THE WARN-WORD TO SIR FRANCIS hastings WASTWORD:  
Containing the issue of three former Treateses, the Watchword, the Ward-word and the Wastword (entitled by Sir Francis, an Apology or Defence of his Watchword) together with certain admonitions & warnings to the said knight and his followers.  
Whereunto is adjoined a brief rejection of an insolent, and vaunting minister masked with the letters O. E. who hath taken upon him to write of the same argument in supply of the knight.  
There go also four several Tables, one of the chapters, another of the controversies, the third of the chief shifts, and deceits, the fourth of the particular matters contained in the whole book.  
By N. D. author of the Ward-word.  Tit. 3. vers. 10. Fly an herttical man, after one or two warnings, knowing that such a one is subverted, and sinneth damnably against his own judgement. 
Permissu Superiorum. Anno 1602.   

THE ENCOUNTERS THAT LIE IN CONTROVERSY BETWEEN the Watchman and the Warder, Sir Fra●cis Hastings, and N. D.  
THE first Encounter, whether England received blessings or cursing, hurts or benefits by the change of catholic Religion.  
The second, whether Catholyks do hold certain absurd grounds, rules and maxims of Religion, which S. Francis doth devise and affirm.  
The third concerning divers forged pe●ils feigned by the said knight in his Watchword, to have been procured to her Matie by Catholyks, both before and since her reign.  
The fourth Encounter ●xamineth sundry calumniations objected against some principal Englishmen, as Bishop Gardener, Cardinal Allen, and others.  
The fifth concerneth the order of jesuits, and some of them in particular specially injured by the Watchword.  
The sixth defendeth English catholic Recusants & their due loyalty to her Matie and the State.  
The seventh concerns foreign Princes intolerably slandered by the Watchword, & first of all the B. of Rome as head of the Cath. Church.  
The 8. Encounter discusseth matters maliciously and uncivilly objected against other Cath. Princes abroad, to their disgrace and injury.  
Lastly there is a speech of the Warder to the Right Honourable Lords of her Majesty's ●ies. privy Council, remitting to their wisdoms the judgement and arbitrament of the whole controversy.  
The first two Encounters are handled only in this book the other are to follow in other several books afterwards.   

THE EPISTLE TO THE CHRISTIAN READER.  
I HOLD not for needful (good Christian Reader) to make any, large presace for thy instruction in that which is to ensue in this book the controversy being sufficiently known by that which hitherto hath been written and printed thereof. The sum of all is this.  
There happened some ●ew years passed (as often also before) a certain false alarm of a Spanish invasion, 
An. 1598.  than said to be upon the Seas towards England, upon the rumour whereof, one knight more hasty than the rest (for that he was of the Hastings) stepped forth, 
Sir F. Hastings.  and offered not only a swift foot to the field (for so are his words) but a much swifter tongue to accuse, and bring in question all Catholic men within the realm, himself being known to be of the Puritan crew.  
And to perform this with more probability of just occasion he made himself (without commission) a general Watchman over all the land, and wrote a most bitter and bloody pamphlet against the said catholics, under the title of a Watchword replenished with all kind of slanders and most odious calumniations, 
The Watchword.  which being joined with the jealousy of the time, & the disgrace wherein the said catholics were before for confession of their religion, was very likely to have brought them to some general ruin, and consequently this knight also to some desired divident of their livings.  
Wherefore this intemperate invective coming to the hands of a certain Catholic man that took compassion of their oppression, and some disdain at the malicious devise of this watchman, he thought good to write a temperate Ward-word to this turbulent watchword, 
The Ward-word.  drawing all that the other had uttered in many wild & waste words into 8. several Encounters, intituling his book a Ward-word; which being published it seemed to touch the matter so to the quick as the first news after the publication thereof was in most men's mouths, that the knight disavowed the watchword, attributing the same rather to certain ministers of his communion, that either wrote the same or induced him thereunto, then to himself, & most men commended the discretion and modesty of the knight in so doing.  
But as men are not always constant in the best; so Sir F. making a new consultation with his presbytery at Cadbury, took another resolution to reply again under the name of An Apology, 
The new reply of Sir F.  & hereby the matter hath grown to a larger discussion than was expected, for that the book (after long expectation of more than two years) coming to my hands, I was drawn to enlarge myself much more in this my rejoinder, then at the beginning I purposed: in so much as having ended the whole answer, with in few months af●er the receipt of the book, it grew to such a bulk, as conveniently it could not be set forth in one volume; and this was one cause of some delay & longer deliberation.  
But another more principal was, an advise written unto me, 
O. E. his book.  that one O. E. a minister had published another volume of the same argument in supply of the knight's defence, much more intemperate & malignant, than the other; which being understood, it seemed necessary to expect the same before the publishing of the former, which hath caused much longer delay than was wished or meant, especially some other impediments also concurring therewith, whereof most men cannot be ignorant.  
Now than these being the causes of the enlargement both of time and matter, it seemeth I should tell you also of the reasons, why these two first Encounters are set forth a part from the rest; but this is sufficiently declared by a certain addition in the end of this book set down by the publisher thereof, whereunto I remit the reader, only I am to advertise him to consider how easily words do beget words, and how a few lavish speeches spoken at random by the knight in his watchword have given an occasion to the handling of above fifty controversies in these first two Encounters only; and then may you imagine how much more the rest may amount unto.  
And one principal reason of this increase & growth is, 
The causes of enlarging this Treatese.  for that our adversaries do handle matters of religion so confusedly, and with so little order, sincerity or truth, that we must either shuffle over things as they do, scarce understood either by themselves or others, or else we must be forced for drawing them into s●me method and perspicuity to spend much time & labour, to explicate, and distinguish the same, and to yield to each thing his true ground, reason and probation; which point, for that I had rather the reader should learn by proof and experience of the things themselves here to be handled, then by my speech, I will proceed no further; but remit myself to the ensuing treateses, beseeching almighty God that all this may redound to his glory and to their good for whose spiritual benefit I have most willingly taken this small plains.  
Your hearty friend that wisheth your greatest good. N. D.   

THE FIRST TABLE OF THE PREAMBLES AND CHAPTERS CONTAINED IN these two Encounters.  

The first Encounter.  AN answer to a certain vain and arrogant Epistle of O.E. Minister unto N.D. author of the Wardword. 
 Certain brief notes and observations, upon S. F. Hastings Epistle to the Christian Reader. 
 Other observations upon the preface of O.E. to the Reader, containing a full answer there unto. 
 A brief Summary of all that before hath been said, or now is to be added about this first Encounter of blessings and cursings by change of Cath. religion. 
Cap. 1.  Of the first charge of flattering the State of England, laid to S.F. and of his own contradiction to himself therein about the devised blessings of his new gospel. 
Cap. 2.  Proctor O. E. is called up the stage to tell his tale, and to help out S.F. in this matter of flattering the State, and how he playeth his part far worse, and more ridiculously than the knight himself. 
Cap. 3.  Often new blessings devised and brought in by S. F. as peculiar to his gospel; whereof the first is union in doctrine, termed by him unity in verity. And how false & vain this is. 
Cap. 4.  The same matter is prosecuted, and the disunion of Protestants is proved & declared by divers other means out of their own books and writings, especially of foreign protestants, Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Caluinists. 
Cap. 5.  The continuation of the same narration about unity in verity, among riged and soft Caluinists, named protestants and Puritans in England and Scotland. 
Cap. 6.  An answer to three fond objections or interrogations of S.F. with an addition about O.E. 
Cap. 7.  Of the second and third blessings which are, reading of scriptures, and public service in English. 
Cap. 8.  The second part of the answer about Church service in English, containing some authorities alleged for it, bu● much corrupted and abused by the knight. 
Cap. 9  Of the fourth and fifth blessings affirmed to have been brought in by Protestants; which are abundance of good works and freedom from persecution. 
Cap. 10.  Of the other five imagined blessings that remain, to wit, deliverance from exactions, long peace, power in foreign countries, wealth of the land, and multitude of subjects increased. 
Cap. 11.  How the contrary effects to blessings, that is to say, of cursings rather and calamities brought in by change of Religion both spiritual and temporal, and how S. F. and his minister, do answer them. 
Cap. 12.  What Proctor O. E. saith to this matter of cursings & how absurdly he behaveth himself therein. 
Cap. 13.  That Protestants have not only no agreement or unity among themselves in matters of religion, but also are deprived of all sure means and certain rule whereby to attain thereunto. 
Cap. 14.  What O. E. answereth to the former chapter about division and uncertainty in religion. 
Cap. 15.  Of the English rule of belief set down by O. E. and what substance or certainty it hath, and how they do use it for excluding puritans and other protestants. And of divers shameful shifts of O.E. 
Cap. 16.  It is further showed by divers clear examples that O. E. and his fellows do plainly despair of all certain mean or rule to try the truth among themselves, or with us. 
Cap. 17.  Of the fruits, virtue, and good works that have followed by change of religion, as also of eight temporal inconveniences, which may be called curses or maledictions ensued by the same. And how O. E. behaveth himself in this controversy. 
Cap. 18.  The Warning or admonition to S.F. Hastings and his friends, as also to his advocate and Proctor O. E. upon this first Encounter of blessings. 
Cap. 19   

The second Encounter.  The sum of that, which before was set down between the Watchman and the Warder. 
Cap. 1.  About the general charge of false dealing laid to S. F. in this Encounter, and how evil he avoideth the same, by committing new falsehoods and treacheries. 
Cap. 2.  How long the Cath. Roman religion hath flourished in England, and of the authority of S. Bede and Arnobius abused by S.F. together with a comparison examined between our learned men. and those of the Protestants. And first of john Husse bragged of by S. Francis. 
Cap. 3.  Of the learning and glorious disputations of Martin Luther▪ Simon Grinaeus, Peter Martyr, Beza and other Protestants boasted of by our knight. 
Cap. 4.  Of two notable untruths laid unto S. F. his charge for a preface by the Warder before he come to the four ●eigned positions. And how the knight defendeth himself therein. 
Cap. 5.  The examination of that which O. E. hath written concerning the former points handled in the precedent five Chapters: and that it is far more impertinent and desperate, then that which the knight himself hath answered. 
Cap. 6.  The second part of this Encounter containing four absurd grounds of Cath. religion feigned by S. F. And first whether ignorance be the mother of devotion, as also about the controversy of Fides explicita and implicita. 
Cap. 7.  The minister O.F. is called upon to help out his knight in defence of this first forged position. And how he performeth the same. 
Cap. 8.  Of the second forged principle, that laymen must not meedle in matters of religion, wherein is handled again the matter of ●eading scriptures in English, and why the Cat. Church doth forbid some books & purge others. 
c. 9  About S. Thomas of Canterbury, whether he were a traitor or no, as maliciously he is called by S.F. & O.E. his minister, & how notorious impostures both they and Fox do use to disgrace him against the testimony of all ancient writers. 
Cap. 10.  Of S. Thomas his miracles & what may be thought of them and other such like, with the malicious corruption & falsehood used by john Fox & S.F. to discredit them. There is handled also the different manner of Canonizing saints in their and our Church. 
Cap 11.  The third forged position, whereby Catholyks are said to hold, that the Pope or any coming f●om him is to be obeyed though he command blasphemies against God, & disloyalties against Princes. 
Cap. 12.  The former matters are disputed with the minister O. E. especially whether Popes do command blasphemies against God and disloyalties against Princes, and whether Popes may in some causes be reprehended by their subjects, and how falsely the minister behaveth himself in all these points. 
Cap. 13.  About the fourth forged principle, whereby Catholyks are said to use pardons for their chiefest remedy against all sins wherein the truth of Cath. Doctrine is declared, and the manifold wicked falsifications of our here●yks are detected. 
Cap. 14.  Of two other examples of pardons abused by Catholyks, as S.F. allegeth and both of them false with a notorious imposture about the poisoning of K. john. 
Cap. 15.  The speech of the Warder is defended, where he calleth the way of salvation by only faith the common cart-way of protestāns: The truth of which doctrine is examined. 
c. 16.  The warning and admonition about this second Encounter first to S. F. Hastings, & then to O.E. his chaplain and champion. 
Cap. 17.  An addition by the publisher of this book, wherein he showeth first a Reason why these two Encounters go alone: then the d●fference he findeth in the writers and their writings: thirdly how a man may use this which here is said to the decision of any controversy of our tyme. 
Cap. 18.    

THE SECOND TABLE OF THE CHIEF CONTROVERSIES HANDLED IN THESE two Encounters.  

In the first Encounter.  
WHo are properly Catholyks, and who heretyks, by the old laws of Cath. Christian Emperors? and whether the laws made against heretyks by these Emperors do touch protestants or Papists at this day in England. annotat. upon the epist. of O.E. & cap. 2. num. 2.  
How a man may make a most clear and evident deduction of Cath. Religion by the foresaid Imperial laws, if no other proof were, and whether ever any Christian were punishable before our times for sticking to the Pope of Rome in Religion. ibid. num. 12.13.27.28. etc.  
How old Christian Emperors did promulgate laws about Religion, & against the transgressors thereof, & how different a thing it was from that which Protestant Princes are taught to do at this day. Ibid.  
What was the old rule of faith, so much esteemed, and talked of among the ancient fathers, & how Cathol. & heretyks may easily & evidently be tried by the same. Cap. 15.  
Whether the English-parlament rule of faith set down by O.E. be sufficient to discern Catholyks from heretics: and whether a parliament can make any rule of faith. Cap. 16. num. 1.2. etc.  
Whether Canonists do call the Pope God or no? and how false S. Francis and his chaplain are found in this point. Cap. 2. & 3. & Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 10.11.12. etc.  
In what sense a creature may be called God, and how Constantine the great did call Pope Silvester so. Cap. 2. &▪ 3.  
What wonderful reverend opinion the ancient Fathers had of the high and divine power given to Priests upon earth, especially to the highest Priest. Ibid.  
Whether protestants have union among them, or any mean to make union, or to find out certainty in matters of faith. cap. 4. num. 10. Item. cap. 5.6.14.15.16.17.  
What Synods and Counsels, conferences, conventicles and other meetings protestants have had throughout the world to procure some show of union, but eue● have departed more disagreeing then before. Cap. 4. num. 12.13.  
Whether Lutherans and Caluinists may any way be said to be brethren, or of one Church, as both S. F. & john Fox do hold. cap. 3 4.5. etc.  
Whether Zwinglians and Caluinists and other Sacramentary Protestans, be truly heretics according to the judgement and sentence of Martin Luther, and what blessing he giveth them as to bastard children. ca 5. n. 1.2.3. etc.  
Whether English protestants and Puritans do agree in jesus Christ crucified, as S. F. saith, or may be accounted true brethren & of one Church ca 6. & 10 n. 8. etc. 12. n. 6.  
Whether liberty for all unlearned to read scriptures in English without difference or restraint, be a blessing or a curse, profitable or hurtful to the people. ca 8. & Enc. 2. c. 3.  
Whether public service in English be a hurt or benefit to all sort of people. cap. 8. num. 7. & cap. 9  
Whether and how the merits of holy men may stand with merits & satisfaction of Christ. Cap. 9 num. 7.8.9.  
Whether abundance of good works be a peculiar blessing of Protestants or no as S. F. defendeth. cap. 10. n. 2.3 4.5. & cap. 17. & 18.  
Whether English nobility and commonalty be richer at this day then in old time, by change of religion? cap. 11. num. 7.8.9. etc.  
Whether it be a special grace and blessed nature of Protestants to persecute no man for religion. Cap. 10.  
Whether freedom from exactions, long peace, great power in other countries, great wealth of the land, and more abundant multiplying of children then before be special benefits and benedictions brought into England by change of Religion. Cap. 11.  
Whether the universal Church may be said properly to teach us or no? which O. E. denieth. Cap. 11. num. 12.  
Whether the sacrifice of the mass be a new invention or no? and whether the number of 7. Sacraments were not agreed on before the late Council of Trent as O.E. affirmeth. Cap. 13. num. 7.8.9.10. etc.  
How far catholic men do depend of the Pope for the certainty of their religion. Ca 16. n. 17.18.19. Enc. 2. c. 13. n. 16.  
Whether any one new or old heresy can be proved truly to be in the doctrine of Papists at this day: and how that there be many properly and formally held by Protestants. Cap. 16. num. 20.  
What differences of doctrine or opinions may be among Cath. men without heresy or breach of the Rule of faith, according to the ancient Fathers. Cap. 16. num. 6.  
How contemptuously the Protestants do speak not only of the old Fathers, but also of their own writers, when they make against them. Cap. 17. num. 17.  
Whether temporal blessings entered into England and other countries round about with the new gospel and change of the old religion. Cap. 12. & 13.14. & 18.  
How many and how great Inconveniences in matters of State, & otherwise have ensued in England by change of Religion since K. Henry the 8. his departure from the union of the Roman Church. Cap. 17. & 18.   

In the second Encounter.  
Whether there were more darkness & ignorance in Q. mary's time & former ages, than now; & whether Protestants be better learned than Catholyks. Cap. 2. num. 18.19. & cap. 3.4. & 6.  
Whether friars we●e brave liars in K. Richard 2. his time as S.F. saith; and what manner of friars they were? to wit corrupted by Wickliff. Cap. 2. num. 11.  
Whether scripture were read generally in English in S. Bede his time or no; Cap. 3. num. 5.6. etc.  
Whether john hus and Martin Luther offered disputation to Catholyks or no? and whether they were of one and the same religion, or that any of them did agree fully with S. Francis and O. E. in their religion now professed. Cap. 3. & 4.  
Whether the Catholyks or Hugonote ministers in the conference at Poysy in France anno Domini 1561. had the better. Cap 4. num. 14.  
Whether Catholyks did ever hold it for heresy to read scriptures in English, or have ever put men or women to death for that fact only. Cap. 4. & 5. & 6. num. 12. & 15. & cap. 9 num. 3.  
Whether the ancient Fathers did use to pray to Saints and Angels or no? Cap. 6. num. 6. num 8.  
Whether the name of Lucifugi scripturarum or scripture-battes', used by Tertullian do properly agree to protestants or Catholyks. Cap. 6. num. 24.25.26. etc.  
Whether ignorance be held by Catholyks to be the mother of devotion. Cap. 7. num. 1.2. etc.  
Whether ignorance in some points concerning religion may in some people be commendable and meritorious (as S. Hilary saith) or no? ibid. cap. 8. num. 3.  
Whether the distinction of fides implicita and explicita be a true & necessary distinction for the salvation of many men's souls, which cannot possibly be saved without the use thereof. Cap 7. num. 6.  
Whether it be true that Catholyks teach: that lay-men must not meddle in matters of Religion, and how far they are to meddle. Cap. ●.  
Why the Cath. Church doth use Index expurgatorius against the corruption of heretyks and their books; how it must be used▪ and what great good ensueth thereof. Cap. 9 num. 23.24. etc.  
Whether S. Thomas of Canterbury, were a true martyr, and of his miracles. Cap. 10. & 11.  
Whether his case were like the case of S. john Bapt. with his King or of S. Ambrose with his Emperor or no? Cap. 10.  
Whether the miracles wrought by S. Thomas of Canterbury after his death were true miracles and did prove him a Saint or no. Cap. 11.  
Which is the better spirit and more conform to scripture and the old fathers, to believe easily miracles, or to discredit them. cap. 11. num 19  
How true saints may be known; and whether Fox-made saints or Pope-made Saints (as S.F. calleth them) are more substantially Canonised. Cap. 11. num. 15.16. etc.  
Whether Catholyks do hold, that the Pope or any coming from him is to be obeyed, though he command blasphemies. Cap. 12. & 13.  
Whether the merits and sufferings of Saints, may be lawfully mentioned in our prayers, as motives to move God with all. Cap. 12.  
Whether no man may say to the Pope, why do you so, though he lead infinite souls to hell, as O. E. cavilleth. Cap. 13. num. 17.18. etc.  
Whether Catholyks do use the Pope's pardons for their chiefest remedies, against all sort of sins, as heretyks do accuse them. Cap. 14.  
In what degree or sense pardons are available to Christians. ibid. num. 8. & cap. 15. num. 1.2.3. etc.  
Whether james Clement, that slew the last K. of France were absolved for the fact, before the committing thereof. Cap. 15.  
Whether it be true that K. john of England was poisoned by a monk, or that the monk was absolved for the same, before he committed the fact, as john Fox and S.F. do hold. cap. 15. num. 4.5. etc.  
Whether the doctrine of salvation by only faith, be a common cartway to hell, for all libertines or no? cap. 16.   
The third and fourth Tables as well of shifts and wilful falsifications, by Sir Francis and O. E. as of the principal matters contained in these two Encounters are to be seen in the end of the book.   

AN ANSWER TO A CERTAIN VAIN, AND ARROGANT EPISTLE OF O. E. minister, unto N. D. author of the Ward-word.  
SMall contentment (gentle reader) can any Christian modest man take, that having to handle a grave & serious cause seethe himself drawn, or rather driven from the same, to contention of words, by the insolency, and importunity of his quarreling adversary, 
2. Tim. 2.  which tendeth to nothing (as the Apostle also noteth) but to the subversion of the hearer, and yet when we are forced to this disorder somewhat also must be said least silence in speech show diffidence in truth, and that a fool (as the Scripture insinuateth) if he be not answered in his folly begin to think himself wise. 
Proverb. 26.  We have signified before in our preface, how a certain contentious minister desirous to be doing, and to play a part, but yet not without a vizard in respect of the follies perhaps he was to utter, resolved to mask, and cipher his name under the letters of O. E. and then having perused the reply of S. Francis Hastings to the Ward-word, and misliking (as it seemeth) the same as insufficient he buckled himself to make in his own opinion a better defence, though in other men's judgement of two bad this is far the worse both in respect of the substance of matters, and controversies handled (whereof this man treateth no one groundedlie any where, but only quarreleth at the words and sentences of his adversary) as also in regard of his outrageous intemperate speech, which runneth also oftentimes both to turpitude, & scurrility, the reason whereof we think to be in part for that the minister persuading himself to be masked, presumeth to utter any t●ing as unknown, and I am content for this time to let him so pass, though in deed his deportment be such against all kind of Catholic men never so learned, virtuous, worshipful, or honourable, as no way he deserveth any such favour, and that I could dismaske him, he may perceive by divers points which afterward I shall have occasion to touch.  
Now ●hen letting pass this, we shall look into the argument of this present Epistle of O.E. to N.D. which you shall see to consist of three principal points, 
T●●e points of ●his Epistle.  to wit, notorious folly, apparent falsehood, & ridiculous vanity, in bragging & vaunting, let us see them all in order.  
This Epistle prefixed before his book hath this inscription, To N. D. al●as Noddy, O. E. wisheth knowledge of truth, etc. and then beginneth he his Epistle thus; Sir N.D. or Noddy, or howsoever it shall please you to style yourself, being a man but of two or three letters, etc. Hee●e you see beginneth a grave contention between O. E. and N. D. about the word Noddy, which none but a Noddy, in my opinion would ever have brought into examination, especially in print; ●or that N. D. being but consonants, and having no sound of their own cannot make Noddy, except you add the sound of O.E. unto them, that are vowels, to give life unto the word, whereof it followeth, that seeing consonants are but the material part of a word, and vowels the formal, O. ●. must needs be the formal Noddy, and that N.D. doth but lend him a couple of consonants to make him a Noddy, and thus much for the name itself. But as for the nature, and essence of a Noddy to which of the two it doth best agree shall appear afterward in the discussion of matters throughout this whole combat, and one point of a Noddy you may presently perceive in these very words alleged, whereas O.E. objected to N.D. that he is a man but of two or three letters, which is answered sufficiently by numbering only how many letters O. E. do make, and so again afterward, and very often in his repli●, he objecteth to N. D. that he durst not put down his name at length, which yet himself being at home upon his own ground and among his own friends, and favourers, thought best not to do, and consequently we must conclude, that as Cicero doth call him a Noddy orator, 
Cicero lib. 1. de oratore.  which allegeth such matter, as maketh no less for his adversary, then for himself, so may we hold O.E. for a Noddy writer, who objecteth that to N.D. which with far less reason, or excuse he practiseth himself, and thus much about the jest, and allusion of Noddy, wherein while the minister would needs be pleasant he is now become ridiculous.  
About the second point which is of his apparent falsehood albeit we might remit ourselves to the multitude of examples which we shallbe forced to lay down in our insueing encounters, yet one shall we show here, for a proof of the ministers talon in this kind; He will needs in this Epistle interpret the letters N.D. to import Robert Persons, and consequently, that he was the Author of the Ward-word, for whose discredit he telleth us, that the same man hath written in all eight contemptible treatises, which he taketh upon him to register, and number up: The first being (as he saith) certain chart●ls written against his friends in Oxford: secondly a book against the Earl of Leicester, entitled (as in the Margin he noteth) Leicester's common wealth. thirdly an other against the late Lord treasurer, called a confutation of pretended fears. Fourthly that he helped Cardinal Allen to make his book against the state anno Domini 15●8. These are four books named by him to which he addeth four more to wit, Philopater against the proclamation. Dolmans' book of titles, the disputation of Plessis, and the Ward-word against Sir Francs Hastings. All which books he a●cribeth resolutely neither more nor fewer to Father Persons: and albeit it were over long ●o examine here all the particulars, yet for the first four of them, I never heard any man of notice, and judgement ascribe them to him before, and if I be not deceived, other particular authors are known to have written them, namely the later three of the first four; for as for the first of all I hold it for a mere fiction, neither doth the minister allege any one proof to show these books to be his; and on the contrary side, he pretermitteth wilfully four or five other books, which most men lightly do account by common fame to have come from him: & this good fellow could not probably but know it also, to wit, the reasons of refusal about Catholics going to protestant Churches. The discovery of John Nicols. The Censure and defence thereof against William Cha●cke. The Epistle of persecution. And the christian directory, or book of resolution; So as in recounting us here eight books the minister telleth nine lies, four positive, and five privative, no less falsely affirming the one then fraudulently suppressing the other, which being discovered at this his first entrance to his answer, and not being able to be excused, each man will see how little truth, or conscience he hath, and how little he is to be trusted in any thing else that he saith or writeth.  
The third point is of his ridiculous crowing, vaunting and challenging, as though he were not only that Terentian Thraso, or Philistian Goliath, but even Behemoth, or Leviathan himself whose lips (as the Scripture saith) do cast forth burning lamps, 
job. 41.  and his nostrils fiery smoke, who esteemeth iron as straw, and contemneth brass as rotten wood, which is spoken of a proud contemptuous spirit discovered every where in this fellow, not only by his fuming, fretting, and facing throughout this idle Epistle, but by his contumelious words, and reproachful speeches also in all other parts of his writing, provoking and challenging as a giant, and yet when he cometh to gripes he showeth himself one of the poorest, and weakest worms, that ever lightly hath come to combat in these affairs as after you will find by experience, now let us hear him a little cracle if you list. I do draw you (saith he) into other five Encounters (besides the former eight) and do protest, 
Examples of vaunting & challenging in O. E.  that if you come not forth, you shall be baffled for a Coward, unworthy to bear arms in this kind of warfayre. Lo here the courageous champion, but if you chance to behold afterwards this menacing mate that here threateneth such terrible baffuling, to be sound beaten; how childish will this bragging seem unto you, well than I remit me to the issue. Yet ceaseth he not, but goeth forward thus: I have taken upon me (saith he) to join with you upon your own ground, and to t●y you at your own weapons, etc. And yet more; If you be not at leisure, let Creswel, or some other babbling jesuite stand forth and try his skill, it standeth you much upon. Do you see how desirous this man is of an Antagonist? as for his demand of Father Creswel, I may answer him, nos●is, quid petis, for he would be overmatched, and Creswel would crush him: and let him take heed how he provoke him overmuch lest he shake him up and say as Cicero did of a like good fellow, 
●●cero. Phi●●p. 2.  non tam despectum, quam vexatum dimittam. Which I am forced also sometimes to do, by his importunity, and intolerable petulancy.  
And to the end the reader may partly also understand, what this masked minister O. E. is, who under a vizard so egregiously playeth the advise, and would bite also even to blood if his teeth were equal to his tongue. 
Relation about O. E.  You must understand that according to the relation we have of that man, he hath been a soldier and pirate as well as a minister, and no marvel seeing all these offices or occupations agree not evil in a man of his quality, neither is there any irregularity (you know) in the m●n of his Clergy. And further I understand, that he hath been judge martial among soldiers, since he was a minister, and now when any bands of men are to be made in his country, he is a chief Muster-man, walking up and down with his truns●ion in his hand (in steed of the bible) to beat and break soldiers heads, that range not to his liking, or obey not his beck, wherein yet they affirm him to be so untemperatelie choleric, or rather frantic, and furious when he is angered, as th●t he were, intolerable to be a comiter to beat slaves in a Galley, and mu●h more to guide or direct free men, that serve voluntarily their Prince.  
He is married (as they say) and matched as a minister ought to be, and thereby perhaps somewhat restrained, yet is his tongue so exorbitant, when he beginneth, as no reason, honesty, or religion beareth rule with him though much trouble it hath brought him already, and may do more if he have his due, for that out of Ireland he was forced to retire in haste about injurious speech uttered against the Earl of Ormond, and Irish nation, and nobility generally, and hereof can the knight bear witness, whose name beginneth with a B, and wa● forced to witness against him. I could allege also divers other witnesses omni exceptione maiores, as well of his own order as otherwise; of his intemperate and odious speeches against the present state, and such as manage the same for temporal matters, complaining grievously among the rest of the servitude, and great poverty of the English clergy affirming in particular, that they paid the third penny of all that ever they had, and finally showing himself as deeply discontent as any man could be that liveth in external show of obedience.  
And for all these and other such points I could name many particulars both of matter, men, time, and place, when and where they were spoken, as also, I could resolve the name of O. E. into his true syllables if it be true that his surname begin with S. but, I have promised to spare him for this time, and will keep my promise: And if it please him to go forward in this controversy taken in hand with christian modesty, and convenient terms of civility as men professing learning ought to do, I shall be content to answer him in the same style, attending to the matter, and not to the man or his manners, but if he delight in the other vain style of scolding, & scurrility, I mean to leave him, and deliver him over into the hands of some, which may chance t●ke him up also in that kind according to his deserts, & in the mean space the man before mentioned that is most injuried by him in his malignity of speech, loseth little by his lewd detraction, but gaineth rather exceedingly both in merit with God, and credit with all good men, and as for the trial of their cause, it will appear sufficiently by that which afterward cometh to be examined in these Encounters.   

CERTAIN BRIEF NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS UPON SIR F. hastings Epistle to the Christian Reader.  
THOUGH whatsoever Sr. F. writeth in this Epistle be handled afterward more at large in the several Encounters themselves that do ensue, yet to let nothing pass wholly unanswered, and to discover somewhat in this beginning, the talon which the K. hath in writing, I have thought best to set down these few annotations concerning the principal points, (though none indeed be principal or material) of his said Epistle to the Christian Reader.  
First of all he beginneth the very first paragraphe of his Epistle with such obscurity or deep mystery, 
Epist. pag. 1.  as I confess I understand him not; for thus he saith: Having observed (gentle Reader) from the words and writings of the learned, that it is a maxim, 
A ma●●m● evil applied.  or rule in Philosophy Finis est primus in intention, the end aimed at is first settled in the intention of man, and finding this Romanist to boast and brag much of his learning it is not unlike, that like a cunning Clerk (whatsoever his learning be) the end of this his work, was the first ground of his writing.  
Thus he writeth and if the Reader understand his meaning, and what he would conclude, it is well, for I profess my ignorance therein, only I know the Philosopher's maxim to be this: 
Aristo●.  that as the end of ●oing any thing is first in our intention, so is it last in preformance and execution. The later part our K. hath left out, the former I know not why he hath brought in, except perhaps his hidden conceit should be, that the last part of my Wardword (which is the remission to the Lords of her Majesty's ●ies. Counsel) was the first thing intended by me, and inducing me to write, which yet is evidently seen to be false, for that the K. Wachword and injuries offered therein to Catholics was the motive, enforcing rather then inducing to that work, and to oppose my ward to so slanderous a watch: so that here S.F. his Philosophical Maxim is fond applied, or not applied at all, and consequently his brag of having observed the same from the word: & writings of the learned, is vain, seeing how unlearnedly he useth it. But this is easily pardoned in a Knight; and so let us go forward.  
After thi● he taketh in hand the title of my book, which is A temperate wardword etc. saying a he proclaimeth temperance in his title, 
Epist. ibid.  and pursueth the a●te of railing in the whole process following, and in the end of all he persuadeth ruin both to Church & comon-w●lth, etc. For my railing I remit me to the judgement of the indifferent Reader, who w●l distinguish between railing and round answering, or rigorous rejection of an importune adversary that multiplieth calumniatious without ground, number or measure, especially in that kind of bloody sycophancy wher●n the watching libel was written, though I do confess as before hath been signified, that I was the more earnest and eager sometime, for that I did imagine the said byring libel not to have proceeded from the knight but from some K. of another kind, not from S.F.H. of so honourable a house and calling, but from some Crane, some W●lkinson, 
S F. Presbytery of 〈◊〉 minister's at Cadbury.  some Sipthorpe (if I remember well their ill favoured names) Doctors and Rabbyns of his puritanical presbytery at Cadbury, but now that I see the knight's humility to be so great as to dishonour himself with taking the name of this work upon him, I shall endeavour to use more patience also with him in my answer, except he over strain it sometimes by the intemperance of his tongue against Catholykes, and so much of this.  
But for the second which he objecteth that I seek the ruin both of Church and common wealth by my exhortation to peace, atonement and mitigation in religion which afterwards goeth in my remitter to the Lords of her Majesty's t●es. Counsel, their Honours and not Sr. F. worship, or wisdom must be judges of this point: and why an exhortation to peace and union should be accounted a cause of public ruin I see no cause; nor yet reason of state or religion therein, except the knight & his puritanical camp do hate peace; following therein that other Maxim, that in troubled waters is best fishing. Which conjecture is shrewdly confirmed by the attempt of their Puritan Captain the Earl of Essex (brought by puritanism into such calamity) who having been stout against peace with foreign Princes for divers years, 
The Earl of E●sex pitifully seduced by the Puritans.  under pretence of home security, had wrought such a troubled water under hand in the mean space, as if his stream had not been troubled, and turned upon him before his time, he might chance to have inhooked the greatest fish of England. And whether Sr. F. were one of those anglers or no, I cannot tell, being so far absent, nor will I accuse him, though he being of the sermon-sect, and exercising society, which under that occasion and pretence laid their hooks to this troublesome and dangerous fishing, it may be presumed he liked well enough the matter, though, perhaps not the manner, and so till a new captain be found, the enterprise mustly raked up in the ashes, and out cries be given again against Catholykes as the only men, that by peace union and pacification do seek the ruin both of Church and common wealth. But this art now is understood, & so I doubt not but it willbe considered of accordingly by her Matie. and her wise council, whatsoever false alarm, or sayned counter-word the sentinels of the adverse part do give out for their commodity. And this is sufficient for a warn-word in this affair.  
The rest that followeth in his Epistle is of no moment, until he come to delight himself somewhat with a certain fensing allusion, to the title of the ward-word, saying: I doubt not, but so to break the strength of all your chief wards (for all your fensing skill as to leave you at length to your hanging ward, 
The hanging ward●. Ibid. Pag 4.  which proveth always a dangerous ward, if it be sharply followed by the assailant▪ Lo here, threats that go before arguments, wherein I confess both him and his to be very eager and sharp assailants, and that no fencers, nor swashbucklers, nor cutters (as they call them) of Queen hive or other kilcowes could ever follow the fray more sharply upon Catholics, than he and Topclif and such other have done, for these many years, by hanging so many Priests and other servants of Christ, that have rested upon this hanging ward of patience and suffering for ancient religion; which ward yet hath proved much more glorious than dangerous to them, their hope and assurance depending of the promise inviolable of their Captain and Master, assuring them upon his honour and power, that no one hear of their head shall perish, which they have seen performed in all former suffering and martyrdoms for the same cause, and so do hope it willbe in them, for which respect they contemn easily, whatsoever the malice of man can work against them. And so (Sir) your bloody jest of hanging ward, returneth to you again, without applause of any that hath feeling of piety or humanity.  
There followeth further in his epistle: The violence (saith he) of the Puritan spirit is added by ●●m (the warde●) ●or a reason why he is provoked by me, by which words (for all his difference made between Protestant and Puritan) both of them are apparently known to pro●esse Christ jesus crucified in religion, etc. 
● F. will not tell whether he be a Puritan, or no.  Here is first to be noted that our K. by no means can be forced throughout all his whole book to declare himself clearly, whether he be of the Puritan faction or no, only in this place he would fain deny (as you see) all difference of those names & professions, which being ridiculous to all English (even children) that know the contrary (and I am to show it largely afterward in the very first Encounter) 
* Cap. ●.  yet he blusheth not to deny it here, yea further he endeauoreth to prove it by a strong demonstration saying: that both of them do profess Christ jesus crucified in religion. But grant that Christ be crucified again in their religion and that both protestant and puritan do conspire therein, is this sufficient to prove them both to be of one religion? And do not all the Anabaptists, Trinitarians and other sectaries of our time confess the same, that is Christ to have been Crucified? also in their religion? Yea all the old heretics, except only such as denied the manhood of Christ; did confess Christ crucified? And we Catholykes in like manner (whom yet he rejecteth as most opposite to him and his) do we not profess that Christ was crucified? how then is this agreement in Christ jesus Crucified brought in for a sufficient argument of their unity in belief and Doctrine? 
A foolish argument of agreement between Protestants & Puritans.  Consider (good reader) what notable arguments you are like to have in the rearward and rest of his book, seeing these and other like are put in the vanguard.  
There ensueth yet further in his epistle. This encoun●ere● (saith he) seemeth to glory that the years of her Ma ●●● grow on fast● but the God of mercy I trust will prolong her da●es, 
Pag 5. Ibid.  to the holding out still of the Pope's usurped authority, etc. Hear are two apparent abuses, 
Calumniation and flattery.  calumniation, and flattery. calumniation in that the Encounterer nameth not her Majesty's ●e●. many years by way of vaunt, but by way of sorrow and compassion to the Realm & comonwelth. The flattery consisteth in that the K. will needs persuade her Mat●e. of holding out still, which as every man desireth to be long, yet this (still) is so gross and palpable a flattery as no man of judgement and gravity can but scorn him for it, especially since the Essexian assault, which may be presumed would have abbreviated this (still) if it had prevailed, if not in the Earls own intention, yet in many other of the puritan hot brotherhood▪ that egged him on to this attempt.  
A little after when I persuade to union of hearts and good wills in England by toleration and mitigation in matters of religion, he (as though there were no need thereof) answereth thus: As for his unity, if it be unity in verity (as his is not) no Christian man can or will refuse that, 
Pag. 7.  but praise God for that, and (if our unthankfulness bereave us not of it) we enjoy that already by & under her Majesty's ●●●. with great comfort. Hear if by (we) he understand all his new gospel brethren, to wit Lutherans, Suinglians, English Protestant's and Puritans (as in the rest of his book he holdeth them for true brethren) than how this (we) do agree in unity of verity all men that have ears or eyes, do hear & see, which matter yet shallbe examined more largely in the first Encounter 
* cap. 3.4 5. & 6.  following where our knight doth assign it for the first and most special blessing of their religion to have this good unity in verity among them.  
But in the mean space, for that he doth seem to restrain his speech somewhat in this place to England alone, by saying, that they enjoy it already by and under her majesty. it is not hard to see or judge what unity in verity there is between protestants and Puritans at home, 

Comfort of protestants and puritans.  
See the book named the su●u●y of pretended ●oly discipline.   and how comfortable a matter it is to the Puritan party to be restrained by her Matie. and her Bishops (as they be) to exterior unity with the Protestants (for to the interior no force will prevail) and what great and singular joy they take thereof it appeareth in part by their several books of heavy complaints about this matter, 
L. Daunge●rous positions.  some of them being driven also to the hanging ward as well as Catholykes by their brethren protestants, 
L. Martin Marprelate● etc.  so as S. F. tale seemeth rather a ridiculous jest then a serious narration. But let us go forward.  
He cometh at length (which perhaps he leveled at in his first words of this his epistle) to censure my intention in pleading for toleration, and especially for offering the view o● my book to the Lords of her Ma ●●e Counsel, which offendeth him much, and therefore he saith thus or me: 
S F. Epist. Pag. 7.  Notwithstanding all his fawning and crouching to the ●e●●rable lor as in his remitter, their wisdoms (I doub not) will easily find out his subtile Synods intentions who s●ameth not with a brazen face, to seek to bring in ●is brazen horse loaden wit armed calamities for England's ruin, etc. This who●e matter is handled afterward both in the remitter itself and other places of the book, where the K. besides this blast of brazen words hath no one argument in the world to reply, or to prove any calamity either armed or unarmed to be likely to be brought in by this brazen horse (as he will needs term it) of mitigation or toleration, 
The imagined brazen horse.  nor answereth he any one letter or syllable to the many utilityes and public emoluments which there I show to be pretended and intended thereby, nor doth he so much as go about to answer or remove any one of the great hurts, dangers, damages and inconveniences which I declare in my first Encounter, partly to have been received already, & partly daily imminent by the course held of change of religion and rigorous manner of pursuing the same: only the poor man showeth to fear extremely, that if any toleration of Catholic religion should be permitted, than his Pandora (as Irenaeus calleth heresy) would fly or fall to the ground presently: 
●rem lib. 2. cap. 54 & lib. 4 cap 2. Fear of toleration in the puritans.  Which fear of Sir Francis is notwithstanding most dishonourable to him and his sect, and quite contrary to that which at the beginning they preached to the world, affirming nothing to be more reasonable or convenient, then to suffer both religions to stand together, as at this day in Germany, France, and other places, where both sorts are found to be permitted for greater peace and concord of the commonwealths; And why then should our K. so much fear ruin thereby to his religion in England, except only for the causes before cited.  
Towards the end of his Epistle he having censured mine intention, as before you have hard, he setteth down his own very confidently in these words: Being called, as it were, into the field by him, 
Ibidem.  I have adventured upon the height of his swelling pride, and have shaped him a plain and sound answer to the material points, etc. whereby I hope (Christian Reader) thou shalt find me cleared and free from the force and fury of his false imputations and biting blows, etc.  
Hear for that he remitteth the matter to the Christian Reader, I am very well content to subscribe to the same remission, who first of all must needs judge for me, & condemn him in the very first words that he allegeth, to wit that he was called into the field by me, whereas his Watchword being the first challenge that sounded the trumpet of war, 
Manifest untruths impudently avouched.  & my answer but only a necessary ward thereunto as both the title & subject of my book declareth how can he so confidently tell so open and manifest an untruth, and withal remit the same to the judgement of the Reader, except he hold him without judgement or conscience. And here I would ask how far this is from impudence? and yet according to the same suit do follow the rest, that is to say: of my swelling pride, of his plain and sound answer shaped to all material points: and that he is fully cleared from all imputations of falsehood, etc. For if my pride be no more swelling, than his misshaped answer is sound and material, I may think myself a very humble man. And if in Westminster hall S. F. should be accused of treason or felony or other grievous criminations (as many Catholic Priests are upon less occasion) and should clear and free himself no better therein, then here he doth in this reply, from imputations of falsehood, he might quickly expect both judgement and execution, and consequently himself be driven to that hanging ward, which here he threateneth to drive us unto.  
And lastly whereas he writeth for the conclusion of his Epistle, that this answer of his being ended and published (which I held myself bound (quoth he) in duty to do, for thy satisfyieng (gentle Reader) and my own credit, his full resolution is not to toil any more by contending with such railing and wrangling spirits. etc. This resolution, I say, of the K. though it were never so full and firm at that time (as being weary perhaps of so difficult a work) yet I doubt that it willbe broken, and he enforced to toil yet further in the matter, if he will satisfy the reader, or maintain his own credit, which poor credit he will find (I believe) so much crazed (in steed of amended) by this his reply; as if it were somewhat shaken before by the Watchword, it willbe quite overthrown now, by this his own Wastword and the answer thereunto; and if before it were battered, or beaten, it will now be utterly broken and shivered in pieces, seeing that much more falsehood deceit and other infirmities are found & discovered in this his supply, than were in the first assault: and if he were troubled before in defending he willbe toiled now. The proof whereof, I leave to the trial, and combat following, whereunto our K. saith that he hasteneth like a courageous defendant taking his farewell of the Reader in these words. To our God I commend thee (gentle reader) and will now hasten to join the combat with this proud Romanist, 
The K. commendation and farewell.  touching his Encounters severally. Thus he saith, and so endeth his Epistle. And if when he nameth our good God, he mean the common God of heaven and earth, and of other Christians, his haste to the combat may chance to be more, than his good speed, seeing that this God, is God of truth, and not of shifts and falsehoods which are hear discovered, and consequently is like to prove no great good God to S. F. cause, that standeth thereon, as the sequeal of this combat (if I be not deceived) will declare, whereunto I also (to meet the K.) do make my repair; with no less haste though I hope with better speed then S ●. F. Hastings.   

OTHER OBSERVATIONS UPON THE PREFACE OF O. E. TO THE REAder containing a full answer thereunto.  
AS I have made before some annotations and observations upon Sir Francis Hastings Epistle to the reader, so may I not altogether pretermit this preface of O. E. which is somewhat more spised with poison, and venom than the other, tending wholly to bloodshed, and cruelty against Catholics: the man I have somewhat dismasked before in my answer to his opprobrious letter, to N. D. whom he interpreteth Noddy: here we shall handle the project and purpose of this his writing, which indeed is nothing else, 
O. E. his plot and project.  but to irrite, and stir up her Majesty and her honourable counsel with the rest that s●and at the stern of government, to engulf themselves in Catholics blood, and spoil of their goods; whereby he, and his hungry crew standing by, and for desire thereof licking their lips might hope to come to have some share in the devidend, 
O. E. watcheth for scraps.  and yet for avoiding public hatred, & notorious shame he desireth to entertain himself in some darkness for a time and to expect his prey under the shroud of a cyphred 
* O. E.  name, for as he said which knoweth well such companion's, qui malè agit, 
Io. 3. vers. 10.  odit lucem, & non venit ad lucem ut non arguantur opera eius, he that doth noughtly hateth the light, and will not come to it lest his works may be convicted, but yet we must draw this Owl to light, and see what he saith under the vizard of O. E.  
His drift in this Epistle, and in his whole writing is to stir up the state to set upon some new affliction of Catholykes rejoicing & clapping his hands, where any rigour is in ure already, and to this barbarous purpose he deviseth divers impertinent, and ridiculous means of persuasion, which I shall run over with as much brevity, as they are void of substance, wit, reason, or honesty.  
His first mean of persuasion is by extolling exceedingly the extraordinary clemency used hitherto in England towards Catholykes, 
Rare clemency towards Catholykes.  which clemency he saith hath been most singular, and admirable, and to prove this (leaving all home testimonies) he runneth into Italy to seek a witness, bringing forth one Petrus Bizartus in his story of Genua, 
Pet Biz. lib. Hist. Gen. 33. Pres. pag. 1.  who saith, that for the first 20 years of her majesties reign no blood was shed, nor any suffered to be punished but by lawful trial and sentence of judges, etc. But what need was there to go so far to fetch so slender a testimony? this fellow wrote a 1000 mile of, and telleth us only that there was no bloodshed, nor punishment without some sentence of judges or lawful trial for the first 20 years. And what then for the second twenty? shall we infer (as it seemeth we must) that for these later twenty years bloodshed hath been used without lawful trial or sentence of judges? and doth not our minister show himself more than 
* Bizarro in Italiam a light & fantastical head.  Bizarro (I speak to him as understanding the Italian tongue) for bringing in Bizarus to so fond a purpose? so that by this you may take a scantling of the man's discretion at the very first entrance, you shall see it more in the next and other points that do ensue.  
For as in this first point he would make Catholics to seem ungrateful, for that having received so singular clemency, they complain of rigour, & thereby deserve to be punished more, so in the second point he begins to treat of their movings against the stare whereby he would have them much more to deserve punishment, and his entrance to this treatise is in these words: 
Ibid. pag. 1.  In the mean while Thomas Harding obtained a Bull from the Pope to exercise Episcopal jurisdiction in England, to dispense with irregularities, and to receive all that would be reconciled to the Pope.  
And then he noteth in the margin anno Domini B567. by which entrance also we may be much confirmed in our former conjecture of our man's deep wit, seeing that at the very beginning he would bring in such impertinent stuff, for the foreshow of his wares: for first it was never hard of before (I think) that D. Harding after his departure out of England to Lovayne in the beginning of her majesties reign, 
Whether D. Harding returned into England.  came home to live in England again, or to exercise Episcopal jurisdiction therein, but rather about the time this man assigneth; he was busy writing in Flanders against his adversary M. jewel. secondly what need was there to give him Episcopal jurisdiction in England at that time, who abiding as I have said in Flanders, there were divers Bishops yet living in England, and other learned men to have exercised that Episcopal jurisdiction, if need had been. But this is more ridiculous which ensueth, that he had a Bull to dispense with irregularities, and to receive all that would be reconciled to the Pope, for what needed either Bull or Episcopal jurisdiction for this, seeing every ordinary Priest may have authority to do it, without Bul or Episcopal jurisdiction, or what special need was there at that time to dispense with irregularityes or to reconcile men more than before? Doth O.E. know what irregularity meaneth? or will he tell his reader truly, what is understood by reconcilling to Catholic religion, which he calleth to the Pope? no, I trow not, it is not their fashion to deal sincerely in any point, for proof whereof hear his exposition, All that were reconciled (saith he) to the Pope, renounced their obedience to the Prince, 
Spiritual obedience may stand with temporal.  and is it so in deed Sir minister? woe then to the Emperor, & to the kings of Spain, France, Polonia, and Princes of Italy and other places, whose subjects are either all, or the most part reconciled to the Pope in the sense that we talk of catholic religion, and yet have they not I trow renounced thereby all obedience to their temporal princes: So that reconciliation to the Pope may stand with due obedience to their naturel princess also, if O.E. & his seditious mates will be content to understand matters a right, and not to cavil wilfully against their own consciences.  
As for D. Mortons' sending into the north by Pius Quintus for declaration of his sentence given in Rome (which is the next point that followeth in this minister's tale) it being so long ago, and but a particular English man's act, cannot by any reason prejudice any more the residue of Catholykes now in England, 
The Earl of Effex his attempt.  than the late attempt of the Earl of Essex did or may do all English puritanes, and protestāns, that were of his religion, or shallbe hereafter, though not privy to his attempt, nor any thing so much, as the said late attempt may touch perhaps this hungry minister, if matters were well examined, who being of his retinue, and of more need than his master; is likely enough to have been of his council, and partaker of his golden purposes.  
As for that which followeth of recusant Catholics, that they do enjoy their lands, goods, country, and liberty, notwithstanding they are secretly reconciled to the Pope and do adhere to her majesties enemies (as by a marginal note he saith) doth appear by divers letters of priests ready to be showed▪ 
Catholykes enjoying their goods, and liberty.  for there enjoying, I would the ministers joy were not greater in his benefices, and then I doubt not, but he would be more calm than now he is, & his haughty wives hair would soon grow through her french velvet hood, but for their adhering to enemies, testified (as he saith) by Priest's letters, we have as little reason to believe him against Priests (not showing their letters) as they should have to write any such untruth, which we believe not, but take it as a stratagem devised, to set us at division among ourselves.  
The whole discourse next ensuing is so bitter, & spiteful & so full of gore blood, & poison as it needeth his viso of O. E. to utter the same, for that the cunning companion, though he be content to fawn, and flatter & be known underhand, thereby to gather up some morsels for the present, yet fearing perhaps somewhat the future, and considering that both times, and matters and men may change, he thought good to prevent afterclaps by covering his true name, and to purchase security for time to come with the loss, or diminishment of some praise present, And therefore walking out of sight in this behalf he playeth egregiously the syrebrand, telling her Majesty and her counsel, 
O.E.A. notorious firebrand of sedition.  that too much extraordinary favour, and remissness towards Catholics hath caused divers rebellions, both in England, and Ireland, and that it hath dissolved the very sinews of government, & that it is more profitable, and expedient to execute laws then to pardon offenders, etc. All which this sycophant chanted out lustily, at that very time and season to fill up her majesties ears, when his Lord and young king Essex was most busy in plotting her majesties overthrow under pretence of meeting at puritan sermons; and seeing that this plot was laid in Ireland (from whence this minister under pretence of running away for fear of punishment of some untemperate words spoken, came into England not long before his master, as here is reported) it may be he came about this negotiation, and fearing lest it might be discovered before due time, he took in hand to write this book of alarm against Catholics to disguise and shadow the other, 
A treacherous devise.  and to divert men's eyes another way: but for this let her majesties wise counsel look unto, and provide as they shall find need, I am only to proceed in refuting of his malice, and folly, let them punish his treachery and knavery if they find it.  
After his spite is spit ou● against the Catholics, he cometh to advance highly Sir F. Hastings wachword, 
Bragging of Sir F. book.  and saith that the good knight of a zealous mind towards religion g●ueth the word to his countrymen. And I say N.D. giveth the Ward, and who giveth or receiveth most venewes let our countrymen be judges as they may also of this champion his success, who seeing his good knight driven to the wall, with more haste then good speed, cometh running to his succour, receiving for his gain the first broken head as wrangling sticlers are wont to do, and so I suppose you will say also when ye see all that passeth. Yet doth he with a confident interrogation commend unto us the whole work, saying, what one sentence in all the whole discourse can be noted unworthy either a true Christian, or a loyal subject, or a worthy knight? whereto I answer that there will so many sentences be found in the treatise following unworthy of all three points mentyoned, to wit, Christianity, loyalty, and chivalry, as if this worthy champion can defend them he will show himself worthy to be knighted also, and to have a K. for the first letter of his title.  
But to return again to the prosecution of this man's invective against Catholics, their lives, honours, liberty and goods; all which he impugneth at one time, and for some flourish, and show of proof he allegeth first certain examples of Scripture where kings of juda were reprehended for permitting unlawful worship and then out of the old Roman laws recounted die Cicero and Ulpian, 
●. Reg. 1●. ●. Paral. ●3. Cicero lib. 3. de leg● bus. Ulpian l. quoties ff. de poe●is.  which do prescribe divers kinds of punishments for malefactors, and ●hirdly out of the laws of ancient Christian Emperor's that willed heretics to be punished, and with this thinketh that he hath proved very substantially, that Catholic men also may, & must be punished in England.  
But thus to reason at random is much like to boys argumenting in Sophistry, Petrus jacet in lectulo, ergo h●●ulus siat in angulo, these examples have no affinity or coherence with our cause, but only so much as they make against this Noddy, 
His argument against him ●elfe.  and for us, for if old Roman laws do give general authority to the body of the common wealth to punish particular offencers & non è contra, as Cicero signifieth in his book de legibus then followeth it in good reason that the Catholic christian church being the universal body of Christ's common wealth upon earth, hath authority to punish Protestant's, Puritans, Lutherans, Arrians or any other sect that doth or shall arise: but not that the●e have authority, or may have to punish the other, for matter of religion, though they s●ould get superiority of temporal power in any place of the world, for that they are but particular men and members of members at all) and the other the body and true common wealth to whom only it appertaineth to punish.  
And le● 
* O. ●.  Oules eye but show me one example from the beginning of Christendom, that ever any man or woman in any age, was punished as an heretic by the Christian common wealth for sticking to the religion of the Pope of Rome, and it shall be sufficient for all, I ask but one example out of all antiquity.  
As for the examples alleged by him of Asa and Manasses kings of juda who notwithstanding, 

3. Reg. 15. 2 Paral. 33. Idolatrous worship on hills among the Iewes out of the Temple pre-figured heresves among Christians. Hierem. in c. ●.  
Amos & in c. 12. O see Aux. de vri●●tate ieiun● cap. ●. Deutt. ●3.  
Aug. de civit Dei l. 1●. cap 51.  
Cypr. lib. de un. Eccl.  
Hier. in cap. ● Ezech. in c 1● Osee & in c. 1●.  
Zach. & in c. 8. ● an.  
Aug. enarrat. in Psalm. ●0. part. ●9. & sup lib joshua cap. 27.   their other good zeal, did not remove the unlawful service and sacrifice accustomed on hills, and high places, they make nothing against us, but altogether for us, and expressly against this ellow, and his people, with their new devised sects, and heresies, which according to the ancient Father's expositions, were prefigured by the schismatical places of Idolatrous worship out of the temple of jerusalem (which temple prefigured the Catholic Church) and consequently were true figures of heresies and heretics among us. The text of deuteronomy also, which here he citeth for putting to death false Prophets, & dreamers of dreams that enticed men to Idolatry (which sentence in like manner he putteth for his poesy in the first page of his book to make men understand whereunto he leveleth) this I say, is clearly also against him, and his, for that hereupon ancient Fathers do ground that heretics may, and aught to be put to death; which are the proper idolaters of the new testament that adore their own fancies, selfe-wil, and judgements, all other external Idolatry being abolished by Christ's coming, and his religion, whose proper work was prophesied to be to destroy Idolatry.  
All this then is against himself as most clearly might be showed by exposition of all antiquity if we had time to stand thereon. But above all the rest most notoriously against himself, is his discourse that followeth, wherein truly I cannot but wonder both at his folly and impudence in setting it down; his words are these (and I pray the gentle reader note the whole matter) to the effect before mentyoned of punishing Catholics. 
Rom. 16. pag. 7.  The Apostle (saith he) writing to the Romans exhorteth them, to mark such diligently, as should cause division, and offences among them, contrary to the doctrine which they had learned, and to avoid them. The Emperor's Grati●m, Valentinian and Theodosius put heretical teachers to perpetual silence, 

●. Omn●s cod. de haeret. & ma●ich.  
Cuncti. ibid. Atriani ibid. lib. 1. contr. Ep. Parmen. c. 6. & ●p. 166 & ep. 62.   and charged inferior officers not to wink at them. Arcadius & Honorius dep●yued them of all exercises of their false religion. Theodosius, and Valentinian the younger banished Arrians, Manichees, and all heretics out of the Roman Empire. And for this cause did S. Augustine highly commend the Emperor's justice, and teacheth, that it was necessary that all heretical teachers should be repressed and corrected.  
Lo here his discourse which first you must understand is quite contrary to Sir F. Hastings, who in the sixth Encounter affirmeth S. Augustine's sentence, and words to be, that it never pleased any good man of the catholic church, 
〈◊〉. 6.  that heretics should be put to death. Which there I do refute by divers evident testimonies of S. Augustine himself, and do show the place by him to be egregiously falsified, and here it is contradicted also by his champion O. E. who saith that S. Augustine highly commended the Emperor's justice, and albeit he say only that it was necessary that heretical preachers should be repressed, and corrected, yet that the said Emperor's justice passed further appeareth clearly by the decree of Theodosius and Valentinian, whose words are: Manichaeis etiam ex civitate pellendis, 
Cod. lib. 1. cit. 5 leg Ar●ian.  & ultimo supplicio tradendis, etc. That the Manichees should not only be driven out of the cities, but also be put to death.  
And thus much for a note of contradiction among themselves to wit the knight and his champion, & now to the matter by O. E. here treated, which containeth; principal points, at you see, that would require a long treatise if I should handle them all at large. The first is out of S. Paul, the second out of the Emperor's decrees, the third out of S. Augustine; all against himself. I shall say a word or two of each one in order and thereby vow shall discern the man's judgement. 
S. Paul alleged by O. E. against himself.  The place of S. Paul is directly against sectaries that make division among them that were in peace and unity of religion before, and do bring in new doctrine different from that which they had learned and received publicly before, which maketh the case of our controversy very clear: For whether Martin Luther, Vldericus Zuinglius, john Caluyn, and the rest of that crew, have done this or no in our age, and whether the protestants in England finding Catholics in peace, and unity, have done like offices in bringing in new opinions and dissension which was not before, let all the world judge. Sure I am they cannot say, that we finding them in unity did trouble their peace, or go out from them, so as this place of S. Paul is wholly against themselves, and this to the first point.  
The second for us, and against them is, of the Emperor's decrees against heretics cited by this minister; And it is strange that ever he world bring them in, but that of all other protestants that ever wrote this fellow seemeth the most impudent (it may be for that he goeth masked, 
Emperor's decrees alleged against himself and his by O.E.  he blusheth not to affirm that which all his fellows have denied until this day, as after you shall see in a number of points) and here now I would ask him, why he brought in these Emperor's decrees of punishing heretics? what heretics they were? how they were defined? by what they were distinguished from Catholics? why and for what causes they were punished?  
The decree beginneth thus: Arriani, Macedonianis, etc. Arrians, 
Leg. Arriani Cod. de haereticia.  Macedonians, Apollinarians, Novatians, Sabatians, Valentinians, Montanists, Donatists, and the like, named in this place to the number of 34. are commanded to be punished for heretics by these catholic Emperors Theodosian and Valentinian in the year of Christ 428.  
And in the very next decree after they say thus: Damnato portentosae superstitionis authore Nestorio. 
Cod. lib. 1. ●●t. ●●g. dam●●●●.  etc. seeing that Nestorius (the Author of a most monstrous superstition for saying that the blessed Virgin was not mother of God, but of man only) is now condemned (by the late Council of Ephesus) we will that his followers have the note of a fit name du● unto them; to wit, that they be called not Christians, but Nestorians of Nestorius, as the followers of Arrius were called by the law of Constantyne (our predecessor of happy memory) Arrians, and the followers of the sect and heresy of Porphirius porphirians, etc.  
This was their sentence for naming heretics after their Authors, 
Names of Lutherans Caluinists, etc.  and do you not think that if Luther, Zwinglius, and Caluyn had been in their days also, and had raised such a company of sectaries after them, as they did, would they not have called them as we do; Lutherans, Zwinglians & Caluinists? yes truly; for that by any other name they could not be understood.  
But hear yet a further distinction given by the same Emperors between heretics & Catholics: Q●cunque in hac sacra Vrbe, etc. whosoever in this holy city, etc. or other whe●e, do follow the profane perversity of Eutiches condemned in the late Council gathered at Chalcedon, and do not so believe in all points of faith as the 318. holy Fathers of the Nicene Council, 

Who are heretics by the sentence of ancient Christian Emperors.  
An Domini 457.   and as the 150. venerable Bishops gathered together in the Council of Constantinople, or the other two counsels following of Ephesus or Chalcedon, sciant se e●ie haereticos, etc. let them know that they are heretics.  
This decree made Valentinian and Martian Emperors of the east and west, nine and twenty years after the former decree. And the like made the Emperor Maximilian after the late Council of Trent against all kind of Protestants, Lutherans, Zwinglians, Anabaptists, Caluinists, and the like condemned by the said Council, so as the same reason that moved Valentinian and Marcian almost 1200. years ago to proclaim them heretics that were condemned by the Council of Chalcedon in their days, wherein Leo primus B. of Rome had the chief hand, and confirmed the same. The same I say moved Maximilian the Emperor of our days to proclaim for heretics all protestants condemned in the Council of Trent, gathered in his time by like authority, as that of Chalcedon was: but yet let us see one deduction further.  
Of what religion (think you) were these Emperors that made these laws against those heretics? or what communion were they of? for by this we shall see who they were whom they condemned. Did these Emperors than agree with the Church and religion of Rome, and acknowledged that for the chief and head church of Christianity, and the Bishops thereof to be head Pastors? For if they did, then condemned they such, as did not the same then, or do not the same now. This point than let us explain (good reader) and thereby also learn the subtle shifting of this shuffling Minister.  
Truly the first decree of all justinian's Code (which is a collection of all Christian Emperors decrees) being of Gratian, 
The religion of Gratian, Valentinian & Theodosius.  Valentinian, and Theodosius, whose first words are. Cunctos populos, etc. Doth appoint and command all Christian people both of the Roman and Greek Empire to follow the faith and religion of the Roman Church delivered to them by S. Peter, and continued unto that day, which (say they) Damasus the Bishop of that City doth follow, as also Peter Bishop of Alexandria, & whosoever did not follow this unity of Religion should be counted infamous heretics: This is the substance of that first decree, which being so, tell me now, if this doth touch our protestants or no? who can abide neither Roman B. nor Roman Religion.  
Thesame three Emperors in an other Decree do describe unto us, what manner of heretics they would have punished, 
Leg. omnes de haerer. lib. ●. Co●. tit. 5.  in these words: Haereticorum vocabulo continentur, & latis adversus eos sanctionibus debents succumbere, qui vel levi argumento à judicio Catholicae religionis, & tramite detecti fuerint, deviare. 
Who are truly heretics?  Those are here called heretics, and to be punished by our laws made against them, whosoever shall be detected to dissent and disagree, even in any small matter, from the judgement and path of Catholic religion. Thus say they. And seeing in their first Decree they do declare that the Roman religion under Pope Damasus was the only Catholic religion to be followed, it is easily seen whether Protestants or Papists at this day be comprehended under these penal laws made against heretics, or no?  
And finally that we may see by one Emperors plain decree, what religion they were of, and of what society and communion, and whom they accounted true Catholics, and whom heretics, you must know that in the foresaid Code of justinian there is a letter of john the first B. of Rome, written to the said Emperor justinian whose title is this; Gloriosissimo & clement●ssimo filio justiniano joannes Episcopus urbis Romae, etc. wherein among other praises which the Pope giveth him, one principal was, that notwithstanding he was Emperor of Constantinople, and that some emulation now began in that Empire against the City of Rome, yet he persisted in his Catholic due obedience to the said Church of Rome head of all other Churches; amore fidei (saith he) & chaeritatis study, 
Cod. lib. 1. leg. inter claras tit. ●.  edocti Ecc is disciplinis, Romanae sedis reverentiam conseruatis, & ei cuncta subijcitis, & ad eius deducitis unitatem, ad cuius authorem, hocest Apostolorum primum Domino loquente praeceptum est, pasce oves meas, quam esse omnium verè Ecclesiarum caput, & Patrum regulae, & principum statuta declarant, & pietatis vestrae reverendissimi testantur affatus, etc. You being moved by the love of faith, & study of charity & well instructed in the discipline of the Church, do continue your reverence to the Roman sea, and do subject all other thereunto, bringing them to the unity of this Church, to whose founder, the first of all the Apostles Christ gave this precept feed my sheep which Church as well the rules, 
10.21.  and traditions of ancient Fathers as the decrees of former Christian Princes have declared to be truly the head of all other Churches, And the same do testify your majesties most reverent speeches and behaviour towards the same.  
This wrote the Pope to him, which letter he putting into his said Code or book of Statutes, as a most honourable monument, answered the same, and made a decree thereon, which beginneth thus: Victor justinus pius faelix Imperator, etc. joanni S more. Archiepiscopo Alme Vrbis Romae, 
Cod. ibid. leg. nos reddentes lib. 1. tit. 3.  & Patriarchae, etc. Nos reddentes honorem Apostolica sedi & vestri Sanctitati, etc. We rendering due honour to the sea Apostolic, and to your Holiness (which always we have desired as becometh to a Father) we have endeavoured, in honour of your beatitude to bring to the knowledge of your Holiness all things that do appertain to the state of all Churches for that it hath been always our study to keep and conserve the unity of your Apostolic sea, and of the holy Churches of God, which unity hath always hitherto persevered immovable without any contrariety, and consequently we have been careful to subject and unite all priests of the whole east countries, to the sea of your Holiness.  
Thus beginneth he his decree which is over long to be here all inserted, but any man may read it, wherein the Emperor with great humility and affection professeth his due subjection and of all his Empire to the Church of Rome, naming her in express words, Caput omnium Ecclesiarum, head of all other Churches, and that whatsoever doctrine is different from the doctrine of this Church is heretical; by which rule he condemneth for heretics in this, and in two other that follow immediately, and are extant in the Code both in Greek and Latyn, Nestorius, 
Leg. eum recta. & ●eru●torem, ibid.  Euthich●s, & Apollinaris as dissenting from the Roman Church and Bishops thereof? Now then let the reader judge whether these laws of the Emperors made against heretics do touch us, or protestants. And so much of this second point.  
The third point also touching S. Augustine his approving, 
S. Augustin alleged by O. E. against himself.  and commending much these Emperors for punishing heresies, & for making laws against heretics is altogether for us in like manner, and fully against protestants, 

August. lib. 1. contr. Ep. Parm●n. cap. 6. & 10. ep. 62. & 166.  
Aug. ep. 4●. ad Vincent.   for that S. Augustine dealing specially in this point against the Donatists & Circumcellians who denied the visible Church dispersed over the whole world, and restrained it to their sect only in Africa (as every sect of our Protestants doth at this day to the particular place, and Society where they live) it is easily seen who were heretics, and who to be punished by S. Augustine's opinion, to wit those that do rise up against the universal known, and visible Church of their time, & do condemn it, or are condemned by it, and let Sir minister bring but one example to the contrary in any age from Christ to Luther, and it shall be sufficient, to wit, that any man condemned by the general known, and visible Church of his time for an heretic, was not held and taken for such by any of that time or any time after that was not an heretic himself, let Oules' eye I say spy but one example of this, out of all antiquity and it shall be sufficient.  
Wherefore to end all his matter about Imperial laws for punishing of heretics, and approving thereof both by the Apostle, and by S. Augustine (which yet other Protestants hitherto did never urge, as this witless minister doth) let the reader mark this firm deduction, and plain demonstration, all those foresaid Christian and Catholic Emperors so much commended by S. Augustine, and other Fathers following after him, to wit, Gratian, Valentinian, Theodosius, Marcian, Arcadius, Honorius, justinian and others, 
A manifest deduction & demonstration against new sectaties.  that made laws against heretics, they held the Roman religion in their days to be the Catholic, and true Christian religion, though divers of them were of the Greek Church and Empire. They professed the Bishops of Rome to be the heads and chief leaders of this universal and visible Catholic Church, as before hath been showed by the example of Gratian, Valentinian, Theodosius to Pope Damasus & of Arcadius Honorius, Theodosius the second, & S. Augustine, Pope Innocentius primus, and of justinian to Pope john the first, and consequently they pronounced for heretics all those that did rise up apart, under particular Authors differing in opinions from this universal church, as Arrians, Donatists, Montanists, and the like. This universal visible and external Church hath endured ever since under Popes and Emperors, and other governors of Christianity until the time of Pope Leo the tenth and his successors, and of Emperors, Ferdinand, Charles the fifth, Maximilian and their followers when Luther began to brake out from that Church, and against that Church, and others following his example since that tyme.  
Now than I would ask by what equity or reason this later brood coming forth of this Church, and rebelling against it can call those men heretics that remained in the faith of the foresaid Church, and moreover will say, that they must be punished by the same laws, that the foresaid Catholic Emperors made against those, that impugned that Church. This I say, I would have our new Oedipus to answer, and in the mean space, the discrete reader may consider how it can be answered by him, & so blush for him that hath not been ashamed to bring in so clear a conviction against himself.  
One only silly shift, or petty cavil this minister perhaps may run unto, as divers of his fellows are wont with a brazen affirming, that the visible Catholic, and Roman Church when Luther began, was not the same, that it was when those Emperors made those laws; but then I would ask him, when it changed, and how, and by what means so great a body so generally planted, so strengthened, and fortified not only by God's spirit, but also by learned men, Doctors, Counsels in every age, could come to be changed and perish without testimony of any one writer, or historiographer without noise, contention, or contradiction of any?  
The Emperors are known that lived, and reigned in this mean space, and except two or 3. (as Leo the third called Isaurus and his son Constantine the fifth surnamed Capronius) which fell into heresies, and were noted, and condemned by the same Church) all the rest lived and died in one Religion of their ancestors. The Pope's also from joannes primus before mentyoned to whom justinian the Emperor wrote his decree, unto Leo decimus, when Luther began are in number about 17c. all of one religion, nor can it be showed that any one Pope impugned his predecessor in matters of faith.  
This demonstration is as clear then as that 3. and 4. do make 7. for when Luther and Lutherans began their new sects, 
A most ●leere & palpable demonstration.  our Church was held for the only Catholic, and true Church of christendom, and so did both Luther, Zuinglius and Caluin hold it also before they fell, when the one was a Friar, the other two Priests, and all three said Mass how then by their falling from it, the said church should be made no church, and their new congregations to be the only true Cathol. Church, and that they should come now tocall themselves Catholics, and us heretics, and that we should be punished for heretics by the former Imperial laws made against themselves, and their like, this I say, is a mystery, and metamorphosis that passeth the reach of all sober men, and none but mad heads can either say it, or believe it, for that by the same argument may English Puritans at this day (which is a younger brood of protestāns as you know in our country) taking some port, or town in England, & fortifying themselves therein, call Parliament Protestant's to account saying (as they do) that they are the elder church, and that they will punish parliament Protestant's with the same Parliament laws which Protestant's made of purpose to punish them. But I am overlong in a matter so clear, and therefore I crave pardon of thee (good reader) and will here end, and so much the rather for that I am to handle this point more at large afterward against O. E. in his new challenge, to wit, who be heretics, and who be not, for that he will needs take upon him to defend this mad, & desperate paradox, that papists be heretics, & protestants Catholics, but I think we shall shake him out of his clouts when he cometh to that combat & somewhat you may guess by that which here hath been said.  
Wherefore to draw to an end of this his preface, & to draw our doughty Minister out of the dyke of imperrinent discourses, after a little ruffle of choler wherein he saith that the proud and presumptuous jesuite calling himself N. D. had presented his ward-word to her Maties. Counsel, he telleth us what an heretical new enterprise he hath taken in hand, 
A new breaking challenge of O.E.  to wit besides the answering of the ward-word, to make an other challenge of his own. I have (saith he) to meet him at every turn with my answer to this noddy conjoined a brief discourse, and in certain new Encounters drawing him into a new combat, proved, that Popish religion is neither Catholic nor ancient, nor true religion, nor the true Church of Christ, nor the Pope's agents that have been executed for traitors; true martyrs, etc.  
Thus he vaunteth what he would do as Goliath did, 
1. Reg. 17.  Dabo carnes tuas volatilibus coeli, etc. but what he will perform when he cometh into the field, where he and I must try who is the Noddy; that we shall see after. And I am content the reader be both looker on and judge, if the sturdy minister receive more blows than he expected, and return home beaten back and side in this first combat about the Ward-word, then may his friends bemoan him if they list while other do laugh and then shall we have little need to enter into his new combat which he offereth after this, but if he prove himself a man in the first than may he more be trusted in the second.  
As for my presumption in presenting my defence, and ward unto the Lords of her Majesty's Counsel, 
No presumption to have offered the Wards-word to the Lords of the Counsel.  I see no reason, besides this Minister's anger and disdain, why it should be so called or taken, seeing their honours are public judges & umpyres by office, for all sorts of persons to have refuge unto. And for so much as the injuries offered by the Watchword as a famous libel, as well to great foreign Princes and nations, as to honourable, worshipful and most honest subjects, did touch the honour and public weal of our kingdom and nation very near, to whom should I have gone for remedy in this matter but only to their Lordships? should I have made my moan to the Puritanical and tyrannical Presbytery of Sr F● Ministers, or to the rude rabble of O. E. his piratical companion's? we have seen the issue of both these sorts of late, and thereby may we gather what equity we should find at their hands, seeing the Prince whom they most flattered, hath found at their hands so egregious treachery and conspiracy.  
To their Honours I appealed then with just reason, & shall do now again in the end of this my book, to call these two defendants to account of the crimes of flattery forgery, & sycophancy, used by them in this their writing, to the end that if my several warnings which I am to give them after all the Encounters do not work some good in them, yet at least wise their honour's authority, and respect may make them blush and put them to silence.  
Last of all the Ministers conclusion is this, not unlike to the premises. This (saith he) I may boldly say that I have not followed the adversaries vain in scurrilous scoffing, nor his vanity in ruffinlike bragging. Boldly you may say it S. Minister, but how truly your writing itself wi●-shew afterward, and hath in part already. And I doubt whether ever any of your coat (if you have any certain coat to be known by, and be not of every coat) have so much exceeded in all these three points of scurrility, vanity, or railing as you have done, for which cause you are forced also to put on the vizard of O. E. for covering your shame. It followeth further.  
But why should I go about (say you) to excuse myself before the faults be proved, percase it is no fault to write as I have done. Lo here an other qualification of the matter, before he denied it, now he putteth it in doubt and percase, but hear yet further. And were it a fault (saith he) yet I trust thou wilt bear with my weakness, seeing as the Apostle saith, 
O. E. calleth his railing weaknesses.  all of us offend in many things. Hear Io is the last refuge and excuse of all to wit, by weakness, & that all do offend in many things. To the first if it be weakness of brain and wit, it is pardonable, for that it is forcible, but if it be weakness of manners and honestly it is a fowl fault in a prelate and preaching deane that should strengthen others. To the second, though all offend in many things, yet that it is no just excuse in every thing, for if this answer might be admitted at Newgate sessions, when those good fellows are brought forth to be arraigned of their offences, than few or none would go to Tyburn, but as there in those kind of people many wickednesses are pardoned, and some offences punished, the one in mercy the other in justice so it should be with this fellow also, and may perhaps one day, if he come to an indifferent session: In the mean space I am content to conclude as he doth to the reader, and in his own words. Read (saith he) with indifferency, and weigh my allegations and compare deligentlie my defence with the Noddies challenge, and then use thy liberty in judgement, to discern who is the Noddy.   

