condemned by all universities, Schools, Books & Treatises of particular learned men, throughout all Countries of Christendom that profess Catholic Religion. Whereupon also the unjust violence, enforcing men to swear the same Oath, under so rigorous pains, as are the loss both of goods & liberty, and therewithal to swear in like manner, that they do it willingly, freely, and without coaction: will be censured (no doubt) for one of the greatest contradictions in itself, and the most injurious manner of proceeding with Christian men, that ever, perhaps was heard of in the Christian world.  
XCIII. And this now occurred to me (dear Sir) to write to you concerning my judgement upon this matter. What more may be said to this Apology, when it shall come into the hands of learned men; you will easily guess by these few notes, that I have here laid together, which contain but little in respect of that which may be written of the matters here handled. God of his endless mercy incline the heart of his Majesty, to take the best way in this his course of Royal Government: & for so much, as he hath been pleased to join so many Great Kingdoms under his only Sceptre, and permitted them to have so great differences of judgements in matters of Religion, that their union of wills, at least, in dutiful affections, may be so combined and conserved by sweet and temperate proceeding towards all, as despair, the mother of headlong precipitation, enter not. The Proverb is known, Qui nimium emungit, elicit sanguinem: & patientia laesa vertitur in furorem. I never heard or read, that too much violence towards free Subjects ever ended well, especially for supposed faults that are not acknowledged for such, by the punished: & consequently no hope of amendment by way of compulsion. Some may dissemble for fear, but they are more lost in their affections then the other. Some reasonable toleration, and friendly treaty would bind up wounds from bleeding on all sides: Exulceration maketh them fester more grievously, and dangerously. To God's holy Providence the whole is to be committed, who will dispose of all to his greater glory, siuè in vitam, siuè in mortem. And to him also I commit you, with my heartiest Commendations, etc. This 10. of june. 1608.  
FINIS.