THE FIRST ENCOUNTER ABOUT BLESSINGS AND Cvrsinge brought in by change of Catholic Religion in England.  
THE ARGUMENT.  
This first Encounter about blessings and benefits, cursings and calamities ensuing upon the change of catholic religion in our Country, or threatening to ensue, was the first and principal matter taken out of S. Francis hastings Watchword by the Warder to be encountered upon, as an argument both of moment and utility to be handled, and well considered, as sufficiently appeareth by the Warders discourse thereof; whereunto both the knight and his advocate O. E. having replied, N. D. maketh this rejoinder, dividing the same for more perspicuityes sake into 19 Chapters, which follow in order.  

A BRIEF SUMMARIE of all, that before hath been said, or now is to be added about this first Encounter of Blessings and cursings by change of Catholic Religion. CHAP. 1.  
TOUCHING the several arguments of the Watchword and Ward-word in general, as also of this second rejoineder & combat between Sir Francis and me, in this his Wastword and my Warn-word, as in like manner the late arrival of O. E. his, Wrangle-word sufficient hath been said before in the preface to the whole work, as also in the epistle to O. E. himself, and in the annotations upon both their letters to the Reader, so as now we are only to treat of the proper subject of this first Encounter, which is this, that S it. F. H. being entered into a serious contemplation in the height of his careful watch over England and thinking to imitate perhaps herein the spirit of some hidden prophet (whom he desired to resemble) esteemed it not only expedient, but incident also to the vigilancy of the office of a general watchman, taken upon him by his own election, & not by any man's commission to forewarn the people not only of great and mighty feigned dangers hanging over them, from Catholics, but also of innumerable new devised blessings, benefits and benedictions abounding among them, and flowing to them daily by the fortunate change of old religion into Protestancy, 
The subject of S F. book.  breaking forth into these words of fervour: 
Pap. 2.  If I should take upon me to enter into the enumeration of all the benefits and blessings that from the Almighty have been powered upon this little Isle of England, etc. And hereupon concludeth that seeing they had gotten so greatly already by the bargain, they should be merry and go forward, and never think of return, etc. and this was the beginning of his watchword.  
To which the Warder, thinking it expedient to oppose himself, 
Ward word  taketh up S. F. for a false and flattering Prophet by these words of Esay: 
Esay. 3.  my people they that say thou art blessed, are those that deceive thee▪ showing further the great inconveniences, hurts, dangers, damages, and pernicious effects of such flattering tongues in common wealths, & that himself doth contradict himself in this very point soon after; talking nothing else but of fears, frights, and terrors by dangers and miseries imminent to our country, 
A brag of blessings examined.  without specifying or setting down to the contrary any one particular blessing at all comen hitherto to the realm, or like to come by their new gospel, but only feeding them with those general fair words of fleering adulation, which the warder holding for fond and contemptible in so manifest, and important a matter, rejecteth them without further answer.  
And then passing on to the point itself more in particular he reduceth all benefits and blessings that have happened to England, or can hap, unto two general heads or branches that is spiritual touching religion: and temporal concerning the common wealth, and in both these kinds, he showeth by many weighty arguments, that not blessings, but cursings, not benefits but calamities, have & are like to fall upon our country, by this fatal & unfortunate change of Religion, giving manifest examples in both sorts, and concludeth with a brief repetition of all, and this is the sum of the warders answer to this first Encounter of imagined blessings.  
But upon this point replieth now again the K. in this his Apology or defence, 
A vain reply by the Knight.  which upon just causes (as you shall see) I have termed a Wastword, and first of all he maketh a solemn flourish by detesting all flattery and allegeth divers sentences of sundry Poets and Philosophers in despraise of flattery, and then addeth, that there is far greater flattery in Rome to the Pope, than he useth in this place, and further that there was no contradiction betwixt his words of present dangers now imminent to England, and of former blessings by their gospel received, so as though England be not blessed at the present, yet hath it been heretofore, and then letting pass all that ever, the warder hath said, in the examination of the foresaid two heads of spiritual & temporal blessings, he bringeth in ten new benedictions freshly framed out of the forge of his own imagination, to the supply of his former want; assuring us that they are proper fruits of his new gospel & ghospellers: 
Ten new fresh blessings.  And that they have ensued by the former change of religion: which blessings, & benedictions he avoweth to be unity of doctrine, Liberty of reading Scriptures in vulgar languages, Public prayer in English exercise of good works more than be●ore, freedom from persecution, deliverance from intolerable exactions, long peace; power in foreign countries, wealth of the land, multitude of subjects sevenfold increased, since the beginning of this change of religion.  
This is the sum of his Apology to this Encounter, 
Warn-wo●e replieth.  our which cometh again the warne● now (who before was only a warder as you have heard) and besides his wards, warneth also the watchman of his wants in this his Wastword, showing first, that all his defence is but verbal and impertinent speech, and consequently justly termed by him a Wastword: for that to flatter, and detest I flattery at one time, is no defence, or just excuse, of flattery but rather folly, and impudence joined to flattery, and that it little easeth him or helpeth his cause, if there should be so great flattery in Rome as he saith, seeing that this justifieth not▪ nor authorizeth any flattery used by him in England, that it is vain and ridiculous to vaunt of blessings past, and not present, seeing the present and future is that which importeth most, and not that which is past, and more ridiculous, for that if they were true blessings which are past, they were brought in and left by the old Catholic religion, and if they be not now present, it is for that the new religion hath lost them: that the ten new felicities now freshly devised, and brought in by the K. are neither true in themselves nor in the nature of blessing, but rather quite contrary, and others nothing pertinent to the purpose, and divers of them of no consideration at all, but rather fond and contemptible mockeries.  
And finally that Sr. F. his running out of the field, 
The Knight flieth the true combat.  and flying from all the ways of trial offered by the warder both about Spiritual, and temporal blessings, and cursings, is a plain argument, that he dareth not join really and substantially in the combat, but only to flourish for fashion sake, and to make a show of skirmishing in the air for holding up his credit with the bare name of a new Apology, keeping himself warily notwithstanding within his own lists only, and far of from the true Encounter, and running now and then, when he is sore pressed, behind the cloth of state, that is to say protecting himself with the name, & authority of her Matie. and of the present government, where all other arguments fail him for his defence; and this in general is the sum of all this Encounter with the K. Now must we come to examine what his Minister champion or martial proctor O. E. hath brought in his supply; coming forth after the other.  
And first in general I must say in his praise, and commendation, 
The argument and sum of O. E. his unswere.  that he is far more impertinent, impudent, and impotent in his writing & railing, then is the K. or any other perhaps that ever took pen, in hand for having taken the vizard of O. E. upon his face, he thinketh that his tongue may walk at random, and utter any thing without blushing. And so to the first point about flattering the state with feigned blessings and benedictions, the minister going quite from the matter, falleth to flatter her Matie. a fresh, and that most grossly in the very first lines of this Encounter, as though the controversy between him and us were about her Majesty's praise or dispraise, or as though the Warder, had not expressly excepted against this sottish refuge of theirs, 
Ward-word Pag. 2.  by severing the inconueniens ensuing upon the change of religion, from the rare good parts both in nature, & government of her Ma t●e. as after in this Encounter is handled more largely. But yet this masked O. E. showing himself no less full of malice & poisoned hatred against Catholics then furious in heresy, falleth from flattering her Matie. to bloody sycophancy, and calumniation of Catholics, as though they hated her Majesty's person, and passing from this to score up the blessings received by his new gospel (which is the principal point (you know) of this first Encounter he agreeth with S.F. in number only of blessings, (for he reckoneth ten) but neither altogether in name or nature, quality, or order, for he setteth them down thus. 1. Deliverance from the Pope's decretals, 
The blessings of O. ●.  excommunications, taxes, and exactions, 2. Scriptures in the vulgar tongue. 3. true administration of two only Sacraments. 4. true worship of God according to Scriptures 5. peaceable government established, and persecution removed, 6. Catholic rites, and service abolished, 7. deliverance from the thraldom of Spaynards, 
1. how doth this 8 differ▪ from the first.  8. abolishment of the Pope's power, and exactions, 9 Peace restored with foreign Princes, 10. Strength of the land grown to be great.  
This is his Catalogue, which if you compare with that of S.F. before (which must be presumed, that this man had seen, for so much as it was first published and printed) you shall perceive that saying of old Tertullian to be true, 
Tertul lib. de pres●●ip con●●. hearer.  who wrote above 1400. years ago, that it was unpossible for two heretics to agree in all points, for that both of them being proud, and both of them following his own brain, it is impossible that one proud brain should yield to follow an other. But this shall better be seen afterward in the prosecution of all this first Encounter, wherein O. E. contemning perhaps the long discourse of S. F. about his new devised blessings, saith ●itle thereof besides the bare enumeration now set down, but taketh an other course, which is, to follow the warders words, as a dog at his heels, barking, and gnybling at every step, but yet so confusedly (and this of purpose as it seemeth) as neither the reader, nor hearer can well understand by his reply, what the watchman, or warder said before him, or what he would say now, but only contradict, and unsay that which the other had said before.  
And truly this kind of writing (seeing these fellows will needs write) ought not to mislike us, 
Confusion of heretical w●y●ers.  for that I doubt not, but any reader commonly falling upon their books will either not understand them, or quickly be weary with the vanity and fondness thereof, or at leastwise, if he persever to read, his head will remain so stuffed with confusion of contradictions (which is the point that many of these men seek) as they cannot tell what to judge, think or determine (especially the unlearned) but only that all is in controversy doubt, and dispute, and that nothing is clear or certain among them, which often is occasion of turning again to the beaten path of Catholic Religion especially to them that have due care of their own salvation. Wherefore I have endeavoured on the contrary side, as the duty of Catholic writers is (that seek to instruct, and not to confound the readers) to bring every thing to method & perspicuous order as near as I could and as I did before in the Watchword (which was but a confuse, wild & wandering invective) gather all to 8. heads, and principal members, distinguishing them, by the names, and titles of 8. several Encounters of different substance and argument: 
The ●●●thode and distinct order of this book.  so now to the same author who was enforced by that my division to follow the same order in his answer, I have replied again conform to that method, but yet more distinctly for better capacity, and memory of the reader, for that I have divided every Encounter into several Chapters, and yet more than this also I have prefixed before each Encounter a summary, as it were of all (as here you may see by this first chapter) & in the end of each Encounter for recapitulation, as it were of the whole I have added an admonition, or warning to my adversaries concerning their faults, and defects in that Encounter.  
And for that the supplements added by O.E. unto the answer of S.F. are lose ●hings without order or method, 
S●opae so●u●.  much like lose & broken brooms as the latin proverb is, I have taken pains to bind them up, and kint them together, the best I could, for the reader's use, though little they are worth when all is done, but such as they be you shall see them in their places, when occasion is offered to present them; which must be commonly after the Wastword of S. F. hath been first examined; for that this peddling merchant coming later to the fair with his wrangle-word, can not have his pack viewed, but after the other, and so with this we shall pass to the said view itself, and the discreet reader shall be judge of all.   

OF THE FIRST charge of flattering the state of England, laid to Sir F. and of his own contradiction to himself therein; about the devised blessings of his new Gospel. CAP. II.  
Whereas the warder laid palpable flattery to Sir F. charge about his idle vaunt of innumerable blessings, and benedictions ensued to England by change of old religion, he answereth thereunto now with this preface or poem. 
Wastword Pag. 3.  Because (saith he) he doth so heinously charge me with the odious crime o● flattery (which I hate naturally as a badge of a bas● mind, but much more through Christian knowledge as most contrary thereunto) I have thought it not a miss to shape a short answer unto it, in suspicion of heresy; Hierome (as Bishop jewel allegeth him) would have no man patient, & though I will not burst out into any impatience (as considering more what is fit for me to speak then for him to hear) yet I hold that in the grievous accusation of flattery, I ought not to be silent.  
Mark reader the points; he will shape an answer, but how he shapeth it, you shall after see, he will not break into any impatience, this promise how well it is observed his future scolding, and contumelious words will declare, and I shall endeavour to put you in mind thereof, now and then when I pass by it. Hierome said (as Bishop jewel allegeth) that in suspicion of heresy no man must be patient. jewel is alleged here with more honour than Hierome, jewel is named Bishop which he never was, and Hierome is not called Saint, which he was; and is, no place in either of them is cited where the words may be read; Hierome speaketh of heresy not of flattery, S.F. would excuse himself of flattery, not of heresy for in heresy he delighteth; and how then do these things agree, and if for further proof I should ask him whether he or M. jewel will stand to S. Hieromes definition of heresy and heretics even in those very books where he hath this sentence of impatience against heresy, to wit in those he wrote against jovianus and Vigilantius, whom he condemneth, and calleth heretics for the very same opinions that Sir F. & M. jewel do hold for ghospelyke good doctrine, 
Heretics out with S. Hierome.  I mean about Virginity, prayer to Saints, lights at Martyrs ●ombes and the like. If I should ask them (I say) this question, whether they would stand to S. Hieromes definition of an heretic, all the world seethe they would fly from it for so much as he calleth them heretics for holding those protestantical opinions contrary to the universal consent of the catholic Church in those days, as our men do at this day, and how then do they allege S. Hierome in matter of heresy, as though he were there friend or favoured them?  
But to let pass this matter of heresy out of S. Hierome, whom in deed of all Fathers they least can bear, and do call him often both borne papist, and scolding doctor. 
jewel against D. Harding Fulke against D. Allen and D. B●istow.  Let us see in particular what our knight answereth to the charge of flattery for making England so happy by change of Religion, 
divers shifts of S. F. for his defence.  whereunto he deviseth divers defences for first he allegeth very solemnly the sentence of Antisthenes, and of some other Philosophers in reprehension of flattery, but what proveth this, or what is this to the purpose? nay rather is it not much more against himself, if he clear not well the charge of flattery laid unto him, for that the more Poets or Philosophers or other Authors do condemn flattery the more is the K. condemnation also if he be found faulty therein. Wherefore this first dedefence is no defence, but impertinent wasting of words as you see, let us behold his second which perhaps may prove worse or more impertinent than this.  
His second defence is that greater flattery may be found in Rome to the Pope than he useth to the Queen and state of England, I would send you (saith he) to the Pope's palace where a man may find more shameless flatterers than I think were ever to be found in any Christian Princes Court. 
Wastword Pag. 5.  Well, suppose it were so (Sir) what doth this excuse you, why should a knight flatter in England for that a Courtier or Canonist doth flatter in Rome? You know that company in evil doing excuseth not nor dedem●n●sheth the sin, and S. Hierome whom you allege saith, 
Hieron. in Epist. ad caelantiam.  nihil agimus, cum nos per multitudinis exempla defendimus, we labour in vain when we go about to defend ourselves by the example of the multitude, & this in case it were as you say: but how do you prove it Sir, hearken (gentle Reader) and hear his words.  
Panormitan (saith he) as by sundry learned men he is alleged shameth not to flatter your Pope so far, 
Waste word. Pag. 6.  as to make him almost equal with God, saying Eccepto peccato Papa potest quasi omnia facere quae Deus potest: Sin excepted the Pope can in a manner do all things that God can do.  
Thus saith our knight wherein I would ask him first, why he had not cited the work or book of Panormitan or at leastwyes some one of those learned men of his side, by whom he saith that Panormitan is alleged, if he omitted the citation by negligence it was great oversight in so weighty a matter, if of will and purpose it was fraud, if he red no● the Authors himself but trusted Ministers notebooks, it was lightness and simplicity, if his learned men that aleage Panormitan and accuse him as he doth, do not city or quote the place no more than he, it is the same fault in them, and a sign that they are afraid to be taken tripping, and this complaint I shallbe forced to make often, for that this shift is ordinary among them, not to city their Authors.  
But now to the matter itself, I say that after much seeking in Panormitan, 
Panorm. part. 1. decret. de Elect. c. Licet.  I have found at length the place, and therein the words by him and his alleged, but with this difference, that Panormitan citeth the sentence not as his own; but out of Hostiensis, and showeth the meaning to be that in matters of jurisdiction and spiritual authority for government of his Church upon earth Christ hath left so great power unto his substitute S. Peter's successor, as he may do thereby and in his name and virtue in a certain sort, whatsoever his Master and Lord might do in his Church, if he were now conversant among us upon earth, I say in a certain sort, for that all both Divines and Canonists do agree that potestas excellentiae whereby our Saviour could institute Sacraments, pardon sins and impart the other effects of thesayd Sacraments without their use and the like, is not left unto the Pope as not necessary to the government of his Church, but all the rest requisite to that end is given to him according to that great commission in S. Matthew. 
Matth. 16.  I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, whatsoever thou losest shallbe loosed and what soever thou bindest shall be bound, etc. upon which commission Panormitan saith, that Hostiensis founded his doctrine in these words: 
Host. in c. Quanto de translat. Episcoporum. Panorm. sup. part. 1. decret. de Elect. cap. venerabilem.  Cum idem sit Christi atque Papae consistorium, quasi omnia potest facere Papa quae Christus excepto peccato. Seeing that the Consistory or Tribunal of Christ and the Pope is one and the same in this world (as appeareth by the former commission) it followeth that the Pope can do (in spiritual jurisdiction) whatsoever Christ can do, except living free from sin.  
This is the doctrine of Hostiensis expounded by Panormitan, 
Panormitan and Hostiē●is both abused.  and if it be rightly understood it hath no more absurdity in it, then if a man should say, that the Viceroy of Naples can do all in that Kingdom which the king of Spain himself can do except being free from treason. And the like of her majesties deputy in Ireland or any other substitute, that hath the Superiors authority fully and amply.  
And albeit heretics do wrangle herein and seek to make the matter odious (as they are wont) by putting down the bare proposition of comparing the Pope with God without any explication at all, 
Wrangling and cavilling of haeretikes.  yet are there so many restrictions mentioned even in this place of Hostiensis (if they would consider them, as easily might answer all their cavillations. For first where they compare the Pope with God both Panormitan and Hostiensis explicat the comparison of Christ not as he is God, but as he is man, that is to say, between the head of the Church and his Substitute. Secondly the comparison is not in all things (as in miracles, holiness of life, nor power of excellency as have been said or the like) but only in the highest jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical matters derived from Christ himself, and given by him, as appeareth by the word consistorium used by Panormitan. Thirdly even in this also is added quasi, which is a diminution in the excellency and generality of the thing itself. Fourthly is put Excepto peccato, which exception though Panormitan do affirm to be improper in Host●ensis manner of speaking, for that to be able to sin is no power, but rather a defect of power: Yet is it added here to signify, that the Pope may sin or err in matter of fact, even in the exercise of this power that he hath under Christ. If he use it not well, for which respect is added also the last restriction of all even in that very place by Panormitan, where he saith: Intellige tamen quod Papa omnia potest clave dis●retionis non errant, 
Panorm. Ibi  that the Pope can do all things of jurisdiction which Christ his Master can, 
What is Cla●is discretionis in the ●ope.  so long as the key of discretion doth not err; which is as much as if he had said that the Pope is bound in conscience to use discretion consultation, inquisition, due deliberation and other fit means to inform himself in matters that he will do or determine, which in points of faith we are most certain that God's holy Spirit promised to his Church will ever direct him unto; and never suffer him to err.  
And so much of this scornful objection guilfully cast out by heretics to deceive the simple and to terrify them by comparing God and the Pope without any exposition or explication as you have heard; which fraud I pass over with divers other such ridiculous speeches avouched out of other canonists in this place, without citing book, volume, place or chapter, and not worth the answering, and therefore I will only mention our knight's conclusion which is this.  
And in a word (saith he) the Canonists say roundly in the gloss, Dominus noster Deus Papa, our Lord God the Pope. If the Canonists so roundly affirm it, 
Sir F. taken in citing Canonists.  why hath not Sir F. either roundly or squarely quoted us the text? Sure it is that I can not find it though much I have sought, and hard it is to believe that any such text may be found, which is much confirmed by that S. F. Proctor coming after him to fill up the gaps that he had left open, and straining himself much about this point could not find any one text of Canonist or other that had those words, and therefore was forced to Father them upon Aug. Steuchus with a notorious falsification, as in the chapter following shall be showed. But yet here to help out S.F. with some part of his credit, 
A devise to help out Sir F.  & for very compassion I will add a conjecture of a friend of his, how he might chance to have been deceived about Dominus Deus noster Papa, if he cite it upon his own reading, for that perchance he might find it written thus; D. noster D. Papa. both D.D. signifying a double Dominus, which some cavilling heretic espying, & judging it inconvenient to repeat Dominus twice, would needs enforce the second D. to be set for Deus; This is my conjecture confirmed somewhat by the similitude of a like fond chance whereof I have heard as happened in the subscription of an English letter written from certain Mariners to the Lord Admiral in these words: To the right honourable our good L. the L. Admiral which second L. a simple fellow interpreted to signify the lady Admiral saying, that the first L. signifying the Lord himself, the second L. must needs signify also his lady. If I miss in this conjecture or comparison S. F. is cause thereof that cited not the text, thereby to clear all matters, and to deliver both us of this doubt, and himself of new suspicion of imposture.  
And albeit this were a sufficient answer to so foolish objections without testimony, or authority, yet for that our K. will needs seem so learned a bible clerk, as to terrify the people with the name of God imparted to creatures, 
How a creature may be called God.  I will ask him and his ministers in this place the meaning of a text or two out of scripture itself, 
Exod. 7. v. 1.  as first those words of God in Exodus, dixitque Dominus ad Moysen, ecce constitui te Deum Pharaonis: and God said unto Moses, behold I have made thee the God of Pharaoh did God give away his deity with this think you? And again I would ask him the interpretation of those words of Christ, when he saith, Nun scriptum in lege vestra est, Ego dixi, Dij estis? 
Io. 10. vers. Psalm. 81. vers. 6.  Is it not written in your law, I said you are Gods? And then answereth to the question, himself thus: Si illos dixit Deos, ad quos sermo Dei factus est, & non potest solui scriptura. If God called them Gods to whom the speech of God was directed, and that this scripture cannot be answered or denied etc. These two questions I have proposed from S. F. and his Minister's instruction, not for that I do think any writer to have been so simple as to call the Pope expressly God, though yet we see clearly by these examples that the word Deus in some sense may be appyed, 
Hierom. lib. 1. in Mat.  also to creatures without injury of the creator. And S. Hierome weighing and pondering the words of Christ unto his disciples 6. mat. Quem dicunt homines esse filium hominis, etc. And then again, Vos autem quem me esse dicitis? hath these words: Prudens lector attend, quod ex consequentibus textuque sermonis, Apostoli nequaquam homines sed Dij appellantur. Mark prudent reader, that it is evident by the consequence, and illation of Christ his words, that the Apostles are not called men here but Gods. Thus said S. Hierome, who yet knew aswell what Idolatry meaneth as S.F. of whom I would ask, why he reprehendeth not Cambden, and other protestant writers, that say to her Matie. Diva Elizabetha at every word, but all may pass with these men so it be not to the Pope. And yet one thing you must note, that whatsoever Canonist, or other Catholic do attribute to the Pope it is not in respect of his person, but of his office, and place under Christ, so that if they flatter they flatter the office, not the man, but Diva Elizabetha flattereth the person, and so it is flat and gross flattery. But let us go forward.  
You have heard then the two first ways whereby the K. goeth about to excuse himself from flattery, whereof the first is but fond, and the second fraudulent, there followeth a third which is both impertinent and ridiculous. For whereas he is accused by the warder to be contrary to himself, 
A very foolish defence.  in that telling us of so many blessings, and English benedictions, yet in the very same lives confesseth infinite fears, frights, and dangers of the realm, he hath nothing in effect to answer, but that England hath been blessed for times passed by the entrance of their gospel, though now through their unkindness, they may be feared to be near to misery, which kind of defence, how childish it is, who seethe not, and is as much as if he should say the head, and face, and first show of his gospel was fair, & frolic, as are the sweet singing Syrienes, but the tail is troublesome, and end pernicious, and biteth like the scorpion. But let us hear both the warder, & the Apologer together in their own speech. 
Pag. 2.   
He that will consider (saith the warder) with judgement, 
The present state of English blessings.  and indifferency the present estate of matters in England, and round about it, (and this especially by reason of change made in religion) and shall read together the fleering tale which Sir F. telleth us in the first lines of his book of the infinite, and innumerable blessings received (as he saith) by the said change, he will either say, that the man lacked wit, and discourse to see the deformity, and contradiction of his own talk, or else modesty, and shamefastness in uttering it.  
For notwithstanding the rare parts, and good intentions of her Majesty in this her government (which no man denieth, nor yet conjoineth with the evil success of this alteration of religion, as well known not to have proceeded of her own inclination at the beginning) who is there so simple that discovereth not, or so evil affected that ruth not from his heart the difficulties already grown, and growing daily by this most unfortunate, and fatal alteration of religion? 
The wachman contrary to himself.  which this man calleth the fountain and wellspring whence all the rest of this our little Islands benefits, and blessings do issue and flow. Nay doth not the silly man himself in all this furious, & sk●rneful libel of his, endeavour to lay before us a thousand fears, and fryghtes of imminent perils, which he saith hang over us, by the division of hearts, of hands, of judgements of affections, of parts, and partialityes, and factions within the realm? or is his whole argument any thing else in effect, but a timorous abodement of infinite ruins, that do beset the realm at this day? And are not his own words these, after a long discourse of perils, I doubt not) dear countrymen) but that you are men of Wisdom, and can easily conceive what dangers we stand in, by that which hath been set down before. And after a little. The life of religion; of Queen and country; is at the stake. And how then doth he pipe unto us this feigned note of melancholy music, amidst so many dreadful cares and sorrows? hath he not read that Musica in luctu importuna narratio. 
Eccles 22.  It is importune chanting when other men are weeping.  
This said I then, what answereth our knight with his Ministers now after so long so large, and so mature deliberation of two years? You shall have it briefly delivered. First they run again (a very grave shift) to an other verse or two out of a poet against flattery and dissimulation, for with this kind of armour Winchester school (where afterward he braggeth to have been brought up) did somewhat furnish our knight; 
Encount. 6.  & therefore oftentimes we have store thereof. But what more? nay no more argument, or reason alleged at all, but only this sentence noted in the margin, No contrariety betwixt our present dangers and our former blessings. Whereby he yieldeth to his adversary in the thing itself as you see, and varieth only in the time, confessing that England is not blessed for the present, but was in old days, which being past it remaineth rather cursed now, if perils, cares, and frights be curses, and yet in his former book (if you remember) all seemed to be present blessedness, 
Foolish trifling in matter of moment.  who can suffer such trifling in a matter of such moment? And yet delighteth he so much in this devise of his cunning distinction of times past, and present that he maketh a long narration thereupon how the people of Israel were blessed under divers Kings, 
Wastword. Pag 8.  and namely josias for a time, and yet afflicted in the end, for their ingratitude by this said Kings fearful slaughter.  
In which example though I could trip him for alleging a false cause of josias murder (for he was) slain through his own fault, & not the peoples, for that expressly against God's commandment, 
4. Reg. 25. 2. Paral. 35.  he would needs fight with Nechao King of Egypt yet am I not delighted with this example, for that it proveth nothing, but that which it should not; to wit that our blessings of England be not present, 
josias slaughter evil applied.  but past, and includeth further some evil aboadment towards her Majesty's tie● person, (as some may interpret) for which cause it was not the wisest part in the world for the K. to bring it in; but that he seethe not or discerneth not always what maketh for him or against him.  
No way then can S. F. deliver himself soundly from the charge of flattery in his former fond flourish of protestant blessings except he could show us in deed some special Catalogue of blessings, & benedictions which England hath received either spiritual or temporal or both by changement unto his religion, more than it had be●ore under Catholic Religion which obligation of plain proof the K. preceyving, hath taken upon him at length to set upon that enterprise, and laying his head together with the consistory of his ministers hath shaped us out ten new fresh benedictions, and blessings never hard of before, or had (I think) in consideration: which now we are to examine and discuss as they lie in order. But first we must see what Minister O. E. bringeth after the K. whose book came to my hand when this was written, and I have promised to give him a place also in the interlude when his turn cometh, and when he bringeth any thing different from the former or worthy the mentioning.   

PROCTOR O. E. IS called up the stage to tell his tale & to help out Sr. F. in this matter of flattering the state, and how he playeth his part far worse & more ridiculously than the knight himself. CAP. III.  
I Have promised the (gentle Reader) to exhibit a short view of the principal points which Proctor O. E. bringeth after Sr. F. (if any may be called principal of so paltry wares) in his late Wrangle-word freshly come out of England which bringeth such trash so stuffed with impotent and impudent railing as maketh Sr. F. seem many times a grave & moderate writer, though often also he will not yield to the other, we shall compare both & so you may judge. First this O.E. setteth down my beginning of the Ward-word thus; 
Wrangle-word. Pag. 9 divers impudencies of O. E.  He beginneth with a long tale of flattery (saith he) & of the harms ensuing thereof, and at his first setting out entereth into a common place as it were into a common Inn pleasing and resting himself, but tiring and harrying his reader with his needle's fooleries. By this you may see the man's vain, desiring to say somewhat, and adventuring to say any thing, true or false, for that the matter of flattery in the Ward-word is but touched in a word or two, and the application ensueth presently; his humour therefore is discovered in using so base a similitude of common Inns and common places thereto adjoining, wherewith it may be, this minister is more delighted, than every one of his fellows, But let us hear him out further.  
What skilleth it (saith he) to know what a dangerous beast a flatterer is? 
Wrangle-word. Ibid.  and who denieth, but that flattery is an odious th●ng? but what is this to us? can he show that Sr. F. is a flatterer? no, nay he doth ●ot so much as go about to prove any such matter, nor doth he apply his common place to his purpose, but leaveth it as a fragment borrowed out of some Fryarl●ke declamation.  
Let any man read the first Page of the ward-woord, and then tell me, whether this Minister have any sorehead at all (though his head be great enough) who saith that I do not so much as go about to prove any such matter against S ●. F. that he flattered the State, the whole butt of my discourse in that place being nothing else, but to show that S. F. and his fellows who preach so many blessings of England by change of Religion (from whence it hath receu●d indeed so many manifest hurts and dangers) must needs be famous flatterers. And this Minister an Archparasyte that blusseth not to persuade S. F. that I durst not so much as go about to prove flattery against him, when notwithstanding that was my whole argument, as before you have heard.  
But will you here, an other impudence as gros as this, and thereby learn to know the man, here at the very beginning, hearken then what he saith of the Warder, for talking of difficulties risen and rising by change of Religion. His adversaries (saith he) do easily discover his notorious ympudency, 
Wrangle-word. Pag. 1●  and his friends do rue his simplicity, seeing him to take as granted, and boldly to affirm that all men see and acknowledge the difficulties that arise out of alteration of Religion, when none either see it or justly can affirm any such matter. Lo gentle Reader, what he saith and whether it be notorious impudency in me to say, that some difficulties have risen in England and other countries by alteration of Religion, or in him to hold this for impudency, and further to affirm, that no man can see or truly affirm any such matter, of this I say be thou thyself judge, who perhaps daily feelest some part of these difficulties by the troubles feared as rising from this fountain and origyn.  
But now to go forward in this matter of flattery how doth this minister proceed therein after the K. you shall here his method. 
O. E. a famous flatterer.  First he setteth down a long recital of the personal praises of her Matie. out of Bishop Ozorius a Portugal in his Epistle written to her very near 30. years ago, and out of Petrus Bizarrus an Italian in his story of Genua and is glad by this occasion to say somewhat, whereof he may hope to receive a good fee, & withal to make it seem that we are enemies of her Majesty's praises which is calumnious & parasitical for we do disjoin the harms ensued by change of Religion from her Majesty's government, and do most willingly acknowledge the personal praises of her Matie separated from Religion, whereof the Warder laid not the fault on her, nay rather expressly excepted it, though this companion in repeating his words omitteth that part of purpose and most maliciously, not being desirous the Warder should show so dutiful affection and good opinion of her Majesty's person, and thereby cut of the argument of this cavillers long and idle babbel founded upon this calumniation; 
The false dealing of O.E.  the Warders words I have related in the former Chapter and forteenth paragraph. where you may read them, and thereby judge of the true dealing of this false Minister or rather the false dealing of this true Minister, which I account all to be one. But let us go forward.  
After his discourse of the praises of her Matie. he entereth to show that Catholics do malign and envy these praises (and yet was Ozorius a Catholic whom he allegeth for the greatest praiser) and so was also so far as we know Bizarrus the other praiser. 
O.E. Pag 2.  And to prove this he runneth about the whole world to seek witnesses, for besides Sanders Harpsfeld, Ryshton Englishmen, Bozius and Ribadinera, the first an Italian, the second a Spaniard (out of all which notwithstanding he allegeth no one word but their bare names) he desireth also King Solomon to bear him witness in these words The wicked doth abhor those that walk aright, 
Proverb. 29.  assuring us that by the wicked are meant the Catholics, and by the other part of the sentence her Matie. and from Solomon he leapeth again to Clement 7. and Paulus 3. Popes of Rome for their sentences against King Henry's marriage with Lady Anne Bollen, and the legitimation of their Children, alleging words which I think not fit to be repeated in this place, and so should be have done also if his discretion had been as great as his head, 
Indiscretion and temerity of O.E.  seeing they are now past and forgotten, and were written when her Matie. either was not yet borne, or of that Infancy as she could have no part in any fault there objected.  
Yet this prating companion to seem to say somewhat in hatred of Catholics & flattery of her Matie. will needs be prattling of these affairs, & not content with this goeth further to renew worse sores, and to accuse both K. Henry himself, and all the State and Parliament of that time with wilful murder and tyranny towards that lady and Queen, saying, 
Odious matter brought in by this hungry parasite. 1. Pag. 3.  The Pope's adhaer●ntes in England never ceased until they ha● brought her Maties most innocent Mother to her end, which was the greatest grief that tormented the King lying on his death bed, sore repenting himself for the wrongful shedding of the innocent Queen's blood, neither did they only murder the innocent Mother, but also sought by act of Parliament to disable, and from the succession to exclude the daughter.  
All this how true or untrue it is, the story and acts of Parliaments of K. Henry's life do testify, 
Lib. Statute. cap. 7. an. Hen. 2●.  especially that of the 28. year of his reign, and whether matters passed so long ago, with such public authority, deliberation and consent as these did, may be called now into question again to the infamy both of the said K. her majesties Father, and of his state counsel and nobility, by such a petty companion as this is, only to flatter, and to get himself a bigger benefice, and without all ground, or former testimony thereof in story, or other authentical register, let all the world judge, as also how near O. E. resembleth here Oedipus who killed his own Father to marry his mother, which mystery, I leave to the curious reader to apply in this place.  
One thing is certain that howsoever the matter passed at that time for justice or injustice, the chief doers thereof next to the king himself were protestants namely Cromwell & Cranmer that could do most with him at that time, 
The dealing of Cromwell and Cranmer about Q. Anne Bollē.  and in effect all, and the first of them was principally employed in the said Queen's condemnation and death as appeareth yet by public records; and the second was used for her defamation after her death, as is extant at this day in the foresaid statute itself, where Cranmers' sentence is recorded judicially given by him, 
An Henry 2●. cap. 7.  as Archbishop of Canterbury, affirming of his own accord, and knowledge such ●hings as no wise or modest man I think will believe, and I ●or th● same cause, and for dewtiful respect to her Majesty do forbear to repeat the same here though it be under his hand and seal, but such a good fellow was Cranmer the first pillar of protestant religion in England, 
Sand. lib. 1. de Schis.  that for gain of living or favour and for enjoying quietly his woman which he carried about with him in a trunk at those days, he would say or swear or unsay any thing, the sentence may be seen by him that will, for it is extant in print in the English book of Statutes; Neither can this sycophants calumniation affirming the said Queen's death to be procured by the Pope's adherents in England have any probability at all, seeing that no adherent to the Pope was in credit or authority in that time, but rather in all disgrace and danger and so much of this.  
After the foresaid sycophancy and foolish calumniations used against Catholics for wishing evil to her Majesty our Minister turneth again to his work of flattery, and telleth more praises of her majesties government, as though our business, and controversy stood in this; and not rather, in the evil events which have succeeded by change of religion. And to help Sr. F. out from the charge of flattery laid unto him after much idle babbling, 
Sup cap. 1.  about particular blessings, wherein (notwithstanding he agreeth not with the K. as before hath been and after shall be showed) he runneth to the same common place before mentyoned of flattery, used by courtiers, and canonists to the Pope, the force of which shift and refuge how vain it is you have heard before discussed, 
Cap ●.  and it needeth not to be repeated here, and the examples, and instances which he bringeth are the same for the most part which Sr. F. touched before and are before answered, as that of Panormitan and other canonists affirming, 
Panorm. in c. licet de election.  idem esse Christi & Papae Consistorium, Christ and the Pope as his substitute to have one and the self same Consistory or Tribunal, 
joan. in c. Quanto de translat. Epis.  whereof we have treated in the former Chapter.  
There is that other also how the Pope is or may be called God in the sense before mentyoned, this man allegeth it thus: Augustin Steu●hus doth honour him as a God, Audis (saith he) Pontificem Deum appellatum & habitum pro Deo, Dost thou hear the Pope called God and held for God? and than noteth in the margin, contra donationem Constantini, Steuchus saith it in his book against the Donation of Constantyne; in which few words, there are so many cousinages, or rather knaveries used, as no man would believe, but in such a cogging Minister as coming lately from Irish wars hath not learned yet to have any conscience or honesty. For first of all that most learned man Augustinus Steuchus Eugubinus bishop of Kysam wrote no book against the Donation of Constantyne as here is imposed upon him, 
divers falsehoods of● the conscienceles minister.  but rather for it, proving the same most learnedly out of all antiquity against Laurentius Valla the grammarian that fondly had impugned the same. secondly the words here alleged out of Steuchus though they be in his book yet are they alleged by him not in his own name, but as coming from Constantyne the great by the testimony of Nicolaus primus Pope of Rome about 800. year ago, who citeth out of the said Donation of Constantine, 
Cap. 2.  that amongst other honourable titles he calleth him also God (in that sense no doubt which before is showed by scripture that both Moses and other holy men were called Gods) and hereupon Bishop Steuchus addeth those words before mentyoned, Aud●s summum Pontificem à Constantino Deum appellatum, habitum pro Deo? 
Aug Steuchus in Lauren. Vall. de donat. Constant. fol. 230.  hoc videlicet factum est cùm eum praeclaro illo Edicto decoravit, ador●uit uti Deum, uti Christi & Petri successorem, & velut vivam Christi imaginem veneratus est. Do you hear how the Pope is here called God by Constantine, and held for God, this was done when he did honour him so highly with that excellent edict in his favour adoring him as God, and as the successor of Christ and Peter, and reverencing him as the lively image of Christ himself.  
Hear now we see how Pope Silvester was honoured by our famous Britain Emperor Constantine the great and yet no man would cry out then, 
The great honour done by Constant. the great to Pope Silvester.  that he committed Idolatry, when he called the Bishop of Rome God, for the meaning was plain that he did it only in honour of Christ his Master which was true God, and had left his place and power upon earth to this his servant, as the Bishop explaineth, in the rest of the words following, which the deceitful minister left out of purpose, and corrupted also those few words he allegeth by shutting out the words (à Constantino) thereby to make it seem that Steuchus spoke this of himself, and so to make way to his lying calumniation saying as he doth, Augustin Steuchus doth honour him as a God, & by this you may see in what case men are that believe these lying lips of conscienceles Ministers upon their words in matters of their salvation, which are commonly at this day without controlment in England, seeing they dare adventure to falsify so openly in points which they may probably doubt to be called to reckoning for, by their adversaries, as we do O.E. in this & other matters, wherein we are to charge him hereafter.  
divers other places he allegeth and heapeth together taken out of Ministers note books, to prove the flattery of later Catholics & canonists to the Pope, but they are such as either make nothing to the purpose or are corrupted or perverted by him, or may have a very true and pious sense in respect of the Pope's authority and place given him by Christ, if they be well and truly understood, and as much or more was used by the ancient Fathers which these companion's do avoid to recite of purpose, for their credit sake, alleging only later writers, as ●or example the very first place cited by this fellow out of Card●nal Cusanus is this: 
Cusan. epist. ad Eohem.  Mutato judicio Ecclesiae mutatum est & Dei judicium. The judgement of the Church being changed about any matter, the judgement of God changeth also, and here the ministers mouth overrunneth exceedingly saying these good fellows for their bellies sake speak rail, 
Ouerlashing of the minister.  hold their peace, write, faun, flatter and unto the Pope's pleasure turn their style. But ho, (Sir swashbuckler) hearken to others that had l●sse care of their belly than you and yours; this of the change of God's judgement, after the judgement of the Church, and of the supreeme Pastor in particular, is a common saying of all the Ancient Fathers upon those words of Christ Whose sins you lose on earth shallbe loosed in heaven and whose ye retain shall be retained. 
Matth. 16.  And S. Chrisostome goeth so far therein (who yet was neither belly God nor flatterer) as he attributeth this of drawing God's judgement after theirs; not to the whole Church and chief Pastor only, but to all & every lawful Priest also in absolving from sin, whose power and dignity he preferreth before Emperors, Angels, and whatsoever else, but the only son of God, which may answer also the idle cavillations of S. F. among his other allegations of flattery in the former chapter, where he complaineth that some canonists prefer the Pope's Authority before Emperors and Angels, let him hear S. Chrysostome.  
Qui terram incolunt saith he in his 3. book de sacerdotio, 
A discourse of S. Chrisost. of Priest's authority l. ●. de sacerdoti●.  To Priests that dwell and converse upon earth is it committed to dispense matters that be in heaven; an authority that God hath given neither to Angels, nor Archangels time in the Church of God? what are you I say? You are the great Priest, the highest Bishop, you are Prince of Bishops, and heir of the Apostles, you are in Primacy, Abel, in government, Noë, in Patriarkship, Abraham; in order, Melchisedech, in dignity, Aaron; in authority, Moses; in judicature, Samuel; in power, 
The judgement of S Bernard about the Pope's titles of honour.  Peter; in unction, Christ, to you are given the keys, and the sheep are committed to your trust, there are other porters of heaven, & other feeders also of flocks besides yourself, but you are so much more glorious than they, by how much more different your title is which you have inherited above them all. They have their flocks assigned severally to them in several, but to you all universally are committed, that is, one general flock to one general Pastor, neither only are you the Pastor of all sheep, but of all Pastors also, do you ask me how I can prove it? I answer out of the word of God.  
Thus far S. Bernard, and then goeth he on to show divers plain places of Scripture for his proof, and those especially which S. Chrysostome, and S. Hilary before mentyoned, and now I fear me our minister Oedipus will say here, that S. Bernard is become a flatterer of Popes also as well as Card. Cusanus, Bellarmin, D. Stapleton, and other like, whose sentences he citeth, but either understandeth them not, or wilfully perverteth their meaning to deceive his reader, & thereby to seem to have somewhat ever to say, though he say nothing, or worse than nothing.  
And here I would leave, now O.E. with his art of cogging to himself, but that he passeth on to a contumelious calumniation, or two more against a friend of mine, & myself. 
Pag 11.  Gifford (saith he) calleth Philip the second the K. of Spain the greatest Monarch under the sun to show himself to be one of the gressest flatterers under the moon, 
About D. Gifford. Deane of Lile.  and I say you show you self on of the veriest fools under the 7. stars to print this for so gross a flattery, which no man of knowledge, & judgement, in matters of story, and cosmography, can deny to be truth, if he consider the multitude and greatness of countries under him, and yourself, that have been a roving & theving about the indies & other his dominions how large and wide they lie, cannot speak this, but of wilful insolency against your conscience. And as for M. Doct. and deane Gifford, who hath his deanery by true adoption, and not by intrusion as some friend of yours, and hath his learning by study, and not by borrowing & wandering, he I say being often injured by you in this book will answer for himself I doubt not, & for that you brag much, that you have set forth (if I mistake you not) a book in Latyn entitled Turco-papismus (which is nothing else, but an apish imitation of M. Raynolds Caluino-T●rcimus printed by M. D. Gifford after the Author's death) and that you require so earnestly to have it answered, I hold him obliged to satisfy your demand, & so I make account that he will take the pain to look over your said worthy work, and give both it and the Author the colours, which both deserve. And thus much ●or my friend, now for myself I may be briefer.  
It followeth, & this Noddy to show himself a n●ble paras●e, 
Pag. Ibid.  upon whom the 〈◊〉 of his whole invective against flatterers doth mo●● f●●l● fall, 〈…〉 the Pope of Rome, & K. Philip the seco●d of Spain 〈◊〉 greatest monarchs of Christendom, etc. And so we ●ee●t a● all this common place of flattery si●●eth this no●●y, and his consorts very properly. Who is the true Noddy in name, & sense, hath been discussed before in my Epistle to the Noddy-maker, but who is Noddy in fact, and merit (namely in this place) either I for saying, the Pope and the K. of Spain to be the greatest monarchs of Christendom, the one in Spiritual jurisdiction, the other in temporal; or this Nodifying Minister for calling me noddy and noble parasite for this speech, let all be judges that be no Noddies, and whether all these before mentioned, whom he calleth my consorts in flattery may be counted noddies also as here he signifieth for speaking so honourably of the Pope (wherein S. Bernard, and other ancient Fathers must enter as you have seen) let wiser heads than this man's noddle determine, and so I leave him for this first combat; after we shall buckle again, as occasion is offered, and now will I pass to continue my former treatise with S. F. about the view of those fresh new blessings which he hath presented us as brought into England by change of Catholic Religion. This dilation hath been made to give his advocate O.E. place to play a pageant also who as being I hear grosser in body than in his two lettered name he could have no less room for the present, the next time he cometh up, we may chance thrust him down again more quickly, in the mean space he may breathe himself until he be called upon again for an other part of the Interlude.   

OF TEN NEW Devised blessings brought in by Sir F. as peculiar to his Gospel: whereof the First is Union in doctrine termed by him unity in verity, and how false and vain this is. CAP. FOUR  
ALL the former subject of dispute and controversy about flattery in the two precedent Chapters hath been touching this point (as you have heard) whether Sr. F. and his fellows have flattered her Matie. and the state or no in telling them of infinite blessings, & benedictions both spiritual and temporal heaped on the same and the r●st of the world by change of our ancient Father's Religion to the novelties that after have sprung up, which absurd proposition the warder having impugned as ridiculous and evidently false▪ hath pressed them to show some part of those infinite blessings, whereof they bragged, and Sr. F. for credit's sake having consulted with his Ministers very seriously as is to be presumed about this weighty point, cometh out now with a decalogue of them, 
The Decalogue of Sir F. blessings.  answering perhaps to the ten Commandments, (for whose observation the jews have many blessings promised them) and in the margin he giveth this title to his enumeration a short view of blessings spiritual and temporal, 
Two sorts of blessings. Pag 11.  etc. and then offering me the favour as to follow my division and order therein (for indeed they are so confused in their own treatesyes as it is more hard to bring their speeches to order then to refute them) he saith thus. I proceed to your advertisement for a better direction to men's judgements that all blessings of a common wealth may be reduced to two heads, the one spiritual belonging to the soul & conscience, the other temporal concerning the body and weal public.  
This is the division which he promiseth to prosecute and to lay us forth in both kinds the benedictions, which he and his ministers have devised for us, great and goodly ones I doubt not but they will be, you shall have them as they come, whereof the foremost as lady and mistress of all the rest is termed by him, unity in verity importing that Protestants have received this special blessing above Catholykes, that they have great unity and concord among themselves in matter of doctrine, 
Unity among protestants.  which is as very a jest, as if a man should say that sparrows do not chyrpe, nor hens cackle, nor daws prattle, nor women chide, or as the fool that said to him that had an extraordinary great nose, You have no nose (Sir) & this is your privilege above other men, which is as good and true a privilege as this is a blessing of the Protestant's to live and agree without dissension, which I am forced for deciphering this first objected blessing to prosecute more largely than I had meant, though yet I doubt not, it may be both profitable and not unpleasant to the Reader, to see the progress thereof; but yet first, it is reason that we hear Sir F. who going about to imitate my speech used before in the ward-word for expressing the unity amongst Catholics, by the points wherein they agree, he will needs say the same, and apply it also to Protestants, which I would have you to consider, how fitly it agreeth. For thus he saith.  
First (saith he) there hath been in England since this happy alteration and change from Popish superstition to Christian verity, 
Pag. 12.  one God worshipped in spirit and truth, one faith, one belief, one form of service in prayer, one number of Sacraments, one head of the Church, which is Christ the Lord, and his substitute anointed and aeppoynted over us our Sovereign and Queen, 
A notorious untruth.  etc. And if you can like to look upon the harmonyes of confessions, you shall find all the Churches of Christendom where the Gospel of Christ jesus is embraced to be of the same judgement: & in this blessed unity grounded upon verity the Lord for ever keep us.  
Lo hear (good Reader) the bold assertion of a theological knight by which thou mayst see the saying of S. Augustine to be true. 
S. Angust. lib. ●. contr. jul. cap. 3.  That the forehead of heretics is no forehead, if we understand thereby shamefastness, & not the material part of their body. For what man in the world that hath any shame or modesty in him would set down in print such a protestation as every child that hath read any thing or knoweth the state of England at this day can control, and those which have read nothing by common report of the whole world can convince to be false? Yet he beginneth this first blessing (if you mark it) somewhat reservedly, saying: there hath been in England, since this happy alteration, one God, one faith, one form of service, etc. as though he would deal only with the union of England, but after he enlargeth himself, saying: you shall find all the churches of Christendom, where the gospel and truth of Christ jesus ●●s embraced to be of the same judgement, by which occasion I am enforced to lengthen somewhat my confutation and first to examine a little the unity of protestants in foreign lands and churches, where their gospel is preached, and after returning home to England to examine somewhat the same points there.  
For unity in verity then in foreign churches (for this is the gay devised title of this first benediction) I could be content, 
Unity among foreign Protestants.  that our knight could show us, if not unity in verity (which is impossible) yet unity at least in falsity, among his professors, so as some name of unity might be among them, for in verity (which is but one) the Protestants cannot possibly be at unity, being so divided and repugnant among themselves, as presently I shall show. In falsytie also it is very hard for them to hold union, 
Tertul. prae●script. contra haeres.  for that (as Tertullian saith) mendac●um mendacio difficulter cohaeret. only doth hardly stand with another lie in peace and concord: for which cause he showeth that all heresies lightly have fallen at bickering among themselves; but in none more hath this been observed then in the new gospel of our time brought in by Luther, Zwinglius, Oecolampadius Carolstadius, Ca●uyn, Melanthon, Beza, and others the head doctors of Sir F. extern churches in Germany, France, Suizerland, and other places, which have been lights and lanterns to ours of England, and their first doctors, and as it were Apostles, who yet were no sooner known to the world, but that they fell at mortal debate and dissension among themselves, and so continued all their lives, sealing it also w●th their deaths, as by their own works, testimonies, & histories appeareth.  
For first who knoweth not that Luther beginning his doctrine in the year of our Lord 1517. and going forward with adding, 
●leidā. Surius Lavater & alij in hist.  altering, chopping, and changing for 7. years together, before it could be made any certain body of doctrine, 
Luther's beginning and going forward.  consisting in itself, it fell out, that within those 7. first years to wit an. 1524. three of Luther's chiefest scholars, Andreas Carolstadius, joannes Oecolampadius and Vldericus Zuinglius (the first and last of the number Apostate priests, the second a friar, as Luther also had been) began the new sect of Sacramentaries, quite opposite to Luther, and within two years immediately following the three named doctors, 
Sacramentaries & their divisions.  profited so well in new divisions also among themselves, as by Luther's own testimony publicly given in a sermon after printed, they were divided into six several sects: 
Luth. ser. de sacra. Haga 〈◊〉 habit anno 1527.  Yea the Lutheran preachers of Brema writing not long after that again to Westphalus a great superintendant in Saxony, do solemnly avouch, 
Concionat. bremen's. Ep. de Eucharist. ad Westphalum.  that there was in●●nita penè opinionum apud Sacramentarios varietas, an infinite variety of opinions amongst the Sacramentaries that denied the Real presence in the Sacrament.  
And did this dissension ever end (think you) amongst these fellows▪ 
Genebr. Su●ius hoc an.  No truly: but rather increased daily, even unto their deaths and after also; for out of Luther's doctrine besides these Sacramentaries, there arose in like manner the Anabaptists, 
Sectaries sprung from Luther, Swinglius and Caluin.  anno 1527. as themselves glory, taking occasion by his Epistle ad Waldenses, where he saith: That it is better to leave of baptism altogether then to baptize children that have no faith: Whereupon they left of baptism of infants, and went forward in the rest of their heresies, even against Luther himself at the last.  
After this there sprung up also out of the same sect of Luther, the potent division of molles and rigidi Lutherani, which endure with open enmity to this day as their books do testify, 
Rigid and soft Lutherans  Westphalus, Illiricus, and others of high Saxony, being the heads of the rigid faction (who resemble our puritans in England that would have nothing but Caluins pure prescription, as these men would Luther's) but on the other side Melanchton and his followers founders of the softer party would follow Luther by discretion, taking so much as ●●rued for their purpose and no more, where unto also do draw near our Parliament Protestant's in England as you know, who receive Caluin with the limitations and restrictions which they think best, that is nothing at all of his ecclesiastical plot of government, nor divers points of his doctrine. And thus much of Luther's own sect.  
But out of that of Vldericus Zuinglius father of the Sacramentaries issued other children not much different from the former, for their dissension and disobedience both to father and mother, 
Caluin. servetus Valent. Gentiles.  to wit: john Caluin and Theodore Beza, and from these again departed into another faction, other good fellows as Michael servetus, 
Vid. lib. calvini de Act. servet. & libel. Genevae editum de act. Valentin.  john calvin's coleage, whom they afterward burned at Geneva for denying the blessed Trinity, and Valentinus Gentilis a new Arrian, whose followers yet remain, though himself was burned also by other Protestants at Argentine. With these joined joannes Paulus, Alciatus, Gribaldus, and others which made afterward the sect of new Arrians and Trinitarians that yet remain in Germany, Poland, and especially in Transiluania, as their books do show.  
All these and many others not only sectaries but arch-heretics and heads of new sects have sprung up out of the new gospel within these fourskore years, and have framed Churches and conventicles to themselves in divers countries all opposite and repugnant one to another, and themselves also divided amongst themselves, though at the b●●ginning all proceeded of one only division from Catholic union, raised by Luther.  
So as we Catholics may well insult, and rightly say of them, as S. Augustine said to Parmenian▪ 
Aug. contra Parm. lib. 1. cap 4.  multa frusta de isto frasto per totam Africam facta sunt: sic sic necesse est, ut minutatim secti, conscissique dispereant, qui tumorem animositatis suae, sanctissimo Catholicae pacis vinculo praetulerunt. Many pieces are already made throughout Africa of this one piece or division) wherewith you began; so so is it necessary that they should perish by division and renting into most small pieces, who have preferred the pride or swelling of their own animosity before the most holy band of Catholic peace and unity.  
Thus saith this holy Father; neither is there any hope or mean to reconcile these parties together, (as in the Ward-word I affirmed, & here will prove) for that the scriptures which are the only pretended means admitted by them, 
No means of union amongst Protestants see of this mor● infra cap. 14. & 15.  every party pleadeth for himself, with such obstinacy in his own sense, as no judge being acknowledged, it is unpossible to come to any determination. And as for Synods & counsels, whereon old fathers rested much for decision of controversies, these men laugh at them; though yet at last pressed by necessity, and much wearied with continual wrangling about scriptures, divers sects of our times (for all it is impossible to draw together) have been forced for some show that they desire agreement, to make among themselves an infinite number of Synods, meetings parleys and conventicles, to wit above threescore and ten as Stanislaus Rescius and other writers have gathered, 
Rescius li. 1. de Atheis. Evang cap 5.  but yet to no effect, not being able to agree upon any one thing in controversy between them before, but rather after infinite brawlings chide and furious invectives, the one against the other, they have departed evermore disagreeing, and more enemies than ever they wear before their meeting: whereof some few examples I shall recite in this place.  
In the town▪ of Hala in Saxony, in the year of Christ 1527. to wit some nine or ten years after Luther began his doctrine, 
The first general council of protestāns in the world 1527.  there was made the first general Council of Lutherans together against sacramentary Suinglians, where, by a solemn decree (which they called Syngramma) they condemned the doctrine of the said Zwinglius, and his fellows Carolstadius and Oecolampadius about the Sacrament, as damnable heresy, and pronounced judicially (Luther being Precedent of the council) all the followers of that doctrine to be prenicious heretics; which decree was published presently and printed in the German tongue (with a preface thereunto of Luther himself) by joannes Agricola one of Luther's chief scholars, in the same year. But what did these men obey or yield to this supreme authority of their new Church? noe: but presently Oecolampadius answered Luther's preface, accusing him of much pride & vanity: Oh humility of a new gospeler! Suinglius also wrote an epistle in the German tongue ad E●s●igenses, wherein he courseth and canuaseth Martin Luther extremely, calling him and his partakers furious and fanatical Swe●merers, (behold the spirit) and this was the event of this first Synod of Lutherans, 
Swermers.  from which time until the year 1529. that is for the space of some two years, I read of no other public meetings, Synods or counsels of moment had amongst these primitive Church Protestants, but that by books and writings only they did vex, and gaul one the other extremely, and Luther himself gave this severe censure of this controversy to them of Argentine, demanding his final resolution; 
Luth. admonit ad Argentorat  Aut Lutherum aut Sacramentarios Satanae ministros, etc. that either he, or the Sacramentaries were certainly the ministers of Satan: but he that would say both, should best perhaps determine the cause.  
In the year than 1529. by meditation of Philippe Landgrave of Hessia, 

Three other Synods of Luth. and Suingl. in vain anno 1529.  
Lavat hist. 1529. & Sleid. eodem an.   an earnest protestant, there were three Synods gathered of Lutherans and Suinglians in one year to make agreement. The first in the town of Marspurge, the second at Suabachium, the third at Smalcaldia, as both Laua●erus a Suinglian and Sleidanus à Lutheran do testify in their histories, and out of all these three Synods they departed with less agreement, than they met; and after their departure every man hasted to put in print the victory against his adversary. The Suinglians published 300. arguments, which they said they had alleged against the Real presence, and other articles of the Lutherans in that Synod, and could get no answer at all. And on the other side, Melanchthon to prove the Suinglians to be obstinate heretics, gathered together all the sentences of the ancient Fathers and Doctors for the Real presence and published them in print. Luther also published that Suinglins in that Synod desired him with tears in the presence of the Landgrave, that he might be received as a brother, but could not be admitted. Melanthon also writing to a friend of his of that Synod saith thus: Quantum attinet ad factionem Zuingli ego ●oram agnovi, 
Melanchton epi●t ad Martin. Go●●i●iū Pastor. Brunsnicensem.  etc. for as much as appertaineth to the faction of Suinglius I did publicly profess in the mee●ing at Marspurg 1592. having hard ●heir chief Doctors of that sect say what they could, that they have no doctrine at all of Christ, but only do dispute childishly, and so they cannot endure. This was Melanchtons' judgement & prophecy of Suinglius, as also of Caluinists in this behalf, to wit, that they hold not Christ nor cannot continue; but let our men consider whether this be true, and like to prove a true prophecy or no; And this was the effect of these other three Synods. Let us yet go ●oward.  
Two years after this, to wit in the year 1531. died Zuinglius & Oecolampadius within three days the one of the others, 
The death of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius. 1531.  the former slain in the field in rebellion against his country and common wealth; the secod found dead in his bed by his wives side, strangled by the devil (as Luther holdeth) or as writers rather think, 
Luth. lib de missa privata  killed by his own wife. But what? was the controversy ended with this? No: for to Zuinglius succeeded presently Bullenger and to Oecolampadius Michonius their scholars, and others that took upon them to defend that faction begun. And some few years after that again, there arose a famous new Apostle one john Caluin a French man of Picard●, 
The beginning of john Caluin and his doctrine  who though at the beginning would seem to approve the substance of the Sacramentary doctrine in denying the Real presence, yet not content to follow, but to be followed, framed out a new opinion quite different from the ●ormer of Zuinglius and Oecolampadius, as the whole church of Mansfeld doth testify in these words: 
Confes. Mansfeldens'  The Caluinists (say they) do reject by a new devise, t●e doctrine of the ●l●er Sacramentaries S●inglius and Oecolampadius, who did hold that Sacrament for an external sign only, but these men confess it (in words) to be the very body & blood of Christ substantially, & truly, but yet figuratively and spiritually, so as Christ's body remaineth notwithstanding only in heaven, for that it cannot be in two places at once. Thus they.  
So as here now we see no agreeing at all hitherto, but rather more eager dissension amongst protestants, the further we go down, even in the same sect itself: and where then is our knights first blessing of general unity among his people? But this shallbe enough for Synods and counsels, for the brevity of this place.   

THE SAME MATTER is prosecuted, and the disunion of Protestants is proved and declared by divers other means, out of their own books and writings, especially of foreign Protestants Lutherans, Zwinglians and calvinists. CAP. V.  
AND whereas I might prosecute this matter with an endless discourse, if I would go over either their Synods, Parlyes', conferences and meetings from year to year unto our time, or their infinite writings one against another in most bitter sort, 
War of Lutherans & Sacramentaries.  both Lutherans against Sacramentaries, and they against Lutherans, and one sect of Lutherans, against the other, as the ridged of Saxony against the soft of the lower parts of Germany, or the Suinglians and Caluinists amongst themselves; I do not think it expedient in this place to detain the reader so long, this being sufficient and more than sufficient (though it be not the hundredth part of that which may be said) to show the impudence of Sir Francis his assertion, where he avoucheth no less blindly then boldly, that all the churches of Christendom, where his gospel is embraced, are of the same judgement, and in blessed unity of verity. For refutation of which mad paradox, he that will see more, let him read first Luther and Lutherans books against Sacramentaries: Haereticos seriò censemus (saith Luther) & altenus ab Ecclesia Dei esse Zuinglianos & sacramentarius omnes. 
Luth. lib. contra Sacramentaries.  We do earnestly censure all Suinglians and Sacramentaries for heretics, and out of the church of God. 
Luth. epist. ad ●lbert. Marchion Prussiae.  And again in another book: Haud aliter caveant omnes à Zuinglio, quàm à Satanae veneno. Let all men take heed of Zuinglius, ●s of the poison of Satan. 
Vid. Auti●ab. Luth. tit. de haeresi.  And again: Sacramentarij sunt perdiabolati, superdiabolati, & transdiabolati haeretici. sacramentaries are indiveled, overdiveled, and thorough diveled heretics.  
And to the end you may not think that this was spoken by Luther in choler only without deliberation, or recalled before his death, I will city you one sentence of his, now when he was old: 
Confess. Tigur. tract. 3. fol. 108.  Ego (saith he) qui iam sepulchro vicinus obambulo hoc testimonium & ●anc gloriam ad Christi salvatoris tribunal perferam, etc. I that now walk near to my grave will carry this testimony and this glory with me, to the tribunal seat of Christ my Saviour, that I have ever, with all vehemency damned and fled those fanatical heretics and enemies of the Sacrament, Suinglius, Oecolampadius, Stinkefel●ius and their followers, whether they live at Zuricke, or at what place else in the world.  
And finally the same Luther in an epistle to a dear friend of his the same year he died wrote thus: 
Luth. epist. ad jacob. presbyt. Ecclesi●● Brem. Doct. 1546.  Mihi satis est omnium infoelicissimo, una ista beatitudo: Beatus vir, qui non abijt in concilio Sacramentariorum nec stetit in via Zuinglianorum, nec sedit in Cathedra Tygurinorum. Habes quid sentiam. It is sufficient for me most unhappy man to die with this one blessing. Blessed is the man that hath not gone in counsel of Sacramentaries, nor stood in the way of Suinglians, nor satin in the chair of Tygurines (by following their sacramentary doctrine) and thus you understand what my judgement is.  
Thus much I thought good to city out of Luther himself concerning his judgement of Sr. Francis his Church, for that he was the first Father of his new gospel, 
Fox in his Calend. maketh Luther a saint.  and john Fox doth put him in his Calendar for a saint and holy confessor upon the 18. day of February. Doctor whitakers also Sr. F. great Doctor preferreth Luther's judgement in divers points expressly and precisely before Augustine, 
Whitaker 'gainst M. Martin's discovery. Pag. 6.  Cyprian, and a thousand Churches, to wit (saith he) when he bringeth scripture for his proof, which is a very foolish and childish exception for that the importance standeth in the interpretation of the scriptures alleged, seeing that Luther as well as other heretics alleged commonly every where scriptures, for every purpose; but then especially when he writeth against sacramentaries, that is to say against whitaker's himself, and his people, whereby the said Doctors foolish censure is easily discovered to be no less void of wit, and reason then of shame fastness; but such men they are.  
Now if any be desirous to hear on further, what the Zwinglians, 
Zwinglians against Lutherans.  and Caluenists have returned home again, to Luther, and Lutherans, or on the other side, what Lutherans amongst themselves, and Caluinists amongst themselves, have written one against another, let them read the Apology of the Tygurynes together with the confession of their Church, set forth anno 1545. where they show the malignity of Luther's spirit, his pride, and insolency, and other such virtues. Let them read the admonitions of John Caluin to joachimus Westphalus, 
Calui●. vit. admon. con. Westph. & in harmonia evang.  where he calleth Lutherans, Temulento● cyclopes, gygantes, latratores, phreneticos, etc. Drunken cyclops, giants, mad barkers and the like. Let them read also the answer of Westphalus, 
Westph. lib. x Caluin.  what he saith of the Caluinists, exhorting the men of Frankford to drive them out as hypocrites, and pestilent doctors, infecting the people with venomous heresy. 
Ochin. lib. contr. sect. teor. ter.  Let them read the dialogue of Bernardinus Ochinus (once a preacher of heresy in K. Edward's days in England) contra sectam t●rrenorum Deorum. against the sect of earthily Gods, meaning by the earthly Gods, his old masters Caluin; Pharellus and other teachers of Geneva, whom he calleth heretics, and profane Gods of Geneva, and Tygurine. of whom he saith amongst other things: Quod noctu somniarunt, id chartis mandant, excudique curant, suaque scripta & verba pro oraculis haberi volunt. That which they dream of in the night, they write by day, and do cause it to be printed, and will have their writings to be holden for oracles. And yet these be the reverent ringleaderes of our new Religion in England.  
Stankarius a famous new Protestant sectary in Polonia, 
Stank. lib. de Trin. & Mediator.  writing against not only Caluin, but Peter Martyr also, and Bullinger (too principal Zwinglians, and the one our principal Oxford professor of new divinity in K. Edward's days) calleth them deploratissimos haereticos, most desperate heretics, and addeth, that they are far worse than papists, and that one Peter Lombard (master of the sentences, though he were a sworn Papist) yet is he more to be esteemed for wit, honesty, and learning then a hundred Luther's, 200. Melanchtons', 300. B●llengers, 400. Peter Martyrs, 500 Caluins, all which (saith he) if they were ponded in a mortar, there could not be gotten out of them one ounce of true divinity. This is his judgement of our best Zwinglian, and Calvinian teachers.  
Hessusius a famous Lutheran, writing also against Caluyn and Beza affirmeth the first to be a very sycophant and delicate Epicure of Geneva, 
Hessus. in defence. contr. Caluinum.  & the second a very beast and lascivious Cyclops, and his Doctrine to be more filthy, 
His judgement of Caluyn & Beza.  and venomous, than the poesy of Martial, and Catullus, fit for the stews then for honest men or women to read. And this of Caluinists.  
What should I go forward here to city the book of Flaccus Illyricus, 
War between soft and ridged Lutherans.  Vigandus, Gallus, Ampsdorphius, Osiander, and the foresaid Hessusius all austere, and ridged Lutherans, against Philip Melanchthon, Eberus, Sturmius, Cl●be●ius, Chy●r●us and other of the sect of softer Lutherans, there would be no end, if we should run over all, for that the fairs of Frankford every year do bring forth so many new books in this kind, of one of these Lutherans against an other, as they cannot be read; and so enough for the present of this external strife.  
But now (godwilling) will I draw homeward toward the union of our domestical ghospellers, 
What union in England by one judgement of fo●●●ne Protestants.  & in England, if by the way you will give me leave first to note one only point more, about these foreign sectaries, which I cannot omit, for that it toucheth England also in particular, and is taken out of an authentical Author, 
Ch●min. epi. ad Elect. Brand.  whom our English Protestant's do highly commend in all their writings, to wit, Martynus Chemnitius, for that he took upon him to examine, & censure the whole council of Trent (a valiant act of a typling German) but that which is worse, he censureth the Queen, and Parliament of England also, in that which now I am t● allege, and so goeth further than he should do. For in a letter which he writeth to the Prince Elector of Brādē●urge, allowing first his judgement, and praising it greatly, quod consultum non esse judicat, ut cum Caluinistis generalis synodus habeatur. That his highness thinketh it not expedient to have any general Synod with the Caluinists as they desired; and secondly he addeth his own judgement to the Dukes, about their punishment, to wit, that it is not convenient, ut punitionis officium contra Caluinistas, intereà temporis penitus quiescat. That the office o● punishing Caluinists in the mean space should utterly cease, but rather be continued. Thirdly he passeth over to talk also of the Religion of England, 
Chemnit his censure of English religion.  and of her Matie. by name, saying, that no good thing in Religion is further to be expected of her: That she hath used hardly the protestants of Germany; That she seethe & seeleth now a third sect risen up in her realm of Puritans, which hate both her, and Caluinians, and are enemies also to Lutherans: and then he scoffeth, that she being a woman hath taken upon her to make Ecclesiastical laws. And lastly, quod soemineo, & à seculis ●naudito fastuse Papissam & caput Ecclesiae fecit. That with a womanly pride (I am forced to interpret his words as they lie) never heard of in former ages, she hath made herself a she Pope and head of the Church.  
Thus saith he and much more, and if any Catholic writer had set down these words, how would Sir F. have inveighed against us for them? But now what will he say to this chief champion of his new gospel? Is this the unity they have among them? did Lucifer & his angels ever more furiously fight among themselves, than these their followers do? But here we must stay our hand and go no further in foreign fights, but rather get home (as I promised) and see what passeth there, among only Caluinists, and whether they be at any better peace than their brethren are at abroad, and if not then will we laugh at Sir F. again, for his unity in verity.   

THE CONTINUATION of the same narration about unity in verity, among ridged and soft calvinists, named Protestants & puritans in England and Scotland. CAP. VI  
HAVING been overlong in this narraration of sorraine disagreement amongst new gospelers, thereby to show the vanity of Sir F. his vaunt, who said that all their churches in Christendom were of the self same judgement, and blessed unity; there wanteth not matter to make a far longer recital of their domestical bicker, hatred and dissensions, risen among the Caluinists of England and Scotland, since the reign of her Majesty seeing there are extant so many books of those matters, both between Cartwright, Whitgyft, Lupton, Martin Marprelate, Mar-martyn, & amongst the rest O. E. also (as is reported) together with whole collections of the issue made & divulged by public authority, wherein the controversies, 
Books between protestants and Puritans the one against the other.  strifes, and manner of defending them are particularly set down, together with the combats, and assaults sleights, shifts, endeavours and policies of each side, which comedy though it be over long for me to bring into this place yet will I touch some few principal points for the reader's instruction, and partly also for recreation, concerning the good agreement of th●se people, or rather their war and bicker; being all professors of one and the self same sect, to the end we may see what unity in verity they have, as our knight braggeth, or rather how their spirit of division is no other than that of the Lutherans, Swinglians and other sectaries, before rehearsed, and as all other heretics have ever been before them, & shallbe after them, for that the self same spirit of one and the self-same find, doth and shall possess them all to the worlds end.  
First then to begin with some points of doctrine especially touching princes (of whom heretics commonly are egregious flatterers if they favour their sects, and notorious traitors & parricides, if they be against them) let us hear the more ridged part of Caluinists, called Puritan concerning her Majesty's authority, 
Calvinian contention about Prince's authority  wherewith the knight seeketh continually to press us, as though we denied both spiritual and temporal which is most false in the one; but his men (I mean English Protestants and Puritans) are so divided among themselves in this point, as is incredible, especially to him that heareth the fawning flattery of Sir F. to her Majesty in his watchword, and knoweth not what his doctors do hold and practise elsewhere to the contrary. For hearken now to his Ministers assertions in this behalf.  
Princes (say they) may be deposed (by the people) if they be Tyrants against God and his truth, 
Knocks in hist. Scot Pag. 78. & 372.  and their subjects are free from their oaths of obedience. Again the people are better than the king and of greater authority, 
Bucchan. de iure reg. pag. 61.13.25.58.40.62. etc.  they have right to bestow their crown at their pleasure, they may arraygne their Prince and depose him: To them it appertaineth to make laws, and to the prince to execute them; they have the same power over the king, that the king hath over any particular person: and it were good, that rewards were publicly appointed by the people for such that kill tyrants, as there are for those that kill wolves and bears.  
Again when the milder sort of Caluinists do object to these rough and ridged brethren of the same sect, 
Objections finely answered.  some places out of scripture, or otherwise to temper this humour, as, that we must obey kings whether they be good or bad: 
Knokes apple. fol. 26.  they answer, it is blasphemy so to say. Again when these object, That God placed evil kings and Tyrants sometimes to punish the people. The others answer: So he doth sometimes private men also to kill them. Moreover when they allege S. Paul, That he commandeth us we should pray for princes, 
●uch. de iure reg. pag. ●7.  1. Tim. 2. The other do answer, we may punish thieves and pray for them also. And when these reply that the same Apostle commandeth expressly, to be obedient to such a prince. 1. Tim. 3. They answer: 
Buch. Ibid. Pag. 50.  That Paul wrote this in the infancy of the Church but if he lived now, he would say otherwise, except he would dissent from himself. 
Ibid. fol. 56.57.  I leave much more that might be alleged to this effect,  
And all this and much more is testified also by a brother of their own, of the softer sort in a book printed at London by public authority in the year 1593. by john wolf, the title whereof was, Dangerous positions, etc. with this posy adjoined unto it out of the epistle of S. Jude: They despise government, and speak evil of them that are in authority. And having given testimony to this which I have cited, & much more, he giveth his censure of others also of the same profession beyond the sea: 
Lib. 1. Pa. 12.  This new divinity (saith he) of dealing thus with Princes is not only held by Knocks and Bucchanan alone (that are Scots) but generally (for aught I can learn) by most of the chief consistorians beyond the seas being of the Genevian humour, as Caluyn, Beza, Hot●mā, etc.  
And the same writer in his second book, afterward doth show at large how that Mr. Goodman, Mr. Whittingham, and other English Protestants that fled to Geneva in Q. Mary's days have left written the same, & far worse positions against the authority of princes, as in their books, and in the foresaid collection of this author may be read.  
Here then these matters being so, and of so great weight, and the contradiction being open and notorious concerning princely authority and obedience thereunto belonging, what will our knight say here, or how will he defend unity in verity to be among his brethren in this so principal & capital a point, or how will he satisfy her Majesty her●n after all his fair speech? for he doth not deny the Puritans to be his brethren (as O. E. doth afterward) but rather defendeth them with main and might, as after you shall hear.  
But if we leave the Prince and come to Bishops, which is the second principal member of their church and body, their disagreement is much more notorious, then in the former. For as the protestant speaketh honourably of them, so doth the Puritan quite contrary: calling them; 
Dangerous posit. lib. 20. cap. 12.  the greatest and most pestilent enemies that the state of England hath, unlawful, false, & bastardly governors of the church, thrust in by ordinance of the devil, petty antichrists, cogging & cozening knaves, profane, paltry, pernicious, pestilent Prelates, in respect of their places, enymyes of God, their calling mere Antichristian, etc. And this for their bishops and chief pastors, whom they ought to presume according to S. Paul's speech to be put over them (if any be) by the holy Ghost, 
Calvinian contradiction about the Bish. & chief Pastors.  Act. 20. But if they be enemies of God, cogging knaves, petty Antichrists, and ordained by the devil himself (as these their own children and brethren say and swear) then are English protestants well directed by them, and to a good end will they come. But let us hear what they say of their immediate pastors and teachers, I mean their ministers and present clergy.  
Our supposed ministers (say they) are a multitude of desperate and forlorn Atheists, 

Ibid cap. 13. Of their ministers.  
Ibid. cap. 11.   accursed, uncircumcised, and murdering generation. The clergy is endighted as the followers of Antichrist; they are wolves; it is a synagogue of Satan, their only endeavour how to prevent Christ, they are known to be enemies unto all sincerity, 
Posir. ibid. li. 2. cap. 4.  etc. And in another place: Right puissant, poisoned, persecuting and terrible priests: The holy league of subscripsion, the crew of monstrous and ungodly wretches, horned masters of the conspiration house, Antichristian, swinish rabble, the convocation of devils under Beelzebub of Canterbury chee●e of devils, etc. Thus of them.  
And concerning the whole government, face, 
Ibid. cap. 4.  and corpse of the Church of England, they say: Antichrist reigneth amongst us; the established government of the Church is treaterous against the Majesty of jesus Christ, it giveth leave to a man to be any thing but a sound Christian, etc. And this of their whole Church parts and pastors thereof.  
But I let pass what these fellows say & write of her Majesty, 
About the QUEEN'S council and parliament.  head of their Church, denying wholly her ecclesiastical authority, and subjecting her to their private excommunications when they please, 
Dang. posi●. lib. ●.  etc. Of the Lords of her privy Counsel also, charging them not to deal in matters ecclesiastical. Of the Parliament in like manner and laws made thereby (which in England is the highest court) saying in particular thereof; 
Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 1.  that as great indignity is offered unto jesus Christ, in committing his English Church unto the government of the common laws, as for hirelings under any great king to commit his beloved spouse unto the direction of the mistress of the stews, etc.  
Finally of their common book of service and administration of Sacraments established by Parliament, 
The comm●̄ book of Protestants.  (wherein by name Sir F. in this reply braggeth so confidently, 
Waste. Pag. 12.  that their is so great unity amongst them) these his brethren write thus: 
Dang. posit. lib. 2. cap. 9  There prescript form of service is full of corruption in all the order of their service, there is no edification but confusion, The Sacraments are wickedly mangled and profaned, they eat not the Lords supper, but play a pageant of their own to blind the people, their public baptism is full of childish and superstitious to●es, etc.  
All these fights, wars and dissensions in most principal points of their religion are at this day in England between ridged or straight Caluinists (commonly called Puritan) and the softer ●ort of the same Calvinian sect, who are distinguished from the others by the name of moderate Protestants, that do follow, for their rule of faith and religion, the prescript of Parliament, and her Maties. proceed.  
But now besides this contrariety of positions, there is yet another dissension among these brethren, more important than all the rest, which is their disagreeing, and capital enmity about the interpretation of Scriptures, 
War in expounding scriptures.  whereunto all matters being by both their judgements to be referred, and all other judges and trials left a side, as they require, they come to fall out presently about the sense and interpretation, wherein it is affirmed by their own writers, that so many men, so many minds and so many divers interpretations among themselves of the self-same words of scripture, are to be found, as you may see set down at large in another book of the softer Caluinists set forth by the same public authority as the former, and entitled A survey of the pretended holy Discipline imprinted at London An. 1593. especially in the 31. Chapter, whose title is this. How and with what disagreement they wrist and misconstrue the scriptures, etc. Where having showed by many examples that five or six divers interpretations are given sometimes upon one and the self same sentence of scripture, by these his puritan brethren. He addeth further these words. 
Survey. c. 31. Caterbraulis. of Protestant's and Puritans.  Unto these Caterbraules and pitiful distractions, (which now I have showed) I might add a great heap of other confusions, all proceeding from such intolerable presumption, as is used, by perverting and false interpretation of the sacred Scriptures. And again, whosoever doth deal with the Scriptures in this sort, (as these fellows do) well may he speak proud things, exalt himself, promise mountains, brag of the Prophets, & Apostles, but in the end all cometh to nothing, etc.  
Lo here what this brother saith of the rest, of the caterbraules, and pitiful distractions from them, of their intolerable presumption in perverting, and false interpreting scriptures, of their swelling pride, in bragging of having the prophets, and Apostles on their side, when they have nothing but vanity, & yet these brags of scriptures, prophets and Apostles, must be good and currant proof, when they deal with us against the authority of the universal Church, as you shall see by O.E. in the next Chapter, and when we tell them of any division among themselves, they will deny it on all hands, as Sir F. doth here of the Puritans, and O. E. afterward, though he hath written against them most spitefully and doggedly (for he hath no other style as it seemeth) and finally let all men judge but especially the reader, whom it most importeth for his instruction, with what truth, and conscience Sir F. can say and write as he doth (matters standing as I have showed) that not only the professors of their gospel in England, but all other Churches also in Christendom, where the gospel is embraced are of one judgement, and thereupon conclude with this hypocritical prayer to mock God withal, And in this blessed unity grounded upon verity the Lord for ever keep us. Whereunto I say also amen, so long as they remain enemies to God's Catholic Church wherein only verity and unity is to be found.   

AN ANSWER TO three fond objections, or interrogations of Sir F. with an addition about O. E. who is called up again to the stage to tell his opinion about this first blessing of unity in verity. CAP. VII.  
AND this now might be sufficient for refutation of this first ridiculous blessing set down by the knight were it not that I am forced to follow him, yet a little further, into an other point, which is, that he forcing how albeit this first blessing of unity among them could be proved (as it cannot) yet might it not be alleged for a peculiar blessing of his men, except it could be showed also, that it were singular to them alone, and not common also to Catholics, before they, and their religion sprung up, for if we had unity also in faith before them, than cannot unity be accounted their blessing, more than ours, for which cause he endeavoureth to show, that Catholics had no unity of faith before Luther's gospel began, which paradox he will needs prove by three grave interrogations, which I pray you note, and thereby observe the man's singular wit, and learning.  
You vaunt (saith he) of a general unity before alteration of religion, 
Pag. 13.  but how worshipped you one God, when you worshipped so many Idols? To this I answer that if we worshipped Idols, 
Three fo●d interrogations ●f the K.  and so were idolaters, this error was so universally received among us, as even in this point also we had unity, which protestants cannot show in their errors, and falsityes, as before hath been declared. And so this question is both idle, and easy to answer, for the consequent, but for the antecedent it is most false, for we deny that any Idols were among Catholics. 
August. de utilitate ieiunij tomo 9 ●ub finem. S. Hier. in c. 6. Amos & in c. ●2. Ose.  S. Augustine's and S. Hieroms sentence is clear and sound, as before hath been noted that heretics are the Idolaters of the new Testament, for adoring their own fancies.  
Secondly he asketh again, how we could have unity, when as we were so miserably rend into innumerable sects of friars, and monks? To which I answer, that all these professed one faith without any difference in any one article of belief. And consequently this question is more simple than the former, for that difference of habits, or particular manner of life breaketh not unity of religion.  
Thirdly he asketh, and urgeth yet more sharply, how can you have one head of your Church, unless you reject Christ, that is the only head? To this I will answer out of his own words, that we can have one external, and ministerial head under Christ by the same reason, that himself in the same place saith, that English Protestants have one head of their Church, which is Christ the Lord, and his substitute anointed their Sovereign Q. under him. So that if it do not exclude Christ among the Protestants to have a woman head of their Church under Christ, much less doth it exclude Christ among us, to have a man head, & a Priest head, & of this reason I am content to make any man judge.  
And with this I will end my treatise of the first benediction of unity in verity, which is as truly, and fitly applied to Protestants, as if a man should assign it for a special blessing of Greeks and Germans above other nations, never to exceed in drinking, or of those of Guinea, never to fall out, or fight among themselves, who never lightly are occupied in other things.  
And lastly I will close up all with the sentence, and prophecy of no worse a man then Martin Luther himself, 
Luther's prophesy of Protestants. comment in Psalm. 5.  who writeth thus, Certè non alia ratione confligit Deus cum haereticis, quam ut inter illos existat factiosus quidam dissensionis spiritus; ex ●llorum enim discordia interitus quoque & perditio consequitur. Truly God doth not fight by any other means with heretics, then by permitting among them a certain seditious spirit of dissension, by which their overthrow also and perdition doth ensue. Thus said Luther a man full of your ghost and extraordinarily enlightened which the spirit of protestants; whose Father and founder he was, and he speaketh of you and yours in particular to wit, Zwinglians & Caluinists & therefore you may believe him if you will, and thus much to the K. about this controversy now to his champion the martial Minister.  
I dismissed from the stage some two or three chapters passed (if you remember) sir F. his proctor O.E. to ken a new his part against he should be called upon again, 
O. E. is called up to the stage.  now his cum cometh in to say a word or two more, and so we must needs make him room though very briefly, for he hath little or no matter of substance at all to entertain us withal in this place.  
First then albeit he holdeth and affirmeth resolutely as the knight doth that on his side there is no division at all of any moment in matters of Religion, but that all disagreement is among us, 
unity no blessing with O. E.  yet doth he not put this unity of his people in the Catalogue of his blessings received by the new gospel, and this perhaps for that he having written so eagerly against the Puritans (as he is said to have done) he dareth not admit them now so easily to the union of brethren, as Sr. F. doth, who is held for a great proselyte or rather patron of theirs, which matter shall be discussed more particularly afterward in this Encounter. Now we are to treat only of this first benediction of unity among Protestants, whereunto, (as I said) the Minister vouchsafeth not to give any place in his list of benedictions, though it have the first and chiefest in that of S.F. from whom this honest man differeth not a little though both agree in the number of ten. 
Pag. 4.  Let us hear this man's Role, he saith that his blessings are of two sorts spiritual, and temporal, six of the one sort, and four of the other, the spiritual are these, as he recounteth them. 
O.E. his decalogue of blessings.  1. deliverance from the Pope's decretals 2. Scriptures in English, 3. true administration of Sacraments, 4. true worship of Christ, 5. freedom from persecution. 6. abolishing of Roman Rites. The temporal are. 1. deliverance from the thraldom of Spaniards. 2. abolishing of the Pope's exactions. 3. peace restored to the land, 4. the strength of the Realm greatly increased.  
This is his decalogue of blessings, whereby if no other argument were of the disagreeing spirit of these fellows among themselves, this might serve for one, to consider the difference between this list, and that of Sr. F. (which yet must needs be presumed that this man had viewed, the same having been published so long before his) for if you compare them together, you shall find singular ●arring in so short a matter, 
Disagreeing in the names and qualities of blessings.  for that five or six of Sr. F. Blessings are quite left out by the Minister, to wit, unity in verity, public prayer in English, abundant exercise of good works, power in foreign countries, and multitude of subjects sevenfold increased. The first spiritual also and the 2. temporal are all one, and the 5. spiritual of freedom of persecution seemeth rather temporal, then spiritual.  
And on the other side the knights head conceived not perhaps that the abolishing (for example) of Roman Rites, was a distinct blessing from the other of deliverance from the Pope's authority, and decreetals, as the Minister maketh it, or that their true administration of Sacraments, and their true worshipping of Christ (being general points) could enter into the rank of particular blessings, more than all the rest of their religion, or lastly that the deliverance from Spaniards may be accounted an effect of the English gospel, having been also in so many ages before, when England was Catholic, for which cause he omitted these blessings in his Catalogue, but finally these are arbitrary matters, and devices of their own brains, & therefore no marvel though each man have his own.  
And this is so much in effect as we have to hear from Oedipus our Minister at this time, about this first and chief blessing of Sr. F. which this man disavoweth as you have seen, though yet as, I have noted a little before when we come to the point to urge him with dissension among his people, he denieth it flatly, and braveth more than any other, for hear his words in this place, speaking of the warders speech about their division. Where the warder saith he, affirmeth that we are divided not only from the general body of Catholics in Christendom, but also from ourselves, he telleth us his own dream, and fancies, fleeting in his idle brain without any ground or truth.  
Lo here (good reader) his resolute answer, but whether I have any ground of truth or no, thou hast seen in the former three or four chapters about their divisions and when thou hearest such desperate devyals of all grounds, & withal seest on the other side so many and great, grounds, it may frame a judgement in thee of their manner of proceeding, and of their resolution to break wilfully through what hedge or wall of truth soever standeth between them, or in their way.  
And yet I cannot but warn thee also in this place for this whole book, and once for all, that never lightly shall it be found that this cogging Minister, alleging my words, doth allege them truly, and sincerely, but altereth, leaveth out, or addeth at his pleasure, though on the other side he putteth them down in different letter, as mine own precisely, & if I would number his knacks in this kind, throughout his reply I should make of this point only a whole volume, yet shall I give a note here and there when the matter cometh to purpose as here now thou mayst take a taste, for I said in the Wardword. 
Pag. 4.  We English of the new profession are not only different, and divided from the general body of Catholics in Christendom with whom we were united before, but also among ourselves, and with other new sectaries sprung up with us, and after us, 
False and fraudulent alleging adversaries words.  we have implacable wars, and are divided in opinions, as with Lutherans in Germany and Denemarke, from Swinglians, in Switzerland from Caluinists in Geneva, France, Holland, Scotland, which words if you consider them do make a more plain and full sense, than those that the Minister pleaseth to repeat, suppressing, and leaving out so much as he thinketh may explain, or mollify matters, as hear the words, we English professing the new gospel are de●ided from the general body of Catholics in Christendom, with whom we were united before, etc. all these words I say which go in a different letter he wilfully put out, and then in steed of my saying, that we are divided among ourselves, he saith from ourselves, which maketh a far different sense th●n among ourselves: and so using these shifts in every place, matter, sentence, and almost period and line which he allegeth of mine, you may guess to what bulk it may arise in the whole work, and what certainty, the reader may have of any thing that is alleged by him, and that these false lads, by these corruptions, and shifts, do endeavour, not to establish any truth at all, but to fill all with doubts, and diffidence, and so much of this beer for that afterwards occasion will be offered to return to some of this treatise again. Now then let us pass on to the remnant of Sr. F. Blessings.   

OF THE SECOND AND third blessings, which are, reading of scriptures and public service in English. CAP. VIII.  
HOw true the former first blessing hath been of unity in verity we have sufficiently (I think) declared; 
Conditions of true blessings.  Now follow the other nine about which we must remember that which before hath been touched to wit, that to prove them peculiar and special blessings of Protestants, it must be showed that they were not among Catholics before, and then also that they are matters of such weight and moment as they do or may deserve the name of blessings, and yet further that they are truly found in deed in Protestants doctrine, and not feigned or supposed by our knights only fancy or imagination, and lastly that they are general and universal to the whole Church of Protestants, and so according to these four conditions, and circumstances of true blissing we shall examine the rank of them that do ensue, & in this chapter some 2. or 3. of them severally.  
Wherefore to come to the matter, he saith that his second blessing is, 
The second blessing about reading scriptures in English.  that the scriptures are now in English for every man and woman to read, etc. This blessing, say I, hath not the ●ormer conditions required, for first it is not general to all, seeing that such as understood the latin tongue before, receive no blessing hereby, nor yet those that had licence before under the Catholics from their ordinaries and pastors (for that was always permitted as the world knoweth) to read scriptures in the English tongue have received any blessing thereby, so that this benediction must needs be restrained to those people alone, that being simple and ignorant of the latin tongue, were accounted before by their pastors and Prelates unfit to profit by such reading of scriptures at their pleasure in their vulgar tongue, but rather had need to be instructed otherwise, and to have so much scripture delivered to them by other means of catechisms, homiles, preachings and such like instructions, as they were capable of, without laying open to them the whole corpse of scriptures to construe and misconstrue as their fancies should afford them.  
This was the censure and judgement of the Catholic Church before Protestants arose, which course our knight calleth darkness an● blindness, and the contrary course of permitting scriptures to all without distinction he 〈◊〉 needs have to be a singular blessing brought in by his men, 
Of divers that perished by reading scriptures in vulgar Languages.  but yet I would ask him, wha● blessing it was to such as fell into heresies an● perished thereby, that of likelihood would no● have happened unto them, if that liberty & freedom of reading scriptures in English ha● not been permitted.  
And I gave for example of this in the ward●word, an instance of one joane Bourcher (alias knel) in king Edward's days, 
Stow anno 1549 Edowardi 6. reg. anno. 3.  who being a simple woman, but yet heady and wilful by reading scriptures in English learned to hold and defend that Christ had not takan flesh of his mother the virgin, In like manner I ask, was it a blessing to the tanner of Colchester her copsmate, 
Stow Ibid.  who picked out of reading scriptures that Baptism was worth nothing, & so held to his death, affirming that he could defend the same by plain and evident scriptures, so as neither Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury, nor the rest of the Protestants in those days (who had taught them to read scriptures) could conquer, or convert them by scriptures, but were fain to burn them with fire for the good effect proceeding of this their own blessing (if it be a blessing) whereby all are permitted, and invited to read scriptures in English.  
George Paris also a simple duitchman was burned by the said Archbishop in the same king's reign, 
Stow & Holinsead Ibid.  for holding, that Christ was not equal to his Father which he avouched to have learned out of the sacred bible, that he had studied in his own language, and could not be driven from it by any disputation of Cranmer, Rydley, or any other our English ministers, but only by the fire, which at length they used, to convert him into ashes.  
In this Queen's days also at the very beginning when scriptures were first published in English, 
Stow. anno 1561. Reg 3. Elizab.  William Geffrey and john More did read so earnestly, and interpret so soundly as they learned to hold, and affirm, that Christ was not in heaven, & were whipped publicly for the same, until they confessed the contrary: so as the reading scriptures in English was no blessing to these men but only a blessing with a whip as you will confess.  
In the 17. year also of her majesties reign, when 27. Anabaptists vulgar people were apprehended together, 
Stow an. 1575. & 1576.  and punished in London by order of the L. Matthew Parker of Canterbury, for denying Christ to have taken flesh, and other such opinions, and two of them burned in Smythfeild, and five others of the family of love, brought in public penance at Paul's cross for heresies, who all avouched notwithstanding, that they had drawn their new doctrine out of the reading of scriptures in the vulgar tongue, what blessing I pray you was this to them, or to such other as have fallen into other sects since that time, both of Brownisme, Puritanisme, & other fancies condemned by the Protestants themselves, & detested by the present state of England, which yet they had never done (by all likelihood) if this public reading of scriptures without restraint or due moderation had not been permitted to the ignorant: 
Sisters of London in the survey of dang●erous positions.  Those busy sisters of London also, and other cities whereof the late protestant writers do so much complain in their books against Puritans, who gad up & down with English bibles under their arms, and will defend any thing against any man out of scriptures, would not so much have troubled either themselves, their husbands or the common wealth if this blessing had not been permitted to them, or if it may be accounted a blessing, and not a cursing that maketh both them and other ignorant people so mad and frantic in heresy.  
So as now it is to be considered, whether the blessing of Catholics be greater, among whom this promiscuous liberty of reading scriptures in vulgar tongues is not permitte●, but rather moderated by choice of persons, or else the new fashion of protestants permitting all to all sorts without exception or difference either of sexes, condition, capacity age, ability, or other fitness, & when this point is well pondered I think Sir F. his second blessing will prove a very poor one, even in the judgement of those that be wise & discreet of his own profession. But let us go forward to the third for of this we shall have occasion to speak again in the 2. Encounter more largely. 
Encount. 2. cap. 7. & 8.   
His third blessing is, that they have not only the Scriptures, 
The ●, blessing of public service in English.  but also their common Church service in a vulgar tongue; the weight of which blessing may in part be pondered by that which hath been said about his second: for if the necessity or Scriptures in the English tongue to every particular man & woman be so small as before hath been showed (many thousands both protestants and others being within the land even at this day that cannot or do not read them, and yet may be saved, as I think he will not deny) and that to some the reading also hath been pernicious and not a blessing bu● rather cursing through their own insufficiency (as by former examples I have showed) much less necessity is there of public service in vulgar tongues, seeing that public service is appointed to be said or sung to the praise of God and in the name of all the people by public Priests and other ecclesiastical officers appointed thereunto, nor is it needful always for the people to be present at it, bu● only in spirit and consent of heart, nor when they be present to intermeddle with that function, but rather to attend each one to their private devotions, as we read of Zacharias the priest Father to S. john Baptist of whom S. Luke the Evangelist writeth: that according to the custom of Priesthood in those days he went up into the temple when his lot came to offer public incense, adding as concerning the people, 
Luc. ●.  Et omnis multitudo populi erat orans foris hora incensi. All the multitude of the people did pray without; during the time of his incense, that is to say, while he performed his office of public Sacrifice, the people stood a loof and prayed by themselves, whereby we may perceive that the people in time of public service and sacrifice among the jews (in place whereof S. Augustine saith that Christ hath appointed his sacrifice of the Mass among Christians) did not intermeddle in the public service, 
Aug lib 17. de ciui● c. 20. Leo serm. ●. de Passion.  but attended to their own devotions a● is now in custom in Catholic countries, except only in certain hymns, litanies, processions, or other such part of the service as is generally to be performed by al.  
Whereof it followeth that it is not necessary that all public service in Christian Churches should be in the vulgar tongues of every nation & country, 
Not necessary for the common people to understand the public service.  nor do we read that ever it was ordinarily but in the three learned languages of Hebrew, Greek and Latyn: sanctified by Christ in the title of his Cross, nor is it convenient (as ancient Fathers do testify) that all things which are handled in Church service praesertim in sacris misterijs (to use their words) should be understood by all unlearned people in their own vulgar languages, 
Dion. lib. de Eccles. Hierarch cap. 1. Orig hom. 5. in numerum. Basil lib. de spiritu sancto ca 27. Chrys. hom. 24. in Matth Greg. lib 4. Dialog. cap. 56.  and so doth teach both S. Dionysius scholar to S. Paul, Origen, S. Basil, S. Chrysostome, S. Gregory & other Fathers, for which reverent respect it is like among other causes, that the said common Church service hath ever been used in one of the said learned tongues.  
As for example in jury itself and Jerusalem it is evident that the public service was in the Hebrew tongue, 
Common service in jury not in vulgar tongue.  which yet was not the vulgar tongue, nor understood commonly by the people without an interpreter as appeareth lib. 2. Esdrae. cap. 8.  
And that the Syrian tongue was the vulgar language of the jews in Christ's time appeareth clearly by the words Talitha cumi, 
Marc. 5. Matth. 27. Marc. 14.  hacheldema, golgatha, Pascha, abba and other such, recorded by the Evangelists, which are no Hebrew, but only Syriac words, as all learned men know.  
And as for the Apostles themselves after Chri●t though they had the gift of all languages, and did both found Churches over all the world, and appointed them their order of service and other points necessary thereunto belonging, as both by their own writings, and other Apostolical Authors ensuing after them, 
Rom. 10. Coloss. 1. Irenaeus li. 1. cap. 3.  is evident, yet shall we never read that they wrote to any of these particular nations or to their Churches in vulgar languages but only in one of the three former tongues, as hath been said.  
Neither can it be showed out of any Author of Antiquity whatsoever, that any Christian Catholic country since the Apostles time had public service in any language but in one of those three except by some special dispensation from the Pope and upon special consideration for some limited time.  
But on the contrary we can show innumerable testimonies out of all Antiquity for the use of one of these three tongues (for reading of Scriptutes and public service of every nation. 
Service in Greek. ) As of the Greek tongue in Syria, 
Hieron. praefat in 〈◊〉. Epi●t. ad G●●●.  Cappadocia, Egypt and almost in all other the east parts which was not yet their vulgar tongue as appeareth by S. Hierome in many places showing that the Greek edition of the Scriptures by the 70. interpreters was only in use in all those places. 
Aug. lib ●. Doct. Christ. c. 13. & lib. de bon. perseue●an. cap. 13.  And S. Augustine testifieth for Africa, that the psalms in his time were wont to be song in the Church in the Latyn tongue, and the same Author also in an other place, repeating the words used in the preface of the Mass at that day, (which are the very same we have now) to wit sursum corda, habemus ad Dominum▪ Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro, dignum & justum est, etc. doth evidently declare that the latin Mass was used in his time, though yet the Latyn tongue in Africa was not understood by the vulgar people. 
Latyn service.   
And the like hath S. Cyprian about the same Latyn preface of the mass in his time at Carthage many years before S. Augustine was borne. 
Cypr. ser. de. orat. Dom.   
And as for other particular countries S. 
Isyd lib. 2. de divini efficijs.  Isydorus a Spaniard testifieth for Spain almost a thousand years past that the Church service in his time was there in Latyn, 
Conc. 4. Tolet. cap. 2.11.13.14.  And the fourth council of Tolet about the same time testifieth the same.  
And for France testifieth the same our great learned Englishman Alcuinus M. 
Alcuin. li. de diu. office  of Charles the great about the year of Christ 840. 
Bede lib. 1. hist. Angl. cap. 1.  And for England testifieth Beede before him; as after shall be showed; and no man can doubt but that S. Augustine our first Apostle brought in our first service from Rome in Latyn. 
Raban lib. 2. de institue. clericorum. Rupert. lib c. de di●inis off●●●js.  And for Germany testifieth Rabanus Archb. of Moguntia above 700. years past, and Rupertus Abbas some ages after him again. And the same might be showed particularly of all other particular countries by ancient Authors of the same nations and times.  
Wherefore if the rule of S. Augustine often by him repeated be true, 
Aug. lib. 4. contra Donatist. cap 24.  which is, that when anything is found generally observed in the Catholic Church and no beginning to be found thereof that this cometh most certainly from the Apostles by tradition. And if his other sentence be also true, 
Aug. epist. 13●.  where he saith disputare contra id quod universa Ecclesia facit insolentissimae insaniae est. It is a point of most insolent madness to dispute against that which the universal Church doth practise: If this I say be true and that the general practice of the Christian world be evident in this behalf for using one of these 3. learned tongues only in public service & public use of scriptures what shall we say of the insolency or madness of Sr. F. & his fellows that not only will dispute and prattle against this practice and custom of the universal Church, but also will make the breach thereof a peculiar blessing, whereas notwithstanding those that pass from country to country & do find the service in particular vulgar languages which they understand nothing at all, must needs account it rather for a curse then a blessing to have it in those utterly unknown vulgar languages, seeing that every man lightly understandeth somewhat of the Latyn either by learning or use because it is common to all and taught in every country but not so of every vulgar language out of the country where it is native, & this much of this first point or part of my answer.   

THE SECOND PART of the answer about Church service in English, containing some authorities alleged for it but much corrupted and abused by the knight. CAP. IX.  
BUT now remaineth the second part which is to examine what the Kt. bringeth for proof of this imagined blessing. And first he allegeth and urgeth much the authority of S. Hierome who said of his time (as this man citeth him) that Tota Ecclesia instar toni●rui reboat, 
Hieron. prol lib. 2. in com●●t. in Gal.  Amen. the whole Church like a thunder did sound out Amen, by which words he would infer, that therefore the public service was in vulgar tongues in S. Hierome time, but mark (good reader) by this one example (if there were no more) the fraudulent manner of these men's aleadging Fathers. For first this speech of S. Hierome is of the Church of Rome, (as after shall be proved) where no man can doubt, but that the service was in Latyn and consequently the example is evil brought to prove service in a vulgar language, and secondly it is no marvel though the people sounded out Amen, in Rome where most men understood the Latyn tongue and those that did not, yet might they easily understand by use what the word, Amen. signifieth and when it is to be used. And I would ask of our K. whether our Church also in England (where yet the Latyn tongue is not so common as in Rome) did not sound out Amen, in Queen mary's days and other Catholic timer in the mass, and other service, when it was in Latyng Will any deny this, but either an ignorant or impudent man? Let him go but over sea to Paris, where the vulgar tongue is French, and hear what the Catholic people do sound out in the public service though it be not in their vulgar language? 
Beed. lib. 1. hist. Angl. ca ● & 20.  Let him read S. Beed above 800. years agone, who writing of our Church of England, & showing first that the use of public service in his days was in the Latyn tongue, (as afterward is proved more at large) rehearseth a notable story, 
Enc. 2. cap. 4.  how S. Germanus & S. Lupus, french Catholic Bishops called in by Catholic Britanes against heretics, did set forth a certain army against the Pelagians and other Infidels, and got the victory by repeating the word Allelu●a sounded out like a thunder (as he saith) by all the Catholic army.  
And yet I do not think that S. F. will go about to prove by this Argument, that all that Army understood the Lat●n tongue, or else the Hebrew for that Alleluia is an Hebrew word, and no mo●e doth it prove that the Roman Church had their service in a vulgar tongue understood by all for that they sounded out Amen, and so much of this.  
But now we are further to consider of a notorious fraud of the K. 
False dealing in alleging S. Hierome.  in this place for that as he & his do never lightly allege any Father or Doctor for their purpose without some shefte or imposture (the Father's being wholly and every where against them) so here S. Hieromes text & whole discourse being quite contrary to him, he durst not allege the whole sentence but culled out the words alleged and framed them to his purpose. Tota Ecclesiae instar tonitrui reboat, Amen. which words stand not in S. Hierome as he allegeth them, but are altered and patched up by him, to make them seem in his favour, leaving out craftily both that which goeth immediately before, & presently doth follow, for that they made against him and his who●e cause of protestants religion, which here I shall explain.  
S. Hierome in his proem cited of his second book upon the Epistle to the Galathians cited here by the knight taketh an occasion to show unto the two Virgins Paula and Eustochium (to whom he dedicated his book) why S. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans praised so much their faith: 
Rom. 16.  His words in latin are these. 
S. Hieron. proemio lib. 2 comment. ad Gal.  Romanae plebis laudatur sides: ubi alibi tanto study & frequentia ad Ecclesias, & ad martyrum sepulchra concurritur? Vbi sic ad similitudinem caelesti● toni●rui Amen reboat. The faith of the people of Rome is praised by the Apostle. For where in any other place of the world do the people run with so great diligence and concourse unto the Churches and sepulchres of Martyrs as in Rome? where do they so much sound out the word Amen, to the likeness of an heavenly thunder?  
Hear now we see the Romans faith highly praised by S. 
The Catholic devotion of Rome.  Hierome and proved to be more excellent then of any other Christians in the world for their earnest devotion and running to Churches and sepulchres of martyrs, this if Sir F. had put down sincerely as it lieth in S. Hierome it would have marred his market, and given a great buffet to his religion as you see, specially if he had added the words immediately following in S. Hierome, 
S. Hier. Ibid.  which are these. Non quod altam habeant Romani fidem, nisi hanc, quam omnes Christi Ecclesiae, sed quod devotio in e●s maior sit & simplicitas ad credendum. The faith of Rome is specially praised by the apostles above others, not for that the Romans had a different faith from that which all other Churches of Christ do hold, but that their devotion, and simplicity in believing was greater than the rest.  
By which words is evident, first that in S. Hieromes time the Roman faith was accounted the general Catholic faith of all Christendom which Roman faith (as after more largely shall be demonstrated) was sent into Britain by Pope Eleutherius before S. Hieromes time, 
Enc. 7. c. 6.7.  & after his time brought into England again by S. Augustine the monk at S. Gregoryes appointment, so as twice we have had communication & participation of this Romayn faith so higlie commended by S. Paul and S. Hierome.  
secondly it is to be noted that the things most praised in the Roman faith by S. Hierome are two points most scorned at by our Protestants, to wit simplicity in believing without disputing or curiously ask reasons, and secondly promptenes of devotion in visiting Churches, martyrs sepulchres and the like: for which two points of simplicity in believing and devotion S. Hierome is of opinion that S. Paul did so specially commend the Romans in his days; which points being so far different from the judgements and affections of the protestants of our days, no marvel though Sir F. here would not let us see S. Hieromes whole sentence, but a piece only cut out, as he thought best, for his purpose, and yet this piece also not truly nor faithfully alleged, as now shall be showed.  
And this is one principal point to be considered (gentle reader) for thy instruction in these men● manner of dealing how many ways the poor shifting knight hath altered this little poor latin sentence of S. Hierome to make it sound somewhat to his purpose, 
S. Hieromes text abused.  to wit, Tota Ecclesia instar tonitrui reboat Amen. Adding first of his own the two first words, Tota Ecclesia, which are not in S. Hierome, & then changing ad similitudinem (which S. Hierome useth) into instar, and leaving out the word caelestis, found in S. Hierome and lastly separating and cutting of the whole from the precedent and consequent sentence, and true sense as hath been showed, so as in six words four at least have received alteration or imposture. And yet we know that both in reason and custom when any sentence is alleged first in latin and then in English as this is by him, the former at least should be exact, and in the Authors own words, but necessity giveth this liberty to Sir F. to clip and cut, trifle and cavil as he may; let us see yet further.  
There followeth in his reply another text alleged out of S. Augustin to the same purpose for proving public Church service to be in vulgar tongues, 
Psalm. ●●.  expounding these words of the Psalm. Beatus populus q●● intell●g●t iubilationem, 
August. sup. psalm. 99  which words our K. interpreteth thus: Blessed is the people that understandeth the joyful song.  
And further addeth out of the same Father this exhortation upon the same words. 
S. Augustine's words falsely applied.  Cur●amus ergò ad hanc beatitudinem, intelligamus iubilati●nem, non èam sine intellectu fundamus. Let us run to this blessedness, let us understand this jubilation, let us not power it out without understanding. All which being meant most plainly of inward understanding and feeling of blessed ●oy within our hearts, this gross interpreter will needs transfer all to outward crying singing and chanting of Geneva Psalms in their Churches, and for this cause translateth falsely the words, intelligamus iubilationem non eam sine intellectu fundamus. Let us understand the song, let us not sing it without understading, as though al● were meant by singing in vulgar known tongues for that the word understanding is so often repeated, which yet is as ●arre of from S. augustine's? true meaning and whole drift in that place, as if the knight would infer also that because he useth the word Curramus let us run, he would defend thereby running games in England, or running at bases or prison bars in Churcheyards as young people are wont to do, for that the holy Father in that place handling these words of the Psalm. 99 
August. Ibid. initio.  jubilate Deo universa terra, let the whole earth rejoice to God, says first. Non ho●ta●ur velut aliquem unum angulum terrae, etc. The spirit of God doth not exhort any one corner of the world, or any one habitation or congregation of men, to jubilate and rejoice unto him, but for that he knoweth that he hath sowed his benediction every where▪ he requires this jubilation every where also. These are S. Augustine's words, and let the reader judge whether these be spoken of any corporal singing psalms or saying service in particular Churches and congregations or rather of inward jubilation of spirit which S. Augustine, expressly meaneth, and for confirmation thereof he allegeth also those words before cited out of an other psalm, 
Psalm. ●●.  Beatus populus, qui intelligit iubilationem. Happy is the people that understandeth this jubilation, which word (understandeth) for that our heretic buildeth all his argument thereon) S. Hierome interpreteth novit iubilationem happy is the people that knoweth jubilation, 
S. Hieron. in Psal. ●●.  or as our ordinary latin edition hath, Scit iubilationem knoweth or feeleth jubilation, which later sense also S. Augustine himself followeth in other places reading Sciens iubilationem All which senses the Greek and Hebrew words do bear, that is to say, Happy is that people of God which feeleth inward comfort and spiritual jubilation of heart in his service. Which being so, most fondly and childishly is this text brought in by Sr. F. to prove external singing of psalms in vulgar languages quite contrary to S. Augustine's meaning, words, and sense, as now I shall more particularly declare out of two plain places of the said Father.  
The first is in the very same treatise alleged by our adversary which if as he could not but see it, 
S. Augustine explica●eth himself.  so had he uttered, or not fraudulently concealed the same the question had been out of doubt. 
S. Aug. in Psalm. 9●.  For thus saith S. Augustine. Qui iubilat, non verba dicit, sed sonus quidam est laetinae sine verbis: v●x est enim animi diffusi laetitia exprimentis, quantum potest affectum, non sensum comprehendentis. He that doth jubilate (or hath this jubilation meant by the Prophet) doth not utter any words, for it is a certain sound of inward joy without words: it is, a voice of our mind full of joy, and expressing her affection as much as she can but not attaining to express the full inward feeling thereof.  
Thus doth S. Augustine explicate himself▪ And in an other place more plainly yet, 
A●g. in Psal. ●●.  ask this question quid est intelligas iubilationem▪ what is meant by the Prophet when he willeth thee to understand jubilation? and than answereth; ut scias unde gaudeas quod verbis explicare non possis that thou mayst know whereof to rejoice without being able to express the same in words.  
Lo here the truth of these good fellows that allege us Doctors so flatly against their own words and meaning. 
About the words of S. Paul. 1. Cor. 14. to speak in a knowe● tongue.  And this were sufficient to end this controversy but that the Kt. hath a flourish more out of S. Paul who most divinely (saith he) treateth this matter (in his favour belike) in his first Epistle to the Corinthians & 14. Chapter, And that Cajetan moved by those words of the Apostle thinketh that prayer should be made in vulgar tongues.  
To the first it is evident enough by the place itself, that those words of the Apostle make nothing at all for public service, and that the former parts thereof are plainly spoken of prophesying, & exhortations, when christians did meet in the primitive Church, 
Cypr. epist. ad Pomp. & Qui●inum. Aug lib. 2. d● bapt. cap ●. Basil. quest. breuite● ex●l. q. 27●. Amb in 1. Cor. 1●.  which exhortations to the people he would have in a known language, which all did understand, & not in foreign peregryne tongues which many did speak by gift of the holy ghost. And so do interpret this place S. Cyprian S. Augustine, S. Basil, S. Ambrose and divers other Fathers.  
And in the later part of the Apostles words where he speaketh of praying and singing that it should not be in a peregryne tongue he cannot be understood to speak or mean of public service in the Church, for that this public service was already in the greek tongue at Corinth whether he wrote this Epistle and in no peregrine or strange language but such as was understood by all (all being Grecians) & consequently it had been impertinent in S. Paul to persuade that it should be in a known language, 
S. Paul's true meaning. Paul Eph 5. vers. 20.  wherefore his meaning was of certain spiritual songs which divers inspired by the holy ghost in the Primitive Church did break forth into ex tempore in their meetings of which S. Paul saith to the Ephesians. Be not drunken with wine which leadeth to uncleanness, but be f●l of the holy ghost speaking one to another in psalms and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and rejoicing in your hearts to Christ. 
Col. 3. vers. 16  And again to the Colossians: sing in your hearts to God by his grace in Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.  
These songs therefore coming of abundance of the holy Ghost and o● that inward jubilation of heart before spoken of in the primitive Church, it fell out that some Christians by the gift of tongues, very ordinarily in those days, did utter sometimes these their affections in strange languages, as in the Arabian, Persian, and other like tongues, which neither themselves perhaps, nor others did always understand, and sometimes others interpreting by the same gi●●e of tongues, that which they spoke without understanding, 
●ift of tongues to the first Christians.  as is plain by the text of S. Paul. who therefore for the common consolation of all exhorteth them, to utter their ●eeling and suggestions of the holy Ghost, rather in a known tongue, then in extern languages; and this of private meetings and spiritual rejoicing of those first Christians among themselves.  
But as for public prayer, and reading of scriptures in the Church who knoweth not that they were read in the Hebrew tongue in the Churches, and congregations of jury, and in the Greek tongue among the Corinthians and other Grecian and east Churches, & in Latyn among the Romans as before hath been showed, and no probability that S. Paul did ever mislike the same, & consequently could not mean thereof in this Epistle.  
And though Caietan should have any other singular interpretation or illation of his own in his commentary upon this place, it is far from the meaning of the Apostle, as you have seen and different from the exposition and sense of ancient Fathers whom we are to follow before him yet in the very beginning of the same commentary he hath these words, 
Caet. comment. in cap. 14. 1. Cor.  universus textus iste loquitur propriè de donis linguarum & prophetiae, ut tractando textus ipse testatur. All this text doth speak properly of the gifts of tongues and prophesying as the text itself in handling doth testify, which if it be true, then can nothing for public service in vulgar tongues be proved out of it: & thus much of this.   

OF THE FOURTH AND fift blessings affirmed to have been brought in by Protestants, which are, abundance of good works, & freedom from persecution. CAP. X.  
HAVING been over long in the examination of the former three blessings, 
The fourth blessing good life of Protestants.  I mean to be much shorter in the rest wherefore there followeth the fourth blessing which Sir F. bringeth in, as peculiar to protestants (for otherwise it were no blessing obtained by change of religion) which is the rare and singular good life of Protestant's, called by this blessing bringer, 
Pag. 18.  their exercise in works of true piety, and in his marginal note and rank of blessings, The exercise of true Holiness, which is a strange blessing, if a man consider well of it, that the exercise of good works, and true holiness was brought in only or principally by Protestants of our days, for first the experience of the whole world will deny it, and cry out against it, and secondly there best friends, who speak most of their faith will and do renounce their works as for example, Erasmus among other, 
Fox in the life of Bilney and other first protestants. Erasmi. Ep. ad Carth. apud Surium an. 1●●6.  whom Fox every where would needs make their first founder and favourer though himself deny and detest them after experience had of their lives, saith thus: Neminem vidi meliorem, deteriores omnes. I never saw any made better in life, by this new religion, but all worse. And Luther himself upon his own trial, 
Luth Po●●i●. sup. Dom. ●. Aduent.  both wrote and printed: Mundus fit quotidiè deterior, sunt nunc homines magis immodesti, indisciplinati, multoque deteriores quam fuerunt in Papatu. The world is daily worse, men are now more immodest, more indisciplinable, and a great deal worse than they wear under the Popedom. And Aurifaber, 
Aurif de dictis Luth. Pag. 623.  one of his chief scholars testifieth these words of him, that he was often wont to say, Post revelatum evangelium, virtus est occ●sa, justitia oppressa, temperantia ligata, devotio pulsa, nequitia facta quotidiana. Since the gospel was revealed, virtue of life is slain, justice is oppressed, temperance is bound, devotion is put to flight, wickedness is daily increased: Thus said these men in the very primitive Church of their new gospel, and what our men especially in England may say now of this argument I leave it to common experience to judge.  
And Sir F. lest he should go to far in this matter of good works saith: 
Two cautions of the K. against good works.  we must take heed to avoid two extremities. The first proud presumption before God, that we put no opinion of merit in our works, secondly that before men we avoid all hypocritical ostentation. Lo here good reader, two great perils of good works laid before thee, but no utilityes remembered. Truly I had thought, when I heard him talk of two extremities, that as the one was to attribute to much to good works, so the other should have been to attribute to little, but both are, cautions against good works, and therefore I marvel how they may be called extremities, 
Absurdity.  seeing they may be both in one and the self same man, to wit, presumption & hypocrisy, which yet is against the nature of extremes, if S. F. remember well his Sophistry learned in Oxford.  
But mark I pray you the difference of spirit and Doctrine in these men from holy Scripture, which every where encourageth us exceedingly with the merit and reward of good works, 
Math. 5. Rom 2. 7. Cor; & 9 Coloss 1 1. Timoth 2. jam 2. 2. Pet. 1. 2. Pet. 1.  as also that they should shine before men, whereas our Protestant's are careful to warn us, that they are perilous things, to engender presumption; and ostentation. Whereunto their Father Luther addeth further that they are also pernicious to salvation, which if you ponder well is but a cold exhortation to the exercise of good works, 
Luth. ●om. 2. ●ol 322 & rom 5 in Gal cap. 4. fol. 382.400.  for that if not only they have no merit, but are perilous also for presumption and hypocrisy, yea pernicious sometimes to salvation, and that on the other side our corrupt nature & sensuality flveth them and swayeth to the contrary of her own inward instinct, who will lose his pleasure to labour in them? and consequently it is no marvel, though these fruits grow so thinly upon protestants trees, as their neighbours (I ween) will bear them witness in England.  
And as for Sir F. himself, notwithstanding his protestation afterward, that he would be loath to yield to any Papist whatsoever in this point of good works (seeing it is a peculiar blessing of his people as you see) yet I do not hear nor understand that this blessing doth so abound in him for the practice, 
Sir F. not so famous for good works as he would seem.  as that his tenants, and neighbours will be his witnesses thereunto, especially if the common fame be true of certain things which here I will not name for christian modesty sake, & for respect either of himself, or his family, or of both, though he in his own person little showeth to deserve that respect, not having held the same with others of greater moment, yea princes themselves; but I shall deal more modestly with him, and let him go free from further ●ouch at this time, but for the matter itself concerning him and his in general for good life and works (excepting in particular those that may be excepted) I may conclude as S. Augustine did a little before about the Church that as it is most insolent madness to dispute against that which the whole Church doth practice, so to avouch that of Protestants lives, and good works whereof all countries and nations do see and prove the contrary, and their own authors also do confess (as hath been showed) is little less madness.  
And with this I might end this poor protestant blessing of good works (especially seeing that after again I am to treat of the same subject) but that our knight will needs allege S. Bernard for his former caution against the merit of good works in these words; 
Cap. 15. S. Bernard abused.  Bona opera sunt via regni, non causa regnandi, which he according to his fashion fraudulently expoundeth thus; good works are the way wherein we must walk to the kingdom of heaven, but not the cause wherefore we shall obtain that kingdom, etc.  
Wherein first you must note that he useth here also his foresaid old shift, not to quote the place, or book where we may find this in S. Bernard, lest he should be taken tripping as a little before, about the other two Fathers S. Hierome, & S. Augustine, yet having sought much in S. Bernard at length we find the place in the very end of an excellent treatise he wrote, 
Catholic doctrine about merits of good works.  De gratia & libero arbitrio, showing therein how God's grace doth concur with man's free-will in all meritorious works, by stirring up man's will to work with promise of reward, and strengthening him to the performance thereof by the assistance of his divine grace, in respect whereof, to wit, of the free promise made by God to reward our good works, (whereto he was not bound) and of the preventing, and assisting us by his holy grace to the working of the same, our merits are to be attributed unto him, as to the first and chief efficient cause, and not to ourselves, though our concurrence be necessary thereunto also, and in this sense S. Bernard in the place by our knight alleged having spoken much of the merits of good worke● wrought in Christ, and by the force of his grace, he concludeth thus: Merita nostra sp● quaedam sunt seminaria, 
Bernar. tra●●. de gratia & libero arbitrio ad finem.  charitatis incentivae, occultae praedestinationis indicia, futurae felicitatis praesagia, via regninon causa regnandi: Our merits are certain seeds of hope, inkindlers of charity, signs of secret predestination, foresages or tokens of our felicity to come, the way to the kingdom of heaven, but not the cause of our reigning.  
Thus saith he, and that he meaneth here, by the cause of our reigning the principal efficient cause, and author (which titles are proper only to God, and so attributed by all Catholic writers) and not the secondary instrumental meritorious cause, ascribed by us to good works, is evident, first by the very next immediate words following in S. Bernard upon the former, 
Rom. ●.  Quos iustificavit (saith he) non quos justos invenit, hos & magnificavit; God hath magnified and exalted to his kingdom not those whom he found just of themselves, but whom he by his grace did make just: by which words S. Bernard doth infer that all the merits of our good works together with the reward promised to them, do come originally, and principally from God, and consequently both the one and the other are to be ascribed unto him, as unto the chiefest cause, though also by our voluntary concurrence thereunto, when we are moved by God we have our interest therein, and are truly said to merit life everlasting, which S. Bernard doth explicate most excellently a little before in the same place, his words are these, having spoken first very largely of good works; 
Bernard. ibid.  Verum haec (saith he) cum certum sit divino in nobi● actitar● spiritu, De● sunt munera, quia verò cum nostrae voluntatis assensu, nostra sunt m●rita. Whereas it is certain that these good works (by me before mentyoned) are wrought in us by the spirit of God, they must needs be called the gifts of God, And for that they are done also by the consent of our will they are our merits.  
Thus saith he, and then doth he prosecute the same with a large and learned discourse upon the words of S. Paul to Timothy, where he saith, Bonum certaemen certavi, etc. I have fought a good fight, 
●. Tim. 4.  I have ended my course, I have kept my faith, and for the rest, then is laid up for me a crown of justice, which God the just judge shall restore unto me at that day. Upon which words S. Bernard saith thus: If it be so that the very will of doing good in S. Paul (whereof all merit doth depend) was not his own, but received from God, how doth he call it a crown of justice, which he assureth himself to be laid up for him? is it (perhaps) for that whatsoever is freely promised, it may be justly, after the promise made required as due debt, etc. he saith further; for that S. Paul believed the promiser, he now confidently exacteth the promise, which promise though it were of mercy, yet now it is to be paid of justice, etc. For it is just that God should pay whatsoever he oweth, and he oweth whatsoever he hath promised, etc. and of this justice it pleased God to make Paul a partner, 
justitiae Paulum Deus voluit habere consortem ut & coronae faceret promeritorem. Bern. pag. 1069.  to the end he might make him also a deserver of his crown, and in this he made him both partner of his justice and deserver of his crown, when he vouchsafed to make him his helper or coadjutor in doing good works, whereunto his crown is promised, & further he made him his coadjutor, when he made him to consent to his holy will and motion.  
Lo here how S. Bernard doth connect & join together the operation of God, and cooperation of man in the matter of merit, attributing to God the first and principal motion of grace, mercy, promise, and enabling us to work, and unto man that he concurreth freely by cooperation with, God's instinct, so as the reward of this work, which is the Kingdom of heaven if we respect the first cause which is God, it is mercy, and if we consider the secondary instrumental cause, which is man, & the promise of God made unto him, it is called justice and dew debt, let us hear S. Augustine in the same matter, 
Aug. hom. 14. lib 50. homiliarum. 2. Tim. 4.  and upon the same words of the Apostle: For the rest (saith the Apostle) there remaineth to me a crown of justice, which God the just judge shall restore to me at the last day. Behold he saith that God shall restore a crown unto him, ergo he is his debtor. 
Aug. in Psal. ●●.  And again in another place: unde debtor? accepit aliquid, etc. Whence is God become a debtor? hath he received any thing, or doth he own any thing to any man▪ and yet behold Paul doth hold him for his debtor, saying, God shall restore unto me, etc. what shall he restore unto thee (Paul) but that which he oweth? whence doth he owe any thing unto thee? what hast thou given unto him? Truly God hath made himself a debtor, not by receiving any thing, but by promising, so as it may not be said unto him, restore that which thou hast received, but pay that which thou hast promised.  
Thus do write these holy Fathers, showing how God becometh debiter to the merits of our good works not by their own nature, but by his own voluntary free promise and mercy, yet deny they not the truth of this merit nor blaspheme it as our fond K. doth, saying that it is a proud presumption before God to put any opinion of merit to our works: 
Pag. 19  but you have heard out of the Fathers, how they do not only put opinion of merit in good works, but do plainly affirm and teach it, and that it is due debt, supposing Gods promise made to reward them: Whereof also it followeth, that albeit the saying of S. Bernard be most true in the sense alleged, that our merits be the way to the Kingdom of heaven, but not the cause, speaking of the first and principal cause, yet were those words not truly, but frandulently translated by our K. that they are not the cause, wherefore we shall obtain the Kingdom, as though they were no cause at all, which is false and absurd, for that no man can deny them to be the instrumental meritorious causes of obtaining heaven, seeing God hath promised heaven as a reward unto them, and having promised is bound in justice to preforme the same, as now you have heard by the Fathers declared. And so much of this matter for this place.  
The fift beatitude which this blessing-maker bringeth is freedom from persecution, 
The 5. blessing freedom from persecution.  and as he calleth them halcyon days, when he saith: The little bark of Christ jesus before tossed with the waves and storms of furious and bloody presecution hath found now some repose and rest. 
Pag. 20.  About which blessing I would ask the K. certain questions thereby to come to the truth of the matter & avoid impostures: and first I would ask him, whether this freedom from persecution be common to all, or to some only, that is to protestants: and then whether this be passive or active in them: that is whether they stand out free in themselves or do suffer other men also to be free from persecution, for if it be not a common blessing to all but particular to themselves, then can it not be called a blessing of the land, but of some part within the land. And again if it be passive only and enjoined by themselves and not active, so as they procure nor yield not the same freedom to others, where they may, then is it absurdly called a blessing or benediction, for that thieves also, and the worst men of the world among themselves, or to others of their crew do not use persecution: 
Matth. 12. Marc. 3. Luc. 11.  nay devils also (as Christ signifieth) do not fight one against another, and yet that this is not true in protestants but that they persecute one another also where they fall to difference of opinions is a thing so evident as needeth no proof and the examples alleged by me before out of all the sects of Germany, Switzerland and other countries, 
Kennit. epist. ad Io. Georg. Elect. Brandeburg.  and namely that out of Kemnitius, do evidently convince it with infinite proofs, for that none of them getting the upper hand in any place doth permit the other sect be it never so brotherly to subsist with it, but driveth them out, even the ridged Lutherans the soft, and these the other wheresoever they prevail, as the Puritans also in Geneva, Holland, Scotland, France, do not suffer any one congregation of softer Caluinists or English Protestant's to stand with them, and on the contrary side, whether our English protestants have suffered their brethren Puritans to live in England without persecution or Noah, or whether they have had halcyon or halter days, 
One side of protestants doth persecute the other.  these later years passed under Protestants, the hanging of Penry and other of the same gospel may testify, as also the many and grievous complaints written by themselves, & published in print, 
Lib. 2. of dangerous positions. cap. 10.  and registered these later days by the Protestant's in their foresaid books, where the Puritans cry out & say among other things.  
This land is sore troubled with persecution, there i● no place nor being for a faithful Minister of the word, our blood crieth for revenge, an inquisition much like that of Spain is among us, o lamentable case, o heinous impiety.  
Ministers are in worse sort oppressed now then they were by the Papists in Q. Mary's time; 
Compla●●● of persecution by Puritans.  besides whorish impudence, halter, axe, bands, scourging, & racking, our Bishops have nothing to descend themselves withal: the Clinke, Gatehouse, white Ly●n, and the Fle●●e are their only arguments. If I say Hieremy. Ezechiel, etc. were alive again they would be sent to the Marshalsey.  
Lo (good reader) these piteous complaints, and many more, do make and pour out one sort of ghospellers against the other, & when their own gospel brethren cry out so much of persecution, what may Catholics do? and how is this then a peculiar blessing of Protestants to be free from persecuting? yet hearken to our knight how he freeth all from suffering at their hands, not only those of their own religion, 
Pag. 21. Sir F. proveth his own men to be wolves.  but also of ours, The wolf (saith he) persecuteth the lamb, not the lamb the wolf; Well; what of this? this is a certain sentence true in itself, but proveth nothing for your sense, nay rather I might infer against you thus: You do persecute greviouslie by your own brethren's testimony them that be lambs by their profession. Ergo you are wolves by your own sentence; but hearken yet further, what he saith also very confidently, even of Catholics. Freedom from persecution in England; 
Wastword. Pag. 21.  You shall (saith he) never be able to prove (so far as I could ever learn) that any one, either Priest or lay man, learned, or unlearned, hath in thi● land for these forty years, been put to death, only for being of a contrary religion.  
Here I doubt not but all England, will cry shame to this shameful, and shameless lack of shame, for what child in England is so ignorant of things tha● pass as he knoweth not this to be a notorious falsehood, having hard of above a hundred Priests put to death for being Priests, 
See two Apologyes for the Catholics with other treatises.  and for being ordained to that function beyond the seas, and for defending the faith belonging to the function, as by diverse treatises written of this matter doth appear. And if this were not so of the kill of so many men for only religions sake, yet is there no persecution but death? will Sir F. say that his Protestants do not persecute, for that they kill not all that be different from them in religion? 
Persecution against Catholics.  doth he not hear and see and know the numbers of them that be daily apprehended, imprisoned, arraigned, and condemned in their goods, and liberties for standing in their father's faith and resisting protestants novelties, and innovations? & is this no persecution? Is this the blessed freedom which protestants gospel hath brought in? Surely I will end, and shut up this absurdity with those words of S. Augustine against julian the famous heretic. 
Aug. contr. jul. lib. 1. c. 7.  Si nesciens hoc dixisti, cur non miseram respuis imperitiam? si sciens, cur non sacrilegam deponis audaciam? If thou hast said this by ignorance, why dost thou not reject thy miserable unskilfulness, if wittingly, why dost thou not leave of so impious audacity? and so much of this.   

OF THE OTHER FIVE imagined blessings that remain, to wit, deliverance from exactions, long peace, power in foreign countries, wealth of the land, and multitude of subjects increased seavenfold. CAP. XI.  
BESIDES the blessings hitherto recited (which have been such and so goodly as you have heard discussed) our knight to make up the number of ten hath added five more to wit. Deliverance from intolerable exactions. Long peace at home. Great power abroad in foreign countries. Wealth & great riches increased with in the land. And finally great multitude of subjects seavenfold increased above that they were at her majesties entrance. Which blessings though the very propounding of them to English ears be so ridiculous, as they need little examination, and much less confutation, yet for honouring of our knight that is the propounder I shall be forced to say a word or two of each of them, advertising the reader first (which yet he will of himself observe, 
A seditious shift of sir F.  especially by the last words of this enumeration) that the knight playeth notably the part of Scogan in the treaty of these blessings, running behind the cloth of state (as often I have warned before, and shall be forced more often hereafter) and so conjoining her majesties government with his gospel and change of religion in the praise and dispraise of that which hath ensued, as if they could not possibly be severed in the effects of blessings and cursings thereof proceeding, which point I hold to be most false and flattering, assuring myself, & presuming also, that any man of judgement and discretion will be of my opinion that whatsoever good effects have come to our common wealth by her majesties government, or rare parts of Princely commendations, 
A note to be diligently observed.  and which truly may be termed blessings, might have been as great as all these, or far greater under Catholic religion, and especially in her Majesty if it had pleased almighty God to have blessed her and the realm with the continuance thereof, and contrariwise whatsoever cursings and calamities on the contrary side have ensued, or may ensue hereafter by the change of religion these are proper effects, and necessary consequents of the new gospel, and not of any defect in her majesties government and this foundation being presupposed in all that I shall say, let us pass on to examine in a word or two, the most ridiculous vanity of these five blessings following which he calleth corporal, accounting his former spiritual.  
For the first of them which is deliverance from intolerable exactions, 
●. Blessing, deliverance from exactions.  if he mean it of the realm in general, as his marginal note may seem to import (which often yet disagreeth in sense from his text) let the Escheker books be compared of the tributes, payments, contributions, and exactions, that were used in England in former days, before this new gospel came in, and since, I mean of the sums that were paid in old times, when Catholic religion bore rule, and protestants were not known, & those that later Princes by reason of troubles, wars, suspicions, and other like occasions rising especially by difference in religion, have been forced to take of their subjects since the year of Christ 1530. or there about, at what time K. Henry began upon the advise, & incitation of Cranmer, Cromwell, and other Protestants to break with the Pope, and church of Rome, let these sums I say be conferred, and then our knight if he be a good Auditor or Exchequer man, will for very shame strike out this blessing and mention it no more.  
But if he mean this blessing especially or principally of our Clergy men this day in England for that they pay nothing now to the Pope, as in the text, and prosecution of this blessing is set down, then let the wealth and ease of the old and new Clergy be compared together, or rather the poverty and beggary of the one with the honour, and splendour of the other, and so this controversy will quickly be decided, and S.F. beaten from this first corporal blessing, of his new Clergy, to a Spiritual, which is, 
Matth. ●.  Beati pauperes spiritu, blessed are the poor in spirit, for in body and purse they are already miserable as themselves every where complain, 
The poverty and misery of the protestant clergy.  & none more grievously or more spitefully in secret, as before hath been touched, than his champion O.E. alleging these reasons, that the most of them having much to pay both to Prince & Patron in steed of the Pope, and little to receive (the gleebe lands of their benefices being commonly swept to their hands) and their charge of women and children so great, as the parishes do commonly feel, when they die, their beggary must needs be intolerable; whereas on the other side in catholic Countries, if they contribute any thing to the Pope as to their head for better maintenance of his state and government of the whole Church, it is neither so great a matter, and commonly, ●●t out of the greater benefices, that can better bear it, and in recompense of that again he defendeth them against the intrusion or usurpation of secular men upon their livings, which importeth them much more (as by experience of catholic Countries and Kingdoms is seen) then is the contribution they make to Rome, though it were so great and grievous, as our K. maketh it in K. Henry the 3. his ●yme, alleging a certain complaint of our English Church to Pope Innocentius 4. in a general Council at Lions an. 1245. against his collectors & officers in England, which being taken out of john Fox) whom this man yet will not name) maketh no more against the Pope's Authority, 
A calumniation of John Fox. act. & ●on. Pag. 241.242. etc.  nor yet convinceth him of abuse that way, then if at this day the same complaint should be made by the Church of Spain (as divers times it is) against the like collectors or officers there, or when any complaint is made in England of any of her Majesty's officers that abuse themselves in their collections for covetousness upon the Clergy at this day, whereof I presuppose there would not want complaints, if all Ministers should be willed to utter their griefs therein.  
And what then doth Sir F. and Fox urge so much against the Pope the complaint of some in England against his officers at that time, 
Why Pope Innocentius required a collection of money for recovering the holy land.  when the public necessity of christendom oppressed by Turks and Saracens enforced Pope Innocentius, (as general Father of all) to lay some contribution upon the clergy of England, and other countries for defence thereof, to which effect also in the very same council of Lions he had appointed and declared king Lewes of France for Supreme general, and yet was not the sum exacted such nor so great, but that more money in these our days hath been sent out of the realm in one year by these men's liking and good approbation for defence of heresy and rebellion in France, Flanders, Scotland, and other countries, than was in this, & many other times in those days for maintenance of the whole Church and Christianity, and yet complaineth not our knight of this, which subjects now feel, for that it is present, but of the other past and gone which they feel not, whereby is seen his indifferency, & that they seek nothing but matter of complay●● and cavilling against the Pope and h●● doings.  
As for long peace which is an other blessing of his (both sweet & profitable) as he termeth it, 
●. blessing, long peace.  I know not what or why I should answer, seeing Aristotle teacheth that to go about to prove or improve by reason's that which is open and manifest to our senses, is to weary reason, and offer injury to sense: who seethe not therefore what hath passed in England since protestant religion first entered in K. Henry's days? for if we talk o● domestical stirs, and tumults among our people, we have had more within these 70. years to wit from the one or two and twentieth of K. Henry's reign downwards under him, and his three children (respecting religion only) then in a thousand before his days and more than in many ages for any cause whatsoever, setting a side the contention for the crown between the two houses o● York and Lancaster, which cannot go by reason in this account for that it was a particular quarrel of certain Princes of the blood royal, not rising of any reason of state or government at home; and if in the time of her majesties reign there hath been less actual home war, then in her Fathers, brothers and sister's time, for matters of religion, much may be attributed to her own moderation, especially at the beginning in not yielding to the furious humours of some hot sectaries, that would easily have put all in combustion had not other counsel been followed to transfer the fire rather to other men's houses, then to have it in her own, but the most especial part in this may truly be given to the mild and bearing natures of Catholics that have passed so many years under the heavy yoke of persecution rather with muttering then moving, 
Patience of Catholykes.  and yet what peace we may truly be said to have at home when such division of heart's judgements, and wills is discovered, as this knight in this very encounter doth affirm, I cannot determine, but do leave it to other men, and himself also to consider.  
But as for foreign wars under her majesties reign (whom most this fleering knight would flatter in this behalf) I would ask but himself; hath it not been almost perpetual with all our neighbours round about us at one time or other, and that for religion itself, which this man braggeth to have brought sweet peace? have not our arms been seen in France for many years together against divers kings thereof for the same quarrel, 
Foreign wars.  let Newhaven speak, by us held, if the knight will not answer, let Lithe also in Scotland tell us, if our arms were there against their lawful Prince in favour of heresy, and as for Spain, and Burgundy our eldest and surest allies in times past, I think no denial can be made but with greater impudence than this brag of peace is asserted? and now what great treasures have been sp● in those continual foreign wars? wha● numbers of men consumed both by sea and land in this action for maintenance of thi● cursed new Pandora (so is heresy termed by old Irenaeus) it is hard to count, 
●enzus li. 2. cap. 19 & 53.  but easy to guess, and yet telleth us this man of his long sweet, and profitable peace, as though wars maintained in Holland, Zealand, Ireland, France, Spain, Portugal, Indies, and other places by English arms, English money, English blood, and all for maintenance of Geneva religion, were no wars, but all peace, all sweetness, all profit, all felicity: wherefore to obey Aristotle, and not to reason any further when sense convinceth so notorious a flattery, and untruth, I will say no more hereof.  
There ensueth the eight (and this no small blessing as this knight saith) of power in foreign countries, 
●. Blessing of power in foreign countries.  which what it may be (we having no one foot of our own beyond the seas since Calis by heretical treason was lost.) I do not well see, and if we compare it with the great & large provinces we had before under Catholic Religion, and especially with the change of our old mighty and honourable allies, and confederated Princes to our new got friends, we shall soon discover the faintness and fondness of this blessing, which is seen also by the quality of those persons, and their cause, which our K. braggeth to have had their refuge in England under a woman's government out of France, Flanders, Swethland, Scotland, and other countries, who if they have been none commonly but open rebels to their true and lawful Princes, & their cause heresy or Atheism, then hath their refuge to England, (as also the Turks familiarity whereof this profane Kt. vaunteth by name) been certain effects of the new gospel little honourable to our country or her Matie. though by necessary consequence of a course thrust upon her, she hath been enforced to entertain them, whom otherwise of her most honourable and princely disposition she could not but contemn, and in her heart detest. And so much of them not worthy the memory.  
Next this cometh the ninth blessing which is (as he saith) great wealth of the land increased by this change of religion, 
Blessing. wealth of the land. Pag. 27.  much riches, plenty, and abundance, such as hath not lightly been known before. whereabout I must tell our Kt. first that it shall be reason that in this point we stand not only to his relation, but that we ask, our people of England themselves, what they feel at home in their countries, and not what pleaseth him in his chamber to imagine, and to set down ●t home with his pen, sitting more at ease perhaps then many others especially since the match with the rich widow, 
Hann●●●  who hath eased well the blow received before by the purchasing Yeoens-baron, 
Yeoens.  & repaired much he ruinous walls of his Cadburie jerusalem.  
And truly where this so blessed & abundant increase of riches should lie in particular, which this our K. so greatly boasteth of, I do not see, for if we consider the nobility and gentry of our Land at this day, and compare them with that wealth, which was wont to be in former times, 
Old & new riches of our nobility.  I mean, power with power, riches with riches, multitude of servants, with multitude of servants housekeeping with housekeeping, and other such like effects of wealth and riches, I doubt me much how S. F. can verify this blessing.  
And for himself, though I will not enter to feel his purse, yet for so much as public fame telleth, I may say without slander, that having sold all, or the most part of his own lands, and spent his goods upon entertainment of Ministers, or other like ministerial minions, he may better brag of good fellowship and liberality, then of great blessing of riches, and in the same case take I the most part of his fellow gospeling knights to be, notwithstanding their daily feeding upon Catholics goods, and that their Alms extend not to build Monasteries, Colleges, Churches, or hospitals, as their Ancestors did before them that were of an other religion, so as to the nobility and gentry of our land the participation of this great blessing seemeth to be but little.  
And as for the commonalty, we ought (as I said) to hear themselves speak in their own case, 
Wealth of the commonalty.  and not this seely proctor only, which intrudeth himself, without proxy or commission, and perhaps also not so well informed in the case as he might be, or not so faithful in relating, as were convenient: for sure I am this cannot be denied that when her Majesty's ti●s. tributes, and other duties are to be exacted of the common people (though otherways they pay them willingly to their power) yet hear I great difficulties and complaints of penury, and where then consisteth this extraordinary blessing of so great riches, plenty, and abundance brought in by change of religion? which yet is so exceeding great by this man's vaunt as it is able & ready to sustain such voluntary wars, 
Ibid. Pag. ●7.  as honourable respects hau moved us to undertake. So are his words, and consider here (discreet reader) the wit of our new councelor, which maketh our wars voluntary upon wantonness of wealth, and not upon necessity, as the wisest Princes are wont to pretend, when they demand helps of their subjects. Moreover as this K. is lavish in bragging of riches and voluntary wars, so is his boasting, plainly Thrasonical when he talketh of his own going, and assistance to the same wars. For in his Epistle of his wachword to the Reader he telleth him very seriously, & with big words, that to himself he hath set down this law, 
Thrasonical boasting.  that shall never be repealed that if his wealth were millions; if he could bring thousands of fight handens to the field; if his life were ten thousand lives, his wealth, his strength, his life and all should go to be spent, hazarded, and ended, against that Antichrist of Rome, and the ambitious tyrant of Spain, etc. And that with confidence, boldness, and assurance of the goodness of his cause, he and his fellows with heart and hand will be priest and ready to take their places, and to march in the field, and their to set forward with a swift foot against these enemies, etc.  
Did ever glorious Thraso upon the stage speak bigger words than these? and yet I do not hear that the K. in fact, is so great a kilkow, as here he maketh himself, nor yet that in such wars as have been offered voluntary, or involuntary, hath he adventured any one life, or brought any one troop of fight hands to the field, nor hath been so swift of foot, as he is in words, but rather hath been content to look on whiles others marched, and to sit at home with his Ministers whiles other men went to fight, and consequently that these words and wishes are far greater than his acts, and gests. And so much of this blessing.  
Wherefore now to come to the last blessing, which is multitude of people, 
The 10. blessing increase of people.  increased mightily (as he saith) since her Majesty's first entrance to the crown (a great blessing of God (saith he) powered upon this land, which God at the least hath sevenfold increased, to the number that at her entrance she found. 
Pag. 27.  If I should stand with this computist about the precise number of sevenfold increased, and ask him how he knoweth it? or who will believe it? or how probable it is, that the people of England should be seven times as many now as they were forty years ago, I should (I think) pose him hardly, and prove him (perhaps) no less lavish in this, then in the former, but yet supposing it were, or be so, how can this benediction (so poor a one at it is) be attributed as peculiar to his new gospel, seeing that, other religions engender also besides Protestant's. And for example, let us imagine that Catholic religion had endured still in England for these later 40. years, or that the jews or Turks religion had been in steed thereof, would not the people have increased also under them think you? yea much more under the later, for that they profess Polygamy and the multitude of many wives, and yet were it much simplicity to say that this increase of Children were a special blessing of their religion, or testimony of the truth therein contained.  
And the like may I say of Protestant's, though I confess that in this point of generation I do yield them some privilege above Catholics for that all sorts do marry among them, and few or none do think of those eunuchs commended by Christ who geld themselves for the Kingdom of heaven, 
Holy eunuchs. Math. 19  but rather all kind of states, sexes, vocations, offices, and ages as well friars, monks, nunes, priests, chaplains, ministers and bishops, as all others do fall to marriage, and multiplication, and consequently no marvel if the people have increased more than before, but whether this be a blessing or a cursing, a benefit or a burden to the common wealth, let the Parishes, and Parishioners of England be asked, who by statute are bound to maintain their brats, when the parents are not able.  
And with this I will end this goodly rank of blessings, which are so vain and fond as I may say to S.F. for bringing them forth, as S. Augustine said to Faustus Manicheus about a like foolish narration, 
Aug. lib. 16. contr. Faust. Manich. cap. 2●.  O hominem se cogitantem dictorem, sed alium non cogitantem contradictorem, ubi est acumen tuum? Oh fond man that thought only how himself might speak (or tell us blessings) and not thinking what an other would answer, where is thy wit? and than goeth forward to ask him further; An in mala causa non posses aliter? sed mala causa te vana loqui coegit, malam verò caeusam habere nemo te co●git. Can you do no otherwise than you have done in so evil a cause truly your evil cause might force you to speak so vainly as you have done, but no man forced you to have an evil cause.  

A brief addition about O.E.  
It may be (good reader) thou dost maruale why O. E. is kept so long from the stage seeing that I have promised him a corner now and then to tell his tale, but the truth is, that his part came not in till now, for that he maketh no several tract of blessings as doth the K. but only a particular brief enumeration of ten, that is six spiritual, & four temporal, called corporal by the Kt. of which kind yet he maketh five, and like number of spiritual, so as the Minister according to his vocation is more spiritual by one blessing, than the Kt. and less corporal, though perhaps not less corpulent. They disagree also in the order, names and substance of their blessings as before I have showed laying both their lists together, & now we shall examine how they will join in defending themselves, and their gospel from the cursings which the Warder threapeth upon them, as ensuing by change of religion, and in this point & part of this first Encounter I shall be forced to alter somewhat the manner of my answer already made to S.F. thereby to give room for the Minister to enter with him.    

OF THE CONTRARY effects to blessings, that is to say of cursings rather and calamities brought in by change of religion, both spiritual and temporal, and how Sir F. and his minister do answer them. CAP. XII.  
AFTER the short & idle defence which our knight in the beginning of this Encounter did shape to the charge of flattery as before you have heard, he entered presently, (for better justification of the vaunts made in his Wachword) into the enumeration of the former ten blessings which now we have examined, and after that presently shutteth up his whole Encounter as though all were dispatched, and he had answered all that had been said, whereas in deed he passeth over four parts of five of the warders speech without either mention thereof or answer at all, for that the said warder in his book to show the vanity of the knights brag of blessings brought in by change of Catholic religion, 
4. parts of 5. praetermitted by the K in his answer.  passeth on to declare, the many and manifold miseries, and calamities happened as well in England as in all other countries round about us by this fatal change, wherein leaving Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Suetia, & other such further parts, where infinite people, have been afflicted, slain, and brought to misery by wars and garboils raised by occasion of this change, he exemplyfieth only in Scotland, Flaunders, France, & Ireland lying next unto us, and from thence also passing home to England itself, saith thus.  
For to begin with Scotland, and to say nothing, of the battles, 
Pag. ●. ward. Sco●lands miseries by change of religion.  murders, destruction of Countries, Provinces, Towns, Cities, houses, and particular men, which we have seen in that realm, within these forty years, that the change of religion hath been attempted no man can deny but that three Princes, two Queens, and one King, the mother, daughter and husband, have been all brought to their bane by that occasion, besides the overthrow, and change of so many noble houses, 
Ireland. Flanders▪ France.  and lineages, as Scotishmen can recount, among their Hamiltons. Douglasses, Stewards & others, as also the Irish will tell of their noble Desmondes, and other Peers destroyed by like occasions. But Flanders and France have no end at all in these accounts, when they begin, they are so many. And all this, as they say (& is evident) by the lamentable consequence of our change of religion in England which drew them after us, or at leastwayes gave example, heart, and help to their change and eversion also.  
But not to step from England itself, where principally this blessing-bringer doth vaunt that his blessings are powered out in abundance, 
England.  let us examine the matter indifferently among ourselves: we are Englishmen, & we talk to men of the same language and nation, that know our country and condition thereof: and many have seen the change, and knew the state of things therein before the alteration, or at leastwise have heard thereof since by their fathers and grandfathers, etc.  
Thus said I in the Wardword, and further I passed on to draw all kinds of blessings to two heads or branches spiritual and temporal, 
Two kinds of blessings.  and examined them both by divers means and ways as before hath been touched, showing, that not blessings, but cursings, not felicities but calamities had ensued every where by this change; and especially wars, tumults, and garboils, as now I have declared. And to all this my declaration which is somewhat large what replieth (think you) our defendant knight? hear his words for they are very resolute and eager. If you had any respect of truth (saith he) or care of modesty, 
Pag. 10. Wa●●word.  you would never make the true religion we profess the cause of murders, tumults, & garboils which teacheth dutiful obedience, & condemneth all mutinies, seditions, & rebellions. Thus he faith, & to this I reply, that if our knight had any consideration of his credit, he would never for shame affirm this so boldly without answering to some of the examples alleged by me against him, as also the asseverations of his own best doctors before mentyoned by me about this matter of obedience, 
En cont. 1 ca 3.4. & 5.  so as having both their doctrine, and practise to instruct us, it is a great impudence to deny it so resolutely; but let us go forward.  
When we came to the division mentyoned of spiritual and temporal blessings in particular ensued to England by change of religion, 
Spiritual blessings before the change.  First about spiritual benefits and benedictions, the warder setteth down, how before the change of religion men had one faith, one belief, one form of service, one number of Sacraments, one tongue in celebration, one sacrifice, one head of the Church together with the rest of Christendom, and that since the change all these things are altered for that English Protestants differ in all those points, or the most, not only from all Catholic kingdoms, but also with their own, and among themselves, to wit first from other new ghospellers abroad, for that neither do we English protestants agree with any sect of the Lutherans soft or riged, nor with the Zwinglians or Caluinists of other countries, nor yet with those of our own, as appeareth by the Church of Scotland, and of the presbyteries of our Puritans in England, Holland, Zealand, and other places. For proof whereof it shall not need to repeat again the whole discourse of the wardword, for that this is sufficiently proved by that I have alleged before about the first supposed blessing of unity.  
To all which discourse of disunion among them set down by the wardword Sir F. answereth no one thing, 
Sir Francis is mute in matters of most moment, Pag. 13.  but only saith, that it is a cunning trick to grate so often upon this division, calling some puritans, & some protestants, which he hopeth the Lord of might and mercy, will turn to the good of the Church, and direct the hearts of their Churchmen, to see how needful it is to join both heart, & hand together to descend the doctrine of faith (which they all hold) against the calumniations of slanders wherewith you, and men of your sort (saith he) seek to lead the truth of our profession.  
Behold here a substantial defence, consisting of four points, first he would gladly deny the difference of names & sects of 
* Of this difference see before, cap. 6 & 7.  puritanes & protestāns, as cunningly devised by us what shift will ye call this? Then he hopeth in the Lord of mercy they will agree at length, but when and how? 
Encount. 1. cap. 3.  After that by a parenthesis, he saith, they all h●ld one doctrine of faith, this how true it is appeareth before out of their own words and writings alleged by me to the contrary. And lastly he saith, these are but slanders devised by us to load the truth of their profession withal. This shift also I leave to the reader to judge of what quality it is, as in like manner of what modesty the K. is in denying matters so evidently known of all, noting by the way, that he dareth not to speak out, 
Sir F. of what religion?  and plainly utter his mind about this division of puritanes, and protestants in any place of his reply, nor yet to discharge himself of the suspicion to be one of them, wherewith the warder often charged him, and he hath not denied it flatly hitherto, nor yet fully confessed it, so as we must hold him either for neutral or ambidexter, until he declare himself further, though in deed he doth sufficiently manifest himself in this place by so many hems, and hams, as he useth in puritanes defence, saying, he trusteth God will direct them to agree, 
Pag. 13.  and that howsoever some dissent hath appeared (as though in deed it were not) yet he doubteth not, but it shall be seen to the world that it is concordia discordia, with a discord that hath concord in it, etc. Thus he salueth the matter for his tender affection towards the Puritans; whereas his Champion O.E. talking of this division, saith plainly, and resolutely of them, 
Infra cap. 15. & 16.  (as we shall treat more at large afterwards) that they are no more to be counted of protestants society, than the Papists that are of the Pope's retinue, and the same do say the Puritans of protestants as before out of their own words hath been declared.   

WHAT THE CHAMpion Minister O.E. saith to this matter of cursings, and how absurdly he behaveth himself therein. CAP. XIII.  
HOWSOEVER our masked minister hath been silent in the former blessings, yet will he show himself vocal now, (seeing his name consisteth of only vowels) about this opposite argument of cursings, and with his verbosity he will supply the Kt. brevity, whereof we have spoken and complained in this chapter, for you must understand (and you shall perceive it by the proof) that this vowel minister is a great vaeun● parlar, 
The manner of O.E. his answeriug.  and followeth up and down the warder, snatching, and snarling at every word almost he saith, but without rhythm or reason, order or method, shame, or modesty, but only saith or denieth as it turneth best to his fancy for the present, thinking the victory to consist in out-talking his adversary, or contradicting whatsoever is said, and that he is the conqueror, who hath the last word, true or false, and by this brief note you may square him out hereafter in all his answer, as by trial you shall see.  
First then to begin with that which the warder layeth down of divers difficulties already grown in England by change of reliligion, he saith, 
Pag. 12.  that to this, the state of things themselves will answer, laws are ordinarily executed, no man is wronged either in his person, lands or goods, but he may have remedy, religion is tru●● preached, and professed, etc. You see how far, & how plausibly he may run counter in this point, 
Whether change of religion be dangerous.  and how substantially he proveth that there be no difficulties by his own only denial, but yet mark reader how soon after he putteth a moderation to this general assertion, granting some difficulties, but denying the true cause.  
Secondly (saith he) we say that howsoever w● stand, true religion is neither the case of trouble nor danger, for if that were so, then were all Princes, & states that profess religion in the same case: 
Pag. 13.  Lo how wise a man he showeth himself to be; first in his proposition, and then in his inference; his proposition is impertinent, that true religion bringeth no trouble, for we talk of protestant religion, which is foolery for him to presume that we grant it to be true religion; and besides this, we talk not of religion itself, but of the changement, which in religion either true, or false may breed troubles in any common wealth: but especially the change of Catholic religion having been for so many ages established and so many Princes and monarchs of the Christian woorld professing the same. His inference that all protestant Princes by this reason should be in trouble, is an idle non consequent, for their cases may be different, their states unequal, the máner of change unlike, and the proceeding therein, after an other fashion: but yet whether the protestant Princes of Christendom have gained or no by the change, or whether they be or may be in more danger of troubles for separating themselves from the Catholic body of christian Princes, than if they had continued in their Father's religion, I leave this to wise men to judge, and time to try.  
And this to his first inference, but besides this he hath a second in the same kind no less foolish that if change of religion bringeth trouble, than all catholic Princes (that have not changed) must enjoy peace, 
Fond inferrences.  and be out of danger, which is true, so far forth as concerneth this danger arising by change, which is of no small importance, seeing it divideth not only between them, and other Princes of different religion, but between them also, and their subjects, and if Catholic Princes have had their troubles also, or dangers in our days, it hath been either for other causes, or for that some in their states have gone about to alter religion against thesayd Prince's wills, as in France, and Scotland, Flanders, and other places, and so consequently change of religion (though not intended by them) hath been the cause of their said troubles and dangers.  
But hear out the minister yet further; lastly (saith he) if religion now professed were the immediate cause, & original of any trouble like to ensue, than should not the Papists have been the principal means to move wars, & rebellions against the state, nor the only practisers against her majesties person, & safety, as we have found them to have been. Thus he saith, but how it hangeth together, God knoweth or the devil that taught him to make this malicious consequence against innocent men, for I see not by any Cambridge or Oxford logic how this illation may be founded, if change of religion bring troubles, ergo why do Catholics move troubles? he hath brought this kind of arguing from the camp (no doubt) for he never found it in school; And as for the calumniation of this wicked assertion, that Catholics are the only movers of wars, and practisers against her majesties safety, the instance (I trow) of his late Mr. the Earl of Essex and the Puritans, 
Essex attempt, & the hopes of his followers.  and other hungry protestants that set him a work (wherein this fellow also perhaps hoped to have no small share if things had succeeded) doth sufficiently clear us, and so both the form of his argument, proving him unlearned, and the substance and matter dishonest, I leave him for this first onset, and come to the second; for thus he goeth forward against me.  

Pag. 14.  You see (saith he) this Noddy hath neither reason nor truth in his discourse, etc. he telleth us that by alteration of Religion in England, Scotland, Ireland, Flanders & France have tasted of many miseries, tumults, calamities, & desolations, he should have said of many blessings, & friendly favours. This needeth no reply if the reader be of any judgement, for he can see the impudence of the assertion. And then going forward to answer my enumeration of so many battles, murder's destruction of so many countries, provinces, towns, cities, noble houses, lineages, etc., occasioned by diversity, and change of religion, he answereth thus:  
As if we had procured all these battles, murders, destructions, 
The flourish of the minister.  as if we or our religion were the occasion, etc. what a shameless fellow is this to impute the cause o● troubles, and wars, unto us, that ever avoided wars as much as we could, and offered force to no man, nor ever stirred, but as defendants for safeguard of our lives; are lambs the cause of the cruelty of wolves? All these big words, are but arguments of the Noddies distracted mind, etc.  
Lo (reader) what a manner of answering this is, and how many books might be made in this kind of writing? wherefore leaving this, let us come to the matter of division in religion.  
Where I say that before this alteration of religion by Luther, there was unity among Catholics, to wit one God adored throughout all christendom, one faith and belief, one form of service, one number of Sacrament, one tongue in celebration, one sacrifice, one head of the Church, etc. and that now ●ll is divided, 
O E. damneth all his ancestors.  he answereth first, that to speak ●●uly the most part of Christians in those days lived without all knowledge of God, or of Christ jesus having ●●thing of Christianity, but the very name, and the ●●tward Sacrament of Baptism. So that he yieldeth not to them the inward virtue of Baptism, nor the true belief of any one article of the creed before Luther rose which after he repeateth again in express, words saying, they understood not any one article of the faith.  

Pag 17.  What will you say to this man, that maketh all his ancestors for so many hundred years together, and the ancestors also of her Majesty, her father, grandfather, and the rest mere infidels, and christians only in name, and that they understood no one article of christian faith. Were not this fellow worthier to be cuggelled then disputed withal? & his tongue rather to be putted out▪ than his pen answered by writing? but he goeth forward saying, that I do ridiculously distinguish faith from belief, in that I do say, there was the● one faith and belief in christendom before Luther, as though the conjunction and, did distinguish, and n●t conjoin together, who is here ridiculous, or who is the Noddy, or who is the ridiculous noddy, let the reader judge.  
Further he proceedeth affirming that wh●ras I say before the alteration of religion there was one form of service, one number of Sacraments, one tongue in celebration one sacrifice, and one head of the Church, then are more palpable and vain untruths contained i● t●es● words, 
Pag. 17.  then is possible to utter readily with on● tongue. And yet he with that his one tongu● uttereth readily and desperately five or six notorious open lies at the least in contradicting that I say.  
For first to contradict that there was not one form of service, he bringeth in the differences of old Liturges, 
Pag. ●8.  saying not only the greek liturgy doth much differ from the latin, but also the latin liturges do much differ from themselves, and were so full of abuses, that the council of Trent abolishing a number of old Missals, & portuisses, was constrained to make new, yet all nought; being nothing like the liturgies of the Apostolic Church described by justyn martyr, Dionise of Athens, & divers other Fathers; for those of S. james, S. Basil, & S. Chrysostome are plainly counterfeited.  
Hear though I call this but one lie, 
First notorious lie about old and new lyturges and Missals.  or impudence, yet are there divers, for first all these liturges do agree in the substance of the sacrifice whose manner of offering they do prescribe, which heretics cannot deny, & Caluyn himself doth accuse the Fathers for it lib 4. cap. 18. institut. as a little after shall be showed more at large, and consequently the difference betwixt these liturges, and Missals, is only either for that the one is in Latyn, the other in Greek, or that they have some different prayers, & ceremonies, altering nothing the thing itself, as the Missals in like manner of the latin Church had always that variety permitted to them without breach of unity, As ●or example, those of the use of Rome, of Milan, of Toledo in Spain, of Sarum in England, and other national Churches are at ●his day allowed. Neither did the council of ●rentabolish any of ●●ese ancient uses, but ●ome newer abuses that might perhaps in so great a body have crept in. And whereas this man will seem to allow of the lyturges of justine Martyr and of Dionise of Athens as Apostolic rejecting the other of S. james, S. Basil, S. Chrysostome, as counterfeit, he contradicteth himself by ignorance and malice, for that justine martyr and Dionise of Athens wrote no lyturges, and the other three, which he rejecteth, together with that of S. Clement (which as little he will allow) are the only lyturges; that are extant, so that if these be counterfeit, then are there no Apostolic lyturges, for justyne and Dionise to describe, as he saith they do, 
Ciril Hierosol. Cathechis. 4. & 5. mistach. Ambros. lib. 5. & 6. de Sacram.  but S. Ciril in his catechism, and S. Ambrose in his books de Sacramentis do describe and expound the foresaid lyturges by this man rejected. And so he talketh he cannot tell what.  
The second notoriously, is in contradicting one number of Sacraments held among Catholykes before Luther's alteration. 
2. Notoriouslyes' about the number of 7. Sacraments.  The number of 7. Sacraments (saith he) was not certainly established nor received before the late council of Trent, and in the council of Lateran under Pope Innocentius there is mention made only of 2. Sacraments which we retain. Here are two shameful untruths avouched concerning two councils. For first the Council of Florence which was an hundred years before that of Trent, 
Concil. Florent. in instruct. Armeno●um.  to wit anno 1440. doth set down plainly and distinctly the number of seven Sacraments, & in the same order that ●ee do now, and above 200. years before that council again Peter Lombard Bishop of Paris, 
Sentent. lib. 4 dist. 2.  commonly called M. of the sentences, & all other scoolemen after him do set down and handle distinctly seven Sacraments without any note of novelty or contradiction made against them, which is an evident argument, that this was at that time also the common doctrine of the catholic Church. And albeit the ancient Fathers (as this man objecteth) do not set down precisely this number of Sacraments in express words, and in one place all together, yet do they set down the things themselves, and the same number also in different places, as by catholic writers is showed abundantly when they treat of the number of Sacraments.  
And as for the objection about the council of Lateran, it is an egregious impudency, for that in the very same place by him alleged in his margin, 
A ●alfication about the council of Lateran.  to wit, Cap. Firmiter de sum. Trinitate (and he could not choose but see it) though it be not the councils purpose, to name all Sacraments there together, yet doth it expressly mention three, to wit: Eucharist. Baptism & Penance, and other in other places, as Panormitan & other expositors upon that council do show. 
Panormitan. in cap. F●r●●ter de Sum. Trinit. & de fide Catholica.  And seeing that the M. of sentences wrote but 50. years before that council (for he was made Bishop of Paris in the year 1160. and the council began 1215. and his doctrine and learning allowed by all men as Catholic, how is it probable that the council would appoint only two, Sacraments, so soon after the other, and all other schoolmen had written so largely of seven without reproveing or recalling their doctrine.  
Wherefore these two lies & impudencies are inexcusable and fit for such an advocate.  

About service in the vulgar tongue.  There followeth the third point, of service in one tongue before the alteration, which he denieth, saying: that in ancient time it was never thought unlawful to celebrate divine service in any tongue understood by the people: 
Pag. 1●.  and that the Greeks' even to this day retain the Greek tongue, and that t●e Apostle 1. Cor. 14. doth directly condemn tongues used in divine prayers or praises if they be not understood of the people. But all this is answered largely by me before in the third blessing and eight and ninth chapters of this Encounter, and these are manifest untruths, which he addeth here, for he cannot show one example out of all antiquity or histories that any one catholic country from Christ downwards to Luther used public service in a vulgar tongue, but only in some of the three learned tongues Hebrew Greek or Latin, except only some particular dispensation for some short time and upon especial causes, 
Aeneas Silvius lib. de origine Bohemorum cap. 13.  as is recorded of the Moravians where the Priests were permitted by the Pope to say mass in their Slavonian vulgar tongue until they might be instructed in the Latyn, which maketh the second part of this objection about the Greek tongue to be very idle, and the third about S. Paul is true in praises and exhortations that, they ought not to be in peregrine tongues not understood by the hears, but of public prayer, it cannot be meant, nor have place, for that in Corinth it was in the greek tongue which all commonly understood. See here (good reader) the impertinency of this fellow.  
Hear followeth the fourth point, and most famous falsehood amongst the rest concerning one sacrifice throughout Christendom before the change of religion, whereof he saith, 
A famous untruth about the sacrifice of the Mass.  The Popish sacrifice of the Mass was not known of the Ancient Fathers, etc. but this is refuted first by all those ancient lyturges before mentyoned whereof some our man granteth to be Apostolic, and all those lyturges do agree upon one external sacrifice of Christians in the new Testament, calling it the body and blood of our Saviour setting down also the manner how that sacrifice is to be offered, which john Caluyn so much misliked (as before I have touched) that he condemneth them for it, 
Caluin. lib. 4. instit. c. 18. ●. 11.  saying, im●●ati sunt propius judaicum sacrificandi morem (speaking of these lyturges) quam aut ordinaverat Christus, aut evangelii ratio ferebat, the Fathers did imitate more nearly the jews manner of sacrifice, then that which Christ did ordain, or the nature of the gospel did bear. Lo here Caluyn will teach S. Clement, S. Basil, S. Cyril, S. Ambrose, S. Chrysostome, what Christ ordained, & what the nature of his gospel will bear or not bear.  
The like impudence do use the Centuria●ores in the very first age after the Apostles, 
Magd. cent. 2 cap. 4.  who reciting the words of Ignatius S. john's scholar, 
Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrnenses  non licet sine Episcopo neque offer, neque sacrificium immolare. It is not lawful to offer, nor to do sacrifice (among Christians) without the Bishop, those fellows say, it was inc●mmodè dictum, incommodiously spoken, to wit for their purpose, & then again, 
Irenaeus lib. 4 contr. heres. cap. ●2.  S. Irenaeus saith, Novi Testamenti novam docuit oblationem, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens universo mundo offered. Christ taught a new oblation of the new Testament, which the Church receiving from the Apostles, doth offer to God, throughout the whole world, of this they say, satis videtur loqui incommodè, Irenaeus seemeth to speak very incommodiously here, And this of the Fathers of the first age after Christ, to whom also we may join S. Martial disciple of the Apostles (though the Centuriatores make mention of him in the third age) citing his words thus, 
Cent. 3. c. 4. Mart. in ep. ad ●udegal.  Caena (inquit) Domini, id est sacrificium Deo creatori offertur in ara. The supper of Christ, that is the Sacrifice is offered to God our creator upon the Altar; and in the same third age, they name divers Fathers, that make mention of this sacrifice, to be used in the Church not only for the living, but also for the dead, 
Tertul lib. de corona milit. Cypr. lib. 3. ep. 6. & lib. 4 ●p. 3.  namely Tertulian and Cyprian, whom the Centuriatores do mislike and reprehend for this cause, and with these Lutheran Centuriatores joineth also in this point of defacing the Fathers (though otherwise their open enemy in other points of religion) john Caluin in his book of reformation, who doth reprove and check five ancient Fathers by name, that is Irenaeus, Athanasius, Arnobius, Ambrose, and Augustine for holding this doctrine, and misinterpreting and falsely applying the scriptures to the proof thereof, 
Vbi supra.  ità ridiculè (saith he) ut dissentire cogat, & ratio & veritas, that is, they do apply the scriptures so ridiculously (for proof of the Mass and sacrifice) that both reason and truth doth force me to dissent from them; see the pride here of john Caluyn, who holdeth for ridiculous so many learned ancient Fathers, and see the impudency together of our bold and blind bayard O. E. that dare avouch the sacrifice of the Mass was never so much as known to the ancient fathers.  
His fifth and last cavillation is about one head of the Church acknowledged by all Catholics through Christendom before Luther's alteration. 
The fifth cavillation about one head of the Church.  Finally (saith he) as the Pope's headship is now denied of the Eastern Churches, & so was for many ages, so was the ancient Church utterly ignorant of that matter, if this Noddy will persist in his error, let him show it if he can. Hear you see that howsoever I persist in error, he persisteth in his contumelious speech begun, of calling me Noddy at every word, but where the noddiship truly lighteth when the matter is tried, I am content to remit it to the reader's judgement.  
And here the very first clause of his speech containeth no small noddytisme to wit the bringing in for an instance the later east churches that have fallen to schism and heresy also (namely about the holy Ghost) as our adversaries will not deny, whereas my assertion was, that one head was acknowledged by a●l Catholic people of Christendom, so as the instance of the late greeks since their fall, doth make nothing to the purpose, and that the ancient greek Fathers did acknowledge the pre-eminency of the Church of Rome above all other Churches, and consequently also of her governor and Pastor the Pope, is most evident even at this day by their own writings yet extant, as by Ignatius his Epistle ad Rom. Iren. at large adversus haeres. lib. 3. cap. 3. Athan. apolog. 2. Epiphan. lib. contr. haereses 68 Basilius Epist. 52. Nazianz. carm. de vita sua. Chrysost. Ep. prima & secunda ad Innocentium. 
Greek Fathers acknowledging ●he principalite & superiority of the Roman Church.  Cyril. ep. 10. ad Nestorium. & add 11. clerum & populum constantinop. ●heodoret. epist. ad Leonem Papam. Zoz●m●n. lib. 3. hist. cap. 7. All which ten ancient greek Fathers let any man read in the places cited (for that they are to long here to be set down) & then let him judge also of the second noddytisme, when he saith, that the ancient Church was utterly ignorant of this matter, for if the ancient greek Church did acknowledge it, how much more all the ancient latin fathers and doctors. And this may be sufficient for this first joinder about unity o● faith in Catholics, let us pass to the second about the means to judge or know the truth.   

THAT PROTESTANTS not only have no agreement or unity among themselves in matters of religion, but also are deprived of all sure means and certain rule whereby to attain thereunto. CAP. XIIII.  
THER● followeth in the Ward-word, that not only the Protestants have no present union in doctrine among themselves, 
In certainty of belief among protestants. See of this sup. cap 4. num. 10.  but also that it is impossible that ever they can have it, which is as great a spiritual curse, and malediction as may be, and this for lack of due means to procure or establish the same. And to this purpose the K. is hardly posed by the warder about the certainty of his faith and religion to wit, how he can have any, and by what infallible means he can be sure that he is in the right way, and not in heresy, and seeing that he, and his do make scriptures their only assurance, & this dependeth of the true sense, he is asked, and urged, whether he hath this certainty of Scripture by his own reading only and judgement or by the credit of some ministers that interpret the Scriptures in this or that sense unto him, and whether soever of these two ways he stand upon it is showed and proved to be uncertain, the first depending only of the own judgement, the second of others, who being private men, & having no more assurance of the holy Ghosts assistance than himself, 
The curse of uncertainty among protestants.  can be no more sure or infallible than the first, whereof it followeth, that a protestant hath not, nor can have any further certainty of the truth of his religion then humane judgement, or probability can give him (which is a miserable curse, and no faith at all) except he will fly to his inward spirit and inspiration, which is far more uncertain, and perilous than the other, all which is contrary in the catholic Church, and in the way and means of trial which she followeth, and consequently that the certainty is far different for security.  
Furthermore the K. is sore urged in this point of uncertainty, about disagreeing not only from the old catholic doctors of the primitive Church, but also from his own the new, yea those that first brought this later light of his religion (if it were light) into the world, as Luther, zwinglius, Caluyn, and such others, and he is demanded how he can dissent from the●e men, as he doth in so great points of doctrine, 
See before cap. 3.4.5.  & yet have no certainty of belief, seeing these men, were as learned as he, and no less illuminated by his own confession, and if they were deceived in some points, they might be in all, etc.  
From this curse of variety and uncertainty of doctrine and belief, the warder passeth to an other no less markable brought in by change of old religion, which is, dissolution of life and manners, which protestants themselves do not deny in their writings as before hath been showed, 
The curse of evil life. Sup. cap 6.  and if they would, the experience of England itself is sufficient for proof, and the warder declareth it by plain demonstration whereunto notwithstanding it seemed good to the K. to answer with deep silence, not so much as muttering any one thing for his defence, so as here I would thank him as S. Augustine in a like case thanked Faustus the Manichie, 
Aug. contra Faust. manich. lib. 2. in fine.  Gratiae tibi agende sunt, ubi nonnulla sic vidisti te refutare non posse, ut ea malles summo silentio praeteriri. You are to be thanked in that you saw (and thereby confessed) some things in my book to be so unanswerable, as you choose rather to pass them over with deep silence then to say any thing unto them.  
Then followeth in the ward-word another treatise of temporal effects by change of religion, which he reduceth also to two heads. First what was likely to have fallen out, if this change of religion had not been made in her Maties time, and then what hath ensued upon the said change, and for the first he handleth eight points likely to have followed. 1. The strength and felicity her Matie. should have had by all likelihood through the union of her subjects, 2. The security thereof ensuing. 3. Marriage, and noble issue of her Maties body. 4. The establishment of succession. 5. Union with Rome, and sea apostolic. 6. Ancient leagues with foreign Princes maintained. 7. much bloody war in our neighbours kingdoms had been avoided. 8. divers important damages, and perils at home by a●l likelihood had never risen, all which great felicities having been either lost by change of religion, or greatly weakened, and put in danger, he showeth further that the contrary effects of curses, & calamities have or may ensue thereby, and having laid them forth he finally concludeth thus.  
All these inconveniences, and calamities had been avoided, 
Pag. 1●. 4.  or the most of them, if change of Religion in England had not been made, so that the innumerable bened●ct●ons which this poor man would neads threape upon us, by that change, do come to be in effect these that follow.  

The sum of all that hath been said about blessings, and cursings.  First in spiritual affairs, to have no certainty of religion at all, as hath been proved, no stay, no foundation, no final rule to try, or judge to determine, but only every man's own private head, and fancy, wrangling and jangling without end, for that it is without judge or means to make an end: novelties without number, liberty of life without fear, or force of ecclesiastical discipline to restrain it. And then in temporal matters the blessings are such as have been discovered, our realm divided & shivered in a thousand pieces; our Princess in years without children, or hope of any, our crown without succession, our old friends & allies made our enemies, our new friends uncertain; our own flesh and countrymen most pitifully divided within their own bowels, and most miserably tossed, and turmoiled both abroad and at home, abroad and in other countries, with prisons, irons, chains, galleys, and other afflictions, even to death itself; for being protestants, pirates, spies, practisers, or other such imputations incident to enemies. At home afflicted with no less persecutions of our own Magistrates, for being Catholics, or deemed to be such. So as I would fain know, who they are in our little Island, that feel these innumerable benefits & blessings by change of religion, which this gentleman talketh of, seeing there are very few either of one religion or other, that taste not of the miseries, whereof I have spoken, either in themselves, their friends, children, servants, kinsfolks, goods honours, or otherwise, and most of all the realm and common wealth itself, etc.  
To all this speech and reason of the warder Sir F. answereth only in four or five lines thus: 
Pag. 2●. Vain and idle answering.  As for your building of Castles in the Air by supposal o● blessings that might probably have ensued, if religion had not been altered, because I mean not to take the pains to follow you in your extravagant discourses, and because they are indeed nothing but the imaginations of an idle brain, I leave them to Mr. More's Fictio Vtopica. Who could answer with fewer words, or less matter so large, & important a discourse, than Sir F. doth here? or who could go further from the purpose than he, that leaveth out the substance of all his adversaries allegation, and entertaineth himself in trifles of his own devising▪ Let the reader judge whether his answer be rightly termed a wastword or no. I must needs conclude as S. Augustine did against julian with this interrogation. 
Aug. lib. 1. contra julianum. cap. 1.  Quaero abs te cur lib●o meo saltem spetie tenus te respondisse glorieris, cum libri mei partem nec quartam reprehendendo tetige●is, eosque saltus in praetereundis meis disputationibus feceris, quasi omnino desp●rares veriusque operis, & mei scilicet & tui quenquam esse posse lectorem qui ista deprehenderet? I ask of you (Sir F.) as good a disputer or shifter rather as was julian) how you can glory to have answered my former book, whereas you have not so much as touched the fourth part thereof, and have made such leaps in passing over my arguments, & disputations, as though you despaired that any reader would view both works, and find out your falsehood in this behalf.   

WHAT O. E. ANSWEreth to the former chapter about division, and uncertainty in religion. CAP. XV.  
I HAVE signified unto thee (gentle reader) before, that where the knight finding matters somewhat hard, or uneasy to answer, seeketh now and then with some regard of honour, and reputation; to step over without stumbling, and to salve some matters by smooth silence, there bold bayard the minister, rushing in with more resolution, & masking himself with the vizard of two vowels. O. E. (which may stand perhaps in his cipher for Owls Eyes to look through and to see, and not be seen again) layeth on load both in babbling, and scolding, saying somewhat to every thing, though nothing in deed to all, and following the thread of my speech, and narration, he picketh quarrels to whatsoever seemeth most capable of cavillation, and this appeareth to be his chiefly intended exploit in this his enterprise of answering, the proof shallbe seen by experience.  
And first of all whereas the warder objecteth division disunion and disagreement to him and his (as you have heard) and this not only from Catholics, but also from their own ghospellers, 
Pag. 4.  as from the Lutherans in Germany, and Denmark (to use the warders own words) from Zwinglians in Zuitzerland, from Caluinists in Geneva, France, Holland, and Scotland, & from Puritans, Brownists and other sects at home, that impugn Protestants daily of the parliament religion. This fellow denieth first very flatly, 
Pag. 19  that there is any division among them at all, And here he winneth the first garland of impudency as you see, but look upon an other more clear than this. 
Great impudence of O. E.  Secondly (saith he) the Churches of Switzerland, Germany, France, & England, do neither hold of Zuinglius, Caluyn, nor Luther, but of Christ jesus, and of his Apostles and Prophets.  
Lo (reader) how quickly this matter 〈◊〉 dispatched, and how soon disagreement 〈◊〉 made between them, see the 4.5. and 6. former chapters for trial of this point: and note by the way, that of purpose he leaveth out here the Puritans espetialie mentyoned by the warder, for that he having written so earnestly against them a little before cannot with his honour now make atonement with them, as he doth with the Lutherans of Germany, Zwinglians of Switzerland, and Caluinists of France, uniting them all in one Church, and in the true doctrine of jesus Christ, and consequently also with himself and his Church of England according to the rule & principle. Quae conveniunt in aliquo tertio, inter se et●an conveniunt, those things that agree in a third● agree also between themselves, which he expoundeth also presently after by the worde● next following. As ●or ourselves (saith he) all of us profess the doctrine of Christ jesus, 
Pag 19  according to that rule that was established by common cons●●● of the Church of England, from which if any digress, he is no more to be accounted of our society th●● the Papists, etc. Mark here (good reader) the guyddy head of this gaggling goose, first he joineth together in the true doctrine of jesus Christ, 
Most foolish inconstancy and contradiction to himself.  and of his Apostles and prophets as well all Lutherans, and Zwinglians, as also all kind of Caluinists and consequently Puritans whom yet presently he cutteth o● again, 
Pag. 17.  no less than Papists and those of the Pope's retinue (whom before he said to be no Christians, nor to hold any one article a right of christian faith) if they do digress in any thing from the rule of faith established by common consent of the Church of England, which all do, and consequently he doth as much as if with one hand he should embrace, & lul and couple together both Lutherans, Zwinglians and Puritans, acknowledging them for his dear and tender brethren, and with the other should beat them of, & detest them as enemies and public heretics, for so he doth in effect, seeing it is evident, that neither the sectaries of Lutherans, Zwinglians, or Puritan-Caluinists of Geneva, France, Scotland, Holland or England do agree which O. E. his rule of faith here mentioned to wit, the rule established by common consent at this day in the Church of England, And this is evidently, and abundantly proved by their own books and sayings before recited in the 4.5.6. and sequent chapters of this Encounter.  
But for that our Minister maketh mention here of a certain rule of faith, whereby he and his are directed, and others that digress from the same are to be rejected from their communion and society, I mean to examine ●he same briefly in this place, and to see what 〈◊〉 is.  
And first of all that there is and must be ●ome certain rule among Christians, 
That their is some certain rule of faith as well how to believe as also whereby to interpret scriptures.  whereby ●o know and stay their faith, and to discern ●ew Catholykes from heretics, is most ●●ident both by reason itself, and by the authority of the very first founders of our religion, who often do make mention, and admonish us thereof as S. Paul to the Corinthians secundum regulam nostram, 
2. Cor. 10.  according to our rul● and to the Philippenses, in eadem permaneamus regula let us persist in the same rule. And to the Gallatians, 
Phil. 3.  quicúnque hanc regulam secu●● fuer●●t, pax super illos, whosoever shall follow this rule of faith, 
Gal. 6.  peace upon them, and other such places, 
Rom. 12.  as namely to the Romans, Prophetia secundum rationem fidei, prophecy (by which i● understood here principally, interpretation of scriptures) according to the rule or analogy o● faith, for so is the greek word.  
By all which places is manifest, that there i● a certain public rule of faith, and was eue● among the Apostles themselves, and thesam● continued afterward by all the Father's o● every age whereby it was easy to distinguish between such as were Orthodoxi or Catholykes, and others that were new fangled o● wrangling people, that would follow no rul● but their own head, and fancies, of whi●● rule make mention also in the primiti●● Church Ignatius after the Apostles epist. ad●●●gnetianos, justinus Apol 2. pro Christianis, Irenaeus 〈◊〉 1. cap. 1. & 2. Clemens lib. 4. stromatum adversus 〈◊〉 rese, Tertullianus lib. de velandis virginibus, 〈◊〉 Alexandrinus as S. Basil citeth him lib. de spiri●● cap. 29. and many other Fathers commending highly, and inculcating often the obseruati●● of this rule as well for belief, as also for inte●●pretation of Scriptures, but especially to c●●●cerne heretics, who (to use these Fathers own words) do no sooner begin to prattle, but that by digressing from this rule do bewray themselves, and show what they are, and thus far that there is a rule, which our enemies cannot deny.  
But now what that rule is it may be that our Minister and I shall not so soon agree, 
What the rule of faith is or was in old tyme.  but yet first of all that it cannot be only Scripture is evident by his own speech and confession in this place, 
Pag 19  where he saith, that his people of England do profess the Doctrine of Christ jesus according to that rule, that was established by common consent of the Church of England, from which rule (saith he) if any digress, they are none of our society, ●o more than Papists. By which words is evident that his rule consisteth of the consent and establishment of certain men in England, what to believe, which is a different matter from scriptures, though they will say perhaps that in this establishment, they followed Scriptures as will also the Puritans and others, that here are excluded by this established rule.  
And besides this confession of O. E. himself, there are many other convincing reasons that this rule named by the Apostles was not scripture, and among other this that either ●one or very little of the new Testament was written, when this rule of faith was published, ●or no use, and practise among Christians, as appears by the often repetition thereof made ●y the same Apostles afterward, when they ●ame to write. Well than not to be longer, for so much as this rule could not be only scripture the best way perhaps to understand what it was and is at this day will be to hear some of the ancient Fathers, describe the same. Holy Ignatius writing to the same Church that S. Paul did (a little before cited) to wit, 
Phil. 3. Ig●. ●. epist. 〈◊〉 Philippenses.  to the Philippenses, saith, id ipsum dicatis omnes idem sentientes, in hoc ipso fidei regulas praeceptáque seruavi, sicut & Paulus erud●ens n●s dicit. Do you say and teach the self same and be of one judgement, for by this have I observed the rules of faith, as Paul instructing us, said. Lo here the judgement of Ignatius, who affirmeth himself to have observed the rule of faith, for that he said and taught that which all said and taught, and thought that which all thought, and followed no singularity either of his own or others.  
Irenaeus calleth this rule the order of tradition from the Apostles time to his, 
Iren. advers. haeres lib. 2. cap 3 & 4. The great estimation of ●he old rule of faith  by which he saith, that all heretics are convinced in such sort that Catholykes shut up their ears, as soon as they hear them speak contrary to the said rule of universal faith, delivered by tradition from age to age. 
Iren. ibid.  Traditionem Apostolorum (faith he) in toto mundo manifestatam in omni Ecclesia ade●● perspicere omnibus qui vera velint audire, etc. We may see the tradition of the Apostles in every Church if we will hear the truth and we can number those Bishops that were instituted by the Apostles, and their successors unto our days, who taught not that which these heretics dream, etc.  
Thus said he, accounting this rule to be the whole tradition of our Ancestors coming down by succession of Bishops and Pastors. 
Ter●. lib. de prescript. contr. haeret. cap. 27.  To whom agreeth Tertullian presently after him calling this rule, the fullness of the Apostles preaching, si ergo incredibile est, (saith he) ignorasse Apostolos plenitudinem praedicationis, vel omnem ordinem regulae omnibus non edidisse, etc. if it be incredible that the Apostles did not know the fullness of the preaching of the gospel or that they did not deliver unto all Christians all the order of the rule of belief, etc. And the same man in an other place, 
Tert. lib de praescrip x h●r. cap. 1●.  Fides in regulae posita est, cedat curiositas fides, certè aut non obstrepant, aut quiescant adversus regulam, etc. Faith consisteth in rule, let curiosity yield to faith, and let heretics either not prate, or be silent against this rule. So saith he, and in an other place, if saith he we will doubt or ask questions in matters of religion, let us inquire o● our own men to wit Catholykes, 
Ibid.  and in such matters, as salva regula fidei possit in quaesti●nem devenire, which without breach of the rule of faith may be called into controversy.  
By all which sayings we see of what account this rule of faith was in the Primitive Church, and that it contained in deed the very sum and corpse of Christian doctrine delivered at the beginning by the miracles & preachings of the Apostles, 
1. Cor. 1●.  whereof S. Paul said to the Corinthians sic praedicavimus sic credidistis, so we have preached, and so you have believed. And afterward partly by writing, and partly by tradition continued, and conserved to posterity by the general consent and succession of the catholic Church, and her governors, and among other things this rule contained the Symbo●um or Creed of the Apostles, 
What the old rule of faith contained. Tert. lib. cont. heres. cap. 13. Rom. 12.  Tertullian expressly testifieth, and besides this it comprehended many things more in particular, as explication of divers hidden mysteries with direction how to understand scriptures, as is plain by S. Paul before alleged where he would have prophesying or exposition of Scriptures to be according to the anology & proportion of this rule of faith, to wit, that no exposition should be made according to the private spirit of any man, but according to that faith and belief which before was generally received, 
2. Pet. 1.  as S. Peter expressly adviseth us, whereby it came to pass as saith Epiphanius, that no heretic could ever put up his head, and begin any thing against this rule, but that presently by the force thereof he was discovered, and discomfited, even as now O.E. in this place as you see goeth about to reject Puritans, and exclude them from his society, for that they descent from his particular new rule established by a few in the Church & Parliament of England, & this rule of his made but yesterday, and by a few, and not yet thoroughly agreed upon among themselves is thought of such force as it can exclude & reject so many learned of their own side, how much more, the ancient rule made by the Apostles, and continued ever since by all the catholic world is sufficient to condemn all new sectaries of our time that dare jangle against it.  
And this might be sufficient for declaration of this rule, the antiquity, force & use thereof, but that I can not well omit a piece of one example out of old Tertulian above 14. hundred years agone, who after the words before cited, where he saith this rule is the fullness of the Apostles preaching (and note that he saith preaching and not wryring) come down in the Church by dissent and tradition, he not only teacheth but useth also the same rule & the eminent force thereof against all heretics of his time, who (as ours do now) pretended that this rule & corpses of faith delivered by the Apostles might perchance be corrupted, altered, misunderstood, or changed by their successors, and that the later Churches were not so pure, as the former, and consequently this rule so much urged of tradition, and universal consent might not be infallible, to which absurdity after many other reasons & reprehensions, Tertulian saith as followeth; 
Tertul lib. de p●es● contr. haeret. cap. 26.  Age nunc omnes erraverint, etc. Go to now, let us grant that all Churches (or the most of them) after the Apostles have erred, & that the holy ghost sent for this cause by Christ, 
A notable discourse of old. Tertul. against all heretics.  and for this cause demanded of his Father, to be the teacher of truth, unto them, hath not respected them and that this steward of God and vicar of Christ hath neglected his office upon earth permitting the Churches of Christianity to believe otherwise, and to understand matters differently from that which the self same holy ghost did preach by the Apostles. But tell m● is it likely that so many & so great Churches over Christendom have all erred, and yet have agreed in one faith? Error of doctrine by all likelihood would have brought in (as it hath done among Protestants) variety also of doctrine among those Churches, but that which it found to be one, 
Quod apud multos vn●̄ inuenitu● no est erratu●● sed tradit●.  and the self same among many is not to be thought to come by error but by tradition, and can any man dare to say that they did err who left, behind them those Traditions? but howsoever you shall call it error, yet this Error reigned for truth until heresies rose up to impugn it, belike truth being oppressed expected the coming of Marc●onithes, and Val●ntinians to deliver her out of captivity, and in the mean space all preaching was in error, 
A scorn of Tertullian falling justly upon protestan●●.  all believing in error, so many thousands of thousands baptized in error, so many good, works of faith done in error so many virtues, so many graces & miracles wrought in error, so many priesthoods and mysteries exercised in error, and finally so many martyrdoms crowned by error, etc.  
Thus far and much farther passeth on Tertullian to urge and convince the heretics of his age by force of this rule delivered by tradition of the Apostles, received by Christendom, and conserved by the Apostles successors unto his time: and the same rule of general consent delivered by succession of Bishops do urge all old ancient Fathers in like sort each one in his age after Tertullian, 
August. Vine. ly●. lib. contr. heres. cap. 27.  but in steed of all let S. Augustine be red urging this rule against all sorts of heretics, but especially, and more largely against the Donatests and Pelagians, and after him again the very next age, Vincentius Lirenensis who after a long discourse to this purpose urgeth the words of S. Paul to Timothy, 
1. Tim. 6.  o Timothee depositum custod● etc. o Tymothy keep well thy pledge or pawn left with thee; which pawn as well this father as the rest do interpret to be the foresaid rule of tradition of faith? Quid est depositum (saith he) what is the pledge or pawn left by the Apostles with Timothy and other Bishops of the Church, and he answereth presently. Id est quod tibi creditum est, non quod a te inventum, quod accepists, non quod excogitasti: rem non ingenij sed doctrine, non vsurp●tionis privatae sed publicae traditionis; rem ad te perductam, non a te prolatam: in qua non author esse debes sed custos: non institutor, sed sectator; non ducens, sed sequens, etc.  
This pawn or pledge is a thing given you in credit, and not invented by you, a thing which you have received, and not devised: a matter not of wit, but of doctrine: not of private usurpation, but of public tradition: a thing brought down unto you, & not brought forth first by you a thing whereof you must not be author, but keep only; not the fownder but a follower, not a leader, but one that is led.  
Thus saith he of the rule of faith in his time, which rule also serveth us no less at this day against all sort of protestants than it did them at that time against their adversaries: but rather much more, for that our prescription of this rule is by many hundred years elder than theirs was, and so this shall suffice about this matter of the Ecclesiastical rule of faith, what it was, and what the ancient Fathers did think and esteem, thereof, and now we will examine a little what stir the minister maketh about his goodly rule of the present particular Church of England.   

OF THE ENGLISH rule of belief set down by O. E. And what substance, or certainty it hath, & how they do use it for excluding Puritans & other Protostantes, and of divers shameful shifts of O. E. CAP. XVI.  
NOTHING is more true in that kind than the saying of the philosopher, 
A ●ift lib. 1. Phis.  Contraria juxta se posita clarius elucescunt, That contraries being laid together do make each other better seen and understood, as a ragged garment laid by another that is fair and precious, maketh the rags and patches more evident and contemptible, and even so this ridiculous new devised rule of O. E. if we compare it with the former ancient rule, commended unto us by the old holy fathers we shall see more perspicuously the vanity thereof, for that he saith. 
Pag. 19  As for ourselves (that is the Protestants of England) all of us profess the doctrine of jesus Christ according to that rule that was established by the common consent of England, and whosoever doth digress from this is not of our society, etc.  
But here I would ask him what rule this is and in what year it was established, by whom, and how many, and what authority they had to establish or to make any new rule from the old received before in matters of religion? 
See the statutis anno Henr. 8.25. c. 14. & an. 26. cap. 1. an. 27. c. 15 & 19 an. 31. ca 14. an. 34. & 35. cap 1.  for if he speak of K. Henry the 8. his days, when the first changes began, and when divers new rules were set down in parliament with this express commendation that they were taken out of the pure and sincere only word of God, I do not think that O. E. will admit them, or stand unto them, though john Fox do hold all that time of K. Henry his mutations after his breach with the Church of Rome, for the time of the gospel and so doth term it every where.  
In K. Edward days also, he being head of the Church, 
An 1. Ed c. 1.2. & 11. & an. 2. & 3. cap. 1.21.23.  though but 9 years old, there was two or three new rules made and altered about matters of religion and their communion book, all pretended out of the word of God, with revocation of that which K. Henry the Father and his Parliaments, out of the same word had appointed before which rule also under K. Edward. I do not know whether our Protestant's will allow in all points now, but sure I am our Puritans do not, nor will not, as appeareth by their own books; what assurance then is there in this mutable and controverted rule of so few years in age?  
But the most important question is, who and what men, and by what authority they made this rule? The Warder knew no other when he writ, but the Lords of the Parliament, and so called it parliament religion wherewith O. E. is very angry, 
Pag. 19  and saith where he calleth our religion parliament religion, he speaketh like himself, that is falsely and slanderously, for albeit the same be received by authority of the Prince & state, yet is it Christ's religion and not the Princes. Soon spoken but how doth he prove it? here is still that old shift of peti●io principij, hissed out by learned men, which consisteth in setting down that for a principle, which most needeth proof, as here where our minister will needs have his religion to be Christ's religion, whether we will or no, and that it was but received and promulgated only by the parliament, but then must I ask him again, what authority besides the parliament hath determined it to be Christ's religion? as also that the Puritans religion is not Christ's religion, notwithstanding they pretend Christ, and his Apostles no less than doth the protestant? and than if we find that the only authority that defineth this matter is the Parliament allowing the one and condemning the other, for that scriptures of themselves can not do it (quia actiones sunt suppositorum, as a little after he urgeth) and then must needs the credit & truth of English religion depend of the parliament, and thereof, worthily be called Parliament religion.  
But hearken (good reader) what an example he hath found to avoid, 
An example making against himself.  that his religion may not be called Parliament religion. The Emperors Gratian, Valentinian, and Theod●sius decreed (saith he) that all people of their government should hold the doctrine of Peter the Apostle, 
Pag. 19  taught by Damasus bishop of Rome, and Peter bishop of ●lexandria, & that they should believe one God and three persons, & yet I hope this Noddy will not call the faith of the Trinity an imperial faith, 
See this handled more largely before in the ann●t. upon the letter of O. ●. to the reader.  etc. Yes surely Sir Noddy-maker, I would call and prove it so if the case were like, that is, if these three Emperors had determined this faith as of themselves, and by their imperial authority, and that it had been a different belief from the rule of faith received before, throughout Christendom, as your parliament religion was and is, having no other ecclesiastical Authority ●or her establishment, but only the authority of your Prince and parliament, which defined it to be true religion and conform to the word of God, and determined that the other which was there before in use, to wit the Catholic to be opposite and contrary to the said word, and therefore to be abolished so as the allowance of the one, and reprobation of the other proceeded from the parliament.  
But the proceeding of the foresaid three Emperors in this their alleged decree, was far otherwise, which O.E. if he had had any more wit than a Noddy would never have brought in, being a matter that doth clearly convince him & his religion of novelty, & heresy. For that Gratian & Valentinian his son being Emperors of the west, 
The decree of the 3. Emp. examined.  and Theodosius of the East, all three do agree to commend to their subjects the roman faith, and bishop of tha● place to wit Damasus then sitting in that chair, under pain of heresy, infamy, and other extreme punishments, which point for that the false minister after his fashion durst no● put down clearly as the words themselves do lie in the text, lest thereby he should discover over much the truth, I mean to do it for him, in this place without other fee for my labour then to prove him a cozening companion, and alleging them brokenly to his own purpose. 
Cod lib. 1. de summa Tri●it. c. Cunctos e●.  Cunctos populos (saith the decree) quos clementiae nostrae regit imperium, in tali rolumus religione vessar●, quam divinum Petrum Apostolum tradidisse Romanis, religio usque adhuc ab ipso i●sinuata declarat, quamque Pontificem Damasum seq●● claret & Petrum Alexandriae Episcopum virum Apostolicae sanctitatis, etc. our will is that all people whom the Empire of our clemency doth govern, shall live in that religion which divine Peter delivered unto the Romans, as the religion by him taught, and enduring to this day doth plainly show, which religion (left by S. Peter) it is evident, that Damasus bishop of Rome doth follow, as also Peter bishop of Alexandria a man of Apostolical holiness, etc. to wit that according to Apostolical discipline, and evangelical doctrine, we all believe one deity of the Father, the Son & the holy Ghost, with equal majesty in holy Trinity, and this law whosoever doth follow, we command that they do embrace the name of christian Catholics, the rest whom we esteem as mad and furious men we will have to bear the infamy of heretical doctrine and to be punished first by God & then by us.  
This is the decree of these three Emperors against heretics for near 1200. year ago, wherein you see they remit themselves all three (though one were of the east Empire) to the Roman religion, and to Damasus the Pope his belief, with whom the Patriarch of Alexandria for the east Church did also agree, and here is nothing determined of religion as you see by their own authority, but only that such as followed the Roman religion, and Pope of those days, should be counted Catholics, and the rest heretics, which if the parliament of England had done in these our days, as all ancient parliaments were wont to do (as appeareth by our statutes) then could not the religion authorized by ●hem be called parliament religion, no more ●hen this can be called Imperial, though published and protected by Emperors.  
Now then (gentle reader) consider how many follies or Nodytismes (which the minister objected always to me) be by him committed in alleging this one example of these Emperors, and on whom they light, but the principal is, that being alleged by himself, and for himself, it maketh wholly against him, & overthroweth quite his cause which may be accounted doltisme also in the deane, besides Nodytisme: for it showeth first the whole difference between these Catholic Emperor's decree, 
Points of the Emp. decree contrary to O. E.  for defence of religion, and the modernal decrees of our Parliaments that take upon them to appoint and define religion in England, it showeth that the Roman religion was received by S. Peter, and had endured so until their days, which was more than 400. years, it showeth also that Damasus Pope of Rome was then the chief governor of christian religion throughout the world: it showeth that these Emperors accounted him for their head, and not he them in matters of religion, it showeth how humbly these Emperors did submit themselves to the decree of the council of Nice made before their days about three persons in one Godhead, confirmed by Pope Silvester, and continued by Damasus; and it showeth how obediently and christianly these Emperors did hold them for Catholic christians, whom the said council, and Pope Damasus did hold for catholics and condemned those for infamous heretics, who did dissent from their obedience in religion; and now whether our later Parliaments of England have done the same by the council of Trent, and Pope's confirming & defending the same (as our former parliaments were wont to do) I leave to the reader to judge, and whether this law of these Emperors were wisely brought in by O. E. or no; but let us pass yet further in examining this rule for trial of truth.  
The minister having shifted of wittily (as it seemeth to him) the exprobration of parliament religion by the foresaid example of the Emperors, falleth to range, and rove wide & far, and to object to us that in Q. maryes' days our religion was established more by parliament, then by authority of the Apostles, that we are divided among ourselves, and have more than 200. divers opinions about the Sacrament of the L. supper, that the universal Church could not deliver us our faith, 
divers manifest false objections.  quia ●●tiones sunt suppositorum, that our faith is neither catholic, nor hath any certain ground ●t all, but is builded upon the particular opinions of this or that mutable and ●ulearned ●ope, that it is not ancient, but full of late no●eltyes, and old heresies, and other such stuff without end, prating much, and proving no●ing so as no Mountebank in Italy could ●●ewe himself less shameless, or more ridiculous.  
And to say a word or two to every one of ●●ese fooleries before rehearsed, the religion ●●at the parliament established in Q. mary's days was it any new religion, 
What religion was planted by parliament in Q. Mary's days.  or different from the rest of Christendom? or did the parliament then do any other thing than th● former edict or decree of the Emperor's tha● commandeth men to hold the ancient re●g●● of Rome descended from the Apostles? an● follow the Bishop of that Church then liui●● as head of all Christendom?  
And as for the two hundred different opinions that Catholykes are said to have, let ●● E. and all his companion's together proved two only that are real differences, and t● maintained by Catholykes being oppos●●● one to the other, and that in points of faith ●●deed, and I shall yield, and pardon all the oth●● hundred eighteen and eight differences that 〈◊〉 objecteth, but if he cannot prove this of 〈◊〉 only, (as never he will be able) then are th● not two hundred differences of ours, but ●● lies of his, and again do you note for au●●ding cavillations that I require two real ●●ferences in matters of belief, for of other c●●●cumstances that touch not precisely belie●● our schools and learned men lawfully m●● have diversity of opinions, as about the man● how bread is con●erted into Christ's flesh the Sacrament, and other like, of which 〈◊〉 of diversities Tertullian spoke a little be●ore, 〈◊〉 he said quaeramus à nostris, 
T●●ul. cap. p●●ced.  quae salva fidei reg●●● quaestionem poss●nt devenire. Let us call in questi●● or dispute among ourselves, and with 〈◊〉 own men (to wit Catholykes) such po●● of religion, as may come in controversy without breach o● the integrity of the rule of faith and with this only distinction of old Tertullian of the different disputing among Catholykes and heretics, the one without touching the integrity of the rule of faith, the other directly opposite against that integrity, by this only, I say, all the vain prating and babbling of our adversaries, that fill up leaves with differences among our schoolmen is quite cut of, and they like barking dogs that have wearied themselves in vain may shake their ●ares, and return to lie down in their ke●els again, until an other fit of bawling be offered, and he that will see an other like baw●●ng whelp to O. E. repealed by a vaunt-curre, ●●d his chaps shut up with the very same di●●●nction, 
Aug. lib. 1. contra. julian. cap. 2.  let him read S. Augustine against julian 〈◊〉 Pelagian objecting the same that O.E. doth ●gainst Catholykes. Alia sunt (saith S. Augustine) ●uibus inter se aliquando etiam doctissimi atque op●ae regulae Catholicae defensores salva fidei compage 〈◊〉 consonant, 
What differences there may be among catholics. salva fidei regula.  & alius alio de una re melius aliquid 〈◊〉 & verius, hoc autem unde nunc agimus ad ipsa 〈◊〉 pertinet fundamenta. There are other points ●●ong Catholykes) in which sometimes the ●ost learned and best defenders of the Ca●●olyke rule of faith do disagree among thē●●●ues, and one doth say better and more truly ●●●haps then an other of the self same thing, 〈◊〉 yet all without breach of the common ●●ke of faith, but this whereof now we treat ●gainst this heretic julian) pertaineth to 〈◊〉 very foundation of our faith.  
Thus saith he, and thus say we, and 〈◊〉 further to O. E. that which followeth in S● Augustine against julian, that he change 〈◊〉 erroneous, and furious mind in accusing many grave Fathers, Bishops, and Pastors, 〈◊〉 the whole visible church of that opprobrio● shame, wh●ch is proper only to heretyks wit of division, and dissension among themselves in matters of faith.  
To the other jest & boyery that folowe● wherein he saith that catholic men can● receive their faith from the universal church quia actiones sunt suppositorum, I might answer this sentence quia omnia plena sunt ●●ultorum, 〈◊〉 otherwise he pretending to make his adu●●sarie a noddy, would never have brou●●● forth so noddilike an argument thereby to increase the number of noddies with additi●● of his own person, for who will not 〈◊〉 him a notorious Noddy who selling himself for a doughty doctor, 
Whether the universal Church may be said to teach or no.  & deane of a Church● understandeth not a proposition in Logi●●● & therefore for his instruction I will send h●● to no higher a treatise for this time, ther● the introduction of Logic or summ● written by Toletus, 
Tolet. in trod. ad dialect. lib. 1. c. ●3.  where among other ●●uisions of terminus singularis, he shall find th● Collectiws autem terminus est qui tantum plura●● juncta significat, ut Roma etc. This I shall expo●● after, when I shall show that this definition Terminus overthroweth his objection, & co●●sequentlie that he is ignorant in ipsis termi●●● artis in the very terms of logic itself.  
But yet in the mean space I deny not, but that the said proposition actiones sunt suppositorum, is true in itself, 
Arist. lib. 1. Metaph. c. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and founded in Aristotle's Me● taphysikes, though Aristotle have not the word supposi●orum, but singular●um, as the greek word importeth, but all is one in our sense. And further I grant that this proposition is used by many school doctors for better explication of deuers' highest mysteries of divinity, and namely of the blessed Trinity, incarnation of our Saviour, and others, as appeareth in divers places of S. Thomas, 
D. Thom. come. in lib. 1. Sent. dist. 5 q. 1. art. 2 & lib. 3 dist. 2. Idem part. 1. q. 34. art 5. & part. 3. q. 19 art. 1.  though yet as it seemeth never read, and much less understood by this rude O. E. as may appear by his foolish application thereof in this place, for that the meaning of this proposition according to Aristotle and schoolmen is that Actiones non sunt universalium logicorum, which are otherwise called universalia in predicando, such as are genus, species and the like, neither yet are actiones universalum in essendo, as were those ideae platonicae, nor yet pa●tium conslituentium vel componentium, but only singularium, aut suppositorum, this is Aristotle's meaning when he saith actiones sunt suppositorum, but what is any of this to our question and speech of the universal Christian Church and her teaching, which Church though in our speech she be called universal collective for that she containeth all Catholykes, yet is she reipsa, and in herself, truly and properly individuum, and not universal logicum vel platenicum, but only as is said universal collectiwm, defined before by Tol●tus, when he saith: Terminus singularis collectiws est, qui tantum plura coniunctè significat, which signifieth the comprehension of many in itself, as Rome, London parliament, city, church, congregation, and the like, which according to logic are properly particular individuals, and not universals, though they contain each of them a multitude in them, and in that sense may be called universals, as the whole and universal city parliament, common wealth etc. and they have this nature that the actions of particulars contained in them, and authorized by the whole, do stand for the whole, and are said to be of the whole as the acts of Parliament in England, though they be done be particular men (and often times not by all) yet are they not called the acts of particular men, but of the whole parliament and the like of the acts of the city, or common wealth.  
And further when such an act is delivered to me by a particular man not in his own name, 
Acts of particular men attributed to the whole body.  nor as his own act or decree, but as the act of the Parliament and in name thereof, I may well say that the Parliament delivereth me the same, which I may also say when the city of London, the chancery, the king's bench the court of wards, or other common bodies maketh out any order though it be delivered by particular men, yet is it the act of the whole universal body, and so called and accounted, and not of the particular men, that deliver or execute the same, which being understood let us now come co the application of our particular case of the universal Church her teaching, and thereby discover the deep lurking of our souldiour-masked minister.  
When we Catholykes say that our faith is taught, 
The application of the former discourse.  or delivered unto us by the universal Church, our meanings, that albeit particular men as Priests, Pastors, or preachers do immediately deliver the same unto us, yet for that they do it not as of themselves, nor as their own, but from the said catholic universal Church, and by her order, we say truly and properly, and cannot say otherwise, but that we are taught it by the said universal Church, which is the body, and not by particular men which are parts only, even as when a man striketh an other with his foot or hand, it cannot be said so properly that the foot or hand struck him, as the man himself, and this argument, runnneth also in our adversaries cause, if he had wit to see it, for when a man is taught at this day the protestant faith of England allowed by the state, may he not say more truly and properly that it is the teaching of the universal Church of England, then of this or that particular contemptible minister? but this he foresaw not, when he came in with his actionis sunt suppositorum, & thereby will see what reason I had to ad stultorum, for so much as his objection besides the ignorance, and falsehood thereof, overthroweth no less himself, and the teaching of his Church, 
Ignorance of O.E.  if it had any force & so much of this which indeed is over much for the fondness of the instance.  
There remaineth then that part only of his babble where he crieth out, that our religion is not Catholic, but his, and that ours is builded only upon Popes which are mutable and subject to error & his upon the eternal truth of God, etc. All which to yes though they have been sufficiently refuted before, in that I have alleged, and a thousand times before that again by other writers, yet these men as hungry flies beaten of from honey do return still with the very same clamours again, for lack of other better matter, and here you see are two points the first, whether we or they be Catholics, and then whether we depend of Popes, and they of God.  
For the first which of our Churches is truly Catholic much hath been said (or at leastwise may be gathered) by the former discourse about the ancient rule of true Catholic faith, 
Who are Catholykes.  but more particularly it remaineth to be handled in this fellows first new foolish challenge added after this for Sir F. wherefore here I will say no more of that mad paradox for which shame enough abideth O.E. in that, when I shall come to answer it.  
Now for the second about our depending of Popes and they of God, and the scriptures, it hath appeared by the two or three precedent chapters, how they depend each man of their own fancy and judgement of scripture, and not of God, or godliness, and as for our depending of Popes as heads successively of our Church, we confess it willingly, and do glory therein, that we are not heretical acheu●● as our adversaries are, but yet to meet with this prating calumniators exprobration we say that we depend not of any Pope as a private or particular man, 
How catholic men depend of the Pope in their religion.  and subject to infirmities, either of ignorance, evil life, or the like, but as he is head and chief pastor of Christ's universal Church, God's substitute upon earth, to whom he hath assured the perpetual assistance of his holy spirit, and of the omnipotent power of his eternal Godhead even unto the world's end, and by virtue of this promise let Peter's successor be never so unlearned, rude, feeble or infirm (as hardly can be chosen one meaner than himself was in all or most of these points (before he received virtue from his master) yet shall his learning be incontrolable for government of God's Church, taking that help by counsels doctors & other learned means, which he may, (and God's providence will ever provide that he shall do) his rudeness also shallbe wisdom, his feebleness fortitude, his infirmity virtue, in respect of his place and dignity, and this did our ancient holy Fathers esteem the matter, not by the talents or merit of the man as heretics babble but by his office, place, and dignity.  
As for example who knoweth not but that Pope Damasus before mentioned in the decree of the three Emperors was not perhaps the learnedest man in the world, nor otherwise the best qualified for human gifts (though he were also a notable man) but other might exceed him in these points. Yet do the said Emperors prefer him before all in directing men for their faith and belief, as you have heard; S. Hierome also was far more learned than he by study, as all men will confess, and himself also, for that he wrote often to S. Hierome to require his opinion in points of learning, and yet when the matter came to determine points of faith S. Hierome subjecteth himself to him, with that humility, as a child and scholar would unto his father and Master, and much more, for that he saith most absolutely in a most hard and perilous controversy of that time not yet determined; to wit, whether one or three hypostacies, or subsistences were to beholden in the Trinity, 
The faith & humility of saynst Hier. epist. ad Damas.  the most learned humble father I say writeth thus to Pope Damasus out of Syria, Obtestor Beatitudinem tuam ut mihi Epistolis tuis sive dicendarum sive tacendarum hypostas●on detur authoritas, I beseech your Hol. that you will give me leave, and authority by your letter to hold or deny three hypostacies.  
Lo here the different spirit in a learned humble Catholic saint, from an ignorant proud contemptuous heretic, S. Hierome regardeth not the personal parts of Pope Damasus, but his place, room, and dignity of his office: our heretics not only do contemn his place, but also most maliciously do load the persons of all or most Popes with infinite calumniations and slanders, thereby to discredit their office and ordinances, what then may we say of these men but that they are given over as S. Paul saith in reprobum sensum to a reprobate sense, and sin maliciously, and desperately to rail against their own consciences, God amend them, and let all wise men take heed of them.  
As for the last and lowdest● lie, which this prating minister affirmeth, 
Whether catholic religion be full of novelties and heresies.  to wit, that Catholic religion is full of new noveltyes, and old heresies, this also is to be discussed in his foresaid challenge when it cometh to be answered, whereunto I might remit the matter, without saying any thing here, as I mean to do, but only to premonish the reader of two points, that there I am to handle, the first, that if this woodcock or any of his crew can show any one novelty (as an article of faith in our religion which was not believed in the Apostles time, and in all ages since by the professors of the Catholic faith, either explicit or implicit (as divines term it) we shall yield in all the rest, for that we hold the foresaid rule of faith delivered by the Apostles to have been full and perfect, and that whatsoever point of faith hath been determined of since, by general counsels, confirmed by Popes, hath been no new thing, but explication only of that which was before delivered by the Apostles, albeit not so expressly known to all.  
In the second point also we hold that if O.E. or his mates, can show any one heresy, taken for an heresy by the general Church since Christ's time unto Luther's, or after, to be holden by us truly, and in the same sense wherein it was condemned for an heresy, and holden by those heretics: if this I say can be truly showed and not as this vice cometh in with fustian-apes for velvet telling us a tale of the Coli●ridians that offered Sacrifice to the Virgin Mary, and other like, from whom he cannot deny, but that we differ most manifestly (though his forehead be never so hard) If this I say can be proved, that any one heresy is truly among us and not the similitude only or shadow thereof, then will we ask no further proof of any thing against us, for that we hold absolutely that either all or none is true in our religion: but on the contrary side, we shall show, and demonstrate most clearly, that they hold many old condemned heresies, in the self same sense, words, and meaning, wherein they were condemned by the universal Church, & held by those heretics. And this is the true difference between us and them, to wit, that they object to us shadows, and resemblances of heresies, but we convince them of true heresy in deed.   

IT IS FURTHER showed by divers clear examples, that O. E. and his fellows do plainly despair of all certain mean or rule to try the truth among themselves, or with us. CAP. XVII.  
NOtwithstanding that sufficient hath been said before in divers chapters of this first encounter to show that Protestants have no sure rule or certain means at all for agreement in matters of Religion, 
Sup. cap 3.4. 5.15 16.  or for consent, or assurance therein, yet for so much as this is a most principal point to be well understood, & deeply pondered by every man that loveth his eternal life, and salvation, I have thought good to treat one point more in this chapter, which is the confession of our adversaries themselves in this behalf, though not in plain words, yet in manifest deeds which are not nor aught to be of less authority than words.  
And first of all I will show this by their passing over without answer this whole matter (being the most principal of all this first encounter) when the warder urgeth them most earnestly in the point itself, and both of them (I mean both the Kt. first, & the minister after him do answer directly no one word unto the whole demonstration, which is a plain confession that they cannot answer it, but yet to show it more evidently, and to convince them in this place, I will repeat again what the warder said before.  
I would ask S. F. (saith he) or any such man as he is, 
Pag. 4.  that determineth so resolutely that his only religion among so many others (as are extant at this day) is true, and all others false; whereon doth he ground his certainty?  

Two ways of trial proposed.  Two only means can S. F. have to guide himself in this case, first that he hath received this doctrine of such or such persons, preachers, ministers, or doctors, whose learning and knowledge in this behalf he trusteth absolutely: and then is his whole faith builded upon the credit of man, as is evident, and consequently is nothing worth, nor no faith at all. The other way is, that he believeth it, for that it is founded in Scripture; but this way to S. F. must needs be as uncertain as the other, if not more, for that to be sure, that it is sound grounded upon Scripture, he must first read himself his whole belief expressly in Scriptures, which is much for a man of S.F. occupation to do, and then he must be able to judge of many other points, belonging to the same, as namely that the book is surely Scripture, that he readeth. And then that the translation which he useth is truly made, out of the learned tongues Hebrew, Greek and Lat●n: And lastly, he must be sure of the true sense and exposition, which also are hard matters for a man of S. F. learning, and much more for others that know less than he.  
Yea and when all is done, if he had all these helps needful for such a matter (as he hath not) yet were it but a private man's opinion, & consequently his faith should be grounded, but upon his own particular judgement, which maketh no faith at all, but opinion only as often hath been said, for that faith must have God's express authority for her foundation.  
So that to conclude, the first blessing which S. F. in particular thinketh to have received by this change of his religion, is in effect, that whereas before when he believed the catholic and universal faith of Christendom, delivered unto him by the universal Church, as founded on Scripture (which Church Christ & his Apostles gave him express commission to credit) his belief was properly faith, & founded upon a rock, that could not fail: now having left that fortress, & cast himself into the waves of new opinions, he hath nothing certain at all but so much as he list to choose of himself, or of other men's opinions, which choice is properly called heresy, for that the word heresy in Greek (as all learned men know) signifieth nothing else, but a certain election, and choice in matters of Religion, to wit, when a man leaving the common consent of the general Church ●● ooseth only to follow that which his own private judgement induceth him unto.  
And to make this more plain, how all these people have no other rule of belief, 
A plain demonstration against sir F.  but only what their own fancy leadeth them unto, I ask S. F. (not of any catholic Doctor, nor of any ancient Father, as S. Augustine, S. jerom, or the rest, whom easily he would contemn) but rather of his own Doctors, Martin Luther, john Caluin, Theodore B●za, & such others, whom he supposeth to have been servants of God, and endued with his holy spirit & all the world knoweth that they were more learned than S. F. yet why should he believe his own judgement more than theirs in points of faith? wherein they differ from him, as Luther about the real presence, and the number, and form of Sacraments, and many other points, Caluyn in matter of the Queen's Supremacy which he denieth. Beza in the whole government of their Church. Or why should I believe S. F. or his new masters of England, rather than these that were more learned than he or his? or what reason, rule, or foundation, have any of these men to believe their own opinion, more than others, but only self will and fancy?  
This then is the first and greatest spiritual benediction (or malediction rather) that I find to have happened to our realm, and nation by this woeful alteration of religion, that whereas before we had a direct rule, squire & pole-star to follow, which was the universal Church, now every man being set at liberty, holdeth, believeth, and teacheth what he listeth. Nor is there any way or mean left to restrain him, for strait way he appealeth bodlie and confidently to the Scriptures, and there he will be both master and Pilot, & boteswayne himself, to govern the bark at his pleasure, for he admitteth no judge, no interpreter, no authority, no antiquity, nor any other manner of trial, which is the greatest madness, and malediction that ever could happen among men of reason.  
And the very same cause that moved the Warder to be so liberal then in setting down this point, hath moved me now to repeat the same again in this place.  
And what do you think that the knight & his champion have replied to all this plain and manifest demonstration? would not you think that both of them for their credit's sake should have buckled up themselves to join in this issue with the warder, showing what certainty they have, or which of the two ways they will take proposed by him, seeing he saith there are no other, or that they should themselves at least appoint some other way: but consider good reader the force of evident truth they are so blanked, and their mouths so shut up with this interrogation of the warder, as the Kt. thought it best to pass it wholly over with silence, as before hath been touched: The minister with more shame than the Kt. hath tatled somewhat, 
Idle tattling in a grau● question.  telling us, that our religion is not catholic, that the universal Church could not deliver it unto us quia actiones sunt suppositorum (as you have heard) that Stapleton teacheth that the Church hath power to prove, tax, and consign the books of holy Scripture. And that universal tradition is the most certain interpreter thereof. And finally that the faith of Papists is built upon the Pope's fancy and opinion, and it is full of novelties, and old heresies, and the like, as before you have heard.  
All these tattlings he hath upon this discourse before rehearsed of the warder, and almost in as many words as I have recited them: but to the matter itself about certainty or uncertainty in religion ne griquidem: he answereth no one word at all, only to the later part, or appendix of the discourse where the warder saith that to make the matter more plain, how protestants have no other rule of belief, he asketh S. F. not of any catholic Doctors, nor ancient Fathers, whom he esteemeth not, but of their own new Doctors Luther, Caluyn, Beza, and the like authors of their own sects, why English Protestant's at this day should prefer their own judgements before these also, (whom they grant to have had great store of the holy ghost) in all matters, doctrines, and interpretation of Scripture, where they descent from them.  
To this I say (all the other storm being passed) it seemed good to the minister to make his answer in these words.  
But saith this Noddy: why should you believe more your own opinions than Caluyn concerning the Q. supremacy, Luther concerning the Real presence, and Beza in the Church government? I answer, first that these men's private opinions concern not fundamental points of faith; 
Pag. 21. A most foolish answer of O. E. about Luther Caluyn etc.  and therefore they are not to be brought forth for instance in this cause where we talk of the foundations and reasons of Christian faith. Mark well his answer (good reader) & judge who is the noddy, he saith two things: the one, that the judgements of Luther Caluin, and Beza be but private opinions among them; the other that the points wherein they differ from them to wit, the real presence in the Sacrament, her Majesty's Supremacy ecclesiastical, and the whole government of the Church are no fundamental points of their faith.  
For the first I would gladly know what authority is available among them in teaching, preaching, and interpretation of Scriptures, if Luther, Caluyn, and Beza be rejected as private and particular men, where they differ from them? our Doctors and Church they do defy, the ancient Fathers they look not willingly after them, their own parliament this man saith a little before doth not appoint but admit their religion only, who then is he, or who are they that must determine, and define in this case? For the second, if the difference with Luther about the real presence of Christ's real body in the Sacrament, be no fundamental point of faith (seeing they accuse us of the highest crime under heaven about the same, that is, of idolatry, and holding a creature to be the creator, and we them again of most heinous blasphemy & highest wickedness upon earth in discrediting Christ in his own words, that said it was his body, & his whole Church that ever so understood him unto this day) if the matter of supremacy be no fundamental point of faith, 
What points are fundamental in protestants doctrine.  whereby all their ecclesiastical hierarchy standeth at this day in England as their Bishop's Deans, Archdeacon's, and other prelate's, and parsons of the Spiritualty, who otherwise must needs be plain intruders, and mere lay men.  
If their whole government of their Church be not fundamental whereof dependeth whether they have any true ministers, preachers and teachers lawfully allowed or no & consequently whether their Sacraments be Sacraments and be administered by them that have authority so to do; if all these points I say be not fundamental in O.E. opinion, what are fundamental? And what Atheism doth this Martial minister & devils deane bring in upon us? But believe me (good reader) these good fellows do only eat of the ministery, and believe as please them; and this being a companion of many occupations, will live by that which will yield him most, & according to that also shall be his doctrine and belief.  
Of their great grandfather friar Martin Luther he saith here in the words following his former answer. 
Pag. ●1. O. E. his contemptious speech of Luther and Caluyn.  We suspend our opinion and give no approbation to Luther's opinion concerning the carnal presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament, for that we see the doctrine to be new, and not taught by the apostolic Church, nay we find it to be repugnant to the Apostles doctrine delivered in Scriptures, etc. Mark the arrogancy of th●s petty chaplain, we suspend, we see; we find; who are those we I pray you? Oh that Doctor Martin Luther were alive again to canvas this arrogant barking bastardly whelp of his, he would prove him but a very demi puppy. Of Caluyn he saith: when Caluyn was better informed (about the Supremacy) he changed his style and retracted his opinion, but where and when, I pray you? why have you not noted the place and time; for Caluyn was to great a man I trow to change style or retract opinions, were it never so false or impious, and whether he changed in this, let his Elizeus that had his cloak & spirit of wickedness double (I mean Theodor Beza) be witness, who is more to be believed in this case then O. E. that is but a fugitive of Ca●uyns camp, going about to betray his Captain.  
lastly about the government, of his English Church, he addeth concerning Beza: 
Pag. 22.  I say that in external government it is not necessary that all Churches should concur and agree.  
Lo his saying: and albeit he say madly, yet I trust he will not say but that in one and the self same Church agreeing all in one true doctrine of jesus Christ (as in the former leaf he affirmeth all sorts of protestants do) it is necessary they agree in the substantial points at least of some government among themselves, 
Pag. 18.  as for example, 
Atheistical Doctrine O.E.  of some one head & the chief members thereof, as whether the Prince be supreeme head ecclesiastical, and may make Bishops, and whether the Bishops be true Prelates, and may make ministers, and whether they be of Gods or the devils making that are so made, which is the proper controversy between them of England, and Beza at this day, and was with john Caluyn also while he lived. To deny this I say, were a very mad new doctrine for soldier O.E. to teach now under a ministers coat, to wit, that none of all these things are necessary points of doctrine, but indifferent rather, and that in his Church a minister, & a ministrel, a preacher, and a pirate, a bishop and a bytesheep, a deane, and a devil are all one.  
And that this fellow, and his companion's have no religion nor conscience in saying and denying, 
The Survey of pretended holy discipline etc. printed by Io. Wolf. 159●. cap 2●. fol. ●54.  admitting or rejecting at their pleasures, it may appear by one of their public books printed, and set forth against the puritanes where they have a whole Chapter of accusations against the said puritanes for rejecting & contemning new gospeling writers of their own when they make against them which yet you see practised here by O. E. himself though no Puritan, and that even against the very chief heads and sires of both their religions, Luther, Caluyn, Beza, yea some are of opinion that O.E. was the Author of that book wherein the Puritans are so eagerly argued for this fault of contemning their own writers when they make against them, though I cannot easily believe the same, for that it seemeth les fond written in that kind, then could be expected of this man's shallow cacitie, that wrote this doltish answer to the Wardword, but be it how it will you shall see the Puritans taken up very sharply by protestants in that book, for rejecting both their own authors, and ancient Fathers, which yet you see this arrogant fool doth practise here in the one (I mean touching their own) and you shall hear afterward how egregiously his fellows d● the like in the other, that is to say, concerning the ancient Fathers. But first let us see what is objected to the Puritans in the former point.  
In a certain place Pelican, Bullinger, Bucer, Illyricus, 
Survey c. 28. Pap. ●54.  and Musculus (all great Doctors among the Lutherans) being brought in against the Puritan doctrine, Cartwright answereth them thus; 
Puritans contempt of their own Doctors.  If they were for one a hundred, they could not bear down the Apostle, to wit, standing with him, as he presumeth.  
But after these is brought in Luther himself, interpreting a piece of Scripture otherwise then they would have it, but they answer that his exposition is out of season. 
T. Cartw li. 2. Pag. 313. & 314.  Then is brought in Bishop Ridly, and brother Bucer great doers in K. Edward's days in England, but the first is dismissed, thus: Bishop Ridley being a party in this cause ought to be no witness, the second thus: 
Ibid. pag. 398.  Bucer hath other gross absurdities, sometimes Homer sleepeth; his reasons are ridiculous, etc. jewel and Fox do follow, but Fox is shaken of with this saying: that he took greater pain in his story to declare what is done, then how justly or unjustly how conveniently or unconuenientlie it was done. jewel received this iyrke, as a contumely engraven in his tomb as the Protestant complaineth. B jewel calleth the doctrine of the gospel wantonness. 
Ibi. Pag. 11●.   
Finally they writ thus of all the chief English protestants in K. Henry. K. Edward. Q. Mary and in this Q. time before themselves: their knowledge was in part; 
T. Catw. li. 1. Pag. 196.  and being sent out in the morning or 〈◊〉 the Sun of the gospel was risen so high, they might over see many things, which those which are not so sharp of sight as they were, may see, for because that which they want in the sharpness of sight, they have by the benefit, & clearness of the Sun and light greater than in their days.  
Lo here the growing and disagreeing protestant faith, and every man his new light and lantern in his hand. Whosoever cometh after presumeth to see more than his fellow that went before him. Where will this matter end? but mark their wrangling spirits one within an other: the puritanes are sorely reprehended for this contemptuous using their own authors; but are the puritanes more arrogant or bolder in this point, than you have heard O.E. before, even with the first parent of their profession?  
As for the old Doctors of the ancient Cath. Church, 
Survey. Pag. 329.  the foresaid book of protestāns, hath also a special chapter of examples of the Puritans contempt against them, calling S. Ignatius scholar to S. john the Evangelist, a counterfeit and vain man, S. Irenaeus is rejected, except (saith the Survey) he will frame his speech after the new cut, 
Sur. pag. ●3●. Annot Bezae in act. ●4. & 1. Timoth. 5.  even according to Bezaes' pleasure. justinus Martyr being urged, that lived presently after the Apostles, answer is made, that in the days of justine, there began to peep out in the ministery some things, 
Th. Cartw. li 2. Pag. 621.  which went from the simplicity of ●he gospel. To S. justine is added S. Hierome, whom they answer thus: Corruption groweth in time, as the times are, so are they that live in them, there is not such sincerity to be looked for at Hieroms hands, as from others that went before him. 
T. Cartw. lib 1. Pag 103.  Clement Anacletus, Epiphanius, Anicetus, Zozemenus Volutianus Ambrose and Augustine are cited by Protestants against them; 
Contempt of old Doctors. Suru. Pag. 337  whereto they answer, the bringing of those authorities (against us by protestants) is the moving and summoning of hell, the times wherein these men lived were not pure and vyrgynlyke, Clement▪ Anacletus, An●cetus, are discharged for rogues, and men branded in the forehead, Epiphanius wrote according to the time he lived in, Ambro●e holdeth other things corruptly, Zozemenus, & Volutianus wrote not according to that which was, but according to the custom and manner of the age wherein they wrote, Augustine's sentence (say they) if it should be admitted would make a window to bring in all popery. Lo these men's spirit.  
Doctor Whitgift urgeth them with testimonies out of Pope Sixtus the Martyr, 
D. wi●g. pag. 344.  Pope Damasus, S. Hierome, Zozemenus, and Socrates, they answer; two of them are counterfeits: Damasus spoke in the Dragon's voice, the best ground among men beareth thistles: those times were corrupt. Twelve other Doctors are alleged together against them, but they answer, what then? if they were for one a hundred, 
Suru. Ibid.  they cannot countervail, truth must not be measured by the crooked yard of men. josephus judaeus is cited with great commendation of Eusebius, Beza answereth, he is ridiculous and foolish. The exposition of 7. greek and latin doctors is alleged upon certain words in the Epistle to the Romans, 
Cap. 12. verse. ● qui distribuit, etc. T. Cartw. li. 3. Pag. 8. & 9  Cartwright contemneth it and saith that by straining the text in steed of milk they draw out blood.  
And generally this surueing protestant showeth that the puritanes do contemn & condemn both Fathers & counsels within the first 500 years, charging them with corruption, & favouring Antichrist the Pope of Rome, alleging for this their own words and sentences, as this for example of Beza: The fathers (saith he) in the first council of Nice underlaid the seat of the harl●t. 
Pag ●43.  And T. Cartwright Beza his scholar; The fathers imagined fond of Antichrist, they dealt like ignorant men: they were overmastered of their own affections: And then further of the Apostles time itself. 
Suru. Ibid.  Although (saith he) the tower of this Antichristian building was not then set up, yet the foundation thereof was secretly laid in the Apostles time, etc.  
I might pass further in raking this channel of desperate contemptuous speeches of these new fantastical brethren against antiquity, but what? do these protestant writers that gather these things against puritans amend the matters themselves? No truly: but rather do worse than they, or as bad, whensoever occasion is offered, and that they are so pressed with the father's Authorities as they cannot shift them of with any sleight or subtle interpretation, whereof let the writings of Fulke, against D. Bristol, D. Allen, and others be witnesses, as whitaker's also against D. Sanders, who hath this general caveat, 
Whit●k cont. sand. Pag. 92.  if you argue (saith he) from the witnesses of men, be they never so learned and ancient, we yield no more to their words in cause of faith and religion, 
We perceive.  than we perceive to be agreeable to Scripture, neither think yourself to have proved any thing though you bring against us the whole consent, and swarm of Fathers, except that which they say be justified, not by the voice of men, but by God himself.  
Lo here (good reader) ponder this with they self and let us make an end, consider what unity, or way to unity, what certainty or mean of certainty have these men, who disagree not only in points and articles of belief, but even in the very principles, and first grounds, how to be tried, who shall be witnesses, who judges, who moderators, who interpreters, and lastly who shall determine the matter in such sort as other thereupon may be bound to obey:) all talk of Scriptures, and all appeal to Scriptures, but they agree not, nor ever will, who shall give the meaning of Scriptures; antiquity they infame by objecting corruptions, old Fathers and counsels they disdain, new Doctors of their own they contemn, when they descent from them, ours they hate, fly and detest, all parties do urge the words of S. Paul to the Romans: 
Rom. 12.  that Scriptures must be expounded according to the analogy, proportion, and rule of faith, whereby they confess if you mark, that Scriptures must be ruled by faith, and not all faith by Scriptures, but what faith this is, which must be the rule for interpreting Scriptures, this is not so easy to be agreed upon, and for that each part hath a different faith, and consequently also a different rule of faith (which in heretics & sectaries is their own brain, in Catholykes the uniform consent of antiquity) hereupon followeth that the self same Scriptures are differently expounded by them and different collections made upon them, each man according to his faith and belief, and so this rule with heretics is nothing else, but an endless labyrinth, & themselves do confess it, and prove it also by experience, as may appear by that which is said before in the 4. and 5. chapters of this encounter about the event of their Counsels, Synods and other meetings, and by other testimonies of their own Authors.  
But for upshot of this Chapter I mean to allege then one only that hath written of late, 
Rob Robertson Anabaptist his means for trial.  & printed his book in Holland, his name is Robert Robertson a teacher as it seemeth among Anabaptists of that country, who complaining much that his people and other of the same new gospel who agree as he saith in one against the Pope and Papists, and all of them profess to follow only Scriptures, can never notwithstanding agree about the meaning thereof, whereupon considering the great inconvenience and hurt that of this doth ensue, he hath thought upon another mean of agreement, which is to make suit unto the States to grant them leave in some field or town to assemble themselves severally, and to pray to God, first the one side, and then the other, to obtain some evident miracle for decision of their controversies, and to know which side should yield to the other. And to the end that the devil may not enter in or deceive them with a false miracle, this man faith, that he hath thought of one allowed and testified in Scripture itself, and such as the devil cannot work, which is to make the Sun to stand still for a while, & therefore would have both s●des severally to pray for this miracle, and thereby end their controversy, nothing doubting but that God (they being so special servants of his) will of his great goodness condescend unto their petition in so just and necessary a demand.  
Hear (lo) is this man's opinion for the mean to try out truth among them after long proof that Scripture alone will not do it, if O. E. and his companion's will accept of his offer to go and pray with them in the fields of Holland to stay the Sun, they may chance to agree together at the next new moon, to whose wanes and changements I leave both them and the progress of their religion, and mean only to say a few words more about the fruits of good works and temporal benedictions, and so to end this first encounter, wherein I have been over long already.   

OF THE FRVITES OF virtue and good works pretended to have followed by change of religion: as also of eight temporal inconveniences which may be called curses, or maledictions ensued by the same, and how O.E. behaveth him▪ self in this controversy. CAP. XVIII.  
Thou wilt not forget (good reader) I hope how in the tenth chapter of this Encounter we examined the fourth blessing of the new gospel assigned by S.F. to be good life, 
En. 1. cap. 10.  and holy works of Protestants above other men (for otherwise it could be no special blessing of their gospel) where I showed first that seeing this blessing was testified only by themselves, & not by their neighbours that lived with them, and aught to feel the effects of this blessing, it was vain and rather to be esteemed a brag then a blessing, which I confirmed, for that the warder coming to th● immediates, and particulars, wherein, and b● what means good works might be tried, & discerned, whether protestants, or Catholykes abound more in them, the Kt. slippeth a side, and letteth pass the whole declaration of the warder without so much as a beck or nod at it, for which respect I have thought convenient to repeat the same again in this place in the Warders own words (for that they are not many) and to see at lest what the Advocate minister supplieth for his Client the Kt. in this behalf, thus then wrote the warder.  
After assurance, stability, and union in belief, the next greatest spiritual benedictions that can be expected of any doctrine, 
Pag. 6. What effects of virtue new religion hath wrought.  are the good effects of virtue which it worketh in men's minds & manners, as it was foretold by Esay the Prophet, that Christ's doctrine, should so alter men's conditions and natures, that such as were most fierce, savage, and wicked before should by this doctrine become most humble, 
Esa 11.  kind and gentle. The wolf (saith he) shall dwell with the lamb, and the pard shall lie with the goat, the calf, lion, and sheep shall abide together: and a little child shall be able to govern them all.  
Well then: hath the protestants doctryn wrought these effects of peace, meekness, mansuetude and agreement? I have touched be●ore the bloody tragedies raised in France, ●landers Scotland, and other places, upon the ●●rst rising thereof, I might add Switzerland, and ●ermany, where their own stories do testify ●●at above a hundredth thousand people were ●ayne within one year, by the rebellion and wars of the countrymen against their lords, 
Sledan.  for the controversy of religion: such humility obedience, and meekness of heart imprinted presently this new doctrine when it came.  
But let us see other effects, Christ's doctrine exhorteth to penance, to mortification of the flesh, to continency, virginity, fasting, praying, alms voluntary poverty, renouncing of the world, and the like. Are there more of these effects now adays in England, or before? or are their more in Syr. F. and his men, then in ours? doth he and his ghospellers pay their debts better than Catholykes do, or keep better houses, or more hospitality, or raise their rents less, or take less fines, or use their tenants better, or lend their neighbours more money without usury? or do they help to marry more poor men's daughters, and other such like good works of charity?  
Is pride in apparel, gluttony, drunkenness, lechery, swearing, and forswearing, covetousness, cruelty, falsehood, deceit, thievery, lack of conscience, oppressing of poor men, more or less now adays in ure or before, when yet this change was not made? Let S. F. answer me to this, and not he only but the whole country round about him, and then let him tell me with witnesses, whether they be spiritual blessings or curses that have ensued upon this change of religion, so much commended by him, and so I shall pass to weigh his temporal benedictions, which perhaps he esteemeth far more them these spiritual. Thus he.  
To all this treaty of the fruits of virtue, & virtuous life in Protestants, S. F. answereth not so much as one line, and therefore his prating Proctor to help out his master must needs bestir himself to say somewhat, but how fit to the purpose, and state of the question his own words shall show, for thus he beginneth. 
Pag. 23.  I answer (saith he) that the doctrine of the gospel hath wrought good effect in all true Christians, and albeit every one do not so square their lives according to God's law, as they should, yet compart our people with the Papists, nay with the Priests, and Popes themselves, whom they call most holy, 
* For his office and not for his person.  I make no question but they do far excel them.  
Lo here this fellow is quick, and resolute, he maketh no question of that which is most in question, or rather which is all the question, whether protestants in all countries where they live be of better lives generally then Catholykes, or that which is the same in effect, (but yet more easy to be discerned,) whether the world since the rising of Luther and Caluins' new doctrine (which this man calleth the gospel, 
Sup. cap 17. nu. 10.  though before he have condemned the same in divers points as you have heard) the manners of men have been generally better or worse, for that according to the warders discourse & Christ's own words true religion, and reformation, bringeth ever with it better life, and behaviour of men, this then is the true state of the question whether protestants religion have done this or no, whereof we have showed the negative part before out of their own writers, and the meanest man, woman, or child that liveth at this day, if they have heard of things past, or can behold matters present with any judgement, will easily discern. Yet this resolute Minister, (as you see,) maketh no question to the contrary, and so from this general assertion passeth on to praise exceedingly the clemency, and virtue of protestant Princes, and then turneth he to the contrary (which is his only plausible common place to dilate, and delight himself) I mean against Rome and her Popes: But the whorish synagogue (saith he) of Rome you must not marvel of the speech (for that whores and knaves in his ministery do often meet) she is red with the blood of saints, no tiger was ever more fierce and cruel.  
Thus in general, and then layeth he load upon Popes, Card. Priests, monasteries, both of men and women, and for proof thereof bringeth out Boccas an old bawdy Italian Poet, & Pallengenius an other, as lascivious in heresy, as the other in Lechery, and besides this he citeth also a work without an author called Onus Ecclesiae wherein many abuses in life and manners by way of compassion are complained on with desire of amendment, and with this doth the minister think that he hath played the man, and proved sufficiently that the new gospel hath brought in great reformation of life, and manners, and that now the world goeth better than before, for good works: wherein (as I said) the best judge may be the common sense, feeling, and experience of men that live in the world, for that descending to particulars, in so long a circuit as is the world, is both infinite, uncertain and odious; yet if I would follow this fowl mouthed minister in ripping up unsavoury matters, of his clergy as he feigneth, & amplifyeth of ours I might go but to public records of his men punished by public justice for their outrageous behaviour in that behalf, I mean in that very point of carnality, which they most object to ours in most false manner, and for avoiding whereof in themselves each one of them have allowed his remedy most desired, called by themselves his vessel of ease, though with no small disease and disaster of the common wealth as before hath been showed.  
But to leave this point, and to come to the second which is about the temporal respects, whether the new gospel and change of old religion have brought loss or gain hurts or benefits, conveniences or inconveniences in this behalf, the matter is not much more doubtful then in the former conference of good life and works. For albeit both the Kt. and his proctor do put down certain temporal benefits as blessings received by their new gospel, yet are they both light & vain in themselves and not agreeing between themselves, neither do they satisfy or answer the great hurts and inconveniences set down on the contrary side by the warder towards the end of this his first encounter, which being very weighty and of great consideration the Kt. leapeth over them altogether, as before hath been signified, but the minister chattereth here and there after his fashion, but far from answering any substantial point thereof, which thing to the end you may the better perceive, I shall take pain to repeat again in this place the former hurts received by change of religion mentioned by the warder in these words.  
For better understanding of the controversy in question, 
Pag. 7. and 8.  men are wont to bring into consideration two points. 
Temporal effects by change of religion.  First what is likely to have been or fallen out if the change of religion had not been made in her Majesty's time, and then what hath ensued upon the change made. To the first they say that if as her Matie. entered most happily and joyfully into the crown of England by general consent of all and promoted especially by the peculiar forces of Catholyks that were at that day most potent without comparison, and that as her Matie. entered catholicly that is to say showing herself in all points of religion and behaviour a catholic according as she had done also before in her sister Q. mary's reign, and was now crowned and anointed catholicly by a Cath. Bishop at a Cath. mass and other like circumstances, if she had continued that course still, & not yielded to the persuasions of some new councelours against the judgement of all her o●d (as indeed she was hardly brought ●o yield thereunto at the beginning, for that she foresaw by her wisdom, divers of the inconveniences that since have ensued,) then say these men if this had been so, both her Matie. and the realm had been most happy at this day, and in particular they allege these benefits following, which of all probability would have fallen upon us.  
This is the Warders proffer in this behalf, and then do ensue, 
The vain chattering of O.E.  8. special considerations of moment to be weighed in this affair, which after we shall lay forth and examine in order. But now to consider the chattering of our parrot minister for denial of all these things, I can no ways make you better apprehend it then to tell you of a certain comedy which once I saw in Venice (if well I remember) wherein the Vice of the play had taken for his invention to contradict every thing that his fellow should say, and so when the one said good morrow to the people, the other said good even, when one said it was a fair day, the other it was a foul when the one said it was noon, the other answered it was night, when the one affirmed that the Sun shined clearly the other would needs hold that it was the moon, and so he passed forward in contradicting all that the other affirmed, until the people being wearied, cried out that the fool should be thrust down for he marred the play.  
And this is our case now O.E. is set upon a new devise to drop denials with his adversary, and to contradict whatsoever he saith, or howsoever: you have hard what the warder hath written in this his preface, hearken then how this fellow contradicteth and with what, and how good reasons.  
The Warder saith that her Maty. entered most happily and joyfully to the crown of England by general consent of all. 
A comparison of a vice in a play  The minister saith it was not so, for that it grieved the Papists exceedingly. The other said: she was promoted especially by the peculiar forces of Catholyks that were at that day most potent without comparison, 
Pag 2●.  this man denieth it & giveth this goodly reason: what needed force if all were willing she should be crowned. The other saith further that her Matie. entered catholicly, showing herself in all points a catholic. This fellow denieth it with this reason: For if she had so done, why should the popish prelates fear any alteration. The Warder furthermore saith: she was crowned and anointed catholicly by a catholic Bishop, at a Cath. mass. O. E. denieth all, and saith: she declared plainly, she would not mass: which how loud a lie it is, not only her Matie. can testify, but as many as yet live, and were present at that act, and himself presently touched (as it were) with some shame of this asseveration, addeth: But were it true, yet his conjecture of happiness is vain, etc. Whereunto I answer, that if it were true, then was O.E. false in denying it: and as for the vanity of the conjecture: that if mass and old religion, had been continued in England, many inconveniences had been avoided, we shall try the matters in the particulars that do ensue, but in the mean space, consider the vanity of this vice for bringing in for instance to the contrary Francis, Charles, & Henry Kings of France, the States of the low countries & the people of Portugal, who have fallen into divers troubles, wars and disasters notwithstanding they continued the mass and were Catholyks in religion. But I would ask O. E. whether these troubles came by their change of religion or no? For if they did not, then are they impertinent to our purpose, which is to show that by change of religion commonly do ensue troubles, but not that only by this means disasters are incurred, as though there were no other, for that catholic Princes & people also may incur troubles by other means, then by change of religion, but they avoid those which this change doth bring with it. 
Change of religion in France and Flanders.  Wherefore this noddy is discovered to speak nothing to the purpose in bringing in those five examples whereof four notwithstanding are wholly against himself, for that all the troubles which he mentioneth to have happened to catholic Princes and people in France and Flaunders have been occasioned by change of religion enforced upon them by others, as the world knoweth, and not by ●heir own wills, and so having seen what ●his minister hath answered to the Warders preface of temporal hurts we may imagine ●ow substantially he will satisfy afterward ●o the points themselves, whereof the first ●ower are those that follow.  
And first (saith the warder) if religion had not been changed her Matie. at this day had had a most flourishing Kingdom, 
Warnword Pag. 8.  united both to her and among themselves in religion, 
1 Strength and felicity by union.  judgement, affection, fidelity and frend-●hip as other realms Cath. of the world are seen to be, & as ours for above a thousand years together with much honour and felicity is known to have remained. 
2 Security.  Hereof had ensued that none of these fears and terrors of conquests, invasions, assaults, treasons, conspiraties & the like, which this Wach-man endeavoreth to lay before us, had ever come in consideration for that England united in it self, hath ever since it was a monarchy made other Kingdoms and provinces round abou● it to fear her forces (as by matters happened in France Ireland, and Scotland for many ages is evident) and she never greatly feared any.  
Thirdly, England had had her Matie. at this day by all likelihood a joyful mother of many fair and princely children; 
3 Issue of her Majesty.  for that the principal cause of her graces not marrying is to be presumed to have proceeded of the different religion of foreign princes, who desired th● same on the one side: and one the other th● inequality of blood in her own subjects for such advancement.  
For to attribute this great resolution of he● Matie. to the only love of sole life and mayd●-head I doubt how it can be justifiable, sein● that among Catholyks where such profesio● is more praised and practised, they use sometimes to draw out even vowed nuns from ●heir cloisters to marriage, for so weighty a ●ause, as is the saving of succession in so great a ●rowne as England is known to be. And ●mong Protestants virginity is not of that necessity or merit, as for it to incur so great inconveniences, notwithstanding the base ●nd servile flattery of this crouching Knight, ●ho casteth in now and then the memory of 〈◊〉 maiden Queen without respecting the ●eadly wound which his country receiveth ●●erby.  
Foorthly of this had followed the sure establishment of the succession of this imperial ●●owne in the blood and race of the united ●●yal houses of York and Lancaster, 
4 Establishment of succession.  and of 〈◊〉 l●ne of the noble K. Henry the 7. which ●ne being now to end with her Matie. in the ●●rect descent is like to bring great dangers 〈◊〉 the realm. For albeit there want not of collateral branches, yet their causes are otherways so implicated for divers respects, but specially by difference of religion (which had ●uer happened if the change had not been ●ade) as no man can tell what willbe the end, ●●d most men do fear extreme calamities ●●erby:  
Thus saith he. Whereunto for the first two ●●ints our minister answereth nothing in ●●ect, 
First & second inconvenience fear & danger.  but that the Warder mistaketh S. F. meaning, 〈◊〉 think him to have spoken any thing of fear, ey●●● of foreign invasions or domestical treasons: but ●●at is this to the purpose, had it not been better, that all this had been avoided? Bu● hear him further. 
Pag. 30.  But suppose (saith he) Popery had been continued, how could this noddy have given 〈◊〉 warrant, that we should have been neither oppug●e● by enemies abroad, nor by traitors at home? Wa●n● Henry the 3. of France excommunicated by the Pop● oppugned by his subjects, & murdered by a Dominica● friar, notwithstanding his zeal in popery?  
Mark here the man's wit, there be tw● parts of his demand, the first: how the Wa●der could warrant, etc. whereunto is easi●● answered that such hurts as came by alterati●● of religion, as division of minds, judgement and affections, etc. had been easily warrante● if religion itself had not been altered.  
The second part about K. Henry the thir● of France is ridiculous, 
About Henry late K. of France.  for he was not troubled for changing of religion himself, b● for being presumed to favour them underhand that meant to change religion, & for the dea● of noble Princes as all the world knoweth having (as divers writ) given his oath, a●● fidelity to the contrary, and received the Sacrament for confirmation thereof; and yet yt either presumption or ignorance in t●● companion so bodily to affirm that the Po●● did excommunicate the said King for this fa●● which excommunication no man ever y● saw published.  
To the third principal point about the probability of noble issue in her Matie. if chan●● of religion had not been; 
3 Inconvenience lack of i●sue royal  this parasite pr●leth as if he were jack daw, showing will 〈◊〉 talk, but lacking wit to say any thing to the purpose, telling us only, that if it had pleased ●er Matie. to have married, she might as well ●aue married in protestant religion, as in Ca●holyke, and that their women may have fair princely children, as well as ours, and that ●●uers Cath. Princes did seek her marriage, ●nd amongst others the K. of Spain. And ●hat the french K. sister at this day is married ●hough she be a protestant, and that Q. Mary ●as married and yet had no children, and di●ers other such trifling toys, which we deny ●ot but say that they are impertinent, and ●o not touch the substance itself of the ●atter meant by the Warder, which is that 〈◊〉 a Cath. state there would have been other ●anner of instance made to her Matie. & other counsel and resolution of learned men laid ●efore her for her obligation to marry in such case for saving of a common wealth and for continuance of royal issue in the same then protestants are wont to do, as by the examples ●●eadged by the Warder is evident.  
And to this the minister saith nothing at 〈◊〉, 
4 Inconvenience Succession not established.  as neither to the fourth about establishment of succession which he saith could not ●●ue been, but by allowance of the Pope, and ●●at this had been dishonourable to her Matie. ●●d intolerable to the state, to bring so great a 〈◊〉 to submit herself to so base a slave (mark ●●e impotent railing of an abject parasite, 
Pag. 3●. ) 〈◊〉 of him to receive her right to the crown. And ●●en he passeth further to the matter of state, saying: But let us suppose her Matie. should leave 〈◊〉 issue behind her, is she the first that hath been in 〈◊〉 case? No, S. Minister, nor will not be the last but what doth this remedy the inconvenience Hear him further. 
Pag. Ibid.  And is there no remedy either by laws already provided, or by wise men to be deuis●● but that we must needs fall by the ears together (about this matter of succession) This is 〈◊〉 supposition of their noddy our adversary, etc.  
God grant S. Minister he prove a noddy for his fear without foundation: 
Who is the noddy.  but ho● great a noddy you are in the mean space, 〈◊〉 setting so light by the matter and disputing 〈◊〉 fond as you do all men see. But whe● you add further to make your aduesar● odious: 
Pag. 22.  that he percase desireth some garboil 〈◊〉 England to gratify the Infanta, & the Spaniard w●● slave he is. 
Who are like to desire more garboils in England.  if he be the man whom yo● would have us to ween, it is very w●● known, that he setteth less by the great ●● benefit or promotion that England or Spai● joined together, can give him, than you 〈◊〉 by the least benefice of the diocese wher●● you dwell, and are a proling minister, a●● much more slave were your to you late 〈◊〉 the Ea●le of Essex running up and down 〈◊〉 by sea and land after him to gain so●● scraps at his hands for your maintenance and you wife with her velvet hood, th●● this man hath showed himself to the great●● Princes in Christendom, with whom 〈◊〉 hath dealt in furtherance of Cath. religion: a●● which of you two hath desired more ga●●boyles in England either he by the lady Infanta or you by your Lord Essex, the events have showed, he being a man that cannot grow by garboils, and you a broken companion that cannot well remedy your needs but by innovations, and with this I leave you, and will pass to the other four inconveniences laid down by the warder.  
Fifthly (saith he) if religion in England had not been changed, 
5 Inconvenience, union with Rome & Sea apostolic.  we had had no breach with Rome, nor consequently had the excommunication followed, whereof so great noise hath been made in the world abroad, and so great trouble at home. And what the union ●nd friendship of the Bishop of Rome may ●mport, even as a temporal Prince, the effects ●hewed of late in France, where especially ●y his endeavour and authority matters have ●yn compounded, that seemed very hard and desperate before, not only between that King and his own subjects but also between that crown and Spain and the ●ates of Flaunders, which without such an ●byter and umpire would very hardly ever ●yn accommodated.  
Sixtly England had continued in her old ancient amity and leagues most honourable ●ith Spain & Burgundy, 
6 Ancient leagues.  & with their de●●ndants, and consequently had avoided all ●●ese long and costly wars, which by that ●eache we have been enforced to main●●yne with loss of so many worthy men ●●d expense of so great treasure, as easily may be imagined, and the quarrel not yet ended.  

7 Wars abroad.  seven so great & bloody wars and tumults in Christian Kingdoms round about us had never happened, as before in part hath been declared, and every man doth impute the principal causes and motions thereof unto the diversity of religion in England.  
And lastly most doleful al●erations in our own country had been avoided, 
Damages received at home.  as the deprivation in one day of all the sacred order of Bishops in England with their perpetual imprisonment, for that they would not subscribe to this unfortunate change of religion wrong out in parliament, as all men know, by the odds only of one or two voices of lay men. The disgrace and abusing of so many noble houses with overthrow of others whereof let Norfolk, Arundel, Northumberland, Oxford, Westmoreland, and Dacres, give testimony● for of the rest I will not make mention, seeing perhaps themselves would be loath I should all which had passed otherwise by probability if religion had not been altered. The continual and intolerable affliction also of s● many honourable and worshipful gentlemen had never happened for persevering in the●● Father's faith, whereto our country was fir●● converted from infidelity, without any other offence objected, or to be proved against them, but only refusing to accommodate the● selves to this change. The torturing, hanging and quatering of above a hundred Priests f●● the same cause; the most of them good gentlemen and youths of rare wit, learning and other parts, which other common wealths would highly have esteemed, and so would ours too in times past, and will again in time to come, when these blasts shall once be overblown. Thus far the Warder.  
All which points O. E. answereth with shifts and sleights as the former, and first to the fifth about breach with Rome, he saith What more absurd than to object the breach with Rome when we esteem that to be one of the greatest blessings that ever happened to this land. To the other point mentioned by the Warder of the late peace made in France between those monarchs by the Pope's mediation, the minister saith nothing for that came not to his purpose, yet he telleth us again here now, that Henry the third late K. of France and the late Duke of Ferrara and other Princes of the Pope's religion, were notwithstanding that, troubled by the Pope. A wise argument, as though there were no other cause for which the Pope might fall out, with any Prince, or punish him, but only for change of religion. But this is the manner of this man's arguing, and with these manner of elenches,, ●aralogismes, and other deceitful shifts of sophistry, this fellow and his companions deceive the simple.  
To the sixth about old ancient amity and ●eagues with Spain & Burgundy he answereth ●●us: 
6 Inconvenience, breach of ancient leagues and amity.  As if it were not more hurtful to the Spaniard ● break with us, then for us to break with the Spaniard. This (as you see) is answered more like a soldier than a minister. 
●g. 3●.  The last two points are in effect denied by him, to wit that either the diversity of religion in England hath been cause of the wars and tumults round about us (which yet France, Flaunders and Scotland do testify how true or false it is) or that any doleful alterations have been made at home, which he saith is like that the warder seems to have been hired to speak in a lamentable voice, and to shed some few tears for compassion of the damages received both by clergy and nobility, and the deaths of so many Priests as have been executed for religion: which he with a long idle discourse will needs go about to prove, that they were truly traitors both by our common, civil, and imperial laws.  
But this extravagant excursion of his about those late martyrs, I am to answer afterward more at large in his new challenge, whereas he maketh this one of his articles, that our Priests die not for religion, but for treason. And albeit future ages willbe more indifferent judges in this matter, as more free from passion therein, yet to understand better the state of the question, I would ask of this wise statesman & lawyer, (as he maketh himself) who both here and every where else calleth me noddy, whether it be lawful to all s●ates, having taken to themselves a form of religion to make any articles of the opposite religion matters of treason? And whether it had been lawful to Catholyks in Q. Mary's days, so to have done against protestants? and whether the treasons so made be true, and properly treasons, and the offenders rightly to be called traitors? And when he hath answered me this, 
Whether our Priests be traitors or martyrs.  and I shall have proved to him out of their own writers and chroniclers (as I can) and by their own public records, that this is the state of our question with them, & that many or most of our Priests have been executed only for those articles of treason that were so made; then will it be easy to judge and discern what kind of traitors they are, who for those transgressions have been put to death and executed. Then will all this vain fellows babbling out of books of imperial and common laws about treasons of other kinds be quite cut of, and proved childish and to no purpose.  
Wherefore to draw at length to an end of this Encounter, I doubt not (good Readers) but thou dost see by thy wisdom, how notwithstanding the double reply made by the K ●. and minister the warders discourse about these blessings and cursings remaineth yet whole and firm. And albeit the minister hath brought more words than the Kt. yet no more substance but rather less, and both of them much fraud and folly, as in the admonition following in part shall appear.   

THE WARNING and admonition to Sir F. H. and his friends, as also to his advocate & proctor O. E. upon the first Encounter of blessings. CHAP. XIX.  
AND now for the conclusion of this Encounter I think is not amiss, to the end that this my answer and rejoinder (which I call a Warn-word) may do his duty and perform so much as the name and title importeth, I am to bestow upon the Kt. in this place a brief and friendly admonition or warning, whereby he may himself (if passion will suffer him to see the truth) or others at least ways that are more indifferent & less passionate in the cause then he, consider the difference of our manner of proceeding in this affair, to wit, the plain and round dealing on our side going directly to the matter, and the shifting and shuffling, on his to avoid due trial, and how that with no probability of reason or truth can he stand in the controversy taken in hand of his blessings brought in by change of religion, his defence whereof is so impertinent, false and from the matter, as before you have seen, yet for better memories sake, and for some advertisement to the Kt. to look over his own faults I shall briefly here put him in. mind of that which hath passed in this Encounter.  
First the charge of notorious flattery in bragging of so many blessings come to England by change of religion, seemeth to lie still upon him more heavy than before, for that he hath answered substantially to no one argument of his adversary to the contrary and the shift of passing over whole treateses and discourses of the warder (yea four or five as is proved) without any reply or mention, 
Cap. 1●.  argueth great weakness in his cause. The other shift also of excusing his flattery by the flattery of Canonists (if it were true) is very vain and ridiculous.  
The new ten devised blessings are such & so poor, 
New devised blessings.  as no man would have brought them in but he that either for lack of judgement, decerneth not, what is for him, nor what is against him, or whom necessity forceth to expose himself to the laughter of all men. For who will, not laughed to see unity brought in for a blessing among protestants that could never yet agree in the points of their religion, nor ever will, or can, and whose badge of dissension and disagreement is so notorious above all other heretyks before them? 
Vid. cap. 3. ●. 5. & 6.  Who will not laugh also and bite his lip to see good works & abstaining from persecution assigned for two other peculiar blessings, considering what passeth in England and what in other countries. I pass our the rest as false or foolish or both, until I come to the tenth, that is copious generation of children, which in respect of the marriage of their friars, monks & ministers, we yield unto them, but deny it to be a blessing especially to those parishes, that by force are constrained to maintain their copious brood & of spring: & to this I call to witness the Churchewardens & parishioners.  
This then is folly to bring in such sorts and suits of blessings as every child may see there vanity and laugh at them. But that which ensueth of fraud, flights and deceits is far worse, 
Variety of shifts.  which may be discovered by the variety of shifts noted in his whole discourse, as namely that which was last recited of passing over and dissembling all his adversaries principal arguments, reasons, & allegations without mention at all, or else mentioning them only in a word or two without further answer; in like manner his not quoting places of books or chapters, of the authors which he citeth when he will deceive, is a new trick never used perhaps before by any that hath written of controversies, though the other of misalleadging, corrupting, perverting & forcing them against their own express meaning hath (I grant) been used by divers, and chiefly by the patrons and grandsires of English protestancy, 
Vid. cap. 9 & 10.  jewel and Fox whom this man principally followeth, but yet so as he out goeth his master (if it may be) in that art, as by the examples alleged before of abusing S. Hierome S. Augustine, S. Bernard, & others hath in part been seen but will more appear in the other encounters following, especially the second and seventh.  
The other shifts also of repeating again often the things before answered, as though they had never been answered; of accusing others for excusing himself; of running behind the cloth of state & thrusting her Majesty's person and government between him & his adversary, his bold impudent assertions of things manifestly known to be false (as that the puritans and protestants are all one and that there is no difference of religion between them, 
Admonition and conclusion.  and other such like, all these points (I say) have been sufficiently laid open before as they fell out, nor need they any new repetition here again, but rather admonition, to wit that the Kt. would with some indifferency consider of these points, and enter into contemplation of a good conscience, reme●bring rather his eternal good, than his temporal honour, and therewithal these words of S. Augustine to julian. 
Aug. count jul. lib. 5.6.7.  Etst coram hominibus sit dura frons tua erubescat saltem coram Deo mens tua. Albeyty our forehead be hard and blush ●ot before men yet let you mind at least blush before God: which were no less wholesome than holy counsel for him, if he would follow it.  
And this was my exhortation and Warn-word to S. F. before I saw the supplement of his proctor O. E. which being much more shameless bitter and false than any thing uttered by the Kt. I was tempted to take this sentence of S. Augustine from him and bestow it upon the minister, but in the end I resolved to leave it common to both, and to the end you may consider how fitly the foresaid sentence as well of a shameless mind as of a shameless forehead doth fall upon the masked minister O. E. you must remember how he hath behaved himself in the former combat & how even at his very first calling upon the stage he showed us a notorious cozening trik about falsifying a place of S. Augustine, 
Vid. Cap. 3.  Stechus, Eugobinus in naming the Pope God, and at his next goying up, he telleth certain notorious lies, 
Cap. 13.  which all the world cannot excuse, adding thereunto a like falsification about the counsel of Lateran, 
Cap. 15.  his impudence also, foolish inconstancy and contradiction to himself is to be remembered in his third admission to tell his tale, & further his egregious folly in setting down his English rule of faith whereby he would exclude the 
a Cap. 16. & in annot. upon hi● epist. to the ●ead.  puritans: and no less folly is discovered in alleging Cath. Emperors decrees quite against himself. And his gross ignorance is laid forth by occasion of his argument, A●●iones sunt suppositorum, thereby to prove that Catholyks receive not their faith from the universal Church.  
Finally his atheism and irreligious judgement is discovered and convinced not only by that he saith the differences between Lutherans, 
b Cap 17.  Zwinglians, Caluinists & Puritans, not to be any essential points in matters of religion, but also by his contemptible speeches of the first Doctors & fathers of his own religion, especially if any of those two books named by me before, 
Cap 6 7.  and written against the Puritans, ● mean the Survey of disciplinar Doctrine, and Dangerous positions, were written by him (as some will say) wherein the whole story of the deformed Church of Geneva by Caluyn, 
Wickedness of Caluyn Pharellus, Beza, and others.  Pharellus, Beza and others, and their actions, counsels, drifts and attempts about the same are so set down and printed by public authority in England, that if a man would study to describe notorious wicked men and catylines of their country without conscience, he could not set it down nor express it more lively, than it is done in the foresaid books against the foresaid new prophets, and their chiefest northern scholars, to wit, john Knocks and his fellows in Scotland, and Goodman and his mates in England, which argueth no faith or conscience in any of them but only to say and do for the time & as the time serveth, and as their proper lucre, ease, ambition and sensuality requireth: and hereby may be warned the discreet reader to look to his soul and salvation, seeing these men for themselves do seem to make that the last and least part of their care, or cogitations, feeding us with many fair words of blessings, but filling us with miseries.   
The end of the first Encounter.   

THE SECOND ENCOUNTER ABOUT FALSEHOOD AND LYING OBJECTED TO SIR F. AND OF certain absurd grounds and principles feigned by him to be in catholic doctrine. And how he dischargeth himself thereof.  

THE SUM OF THAT which before was set down between the watchman & the warder. CAP. I.  
AS in the former first Encounter the knight in his vaunt of vanity, 
Watchword and vanity thereof.  & height of heretical pride went about to persuade us, yea to lay before our face the inestimable, and innumerable blessings which our country (for sooth) had received by change of catholic religion into protestancy, so for better confirmation of this so lofty a drift he took upon him in this second Encounter to make declaration that in Queen Mary's reign, and former times under catholic English Princes, there was vothing else but darkness, clouds, mists, shadows, ignorance, blindness, want of learning, lack of light, and other such calamities, and miserable obscurities: for proof whereof he setteth down as it were by way of preface or preparation to his designed treatise certain preambles forged by himself, as for example, that the only desire to read upon the book of God the old or new testament was held for heinous heresy in former times so far forth that for this only act or desire men were brandled to the slaughter, and then passing further on to the depth of his discourse he setteth down four famous grounds or principles of catholic doctrine all put in order by him, as most sure, and consequent the one of the other which he calleth general grounds and Maxims of our religion. The first, that ignorance is the mother of devotion: The second, that lay men may not meddle with matters of religion. The third, that the Pope, and every least mass-priest coming from him must be obeyed, though he command that which is blasphemous before God. The fourth, that the Pope's pardons are ready remedies for all sin among us though never so grievous, even immediately committed against God himself.  
For answer of all which fancies the Warder having made a competent declaration to show first how fond and ridiculous a manner of proceeding this was, 
The Warder his defence against the Watchman the first part  and is in our Kt. after so much folly and flattery uttered in his former tale of blessings throughout the first Encounter, to enter now into so shameless a course of forging, falsifying, and lying for defacing of our doctrine and doings, he showeth first of all the small reason the Kt. had or hath to contemn so proudly as he doth, the Clergy of Q. Mary's time, and of former ages for darkness, ignorance, and blindness, declaring by divers particulars, that they were far more learned, than those that since have stepped up in their places, and possessed their rooms. And from this he passeth to show, that the foresaid two preambles about reading scriptures, and the punishment of death thereunto said to be assigned, are no ways true, in any plain meaning sense, or interpretation, but feigned by the Kt. himself, and consequently can not ever be proved, or defended, and by occasion of these preambles, 
About reading of scriptures.  the warder entereth into examination of the things themselves declaring how far the reading of holy Scriptures in vulgar languages is permitted to all men among Catholykes, and what restraint is made thereof towards some, & for what causes, and reasons, and upon what necessity, and what is the true state of this controversy between us and Protestants, as also what hurt, profit, damages, or commodities have or do ensue thereof, with alleging both reasons, authorities, and experiences in that behalf.  
To all which discourse of reasons and experiences set down at good length by the warder, and containing in deed the principal substance of the controversy, the K ●. answereth no one word, nor so much as mentyoneth the same in this his reply, but passeth to other matters, as by the combat of this ensuing Encounter you will manifestly see, and behold and pity the poor Kt. for this weakness.  

The second part of the watchman's impugnation and warders defence.  After this cometh the warder to handle the second part of this Encounter to wit, about the foresaid four absurd positions, grounds, and maxims set down by the Kt. for ours, which the warder proveth to be neither Maxims nor minims of catholic Doctrine for that to prove them Maxims all catholic writers must hold them, and to prove them minims, some one at least must hold them, but that neither of these can be proved. And consequently that they are no positions, or principles of catholic religion, but fictions rather of heretics, and false impositions of the Kt.  
And for the first that ignorance is held by us to be the mother of devotion, 
The first forged position.  for that the watchman bringeth no other proof but only that reading of Scriptures was forbidden to the lay sort (at which distinction also of laity, & clergy he seemeth to jest) hereupon the Warder taketh occasion first to prove by many old testimonies the use and antiquity of this distinction, whereunto the Kt. in this last reply returneth not any one word of answer, and after this again the warder declareth largely that this position is neither Maxim nor minime among Catholykes, and that ignorance is neither held for the mother, daughter or kinswoman of devotion, which he proveth both by the definition of devotion itself out S. Augustine, S. Thomas, and others, as also by the effects, showing that devotion is grounded upon knowledge & not upon ignorance though upon particular causes the learnedest men are not always the most devout. All which discourse the Kt. thought good to pass over with silence as well as the former, without taking any notice thereof in this his last reply, and thereby you may see whether it be more and more substantial that he leaveth unanswered then that which he answereth.  
About the second position imposed upon Catholykes, 
The second position.  that lay men must not meddle with matters of religion, as the untruth thereof is more apparent than any of the rest, so was there less written in the refutation, but that necessity enforced the warder to defend S. Thomas of Canterbury, dishonoured, and slandered intolerably by the Kt. whereunto what he answereth in this Wast-woord now and how for defence of his former, falsehoods he entangleth himself in divers new difficulties and inextricable absurdities shall be seen afterward in the particular discussion of matters that ensue.  
In the third position that the Pope or meanest Priest coming from him is to be obeyed under pain of damnation though he command blasphemy, 
The third feigned position.  etc. The warder is more brief in like manner, for that the evident falsehood thereof is apparent to all yet writeth he so much as is needful for a manifest brief confutation, and how little the Kt. hath to answer for devising of this position, and laying it so falsely to Catholykes charge, you shall afterwards see discussed.  
And finally about the fourth and last forged ground of catholic religion, 
The fourth false ground.  to wit that our chief remedy for sin though it were committed immediately against God himself is, (to use the watchman's words) A pardon from his Hol. and absolution from his holy Priests, but if the decrees or ordinances of their Romish Synagove were transgressed hardly any mercy was to be had etc. About this I say the warder observeth only the apparent cavils, ignorances, and falsehoods of the watchman, as first, that the greatest sinner immediately committed against God himself are to be remitted among us by pardons, which is a malicious cavil, for that we hold such pardons to be available only for the pain due to venial sins, or for remitting the temporal punishment, remaining after mortal sin forgiven before. secondly that he conjoineth together Pope's pardons, and the absolution of Priests in the Sacrament of penance, as though they were both one, which is ignorance, for that the later remitteth all sin, and the first not. And thirdly that the transgressors of the decrees and ordinances of the Church can hardly ever obtain mercy, and that they are more hardly pardoned, than the grossest sins committed against God himself the warder showeth to be a most malicious fiction without any ground or colour of truth. To all which observations and deductions of the warder the Kt. answereth nothing at all in this last reply, but filleth up paper with tales either devised by himself, or taken out of John Fox as for example of one ●esselius, a merchant of Pardons, and of the absolution of one Simon a Monk, that is forged to have poisoned K. John, and other such stuff, which you shall hear discussed and refuted afterward and thereby see and perceive how justly this last reply of S ●. Francis is called a Wastword. And so we shall pass on to the particular examination of matters point by point.   

ABOUT THE GENERAL charge of false dealing, laid to sir Francis in this Encounter, and how evil he avoideth the same by committing new falsehoods, & treacheries. CAP. II.  
FIRST then the general charge laid to our Kt. throughout this whole second Encounter concerneth two points, to wit, falsity, and falsifying, the later whereof hath this difference from the first, that it is both witting, and willingly committed, and consequently much more reprehensible than the first, (especially in a knight) and how (think you) doth he deliver himself now from this charge? 
Pag. 2●.  you shall hear presently by his own pen, for after a few words of some compunction, and humility (as it might seem) wherein he wrote that he would bear this charge of lying according to the council of an ancient Father, who said that God suffereth slanders to assault us, that pride may not surprise us (as who would say, that his learned Wachword had been so glorious a work, as it might have put him into some pride, and set him a fit, had not the warder, by his answer taken him down again, and taught him to know himself. After this I say he runneth presently to a certain shift before mentioned of laying the like charge of lying to other men also of our side, as if that might excuse him somewhat, to have some companion's in that exercise, and as you have heard before in the precedent Encounter, that being charged with flattery, he ran strait ways to Canonists; saying, that they flattered much more the Pope, than he the Queen and state, so now being charged with lying, he leapeth in like manner to lay the same charge upon friars, hear his narration. Walsingham (saith he) an ancient Chronicler writeth of Friars in Richard the second his time, 
Pag. 29.  that they were of long time so infamons for lying, that it was counted a good argument both in matter and form. This is a friar, ergo a liar: And it should seem, the Romanists keep still their old wont, by that famous lie which also of late they have sent us over, not only in print, but in picture too, namely that some of the maintainers of their catholic Religion, have been by us here put into bears skins, & so hayted to death with Maist●ues, a lie printed in the English College at Rome 1584. with Gregory the 13. his privilege, so great a lie as no place was fit to utter it, but only Rome.  
Lo here thou mayst see (good reader) put in practice again the refuge before mentioned of excusing one fault by an other, which is a most absurd shift; for as S. jerom. saith, peccantium mul●itudo non parit errori patrocimum. 
Hiero. epist. 66 ad Ruffinum.  The multitude or society of offenders doth not protect, or give patronage to the error. But much more in this case when many points be different: for I would ask the Kt. what relief or discharge is this to him, if both these examples were true (as after they will prove false) to wit, if friars were such liars in King Richard the 2. his time, why should ●nights be liars in Q. Elizabeth's time ● or if a printer or painter in Rome, or both, or these that set them a work living a thousand miles from England, should have ●rr●d in ●ome one particular fact wr●tten, or related from thence, what excuse may this be to S. F. who writing in England is accused to have lied and falsified things present, and such as all England doth or may know to be false? furthermore he cannot be so ignorant, but that he must know, that there is a great difference between historical, and doctrinallyes & the first much more perdonable than the second 
* The rela●●t of the disputation's between Plessy Mornay, and ●he B●●h o● Eur●ux b●fore the K of F●aunce in May anno 1600.  and that one of our countrymen of late hath offered to show an infinity of doctrinal lies out of divers principal protestant writers, and especially out of John Fox by name this man's master, & that within the compass of two leaves, yet doth he pardon him all mere historical lies, such as by evil information he might be deceived in the relating of, 
Fox. act. and ●o● 115.  as namely that of john Marbeck the singer of Windsor, & divers others, whom he setteth do●ne for martyrs, and bo●h printed● and painted with fire about ●hem, & their bodies burned to ashes, whiles they were yet alive, and me●r●e, when Fox printed his book.  
With much more equity than do we deal with S.F. and his friends, than he w●●h us, if the matters alleged were both true, & to his purpose. And whereas he addeth, that this report of the bears skin is privileged for truth by Pope Gregory the 13. it is a childish cavil, for that Prince's privileges do warrant only the printing, and not the truth of the book, for if her Majesty's privilege to Fox and jewels books (for example sake) or to this poor one of S.F. should be an obligation to her Matie. to defend all the lies and falsehoods therein contained, it were a pitiful case, and dangerous also to the authors and writers themselves, for than were her Matie. obliged in honour to see the same punished when they are found out and at least to grant the demand of the foresaid relator of Plessy Morney his disputation to have our protestants falsehoods come to public trial before her person or counsel as those of Plessis Mornayes impostures were examined, and convinced in presence of the K. of France, which were a dangerous point in England, as matters now stand, I mean daungerons to the credit of Protestant's doctrine and dealing, but otherwise profitable for the truth, & most honourable to her Matie. and memorable for posterity.  
But now let us examine the fact itself objected about this bears skin (for of this I mean to treat first, 
About the man baited in the bears skin.  and of the friars afterward) true it is, that at my being in Rome, I saw among other pictures, on the English Church walls of old and new martyrs, divers representations, and of some cruel usage of Catholykes for their conscience sake in our days, and among other this portraiture of one in a bears skin, baited with dogs, and for that I had not heard, nor read of any such matter publicly done in England I began to marvel how it came to be painted there, yet considering on the other side (as every indifferent man should) that they being grave and learned men that were in Rome at that time, and gave the instructions to the painter in that matter, and that it was nor likely, they would be so wicked, or foolish, or so little respect their own credits, as to invent, or fayne any such matter of themselves, & set it forth so publicly to be seen, and red of all the world, I began to imagine, that either themselves knew it to be true, which I knew not, or else might perhaps by letters be informed thereof out of England, from some friends who might affirm it of their own knowledge, to have been done in some private manner, & for that the said persons in Rome were now dead, I began to inform, myself of others, and presently I fell upon a very sufficient gentleman of Lincoln shire, who told me that in the parish of Lowth it is most certain that in K. Henry the eight his days a catholic man was so put to death, being made odious first for the title of Supremacy, and then so baited in a bears skin, and that this was done, by certain vehement heretics at that time, but whether by public authority, or by particular fury, he could not tell, but sure he was that the fame thereof is fresh yet in Louth among all men as easily may be learned.  
I found also an other gentleman of good worship, who told me that he heard S.. Edward Carew (brother to the now L. chamberlain) talk of an other such like fact, practised by certain nobles or gentlemen, for their disport upon a catholic man in this Q. days, baiting him with their Spaniels, and whether this be true or no, it may be easily tried the party yet being a live, but by this it appeareth that they which caused that picture to be painted in Rome, might have more ground for it, than every man at the first sight, knoweth: and if they had been misinformed so far of from England (as Fox confesseth he was in divers things in England yt self) it had been rashness in them (I grant) to put it either in print or writing. But this little relieveth S.F. his cause, who is accused to have set down and printed things that himself did know and must needs know to be false when he printed them, which is error not of ignorance, but of obstinacy, and plain lying.  
And this being the true state of our question, I come now to the friars, whom our Kt. seeketh to disgrace, with this note in his margin, friars brave liars, but for bravery it agreeth better to gilten spurs, then to grey hoods, and as for lying we shall now examine the matter, wherein the reader shall find our Kt. to have used a far worse, and more dishonourable shift, than the former, that being but a sleight, this a plain imposture, abusing the Author Walsingham by him alleged quite contrary to his own sense, drift, and meaning, as now we shall declare.  
And first I do grant, that the historiographer Thomas Walsingham living almost 200. years agone or more, writeth in effect as St. F. allegeth, that it was a common saying in K. Richard the 2. his time, that friars were liars; but what friars were these trow you? for herein lieth the whole matter which the K ●. very craftily concealeth, and yet might he imagine easily that it would be espied by his adversary; for that Walsinghan being a catholic and religious man, cannot be thought to have condemned all friars in general, & who then were those friars by him condemned? surely he showeth it evidently that they were more of S.F. humour, 
Friars corrupted by wickclif in K. Rich the ●. his tyme.  then of S. Francis holiness, for they were such begging friars as Wicklif, newly sprung up, had corrupted with his pestilent heresy and had set against other religious orders that had possessions (for that was W●ckclifs first cunning wickedness to set begging friars against monks, and such as had riches) & to make these monkss more odious to the people, these friars gave themselves by Wickclifs good instructions to invent infinite lies of them, whereby they made not so much their adversaries as themselves in famous for lying, and Thomas Walsingham being one of the said Monks of S. Alban monastery no marvel though he complained of them.  
Behold here the state of the question, and the honest dealing of S. F. which point that you may the better understand, you must know, that the said Thomas Walsingham doth describe the most barbarous rebellion of the common people under what Tyler and jack straw, 
Wat Tyler & jack Strawe● rebellion anno. 1●●1.  and others in the 4. year of K. Richard the 2. (in which they spoiled London, took the King, beheaded the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the L. Treasurer, and meant to have slain all the Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical and religious men of possessions within England, reserving only the begging friars.  
And to the end we may understand that all this proceeded of W●ckcliffes doctrine (as the like did in Germany in the year 
* Vide sup. Enc. 1 cap. ●.  1525. of Luther's) walsingham in the beginning of this lamentable story, 
Walsing an. 1381. sub Richardo 2. Pag. 256.  writeth thus in latin: Anno Dominicae incarnationis 1381. etc. In the year of the incarnation of our Saviour a thousand three hundred fourscore and one, and in the 4. year of the reign of K. Ric●ard the s●cond after the conquest, That true hypocrite, the Angel of Satan, the forerunner of Antichrist, unworthy to be named, I mean the heretic john Wickclif, or rather weeckebeleefe continuing his dreams, seemed that he would now drink up the river of jordan, and cast all good Christians into the dungeon of Hell, etc.  
Thus beginneth Walsingham this year, and presently entereth into the pitiful narration of the former tragedy of the popular rebellion of what Tyler etc. & having ended all, beginneth to search the causes why God did suffer such exceeding calamities as these to happen upon the land, and saith that some did lay the fault upon the Bishops and Prelates of the Church for that they had not looked better, 
Nobility and gentry corrupted by Wickclifs Doctrine.  and more diligently to stop and punish Wickclifs heresy at the beginning, Cum novissent indignè agere filios suos, joannem Wickclif, & ●ius sequaces, dagmatizando peru●rsam, & damnatam doctrinam, etc. Whereas they knew divers of their Children as john Wickliff, and his followers to live unworthily, & to set abroad perverse and damned doctrine, etc. Others, he saith, did attribute this calamity to the sins of the gentry, and nobility, Quia maiores penè Provinciarum eorum se quebantur errorem. For that the principal almost in every shire did follow these men's errors, & again, Quia in Deum erant fictae fidei, nam quidam illorum credebant nullum esse Deum, nihil esse sacramentum Altaris, nullam post mortem resurrectionem, etc. And for that they were of a feigned faith towards God, some of them believing no God at all, and that the Sacrament of the Altar was nothing, and that there was no resurrection after death, but that man endeth as doth a beast, etc.  
Behold the issue presently upon heretical doctrine, what effect it brought forth in the nobility. But what? brought it forth any better fruit in the common people? 
The commons corrupted.  No, for that their acts do show in this barbarous rebellion, wherein they made profession to slay every one that was learned, 
Walsing. Ibid. Pag. 2●1.  or bore a pen, and ynkhorne at his girdle. And besides, Walsingham saith, vivebant rixando, litigando, frauds, & falsitates iugiter meditando, libidini dediti, adulteijs maculati, etc. Et super haec omnia in sidei articulis plurimi claudicabaut. They lived in brawling, and contention, devising falsehood, and deceits day and night, giving themselves over to lusts of the flesh, being spotted with adulteries, and besides all this, most of them did halt in the articles of their faith.  
And after this he cometh to talk of religious orders in like sort, 
Religious men also corrupted.  and principally of those that having no possessions lived by alms, and were most corrupted, and set on by wicliffe, against those that had possessions, of whom Walsinghan saith, suae professionis immem●res, etc. & possessionatis invidentes, etc. being unmyndful of their profession, and envying such of other religious orders as had possessions in tantum illam veritatis professionem suam maculabant, ut in d●ebus illis, etc. They did spot so far forth their profession of truth, as in those days it was in every manes mouth, that this is a Friar, ergo a liar.  
This is the discourse of Walsinghan, wherein you see first that he speaketh not of all friars, nor against the profession itself of friars (which he saith was the profession of truth, but against such as being forgetful thereof, and brought ●o malign, and envy other orders that had possessions (which was the art and doctrine of Wicliffe) became liars, so as these were Sr. F. his friars, and not of S. Francis (as before I noted) and when he telleth their faults, he uttereth the shame of his new gospel, 
Fox in Calend 2. lan.  which began in England by Wicliffe, as Fox doth testify, who maketh this first prophet of theirs a Saint, and calendar Martyr, 
Fox monument. Pag. 421.  though he died in his bed at his benefice in Lincolnshire, as Fox denieth not, yet such was his talon in making martyrs. And besides this he discovereth to the Reader to much false dealing in that among all the faults of Bishops, nobility, commonalty and religious orders touched severally (as you have heard) by his author walsingham, he culled out only the lying of Friars, 
Sir F. taken in false dealing.  and those not of ours, but of his friars, who were made liars not by their own institution, or by our religion, but by the principles of Wiclifs Doctrine which S.F. acknowledgeth (I think) for his. Consider then the man's wit in alleging this example, and his truth in handling the same. And by this one judge of the rest, though there will not want other occasions after to contemplate also the same much more.  
And hitherto now we have talked of the general charge of lying, and falsehood laid to Sr. Francis, and how he hath sought to avoid the same by recharging us, and some of ours again with like fault, which as if they were true and could be verified they deliver not him of his fault: so being found also to be false, they double his former error, and make him more culpable: to which effect, and for justifying more the charge laid upon him of bold false assertions, we are now to examine some other particulars of like quality. For more clearer performance whereof I shall set down some lines of the Warder which contain the first controversy or charge. Thus than he wrote at that tyme.  
But before S.F. cometh to the matter, that is, 
Wardword. Pag. 1●.  to set down those absurd principles of ours he maketh for his preface, a certain poetical description of the dark, cloudy, and misty state of things in Queen Mary's time, in these words. It is not unknown: (saith he) to many yet living, neither can it be altogether hidden from the younger sort that ly●ed with them, what a dark misty cloud of ignorance (which brought in popish Idolatry, 
Devised darkness.  and all manner of superstition) did over shade the whole land, etc. And again after. In these dark & cloudy days, lest the sunshine of knowledge should disperse the mists of ignorance, and give light to the dim of sight, etc. Doth it not seem that this grave gentleman describeth the lake of Avernus in Italy, or some foggy marsh in England, or some smoky kitchen, or woodhouse of his own without a window, when he speaketh of our famons country in former times? for above a thousand years the state of England, and the Princes, people, nobility, and learned men thereof had continued in that Egyptian, or rather Cimmerian darkness, which this gentleman describeth under clouds, mists and shadows, until his new sunshine doctors came to enlighten the same. And it was accounted then, as wise, learned, holy, valiant, noble, and flourishing a kingdom (aswell for religion as otherwise) as France, Italy, Spain, and other reading the scriptures in English could not judge, whether matters of doctrine and religion taught them by their Prelates, were true or no (as though now they could do it by english reading) and that for this cause, and for lack of Scriptures in English a number of lving miracles were believed, and in steed of Christ's blood, the blood of a duck was worshipped, as the blood of Hales was plainly proved to be▪ 
Sir Francis posed in dicerning a ducks blood from other.  and openly showed at Paul's cross in K. Hen. days (which yet I would ask our K●. how a duck's blood could be discerned from other blood after so many years.) All this I say and many other such manifest vanities, 
See afterwards cap. 6. what O. E writeth also of this matter.  and known untruths, as that Bishops in Q. Mary's time did not preach nor others for them, except certain strawberry sermons of ●●otting friars, and the like. These bold assertions I say, and contumelious irrisions being known to be false aswell by a●l that are yet living and saw those times, as by the books of Homilies, and sermons yet extant▪ I mean not to stand upon the answering in this place, but to pass over to matter of more substance, and to consider of an example or two of ignorance in Q▪ Maries time, and before. For this K●. for a full and irrefragable proof that all was ignorance among Catholykes before the light o● Luther's Gospel began to shine, 
Wastword. Pag. 32. The story of D Bassinet a ● french Apostata Friar.  he bringeth us, the only example (as he saith) of D. Bassinet ● man of great learning, and authority in France, wh● confessed his own ignorance until he fell to read the Scriptures, though he had been a judge upon heretics before●  
Look here (gentle reader) the important proof that he allegeth for his purpose, citing only. john Fox his Acts, and Monuments in the Margin, 
Fox edit. ver. Pag. 862.  but neither he nor Fox do allege any one Author where we may read the story (for this is also Fox his shift among others when he meaneth notorious treachery) and if the whole narration of this Bassinet confessing himself to be ignorant before he fell into the new gospel, were true, what authority or credit may the saying of an Apostata Friar fallen into heresy have against his former state and condition? is it marvel if he say, that he was in ignorance before, or is it strange that he should pretend to come to this new light by reading Scriptures? what other pretence did ever ancient heretic or new take upon him? or what other excuse could this man make of running out of his Cloister, or taking a sister to his Companion, or from a judge of heretics (while he was a Dominican friar) to become an heretic himself, as appeareth plainly by Fox his whole discourse, though S. F. so telleth the tale as he could be content we thought him to be a great learned catholic, and for that cause between John Fox and him they have doctored the poor friar, without ever hea●ing him dispute much less do his act, only ●o give him more reputation and reverence with the reader.  
And on the other side they do bring in the archbishop of Aix, who was against him (and calleth him wicked Apostata) to speak most absurdly (though he were known to be a most reverend, and learned man) and among other words they make him say thus. This doctrine is contrary to our holy Mother the Church, and to o●r holy Father the Pope, a most undoubted and true God in earth. And did not those heinous words deserve I pray you some quotation where they might be found? but neither the Kt. nor the Fox vouchsafeth us so much, but as though the matter were most certain the Kt. braveth in a marginal note with these words, O blindness, O blasphemy: But a man might more justly say. O cogging, O cozenage, that dare avouch so horrible a slander, against so honourable a parsonage, without citing the place or Author for the justification. But we must pass over many of these absurdities with patience, & so go on to other matter.   

HOW LONG THE catholic Romayn Religion hath flourished in England: & of the authority of St. Bede & Arnobius abused by Sir F. together with a comparison examined between our learned men, and those of the Protestants: and first of John Husse, bragged of by Sir Francis. CAP. III.  
AFTER this the Kt. before he come to answer in particular to the untruths objected against him will needs say somewhat to those words of mine, that above a thousand years the State of En●land and the Princes, people, nobility and learned men thereof had continued in that Egyptian or rather Chimerian darkness, 
Wastword Pag. 34.  which he describeth, under Clouds, Mists and Shadows, until his new Sunshine Doctors came in etc. Which words of mine he having corruptly alleged (as often his fashion is) saith two things, first that my bold assertion of a thousand years is vain for that it is evident by Bedes plain testimony, that in his time this Island had the Scriptures in their own language (as though this only were sufficient to make that age to be o● Protestant's Religion though it had been so) and the second, that we do secretly yield the first 600. years after Christ's to Protestants, seeing we challenge commonly but a thousand for ourselves.  
But by this last point to answer this first, you may see how wise an Answerer this is, seeing that when we name a thousand years we understand from the first conversion of our English nation under Gregory the first, 
Protestant's religion in no age.  which no man can doubt of but if sir F. will go higher under the Britan's, we shall easily also show the like in that tyme. But in the mean space it is but a hungry trick of this needy knight to snatch that which is not given him, to wit 600. years together of the primitive Church; whereof our meaning is to give him no one year, nor half one, wherein his Religion was extant or had any one that professed the same in those days as he doth now, 
Enc. 7. c. 4. 5.6.7.8-9.  & this I shall largely prove & declare afterward, and this to the second point.  
But now to the first point of proof alleged out of St. Beede, if it were true as Syr. F. citeth the same (& surely knights should have truth in their allegations) to wit, that Scriptures were in those days read by some people in their vulgar languages and tongues which Bede nameth, yet were it nothing against us, who do use the same liberty, and have done in all ages to permit some vulgar translations for such as are thought meet to profit, 
Enc 1.8. & infra cap. 5.  and not to take hurt thereby, as before hath been declared, and after shallbe showed more at large.  
But now you must understand, that this plain and evident testimony of S. Bede which Sir F. braggeth of, but quoteth it not, (as commonly his shift is; when he would not have matters examined, or his fraud found out) this place I say of Bede which he allegeth is quite contrary to him: for this saith Bede. 
Beda lib. 1. hist Angl. cap. 1.  Haec in praesenti ●uxta numerum librorum quibus lex divina scripta est, quinque gentium linguis unam eandemque summae veritatis & verae sublimitatis scientiam servatur & confitetur, Anglorum vz Britonum, Scotorum, Pictorum & Latinorum, quae in meditatione Scripturarum caeteris omnibus est facta communis, etc.  
This Island at this present according to the number of the (five) Books, wherein the law was written (by Moses) doth in five tongues search out and confess one and the self same knowledge of the highest truth, 
A notable abusing of S. Bedes authority.  and of the true highness (which is the Religion of Christ jesus) to wit the tongue of the Angles (or Englishmen) of the Britan's, of the Scots, of the Pictes, and of the Latins (or relics of the Romans) which Latyn tongue is now made common to all the rest in meditation of the Scriptures.  
Thus saith Bede wherein 3. things are to be observed first, that all th●se five nations living together in one Island, and in continual enmity and wars in other points, yet in Religion and profession of one truth they all agreed, which showeth notably the unity of catholic doctrine even among enemies, and overthroweth that fond fiction of protestāns, who in all their books give out and avow (especially Fox and Hollinshed) that the religion of the Britan's was different from that which S. Augustine the Monk brought in from Rome to the English nation. 
Fox monu. pag 107.108. Ho●●n●h. des crip. Angl. Cap. 9   
Secondly it is ●o be noted that since the new Religion of Protestants came up though all the ●●and almost be of one tongue, & thoroughly friends in other matter●, yet in points or Religion they agree not, as in Bedes time when they were enemies, which is the virtue of their unity. And thirdly may be noted the evil dealing of Sir F. himself also, who in this place sticketh not to avowche to the Reader that by these words of Bede it is evident and plain, that the Scriptures were now in all these five tongues, where as S. Bede saith the quite contrary, to wit, that the Latyn tongue was made common to all five nations in the meditation of the Scriptures, which could not be spoken to any purpose, if the Scriptures had been common to all before in their languages, so that S. Bedes meaning must needs be, that albeit all five tongues confessed one and the self-same highest truth in one Catholyk Christian Religion, yet in reading and meditation of scriptures and divine service, the Latyn tongue was the common tongue. This is his plain sense though (as I have said, I doubt not but that in those days there might be some catholic translations into the vulgar tongues, permitted then and after also, as in time of K. Edgar and other Kings we read of, and after that again under K. Edward the 3. Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury permitted and appointed the same ●n a Synod ho●den at Oxford, 
Linwod. l. 5. de Magistris. How some vulgar translations of Scriptures was always permitted.  and in all Catholyk times after that again were never forbidden all vulgar translations wholly, but to be used with such prudence and moderation among the ignorant & rude people as might do good & no hurt.  
Wherefore it was not needful that Sir F. should adventure to shame himself by abusing S. Bedes name and words to prove a thing that we deny not, though in the sense he would have it we say it is most false, to wit, that Scriptures were publicly and promiscuously red in vulgar tongues at that time, & so saith S. Bede also, and being an Englishman himself, as he was, might have an action of force (if not of forgery) against Sir F. for that he hath wrested him against his own plain meaning: as might Arnobius also whom the Kt. citeth a little after in the next page against the Christian use of Images, for that in his books adversus gentes (which title he cunningly omitted, lest it should discover his fraud, for that Arnobius speaketh against heathenish Idols and not Christian Images) he detesteth (saith our Kt.) Simulachra & Deos malleis fabricatos. Idols, Gods of Gentiles made with hammers. 
Arnobius abused by Sir F. Wastword Pag. 35.  But what is this to Christian Images which are no Idols? and what dealing is this? what cozenage in a Kt. what violent laying of hands on Authors against their own sense and meaning, & upon God's servants contrary to their own intentions, what author may may not be abused by this boldness? what writer may not be wrested against himself? when that their words expressly uttered against gentiles and Heathens be impudently urged against that Christian Religion which themselves professed. But let us permit this shift to the Protestants poverty and so go on.  
There remaineth yet one shift more, which is nothing else indeed but a certain petty cavil picked by those words of mine before rehearsed, That England was accounted under those mists and clouds whereof Sir F. talketh) for as wise, learned, valiant, noble and flourishing a Kingdom, as France, Italy Spain, and other catholic Kingdoms be at this day, where if any one of these our enlightened and sunshined Ministers (which Sir F. braggeth much to have enlightened the world) should appear, he would not dare to open his mowth in Schools and matters of learning, etc.  
To this the Kt. answereth two things: first that Rome also when it was heathen was as wise, learned and valiant, and yet was it in darkness of Religion. 
A mere cavil.  which I deny not, but it was not as wise and learned in Christian religion, nor in comparison of other Christian Kingdoms, as I compared England with France, Spain & Italy & other such states in respect of darkness mists and clouds which Sir F. would lay upon it. So as both the matter, subject and object being changed in the comparison, no marvel though it hold not, and it is called among Logicians a fallacy or elenchus, and in English a cavil, and this to the first shift used by him.  
The second point which he answereth us, that my vaunt of unmachable learning on our side (as he termeth it) is vain and childish, and that our divinity is cloudy and owle-lyke divinity, if his Ministers can not understand it, (as I said in the wardword) they did not, and then for the proof of the great learning on his side, he allegeth the offers of disputation made by john hus at the council of Constance, and by Martin Luther at Worms and Augusta and of Simon Grinaeus at Spire, and of Beza with others at Poysie in France.  
To the first point of which reply I answer, that for comparison of learning in Protestants and Catholyks I remit me to the proof and judgement of the wise, that shall read the books and works of both sides, for better or briefer trial than this we can not assign, seeing they fly the public trial of equal disputation, which so often we have desired and offered: though their manner of teaching (having excluded all substantial and scholastical method and matter out of their Schools) doth easily show and convince the same.  
Wherefore to the second point answered by Sir F. I say that if it follow, that our divinity is therefore to be accounted cloudy & owle-lyke, for that his Ministers can not understand it, then are all other good sciences also in a pitiful case (whereof for the most part they are ignorant) & this a new consequence or kind o● argument invented by our knight, 
A foolish consequence of the Kt.  that lack of ●earn●ng should be attributed rather to the obscurity o● the arts and sciences, then to the defect of such as want them.  
To the third point wherein Sir F. allegeth the disputation of john Husse. Martin Luther, Simon Grinaeus and others, seeing he citeth no Author at all to justify his vain assertion therein (as his manner is when he would not have his matters examined) I had thought once to have said nothing: 
The story of John Husse & his disputation at the council of constance.  but considering on the other side his bo●d impudency in avouching things plain opposite to the relation, of all Authors that wrote in those days, when the things themselves fell out, I can not choose but shake him also here by the sleeve, to see whether he will blush or any friend of his for him at this shameless dealing which I am to discover.  
First where as he writeth, that john Hus came to the council of constance there to defend publicly his assertions, 
Wastword. Pag. 37.  and that those grave Fathers did learnedly refute him by clapping him in prison, loading him with chains and fetters, and condemned him not only not being convicted, 
Tomo 4. council. Pag. 313. Aen. Sil. hist. Bohem. c. 36. Io. Dub. li 24. john. Cochl. lib. 2.  but not so much as heard, etc. This I say is to to shameless, if we will believe either the acts and records of the council yt self, yet exstant, or the gravest Authors that have written since that time thereof, as Aeneas Silvius in the history of the Bohemians, johannes Dubravius B. of Olimutz, johannes Cochlaeus, in his history of the Hussits and others.  
For as for the acts and gests of the council 〈◊〉 self which are the best witnesses) the who●e ●●tenth session containeth this Story at large 〈◊〉 john Hus, his coming to the council, his ●●am nation, conference, perversity condemnation and the ●yke. And fi●st it is declared ●●erein how that after Mass of the holy ●ost being song by the Cardinal of Vivaria, ●egat for the Pope, 
The number that came to this council. Arch and Bishops 346. Abbot's and Doctor's 564. Prince's noblemen and their train, 16000 Fox. P●g 5 9 Sessio 15. Pag 314.  the Litanies also said, and 〈◊〉 the Princes both Ecclesiastical and temporal set in their order, (which in the beginning of the said Session are recounted by ●ame) john Husse was brought into the council upon a Saturday the 6. of july anno ●omini 1415. who being placed ad medu●m ●oncily, ubi erat leua●us in unum altum scamnum, & c. ●n the midst of the council, raised up, upon a ●igh stool, to the end that all men might see ●im: there was a learned Sermon made first ●y the B. of Laudium, upon these words: Des●ruatur co●pus peccati Rom. 16. and that ●eing ended, there was first made by the council decretum silen●ij, a decree that all men ●hould hold their peace, and after were read the articles of john wicklief, under whom Husse had studied in England, to the number of 60. or there about condemned before in a council at Rome, which john hus was accused after that condemnation to have preached and defended in Bohemia. And after this his own Articles to the number of 30. were read also publykly and condemned: the last thereof was this. Nullus est Dominus civilis, nullus est Praelatus, nullus est Episcopus, dum est in peccato mor●●, no man is a civil Magistrate, 
A wicked article of john Husse.  nor Prelate, no Bishop so long as he is in mortal sin.  
After this doth follow in that session great company of other articles (for the form● were found under his own hand) which we●● proved by witnesses & processes against hi● all which being urged, and showed to 〈◊〉 wicked false and seditious, his refuge w●● (when he was pressed by the council an● learned men thereof) that he did appeal 〈◊〉 jesus Christ from them all, 
The manner of john Hus his answer.  flying thereby (as the council saith) all ordinary Ecclesia●stical jurisdiction as heretyks are wont t● do, when they can not defend their fanciest  

Ses. 15. Pag. 316.  And when after the condemnation of these ar●ticles divers Cardinals, archbishops, Bishop● and other men (which the records do name● were appointed by the council to confer● with him again, and to persuade him t● follow reason, and not to stand only in hi● own judgement. Respondit, quod vellet stare i● eo quod scripsit manu sua in praesenti part: & fact● hinc inde suasionibus quod non vellet inhaerere su●● opinions, Sed potius stare cum tota Ecclesia, etc. H● answered that he would stand in that he ha● written with his own hand in the present affair: & then divers persuasions being mad● to and fro unto him that he would not so stick in his own opinion, but that he would stand rather with the whole Church and with the learned men thereof in this present council gathered together: Finally he stood ●●iffe in his own purpose etc. Thus far the ●oords of the register.  
And then again a little after: Reperto de●um johann remanere in perversitate sua, 
Va●neglory held hus from converting.  and di●●●e, quod propter homines quos dòcuit de opposito 〈◊〉 velit ab●urare etc. And finally finding that ●ohn Hus did persist in his perversity, saying ●●at in respect of these men whom he had ●aught the contrary he would not abvire, ●r that it would be scandalous etc. Heere●pon they proceeded to this condemnation. ●nd thus much of that point whereby appears (contrary to Sr. Francis assertion) that ●e was both heard, disputed with, and charitably persuaded to return unto the truth.  
But besides the former articles of doctrine, ●e was convinced also of two notorious untruths, one a lie, the other a forgery concerning England: for first he had published 〈◊〉 prague, 
Stow Pag. 326.  that in a meeting of many catholic ●●●rned men against his Master John Wicliffe in ●. Paul's Church in London (which I guess to ●e that which john Stow mentioneth in the ●nd of K. Edward the 3. his life, 
Two famous heretical untruths of hus.  anno 1377. ●hen john of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster upon contention against the B. of London, stood ●r wicliffe and defended him in S. Paul's church, Husse said that such a Thunder, and ●●ghtening came from heaven upon the sudden as ●●ke up the doors, and so chased Wiclifs enemies, 〈◊〉 with much a do they escaped into London. This ●as one notorious lie which is convinced also your histories.  
The second was, that hus had brought forged testimony of the university of Oxford, aff●●●ming that john Wicliffe both lived and died Catholy●e man, which thing was proved ●or●gerie by testimony of the same university which under their Seal had gathered 26● errors out of the books and writing, 〈◊〉 W●cliffe, and sent them to the said coun●●● of constance, to be seen, judged, and con●demned, as they were.  
All this and much more is related of Iho● hus in the session of the council: by whic● is convinced the falsity of S. F. who saith that he was condemned, not being so muc● as heard, but laden with chains and fetter● whereof no Author else that ever I read dot● make any mention, but that the K ●. as y● seemeth hath devised it at home in his studie●●  

Contrarieties betwixt hus, and Sir F. religion.  And finally why he should labour so muc● for the praise of this John hus or brin● him in for one of the learnedest and chiefe●● champions of his Church, I see no reason bu● beggary on their behalf, and penury o● men to fill up their Church. For that Huss● confesseth many things in his articles for 〈◊〉 against S. F. as the seven Sacraments, 
Art. 8 Pag. 318.  an● divers others points of catholic religion's And on the other side hath many proposi●tions which S. F. will not dare to admit i● England● either for shame or fear, as tha● above mentioned of the civil magistrate 
Art. 30. Pag. 319.  Pastor's and Prelate's to lose their authorities and that they are not to be obeyed when s● ever they fall into mortal sin, which were a very hard case for both clergy, and laity this day in England.  
And an other that beginneth thus: Quilibet Tyr●nnus potest & deb●● licitè, & meritoriè occid● per quem●umque vassalum suum vel s●bditum, etc. Every tyrant may lawfully, and meritoriouslie, yea ought to be slain by any vassal or subject of his, whether it be by force or flattery, or secret trains, notwithstanding any ●ormer oath of fidelity, or confederation made with him, and this without expecting any sentence given against him, or the commandment of any judge whatsoever.  
This was one article of John Husse condemned by a special decree of the said council in the end thereof, 
Pag. 326●  as is to be seen, and the reason why the council condemned it so solemnly was both the falsity of the doctrine, 
Desperate & dangerous doctrine of Hus●e.  and the scandal which the Emperor, & other Princes there present took of it. And finally for that he reserved to his own censure and to those of his sect, who was a Tyrant, and who was not, to wit, any Prince that should be contrary to them, 
Enc. 1. cap. 6.  as before I have showed of our Puritan Caluenists.  
And this being so, what gaineth S. F. by vaunting of the learning of John Husse, if all were true that he allegeth for him, and being false (as I have showed) what booteth him to lie so shamefully for his sake, and how doth he allege John hus, who teacheth so many things contrary to him, and to Caluins' doctrine and from whom Luther in his disputation with Ecchius at Lipsia in Saxony in the year 1519. 
Io. Cochl de act Luth. an. 1519. Pag. 16.  did openly disclaim together with all his Sect in Bohemia, saying Numque mihi placuit, nec in aeternum placebit. It never pleased me, nor ever shall it please me.  
By this then a man may see what union ground, or certainty these men have in religion that gather such members as these into their Church, nay what conscience also they have in treating these matters, whereof take an example not only in this Kt. but also in John Fox the Saint-maker, who having laid out to the reader an infinite rabble of things about this John hus good and bad, 
john Fox his mad treatise of Io. Husse.  true and false but all to his praise for 80. columns or pages together of his vast book (but with such confusion as no man can tell what to say or judge of it) at length he cometh to repeat the absurd propositions before mentioned namely about Prelates and Princes, that they lose their authority when they fall into mortal sin, which Fox is so far of from misliking, or denying, as he writeth, that Husse defended the same, and said he would prove it, not only out of Scriptures (by example forsooth of Saul that was deposed and slain) but by the authorities also of all old ancient doctors, 
Fox Pag. 564. 1. col numb 5.  to wit, S. Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostome, Gregory, Cyprian, & Bernard, (a most impudent brag of a shamels heretic) and when John Fox hath told all this, and much more, and made a long Catalogue or trental of his worst articles, he putteth down his judgement of him in those words.  
These hrings (saith he) thus declared, 
Fox Pag. 569. col. 1. nu. 5●●  a man may easily vndestand that John hus was not accused for holding any opinion contrary to the Articles of our faith, but because he did stoutly teach and preach against the Kingdom of Antichrist, for the glory of Christ, and restoring of the Church.  
Lo here the truth of John Fox, that hus, was not so much as accused (much less condemned) for holding any one opinion against any article of our Christian faith. But let the reader see the articles in the council, and then will he cry shame of John Fox, and all his crooked cubbes though they have no shame, especially in that they object to us so often the doctrine of our school divines for allowing the punishing of Tyrants in some cases with so many limitations, conditions, and restrictions, as by us are set down therein. And yet these men, approve the wicked opinion of hus in this place as also of the Puritans before recited, that permitteth every one of their Sect to attempt it at their own pleasure, and judgement, which all Catholykes do condemn as doth also this council of Constance, that condemneth john Husse nominatim of the same.  
But let us pass on to the other famous Champions of their Religion before mentioned. For of John hus, this is sufficient if not over much, he being so contemptible an heretic as by this story appeareth. Yet John Fox sanctifieth & canonizeth him in his Calendar as before hath been said, & the Hussites in Prage do keep for an honourable relic of his sanctity an old pair of leather breeches in their public Church, and do show and kiss the same with great reverence at certain times, which yet I think both John Fox, and S. F. would take scorn to do, and so do Catholykes also, and thus much of hus which in the Bohemiam tongue signifieth a goose & the Kt. showeth himself but little better for bringing him in and giving him place in the forefront of his champions.   

OF THE LEARNING & glorious disputations of Martin Luther, Simon Grinaeus, Peter Martyr, Beza, and other protestants boasted of by our Kt. CAP. FOUR  
I Must now come down lower to other more fresh champions of Protestant Religion, to wit, from Io. Husse, to Martin Luther, and other by him named. And as for the first that is Luther, I will be much shorter detecting only some notorious false points affirmed by S.F. partly as I take it of ignorance, partly perhaps of worse meaning: the ignorance appeareth in that he saith Martin Luther first to have gone to Worms there by disputation to defend his doctrine before the Emperor; and States, and after again to have gone to Augusta to the same before Cardinal Caëtan the Pope's Legate: 
Cochl. Sursleid in their histories an. 1518. & 1521.  whereas in deed his going to Augusta was three years before his going ●o Worms, to wit 1518. where the other was 1521. as both by Cochleus, Surius, and Sleidan, & others both catholic and heretical writers is manifest. Secondly the whole narration of S.F. is false touching the stout behaviour of Luther to the Cardinal legate, to wit, that he stood to justify his assertions, and offered there or else where to defend them, 
Waste. Pag. 3●  sending a writing in defence to the Card▪ to justify his opinion by the Scriptures, and that the Card. would hear no Scriptures, but willeth him to come no more to his presence, unless he would recant.  
In all these words I say, though somewhat be true yet are there many falsehoods, and divers untruths joined therewith. For first it is set down both by Cochleus that was present and Surius that lived soon after, if not at that same time, & had authentical relation of that which passed, that Maximilian the Emperor, being yet alive called this year a diet at Augusta, partly for war against the Turks, partly for troubles raised up by Luther's new doctrine begun the year before, Pope Leo decimus sent Card. Caëtan for his Legate thither for both causes. 
Luth. at Augusta 151●●  For albeit he had cited Luther to Rome before, upon relation of his new opivions, yet by intercession of Frederick Duke of Saxony desiring the judges might be appointed to hear the cause in●●ermany, he had committed the hearing if the said cause unto the said Card. to whom Luther came by force and not of free will, as our K ●. feigneth, neither had he yet safe conduct of the Emperor, but only the letters of his patron Duke Frederick in his commendation to the said Card. Legat requesting that he might return safe.  
Wherefore he being afraid what the Card. would decree of him, 
The dissim●lation of Martin Luther with Card. Ca●tan  gave him the fairest words in the world, and the first day being urged to recant his opinions desired space only to deliberate: and the second day coming to him again, and finding four of the Emperor's counsel with him, to dissemble the more gave up this protestation in writing, Ego frater Martinus, 
Luther's first protestation. an. 1512.  etc. I Friar Martin Luther of the order of S. Augustine do protest, that I do reverence and follow the holy Roman Church in all my sayings and doings both present past, and to come, and that if any thing hath been said by me, or shall be said contrary or otherwise then this, I do desire, that it should be esteemed and holden as not spoken.  
And after this being urged again by the Card▪ 
Cochl. & Sur ibid.  to revoke his errors particularly, he desired that he might answer in writing, flattering the Card. with many praises, and fair words, but yet so tempered he his style in answering, as the Cardinal easily did see that he meant to proceed in the said errors still, and signified so much unto him, whereupon he being afraid, lest the Card. would imprison him, he procured by his friends a public safe conduct of the Emperor's officers which assoon as ever he had, he appealed from the Legate to the Pope, and put the appellation upon the walls of the town, & so stole away, writing first notwithstanding very fair letters to the Card▪ at his departure, but unto others very skoffingly, and contemptuously of him, This is the sum of that which the two foresaid Authors and others do write of the doings of Luther this year at Augusta let the reader judge how worthily S. F. doth vaunt of his challenge and disputation, and how many lies there be in his words before set down.  
The second vaunt of Luther's disputation at Worms before the new young Emperor Charles the fifth, 
Luther at Worms 1521. before the Emperor.  and his parliament there gathered together three years after, to wit, 1521. is much more vain, and untrue. For whereas S.F. saith, 
Waste. Pag. Ibid.  that before the Emperor himself, and the whole states of the Empire he maintained his doctrine, answered the adversaries, and with the Emperor's favour departed in safety, though full sore against the minds and wills of some Papists. Yet the truth is this that ensueth for which I allege my two Authors aforesaid, one of them present at the act itself which he published soon after in print S. F. alleging none at all for his vanities.  
At the said diet or Parliament of Worms when the most learned man jeronimus Aliander the Pope's Nuntius had propounded the great troubles and dissensions which had risen the last three years since Luther's being at Augusta by continuance and increase of his heresies, 
Cochl. in vita Lutheri. Sur. in hist anno 1521.  and had recited out of one of his books, De captivitate Babilonica lately come forth above 40. places which tended all to sedition, & perturbation of the common wealth, Fredericus Duke of Saxony his Patron being much astonished to hear those things, requested that he might have safe conduct to be sent for, and so he was by a Pursevaunt of the Emperors, named Sturmius: so that this time also his coming was not of free will as S. F. will have it, but of necessity, nor came he to dispute but to answer for himself. And the foresaid Authors do name his companion's that came with him, 
* jonas Scurfus Ambsdorfius.  the sumptuous and delicate manner of his journey the good cheer, and music in his Inns, 
Luther's behaviour in his journey to the Emperor.  and how he himself being yet in a friars weed played openly on a Lute as he road in the Coach, and other such things as Cochlaeus being present did see with his eyes; and I let pass to recount it in particular for brevities sake.  
But for the principal matter in hand which is his brave disputing whereof S. F. braggeth I read of none at all. For in his first coming before the Emperor and States the first day he was commanded to hearken only, 
Luther's answers and behaviour the first day before the Emperor.  and to speak nothing that was not demanded: and then the Catalogue of his books going in his name before recited public, he was asked whether he acknowledged them for his or no? which he saying that he could not deny but they were his, & being asked again whether he would recall them or no? he desired most humbly to have space of deliberation, which with much a do they granted him until the next day at the same hour, 
His answer the second day.  which being come he appeared again, when not answering simply, but dividing his books into three kinds, sought only to draw out the time, which they perceiving, he was so pressed by the Emperor, and nobles present to say of or on, that in the end he saith he would do nothing against his conscience, nor recall any book of his except he were convicted first by the testimony of the Scripture, and then he concludeth with these Germane words Got helf myr, Amen. that is, God help me, Amen. showing thereby the fear that he was in.  
Then followeth the sentence of the Emperor some days after given against him, written with his own hand to the Lords and Princes of the Empire, a noble sentence, and worthy to be read by all Princes, 
The determination of Charles the Emperor against Luther, after he had heard him.  he being not past 20. years of age maketh such a Protestation of his catholic faith according to the belief of all his Ancestors as may be an example to all other Princes. And towards the end of the said Parliament he published an Edict against Luther, and all his followers by consent of the whole council, affirming, amongst other things, Lutherum non hominem sed diabolum esse sub humana specie. That Luther was no man, but a devil under the shape of a man, and this was the end of that combat of Luther.  
But he wrote afterward these Acts of Worms himself, and saith among other vain adulations of himself, that the people so much favoured him, as one of the company cried out (belike some poor woman that was his Hosts, or other new sister bewiched by him) Beatus venter qui te portavit. 
Luther in act. Wormat.  Blessed was the belly that bore thee, which yet other Authors do not testify.  
But if it were so, it was no less vanity, & arrogancy in him to report it of himself, than madness in the other to make that comparison of him with Christ, and yet it seemeth he was made thereby both more proud and obstinate. For albeit he were dealt with all afterward by divers sent unto him by the Archb. of Trivers, and others of that counsel to reform himself, yet would he not, but still remitted himself to the word of God: which the Emperor understanding sent unto him his Secretary the chancellor of Austria commanding him, that within one and twenty days he should departed, and put himself within his own security again, upon his own peril. And this was the Emperor's favour of which S.F. so much braggeth that Luther departed from Worms in safety, which was to much favour in deed considering either his merits, or the public damages ensued by him afterward to the world, and happy had it been for many thousand souls if he had been dealt withal as john Husse was.  
But now touching Simon Grinaeus, which is his third example, 
Fox Act. and men. pag. 1884. excomment. Melanch. in c. 10. Dan.  brought in to show the great learned men of his side, which he took out of John Fox (though for pride he will not confess it) what doth it prove to his purpose though it were in all respects as Fox allegeth it out of Melanchton, as good an author as himself, 
The vain brag of Simon Grynaeus his learning, & disputation.  the story is this. Simon Grinaeus being at the town of Spire in the year 1529. when Ferdinandus K. of the Romans was present, and hearing Faber Bishop of Vienna a famous learned man make a catholic Sermon, he went to him secretly (as Melanchton reporteth) after the Sermon ended, warning him of certain errors in his Sermon, as he termed them, being in deed points of catholic doctrine, & offering to confer with him if he would about the same: But the Bishop being called for at that present by the King told him he could not then, but deferred the same until the next day, and in the mean space the King's officers being informed that Grynaeus a Lutheran was in the town, and seeking to apprehend him, the Protestants hearing of it, they attributed it unto the B. procurement (which perhaps was false) and Grynaeus ran away by night over the river of Rheene, and so escaped.  
This is the story of Grynaeus, as his best friends tell it, wherein you see there is no mention of disputation, but only of running away, and how then doth this prove that S. F. men are better learned than ours, especially the last two Luther and Grynaeus a Lutheran, who are as eager against S. F. with all the learning they have as they are against us, 
Enc. 1. cap. 4. & 5.  as I have s●ewed at large by their words deeds and writings in the former Encounter. And moreover the learning they had, they received from us among whom they were brought up, and not from those of S.F. side. And consequently we may better brag of them then he, if any thing were in them worth bragging at all as in deed there was not when they fell from the catholic Church to wrangling and heresy.  
There remaineth then the last brag of our Kt. about the colloquy at Poysie in France by Peter Martyr, 
About the Colloquy at Poysie between Catholykes, & protestants.  Beza, and other 12. ministers, whereof S. F. vaunteth as though the Catholykes had received the worst in that meeting: but who shall be judge of this? S.F. allegeth no Author at all, but his own word, saying, that our Card▪ of Lorraine was in a pitiful taking there, and that I must needs yield, 
Waste. Pag. 39  that either their men were more learned than ours there, or that (which he more desireth) that their cause was better. Wherefore I shall allege here the sum of the matter out of the best authors that have written thereof as Belleforest, Surius, Pegnillus B. of Mets, and Claudius de Sanctis who was present, and then let the reader himself be judge.  
First then the truth is this, that Charles the ninth K. of France being newly come to his Kingdom (a child of 12. years old) & finding all in war and garboil, and that the murder of his predecessor had been designed in Geneva the year before, 
Chro. geneb. pag 457. & Sur. in just. an. 1561.  by Caluyn, Beza, Otoman, and others, as Genebrard and Surius do testify, thought it expedient (or at leastwayes his mother the Queen) to permit this meeting, somewhat thereby to mitigate the heretics that were in armour, though it being amongst swords on every side the Catholykes did mislike thereof, and some refused to come thither: others that came complained greatly, 
Complaint of F Laynetz of the colloquy at Poisie  and among others jacobus Laynets a Spaniard, and great learned man, General afterward of the jesuits, who spoke openly against it in the colloquy yt self, showing that it was rather a betraying of religion, then defending it, to put it in dispusation with such disadvantage, when the Hugonots were in the ruff, and had taken Newhaven, Roan, and most of the chief holds round about, threatening also to overrun all France, as for the greatest part they did the year following and so was this colloquy dissolved (saith Genebrad) without any fruit at all. 
Geneb. anno 1561.   
Hereupon divers bragging, and lying books were set out by the heretics of this meeting, and their victory therein, as though they had gained all: and one shamed not to say and write, that the Catholykes had yielded, and offered to become all Protestants: whereof Genebrard writeth thus: 
Geneb. Pag. 464.  Impudentissimum est mendacium quod Lauaterus scribit, collocutores Catholicos consensisse cum ministris. 
Lavat. in hist. de re Sacrament●  It is a most impudently that Lavater (a Swinglian historiographer) doth write, that the speakers of the catholic party (in Poysie) did agree in opinion with the Ministers. And then he addeth that the sequel of this Colloquy or conference was most bloody war that ensued presently throughout all France, and endured for 18. years together, and in the very next year after, he saith that France suffered more in that one year of Frenchmen themselves enraged with heresy, then in all former ages by strangers. At what time also England took Newhaven into their hands delivered by the Hugonots.  
This was the case then of the temporal state when this armed meeting of Hugonots was appointed in France, rather upon necessity, and fear (as the Queen mother of France after excused herself, and that famous learned Bishop Claudius Sanctius testifieth it of her own mouth) then of election & deliberation. 
Claud. de Saints in resp ad Apol. Beze.  And to this colloquy for the Protestants came 12. ministers, whereof 8. or 9 were Apostata Friars as the said Claudius (that was present) and Surius do write, 
Sur. in hist. anno. 1561.  and testify whereof the chief and head of those that came from Geneva was Beza, 
Theod. Beza. Peter Martyr and other Ministers.  but of the other that came from Germany the principal was Peter Martyr, who disagreeing from Beza almost in every one point to be disputed on (especially about the Eucharist, and baptism, for that Peter was a plain Swinglian, and no Caluenist) no one thing could be thoroughly concluded between them, which was no small help to the Catholykes in that terrible time, who notwithstanding lost not their courages, but stood to it and took their places as superiors and judges of heretics (especially the Bishops, and other Prelates) next to the King, and other Princes, and made the ministers that would have thrust themselves in also, to stand a loof, with this reproach as Sanctius saith, 
Apoc. 22.  foris autem canes, and it was no little mortification to their high stomaches to hear those words, and to be so contemptuously used, who came into France to that meeting most proud, & magnificentlie provided and more like warlike triumphers, 
Resp. ad Apol. Beza.  then Apostolycal teachers, as the same author describeth it in a book dedicated to Beza himself.  
And first he showeth how and in whose Coaches, 
The pomp and dissolution of the Calvinian ministers going to pois sie.  horslytters and other such furniture they were brought into France, how sumptuously feasted, & entertained upon the way with concourse, and meetings of noble men, but especially of noble women who received, cherished, and banqueted them most sumptuously, with some whereof he showeth, that Bezas own companion's accused him to have been over familiar, & to have had sometime four hours conference in great secrecy, to wit, he and she in a Chamber alone, and moreover he showeth that Beza his creditors whom he had deceived at his first flying out of France, were now upon his back again and called upon him hotly for their money, but in vain for they had both favour of great Princes, and good Hargubushes also to answer for them.  
After this he showeth that passing through France with an army following them, when they came to Poysie, they were lodged all in a monastery, where there was such wonderful provision of delicate bedding, furniture of chambers, and good cheer made for them by those of their faction, as if they had been Princes of the blood royal of France, and that whensoever they went thence to the assembly so many chains of gold, so many Captains & noble men went before them for their honour, as was marvelous, and ridiculous, but much more when they returned home again from the assembly, they had procured that each of them should have some great man, and governor of some place or Province ready to lean upon, 
Wonderful delicateness of apostolical Ministers.  and to lead them by the arm to their coaches or horselitters, as though they had been very weary which earnest disputing for the Gospel.  
But let us hear that most learned man Bishop Sanctius his own words, that was present, and saw it, and objecteth the same to Beza himself as principal actor at that tyme.  

Saint in resp. ad Apol. Bez●a.  Do you remember (saith he) when twelve of you ministers, were carried from S. Germane town (by Paris) to Poysie, in noblemen's coaches, and horselitters covered with silk, & accompagnied with great troops of Soldiers, going not as Apostolical teachers, but Martial Ministers, at what time every one of you had either some great man, and Governor of Provinces at your sides, when you went out of the Monastery upon whose arm you must lean like delicate virgins, or noble women great with child, and then going into the Inn of the sign of the Ange●, you were richly banqueted all in silver and gold plate, good exquisite wines, pleasant Music, and great concourse of nobles to congratulate you the victory against Catholykes: and then your banquets ended, your fashion was (if you remember) to get you to coach again, and to run up and down woods, and fields for recreation, sounding out your Geneva psalms, and other songs to refresh your spirits.  
Oh what a sight was it to see 8. or 9 of your Company that were poor Monks and Friars a little before, 
Wanton Monks and Pryars made new Gospelers.  and most of them of the poorest begging orders, who had scarce dry bread at home to feed on, and were commonly the, refuses and worsser sort of their Monasteries, now to be so pampered in silk apparel and with delicate fare, and to have great part of the nobility of France to wait upon them, and to lead them up & down, leaning upon their arms and shoulders, as if they had been Maiden Queens, or great noble women, and no less delicately than you Beza at home in Geneva lead up and down your Candida. And this was the preface or poem of the new reformation, which these Apostolical men were to make in France.  
Thus far writeth the learned Bishop Sanctius. And surely the pitiful Tragedies that followed presently upon this proheeme before these fellows left France are incredible, (yet much thereof may be seen in Belforest, Surius, and others in their histories of the year 1562. to which I do remit the reader) and only for our purpose of disputation I say, 
The good which came of the Colloquy of Poysie  that albeit any great event could not be expected of this meeting for matters of religion in such times of garboils, and with such men: yet this good came to the catholic cause thereby, that it was easily perceived by discreet men, what difference there was between the teachers of the one, & the other side, both in life, and substance of doctrine. For as for life and manners divers of their own side were so scandalised with these twelve Champions behaviour, as they never after liked their sect, but returned by little and little to catholic Religion again. And as for substance of doctrine this at the least was seen of all, that the Catholykes agreed in one and showed their like agreement in and by all former ages.  
But the new ministers could not agree fully (as hath been said) in any one point. 
Dissension of the ministers of Poysie.  For about the Eucharist Peter martyr following Swinglius held it for a figure and trope only, and the bread but a bare sign. But Beza following Caluyn, had a new devise: that it was the very true real and natural body of Christ, but yet spiritually, and with this word spiritually, he cutteth of all again that he had yielded before, and yet would he not agree in any ●ase that it was a sign only with the Swinglians.  
The like controversy was among them about baptism to wit whether it were good, and available or no, if it were done in time of necessity by a private man or woman, and not by a Minister, 
Pegnil. 1. de disend. ministros in Colloque Pois.  which the most part of those Ministers denied, as appeareth by the proper letters of Beza and Tafinus head Minister of Mets, 
Sanct. in resp. ad Apol. Bezae.  which Pegnillius Bishop of that city set forth in print, translated into Latyn out of French, as they were taken in Chalon of champagne, and Sanctius testifieth to have seen the originals, and known the subscription of Beza his own hand.  
So as these fellows being at such war, & variance among themselves, & being able to agree fully in nothing, but only to be contrary to Catholykes, what victory could they get in this Colloquy at Poysie? or to what purpose think you hath S. F. alleged it, to prove thereby the excellent learning of his side, seeing if there were any rare or singular learning in these 12. Ministers, as God knoweth there was little besides pride, & a wrangling spirit, it were rather to be ascribed (as before hath been said) to our side then to his: seeing the most of them were Apostata Friars and fugitives of our camps, where they had studied, and learned their knowledge (if they had any) except only the art of dissolution, and luxury, which I leave to S. F. his school. And so an end of this matter, & of the comparison which (as I said before) is hardly tried by words, & particular examples, but yet whosoever will make but a general view of the schools and learning in the world at this day, may easily guess, if he will judge indifferently.  
The Champion O. E, whom we have kept from the stage hitherto, 
An addition about O. E. what be saith touching the difference of learning on both sides.  as saying nothing to this effect, steppeth in here, as hot as a toast, showing desire to have the matter tried by disputation, and saying that our learned men being challenged by theirs to dispute in the beginning of this Q. utterly refused it. Procure us (saith he) the like liberty to dispute in Sivil, Paris, or Milan, and see whether we will refuse to come or no.  
But seeing we challenge them for so many years to dispute with them at home with less trouble, peril, and charges, and they refuse hitherto, who will believe this idle vaunt of going abroad? whereby the reader may see, that these men talk not what they think or mean to do, but what may entertain time, and fill up paper. And so much of his brag for the present, afterward we shall examine him more at large.   

OF TWO NOTABLE untruths laid unto S. F. his charge for a preface by the warder before he come to the four feigned positions, and how the K ●. defendeth himself therein. CAP. V.  
ALL this hitherto that hath been said in this Enconter, is but by the way of Preamble unto the 4. false forged positions induced by the Kt. which is the proper subject thereof: and yet one point is to be handled more, which is, that before the warder entereth to treat of the said positions and grounds which S. F. affirmeth to be principles ●n catholic Doctrine, he chargeth him with too notorious untruths. For declaration whereof, I shall lay down his own words in ●his manner.  
But let us see (saith he) how our Kt. goeth ●orward in his tale, 
Pag. 12.  after he hath told us of ●hese clouds, 
Manifest untruths.  mists, and darkness, that then ●aigned, he addeth these words. Whereunto (saith ●e) was added, and where with was mixed all bloody & allage cruelty against those that desired knowledge, & ●●re any way enlightened by God's grace, with a glim ●●ring, or small insight into true Religion. For though ● were but only a desire to read upon the holy book of God, either the old or new Testament, than heretic ●as his title, heresy was his fault, and for this was he called before the Romish Clergy to receive ther● censure. And such never departed from their clutches till they had brandled them to the slaughter. This is his narration, wherein first we must separate open and manifest lying from fond and rud● ignorance: for that the former is less sufferable (in a Kt. that holdeth account of honour then the second, especially in matters of divinity. And then again.  
And here I must begin in this very plac● saith the warder to tell him, that two manifest untruths properly called lies, (for that the● are wilful) are set down by him in the word● alleged, & known to be such to very Childre● and novices in the catholic Religion. 
The first untruth.  Th● first that it is holden for heresy, or ever wa● amongst us to read upon the Bible, or boo● of God (as his phrase is) in what language soever. For ever in vulgar tongues it is permitted to infinite lay people in all Catholyk● countries by licence of the ordinary as al● men know and it cannot be denied, which would never have been permitted, if we had held it for heresy.  
The other lie is, that for this fault only me●● were called before the Romish Clergy i● England and brandled to the slaughter. 
The 2. untruth.  These I say are apparent fictions, let the Kt. defend his honour in avowing them. This was my saying then, and how doth S. F. think you defend his honour now in avoiding them. He beginneth thus. Soft sir you shall find it harder t● convince me of one lie then to charge me with many.  
To whom I do answer, that I shall willingly go as soft as he will have me to hear his proofs: only I will add this about the first untruth objected, that in deed it is far greater and more absurd, if it be well considered, than the warder before urged, for that S. F. not only said in his watch word, that we hold the actual ●rading upon the holy book of God be it old or new Testament for heresy, 
See more of this infra. ca 6. num. 12.  but also the ●nly desire thereof to be no less, which is so far from all show or shadow of truth in ●eed, as the plain, contradiction thereof is evident to babes among us, to wit, that the Ca●●olyke Church doth not condemn, or punish outwardly any inward desire be it never so ●icked, and heinous, so it break not forth ●o act, for that as the law saith Deus solus in●●● de occult●s: God only doth judge of inward ●●dden things, as desires are. But let us ●●rdon the Kt. this overlashing, seeing he never ●ad (I suppose) what Catholykes do hold in ●is behalf. Wherefore let us stand upon that ●nly which was before objected about actual ●●ading of Scriptures, how doth he prove now ●●at we do hold it for heresy? and much ●ore that we do brandle men to the slaughter ●● the same, which is his second untruth. Su●●●y except he prove it substantially, he must ●●mayn convinced of two great calum●●tions.  
For proof then of the first he allegeth ●●ree reasons which are these. First that Ca●holyks do forbidden vulgar translations not only of Protestants but also of their own men, 
3. Reason's ●or S. F. his answer, and never a one concluding.  except the Bishop or Inquisitor give special licence ergò we hold it for heresy. Secondly that it was objected to john Lambert for an● heretical opinion (which he allegeth out of Fox though he name him not) that he held, 
Pag. 41. Fox act. and monu. Pag. 1006. col. 1. num. 65.  That all heads and rulers are bound by necessity of Salvation to give the holy Scriptures, to their people in thei● mother language. His third argument is, for tha● our Rhemists in their preface of the translation of the new Testament say, They do not publish the Testament in English upon any erroneous opinion of necessity, that the Scripture; should always be i● our mother tongue, or that they ought or were orda●ne● by God to be read indifferently of all. By which thre● Reasons he thinketh it sufficiently proved that we hold the reading of Scriptures for heresy.  
But who seethe not that no one of these rea●sons nor all together do conclude any thing to that effect. 
The 3. reasons of S. F. examined.  For to the first though catholic do forbid men to use their own vulgar translations but with licence, yet do they not forbi● it as heresy for then (as I said) they woul● grant it to none: but they forbidden it as a thin● whereof being abused heresy may follow, as a Father should forbid his children that a●● weak, or indiscreet to drink strong wine without water, lest they be drunken, or cat●● an ague, he saith not that the drinking it se●● is drunkenness, or an ague, but that being abu●sed it may cause the same.  
And so to the second: the reading of Scri●ptures was not objected to Lambert as heresy, but for that he was charged to hold it necessary under pain of damnation to give the said Scriptures in vulgar languages to all people, which was an heretical, and false assertion. The Rhemists also (which is the third objection) do call the said opinion of Lambert about the necessity of reading Scriptures in vulgar tongues by all sorts, erroneous, and not the reading of Scriptures yt self.  
Now then let us hear and examine S. F. argument made upon the words of our Rhemists before recited. 
Pag. 47. The absurd, & vulearned manner of reasoning used by the Knight.  Now (saith he) if to think the Scriptures may be read indifferently of all he in your judgement an heretical opinion: then for men to read them is in your judgement, an heretical action. Mark (good Reader) ●. F. manner of argument first he perverteth the words alleged by himself our of our Rhemists. For they say, It is erroneous to put necess●tie for all to read. But he saith, they affirm it heretical that all may read. Now between must & may erroneous, & heretical, there is much difference. Then doth not this second proposition follow of his first, for though it be erroneous or heretical to hold necessity of publishing the Scriptures in English to all (as Lambert did hold) yet followeth it not, that ●he reading itself is heretical: for a man may have leave to read and so avoid all fault, and ● catholic man upon curiosity may chance ●o read without leave, and yet not believe heretically, that it is necessary to permit them ●o be read of all. And to the end (good reader) thou mayst see the vanity of his former consequence, consider the same in an other example. It is an erroneous and heretical opinion to say, that all men and women may or must preach, teach and administer Sacraments without ordination or licence, ergo it is heresy, or at least ways an heretical action to teach, preach, & administer Sacraments, who seethe not the folly of this consequence.  
But now whereas the warder upon this occasion entereth into the very substance of the matter, 
The chief substance of the matter omitted by Sir F.  showing at large how and in what sense reading of Scriptures in vulgar tongues is forbidden in the catholic Church, and upon what causes and how far, and to what persons, and to what end, and with what limitations, and how falsely heretics do cavil, and slander them in this behalf and confirmeth the same by many authorities, arguments, and evident reasons: as also that the right understanding of Scriptures is a peculiar gift of God and not common to all, and that experience both of our, and old times, have taught us the great evils, and dangers which had ensued by schisms, heresies, and varieties of opinions gathered out of Scriptures by evil interpretation, alleging also divers examples for the same.  
To all this (I say) being the pith and substance of the whole matter S. F. answereth not one word according to his shift of omission before mentioned when he hath nothing to answer and therefore using silence in this he passeth over to the second untruth objected, that men are brandled to the slaughter for only reading upon God's book, leaving the first sticking on his sleeve, as you see, and much more confirmed then removed by his answer. For seeing he affirmed it so stoutly before that we held it heresy, even to think or desire to read Scriptures in English; why had he not alleged some one plain text, some Canon, some one sentence, some one Author of ours, some book, scrip or scroll, where we say so, and where we do pronounce that first for heresy? why runneth he to so blind & weak arguments, and conjectures as you have heard? Hereby you may see what men of their word● conscience, and verity they be, and I may say of this Kt. as Tertullian said of Martion the heretic, 
Tertul. lib. 5. ad Marc. cap. 14● num. 231.  quantas foveas fecit aufe●endo quae voluit? how many great gaps hath he made in my book leaving out what he would, or could not answer?  
But now to the second untruth whether men were put to death in deed for only reading scriptures: 
About the second untruth, whether men were put to death for only reading scriptures. Wastword. Pag. 43.  this dependeth of the first. For if it be evident that we hold not that the only reading of Scriptures is heresy, as he affirmeth and we have showed the contrary, then followeth it not to be likely, that we brandle men to death with fire for this fact: which is a punishment due to heresy. Let us see then what the K ●. saith here.  
First of all he picketh a quarrel as though I had added somewhat to his words saying▪ 
Pag. 43.  Before I proceed to the justifying of my speech, 
Pag. 43.  give me leave to tell you that this word (only) by you thrust into my words is one lie of your coining though not the only one lie.  
Hear (gentle Reader) I will make the judge of this new quarrel, to wit, whether this new only lieth on his side only, or on mine, and I will call no other witness, but the Kt. own words to try the controversy. Can I deal more frankly than this? Hear then himself against himself, for thus he writeth. For though it were but only a desire to read upon the holy book, etc. heretic was his title, heresy was his fault, and for this he was called before the Romish Clergy, brandled, etc. If you find only in his own worde●, then do you lay this new only where you find it, and there is an end of that matter, for with so open impudence I will no further strive.  
It shallbe to no purpose also to refute that notorious, 
Pag 43. S. Francis worthy to lie for the whetstone.  and ridiculously, where without citing any author at all the Kt. saith that an old Doctor among the Sorbons' protested that he had studied more than 50. years over he could tell what the new testament was, etc. Will any man believe him in this? or is he not worthy to lie for the whetstone, that will avouch this in print? And you must understand by the way that the Doctors of Sorbon are Doctors of divinity, and have much exercise out of the Scriptures before they can take degree, how then did this Doctor never so much as hear of the new Testament in 50. years study? But hear yet another as improbable as this without author also: An Italian Bishop (saith he) told one Espeucaeus that his contremen durst not read the Scriptures, lest they should become heretics thereby. A goodly tale. And what author is cited for this? none at all. You must take it upon the K. credit, and what that is, or deserveth to be his doings declare.  
But now to the principal point, how doth he prove that men were brandled to the slaughter for only reading the old or new Testament? 
Wastword Pag. 44.  he allegeth divers examples out of John Fox in these words Our stories are full of Examples out of your own registers that reading of Scriptures was accounted heresy, and not to stand upon many: 
Fox act. and mom. Pag. 752. & deinceps.  under Longland B. of Lincolue Agnes wells was convented and examined whether Thrustan did ever teach her the Epistle of S. james in English, 
Well proved  and Thomas Chase was charged for hearing the said Epistle read in English, Agnes Ashford for teaching james Norden certain sentences of Scripture in English, Robert Pope, John Mordon and his wy●e that they recited the ten commandments in English John Fippes for that he was ripe in the Scriptures and the like proceeding was used by other Bishops, as namely by Tonstal, then B. of London, before whom many were convented for that holy heresy of reading Scriptures, etc.  
Thus he saith of whom a man may hardly say whether he brought these examples to prove or disprove his own saying which is great simplicity in any writer not to discern what maketh for him, or what against him, seeing by these examples in steed of proving his second proposition he overthroweth both the first, & second: The second about brandling to death, for that these his own examples do show that none of them that were accused were put to death for reading, but had some lighter punishment only for their disobedience in that act, his first proposition he overthroweth also, which was, that reading of Scriptures was accounted heresy, for that the fault of reading scriptures in this place is joined, and equalled with things which no man will say that we hold for heresies, as the reciting of the 10. commandments in English, and the cyring of certain places in our English tongue out of the Scriptures. And consequeutly these examples if they be granted to be true in fact (as the most of them are amplified by John Fox) yet prove they not, but directly rather do disprove that which the Kt. should prove.  
Wherefore the only thing that these examples do prove is, 
Examples fond alleged that make against him.  that the reading of Scriptures in vulgar language without licence, and perhaps heretical translations in times of heresies, and by such persons as can not be presumed to profit thereby, may be a sufficient cause to the B. to convent, apprehend, or examine them upon suspicion of heresy, as if a civil Magistrate in time when many robberies are committed, shall call in question, apprehend or examine certain men that spend much and have little of their own, go gay in apparel & play at dice, and the like, by which they may be suspected of theft though the very act of playing be not theft: and as it should be slanderous and ridiculous in that case if any man would cry out of that common wealth or Magistrate, saying, it were tyrannical, that men should be imprisoned for costly apparel, faring well, or playing at dice, as though those acts were theft, or felony (which in deed are not, but only may induce to theft or give suspicion thereof) even so in our case, it is as mere a calumniation to affirm that we hold reading of Scriptures for heresies which is false though in certain persons in whom it may perhaps engender heresy, or give suspicion thereof the same may be punished for disobedience and disposition to heresy. And this is sufficient, or rather superfluous in so vain a matter against the babbling of our fond knight.  
And by this is answered a long tale also that he hath out of Fox of a book seller of Avignon in France condemned to death by the B. of Aix for selling french bibles in the vulgar tongue of whom S. F. concludeth in these words: 
Wastword. Pag. 46.  And so exhorting the people to read the Scriptures, he was for this cause only cruelly put to death. By which he would have his reader understand, that only for reading Scriptures, and exhorting men thereunto he was cruelly put to death which is plain cozenage. For in the story of Fox himself, which the Kt. craftily omitteth it is contained, that the bookseller upon examination was found, an heretic, & denied the authority of the Bishop and his office, and other ecclesiastical judges, saying: That they were rather the Priests of Bacchus and venus then the true Pastors of the Church of Christ, 
Fox act and mon. Pag. ●63. col. 2.  whereupon (saith Fox) he was condemned, etc. So as S. F. corrupteth also Fox, and addeth more lies to the most famous liar, that ever perhaps took pen in hand, and with such men have we to do.   

THE EXAMINATION of that which O. E. hath written concerning the former points handled in the precedent five chapters: and that it is far more impertinent & desperate, then that which the Knight himself hath answered. CAP. VI  
IT may seem much perhaps to the Reader that O. E. hath been kept so long tied up from barking somewhat in these affairs before handled, but now we shall uncoople him, and you shall hear how he will behave himself. I am constrained to hold him back and to let him come in but here and there for the causes before mentioned, to wit, that having ended my reply to S. F. a good while before I received this partners book, I could not well give him access at every. Q where the matter required without disordering my whole former answer, and consequently I resolved to bestow a chapter on him here and there alone, wherein he might be heard, and all that he bringeth discussed, which is commonly worse, and in worse order and method, and with less show of truth or probability then that which the Kt. & his ministers do allege. But as for scurrility of speech, insolency of brags, malepartnes in scolding, 
The exorbitant manner● of writing of the minister O. E.  and impudence of lying he is far more exorbitant, not only then any Kt. or known honest man hitherto heard of, but even then any other K●. whatsoever hath to this day (I suppose) uttered, or put in paper, which in part you shall perceive by this my answer, albeit many things belonging to this point, I shall be forced for very shamefastness both here, and otherwhere to pass over with silence. But now to the matter in hand.  
Whereas before in the second Chapter of this our answer is handled the controversy, 
Cap. 2. nu. ●5. & deinceps.  whether the state of matters in Religion during the time of Q. Mary's reign, and of other former English catholic Princes, was altogether in darkness, clouds, shadows, mists, ignorance, and the like, as the watchman had affirmed: The warder by many clear reasons and demonstrations showeth the contrary, & that among other points, there was not a more learned Clergy for many ages in England then under Q. Mary's government. Whereunto what the Kt. hath replied again in this his answer, you have heard before, now shall you hear how this his prating proctor O. E. doth jump in with him, advertising you by the way (if you have not observed it before) of one notorious cogging trick which this gamester hath above all the rest that ever I knew of his occupation (though I have known few good, and many ba● enough in this point) which is to interlace every where almost his adversaries words in a different letter, 
A notorious cogging trick.  but ever commonly with some corruption, either in the sense, phrase or words themselves, putting down somewhat of his own oftentimes for his adversaries, & so of this we shall note you examples now and then, as we shallbe forced and the matter urge us thereunto, though many times we shall let it pass, not to spend time in brabbling at every meeting.  
Now then to the foresaid enumerations of good, and learned Bishops, and other clergy men, in Q. Mary's days, he answereth thus: First admit these men whom he nameth were great Doctors, 
Pag 42.  yet it followeth not thereof, but that the people lived in great error and blindness. 
Sup. cap. 4.  Yea S. will you say so? and what (I pray you, doth make the people intelligent, and skilful, in that which they ought to believe, & do, but the learning and skill of their Doctors, & teachers? 
Ibid.  But (saith he) ●ewe of the people could say their Pater noster, and belief, and of those that could by heart say them, not one among twenty understood them. And how can O. E. prove this in particular? If he were in foreign Cath. countries at this day, and did hear the common people, yea children and babes to answer in these, and like points of Christian doctrine set forth by the Church, and exercised in a●● places, not only particular Churches, houses, colleges, and communities, but even in market places also upon all sundays, holy and festival days, and other dedicated to this exercise: If our pert minister (I say) did see this, and how far this diligence piety, and charity of our catholic Clergy exceedeth his for instructing youth, & common people in the necessary points of Christian institution he would either be ashamed of his ●ayne brag, and false exprobration, or with a brazen face deny that which his own eyes, & ●ares should be witness of against him.  
But now either not knowing this or not thinking it convenient for his honour to confess somuch, he goeth forward in this his folly. 
Ibid.  Like parrots (saith he) they said Credo in Deum, but understood not what they said. A lack poor men, and was there no creed in English for them that understood not latin? and was ●here no man to teach them, what Credo in Deum meant, before Martin Luther came, who ●aught us among other points, 
Vid Enc. ●● cap. 5.  that Zwinglians and Caluenists Masters of O. E. are wholly possessed and guided by the devil as largely we have showed before. But let us hear him further. 
Ridiculous reasoning of ●he minister.  They prayed likewise (saith he) but understood not what they prayed. But I would ask him, whether God understood them or Noah, to whom they prayed? or whether themselves understood their own meaning, & intention, and what they needed or desired most to obtain at God's hands? And if neither of these points can be doubted of, then is it foolish which followeth immediately in the minister: Now what availeth it to pray with the lips, if the heart understand nothing? This I say, is a foolish inference, for that the heart of h●m that prayeth understandeth his own affection, and God that knoweth all languages understandeth in like manner the sound of his lips in what tongue soever.  
He goeth forward. Likewise they came to Church and heard Matins, 
Pag. 42.  evensong, and mass in latin, but what were English people, that understood no latin, the better? They were the better S ●. for that they were partakers of the public prayer of the Church made for all, by those that understood latin, 
The fruit of devotion by bring at public Catholic service though i● be in Latyn.  and besides this public merit of the whole Church (which in such deuou● meetings is the greatest) they enjoyed the fruit also of their own private devotions, petitions, prayers, and holy desires, which in time of the public every man exercised, which is an other manner of fruit, & worketh far different effects of piety, and good life than doth the presence of the protestant common people sitting down & looking about or talking & bargaining one with an other, never kneeling, praying, or attending lightly what is said or sung by the Minister, but so much as may concern their temporal affairs, understanding commonly as little of the sense of that which is song or said (though they understand the English words) as when it was in latin: & this is seen by the bad fruits thereof which both England, and other nations do daily feel.  
And as for the public service, & Christian sacrifice itself called the Mass, 
About the Latyn Mass.  whereunto catholic people do resort withal reverence, to be present and assist, for acknowledging their bond duty, and humble devotion towards almighty God, by this public adoration appointed by him in his Church, it is not necessary, that all particular people should understand all the words therein used by the Priest and public minister in administration thereof: to which effect read in the beginning of S. Luke's gospel that Zacharias the father of S. John Baptist being a levitical priest and coming to his turn to do the public service for the whole people, 
Luc. 1.  the Scripture saith of him. Sorte oxijt ut incensum poneret, ingressus in templum Domini, & omnis multitudo populi erat orans foris hora incensi. It fell to him by lot that he should go into the temple of God to offer incense, & all the multitude of people did pray without at the hour of incense.  
Lo here the whole multitude of people came to the public service appointed in the Church, 
A ponderation of the fact of Zacharie father to S. John Baptist.  though they neither understood all of them the language, wherein it was made (for it was in Hebrew, and their vulgar language was Syriack at that time) neither yet if they had understood it, were they admitted so near, as they could hear it, but standing a far of were content to pray alone, and to join in heart and affection with the priest Zacharie, and God we see was highly pleased therewith, and sent an Angel to ta●k with h●m in that place, and to tell him the good news of his son S. John Baptist soon after to be conceived and borne into the world, all which speech and conference the people heard not, but wondered to see him come forth doom, but yet were they partakers also of his blessing, for that the Child was to be borne no less for their good, then for his.  
By this than we see the prattling of O. E. against prayers in latin, Mass, matins, and evensong. etc. is partly false in the fact itself, and wherein it may be true it concludeth nothing to his purpose, yet he goeth on in his railing manner, 
Pag 43.  saying; they were likewise taught to pray not only to Angels, Saints, and to our Lady; but before stocks and stones, etc. But let this whipster tell us, where they were taught to say o stock, or o stone help us, or pray for us etc. As for our Lady, Saints & Angels, they living in glory, & enjoying the perpetual presence, sight, & high favour of Almighty God, 
About praying to our Lady, Angels, & Saints.  they may piously be prayed unto for their assistance to their Lord & master, without any derogation of his divine honour, but rather with much increase thereof, and so were they wont to be prayed unto in the ancient Christian and catholic Church by better men, more learned and devout then ever O. E. or any of his companion's are, or mean to be; as namely S. Basil hom. 20. in 40. Martyrs, praying to the said martyrs, S. Greg. Nazianzen orat. ●n laudem Ciprian● Martiris, 
The practice of ancient father's in praying to saints.  maketh his prayer to the said S. Cyprian, as also unto S. Athanasius, and to S. Basil, after they wear dead. orat. de laud Athan. & orat. funeb. in laud. Basilij, S. Chrisostome also prayed to S. Peter. Ser. in adorat. venerabilium catena●ū S. Apostolorun Principis Petri, in his sermon upon the adoration of the venerable chains wherewith S. Peter Prince of the Apostles was tied. S. Ambrose invoketh also the same Apostle, comment. in cap. 22. Luc. S. Hierome doth the like to the holy widow S. Paula then dead, in Epitaph. Paulae viduae. And S. Augustine to S. Cyprian and other saints lib. 7. de Bapt. contra Donat. cap. 1. and else where. And the same might I show by infinite other examples of those, and other times ensuing. And now if any man will be so mad, as to prefer the scoffs and contemptuous words of a contemptible broken soldier minister, contemning both saints and sanctity, God and godliness, before the facts and deeds of such, and so many worthy fathers, and most notable pillars of Christ's Church, let him do it alone for me.  
And with this would I shake of this barking whelp but that he runneth after us still crying that our forenamed Bishops and Prelates of Q. Mary's time showed themselves unlearned, 
O. E. Pag. 4●.  for that when in the beginning of this Q. ●ayes, they were challenged to dispute, they feeling their own weakness utterly refused. This for the most part to be a notoriously, both John Fox, and our common Chronicles do testify, who writ that they accepted of a certain conference at westminister, 
Stow. an Eliz reg. 2 1559.  but if they were not willingly drawn thereunto, or that the fruit thereof was like to be little, seeing the conditions both of the time, place, judges, and order of disputation itself were nothing at all conform to equity and reason, 
About the disputations between Catholics, and Protestants in England.  the time being wholly bend to a change, the state against them, the place inconvenient the judges either adversaries, or Atheists, the manner only by way of dialogue, or conference in writing without admitting of scholastical argument, but so many offers of equal disputations having been made since that time by catholic Priests, both in word, writing, and books printed, and so many earnest petitions given up about the same together with most indifferent, and reasonable orders of trial appointed thereunto, and refused ever hitherto by protestant ministers: All this (I say) being so, it well showeth of what truth or substance the brag of this little mountebank may bear, (which I mean for his little learning judgement or honesty, though otherwise they report him to be a companion gross enough) when he writeth: 
Pag. 43.  Procure us the like liberty to disputti● Siuil, Paris, or Milan, & see whether we will r●fus●t● dispute with these great Rabbins or no. And again a little after, wherefore let this lunatical, and ex●a●u● friar either forbear to brag, or else procure us 〈◊〉 to dispute.  
Thus saith this fervent, and forward gentleman, who dieth with desire of disputing, ● great pity it is that the good man had not been of years and wit, when the council of Trent was, who gave liberty to all Protestants to come thither, and to dispute their fill, for then by his journey thither he might have both satisfied himself, and saved the honours of his brethren the English Ministers that durst not go, And as little meaneth he to go to Sivil or Milan whatsoever he talketh in this lunatical, and ecstatical fervour of his to entertain time, and such simple people, as will believe him.  
And now from this matter he leapeth to ● new without order, method, or coherence of one with an other (for so is his fashion) more like indeed to a well tippled head, then ecstatical spirit, neither can any method set down in the wardword hold him to any, as it doth oftentimes the Kt. but that he will rush upon that first which I handle almost last, and consequently trouble order in every point; And as for the learned men of his order alleged by Sr. F. to wit John hus, Martin Luther, Simon Grynaeus, Peter Martyr, Beza, Bassanet, and others before treated of, this fellow doth not so much as name them, esteeming himself as equal with the best, and a principal pillar of his poor church.  
He falleth then upon the controversy before handled by me against Sr. F. whether Catholykes do hold reading of Scriptures to be heresy, Sr. F. (as you have heard) went so far in that matter, as he said, that though it were but only a desire to read upon the holy book of God, either the old or new Testament, than heretic was his name, and heresy was his fault, etc. 
Cap. 5. nu. 1.  But seeing him to to far over the shuwes in that exaggeration of speech, 
Whether catholics hold reading of Scriptures in vulgar languages to 〈◊〉 heresy.  I dealt more mildly with him, to recall his words from desire to deed, and fact of reading, showing against him that not only the inward desire, but neither the external reading itself was held by us for heresy confirming the same with divers reasons, 
Ser. sup. ca 5.  most evident, and manifest, as that it can never be found in catalogue of heresies written by any of our side, neither that it can be contained in the definition of heresy, given by us. And finally for that we do permit reading of Scriptures in all languages, yea vulgar translations also with discretion, and choice, and with licence of the superior, which we would not or could not permit, if it were heresy.  
But on the contrary side as you have heard the proofs which the Kt. allegeth to prove, that we hold reading of Scriptures for heresy are so childish, as they need no other answer, but only to relate them, as namely; for that we forbidden some vulgar translations, and divers of the common people to read them, that some have ●yn apprehended, and put in prison for reading Scriptures, 
Cap 5 nu 4.5.6. etc.  and the like, which you may see discussed more largely in the foresaid chapter. But now after all this said and done, and the same both seen and read by O. E. doth this wise noddle, that every where calleth his adversary noddy, either hold his peace in this controversy, or bring matter of more moment? no truly, for he can do neither, pride and lack of wit forcing him to the former, and truth & learning saying him in the second. But let us hear his own words (if you please) and mark that when I city his words in a different letter, it i● ever with all sincerity, & exactness of truth, but he contrariwise, maketh me speak oftentimes af●●r his phrase, and thereby altereth the whole sense. 
Pag. 4●.  For the first (saith he) it is very evidently disproved (to wit) that we account not r●ad●ng of the bible to be heresy) by divers examinations in K Henry the eight, and Q. Mary's days, where it is ob●ected to lay men, that they read the Scriptures in English, which should not have been done, unless by that article they should have been con●●●nced of heresy.  
Lo here his whole argument, and all that heuseth in this behalf; so as where Sir F. had alleged 3. arguments, such as they were, and published the same in print before, this poor companion coming after him, and seeing what he had done, would needs be tampering also and make a new show, 
The ministers fond behaviour.  by alleging one of the three, and the worst of all, adding unto it a childish consequence, that some men being examined in Catholic times upon suspicion of heresy, for that contrary to their bishops, and Prince's commandment, they were found reading of pohibited vulgar translations of Scripture. Ergo the very reading of scriptures itself is accounted by us for heresy. The ridiculous fondness of which inference is examined 
* Sup. Enc. 1. cap. 8. & 9 E●c. 2. cap. 5.  before by divers examples, as if playing at dice (for examples sake) should be termed theft, for that sometimes it may induce suspicion of theft, and the like. And this for the first point whether reading of Scriptures be heresy in itself?  
As for the second, wherein Sir F. also was convinced of falsehood, affirming, that we did branale men to death for only reading Scriptures; This copesmate is no less therein rash and ridiculous then in the former for thus he proveth it. 
Pag. 44.  In the beginning of King Henry the eight his reign (saith he) certain were condemned for reading the Epistle of S. Paul in English as appeareth by the register of Lincoln, Dioces. Well, & what if it were so● condemning and burning are two things, a man may be condemned in other punishments then burning, and yet here is ●o author cited for this at all, except John Fox tell us this tale, as he doth many other as fond and false as this. But it followeth in this good fellows narration. And B. Longland preaching at the burning said, 
Pag. Ibid.  that they were damned that moved their lips in reading those chapters of Scriptures, etc. Yea● and who testifieth this, for here is no author cited, and the tale is so improbable to them that knew how grave and learned a man B. Longland was, as without an author, they will not believe it, though this companion do weary his lips never so long in telling it.  
Wherefore at last the minister cometh to prove both these points with one authority of much less force, and with much more impudence than the other. Both these points (saith he) are proved by the provincial constitution of Thomas Arundel (Archbishop of Canterbury) who saith in a provincial constitution; 
Const. Prou. C cap. Praeterean de haereticis.  statuin●us, ut nemo textum aliquem sacrae scripturae authoritate sua in Linguam Anglicanam, seu aliam transerat, ●●c legatur aliquis huiusmodi liber vel publicè, velocculte sub paena maioris excommunicationis. Qui verò contra hoc fecerit, ut fautor haeresis, & er●●●s similiter pun●atur. We do ordain that no man, upon his own head and authority do translate into the English or other tongue, any part of the holy Scripture, nor that any such book, if it should be translated, be read either publicly or privately under the pain of the greater excommunication. And he that shall do contrary to this ordination of ours, let him be punished as a favourer of error and heresy.  
This ordained that Archbishop almost three hundred years ago, And yet if you remember I have showed 
* Cap. 3. Enc. 2. num. 6.  before, how the said Archbishop in his Synod holden at Oxford did appoint, 
Linwod. lib. 5. de Magistris.  that there should be a true English translation of the whole Bible permitted (by approbation of the Bishop) to all such common people as should be thought apt to profit thereby, which being considered, and that here only he ordaineth, that no particular man of his own authority should translate the scriptures into English or publish the same to other men's reading without lycens, I would know of O. E. why this constitution was alleged by him, seeing it proveth neither the one nor the other of the foresaid points (both which he sayeth are proved thereby) to wit that reading of Scripture was accounted heresy, 
The Archb. constitution is against O. E who allegeth it.  or punished by brandling, nay both these assertions are refuted by this: the first for that translation & & reading of scripture in the English tongue by lycens of the Bishop was permitted, ergo, it was not heresy, for that no Bishop can permit heresy: secondly for that the punishment of excommunication is neither death nor burning: ergò for this they were not brandled. Now then look you in the forehead of this brandled and masked Minister O.E. who concludeth his former discourse in these words: So it appeareth that the challenger our adversary lieth notoriously in both these points. 
Pag. 45.  Thus he sayeth whereof let the Reader be judge.  
And a little after disdaining that I should say this prudent ordinance about translating and reading of Scripture with difference and choice of men to be the ordinance of the Catholic church, he cometh into his accustomed vain of scurrilytie saying. If he mean by the Cathol. Church the conventicle of Trent, 
Pag 45.  he is an absurd fellow, to think that scum & sink of priests and friars which the●e gathered a council against Christ, to be the Cathol. Church. Let any man judge of this unclean and uncircumcised tongue. 
About the Cath church  And for the thing itself I would ask him if the Council of Trent consisting of the chief Bishops and Prelates of Christendom represented not the known Cathol. Church at that day what other Catholic Church can he show us to have been extant at that time, seeing as he saith in his definition of Catholic afterward in his challenge out of V●ncentius Lirinensis: We are to hold that which always hath been believed of all Christians, 

O. E. challenge. 1. Pag 2.  
Vincent. Lirinen advers. haeteses ca 3.   for that is truly and properly Catholic. Which if it be true, let him show us, that in the time of the council of Trent, there was any other Christian faith always believed of all christians from Christ to that day but only the Roman, and then we will say, that albeit for his scurrilytie of speech he be to be accounted of as he deserveth, yet that in the rest he hath some reason: But if he can not do this, then showeth he himself shameless in both.  
And this might be sufficient for somuch as concerneth this point of reading scriptures, wherein you see how vainly this unlearned and ydleheaded Minister behaveth himself running in and out, forth and back without rule or order sense or reason. But yet I must follow him a little further in certain quarrels picked against me. The first whereof is, for that I do allege these words of S. Paul, 
2. Cor. 3.  litera occidit, Spiritus autem vivificat. The letter killeth but the spirit giveth life, thereby to prove that it is not sufficient to read only the words of scripture except they be rightly also understood, and consequently that all standeth not in reading specially amongst the ignorant who oftentimes receive more hurt than good thereby hereupon cometh in the Minister very hotly, 
Pag. 47.  saying: He doth shamefully abuse the words of S. Paul to the condemning of reading of Scriptures. But soft Sir, I neither abuse nor use the words of the Apostle to the sense you falsely say, but to that sense which other holy Fathers before me have used & alleged them, 
S. Hier. Ep. ad Nepot. in 3. Reg. c. 1.  as namely S. Hierome, and S. Augustine cited by me in the Ward-woord, and passed over craftily by this companion, 
Aug. de Spiritu & littera c. 4 & 5. & primo Retract c. 4.  as though he had never heard of them. And besides that which there I said I will here adjoin an other place of his, lib. primo ad Simplician. q. 1. where he saith: Lex tantummodo lecta & non intellecta vel non impleta utique occidit, tunc enim appellatur littera. The law of God being read only and not understood nor fulfilled doth kill, for that it is called the letter, by the Apostle.  
Thus saith he, and where as our Minister addeth Bellarmyne his companion may instruct him that none but the Swink feldians and Originists by the letter that killeth understand Scriptures as this Noddy doth: 
Examination of the words of S. Paul. littera occidit. 2. Cor. 3.  showing himself therein a plain heretic an● enemy to the Scriptures. This I say showeth who is the Noddy, who is the heretic and who is the enemy to Scriptures, if lying and cogging do put enmity between the liar and the Scriptures, which are truth itself. 
Bellarm. lib. 1 de verbo Dei. Cap. 3.  For Cardinal Bellarmyne doth not ioyn● Swinkfeldians and Originists together in denying scriptures as this man doth, but citing only an interpretation of Origen improveth the same in one sense, though in an other he admitteth it. The Swinkfeldians indeed and Libertines (Children of the new Gospel of Martin Luther, and consequently our Ministers brethren) did deny the external letter of the Scripture founding themselves upon this place of S. Paul, litera occidit, which Bellarmyne denieth to serve to that purpose. But this is nothing to our sense who deny not nor condemn (as this Noddy slandereth us) either the external letter of Scriptures themselves or the reading thereof with discretion, due reverence and order, but only rash and presumptuous reading and interpreting the same, according to their own sense and understanding, different from the meaning and interpretation of the ancient Fathers & Catholic Church.  
But yet let us hear somewhat more how he goeth forward in this matter: 
Pag. 4●.  He telleth us further (saith this Minister) that the understanding of scriptures is a particular gift of God reserved espetialy unto Christ, and by him bestowed upon the Church which he proveth by this place. 
Luc 24. Act. 8.  Tunc aperuit eis sensum ut intelligerent scripturas: then he opened to them the sense whereby they might understand scriptures. And again by the example of the Eunuch that without Philip the Apostles help could not understand the prophecy of Isay. Thus sayeth O. E. and how doth he answer think you all these reasons of mine? you shall hear in few words all he saith. 
Pag. 4●.  If Christ be the best Interpreter (saith he) where should we better understand what his interpretations are then in holy Scriptures? 
The ministers ridiculous circuling.  Here is one circle hear an other. Is he hath bestowed the gift of interpreting scriptures on the Church, how should the people be better assured of the excellency of the Church's interpretation then by seeing the same confirmed by scriptures. This is the second circle more foolish than the former. And mark here (good people) the assurance which these men do teach you for your safety in reading scriptures, when you understand not the letter of the Scripture, first (saith he) you must go to Christ the best interpreter, and when you understand not Christ's interpretation, you must return to the letter of the Scriptures to know the excellency of Christ's interpretation, and if you understand neither, then must you go to the interpretation of the Church, and if you understand not that, then must you go back again to the scriptures to assure yourself (as he saith) of the excellency of the Church's interpretation. 
Intricat dealing of heretics about understanding of scriptures.  But in all this going and coming, turning and winding, I would ask our whirle-headed Minister who shallbe judge? or where shall the stay be? or how can simple people discern of these things which he prescribeth? One will think he hath the letter with him, an● other the sense and spirit, a third the inspiration of Christ, a fourth the interpretation of the Church, & then will all four fall out, where and what and which is the Church, and must return to the Scriptures again, and to their own fancies and interpretations about this and all the rest. And this is the grave and sure direction which O. E. delivereth us.  
To my other instance and example of the Eunuch (Apostle afterward of Ethiopia (as S. Ireney and other fathers do call him) to whom reading and not understanding the Prophet Isay, 
Iraeneus.  Christ by his Angel sent Philip to be his interpreter, this fellow answereth nothing but that it was not Philip the Apostle, but the Deacon who was sent: But what of this, if it were so? Doth this answer the argument? The gloss upon that place of the Acts saith, 
Nie. de Lyre in cap. ●. Act.  that divers learned men were of different opinion about that matter, whether it were Philip the Apostle or Philip the Deacon that was sent to the Eunuch. And Tertullian more near to that time than our Minister by a thousand and four hundred years, 
Tertul. lib. de Bapt. c. 1●.  and more learned than he by ten thousand and five hundred yards doth call this Philip an Apostle twice within five lines. But what if it were Philip the Deacon? what hurteth it my argument? either of them is sufficient for our purpose, to prove that this Eunuch being a principal chief man, and a Proselyt o'er jew by religion, and not unlearned in both their law and language, as appeareth by his reading their scriptures, yet had he need of an external interpreter to be sent to him by God. Whereof is inferred, that much more unlearned & simple people reading scriptures translated into vulgar tongues and for the most part corrupted by Sectaries to their hands have need to be moderated and well directed in this matter; to the end they gain and not lose thereby: wh●ch point the Warder proveth by evident effects of infinite heresies risen by rash and unreverent reading of the Scriptures, 
Luther.  in which respect Luther himself against other Sectaries ympugning him by show of Scriptures calleth it, Librum haereticorum, the proper book of heretics, whence all of them by evil interpretation do frame their heresies. We see also within the space of these four score late years, since the Bible hath been laid open to all sorts of people in all vulgar languages, what a Sea of monstrous sects and divisions have flowed upon us, whereof the Warder also giveth divers particular examples in England itself, and those punished also by Protestants, as of joane Burcher, William Hacket; William jeffrey and others.  
Unto all which experience & declaration, this good fellow answereth briefly thus. It is not reading of Scriptures which he styleth rash reading used by lay people▪ 
Pag 49.  but neglect of scriptures bringeth forth error and heresy. So that say what you wil● and prove what you will, this fellow wipeth of all with a bare denial. Yet whether neglect of Scriptures or rash or unreverent reading, which he doth here bring in as opposite may not in some sense be the self same, I leave to discreet men to ponder, and thereby the wit of this writer. And where as he saith that heretics by Tertullian are called Lucifugae Scripturarum, 
Ibide●●.  the bars of scriptures, for that they fly from the true light of scriptures, I would pray the reader by this one place to ponder well with himself of this the fraudulent cogging companion, for he would have it seem (and to that end he brin●eth it in) that Tertullian did assign it for peculiar property of heretics to fly rea●ing of scriptures, whereof here we entreat, which is so false as nothing can be more, and ●●at well knoweth the seared conscience of his deceitful Minister, 

A notable abusing Tertullian.  
Tertul. lib. de praescrip. adverse. haeret. cap. 15.   seeing that the whole ●earned discourse of Tertullian, De praescriptio●us adversus haereticos, that is of prescriptions ●prescribing against heretics is principally 〈◊〉 exclude them from trial by scriptures, ●herof they bragged, and whereunto they ●ould seem to run, as ours do now adays, 〈◊〉 this he doth from the 17. Chapter downwards: and before he entereth into this demonstration he useth this Preamble, Ipsi de Scriptu●agunt, de scriptures suadent, scripturas obtendunt, ●c. & hac sua andacia statim quosdam movent. Heretics do treat of scripture● do persuade out scripture, do pretend scriptures, and with is their audacity do move some people, etc.  
And in the very book alleged by our Mi●●●ter out of Tertullian, De resurrectione caruis, showeth that heretics are great scripture ●n, but to pervert, and not to understand them aright, and that without scripture no heresy can be founded, 
Tertul. lib de carnts resurrect c. 40.  Haereses (saith he) esse non possent, si non & perperam scripturae intelligi possent. There could not be heresies, y● the scriptures could not be evil understood. And in the very particular place and controversy handled by him of the resurrection of the flesh and body against heretics that denied the same under pre●ence of scripture, he saith to one of them. 
Ibid. c. 10.  Ten●s scripturas, utbus caro infuscatur? tene ettam quibus illustratur. Thou dost allege scriptures whereby the baseness and infirmity of our flesh is set forth, harcken also to those scriptures, by whi●h the same is exalted and glorified. And then passing over to an other point of proof, he allegeth a place out of the Apostle, 1. Thess 5. for resurrection of the flesh saying thus: Age tam quod ad Thessalonicenses, ut ipsius solis radio putem scriptum, 
Ibid c 47.  ita clare●, qualtter acciptant Luci fugae isti scripturarum. Go to then, how will these scripture-bats (the heretics) understand this place of S. Paul to th● Thessalonians, though it be so clear as I may think it to be written with the very beam of the Sun itself.  
Here than you see, that heretics are no● noted or called night-battes' by Tertullian fo● flying the reading of Scriptures, as this fai●● lad would persuade his Reader, but rathe● the quite contrary, that reading and bragging of Scriptures more than others, 
How heretics ●re scripture bats.  yet are the●● so blind in the true light thereof (through their own pride and malice) as they fly the true sense and interpretation he●d by the Catholic church, as night-bats do the clear day light and shining of the Sun, which Tertu●●●an in the forenamed book of prescription and else where doth largely declare: and it is our complaint also against Sectaries of our time who swarming over scriptures like blind bats in the darkness of their own passions and imaginations, and flying the light of ancient doctors and Churches interpretations do break their own heads and necks of entymes upon scripture walls, in respect whereof thesayd Tertullian in this very book by O.E. alleged concludeth thus, and therein giveth us good counsel saying. ●ecundum praetudicta tot authoritatum scripturas in●●lligi oportebit, 
Ibid. c. 18.  non secundum ingenia haere●●corum de ●●la incredulita●e vementiae. Scriptures must be understood according to the fore established judgements of so many authorities (as I have now alleged) and not according to the wits or wrangling inclinations of heretics which proceed commonly of only incredulity which ●s as much to say as that the natures of heretics being inclined to incredulity, & not to believe what the authority of the Catholic Church hath set down before them, they seek to draw the interpretation of scriptures to their own phansyes.  
Thus writeth he, and his reason is for that heretics reading scriptures with curiosytie for feeding their own humours, and being bound to no rule or prescription of interpretations, but to take and leave or like at their pleasures commonly their wits guided by humane spirit incline to incredulity, calling in question what others have held or believed before them, and shaking of the foundations of all former belief by their new quarreling: and whether the Sectaries of our time have done this or no by their much reading and tossing of scriptures, let experience teach us. And this shall suffice for this place.   

THE SECOND PART of this Encounter containing four absurd grounds of Catholic religion feigned by Sir francis: and first whether ignorance be the mother of devotion: as also about the controversy of fides explicita, & implicita. CAP. VII.  
WE have been occupied hitherto about so many other falsehoods and untruths of these our adversaries uttered in their preambles as we have not been able to come to the principal subject of this Encounter, which is a quadruple number of absurd grounds & positions, which the knight affirmeth us to hold for general grounds and Maxims of our religion: whereof the first and ring leader is, that ignorance is the mother of devotion, which he uttereth in these words. 

Watch. p. 17  
The first forged position.   In these dark and cloudy days (saith he) lest the Sunshine of knowledge should disperse the mists of ignorance, and give light to the dim of sight, this position was set down for their Maxim or rule infallible, that ignorance is the mother of devotion, & that the sacred word of God which was given to be a Lantern to all our feet and a light to our steps was forbidden to the lay sort (for so they called them) as matter unfit for them to look into. To which the warder beginneth his answer thus.  
How manifest a falsehood it is that reading of scriptures is forbidden to all lay men is sufficiently showed by that which goeth before, 
Ward p. 17.  for in any of the three learned tongues, any lay man or woman may read them at their pleasure, and in vulgar translations also such as have lycens: and I think Sir Francis will not deny that many of the laity understand Latin. How then and with what face complaineth he so piteously or rather hypocritically, that the sacred word of God which was given to be a lantern to our fleet, etc. was forbidden to the lay sort.  
To this interrogation of the warder Sir Francis replieth now no one syllable more than before is said. 
Whether ignorance be the mother of devotion.  And further where as the warder chargeth him sorely with malapert ignorance for scoffing at the word (lay-men) and a● the distinction between laity and Clergy, and by this occasion showeth the true meaning of those words, with the ancient beginning use and practise of the primitive Church, out of Origen Epiphanius Hierome and divers other fathers, doctors & general Counsels, the patiented knight dissembleth all this according to the first shift discovered in the beginning, 
Sir. F. and O. E. do fly shamefully.  and saith nothing at all to it neither doth his Proctor O. E. help him out herein with any one word, though words be very good cheap with him.  
After this the warder cometh to the position itself, saying: But we deny this Maxim or infallible rule to be ours, and do say that it is your calumniation only, and not our position, and that among us it is neither Maxim no● Minime. And for you to prove it a Maxim, you must show that all Catholykes or the most part do hold it: and to prove it a Minime, at least you must show that some one doth hold it: neither of which you can ever do, and so you remain disgraced. Thus said he what answereth Sir F. Thus: 
Waste. pag. 47.  A strange accusation and grievous slander (no doubt) to charge those men with nourishing the people in ignorance whom all the world knoweth to have used strange means to bring them to knowledge. For what meant they by the costly setting up of many fair and well guylded Images in Churches? was it not that they might be lay men's books, and by reading on them they might attain knowledge?  
To this I answer first, that this proof is far of from showing that it is a Maxim and infallible rule among us, that ignorance is the mother of devotion, why is not this proved, especially seeing Sr. F. is required in honour to do it? Is the running to the controversy of Images a sufficient discharge for this? Do not all men see, this kind of shifting? But let us say somewhat to his instance of fair guilded Images, as though they made to his purpose. First then I say that those fair Images of Christ and his Saints, against which he enueigheth, if they be joined with other instruments of light & instruction as are preaching, teaching and such other like, used among us, can not be a hindrance to knowledge as the Kt. would seem to affirm, but rather a furtherance; for that otherwise, why hath John Fox so many pictures and paintings in his book, but to teach men thereby the contents of his writings. But consider reader here (as before I have said) the substance of heretical answering, which runneth up and down & never cometh to the purpose. Hath not the warder offered our watchman fair and friendly, that whereas he hath affirmed, written & published in print, that it is a Maxim among us & rule infallible, that ignorance is the mother of devotion, we are content that he prove it only a Minime? And where as for proof of the former he was bound to show that all Catholic writers or the most part of them avouched it, we are content to accept the word or testimony of any one Cath. author, learned or unlearned that ever wrote or printed such a position?  
And is not Sr. F. then with his whole presbytery of ministers marvelously shamed if they bring not forth some one such writer? 
Impertinent dealing of our adversaries.  Can a more easy or indulgent satisfaction be required of so rigorous a charge? well what then do they? After running hither & thither and telling us a tale how P●us Quintus went on foot for edifying the people (as much appertaining to this matter as the steeple of Canterbury to the Churchyard of Paul's) they come out at length with this proof. I say th●● Doctor Fulke doth justly charge your Rhemists with this old impudent proposition, 
Waste. pag. 6●.  that ignorance of the scriptures is the mother of devotion: for what meant else their so strict forbidding to lay-men the reading of scriptures in the vulgar tongue? Lo here a witness & a reason again repeated of this Maximè, To the witness the answer is quickly made: Ask my fellow whether I be a thief. The reason being ridiculous and refuted before bringeth a new forged assertion with it, that lay-men are by name strictly forbidden the reading of scriptures (which is as shameless as the former if he mean it generally of all lay men as the words do stand) and consequently no less impossible for Sir Francis to show out of any Cath. 
A new false position brought forth by the knight.  Author living or dead, than the former position of Ignorance to be the mother or daughter of devotion. And besides it is apparently ridiculous to very children, who see how many lay-men are learned and read scriptures daily, and some lay-men have written also commentaries upon the scriptures: So as to be a lay-man bringeth no impediment in itself to read Scriptures.  
Wherefore after this he runneth to an impertinent excursion by jesting at our distinction of Fides implicita & explicita. 

Pag. 49.  
The controversy about fides implicita & explicita.   Hence (saith he) hath grown your devise of fides implicita a faith wrapped & folded under the obedience of the Church, namely that it is sufficient, though they know not distinctly what they aught to believe, but obediently submit their understauding to the Church, believing as the Church believeth, though what the Church believeth they know not. This Carbonaria ●ides or Collier's faith is highly commended by Card. Hosius, etc.  
Thus writeth the Kt. and as for the later part of this assertion concerning Card. Hosius we shall handle it a little after when we come to couple with the Minister O. E. showing how egregriously he abuseth both Card. Hosius & his reader in this point. But for the former about the distinction itself of fides explicita and implicita, we must handle a little here with our Kt. advertising first the reader, that by fides explicita we mean a clear, distinct and particular faith or belief of any article, point or parcel of Christian Religion: and by fides implicita we mean a more dark, secret or hidden faith, implied as it were or wrapped (to use Sr. F. word) in the belief of an other more general point, which includeth this: As for example, in the article of Christ's incarnation we do believe clearly and distinctly, not only that the son of God was made flesh for us, but further also in particular that in two distinct natures there was but one person, and yet not one will only, but two distinst wills, & the like: and this is fides explicita.  
But some other men that are not bound to know 〈◊〉 these and other particularities be: ongoing to Christ● an faith in these and other mysteries may believe the same things per fidem implicitum, by an implied faith: to wit, by believing in general, that the Son of God was ma●e flesh for our redemption: and moreover believing whatsoever other points Gods holy Church teacheth deduceth or believeth in this behalf, albeit they do not clearly know them or understand them in particular.  
And this is so necessary a point of doctrine for the salvation of the common sort of people, as if we take it away (as Sectaries do who understand it not) it must needs follow, that thousands yea millions of Christians must perish for lack of faith, 
The necessity of ●ides implicita for salvation of the common sort of Christians.  seeing the whole first Council of Nice set down this dreadful foundation, as appeareth in the creed of S. Athanasius: that it is necessary for him that ●il be saved to hold the whole Cath. faith, which if any man do not, he must perish eternally, whereof must needs be inferred, that for so much as the far greater part of Christians do not know or understand the foresaid points of faith and many more belonging to many mysteries of Christian Religion and consequently can not believe them but only by fides implicita as hath been showed, it followeth (I say) that if we take away the truth and use of fides implicita which ever hitherto the Cath. Church hath taught you must needs teach desperation and damnation to the unlearned sort, that either for lack of time, capacity, learning and other such lets, can not come to know and believe all particulars belonging to a Christian set down in books or handled by learned men, but content only with the clear and distinct belief of such articles as are most needful and important, do believe the rest fide implicita, that is, by the implied faith of the Church.  
Wherefore how so ever this distinction of fides explicita and implicita may trouble the unlearned Sectaries of our time, and give them occasion to jest at that they understand not, as Sr. F. doth here, yet the thing itself is most evidently true and necessary and the same distinction in other words is set down by S. Augustine, where he speaketh of the differens of the faith of holy men under the old testament, he not being able otherwise to defend the position of S. Paul and other Apostles, affirming the old good jews to have believed also in Christ, & to have had the self same faith that we have in substance, but only by this distinction, though set down in other words. For thus he writeth: 
Aug. lib. ●5. Cont. Faust. cap. 14.  Tunc occulta erat fides, nam cadem credebant, eadémque sperabant omnes iust● & Sancti temporum ill●rum, etc. Then (under the old testament) the faith of Saints (whereby they believed Christ to come and all his mysteries) was hidden or covered, for that all just & holy men of those times believed the self same things that we do now, and did hope for the same, but now our faith is clear & revealed.  
Thus saith S. Augustine: making the same difference in effect as you see, between t●e faith of us (Christians) and of those under the old testament, as we do between learned and unlearned men at this day, the one being clear, distinct & particular, the other obscure, confuse and more general, for so much as those points of Christ's incarnation, divinity, person, natures, wills, sacraments, passion, resurrection and the like, which we believe now distinctly and clearly; and in particular, they believed obscurely and more confusedly as under a vail, 
2. Cor. 3.  as the Apostle termeth it, and as it were in gross and general: in that they believed whatsoever the Prophets and patriarchs had foretold or believed of Christ to come, and his doctrine and mysteries, as the more unlearned sort of Christians do now, in believing whatsoever the Church holdeth, though in particular they knew not every point which she holdeth but only the most notorious and needful, as those general heads commonly called the Articles of the Creed, & some other deduced thereof, and appointed to be taught and explained to every Christian more in particular, though not all, but so many as are necessary to be known for their salvation. And this simplicity of belief in the common sort which our scoffing knight calleth the Collier's faith (himself being more ignorant in divers points of true faith then many Collier's or cobblers in the Catholic Church) the foresaid holy father and learned doctor S. Augustine doth so highly esteem as he dareth avouch against as stout an heretic as our K ●. or his Ministers, this sentence: 
Aug. 1. cōt●a Ep. Fundam.  Turbam, non intelligendi vivacitas sed credend● simplicitas tutissimam facit. The vulgar sort of Christians are made most sure of their salvation by the vivacity of their understanding, but by the simplicity of believing, etc.  
Well then (good readers) all this that hitherto hath been said hath been to lay before you the fond cavillations of wrangling Sectaries, about fides explicita and implicita, they understanding neither the nature, utility, or necessity thereof. For the truth is, that Cath. religion doth hold them both, and judgeth both most necessary in all sorts of men, though they are more in some then in others. 
The necessity of fides explicita in all men.  For as for fides explicita all catholic writers do agree that all sorts of Christians whatsoever must have it in the principle articles of Christian belief under pain of eternal damnation, that is to say, that all Christians learned and unlearned of what sort so ever must be taught to believe expressly, clearly, and distinctly, the principal mysteries of Christian religion, as for example the mysteries of the Blessed trinity, and incarnation, etc. This doctrine is so ordinary and universal among catholics, 
D. Thom. 2. 2. q 2. art. 6.7.8. etc.  as S. Thomas hath divers whole articles thereof and all other school divines do agree about that matter, though our Kt. would gladly have men to think that we do not teach this fides explicita as necessary to any almost of the simple sort.  
Secondly our Church teacheth, that albeit this clear and distinct faith be necessary to all Christians in certain articles, yet not to all a like, 
More things necessary to be believed by some than others.  but that the learneder sort are bound to know & believe by this faith more things than the simple especially those that must teach others, as Curates, Pastors, Preachers, and the like, and more than all the rest, Bishops and Prelates, which S. Thomas declareth in these words: 
Secunda, 2. q. 2. art. 7. in corp. artic.  post tempus gratiae revelatae, etc. After the coming of Christ, as well teachers as the people are bound to have fidem explicitam, clear and express belief of the mysteries of Christian faith especially touching those points that are solemnized in the Church, and are publicly proposed unto them, as are the articles of the incarnation before treated: But as for more higher considerations some are bound to believe more and some less according as the state and office of each one requireth, etc.  
And again yet further: plura tenentur explicitè credere maiores, 
Ibid. art. 6. ad primum.  qui habent officium alios instruendi, quam alij: Those that be in Ecclesiastical authority, or have obligation to teach others, are bound also to believe more things expressly and distinctly then others. Thus teacheth our Church, and the discreet reader will easily judge, with how great reason, piety & necessity, for the salvation of those that are committed to her charge.  
And to the end you may see with how little judgement the sectaries of our time, and namely our Knight (taking the same out of john Caluyn) do cavil at our doctrine herein; 
Caluin Institut. l. 3. c. 2. ●. 2.  I shall make you see, and him also to confess, if he be not shameless, that himself & his men do use & put in practise the very same distinction of fides explicita and implicita, & are forced ther●nto, if in truth they will confess to have any ●aith at all.  
For I would ask him first, whether every protestant do not profess to believe all that Christ and his Apostles and the Prophets be●ore them have taught, 
The necessity of fides implicita even in heretics.  or at leastwayes, so ●uch as they have written and set down in ●●riptures? And then would I ask again how ●any English protestants do know distinctly 〈◊〉 this day, all that is in the scriptures, touching ●hristian faith? And if to the first there be no doubt, but that he will answer affirmatively, 〈◊〉 that to the second he must needs answer negatively; than it followeth, that those protestants who believe all things that are in ●●riptures, and yet do not know expressly or distinctly what they are; in particular these I 〈◊〉 do believe those points which they know 〈◊〉, fide implicita, that is to say, by an implied 〈◊〉: in that they believe in general, whatever is contained in the scriptures.  
Another like demand may be to the sim●●r sort of Protestants, 
Another demand to Sir Francis.  and perhaps to Sir F. ●●●self though he take not himself for such, ●●ich is whether he believe to be false, all 〈◊〉 errors and blasphemes which the jews, ●●cks, Moors, or ancient heretics have held against Christ, and the Catholic faith, for the space of these fifteen hundred years together; whereto (no doubt) but he will answer yea. And yet if I should ask him again whether he understand or know distinctly & clearly all the said particular errors, and blasphemies which these sects have set down: in their books against Christ, and his faith? he would (I think) even for modestyes sake answer no, or at least wise he would be easily forced thereunto, if he were well posed: whereof it ensueth, that this faith whereby he believeth all those things to be false must need● be fides implicita an implied faith which here he so much scorneth and impugneth; & consequently he both scorneth and impugneth himself. And so much of this.  
After this excursion he useth an other, alleging us an impertinent tale out of Ioh● Fox, 
An impertinent jest in steed of answer.  how ignorance was not only the mo●ther, but a fruitful daughter also of devotion by moving English Princes to build monaste●ryes, as though ignorance had been the chief motive to their works of charity. And the● he allegeth half a tale and half a lie toge●●ther out of D. john Reynolds, 
D. Ram. de ecclesia Rom. lib. 2. cap. 5.  that Francisc● Samson general of the Friars Franciscans should 〈◊〉 that Friars had first Conscientia, then losing 〈◊〉 first syllable, they remained only with Scientia, 〈◊〉 then losing again an other first syllable there rema●●ned only entia: a jest fit for john Reynol● wit, with which kind of devices he answereth Card. Bellarmynes' serious writing, 〈◊〉 rather the little piece thereof, which hath held him occupied so many years with shame enough. But why do not D. john or Sir. F. tell us the original, or city some author where we may read this goodly merry tale, which yet every man seethe how little it is to the purpose we have in hand: and yet notwithstanding as though he had said something to the purpose, yea proved clearly the former proposition, that we hold ignorance to be the mother ●f devotion he adjoineth immediately these words:  
To add further proof in a case so manifest were 〈◊〉 light a Candle at noon day, 
Pag. 51.  yet this will I ad ex ●bundanti: if public prayer in the Cathol. Church 〈◊〉 congregation of the faithful be a chief & a principal part of devotion? 
S. F. lighted candle to ● us see his own ignorance.  made you not ignorance the ●●ther of devotion, when as you would not allow ●heir public prayers in a tongue that the people understood? Surely Sir we are much beholding 〈◊〉 you for adding this abundant proof, and ●or lighting us a candle to see and discover our ignorance thereby, who understanding or what devotion is, though the Warder at ●●rge laid you down her definition with 〈◊〉 causes and effects thereof both out of S. augustines, 
What devotion is A●g. ●. de Spirit. & li▪ cap 50. D. Tho. 2. q. 82. art. 20.  S. Thomas and others showing largely, that devotion is a religious virtue de●ending of the inward affection and will of ●an, devoted to God's service, which thing 〈◊〉 knight and his Ministers either understanding not or caring not for it, do come now ●●aine to affirm & put in print that public prayer in the Church is the chief and principal part of devotion. Which if it were true, than singers, reader's organists and other that perform the said public service should be ever most devout, whereof commonly notwithstanding the contrary is found by experience. And it is a most absurd thing in the knight and his Ministers to define an internal virtue by an external act, albeit the said act of prayer may sometimes be an effect of devotion in good men, though not always or of necessity, for that a man may be inwardly devout, and yet not pray externally: and again he may say many external prayers with the lips without true internal devotion of the heart, as beggars are wont to do for an alms, and ministers for their fee. And thus I am forced to lose time in teaching this old knight very ordinary grounds and principles not only of true divinity, but also of very moral philosophy.  
But let us go forward, and see whether he have any more proofs for his false former assertion of ignorance to be the mother of devotion, for that these hitherto are found to be none at all, but shifts and follies. Our contriman (saith he) the Pope's Champion D. Stapleton confidently affirmeth, 
D. Stapl. against jewel, art. 3. p. 75.  that denotion is not furthered but hindered by a tongue that is understood. Lo here a goodly proof, and well to the purpose. But I answer you that he affirmeth it not so confidently (Sir) as you guilfully relate him) corrupting both his words and his meaning: For he saith not absolutely as you would make him, 
How a known tongue may let inward devotion more than an unknown.  that the act & exercise of a man's devotion is all ways hindered by a known tongue, but that sometimes in some case it may be; as for example, if a devout man understanding not Latyn would exercise his private devotion & contemplation a part in S. Paul's Church at London when your Ministers are chanting their English service: clear it is that the less he should understand the words of the singers, the less distraction he should have from his inward devotion and recollection of mind, so as in this case, a known toug would hinder devotion more than an unknown, which is the case whereof Doct. Stapleton and other Catholykes do speak, and in this sense it is most true and evident to all that understand the nature of devotion, which Sir F and his Ministers seem not to do, either in the nature of her definition, or in tenderness of affection and inward feeling, as the Warder telleth him.  
Well then we have heard his proofs hitherto for the position before set down, no one of them proving any thing at all, or being to the purpose. Now let us hear his last, and most substantial proof. In a word (saith he) D. Cole deane of Paule's in the disputation at Westminster did a●ow even in the honourable assembly of the Council and Nobles, and frequent concourse of the Commons with great vehemency this proposition in these words. I say, ignorance is the mother of devotion. Lo, here what a goodly birth is brought forth after so long traveling, no book, no writing, no one letter can be alleged to prove this Maximè, but only the saying of one in vehemency of disputation, and this also without any certain witnesses besides the adversary himself. If Doct. Cole should have uttered any such word in that vehemency which here is signified, 
A Cavil ●. ou● D. Cole.  were this sufficient to make it a Maximè and infallible rule of belief among all Catholykes? Or can this deliver Sr. F. from rashness and levity to have written and printed, that we all hold it so? Doctor Cole might say perhaps, or any other, that the leardnest men are not always the most devout, and so doth the Warder also, setting down the reason thereof out of S. Thomas at large, for that devotion depending more of the affections of our mind then of our knowledge and understanding, is found more abundant oftentimes in the simplez sort. And if Sr. F. understood the nature of virtues and were not obstinate in respect of maintaining his own heretical credit, he would see and acknowledge so much also, and recall his former mad calumniation, that we hold Ignorance for mother of devotion: 
Lib de 〈◊〉.  but as Tertullian saith: It is easier for Sectaries to a● ten new errors then to recall one. For which cause I will urge this matter no further against him.   

THE MINISTER O. E. is called up, to help out his K. in defence of this first forged position and how he performeth the same. CAP. VIII.  
ANd yet before we leave of this whole treaty we have thought it best to call up the stage once again O.E. the knight's proctor and soldier of succour, to hear what he hath to say, for it is likely that coming after the Kt. he will add somewhat to the others invention, and bring some new knack or other to help out his graveled Kt. and to entertain the reader withal, wherefore it shall not be amiss to give him the hearing: thus then beginneth this new Mowntebank his tale: I say that it is most true that Sr. F. doth object viz, 
Pag. 42.  that Papists hold Ignorance to be the mother of devotion. Loehere a new Pythagoras that will be believed at his word, I say (quoth he) And what are you sir I pray you, that we must believe you after the Kt. and more than him, who having said it, oftentimes before, hath not hitherto been able to prove it? Let us hear then how you will play your part, who came in so freshly and avouch so stoutly: Let us hear your proofs. It followeth ymediatlie. Doctor Cole (saith he) in a certain disputation at west-minster did openly affirm it. This is no more than was said before and not proved, & therefore foolishly brought in now again by the supplier. But hear him out further for he hath yet more to say: Hosius (saith he) affirmeth, 
Ibidem. An issue joined upon the words ascribed to Hosius.  that ignorance is not only worthy pardon but reward also. And is it so Sir & will you stand to it? well then let us join upon this issue, & see who shallbe cast, & let the reader first note that the false Minister setteth down these words ascribed to Hosius in a different letter, to make them more markable, as if they were Hosius his own words indeed. And secondly let him consider, that whose words so ever they be, yet do they not prove the former proposition that Ignorance is the mother of devotion, but only that some kind of ignorance or lack of some knowledge may not only be pardonable but meritorious also, which is a different thing from avouching Ignorance to be the mother of devotion.  
But let us examine the point, whose words these are, & thereby discover a notorious trick of a cozening companion in this Minister, who reading these words in Hosius, & seeing him to allege them out of S. Hilary a most ancient and authentical author, would not city them as the words of S. Hillary, lest they should have more credit with the reader than himself, that sought to discredit them, but thought best rather to forge and father them upon Card. Hosius, albeit he told him expressly that they were the words of S. Hillary, and so cited them with the place quoted in the margin, for that Hosius having set down many other authorities of ancient fathers, to prove what a great and singular benefit we receive by the force of that article of our Creed, 
A cozening trick.  Credo sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam, I believe the holy Catholic Church, and all that she holdeth & teacheth, he showeth that among other commodities which we receive from thence, one is, that simple men understanding only the principle and necessary points of their faith, and professing with S. Paul, 
1. Cor. 2.  that they believe Christ jesus crucified (and therein all that belongeth thereunto) for other matters and mysteries of higher capacity, it is not absolutely necessary for every particular man and woman to know and believe them fide explicita, 
Supra cap. 7. Num. 6.  that is, by distinct and clear belief, as before hath been showed, but that by a more general and ymplied faith, whereby we profess to believe his holy catholic Church, and all that she teacheth and believeth, we include also these other points necessary to our salvation. To which purpose Hosius having alleged the saying of S. Clemens Alexandrinus & other father's more ancient than S. Hillary he addeth these words: 
Hosius, lib. de fide & Symbolo c. 14.  Et eos secutus Hilarius, habet (inquit) non tam veniam quam praemium ignorare quod credas, quia maximum fidei stipendium est, sperarequae nescias. 
Hillar. lib. 8. de Trin. inetio.  S. Hillary following the foresaid fathers saith, that to be ignorant of that thou believest is a matter worthy not so much of pardon as reward, for that the greatest reward of faith is to hope for that which thou knowest not: These are the words of that great and ancient Catholic doctor S. Hilary, whose name our Minister durst not city, but of purpose omitteth the same and affirmeth most falsely that they are Hosius his words. And this is one cozenage, let us examine an other.  
And in an other place (saith he) Hosius affirmeth that, 
Two nototorious Cozenages of O.E.  nihil scire ijs, Omnia scire, to know nothing is to know all things: and that it is sufficient for a man to believe that which the Cathol. Church believeth, 
Pag. 42.  albeit he be not able to show what it believeth. Here I say there is an other false deceitful shift, no less fraudulent and shameless than the former: for that these words are not the words of Hosius no more than the former, 
Hos. Ibid.  but are only cited by him, by name, and expressly out of ●ertullian de prescript. Where after a long and learned discourse about the rule of faith instituted by Christ and his Apostles and left to the Church to be delivered unto us and to be conserved from time to time, Tertullian saith, that all good Catholic men ought to be content and acquit their minds with this rule & sum of faith left unto us, and not to be over curious in examining, discussing or seeking further knowledge than is delivered to them in this rule by their Catholic mother the Church. Haec regula (saith he) à Christo instituta nullas habet apud no● quaestiones, nisi quas haereses inferunt, 
Tertul. de prescript. cap. 14.  & quae hareticos faciunt. This rule of faith instituted by Christ and delivered to his Church hath no doubt or question among us Catholykes but such as either heresies do bring in, or do make heretics: And then after a sharp reprehension against curious men, 
Tertullians' reprehension of curious heretics that brag of skill.  and such as under pretence of seeking knowledge are always disputing in matters of faith, he concludeth thus. Novissimè ignorare melius est, 
Tertul. Ibid.  ne quod non debeas, noris, quia quod debeas nosti, etc. Finally it is better to be ignorant in many things lest you should know that you ought not to know, seeing you know already (by the rule of faith received) so much as you should know. And then further. 
Ibid.  Cedat curiositas fidei, cedat gloria saluti, certe aut non obstrepant aut quiescant adversus regulam, nihil ultra scire, omnia scire est, etc. Let curiosity of searching yield unto faith and believing: let the vain glory of disputing yield unto the study of our salvation, and at leastwise either let them not brabble at all, or let them be silent against this rule of faith received, for to know nothing besides this, is to know all things.  
Now let the sober reader judge what honesty, wit or shame this Minister may have in him, 
Illations against O.▪ E.  that citeth these places out of Hosius, to prove his purpose that we hold Ignorance to be the mother of devotion: for first they are not the sentences of Hosius as now we have showed, but of S. Hillary and Tertullian: and secondly they do make nothing to prove, that we hold ignorance to be the mother of devotion, but rather that these fathers do hold it, if any such things be in their sentences or tending that way, which is much against our Minister if you mark it. But thirdly I say that all this is nothing to his purpose, but altogether to ours, for that these sayings of the fathers and many other that might be alleged to the same effect do tend principally to reprove the curious searching disputing & wrangling of heretics that brag of singular knowledge and do object ignorance and simplicity to Catholics, which ignorance notwithstanding and simplicity with promptness of obeying and believing what is left unto them by the Church their mother, is preferred by the foresaid fathers before all the curiosity & knowledge vawnted of by heretics, 
●. Cor. 8.  which is truly called. Scientia inflans puffing science, by the Apostle.  
And thus now as you see hath the Kt. with his Minister struggled hard hitherto for delivering himself from the forged position feigned against us, 
The Conclusion of this chapter.  that we hold Ignorance for the mother of devotion; albeit to the very force and substance of the Warders reply he hath answered scarce any one point at all to the purpose. For the Warder meaning to have the truth tried indeed substantially and really whither ignorance or science were holden by Catholykes to be needful to devotion, he took a sound way & went roundly to the matter, setting down the true definition of devotion out of catholic Doctors, & namely out of S. Thomas in name of all the rest: which definition being the true touchstone of the nature of each thing, seeing it excludeth ignorance expressly, and requireth knowledge, doth convince Sir F. his fiction of forgery, and delivereth all Catholykes from that fond imputation.  
Moreover the Warder again showed at large out of the said Author (S. Thomas) that albeit knowledge and contemplation of God's benefits unto us be the true mother of devotion indeed, yet may it fall out oftentimes, that the most learned be not the most dedout; the cause whereof is, for that devotion dependeth more of the affection then of the understanding, and then he concludeth in these words: Thus you see (S ●. F.) that we hold not ignorance for the mother nor daughter nor kinswoman, of devotion but rather to the contrary we hold that devotion is founded and proceedeth of knowledge, whereof Catholyks have been ever and in all ages more studious and greater enemies to ignorance then Protestants can with any reason presume to have been, for the little time they have been in the world.  
And by this means the said Warder taketh an occasion to make a third discourse, 
Principal points of the Warders discourse untouched by the knight & Minister.  and to show by many profess and examples that Catholyks have been ever more greater furtherers of all kind of learning, science and knowledge belonging to piety, than Protestants, and namely of that whereof every Sectary of our time doth brag, to wit, of holy scriptures, which is evident, by conserving the same uncorrupt so many ages, whereby Sectaries of our time are come to have them, which otherwise they should not, and they are forced to take them upon our credit. And more than this, the bibles set forth in our times in Hebrew, Greek Chaldy, Syriac and other learned tongues was done by our men, infinite commentaries also published upon them, Universities and Lectures erected by them for their study, School degrees and preferments appointed for those that profit most in that study all which Catholyks would never have done, if they had been enemies of knowledge and specially of Scriptures.  
And as for Christian knowledge and perpetual remembrance of the mysteries of our Saviour especially in the lay people that can not read, nor understand the Scriptures, no man can in reason deny but that Catholyks have & do use many means more than Protestants do, 
More means to Christian knowleg in use amongst Catholyks then amongst Protestants.  as the frequent use of festival and holy days, wherein the Acts of Christ and his Saints are recownted, repeated and imprinted to the people's minds.  
The use of Images, representations and many exterial ceremonies belonging to the same end: all which do contain, renew and keep in memory the mysteries of Christian faith amongst unlearned people (which can not read or study books) more than any thing else, especially the Cath. expositions of their Pastors and teachers being adjoined thereunto, as before hath been showed to be ordained by our Church: So as if all these things do tend to knowledge, yea a more certain, sure and wholesome knowledge (containing the sense and true meaning of their mother the universal Cath. Church) than every private man can pike out of scriptures by his own study or reading (though every man and woman could read as they can not) or then they can take by the interpretation of any particular Minister following likewise his own head, or of any particular country or Province following their own devise, different from the whole body of Christendom: This I say being so, and so many ways to knowledge used by us, let every indifferent man judge, who may best brag of knowledge, or more object ignorance to others, notwithstanding the Kt. and Ministers babble to the contrary. And with this we end our speech of this first forged position objected unto us.   

OF THE SECOND forged principle, that lay-men must not meddle in matters of religion; wherein is handled again the matter of reading scriptures in English, and why the catholic Church doth forbid some books & purge others. CAP. IX.  
THE second ground or position attributed by Sir F. to Catholykes is set down by him thus. 
Watchwoord. Pag. 20.  When they had (saith he) thus settled this blind course to keep the people from knowledge, etc. Then they offer an other position, that it was not for lay-men to meddle with matters of religion, 
The second fayved position.  for that belonged only and wholly as a privilege to Priests, thereby making them secure and careless of God and all godliness. This is the position; whereunto the Warder answereth in these words: In setting down of this forged position by the knight there is some subtlety joined with impudence. 
Wachword pag. 20.  For first in the former part, where he saith we hold, that it is not for lay-men to meddle with religion, he subtly leaveth doubtful this word (meddle) either to signify that lay-men must not determine or define matters of religion, or else not to meddle or care for them at all. In the former sense we grant, that in Synods and counsels where controversies of faith are to be treated Bishops and clergy men have only authority to define and determine. For that S. Paul saith, 
Act. 20.  that they are appointed by the holy Ghost to govern the Church, though before they do come to determine, they do help themselves also in the search of truth by the labours & learning of lay-men, and take their judgement, when they may give light, as in all Counsels is seen. But in the second sense, it is most impudent, that he inferreth, that hereby we would make lay-men secure and careless of God and all godliness.  
This is the charge. How doth Sir F. defend himself now? stoutly no doubt, for he saith, it may be justified in either sense. Well then let us examine it a little in the second sense (for in the first we strive not much) how & with what face can the K ●. aver again that lay-men are so barred by us from meddling in matters of religion, as thereby, we make them secure and careless of God and all godliness? what proofs doth he bring now (think you) for answering so notorious a charge? You shall hear his own words. 
Pag. 52.  In the later sense (saith he) I need not labour any more for proof, then that before is set down, touching your breeding of God's children in blindness and ignorance, and withholding the key of knowledge from them. 
Very fond reasoning of the K●.  Do you see what he bringeth? If the Kt. had talked of breeding young geese, he could speak no more fond than here he doth. And what I pray you is his key of knowledge withholden from the lay sort? forsooth the reading of the English Bible from such as understand it not. And how many apprentices and good wives of London with others of other places have opened so many doors of later years to disorders with this key, as neither their husbands nor Masters nor Magistrate could or can well remedy? let puritanes brownists loving-families and other like be witnesses. And yet as though all stood in this point of reading English bibles, he asketh us very earnestly in the next words following. 
Pag. 52.  And how will you have them (lay people) meddle with cr●are for that they know not? And then again. How do you permit lay-men thus to meddle with matters of Religion, when as you take from them the use of scriptures? Did you ever hear such demands? or did ever man deal with such adversaries? is there no care of piety, God or godliness (for this is our question) but in such only as read scriptures in English? What will you say to all those Protestants among you who can not read nor have time to hear them red, will you say there is no godliness or care of God in them? if you do, I say, and you can not deny it, that they are the greatest part of your English protestant people.  
But from this he leapeth to two places of scriptures, the first out of the Acts of the Apostles of the men of Berraea, who are much commended (saith he) for searching the Scriptures, whether things were so as the Apostles had delivered. The second out of S. john's Epistle saying, Dear beloved believe not every spirit, 
1 joan. 4. Examination of two places of Scripture for vulgar reading thereof.  but t●ie spirits whether they be of God or not. Out of both which two places he would have us take it for proved, that all kind of lay people, men and women, learned and unlearned must search scriptures daily in the vulgar tongues, to examine and judge whither their Pastors and teachers say truly or no? And thereby also try spirits: and that without this, there is no care of God or godliness in the lay sort: every man, woman and damozel must have their key of knowledge to open scriptures and try spirits.  
But first what a common wealth this would make if it were well executed all men can see: secondly the places of scriptures are as fitly alleged as these men are wont to do, as you shall see by examination. For to the first, of the men of Berraea (which every where is alleged and urged by Protestants most impertinently to this effect) I would ask our Kt. how he can prove their case to be like ours? to wit, first that they were unlearned and vulgar jews that searched those scriptures in Berraea, to see whether the places of the Prophets alleged by Paul and Silas about Christ were so or no and secondly that those scriptures which they searched were in the vulgar Syriac tongue and not in the Hebrew, which the common people for the most part understood not, and thirdly that this searching was a general promiscuous reading of all scriptures translated into vulgar languages for all sorts ●f people to read and examine thereby their Priests & Pastor's doctrine and to judge thereof, which three points the Kt. and his Minister will never be able to prove, & so indeed do prove nothing in alleging this place most impertinent to their purpose. For as for the case of the men of Berraea, it was a very particular and different yea extraordinary case, for that S. Paul and Silas were not the ordinary teachers & Pastors of those jews of Berraea, but taught rather a new and strange doctrine different in many substantial points (as appeared) from the ancient Religion of the jews and yet they alleged the sayings and testimonies of the old Prophets and patriarchs for the same: 
How the jew of Berraea did search the Scriptures.  so as the learned sort of jews of Berraea had great reason to search diligently ●hose places of scriptures to see whether they were so as the Apostles alleged and interpreted or no; and for that the controversy was not so much about the words as the sense and interpretation, it is evident that they were of their learned men that took this search in hand & not vulgar people, whereof our controversy is, and so much do the precedent words of the text clearly show: if S. F. after his fraudulent manner had not cut them of and dissembled them, for thus saith the text of S. Luke.  
Fratres autem confestim etc. The brethren out of hand conveyed by night Paul and Silas from the persecution of Thessalonica unto the town of Be●●●, 
Act 17.  where being arrived they entered into the synagogue of the jews, and these were the most noble of them t●at d●e in Thessalonia, who received the word with all g●●●dines searching daily the Scriptures if these things alleged out of the Prophets about Christ by Paul and Si●as) were so or Noah. This is the place● Now let the discreet reader weigh prudently whether S.F. have behaved himself knightlike here or no: first in cutting of these word which most cleared the doubt (to wit tha● these were no unlearned jews, but no bilio●es, ● saith the text, that is the most principal among them) and then in making so impertinent ●illation, that for so much as these princip●● learned jews did in that particular occas●●● search some places of Scriptures, ther●●●● must all our lay people read of necessity, 〈◊〉 make themselves judges of their ordina●● teachers and Pastors.  
To the second place of trying spirits whether they be of God or no I would ask the Kt. whether there be no other way or means of trying spirits but by remitting all sorts of people to the scriptures and those in vulgar languages? 
About tr●eng of spi●its.  for if there be any other means, than it is absurd to tie the Apostles counsel of trying spirits to every man's reading of scriptures, where the trial being remitted to each man's own interpretation will ●al out so difficultas no end can be expected. For I would ask our Kt. for example's sake when will two women accusing one the other of a scolding spirit try out the truth of each one's spirit by their own reading scriptures, especially if there he no judge nor the coocking stool at hand? Or to take some greater example when ●il any two Sectaries as Brownistes and any other of our time contending about heretical spirits try the same by scriptures, yea though ●hey be of the learneder sort? doth not this appear by experience daily? and how much ●esse than can unlearned people try their own ●r other men's spirits by reading scriptures in ●ulgar languages?  
And with this I would leave the Kt. in this ●oint, but that he abuseth so egregiously a ●●ace of S. Chrisostome to wrest him to some ●ew of his purpose, 
S. Chrysostome notably abused the Kt.  as I can not omit to dis●●uer it to the reader, whereby he may see ●ith what consciences these men treat mat●●rs of religion, using legerdemain in every ●ing, and this not of error or ignorance, but of known and set malice to deceive, which trick whensoever (good reader) thou dost discover plainly in any writer though it were but once, yet oughtest thou never to trust him again, but much more here in this our controversy, where so often I have showed the same most evidently both in the Kt. and his Minister O. E. and the rest. But now to the place itself.  
He will needs make S. Chrisostome to be of his opinion for permitting scriptures in vulgar languages to all sorts of people, and that they both learned and unlearned must examine and discuss all their controversies thereby. Hear his words. S. Chrisostome (saith he) thinketh it an absurd thing that all men▪ should not thus meddle with religion. 
Pag. 53.  Quomodo absurdum non est, etc. What an absurdity is that: for money we trust not other men but count it and tell it after them, 
Chris. in 2. Cor. hom. 13.  but for more excellent things simply to follow other men's sayings, especially sith we have the exactest rule and balance of all the testimony of the Law of God, therefore I pray and beseech you that you will leave what this and that man thinketh, & inquire all things of the Scriptures.  
Thus relateth he S. Chrisostome: wherein truly there are so many frauds and shifte● used, to make S. Chrisostome seem of his opinion, as is strange in a man of any honour or shamefastness; and the greatest fraud o● all is to pervert S. Chrisostoms' whole meaning and discourse who handling this argument in the later part of his 13. Homely which he calleth the Morality of that he had said before, 
S. Chrisostons' whole argument perverted.  to wit, pauperem meliori esse conditione quam divitem, that the poor man is in better stare than the rich: and he prefixeth these words for the title of the Chapter which being a Christian Paradox as you see, he prosecuteth the same most earnestly and piously through out the whole Chapter, showing the perils of the rich, & security of the poor with many other differences, and that we must not in this point follow the common opinion of worldly men that esteem riches for great felicity but attend rather what the laws and rules of Christ do teach us, and finally he concludeth: 
Ibidem.  Quae cum ita fint vulgi opiniones ne circumferamus, Sed res ipsas expē●amus. An non enim absurdum & praeposterum fuerit nos cum de pecunijs agitar, alijs fidem non habere, Sed numero & cal●ulo id co●●attere: cum autem de rebus judicandum est in al●o●um opiniones temere ac velut obtorto collo trahi, ●●que cum exactam rerum omnium lancem & amussim ba●eamus nempe devinarum legum Sententiam? Quo●●●avos omnes, rogo atque obsec●o, ut quid hic au● ille de●●●● rebus sential, nihil morantes, Scripturas sacras ●de en consulatis, ac quae verae sint opes cogn●scatis, which words truly englished do sound thus.  
Which things (concerning true●riches and poverty) seeing they are so as I have before declared) let us not carry about with us the opinions of vulgar men, 
The true interpretation of S. Chrisostomes' words.  but let us examine things as they be in themselves, for were it not an ●bsurd & preposterous thing, when we deal in money matters not to trust other men, but to tell and count it, and when we are to judge of things themselves to suffer us rashly and as it were with a wry neck to be draw into other men's opinions, especially where as we have that exact balance, rule & square of all things, which is the sentence or determination, of God's laws? Wherefore I do pray & beseech you all, that in these things you will not stand upon, what this or that man thinketh, but that you take counsel rather of holy scriptures, and learn by them which are true riches indeed.  
Thus saith S. Chrisostome, and now let us briefly examine how many ways the K. hath perverted this one place, 
The abuse offered by S. F. to 5. Chrysostome.  to make it sound somewhat to his purpose, albeit not much though it were as he allegeth it. But first of all he wresteth his whole meaning (as before I have noted) which is the greatest sin in alleging any author that may be. For S. Chrysost. treateth a far different question from ours, to wit, of true and false riches, as in the title of the Chapter he professeth, and having handled it largely, he concludeth in those first words by me alleged, and gu●lfully cut of and left out by Sr. F. Quae cumita sint etc. which things being so let not us follow the opinion of the vulgar sort (about true riches and poverty) but let us consider things ●● they be in themselves, etc. which words do wholly overthrow Sr. F. principal illation, that unlearned people should not follow other men's opinions, to wit, their Pastors in matters of religion, but go & try it in scriptures, whereof S. Chrysostome never so much as dreamt.  
Secondly the first words alleged by the Kt. in Latyn Quomodo absurdum non est, etc. are not so in S. Chrysostome as you see by those which I have alleged, which is a token that he had them out of some Minister's note-book and read them not himself. Thirdly the word praeposterum left out in his translation importeth some fraud also, for that this word showeth the comparison not to be between reading of scriptures & other men's testimonies, especially our ordinary Cath. Pastors as he would have it seem. Fourthly those other words. (But for more excellent things simply to follow other men's sayings) are not in the text as you may see by comparing it, but are deceitfully laid together to make men think that simple obedience or belief of our teachers in God's Church is here reprehended by S. Chrisostome, and that every man and woman is willed to go to the scriptures. And for this cause fifthly he translateth those words divinarum legum sententiam the testimony of the law of God: where as the sentence or determination of these divine laws here spoken of by S. Chrysostome, as they be contained partly in scriptures and partly in the tradition of God's Church, which was before scriptures were written, so is it not necessary for every man and woman to be remitted to reading of scriptures for learning them as here, is pretended.  
It followeth sixtly in S. Chrysostome. Wherefore I pray and beseech you all, that in these things you will not stand upon what this or that man thinketh, etc. Which words Sr. F. translateth thus: I pray and beseech you that you will leave what this or that man thinketh, etc. leaving out of purpose the words that make most to the matters de hijs rebus, of these things, to wit, of true and false riches, which is the subject handled by S. Chrysostome. And Sr. F. would have his readers think (though never so unlearned) that he is prayed in all matters of Religion to leave what this or that man thinketh (though it be his Pastor or any other Cath. teacher) and inquire all those things of the scriptures which is most absurd and furthest from S. Chrysostom● meaning: And in these very last words of the Kt. there be two or three shifts and manifest corruptions: for where as S. Chrysostome saith: Scripturas sacras de eis consulatis, he translateth it, and inquire all these things of the scriptures, adding the word (all) of purpose to disguise the meaning of S. Chrysostome, as though he would have all matters by every man and woman immediately searched out from the scriptures, & as though he had not handled a particular argument, for which the scriptures were to be consulted against the vain opinion of vulgar men about true and false riches, for which cause the Kt. cutteth of also the next imediat words following in the self same sentence for explication of S. Chrysostoms' meaning ac quae verae sint opes cognoscatis, and that you may know which are true riches.  
And thus I have been longer than I thought to be in notifying unto you this manner of dealing of S.F. and his Minister (as in the precedent Chapter you have seen also about the handling of Hosius) when they cite any Fathers or Authors of moment against us, which commonly is with such fraud and deceit, corruption and mangling, as if the controversy were for men's shuwes & not souls, or for shuw-soles, or as if it were for some temporal and earthly trifles, and not for the everlasting possession of hell or heaven. But let us see more of this kind of proceeding in the Kt. It is recorded (saith he) that some of the learneder sort of your Clergy have used to say among their friends: 
Pag 54. Paralip. Abb. urspergen. Pag 448.  Sic dicerem in Scholis. Sed tamen (manet in●er nos, etc.) I would say so in the Schools, but yet (let it be kept secret amongst ourselves,) I think the contrary.  
These words I do not find in the Author by him alleged cited in the margyn, and therefore God knoweth from what forge they come, perhaps by some Minister's note-book, that either devised or corrupted them in citing. But suppose they may be found, and that some School readers in matters either of philosophy or divinity (for he specifieth no science) not belonging to any article of faith should say thus, 
Impertinent matter brought in.  that in the schools for not offending any part, he would follow the common opinions of that university of school, though in private for himself he were of an other opinion, what doth this prove? or to what end was this brought forth by the Kt. to confirm his principal proposition, that we forbidden lay-men to meddle in matters of religion? do you see what direct proofs they bring.  
But hearken yet further to another charge immediately following more heinous than this: The Fathers (saith he) you have mangled and depraved where their testimonies were pregnant against your errors, 
Pag. 54.  as for example; that plain place of Gregory Nissene, eam solummodo vaturam, quae increata est, colere & venerari d●dicimus: we have learned to adore and worship only that nature, which is uncreated: where your Spanish divines in their Index expurgatorius set down this direction, deleatur dictio solummodo, put out the word only; and sundry such places, as both, 
Of divers judices printed and pablished in sundry countries.  our learned men have discovered, and in your Indices are to be found out, etc. If our Indices be extant (Sir) and that in print to show to the world what we do in this behalf, then is not necessary the discovery of your learned men to manifest the same, 
See Posseui●us in biblioth. select. lib.  and then is it both false and ridiculous which immediately you add; that we thought to have it remain secret among ourselves what we do in this behalf concerning the ancient Fathers, etc. For who would publish books and expurgatory Indices in all countries of such corrections as we think needful, if we would have the matter secret, but these men must needs say somewhat though never so fond or repugnant to reason.  
But for that of later days, divers sectaries have begun to complain greatly of the continuance of an ancient diligence used by the Cath. Roman Church for repressing heretical books and purging others corrupted by them, with infinite impostures, false translations, wicked annotations, pernicious commentaries postiles, arguments, observations, and other like most pestilent infections, I shall be forced in this place to stand upon this matter somewhat, and to open to the reader the truth of things about this point, and then shall we answer also this particular objection, of deleaiur solummodo made here by Sr. Francis, & else where by many of his comparteners as though we meant to blot out, all that is against us in any sort of authors whatsoever.  
First than it is to be understood, that it hath been an old custom of heretics and sectaries from the beginning not only to write wicked books themselves, 
The custom of heretics to corrupt books.  but to corrupt other men's writings also most audaciously, to make them seem to be of their sect and faction, even as rebels are wont to do, who being but few at the beginning, do give out notwithstanding for their better credit, that they have many & great partners in secret, and do oftentimes fain letters to testify the same.  
Of this fraud of heretics, 
Origenes in epist. ad Alexandrinos'. Tertul. lib. contra Martion. Euseb. Caesar. in apol. sub. nomine Pamphy●● martyris Ruffinus in epist. ad Macarium.  and of their corrupting not only the scriptures when they can but also other authors and writers, we have many ancient complaints among the Fathers of all ages, which were overlong here to recite, the reader may see those that I have noted in the margin, and thereby may he make a guess of the rest.  
But now to this most dangerous assault of the devil, 
●uagr. lib. 3. ca 31. Cassiodorus de divin. lect. ca 2. Levitius de Sectis. Act. 8. tom. 9 Byblioth. Sanct. 6. Synod. act. 15. tom. 2. council. etc.  whereby he would bring all things in doubt and consequently the Church of God into confusion, the said Church in the strength of his holy spirit hath striven and resisted ever with all diligence industry and longanimity, accursing first both the heretics and all their heretical writings, & then cleansing and purging the works of other authors from their pernicious corruptions, 
No book of former heretic hath remained.  infections, and poisoned impostures, and this diligence of the Cath. Church hath pervayled so much & hath been so grateful in the sight of God, as we see and feel at this day the miraculous effects thereof which are, that of so many heretical volumes, as have been written from age to age against the truth of catholic religion, and were curiously read and highly esteemed in those days by men that loved novelties; scarce any one remaineth to this day, in so much that if we had not mention and memory of their said books and absurd positions by the testimony of Cath. authors that wrote against them, we should scarce have had any knowledge that they had written such works.  
For what is become (I pray you) of all those volumes written by the Arrians, which did set a work all the Cath. Fathers and Doctors of divers ages to answer them? what is become of the many books of Pelagius our learned (though wicked) Britain? of Faustus the great Manichie, of whose great parts and labours S. Augustine himself that was, his greatest adversary doth bear witness? of Petilian, Crescentius, and other writing Donatists? What is become of the 200. books or volumes of our John Wicliffe or wicked-beleef as Thomas Walsingham calleth him? are they not all gone? So as if our other learned contreyman Thomas Walden Wicliffes' opposite, and some others did not make mention thereof, and of that number, we should never have known that he had written so many to his own confusion.  
Well then these are the effects of this holy industry of the catholic Church in censuring and condemning the writings of heretyks, which censure though it be commonly little esteemed, but rather contemned by them and their followers for the time present, yet as the figtree in the gospel died and withered away after the curse of Christ received so do these men and their works by little and little die in themselves after the malediction and condemnation of his spouse the Church, though presently it be not seen, but future times will declare it, and if we have seen the experience thereof in 15. ages past, we may believe it also of this, which is the 16. Let the heretics vaunt and brag what they will to the contrary, and already we see some proof thereof. For I would ask you, who readeth or esteemeth greatly Martin Luther's works at this day in England (I mean of Protestants) though they were more perhaps in number then those of S. Augustine, and much more esteemed for some years by his follower's, 
Luther's books out of request.  he being accounted the Elias of our time, & Father of the new gospel. And the like I might ask of the books of Oecolampadius, Carolstadius, Zwinglius, and other the first pillars of Protestants Religion? and if they be either in contempt, or of declining estimation among their own offspring so soon, what do we think that they are amongst Catholyks, and will be to their posterity when this tempest shallbe blowne-over, and the Church restored to a calmer season again?  
And thus much of the effects of this diligence as also of the necessary causes inducing to use the same, which may be greatly confirmed by the contrary effects to be seen among heretyks and sectaries where this diligence is not, or cannot be used, nor if it were, can it have the foresaid benediction of good success, for that God the giver of that benediction is not with them; & so we see that among them all sectaries books whatsoever are read promiscuously of all men and women, even the Turks Koran itself, Machevile & Bodin tending to Atheism, and bawdy Boccace, with the most pestilent English Palace of Pleasure (all forbidden among us Catholyks) are read and studied by whom it liketh them, whereby it must needs ensue, that the people's judgement & affections are pitifully infected with poison in every kind where no prohibition is used to the contrary.  
The only diligence that is used at this day among them is to prohibit and keep out catholic books, 
No books prohibited amongst protestants but catholic.  which only do contain indeed the true medicines for these maladies, and yet is this a hard matter to do, considering the variety, utility, and necessity of such books, insomuch that if they exclude not all good sciences, and together with them the ancient Fathers, Counsels and Ecclesiastical histories themselves, and more than this destroy not many monuments of their own, they cannot exclude the arguments persuading people to the truth of catholic religion.  
And this being so let us see now a little what manner of diligence the catholic Church doth use in repressing heretical books and purging other by heretics infected. 
Diligence of the Catholyk Church in prohibiting and purging books.  The late universal and Ecumenical Council of Trent preceyving the infinite multitude and variety of heretical writings that were come forth already and came forth daily of all new sects as Lutherans, Zwinglians, Anabaptists, Caluinists, Swinkefeldians, Libertines, Trinitarians, new Arrians; and others, to infect the world withal, 
Index expurgar. Concili●̄ Trident.  resolved according to the custom of other general Counsels & Synods before them, to take some effectual remedy for this disorder, and for that purpose appointed an Index or catalogue of all prohibited books, and did set down 10. rules at the beginning thereof for better direction of all Cath. men in that affair; whereof the first is; that all books and authors forbidden or condemned before by any General Counsel or Bishops of Rome until the year of Christ 1515. (which was 2. years before Luther published his heresy) should be understood also to be forbidden and condemned by them; by which we may see, that one council in the Cath. Church hath relation to another and confirmeth the same, which heretyks use not to do in their assemblies & meetings.  
The second rule is; That all Archeretyks that have been Authors of several sects since that time, as Luther, Zwing●ius, Caluyn, Balthasar, Pacimontanus Swin●feldius, and other like are condemned by name with their books, as other heretics also whatsoever since that time in general. The third rule is; that all translation of other men's works & writings made by heretyks, so they contain no corruption contrary to the Cathol. faith may be permitted.  
The fourth rule is, how bibles in vulgar tongues, may be read, permitted, or forbidden. The fift rule is; that books which treat not of divinity but of other matters set forth by heretyks may be permitted after they are cleansed, and purged from heretical impostures; and the like of other books and works with particular direction how they may be purged, and restored to their pure integrity, the particulars whereof were overlong here to be discussed. Only I will advertise that besides these rules, 
Instructions for expurging of books.  there are certain instructions also set forth in print in the same Index for the execution of these rules, wherein having showed how they may proceed with books of our age written either by heretics or Catholyks, if they contain errors heresies, athesmes, scurrility, lasciviousness or the like. The fourth instruction hath these words: 
Index expu●gat. Conc. Trident. de correct. §. 4.  In libris autem Cath●licorum veterum nihil mutari fas sit nisi ubi aut fraud haereticorum, aut typographi incuria manifes●us error irrepserit. It may not be lawful (for them that correct books) to change any thing at all in the books of the ancient Catholyks, except where any manifest error should appear to have crept in either by the fraud of heretyks, or negligence of the printer, etc.  
Behold here Catholyks delivered from that wicked slander offered by Sir Francis & his fellows, that we take authority unto us to change, put out and put in what we list in the ancient Father's works. This is the instruction of the general counsel confirmed by Pope Pius 4. and of all Popes after him, and now again by Clemens Octaws as appeareth by their several Breves put before it, neither would the Spanish Index expurgatorius have dared to gone against this direction, 
Index expurgat. Hisp. impress. Madrit● apud Alphons. Gomitium. an. D●i 1584.  especially seeing that the Card. Gaspar Quiroga head of the Inquisition in Spain in his preface to the said book saith; that this expurgation was made according to the meaning and direction of the council of Trent and that by the chiefest men of all their universities, 
Two considerations in putting out any thing of the ancient waters.  so as albeit they cannot stand to give a particular reason of every censure or expurgation that is made; yet it is most certain, that in all they put out of any author before our age, they follow one of two reasons before mentioned, to wit that either they find it thrust in by heretics, or by error of the printer, and that other more ancient and corrected copies had it not, and so might they say also of the former sentence alleged by Sir F. deleatur dictio solummodo, especially seeing they do censure the sentence, not as a sentence of Gregory Nissene (as falsely and fraudulently Sir F. doth set it down) but of a far later greek author named Antonius Abbas of whom they say thus in their Index: 
Index expurgat. Hisp. fol. 20.  Ex libris Antoniuses Abbatis qui inscribuntur milissae, sive sermons & ementi●o titulo ascribuntur Ant. Magno. Out of the books of Antony an Abbot, which are entitled Melissa or certain sermons, which falsely are ascribed to Anthony the great, etc.  
Whereby we may understand, that these learned men which gave this censure esteemed not the sentence to be either of Gregory Nissene (as Sr. F. allegeth it) nor yet of any other author of great antiquity, being indeed nothing else but a collection of sentences out of many authors here and there without order or method, and alleged by Margarinus a Doctor of Paris in the fifth to me of his Bibliotheca sanctorum Parrum; In which work as himself confesseth, in a certain preface, many things were hastily shuffled up, and passing by many several hands divers impertinent notes were made in the margin, upon one of which Sr. F. groundeth his argument; that this sentence so censured was taken out of Gregorius Nassenus, which yet neither is found in him, nor do the learned men of Spain censure him or speak of him, but only of these sermons of Antonius Abbas, in which many other things are found worthy reprehension as this Index doth show, & Protestant's themselves will not deny, as for example, where they say: 
Serm. 72. col. 73. Serm. 26. col. ●49.  Deleantur illa verba, non potest ammus iniquus justificari. An unjust mind cannot be justified. And again Deus non omnium Deus est. God is not God of all men. And again: Largire pio, & peccatori ne succurras. 
Serm 27.  Give unto a good man, but give nothing to a sinner. And yet further: 
Lib. 2. Serm. 10.  Est autem in Dei ma●u non qu●uis: Every man is not in the hand of God. And finally: Deus non colitur ab homine malo. 
Serm. 55.  God is not worshipped by an evil man, etc. In all which sentences, you see there is need of some censure & examimation, according as this Index doth note; and albeit by marginal notes they are pretended to be taken out of ancient Fathers, yet neither is it always so, nor do they contain good doctrine, as you see, & it appertaineth to the solicitude of the Cath. church to give notice thereof, where need is, least simple people be deceived.  
And thus you see that we have justified the practice of our Church in this behalf, and have showed the quarrels to be vain and foolish, and not sincerely treated by him; and when all is said and considered, you shall find it far from his purpose, which is and aught to be to prove, if he could that we forbidden lay men to meddle in matters of religion, which ●e proved first for that they had not the scriptures in English, and then for that we pervert (as he saith) the ancient Fathers with the censure of deleatur when any sentence liketh us not. Of which two proofs whether is most from the purpose let the reader judge, who hath heard them both discussed.  

The calling in of O. E.  
But will you hear now in a word or two, what Sr. F. Francis soldier of supply O.E. saith in this point? 
What the minister O. E. saith about this controversy.  First you must imagine he had seen all both what the watchman and the Warder had said before, and what Sir Francis also had replied, and yet he cometh in with a flat new assertion as though he had seen nothing hitherto. 
Pag. 5●.  likeways (saith he) they teach that lay-men may not meddle with, matters of religion, that is, that Princes have no power to reform the Church nor make Ecclesiastical laws. Yea (Sir Minister) will you run out at that hole? and is that the meaning of the Kt. assertion? How then followeth the second part; that thereby we make all lay-men careless of God and all godliness? and how doth the Kt. himself go about to defend it by saying, that we bar laymen from reading scriptures in English? can this be understood only of Princes and their authority to make ecclesiastical laws? Who ever saw such brazen faces, as not to blush thus to disagree? But hearken to his inference upon this bold assertion and confess that he may bear the bell for impudence.  
If the Papists (saith he) do so remove laymen from government in Eeclesiastical causes that they need not to care how God is served then are they not wronged by Sr. Francis, etc. Who would lose time to dispute with this companion, and much less to answer him in his frantic contumelious speech against F. Persons, which all men knowing to be unjust and false and so to be proved by infinite witnesses, and to proceed only from a slanderous and ignominious tongue of a lewd malicious minister, is rather to be contemned then answered. And so this shall suffice for examination of this position.    

ABOUT S. THOMAS of Canterbury whether he were a traitor or no as maliciously he is called by sir Francis and O. E. and what notorious impostures both they and Fox do devise to disgrace him, against the testimony of all ancient writers. CAP. X.  
But now we must come to a greater controversy about S. Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury whom Sir Francis without all occasion bringeth into controversy among other impertinent points to maintain matter of talk. For his subject being of laymen debarred the scriptures, and thereby, (as he saith) made careless of God & all godliness; how might it fall to his purpose (think you) to rail at this blessed archbishop martyred so long ago, and reigning now in heaven for so many hundred years; but that such prince-parasits as these, do think they cannot grace themselves sufficiently with Kings and Queens now a days in England, except they have a fling at this ho●y man who stood in the gap and lost his life for the defence of his Church's liberty.  
Wherefore Sr. F. having both falsely and foolishly witten in the watchword, that among Catholyks there was no more required at laymen's hands to the exercise of piety, but only to go devoutly to mass, and to confession once a year, and then though he were to be tainted with the grossest sins, yet Rome had a trick to hale them into the rabble of their saints and so to canonize them. You see how liberal this gentleman is in canonizing, that requireth no more perfection, but once a year to go to mass and confession, and then he addeth: Of this we have example of Tho. Becket in K. Henry the 3. his time, whose treason to the Prince was apparent and manifest, etc.  
Thus saith he in his Watchword, wherein the Warder took him up for divers untruths and absurdities as namely for saying that we hold it for sufficient perfection of holiness, to hear mass and confess once a year, and that a man may be a Saint▪ with us yea canonised though he be tainted with the grossest sins that may be: That S. Tho. of Canterbury was such a one canonised in the time of K. Henry the third, etc. which last point (to omit the rest) about the time of the death, 
A gross error About the time of S Thomas his death.  and canonisation of S. Thomas under K. Henry the third (as this man saith) and not the second, is showed not only to be false, but of gross ignorance also, seeing that K. Henry the 3. nephew to the second was borne more than 30. years after the death and canonisation of S. Thomas, to which represension of error in story I do not find that S. F. giveth any reason of just excuse in this his reply now, nor yet O. E. for him, but rather as though nothing had been said against him for it turneth to repeat again the same error under pretence of a nameless author, though in the manner of telling his tale he would covertly seem somewhat to answer the objection, for thus he writeth:  
To examine a little (saith he) the State of this Becket, 
Pag 55.  who was a traitor as I do affirm (and not I only but 
* None ever except some late heretics.  many before me) against king Henry the second, but (to use the words of my author) taken up and shrined for a new saint made of an old rebel 50. years after his death, which was in the fourth year of king Henry the third, etc. But this being so notorious an untruth (if he mean of his canonisation as by his former words in the Watch word may appear) & he being reprehended for it before (as you have heard) for modesty's sake should at least have named his author for some show or defence. For if it be john Fox, or some such other of as light credit as himself, you see what cogging it is one of them to allege another, especially seeing Fox also citeth the same words, with the same parenthesis (to use the words of my author) but neither the one or the other citeth any author at all. And most certain it is that never any author of credit in the world said or wrote that S. Thomas either practised treason or was made a saint in K. Henry the 3. his time, as in the former words of his watch our knight affirmed, for that his contention was with K. Henry the 2. grand father to K. Henry the 3. and his canonisation was by Pope Alexander the 3. many years before K. Henry the 3. was borne, as all writers do agree. And the poor shift which here the knight runneth unto for salving of his former error (to wit that S. Thomas his body was translated, 
Se Math. Paris and Matth West. an. Dni 1220. Henr. reg. 3. an. 5 of the translation of S Tho. 6. july.  or as he termeth it, shrined the 4. year of K. Henry the 3.) maintaineth not his former assertion that Thomas Becket committed treason and was made a Saint in K. Henry the 3. his tyme. For what if S. Thomas body was translated from one shrine to another under K. Henry the 3. doth this prove that he was not canonised before? or that he committed treason against this prince that was scarcely borne 30. years after his death? 
Ward. pag. 2●.  We have an example (saith he) of Thomas Becket in Henry the 3. his time, whose treasons to the prince were apparent and manifest, etc. And is it not hereby apparent and manifest, that he told us before that Tho. Becket committed treasons under Henry the 3● and can this be excused now with telling us that his body was translated under Henry the 3? But these are the ordinary shifts which our adversaries use when they are taken trip, to run to impertinent matter, thereby to dazzle the eyes of the reader.  
Let them read but john Stow in the 25. year of K. Henry the 2. his reign, which was of our Lord 1179. and 41. before the translation of S. Thomas his body mentioned here by them and they shall find that both the s●d K. Henry the 2. and K. Lewes of France went in pilgrimage to S. Thomas his Tomb and offered rich jewels for their devotion being but 8. years after his death which happened in the year 1171. So as hereby is seen that he was canonised under K. Henry the 2. and not the third. To which effect also and for cleared this whole story let the ancient authentical authors be read which lived with S. Thomas or presently after him as for example those five that wrote his whole life, actions and death, 
The authentical authors of the story of S. Tho. of Canterbury.  to wit: Herbert Hoscan afterwards Cardinal, john Salisbury bishop of Charters, Allen Abbot of Teukesbury, William and Edward monks of Canterbury, all which lived with him, as did also Peter of Blois Archdeacon of Wells. And soon after under K. Richard the first, son to K. Henry the second, wrote Roger Hoveden doctor and chief reader of divinity in Oxford the whole life of S. Thomas, as is extant in his story, and so did Nubergensis also handle the same at the same time, and so consequently after these, Matthew Paris, Matthew of Westminster, Thom. Walsingam, Polidor Virgil, and others downwards in their histories, all which do agree in this point against Sir Francis. First that S. Thomas was slain and canonised under Pope Alexander the 3. and K. Henry the second, and not under Henry the 3. his nephew, and secondly that he was a most holy man of life, even setting the privilege of his martyrdom a side, and neither tainted with gross sins as these gross tongues do slander him nor committed ever any point of treason against his king, but as primate and head of the English Church stood for the Ecclesiastical liberties thereof as in conscience he was bound, and by the issue of this my rejoinder shall appear.  
Wherein first I must note unto you that the knight in the beginning of the combat about S. Thomas of Canterbury doth complain that I in my former answer seemed to threaten, that they who strived against Saints would remain in the end with broken heads and that in some place I speak of bastinadoes, but all this is but picked matter by him to make a quarrel for well he knoweth, that this is not to be understood but figuratively, and that we are not to enter battle or to stand with so puissant a knight in material arms. Wherefore the bastinadoes or broken heads which I say he is like to gain by fight with saints is in his credit and reputation with men, 
What bastinadoes and broken heads are threatened to S. F.  and in his demerit also with God, if he esteem that any thing, as it is like enough he doth, but little. But for the first about discredit I do remit it to the judgement of the indifferent reader, what men will or may think o● the honour of such a knight, as is not ashamed to come forth in print with so many opprobrious speeches, made out (as it seemeth) of his fingers ends against so honourable a parsonage as S. Thomas of Canterbury was, whilst he lived, and so highly praised and esteemed by all writers for 4. hundred years after his death, and this without alleging any one author old or new, good or bad, credible or without credit for proof of that which he writeth: For so doth S. F. deal with, us in his railing narration against S. Thomas, setting down as he pretendeth the whole substance of that whieh passed between him & the King without citing book or author, and quite contrary to all that (for the most part) which all ancient writers that lived with him have left behind them written of this affair; and moreover hath corrupted (which is far worse) and falsified also witingly and willingly divers things which he found in other authors, 
False dealing of S. Francis.  thereby to make them seem somewhat to his purpose: all which you shall see evidently proved in this examination of the two foresaid points, to wit of his life & contention with the King.  
And for the first about his life and conversation, whatsoever S.F. tatleth of gross sins here or else where, most certain and clear it is, that all the foresaid ancient authors, and whosoever hath written of him beside (notwithstanding they wrote under the foresaid K. Henry his enemy or Richard the first his son) do give most high praises to this man for his integrity of life according to those words of D. Hoveden: 
D. Hoveden annal. part. 2. fol. 2●7.  Vita etus irreprehensibilis erat coram Deo & hominibus. His life was irreprehensible before God and man, yea his very adversaries themselves as John Fox by name, after he hath showed the greatest gall against him, yet confessing the helps of nature that were in him (to use his own words) he addeth: 
Fox act. and mon. pag. 1●6 col. 2. n. 4.  Besides this (saith he) he was of a chaste and strict life if the histories be true.  
Mark john Fox his exception (if the histories be true) & why should he call in doubt ancient histories, more in this point, then in others? But you must understand that this Fox having a special spite against this blessed man, & being desirous by all means possible to disgrace him and his actions in his false lying martyrologue, and finding no authors in the world before Luther's heresy to serve his purpose or to speak or write evil of him, but all rather highly in his commendation, what course taketh the miseriable man think you? truly a most desperate, which is to use these authors against themselves and against both their own sayings and meanings and so patcheth he up, as it were out of them a long treatese and narration of above 40. pages of paper against S. Tho. pretending to take it out of the foresaid authors, but yet spicing it with so many ass & and's, 
Fox his egregious fal●e dealing against S. Thomas.  & adjoining so many glosses, parentheses, notes, observations, interpretations, commentaries and censures of his own both in the text and margin, as he maketh all those writers to tell a quite contrary story to that they purposed, and for which they wrote their books, in such sort, as if a man should set out the bible or new Testament itself with such corruption and perversion it would more disgrace Christian religion (for whose confirmation it was written) then any other wicked book whatsoever, yea then the Turks Koran itself.  
And this is the dealing of john Fox in citing and corrupting authors, as after shall appear more particularly. But Sir Francis taketh another course which is to tell his tale at his pleasure, without citing any testimony or author at all, whereof I take the reason to be that which john Fox telleth us in these words plainly: 

john Fox discrediteth all old writers.  
Pag. 204. col. 1. n. 4.   Scarce any testimony is to be taken of that age, being all blinded and corrupted with superstition. Thus he saith and this is the cause why Sir F. allegeth no author, and Fox forceth them to speak as he would have them. But I would ask john Fox again, if no writer of the age itself wherein S. Tho. lived be to be credited about his affairs, how shall we believe writers of later ages that must needs take it from the former, if they writ with foundation & not devise matter of themselves? Again, I would ask whether it be probable that so great a king as K. Henry the second was, could get no man to write the Story indifferently for him in his age? How likely a fiction is this of Fox? And this may be sufficient for the first point; for seeing all the foresaid writers and their works are full of high praises of S. Thom. for his sanctity and perfection of life, and for that cause are specially discredited here by john Fox it shallbe sufficient to remit the reader in this behalf to the said volumes and writings before mentioned.  
For the second which is his cause with the king whether his resisting as Primate of England for liberty to the English Church were treason to the K. or no, 
Whether S. Thom. was a traitor.  is easy to be judged by him, that is not passionate, and will without flattery of temporal Princes consider indifferently, the dignity, pre-eminence, duty, and obligation of Ecclesiastical governors in this behalf, for defence of their spiritual jurisdiction; To which purpose the Warder said as followeth:  
If in every contention or dissension, that a bishop, 
Ward. p. 22.  priest, or other spiritual subject or Ecclesiastical Prelate may have with his temporal prince, 
That all spiritual men resisting temporal magistrates in Ecclesiastical matters are not traitors. Marc. 18.  the subject shall presently be condemned of treason (according to this servile censure of our knight who for flattering princes doth make them absolute lords both of body and soul) than john Baptist also must be accounted a traitor that dealt so peremptorily with his king Herod his liege lord in temporal affairs. Or if you will have examples of christian princes, S. Ambrose must be a traitor, first for resisting openly his ●ord and King, 
Theod. lib 4. ca 6. & lib. 9 cap. 17 & deinceps.  Valentinian the younger, and then for handling so hardly the elder Theod●sius in Miliayn as he shut him out of the Church, and made him go home again with shame and do penance. 
Zozomenus lib. 8 fear pet totum.  S. Hilarius also and S. Athanasius shallbe traitors for their contentions with Constantius their lawful Emperor and temporal lord who banished them from their bishoprics, and the former of the two wrote two vehement books and invectives against the said Emperor, and yet no man ever accounted him a traitor for the same, but rather a great Saint, for his christian liberty and constancy.  
S. Chrysostome in like manner shallbe condemned for a great traitor who had greater contentions with his temporal lords Arcadius and Honorius christian Emperors, 
Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 16.  and with their wives Theodosia and Eudoxia then ever S. Thomas had with K. Henry the second: 
Zozom lib. 8 cap. 17.  for he preached against them publicly with great vehemency and thundered out excommunication against them, 
Niceph. li. 14. cap. 43.  and was twice banished and driven out of his bishopric by their disfavours, and died in exile. And yet was he never called or accounted a traitor, but a singular holy man: and Theodosius the younger, son of Arcadius, brought his body with great solemnity honour and reverence into Constantinople, and wept most bitterly for the sins of his parents in persecuting so blessed a man, & (as the Story saith) made prayer to him now dead for pardon of his father's sins; as did also often both our K. Henry the second himself and his son for the offence of his father, 
Math. Parisien in vit. Henr.  who had been some cause of the death of this just man his pastor and spiritual father.  
Thus wrote the Warder then, and what replieth now our knight or his minister to all this? you shall hear the knight in his own words: Who (saith he) but such a one as hath sold himself to all impudence and shameless gainsaying the truth, 
Pag. 54.  would seek to cover Beckets' rebellion by the facts of S. john Baptist, Ambrose, Hilary, Athanasius, and Chrysostome, which have as much agreement with the cause of Becket, as hath light with darkness, good with evil, sweet with sour. Here you see the knight in a great heat, but his minister O. E. answereth somewhat more temperately saying only, that These examples fit not Thomas Becke●s cause. Well then of two points contained in this matter, the one we have gotten that in some cases, spiritual prelate's, though subjects in temporalityes may reprehend and resist, yea chasten also by Ecclesiastical punishment their liege lords and temporal princes without being traitors for the same. The second whether the examples be like, we are to examine a little in this place.  
And first I would ask our minister that denieth the fitness of the examples, 
The comparison of S. Thom with S. Ambrose, Hillary and other fathers.  as also his master that chafeth at them. what and where about were the foresaid Saints contentions with their temporal Princes, were they not for the defence of the laws of Christ and his Church, did not S. john Baptist withstand Herod his temporal Lord to his face for breaking the laws of wedlock and was not the strife of S. Ambrose with Valentinian his Emperor first for that he would not deliver up a Catholic Church to the use of Arrians as he and his mother had commanded, and secondly for that he would not give up the treasure and vessels of his Church into the Emperors own hands as he required. Hear his own testimony thereof. 
S. Ambr. in orat. in Auxon. de Basilicia traden.  Cum esset propositum (saith he) ut ecclesiae vasa iam traderemus, etc. when it was proposed unto us in the emperors name that we should deliver him the vessel of our church I gave this answer. If any thing of my own were demanded, either land house gold or silver I would easily yield unto him any thing that were belonging unto me. But from the Church of God I told him that I could take nothing, for that I had received it not to deliver but to keep. And that with this I had respect also of the emperors salvation. For that it was neither expedient for me to give, nor for him to receive. Accipiat ergo vocem liberi sacerdotis, etc. Let his Majesty then receive the word of a free priest if he will have care of his own salvation, let him cease to offer injury to Christ.  
Lo here the answer of an ecclesiastical Prelate but a temporal subject to his highest Prince, doth not this seem to be speech of some catholic Bishop to a Protestant Prince that would invade Church goods & possessions against which point S. Ambrose was so resolute to stand as he saith in the same place: that if source were used towards him his flesh might be troubled but not his mind, and that he was ready if the Emperor would use his kingly authority in offering violence to stuffer that which belonged to a good Priest to bear. And what doth this differ now from the cause of S. Tho. of Canterbury who stood upon defence of his Ecclesiastical jurisdiction against K. Henry his temporal Prince that usurped the same. Hear the words of S. Thomas himself used to K. Henry in a Council at Chynon in France as D. Hoveden sets them down: 
Rog. Hove in vit. Henr. 2. pag. 285.  Non deberetis Episcopis praecipere absoluere aliquem vel excommunicare trahere Clericos ad saecularia examina judicare de decimis, de ecclesits interdicere Episcopis ne tractent de ●ransgressione fidei vel juramenti, etc. You ought not to take upon you to command Bishops to absolve or excommunicate any man neither to draw clergy men to the examinations of seculars, neither to judge of tithes or of churches or to forbid Bishop● to treat of transgressions against faith, or against oaths broken or the like, etc. Do not we seem to hear in this place the voice of S. John Baptist to his K. Herod. It is not lawful for the to have the wife of thy brother. 
S. Marc. 1●.  Or is not this agreeable to the speech of S. Ambrose to Valentinian that he could not force him to deliver any church or holy vessels thereof, and that he would die in that quarrel against him.  
But let us hear an other controversy of his with another Emperor more devout & religious than the former, 
The contention of S. Ambrose with Theodosius the Emperor.  to wit: Theodosius the great in Milan for that he would not do public penance prescribed by this holy B. to him for the excess in punishing those of Thessalonica, and had not this been rebellion and treason by Protestants law for a priest to drive his king and Emperor (that by their divinity was head of their church) to public penance and to go out of his Church as S. Ambose did compel Theodosius to go out of the church of Milan. But let us go forward and see the rest of examples before touched, 
Pallad. in vit. Chrysost.  was not the contention of S. Chrisostome with Arcadius and Honorius his Princes & Emperors and with their wives when he kept some of them by force out of his church about ecclesiastical liberty and jurisdiction also. And that also of S. Athanasius & Hilarius against Constantius their Emperor and supreme head also according to the Protestants opinion in spiritual matters, for that he favoured Arrians, deposed Catholic Bishops and made himself umpyre in ecclesiastical affairs as Protestants Princes do now a days. Did S. Tho. Primate of England say or write more to K. Henry at any time then S. Gregory Nazianzen a particular Archbishop said unto his Emperor that was present and angry with him. 
Nazian. orat. ad Cives & Imper. ●rascētem.  Vos quoque potestati meae meisque subsellijs lex Christi subiecit, scio se esse ovem mei gregis, sacri gregis, sacram ovem. You also (o Emperor) the law of Christ hath made subject unto my power, and to my tribunal. I know thee to be a sheep of my flock, a sacred sheep of a holy flock. If Nazianzene had said this to an English King or should do at this day, how would our Protestant's Prince-parasytes cry out and say that he were a proud Prelate as they say of S. Thomas.  
The chief and only contention of king Henry with the Archbishop as before in part you have heard was about ecclesiastical jurisdiction as the articles set down by all writers do testify, 
The articles upon which S. Tho. disagreed with the king.  as namely, that no Bishop might appeal to the Sea Apostolic without licence of the king that no servant or tenant holding of the king might be excommunicated without his licence, that no Bishop should be able to punish any man for perjury or breaking his faith, that all clergy men might be forced to secular judgements as all controversies also pertaining to tithes and other like cases. And now if these controversies should have fallen out as in part they did between the ancient christian Emperors and the holy Bishops before named would they not think you have stood in them with no less fervour then S. Thomas did.  
But now let us hear and examine how Sir F. doth prove this holy Archbishop to be a traitor. Thus he writeth of the beginning of the controversy. There was (as authors do affirm) in that time of Henry the second, 
Pag 56.  more than a hundred murders besides other felonies proved upon the clergy which when the king would have punished according to the laws of the land, 
A f●lse and slanderous beginning of the 〈…〉.  Becket opposed himself and beardeth the king in this so just an action, under title of standing for the liberties of the Church & from this strange ground these proceed ensued. In which words of the knight there is to be noted first that where he saith: authors do affirmè that more than a hundred murders besides other felonies were proved upon the clergy: no other author is found to mention any such thing but only Nubergensis who yet doth not say that they were proved upon the clergy, but his words are: 
Nuberg hist. Angl. l. 2 16.  that it was said to have been told the king at a certain time that above a hundred murders had been committed within the kingdom of England since his reign, by Clergy men.  
In which words as you see Nubergensis doth not say, that it was true, or that it was proved, as our knight doth: and secondly he speaketh of the whole time of king Henry's reign, until this contention, which was some 14. or 15. years: and thirdly the falling out of the Archbishop with the king was not for that he would not have these clergy men punished if they had offended (as wickedly this knight giveth to understand, saying presently after; This proud prelate durst protect felons and murderers against the king and justice of the lan●) but the controversy was only about the manner of punishing those that did offend, and by what judges and jurisdiction they should be punished, to wit whether by ecclesiastical or temporal power, for that the Archbishop affirmed that equity required that clergy men offending should first be judged condemned and degraded by ecclesiastical power according both to the cannon laws as also the municipal laws of the land confirmed by all former Christian Kings from the first conversion of England, and that they being thus condemned, should be delivered to secular power for execution of the sentence, which is a case that fa●leth out daily in spain, Italy, France and other Cath. countries, where Bishops do defend their Ecc●es. jurisdiction in punishing Eccles. persons, taking them also by force of censures out of secular judges hands when occasion is offered without all note of rebellion or treason. And no less was this law of the realm of England confirmed by ancient parliaments and other antiquities than were the secular laws, for which Sr. F. standeth, and fond calleth the defence of eccles. laws treason and rebellion.  
Wherefore having set down so false a relation of the beginning of this controversy (falsifying Nubergensis, as you see, in many points) he doth prosecute the same with like untruth, as presently you shall see. And first he beginneth with a certain letter of Maud the Empress unto the Archbishop which she wrote at the instance of the King her son, and upon the information of such courtiers as were contrary to the Bishop and his cause. In which letters she chargeth him, that (to use S ●. F. own words) as much as in him lay, he went about to disinherit the King and deprive him of his crown. Whereunto I answer, that truth it is, john Fox hath such a letter of the said Empress Maud without telling where, 
Pag ●8.  or whence, or how he had it, or where we may read it, for in none of all the authors above mentioned I do find it. Yet one thing I would have the reader to note, 
S. F untrue dealing in citing matters, against S. Thom.  which testifieth the continuance of Sr. F. untrue dealing in this affair, that whereas in john Fox the whole charge of the empress against the Archbishop is mitigated by this parenthesius (as the report is) which showeth that these were but suspicions only and reports of his enemies; 
Fox Pag. 201.  Sr. F. hath left out the parenthesis (as the report is) as though she had charged him upon her own knowledge, which is no true dealing or right meaning as you see.  
But let us hear further Sr. F. his words pretending a more certain proof, of treason & rebellion in S. Thomas: 
Pag. 58.  But if the Empress (saith he) might be thought to speak partialy on the K. her sons behalf, yet the two Card. sent by the Pope to hear all this controversy, out of question will not condemn him without just cause, and yet in a letter sent from them to the Pope, they do condemn him, etc. If S. F. prove himself a true K ●. in verifying this one point which here he saith, I am to pardon much of that which hath passed before: But if in this matter of so great moment he be taken in like falsehood, who will then trust him hereafter? Let us examine then the matter & I will have none other evidences or witnesses but his own words: for presently after he setteth down a part of the letter of William and Otho. Card. sent by Pope Alexander to hear the cause between the King & the Archbishop and having travailed therein, the King being in Normandy and the Archb. at Paris, they found the matter more hard than they imagined to compound, 
False dealing of Sir Frances.  for that the Archbishop demanded restitution to his livings for himself and for his friends, and revocation of certain laws lately made, prejudicial to ecclesiastical jurisdiction, before he could end the matter wherewith thesayd Card. being somewhat displeased, for that they desired to carry with them to the Pope the glory of this accord made by them, and for that the King had much gained their good will by liberality towards them; for these causes they wrote to the Pope somewhat favourably in the King's behalf, but yet nothing condemning the Archbishop as untruly out K ●. doth avow, which now I shall show out of the words of their own letter alleged here by S.F. which are these.  
William and Otho Card. of the Church of Rome to Alexander the Pope, 
The letter of the two Cardinals to the Pope.  & ●. We coming to the land of the K. of England found the controversy betwixt him and the Archbishop of Canterbury more sharp and vehement than we would, for the King, & the greater part about him said, that the Archbishop had stirred up the french King grievously against him, as also the Earl of Flaunders his kinsman, (who was very loving and kind to him before) whom he made his open adversary ready to wage war against him, as is by divers evidences most certain, etc. These are the words of the Card. by S. F. relation, which supposing they were truly alleged, yet he that shall consider and ponder them well, will see that out of them no more can be urged against the Archbishop, but that the King and those about him did say, that the Archbishop had stirred up the K. of France and the Earl of Flanders against them, and that this was held by them for most certain upon divers evidences. But what these evidences were none of them do set down.  
So that here is no condemnation at all from the Card▪ themselves, but only that they relate what the King and his part said, and yet you must note that S. Francis (besides other evil translation of the words) hath wilfully corrupted the last clause of all to make it seem as though it proceeded from the Card. judgement, to wit, 
Quadrileg. de vita B. Thom. lib. 5. cap. venientes.  as is by divers evidences most certain, whereas in latin after the first words: Asserebat Rex & sucrum pars, etc. The king with the greater part of his affirmed that the Archbishop had done this etc.) it followeth, Sicut sibi pro ce●to constabat, & euid●ntibus apparebat indicijs, as to them it was held for certain and appeared by evident signs. Out of which words S. F. of purpose cutteth of both sibi and indicijs, 
False dealing of Sir Francis.  to them & signs: For that by the first it was evident that this was spoken in the name of the King and his friends and not of the Card. and by the second appeareth that the evidence which the King and his had of this matter and accusation was founded only in signs and conjectures: which being evident to our K ●. he did not only strike out the said words, but maketh also a severe inference upon the rest, that are left mangled by himself, as you have seen: his inference is this: 
Pag. Ibid.  Now (saith he) for a subject to stir up foreign states to make war upon his sovereign, and country, was at all times high treason: but that Becket did so by the Card confession, was by divers evidences most certain. Therefore Becket, not now his enemies, but his brethren the sons of his own mother being judges, was a traitor.  
Lo here the invincible argument of our learned knight: if any man can trust him hereafter upon his words, I shall much marvel seeing him so shameless in a matter so evident. For who discovereth not the impudence of his second proposition, when he sayeth that Becket did so by the Card. confession, wh●ras the Card. confess no such thing, but only say that the king and his people did affirm it; neither did the Card. say as our Kt. falsely chargeth them, that the matter was certain to them by divers evidences, but only that the king said it was certain or seemed so to him by divers evident signs and conjectures. Shamefully then hath our Kt. abused the authority of these Card. as he doth commonly all authors that come through his hands. And with this I end this controversy of S. Thomas his cause with the King: which cause whatsoever the Kt. tatleth to the contrary yet was it never accounted treason or named so by any author that wrote in that time, either friend or foe, nor shall S. F. be able to allege me any one instance to the contrary before Luther's days.  
And as for the King himself though he pursued him eagerly, for that he would not yield to his desire touching Eccles. jurisdiction, yet never is it read that he ever called or counted him for a traitor, nor any foreign Prince whatsoever. And within 8. years after his death (as before I noted) both he, and Lewes the K. of France went in Pilgrimage to his tomb at Canterbury, which is likely they would not have done, neither the one nor the other, if they had reputed him for a traitor. john Stow putteth down the relation thus. The 27. of August both the Kings came to Canterbury, 
Stow anno Domini 1179 reg Hent. 21. 25.  where they were with due honour received, etc. Lewes K. of France offered upon the tomb and to the shrine of Thomas Becket a rich cup of gold: he gave also that renowned precious stone▪ that was called the regal of France, which K. Henry the 8. put afterwards in a ring, & wore it on his thumb, etc.  
Thus saith Stow out of other authors. And whether king Lewes of France would have taken a journey into England to the shrine of a man that he knew, and had talked withal few years before, and would have offered such precious gifts, if he had suspected him for a traitor, or that his miracles had been feigned as after Sir F. affirmeth; and whether king Henry himself being no way forced thereunto would have accompanied him in such an action to his own disgrace (who commonly was reputed to have been the cause of his death) if he had held him for a traitor, let every man judge. And so we shall pass from his point to another about his miracles wherein the cavillers show themselves more vain, conscienslesse and malicious (if it may be) then in the former.   

OF S. THOMAS HIS miracles, and what may be thought of them, and other such like, with the malicious corruption and falsehood used by john Fox and S. F. to discredit them. There is handled also the different manner of canonizing saints in their and our Church. CAP. XI.  
AMONG many other arguments that I used in the Wardword for the holiness of this Archbishop (to all which this Wastword answereth no one word at all) I said also that many miracles have been recorded by grave authors and public testimony of the whole Island, 
〈◊〉 3.  and of foreign writers to have been wrought by God at his sepulchre and otherwise by his intercession in witness of his sanctity. Upon which words Sir F. taketh occasion (with his heretical spirit of incredulity) to jest and blaspheme at all miracles of Pope-made Saints (for that is his contumelious term) but with what reason, truth, prudence or piety we shall somewhat here examine by this occasion, noting first two points to this purpose.  
The first, that the miracles of S. Thomas done presently after his death had a circumstance annexed unto them, 
Two especial considerations in the miracles of S. Thom.  which greatly confirmeth their certainty, to wit, that they brought with them the public reproof of one of the greatest kings that day in Christendom (if not the greatest of all) which was king Henry the second, by whose fault he was put to death & who laboured with all his power for avoiding that infamy either to suppress or improve the miracles that fell out. And who knoweth not what the force and favour of such a Prince may do in such a cause, and yet was the multitude and evidency of S. Thom. his miracles, such, as they broke through all obstacles that the king could put against them, and so conquered himself also as he finally yielded and went to his sepulchre, wept & did penance, as by all authors is evident. This then is the first point of consideration in this affair.  
The second is that this matter of miracles is an ordinary common place, wherein the scurrility of incredulous and scoffing heretics doth enlarge itself very much and often, it being a subject sit for that purpose; seeing that miracles being above the common course of natural things must needs have some disproportion or improbability in the sense of ordinary understanding, that measureth all by that they see with their eyes; and then being set forth also with mocks and moes in the most ridiculous sort that malice can devise, and the improbability increased commonly by such lying circumstances as are added by the reporter, it serveth to entertain and make merry the incredulous, ignorant or light of heart, and to bring them by little aed little to trust or believe nothing that passeth sense or exceedeth the reach of every particular man's reason.  
These two observations then being premised in this matter, we shall pass to examine, what our unbelieving knight bringeth in to discredit miracles. And first to begin withal, and to make some path and preamble to the infidelity which here he meaneth to teach, he allegeth us an old proverb (as he calleth it) which for more credit he setteth down in different letter. 
Wastword. Pag. 58.  That many are worshipped for Saints in heaven, whose souls are burning in hell. And for this in his margin he quoteth ex Auentino, 
Ex Auentino  but Aventinus his works and story being very great, why did he not quote the book, chapter or place: For though, Aventinus be not of much credit with Catholics in his history, yet might we have examined upon what occasion, and in what sense he said it, for that in some sense it may be somewhat true, and yet help nothing Sir F. his cause, nor the infidelity he endeavoureth by his doctrine to establish. For suppose if that should fall out so, that some christians were deceived about the particular holiness of some persons, who being honoured upon earth for Saints, were none in deed, but rather damned, as it is reported by some that S. Ambrose by revelation discovered that two bodies which had been honoured by some simple people for martyrs, not to have been those martyrs, but rather the bodies of two malefactors, which suppose it were true, what hurted that the Church of God or what hindered that the merit and devotion of those simple people, that being deceived honoured those memories as of special servants, and saints of Christ, and received (no doubt) the reward of their devotion according to their meaning, and holy intention, & not according to the external error happened in the material object, 
Material error in honouring saints hunteth not the devout.  as if when Christ's body was risen from the sepulchre, the jews had put one of the two thieves bodies there, that were crucified with him, and S. Mary Magdalyn, and the rest had anointed that body thinking it to be Christ's, had this think you divinished their merit, or made their act superstitious, as heretyks call it?  
So as then this material error little importeth and consequently the place out of Aventinus (if it be there) is nothing to the purpose. For avoiding notwithstanding of the which and like errors, great care was had in the primitive Church that the acts of Martyrs deaths, and burials should be diligently observed, and distinctly committed to writing, for which cause not only the Bishops themselves were employed therein, every one in his own diocese, but a deacon also under every Bishop, 
The diligence of the primitive Church about Martyrs and S.  and a subdeacon under every deacon, and a public Notary under every subdeacon were assigned to attend to this particular care. And in Rome (for that it was so big, and divided into 7. regions) seven deacons, and seven subdeacons with several notaries under them had this charge, as appeareth in the Roman register ascribed to Damasus in the life of Clement, 
Damas. Pontifical. in vit. Clement. Fab. etc.  Fabian, Anteros, julius, and other Bishops of Rome. And thesame to have been observed also in the Church of Milan testifieth Paulinus the Notary of S. Ambrose Bishop of that city, who writing the life of thesayd saint, saith: he was under the charge of Castus deacon to gather such things together of saints, 
Paul. in vita Ambros.  etc.  
And before this again Pontius the deacon of S. Cyprian afirmeth that blessed Bishop and Martyr to have been so sollicitious in gathering the gests of Martyrs, 
Pont. Diac in vita Cypriani.  as he would have the very days exactly noted, in which each one suffered, which S. Cyprian testifieth also himself in his Epistle to the Priests & Deacons of his Church of Carthage: 
Ep. Cyprian. ad presb. & Diacon.  and of other Bishops before him, 
Pont ibid.  thesayd Potius saith, that they were so studious in this care, as not only of all baptized Christians, but also of Catecumeni, if they were martyred, order was given to have their acts written, etc. And this we read also put in practice by many other Churches of the world, as by that of Vienna in Austria by Lions in France by Alexandria in Egypt, and the like, as appeareth by their Epistles registered by Eusebius and other writers.  
This was the spirit of the ancient primitive Church, and the very same diligence by like spirit hath been continued by the catholic Church ever since, 
The process needful to Canonization of saints.  not only in the acts and gests of martyrs, but of other holy men also, since martyrdom in great part hath ceased, as may appear by the long process, and most diligent examination of hundrethes of witnesses by lawful and indifferent judges appointed, when any man is to be Canonised or declared for holy in the Church after his death, which thing for more certainty and less partiality is done by order, and authority of the highest judge, and Pastor in spiritual causes, and it is not done but upon many years examination commonly, except the cause be otherways made evident to all.  
This is the practice of the Cath. Church, & here now let Sr. F. or any other wrangler or calumniator equal to himself, tell me, if any mean of trying men's merits & holiness be to be had in this life, what better, or more indifferent way can be taken then this, which is by the highest and most universal Magistrate that we have in our Church, 
Fox-made-saincts not to be compared to Pope-made-saincts  whereas among them every particular man (as John Fox for example) maketh saints, and unmaketh them at his pleasure, and putting them down in his Calendar in great red letters for martyrs, or confessors or in black lesser letters for lesser saints as he thinketh best without any other examination, or approbration of superior authority, and that which is most ridiculous of all he careth not of what faith or religion they were of among themselves so they were contrary in any one part to the Catholykes, yea though they were different and opposite one to another, 
A notorious rabble of martyrs.  as Barnes, Hierome, & Carrot, burned in one fire; or that they held twice as many opinions against him as with him, as John Husse of whom I have spoken before, & many others: or that they were not martyred at all but died in their beds, as Fox himself confesseth of John wickliff; or that they denied his religion at their death as is evident of Thomas Bilney: or that they denied, or blasphemed Christ himself as Coubridge; or that they were mad in his judgement, as Colyns burned with his dog, and the like, of all which I shall say a word or two in order to the end that you may see the certainty and good order which these men have in canonizing their saints.  
Robert Barnes an Augustine Friar, Thomas Gerrat, and William Jerome Apostata Priests were burned together in one fire, in Smithfeild the 30. of july in the year 1540 as John Stow, D. Sanders, and others do put it down, though Fox in his Calendar doth agree with neither of them in year month nor day, but putteth them in his Calendar about the midst of Octobre 1539. 
Barns, Herome & Gerat.  These three were full contrary one to another in matter of Religion especially about the most important articles of the real presence, Barnes being an earnest Lutheran, and zealous defender of the real presence, as both 
a Fox, act. & Mon. p. 1097.  Fox and 
b Ibid. p. 9●7. an. 1536.  Tindal do testify of him, and the other two no less vehement Zwinglians against the same doctrine as their examination doth testify set down by Fox himself, and yet did they all three protest at the fire that they never held error or heresy in their lives: 
Fox. p. 1●93. col. 2. n. 86.  For thus John Fox writeth. Those 3. good saints of God the 
* This is contrary to himself in his calendar.  30. of july were brought together from the tower to Smythfeild, where they preparing themselves for the fire, D. Barnes thus began. God I take to record I never to my knowledge taught any erroneous doctrine, but only those things which scripture led me unto, and that in my sermons I never maintained any error etc. 
Barnes his protestation at the fire.  Thus writeth Fox of him and alloweth well thereof: so that if this man did err (as in the articles of the real presence Fox will not deny) then did the scripture lead him thereunto, & yet will not he or Sir F. grant that he or any man else can take hurt by reading of scriptures.  
Well but what did the other two his opposite mates? did they protest nothing? yes I trow, 
Fox, ibid. pag. 1094. col 2.  for thus writeth Fox: The like confession made Hierome, and Gerrat professing their belief as the time would suffer, whereby the people might understand, that there was no cause, nor error in their faith, wherefore justly they ought to be condemned protesting that they denied nothing that was either in the old or new Testament set forth by their sovereign Lord the King whom they prayed the Lord long to continue, etc. Lo here a contrary protestation for their contrary belief founded also in scriptures especially in the K. Bible. And how can John Fox now join these together, calling them those three good Saints of God, and making them all three martyrs, but as Samson joined his fox's tails.  
And because in this last protestation there is mention of their praying for the king you must understand that they being in hope (as it seemed) of some pardon even at the fire, flattered the king extremely, and one of them having exhorted the people greatly to obey and follow the king in all things, at length writeth thus: yea I say further that if the king should command you any thing against God's law, 
Barnes ibid. apud Fox, pag. 1094. col. 2.  if it be in your power to resist him you may not do it. Lo what a spirit of a good saint this is, that teacheth kings to have power above God, but when he saw that the pardon came not, he sent certain messages to the king by the sheriff there present whereof the first was, that he and his new fellows the new-gospellers had made his Majesty a whole king, whereas he was but half a king before (being not head of the church nor of the clergy of his realm) a thing (saith he) that never any of his majesties ancestors had before.  
Behold what a benefit this was, the like whereof was bestowed by them upon monks and friars as appeareth by a lamentable letter of Friar Peter Martyr written from Oxford to Sir john Cheke. 
How these new preachers make whole kings and whole friars of half ones.  King Edward's schoolmaster, wherein the old man complaineth pitifully that his woman the nun being dead whom he called his wife, he was but dimidiatus homo half a man: so as Barnes and his companions giving wives to monks and friars, and spiritual primacy to kings and princes by their new doctrine, they made aswell friars whole men of half as whole kings of half kings. And thus much of these.  
There followeth john hus, of whom I said, that he held more opinions against the protestants, 
john Husse.  then with them, which is evident by the articles of his doctrine, yet extant, and authors that have written of him, whereof we have spoken sufficiently before in this 
* Cap. 3.  encounter; and yet is he put in john Fox his calendar for a solemn martyr in red letters upon the second day of May.  
And the like I might also show of the Waldenses, Albigenses, Pauperes de Lugduno, and many other base and desperate heretics which john Fox in his protestation to the whole church of England doth allow for saints of his faith, 
Fox protest. pag. 10.  whereas notwithstanding they held many more things against him then with him, and some so beastly, that they are not to be named.  
As for john Wickcliff there needeth no dispute or other proof than john Fox himself and his own testimony: 
john Wickliff. Fox. pag. 411.412.413. etc.  For he confesseth that he died in Lincolnshire in his own benefice and bed and yet he putteth him in his calendar for a martyr the 2. day of january in fair red letters saying thus: john Wickcliff preacher and martyr.  
As touching Thomas Bilney, 
Tho. Bilney.  Sir Tho. More in his preface before his confutation of Tyndales answer doth prove largely by many witnesses and evident demonstrations, that he having recanted publicly certain heresies of Luther, 
Thom. More in p●aefat. ad Tyndal pag. ●49.  which for a time he had held (which john Fox also confesseth) and falling again afterward into relapse was condemned and burned, but before his burning he recanted again, and confirmed the same at the fire, was confessed; heard mass devoutly, desired absolution upon his knees from the excommunication laid upon him, and finally received the B. sacrament, as a true Catholic and so died. About which later recantation albeit john Fox would seem to wrangle somewhat, yet saith he: 
Fox pag. 920 col. 2.  admit he did so, being a man of a timorous conscience not fully resolved touching that matter of the Church, etc. And then again. It is not impossible but that Bilney might both hear mass and receive the sacrament, for in that matter it may be he was not resolved otherwise, etc. Neither do I find in all the articles against him, that he was charged with any opinion against the mass or sacrament, which makes me think that he was yet therein ignorant, etc. Thus answereth Fox about Thom. Bilney, granting him as you see not to have been fully and in all points of his religion, yet he setteth him down in his calendar for a special martyr of his Church in great red letters upon the tenth day of March, saying Thomas Bilney martyr. Whereupon I would ask john Fox how he defendeth the second verse of S. Athanasius his creed confirmed in the first council of Nice, that except a man do keep the whole entire Catholic faith, 
In Symbol. S. Athanal.  he shall perish without all doubt eternally. Thomas Bilney did not hold all Fox's religion by his own confession, and how then ●oth he put him in his calendar for a martyr of his Church.  
As for William Coubridge, whom we gave for an instance of Fox his martyrs that blasphemed Christ, 
Will. Coubridge.  his articles are extant which he confessed openly by public register under the B. of Lincoln in the year of Christ 1539. as Fox counteth them. 
Blasphemous articles of Coubridg.  Of which articles the 7. is this, that Christ was not the redeemer but the de●eyuer of the world; and the 8. I esteemed (saith he) the word Christ, 
Apud Alanū Capum dial. 6 p. 623.  as a filthy word, and therefore did blot it out of my books wheresoever I found it. And the tenth: I affirmed and wrote, that all those which believed in the name of Christ are damned to hell, etc.  
Thus do relate the registers, but what saith john Fox? 
Fox, p 1033. col. 1 n 79.  Coubridge (saith he) being mad and besides his right senses was condemned by Longland C. of Lincoln, and committed to the fire by him to be burnt at Oxford, etc. So saith Fox, but he concealeth one thing which is: that Coubridge his cause was sent by the bishop to the L. Cromwell Vicegerent to the king at this time in spiritual affairs, and that by his voice also he was condemned; as Alanus Copus in the foresaid place doth show. But how soever this was, if it be true that William Coubridge was mad and besides his senses (as Fox here for his excuse deviseth) how happeneth it then that himself maketh him a martyr of his Church & doth register him under that name and worthy title in his ecclesiastical calendar upon the 10. of October an. 1539. Is not this to make mad and furious men pillars of his new Church?  
The last was one Collyns, of whom Fox writeth thus: 
Colyns and his dog. Fox. Ibid. 1033.  Colyns being besides his wits & seeing the priest holding up the host over his head at mass, & showing it to the people he in like manner counterfeiting the priest took up a little dog by the legs, & held him over his head showing him also to the people, for which he was brought to examination & condemned to the fire, etc. This is the narration of Fox himself touching Colyns, whom notwithstanding this, he setteth down for a solemn martyr upon the foresaid 10. of October in the year of our Lord 1538. So as here no man can deny, nor Fox himself doth, but that he maketh divers wicked blasphemous and distracted men to be of his martyrs & patrons in heaven; so with mad men I leave him among whom we may well account him, whether we consider his wit or writings.  
Well then to return to our purpose treated I would ask our adversaries which of these two ways hath more indifferency or reason in it, to have saints declared by public inquisition, examination and sentence, or by every particular man's judgement and fancy at his pleasure.  
And thus much is spoken of this matter by occasion of Sir F. his Pope-made saints (which must needs have more authority than Fox-made-saints) and as for his profane proposition (which he calleth a proverb) to wit, that many be worshipped in heaven for saints that are damned in hell: 
Pag. 59  he would draw all men's hearts into mistrust and contempt of all saints, their miracles and memories, I thought good to enlarge myself somewhat in this behalf, to show the conformity of spirit between ancient christians & us, for the care towards saints, and our equal proceeding conform to all reason and piety in declaring the holiness of saints, & the contrary mad fantastical dealing of heretics doing or undoing of their own heads what each man for the time thinketh best. For imagine you if the Lutherans in Germany should have the viewing or correcting of john Fox his martyrologue, how many saints would they strike out and cast to the dunghill which he hath put in, and painted out in the highest degree? And the like would Brownists and Puritans do. Nothing then is certain among these goodfellows, and so let us leave them, for this is the devils drift by discrediting some to call all in question.  
But now to return to the Archbishop S. Thomas, whom in particular our knight desireth to discredit, let us hear what he saith. First he citeth out of Caesarius a monk, as he calleth him; 
Pag. 59  That there was a question made in Paris after S. Thom. his death whether he were damned or saved, Roger the Norman (who had been a special enemy to the Archbishop) saying that he was damned, for that heresisted his King, & Peter a Parisian, that was chanter of that Church holding that he was a true martyr. This story out of Caesarius is in part true, but yet powdered with so many falsities & corruptions, partly by Sr. F. and partly by john Fox (from whom he took it) as it is a world to see, and showeth evidently that a man may believe nothing they allege, further than he seethe it with his eyes.  
For first they allege this author quite against his own meaning, 
A notorious corruption of Caesarius by Fox and Sir F.  for he being a Germane and living about Colonia at the same time or soon after the Archb. was murdered, he proveth his great holiness among other things by his great and many miracles, for that is the title of his book, Illustrum miraculorum & historiarum memorabilium libri, 12. Twelve books of famous miracles and histories happened in the world. And having spoken of other countries and men, at length he cometh to treat of S. Tho. of Canterbury in these words: Beatus Thomas, etc. Blessed, Thomas Bishop of Canterbury who in our time hath fought for the liberty o● the Church unto death did not shine by any miracles during the time of his persecution, 
Caesar. Heisle●bac. lib. 2. c. 69. dialog.  and after his slaughter there hath been much disputing, seem saying that he was damned as a traitor of the Kingdom, and others that he was a martyr as defender of the Church. And the same question was disputed also in Paris among the masters, for M. Roger swore that he was worthy of death albeit not such a death as he had, judging the blessed man's constancy to be a contumacy. On the other side M. Peter chantor affirmed upon his oath that he wus a worthy martyr of God, and slain for the liberty of his Church. These men's questions (or controversies) Christ hath now dissolved, having glorified him with many and great miracles.  
These are the true words of Caesarius translated out of Latyn, and if we will see the falsehood both of Fox & his scholar Sr. F. in alleging this one little text only, it shall not be amiss to set it down here as it is found in Fox himself, first in Latyn and then in English. Thus then Fox allegeth Caesarius his words: Quaestio Paris●is inter magistros rentilata suit virum damnatus an saluatus esset ille Thomas: 
Fox pag. 204. col. 2. nu. 40.  dixerat Roge●●us tunc Normannus fuisse illum morte ac damnatione dignum, quod contumax esset in Dei ministrum Regem Pro●ulit contra Petrus Can●or Parisiensis, quod signa saluationis & magnae sanctitatis essent eius miracula, & quod martyrium probasset Eccles. causa, pro qua mortem subierat, etc. Thus do Fox and Sr. F. allege his latin words which in English are these: 
Fox doth Falsely all●adg Cesarius.  There was a question moved among the masters or doctors of Paris, whether that Thomas were saved or damned: Roger then a norman, said that he was worthy death & damnation for that he was so obstinate against God's minister the King, Peter Cantor a Parisian came out to the contrary, saying that his miracles were great signs and tokens of his salvation, and also of great holiness, affirming moreover, that the cause of the Church did allow and confirm his martyrdom, for the which he died. Thus far Fox.  
And then immediately he adjoineth this continuance of his speech. And thus have you the judgement, and censure of the school of Paris touching this question for the tainting of Thom. Becket. And yet as you see it was but the altercation of two men, the one a Norman (as Fox saith) subject at that time to the king of England, & the other a Parisian subject to the king of France, who in reason may seem more indifferent for that he was not interessed on any side. Yet with what face can Fox out of these words affirm, that here was given the judgement and censure of all the University of Paris, seeing it was but an altercation of two private men only. Who discovereth not here the impudent false humour of Fox in calling it the determination of the University of Paris?  
But let us now return to examine the notorious abusing of this short authority by Fox and his scholar Sir F. First they cut of (as you see by the text itself before set down in English verbatim) the whole beginning and ending of the author's speech, 
Many corruptions of Caesarius both in latin etc. English.  which do comprehend the full purpose and meaning of his narration, with his whole judgement of the controversy, which is such dishonest dealing as may be in abusing any author. And after this Fox choosing to put down the text for more credits sake in the latin tongue, first he should have put his very own words as you know, which he hath not done, but hath added, altered, and taken away so much as he thought good for his purpose, making his reader notwithstanding believe, that they were the very words of the author, seeing he putteth down first the latin and then the English in a different letter. But yet he that shall examine, and compare text with text, he shall find added first the whole sentence, virum damnatus an saluatus esset ille Thomas, Then dixerat Rogerius tunc Normannus; thirdly, quod contumax esset in Dei ministrum, reg●m. Fourthly is added the word (damnatione) which is not in Caesarius. Fifthly, quod signa saluationis & magnae sanctitatis essent eius miracula, is not in the author's text, sixtly also the words, quod martyrium probasset Ecclesiae causa. Caesarius hath them not.  
All these words and sentences therefore are foisted in by john Fox even in latin which make the more part or very near, of the whole text by him cited. He cutteth of (besides the beginning and ending before mentioned) these words following: first of Roger, who though he affirmed him to be worthy of death, yet he addeth etsi non tali yet not of such a death as he had, which words john Fox concealeth, as he doth also the words immediately following of Caesarius: beati viri constantiam, iudicans contumaciam; judging the holy man's constancy to be contumacy. After this Fox leaveth out those words pro libertate Ecclesiae tru●idatum, that he was slain for the liberty of his Church, but especially those that immediately follow containing the author's conclusion of all, which are these: quorum quaestionem Christus soluit, cùm multis & magnis miraculis illum glorificavit, whose question (or controversy) Christ hath dissolved, in that he hath glorified him with many and great miracles.  
Thus wrote Caesarius, soon after S. Thom. his martyrdom. And now by this one example of plain forgery and cozenage, and by these few lines so corrupted perverted and altered, the reader may imagine, what infinite falsehood is to be found in Fox his huge volume according to this account. In which upon my conscience (and some trial also) I do think there is scarce any one story truly related in all parts in that monstrous huge book. And yet you must mark also that Sir F. doth not city so much as john Fox for this allegation out of Caesarius neither any author beside, 
False dealing in both hands between the Master and scholar.  lest the falsehood should be found. And so much for this point.  
You have hard what falsifications & forgeryes have been used, 
divers ways deuise● by haeretiks to disc edit miracles.  to make authors to speak some evil against this blessed Saint. Now when that cannot stand, but that God testified his holiness with so many and famous miracles, as Caesarius living in that time, and so many others before, eye witnesses, do testify; consider whether the impiety of restless heretics doth rush. They devise divers ways how to delude or discredit all miracles, and thereby also these of S. Thomas. And first john Fox deviseth two, saying, that you may answer, 
For pag. 204. col. 2. nu. 70.  that either they were not wrought at all, but devised and forged by friars and monks: or if they were wrought in deed, it was not by the power of God, but of the ●iuel and his deceiving spirit. Which later way he taketh from the jews, who as you well remember not being able to deny the miracles wrought by Christ, objected unto him that he did them by the power of Satan and cast out devils by the hands not of God but of Belsebub. 
Math 24. Marc. 22.  And to these two ways of evasion Sir F. as a good scholar hath added a third, which is: that many of these miracles might be done by natural power and means, though hidden to the ignorant.  
And now tell me (gentle Reader) what miracles of Christ and his Apostles may not be brought in question and made doubtful by some of these 3. means. And consider I beseech thee) whether the spirit of heretyks doth lead a sensual man's understanding; Is it not to doubt of all? For what more certainty have I, or can any man have of the ancient miracles of the primitive Church, than that divers virtuous and learned authors do write them, who lived in the same times when the things were done? and when they would have been contradicted (no doubt) by all the world, if they had been false or forged, as none ever of S. Tho. were called in question by any author of ancient time, so far as we understand.  
Again I would have thee consider (good reader) attentively with thyself, 
Which is the better spirit to believe or discredit miracles.  which is the better spirit, more pious and more secure, either to scoff at miracles, and extraordinary work● done by God, and to seek reasons to discredit them, as Protestants do, or to incline rather to believe them, or at least ways quietly to let them pass with pious humility, thinking that God can do these and greater matters to his glory, and hath done for and by his servants. And consequently whether they be true or false the matter not being apparent to praise God for that which is reported of his works, rather than to scoff thereat, which is the true spirit of Catholic men, who do not make every one of these miracles matter of their belief, nor yet on the contrary side do run to the proud or contentious spirit of condemning all, or calling every thing in controversy with contempt, whereas in temporal matters also they believe many things upon less authority and witnesses.  
And surely if we consider the whole course of scripture we shall find pious credulity to be much more secure and commended, 
Credulity commended in scriptures.  than diffidence, distrust, or incredulity, and that also about miracles. 
Mar. 16. joan. 12.  For why was S. Mary Magdalen so much commended before others but for that she was more prone than the rest to believe the miracle of Christ's resurrection, when it was told her? And why was S. Thomas so much reprehended by Chryst, when he said, noli esse incredulus, 
joan. 20.  sed fidelis. Be not thou incredulous but faithful, but for that he would not believe the miracle of Christ's apparition, and entrance when the doors were shut, related unto him by others? And why was S. Peter reprehended by Christ when he said, 
Math. 14.  modicae fid●i quare dubitasti? but for that he doubted in his miracle upon the going 〈…〉 why did Christ generally 〈…〉 to all the Apostles together 〈…〉 took his leave of them, but for that as t●● Evangelist specifieth, they had not given credit so easily to such as had reported the strange miracle of his resurrection to them? Finally it is said of charity omnia credit, and of incredulous people. 
1. Cor. 1●.  Non fecit ibi virtutes multas propter incredulitatem corum. 
Math. 1●.  Christ did not many miracles there, because of the people's incredulity. And again. 
Collos. ●.  Venit ira Dei super filios incredulitatis. The wrath of God, cometh down upon the children of incredulity, and many other such places to this purpose which for brevity we pretermit.  
Now whether Protestant's or catholics be given more to this quality of incredulity in matters of miracles, all the world seethe. It is reported that some years since, a certain learned man coming among a crew of Protestants that did scoff merrily at miracles, 
A Story of lesting at miracles.  he told them pleasantly, that he had fallen of late upon a certain book of ancient monks in the primitive Church, wherein were many strange miracles wrought, which he said he was in great doubt whether he might believe or no, and desired to have there opinion; and they prayed him to recount some of them, 
Strange ●●racles.  and so he did, saying: That the first was of a certain poor man, cutting down wood, the head or iron of whose hatcher, falling into a great deep water, he cried to a 〈…〉 was near, and he 〈…〉 though it were of 〈…〉 from the bottom, and swymne to ●●m again.  
At this story all began to laugh heartily. And then he told another, that a certain man being dead and buried, by chance in a place, where a certain holy monk or friar had been buried before, as soon as the dead body touched the monks bones, he turned to life again.  
Then he told them further, that a certain poor woman, which was wont to give milk to monks, one day had but a little pan full of milk left, and the monks would needs eat it, but she said that she had no more for herself. Then they told her, she should have the more for their eating of that, and so they did eat it, & after the woman found more milk in her daitry, then ever before. This being heard increased the pastime.  
After this he told yet more incredible tales, as that one monks mule talked to him upon the way. And that divers monks coming to a great river when they could not pass, one of them made a bridge with his cloak or cool. And that one of them falling into the water, was devoured by a fish but shortly after gotten out again of the fishes belly. And that one of these monks hearing that one of his friends was sick, took of his girdle and sent it to him, which touching the sick, presently he was well. And that other sick people of incurable diseases comm●g 〈…〉 monks, and putting them 〈…〉 shadows, were presently 〈…〉 diseases.  
When all these things were told, much jesting their was, and some said they were pretty tales, and some other of a more hot and zealous protestant spirit entered into indignation, saying that this was abominable superstition, and folly to believe these tales, or suffer them in writing. Whereat the man that had told them was forced for his own defence, to show that all he had recounted was written in the holy scripture, changing a little the names of persons, 
Explication of the former miracles.  which he had done to the end they should not presently discover him. And so he declared that the first of his examples was taken out of the book of Kings, where is recounted of the head of an hatchet made swymne by the prophet Elizeus the 4. book of kings 6. Chapter.  
The second of the dead man raised by touching Elizeus his bones, is in the same book & 13. Chapter. The third of increasing the milk is expressed in the same book and chapter, by increasing the oil of the poor woman of Sarepta. The fourth, of the talk which the monk hath with his mule, is verified in the speech of Balaam his ass, in the book of Numbers 22. chapter. The fifth of passing of many monks through a great river, by help of a monks cloak, is showed in Elias his fact, in the 4. book of Kings 2. chapter. 〈…〉 by a fish, and gotten 〈…〉 in jonas, chap. 2. The 〈…〉 from sending a girdle to heal a to 〈…〉, is the fact of S. Paul, recounted by S. Luke, Act. 19 And the last, of men cured by standing only in the shadow of other men, is testified by the same Evangelist. Act. 5.  
And so we see that by jesting at monks miracles as also of bishops, and other godly men, that are recorded to have wrought such wondered works in Christ's Church by the same power and virtue of their master as the former saints did, these scorners come to deride also and call in doubt the miracles of all ages as well of the primitive Church, as of later times, for that there is no other reason of believing them of those days, but only the testimony of the Church in that time and of grave writers therein. The like whereof we have for witnesses of those of Sr. Thomas, which our heretical English spirits of these days do so maliciously deride contemn and jest at. But with mad men there is no disputing, and so to their frenzy of heresy I leave them.  
And yet if I thought they wear curable of this frenzy, 
The ancient father's ceiling & sense about miracles of holy Saints.  and would hear good counsel, I would send them to a treatese or two of S. Ambrose, as also of some other fathers about this incredulous humour of heretics in scoffing at miracles wrought by Saints after their deaths, for that S. Ambrose having found out by revelation from God the buried bodies of S. Geruasius & 〈…〉, and showed them 〈…〉 due honour to be 〈…〉 miracles were wrought 〈…〉 whereof S. Augustine also was an eye 〈…〉 as he testifieth in these words: Tantae gloriae ma● tyrum etiam ego testis fui, 
〈…〉 & 〈…〉 vita.  ubi Mediolani eran● facta miracula novi, etc. Of this so great glory of these martyrs, I was also a witness, and knew the miracles to be done when I was at milan. But more largely than the rest doth S. Ambrose himself testify of this matter in a large epistle to his sister Marcellina, 
Amb●e 〈◊〉 ad Mar●●.  that was a nun saying: Cognovistis, imò vidistis ip●i, multos à daemonijs purgatos, etc. Yourselves have known nay rather you have seen many delivered of devils (by the relics of these martyrs) great numbers also delivered from their sickness, as soon as they had touched with their hands the Saints apparel. You have seen the miracles of old times restored and very many made hole, with the very shadow of these holy bodies, etc. Thus he saith; and then presently prosecuting the same about the devotion of the christian people of those days he addeth: 
Amb. ibid.  Quanta oraria iactitantur, etc. How many handkerchefes or napkins were cast upon these bodies? how many garments were made medicinable to heal others even by their very touching of these most holy relics? All did desire to touch the very uttermost parts, and whosoever touched was healed. We thank thee o lord jesus, that in this time thou hast 〈…〉 of these holy martyrs, 〈…〉 most need such helps.  
〈…〉 from holy Father and doctor to 〈…〉 ago, of the practice of true 〈◊〉 out christians in his days, against the scoffing incredulity of Arrians, wherewith he was no less troubled, at that time, than we are at this day with Lutherans, Caluenists & like faithless humours of heretics, who with the same spirit scoff now, as they did then; against whom the said holy father made a solemn sermon the very next day after the invention of the bodies, inveighing against the said Arrians: Qui pertinacia quadam judaica atque haeretica in tanta hominum ac etiam daemonum confessione negarent illos esse martyrs, 
Ambr. serm. 5. de Sanctis. Paulin. in vi●● Ambrosijs.  detraherent miraculis, seque calumniarentur, cuius arte ea omnia composita esse dicerent. Which Arrians by a certain jewish and heretical obstinacy, in so public confession both of men and devils, did still deny that they were martyrs, detracting from their miracles, and calumniating himself (S. Ambrose) and affirming all these things to have been devised by his fraud.  
Thus said these heretics against S. Ambrose and the miracles of S. Geruasius & Protasius, as ours do at this day with the same spirit against those of S. Thom. of Canterbury: And it is to be marked, that Paulinus in the life of S. Ambrose doth note, that only devils and Arrians did contradict the said miracles, but the Arrians more obstinately than the devils, for that divers devils did 〈…〉 holiness of S. 〈…〉 citeth S. 〈…〉 But divers 〈…〉, some of the 〈…〉 invaded and 〈…〉 by the sa●● devils. Which dreadful examples being recorded, by so ancient and holy men ought to move our scoffers and scorners at the works of God in his saints, to beware least for like impiety, they incur not the like danger, at leastwise of being given over to the possession of an inward devilish spirit much worse both for themselves and others, than the corporal, possession by the wicked fiend; from which God deliver them. And so we pass on to the third feigned position laid upon us by Sir F. with whom we have dealt above in this matter of miracles, for that this minister O. E. seeing perhaps his case to be desperate, thought best to leave him in the lurch, and to say no one word for his help or defence.   

〈…〉 GORGED 〈…〉 are said 〈…〉, or any coming 〈…〉 though he command 〈…〉 ●gainst God, and disloyalties against Princes. CAP. XII.  
BUT now (saith the Warder) let us see his third position, 
〈…〉 position. Wardw. p. 23.  that he feigneth to be among us (Catholykes) as a ground of religion: These two irreligious and profane grounds (saith he) being laid (though you have seen that the knight hath laid them as fictions of his own and not foundations or grounds of ours) they proceed to a third, and set it down for a popish ground also, that it was a dangerous and deadly sin for any man to disobey the Pope and his Clergy in any of their orders enjoined and commanded, in such reverence and regard must he and his Clergy be had, that the meanest maspriest coming with authority from him must be obeyed under pain of damnation though he command that which is blasphemous before God in christians, and disloyal to men in subjects. 
Impudent calumniation.   
This is his narration. From which (saith the Warder) if we separate a manifestly or two with some fond exaggerations (for without this kind of leaven the poor knight can make no batch) as for example, that the Pope and his Clergy must be obeyed, though they command blasphemies against God and disloyalty against princes, which is a 〈…〉 disobedience (if 〈…〉 order enjoined by th● 〈…〉 and the like. 〈…〉 overlashing of the 〈…〉 objecteth is rather 〈…〉 religion, than any reproach at all. For in that he saith, we obey the meanest priest as the highest, if he come with authority of the highest, he showeth thereby that we have among us true obedience and subordination, and that for conscience sake, not respecting so much the person that commandeth, as him for whom, & in whose name, and authority he commandeth; and therein we fulfil the precept of S. Paul. 
Hebr. 1●.  Obedite praepositis vestris & subiacete eye; ipsi enim pervigilant, quasi rationem pro animabus vestris reddituri. Obey your Prelates, and humble yourselves unto them (he distinguisheth not between high and low) for they keep diligent watch over your souls, as men that must render account thereof to God. And in other places he saith: that this obedience must be with such reverence, 
Ephes. ●.  humility and inward affection, as unto Christ himself, whose substitutes our spiritual Superiors be, though never so mean or contemptible in man's sight.  
Thus it was answered then by the warder and more also added to that purpose out of divers places of scriptures. And how replieth Sir F. now? Can he defend these overlashing speeches? Can he show that any one Cathol. writer that ever put pen to paper held this most absurd ground, 
The knight is urged to answer.  that he setteth down, 〈…〉, when 〈…〉 almighty God. 〈…〉 upon him 〈…〉 Now he should 〈…〉 substantially he 〈…〉 proof whereof (saith he) that which your own men have written of the infinite power of the Pope may abundantly suffice, namely though all the world judge in any matter against him, yet we ought to stand to the judgement of him, etc. And whosoever is not obedient to the laws of the Church of Rome, must be denied an heretic, 
 etc. And though he draw infinite souls with him to hell, yet no man may presume to say, why do you thus? etc.  
Lo here (good reader) what manner of proof this knight bringeth. First new assertions as idle and doubtful as the first, and cytheth no one author in the margin where these things are to be found or discussed. And secondly, if all were true, this proveth the greatness only of the Pope's authority to edification, not to destruction, to good not to evil, albeit the last point wherein he affirmeth, that no man may say to the Pope, why do you thus, though he draw infinite souls with him into hell (it being an ordinary common place, as well to all writers and wranglers in their books, as preachers & praters against the Pope in their pulpits) we shall examine the same afterwards towards the end of this Chapter against the minister O.E. for that he vouchsafeth to city some author for the same, though falsely and fraudulently as you shall see. Now then let us hear how our knight 〈…〉 the premises. 〈…〉  
And your holy 〈…〉 to tell us in his 〈…〉 mory that Christ 〈…〉 Paul, but him that 〈…〉 this divinity we must obey ●●● Pope, whatsoever Pet●● and Paul teach us to the contrary. And this (I hope) is a sufficient justification of my accusation, etc. Lo how roundly he riddeth himself. But yet note (good reader) 4. points of Sir F. divinity out of this one sentence with a preface convenient thereunto. 
〈…〉 kind of 〈…〉  His preface consisteth in qualifying the writings of D. Harding and M. jewel calling the former an invective, and the later of blessed memory, whereas all learned men that have read the same with indifferency (and divers great protestants also converted by that reading) will and do testify the contrary, to wit that D. Hardings' writing against jewel (especially his last book called, 
D. hardings works against jewel.  The return of untruths) was rather a convictive than an invective, leaving M. jewel with the commendation rather of a lying, than blessed memory. And so I dare avouch that any man shall find him, who hath time learning, store of books, patience & indifferency to read and examine him.  
Now then let us examine the four points before mentioned whereof the first is his ordinary sleight, whereby he allegeth D. Hardings' assertion about S. Peter & S. Paul without telling us where, to the end that the truth of this citation may not be examined, and for that 〈…〉 playing 〈…〉 justly suspect 〈…〉 the proposition 〈…〉, which is (as 〈…〉 of us now, not ●● 〈…〉 sitteth in their chair: Which if it be to 〈◊〉 S. Peter & S. Paul being now absent, cannot personally determine all matters as when they were here in earth, but have left their successors in their place to be obeyed as themselves. Why should this proposition so much mislike our Kt? Sure I am that he dareth not deny the same or equivalent thereof in the magistrates of divers cities, Princes & temporal successors. And if a man for examples sake, should ask him whether God do command English men at this day to obey the Queen that now reigneth in matters belonging to her government, or rather William Conqueror first founder of this Monarchy, or K. Henry the 8. her Maties. Father? and so in other Princes; as whether the present K. of France be to be obeyed and respected or Hugo Capetus the first founder of his house? No man will doubt but that present Princes and governors are to be obeyed.  
And if in temporal successors this be to be observed, why not also in spiritual? Is the Kt. so simple as he seethe not, the convenience of this matter? and that governors present, and not passed are to be repaired unto for present resolution and decision of affairs? If God in his Church had willed men to obey S. Peter and S. Paul 〈…〉 wils & 〈…〉 not known 〈…〉 express writings 〈…〉 only their epistles 〈…〉 world, nor were other 〈…〉 governors nor yet writings needful: whi●● yet is most absurd in all men's sights: for that all causes incident are not determined in S. Peter and S. Paul their epistles, nor can all men read and understand them, and consequently is needful the authority of a present governor s●tting in their chair, and having the same authority that they had, which we believe to be in the Pope for necessary government of the Church.  
Thirdly then consider the heretical cavillation of Sr. Francis his inference upon the foresaid premises which is this: Ergo he biddeth us to obey the Pope though he teach contrary to S. Peter and S. Paul. This Doctor Harding saith not, nor is it necessary, nor doth it follow of the premises, but only is a wrangling of a contentious heretical spirit, as every man may see, and ought diligently to mark for their instruction how to believe, and give credit to those men's arguments and illations: Wherefore after all these note the fourth point which is his substantial conclusion: And this (I hope) (saith he) is a sufficient justification for my accusation. His accusation was as before hath been heard, that the Pope is to be obeyed, though he command blasphemies against 〈…〉 to h●l, and the 〈…〉 justified by 〈…〉 at the present 〈…〉 chair 〈…〉, and not only 〈…〉 man judge how 〈…〉 justified himself, and his accu●a●●on.  
But yet to the end he may seem to say something to prove that Pope's command sometimes both blasphemies and disloyalty, he allegeth for the first (about blasphemy) certain pieces of prayers out of Portiphorium used upon the festival day of S. Thomas of Canterbury Tuper Thoma sanguinem, 
〈…〉 our prayers.  etc. which the Kt. to show himself a good versifier putteth down in a poem thus: 
By the blood of Thomas which he for thee did spend.  
Make us (o Christ) to climb whither Tho. did ascend.   
And then again: opem nobis ò Thoma porridge, etc. O Thomas lend us thy help, etc. Out of which words, where there is not a spirit of wrangling & calumniation no evil sense can be gathered: For in the former, there is no more blasphemy contained, then when the holy prophets did mention the name, faith and merits of Abraham Isaac and jacob, 
Psalm. 131. Daniel. 13.  and other their holy fathers, thereby the sooner to move God to respect them.  
And in that sense may Christians mention also the blood of S. Thomas and other martyrs shed for his cause, as motives & inductions to stir up his 〈…〉 second where 〈…〉 unto to lend us 〈…〉 that he shall do 〈…〉 for us, which 〈…〉 ●n heretical and 〈…〉 hatred to God's Saint 〈…〉 it, being a thing most 〈…〉 Father's, and other pious men of all antiquity to use like invocation to Saints gone to heaven before them, as 
*  before I haue● showed by many examples, and might do here much more, if I would stand therein. Nor dareth Sr. Francis, 
 or any heretic in the world to join issue upon this point of all holy father's practice in this behalf, but only are forced to say of them as they do of us, that it was ignorance, blasphemy or simplicity in them.  
And now after this sharp encounter against the naming of the blood and merits of S. Thomas of Canterbury, the knight's choler and pride mounteth up to the assault, of a far higher Saint, which is the mother of God herself, whose sacred conception he taketh heinously, that it should be honoured with a several feast and holy day by Pope Sixtus Quartus: for thus he writeth.  
Sixtus the fourth taketh up the controversy betwixt the Franciscans and Dominicks about the conception of the blessed virgin, 
Pag. 6●.  and against manifest scripture, plain testimony of fathers, and the stream of his own doctors, decreeth her conception, to have been without original sin (so taking from Christ his prerogative) 〈…〉 the feast of her 〈…〉 them for 〈…〉 And granting to 〈…〉 from the first 〈…〉 of the same, as many 〈…〉 4. and Pope Martin 〈…〉 the service of Corpus Christi 〈◊〉, etc.  
Thus writeth our knight wherein if you find him more true & sincere then in his former narrations and assertions it is marvel, for though somethings be true which here he relateth, as namely first that Sixtus the fourth took up the controversy between the Religious of S. Francis and S. Dominiks' order about the conception of the blessed virgin, (which is the benefit of having one supreme head, a thing not to be found among sectaries) and secondly that he allowed the solemnizing, of a feast upon that day, and gave indulgences also, to such as with devotion and contrition for their sins should celebrate or hear divine service, and this to the increase of Christian piety, yet are there twice as many other points here set down by our knight quite false and forged of himself.  
For first it is false, that Pope Sixtus, decreed the conception of the blessed virgin to have been without original sin: 
First untruth  for albeit himself being of S. Francis order before he was Pope, did hold that opinion for more probable that she was conceived pure from original sin, yet did he never decree the same, but left it ●ree for every 〈…〉 he would therein 〈…〉 trouble or 〈…〉 appeareth by 〈…〉 Sixtus, extant in 〈…〉 an. 1466. and 〈…〉  
The same 〈…〉 of Pope 〈◊〉 Quintus, 〈◊〉 super specula, wherein referring himself to the former constitution of Sixtus Quartus, & to the council of Trent. Ses. 5. in the decree of original sin, the last paragraphe, (where the said constitution of Sixtus is also mentioned and approved. 
. ) This constitution of Pius 5. hath these words: Liberam cuique facul●atem relinquentes opinandi huius controversiae quamlibet partem, prout vel magis piam, ●el magis probabilem esse indicaverit. Leaving to every man's freedom to hold in this controversy what opinion he thinketh more godly or more probable. This ordained Pius 5. withal indifferency though he were of S. Dominiks' order, and nothing different from that which Sixtus 4. of S. Francis order had ordained before him. So as hereby is seen the first foul untruth of our knight, avouching that Pope Sixtus 4. had decreed the question on the other side.  
And of this first followeth the second untruth more foul than the former, 
●. Untruth.  if it may be, where he saith. That Pope Sixtus excommunicateth and condemneth them for heretyks, that were of the other opinion. The plain opposite and contrary whereof, is set down in Sixtus his 〈…〉 simili poena 〈…〉 asserrere 〈…〉 gloriosam 〈…〉 to fuisse conceptam 〈…〉 mortale; cùm 〈…〉 sede decisum: We 〈…〉 and censure, all t●ose 〈…〉 to affirm that those who hold the contrary opinion, 
 to wit that the glorious virgin Mary was conceived in Original sin, to incur heresy or mortal sin thereby, 
 seeing that the matter is not yet decided by the Roman Church and Sea apostolic.  
In which words we see two points most evident for convincing the former two falsehoods of the knight: the one that the Pope himself affirmeth here, that the matter was not yet decided by him or the Sea Apostolyk: the second, that he was so far of from excommunicating or condemning for heretyks those that held the contrary opinion to his (as Sr. Francis saith here he did) that he excommunicateth all those, that should hold them for heretyks, or that they sinned deadly for being of that opinion.  
And this for the first two untruths avouched so audaciously by our Kt. other two there are which I will not stand upon, 
The 3. and 4. untruths.  but remit him to the authors that write thereof. First that Pope Sixtus decreed this controversy against manifest scripture, plain testimonies of Fathers, and the stream of his own Doctors. And secondly, that he tooks: 〈…〉 etc. Let the is est 〈…〉 of two 〈…〉 the one 〈…〉 other to 〈…〉 Zuares upon: 〈…〉 27. and he shall 〈…〉 father's, & Doctorie●●ere are brought for both sides, which I do avoid to allege of purpose in this place in regard of the constitution of Pius quintus, forbidding all writing of this matter in vulgar tongues to the unlearned sort, 
 who are not capable of this disputation, amongst which I accounted S. Francis for one, howsoever he accounteth of himself, neither doth he only show himself unlearned but malignant also, who goeth about to calumniate Pope Sixtus for this fact of great prudence and piety, in decreeing as he did, and not as the false Knight relateth.  
And this may be sufficient for this matter, for that the grounds & principles of his babbling being merely false and forged, as I now have showed, to wit that either Pope Sixtus defined the question affirmatively for our B. Lady's conception out of original sin or that he excommunicated all that held the contrary opinion; it must needs follow, that all the inconveniences and objected blasphemies builded by him therein as castles in the air, must fall and he under them: and so we leave him for the present, and will pass over to his minister, and see what he bringeth, or hath to say also in this affair.   

〈…〉 by the subjects? and how falsely the minister doth behave himself in all these points. CAP. XIII.  
WE having hitherto seen and beheld how well our knight hath discharged himself about the former position of obedience to Popes and their commandments, we must needs now give a little room also to his champain or Proctor O.E. who undertaketh his defence, though somewhat more coldly, and much more impertinently than the knight himself fighteth for himself. You shall see by the issue of the combat, how truly this is spoken.  
First this minister having cited the words. of Sir Francis thus: 
Pag. 53.  That albeit the Pope and his clergy command blasphemies, etc. yet must he be obeyed upon pain of damnation; he addeth presently: and his meaning is most true: not so much defending the words as the meaning of the writer, as though he had had conference with the knight about it. For justifying of which meaning, he bringeth in this substantial proof: james 〈…〉 K. Henry the 〈…〉 the popish 〈…〉 this, 〈…〉 the proof 〈…〉 he) in the 〈…〉 detestable 〈…〉 example of Gods 〈…〉 most excellent mysteries of Christ's 〈…〉 etc. and then he quoteth in the 〈◊〉, the oration of Sixtus Quintus; and la sulmanante, etc.  
But first if all this were true which is most false and wickedly devised out of his own fingers ends, 
A vain ridiculous kind of proving.  and that Sixtus Quintus had said, that it was 〈◊〉 case, and a dreadful example of 〈…〉, for that kings evil behaviour, and m●rder of the Duke of Guise and his brother the Cardinal after his faith given to them to the contrary a little before, receiving thereon the blessed Sacrament: how doth this prove, that we hold the man, that so disorderly killed him, for a martyr? But now the rest which he saith: that Sixtus Quintus in the consistory of Cardinals should so much commend that act and compare it to the most excellent mysteries, of Christ's incarnation, and resurrection, etc. is a most shameless and heretical fiction, without all truth or probability: For what similitude or likeness, hath the kill of the King of France to the mysteries of Christ's incarnation and resurrection? or what man is there living this day in Rome or 〈…〉 (which was hitherto seen 〈…〉 of) to this effect. And if by la fulminated our minister do mean the excommunication against the king of Navarre that then was, the lie is evident, for so much as that excommunication was set fourth four years at least before the other king was slain. And by thi● you see how the ministers triumphant demand is answered; who after the former i●●pertinent and forged stuff set down asketh: And what hath either Parson's the jesuite or this personate Noddy to object against us in this point? 
Pag. Ibid.  You have hard what is objected: and it seemeth the personate Noddy hath said, and is like to say so much ere he end this combat, as the ministers noddle willbe much troubled in answering him, and prove himself no personate, but a personal and real noddy.  
Well forward yet he goeth to show that Catholics hold themselves bound to obey the Pope though he command blasphemies against God, 
About disloyalty to Princes.  and disloyalties against Princes. And for the second about princes it is not a matter to be much discussed here, for that it dependeth of the examination of many causes, and circumstances, 〈…〉 by which 〈…〉 when the 〈…〉 to the 〈…〉 not. And on 〈…〉 as have been made 〈…〉 our days in France, Germany, 〈…〉 Scotland for setting forward of their new gospel against the wills and commandments of lawful princes; Our minister I am sure will hardly confess them to be disloyaltyes, though we think they be. And so seeing that Protestants do allow well of such disloyalties, when they are in favour of their own faction and that we have showed in our former Encounter very largely out of their own words & writings, 
Enc. 1. cap. 6.  that no rule of obedience or subjection holdeth them, when they mislike the magistrate or his doings, it is malapert sauciness in this prating minister to keep such a do about disloyaltyes so much defended and practised by themselves, & no ways approved by us, but where lawful authority just causes and other circumstances do make them loyaltyes.  
There remaineth then the first points about blasphemies. 
About Blasphemies.  And how (think you) doth this minister prove that we hold ourselves bound to obey the Pope or any priest coming from him, though they should command blasphemies? Hear his arguments as they lie, his first 〈…〉 obedience 〈…〉 this, he 〈…〉, to 〈…〉 called an 〈…〉 subjection to 〈…〉. But to the 〈…〉 profess obedience 〈…〉 Vicar and substitute 〈…〉 it follow thereby that either the Pope will command them blasphemies or if he would or could, that they must needs obey him therein, seeing their obedience to him is in respect of Christ and for Christ and blasphemies are against Christ, and this folly is no less ridiculous than if one should say (for examples sake) to the Neapolitans at this day, you profess obedience unto your Viceroy, as to the king of Spain himself, ergo if he should command you treasons against the king you would obey him; were not this a wise argument trow you, but now the second is as wise as this. Boniface the eight (saith he) maketh subjection to the Pope to be a matter of Salvation. Suppose he do, seeing that to obey or disobey our Superiors is a matter of salvation or damnation by S. Paul's express words. 
Rom. 13.  But what is this to blasphemies? But hear his third argument: Bellarmine (saith he) maketh it an essential point of a Catholic, to be under the Pope. This also we grant. But what inference can be made of this? It followeth further: And such trust have Papists in his judgement, concerning matters of faith, that they think he cannot be deceived. This also we 〈…〉 it of error 〈…〉 that it 〈…〉 power 〈…〉 his Church 〈…〉 assistance of 〈…〉 seeing Christ 〈…〉 able to preforme it, we 〈…〉 is this also to blasphemy?  
He addeth further: 
Cap. 17. Pag. 54.  Nay if he once 〈◊〉 or determine any thing, they count it no better than sacrilege to dispute of his doings. This is exaggerated, for we call it not sacrilege, but pride rather, disobedience, malapartness, and other like sins for inferiors lightly to dispute or examine the doings of their Superiors; which among Protestants perhaps is held for a commendation and quickness of wit; for so this minister determineth the matter presently after, 
Ibid.  saying: We are not to believe every thing our Pastors teach, but as far as they teach the doctrine of Christ jesus, nor are we absolutely to obey, but when they command according to the law. But who shall here be judge? or who seethe not that this is a most absurd circle opening the way to all wrangling dispute and disobedience, 
An absurd proposition about obedience.  nothing being attributed here more to the judgement and authority of Superiors, then to the most unquiet spirits and dissentious heads of any inferior whatsoever.  
And finally wholly to disgrace our obedience to the Pope, he bringeth in that former famous sentence cited by Sir Francis before, and now 〈…〉 all his 〈…〉 Pope should 〈…〉 an must say 〈…〉 why do you 〈…〉 the Pope 〈…〉 for proof of 〈…〉 margin out of 〈…〉 si Papa distinct, 40. which 〈…〉 have heard omitted to quote 〈…〉 ●nd so had this man done more wisely in my opinion if he had followed the other example, 
〈…〉 any Pope's doings.  and not shamed them both by noting the place, where their false shifting might be discovered, as now it is like to be.  
For understanding whereof we are first to note that the foresaid sixth Chapter of the decretal cited by him which beginneth: 
D●cret. Part. 1. dist. 40. c. 6.  si Papa suae & fraternae salutis negligens deprehenditur, etc. if the Pope be found negligent of his own salvation, and of the salvation of his brethren, etc. 
The sentence of S. Boniface an English man.  This whole chapter or Canon (I say) is taken out of the words (and so it is noted in he decretal itself) of S. Boniface an Englishman (before called Winfrid) first Archbishop in times passed of Moguntia, Apostle of Germany: & finally a most holy Martyr, who lived under Ethelbald King of the Mercians, to whom his most Christian writings are extant, about the year of Christ 720. 
See john Stow in his Chron. Pag. ●5. an. 718.  And the whole purpose of this Chapter or Canon tendeth to show the imminent danger of everlasting damnation to Popes above other men, if they live not carefully according to their State and degree, and this showeth 〈…〉 which is this: 〈…〉 fraternae salutis est ne 〈…〉 that neglecteth 〈…〉. And then 〈…〉 is set down in 〈…〉 biles populos caterua● 〈…〉 gehennae, cum ipso 〈…〉 For that an evil Pope doth 〈…〉 immunerable people by multitudes, 〈…〉 with himself the chiefest bondslane of her● there to be punished with him everlastingly with many stripes.  
Behold here the Pope nothing at all flattered by S. Boniface in this Canon, 
Plain speech of S. Boniface to all Popes.  which Protestants do cite for most high flattery towards him. And if all Canonists or Popes themselves did love flattery so much as this minister, and his mates do make them, they would never have suffered this plain speech to have been registered for a Canon of Ecclesiastical decrees, to be seen and read by all the world to all posterity. As neither would they permit the books of S. Bernard, de Consideratione ad Eugenium Papam, wherein he putteth both that and all other Popes in due considerations of their own defects which are willingly read by Protestants. But yet together with this plainness; doth this holy martyr S. Boniface, as also the other devout Father S. Bernard, acknowledge the Pope's prerogative also of not being subject to any mortal man's judgement in this world, except in matter of apostasy from 〈…〉 culpas ostic 〈…〉 llus quta cunctos ipse 〈…〉 dus nisi deprehendatur 〈…〉 may presume to 〈…〉 opes faults in this 〈…〉 to err in faith for 〈…〉 judge all other men 〈…〉 no man but by God 〈…〉  

 ●nd this is all that here is said of this matter, which doctrine about the Pope's immunity from judgement in this life, cannot in reason mislike Protestants, seeing many of them and other their friends in their books do grant the same privilege to every temporal prince in his own dominion making him so absolute both in temporal and spiritual affairs, 
See two books of Bellay named Apologies in ●rench.  as he may not be judged by any mortal man but only by God himself. And albeit our adversaries do bestir themselves to infer further upon us here then this, partly by the word redarguere, used by S boniface, partly by the sentence foisted in by themselves, that no man may say, why do you so? whereupon they do infer, that we make the Pope not only free from being judged or condemned, but also from being so much as reprehended by any in this life: Yet this is manifestly showed to be false as well by the grievous reprehension used here to all evil Popes by S. Boniface himself, calling them the chief bondslaves of hell, and by the many like reproofs used to the same effect by the forenamed holy man S. Bernard in his books of 〈…〉 of the ordinary 〈…〉 these:  
Bonifacius martyr 〈…〉 possit iudicars, si mu 〈…〉 operibus suis, cum 〈…〉 & similiter multos 〈…〉 non, cùm debeat omn 〈…〉 prehendatur, pro cuius 〈…〉 cum ipse 〈…〉 post Deum, universitas fidelium instantius ore●. 〈◊〉 niface the martyr was demanded whether t●● Pope might be called to judgement by any man, if he were found negligent and remiss in his office, seeing that such a one not only did hurt himself alone, but all his subjects in like manner, and did draw many with him to perdition: 
What is to be done to evil Popes.  Whereunto the martyr answered, no, for that he hath to judge all others, except he should be found to be an heretic, so as the whole community of Christendom hath to pray for him, and his salvation as head of the Church under God.  
And this is the answer of S. Boniface about the danger of Popes that live evil, and attend not to their office as also for their privilege and exemption from man's judgement in this life, except in case of heresy. And finally that faithful people in steed of calling them to judgement should pray for them, as Supreme magistrates of Christ Church.  
And thus much is in this Canon si Papa, cited by O.E. and no more is there to be found. Well then you will ask perhaps, what is become 〈…〉, that albeit 〈…〉 soul's to hell, yet no 〈…〉 do you so? This our 〈…〉 and show where 〈…〉 an objection 〈…〉 and pulpit every 〈…〉 later part is not in 〈…〉 else to the sense 〈…〉 it. For though in another 〈…〉 far different, 
 of the Canon law, I ●o find some such words in the gloss, that in some cases no man may exact a reason of the Pope's doings, when they depend only of his will and arbitrement, yet are they not spoken to such purpose as here they are alleged, nor annexed with the former words of drawing infinite souls with him to hell; but appertaining only to a particular case, as namely of free disposing or transferring of Church goods from one Church to another without obligation to yield reasons for the same, but only his judgement and wil The words of the gloss talking of this particular case are these:  
Licet inferiores iura unius Ecclesiae in aliam sin● certa solennitate transferre non possunt. 
Gloss. in e●trau. Apost. joan. 2. ●. tit. 5. c. 2. conti●et●●.  Papa tamen gaudet plenitudine potestatis, & hoc facere potest, nec est qui audeat dicere, Domine cur ita facis? cùm in ijs quae de iure positivo sunt, possit pro libito super his dispensare. Albeit inferior Prelates cannot transfer the rights of one particular Church to another, but by a certain prescript form of solemnity appointed by law, yet the Pope (being general h● Enc. 〈…〉 fullness of his 〈…〉 man, that may be so 〈…〉 he doth so? seein● 〈…〉 are only of divine law) he may 〈…〉. This is the speech and 〈…〉 ●ohn de Fan●, in his gloss 〈…〉 a certain canon, the 〈…〉 good to examine more at large 〈…〉 that by some few examples our country 〈◊〉 may be taught to take heed of these false deceiving companions who speak truth in no one point they treat: And mark I pray you how many sleights and falsehoods they have used in this one allegation.  
For first of all they pervert the whole meaning of S. Boniface speech in the Canon s● Papa turning that to flattery, which he writeth for dreadful admonition and reprehension of evil Popes, as you have hard. Then whereas he saith, that evil Popes do draw many to perdition with them; these fellows do corrupt the whole sense, saying: that if he should draw infinite, yet no man must say to him, why do you s●? thirdly they join falsely together these two sentences as uttered in one place, and to the self same purpose, which are found in two distinct volumes of the Canon law, written upon different occasions and grounds, and in different matter, and neither of them to the sense or meaning for which here they are alleged. And this could not be hidden or unknown to 〈…〉 their error 〈…〉 of authors is 〈…〉 dealing unchristian, 〈…〉 God to give 〈…〉   

〈…〉 HE FOURTH 〈…〉 whereby Catholics are said ●●●se Pardons for their chiefest remedy against all sins, wherein the truth of Catholic doctrine is declared, and the manifold falsifications of our heretics are detected. CAP. XIIII.  
FOR discussion of this fourth forged principle and maxim objected by our knight, 
The fourth ●ayned position.  for that it is a common pulpit matter among our ministers, wherein they chiefly abuse the simple people, and was the first ground and occasion of their new gospel by Martin Luther, and for that by the shifting and shuffling reply of Sir Francis to that which before was answered by the Wardword it may easily be descried how little in substance they have to say in this point of pardons and indulgences, besides lying, cavilling and calumniation, I mean to stand a little upon this point. And first to begin with the former answer and explanation of the warder, which was as followeth.  
There 〈…〉 ground or 〈…〉 would needs 〈…〉 this he setteth 〈…〉 wing: And having thus 〈…〉 out stop to the mark and 〈…〉 so hemmed men in, as they 〈…〉 escape danger but by them 〈…〉 them, they propounded unto them a 〈…〉 from all dangers (even when they sinned immediately against God) which is a pardon from his Hol. and absolution from his holy priests. But if the decrees or ordinances of the Romish synagogue, were transgressed, hardly any mercy could be had.  
Thus writeth our knight (saith the Warder) if you will believe him, but having taken him trip in so many falsehoods, forgeryes and calumniations before, I presume that the discreet reader, will give credit to him and his assertions hereafter by weight and measure, looking to his fingers as well as to his lips, as men use to do when they deal with Egyptians. Now then let us examine what truth there is in this tale of his. 
Many caui●● & falshood●.  First and foremost, who seethe not how egregious a cavil it is to say, that catholics by teaching men to obey their Superiors simply, and for conscience sake, and under pain of sin, (as you have herd also S. Paul to teach) that thereby they bring men into snares, 
Rom. ●●.  or hem them in (as this man's phrase is:) by which argument he may prove also, that God himself, when he gave the law to the jews, did hem them in to snares of sin, 〈…〉 hemently 〈…〉 of his Epistle to 〈…〉 a notorious 〈…〉 we prescribe of 〈…〉 of sin, is 〈…〉 greater and more● 〈…〉 he addeth by a 〈…〉 immediately against God 〈◊〉 〈…〉 doctrine is clear 〈◊〉 point, that the Popes and Churches 〈…〉, 
〈…〉  avail not to remove mortal sin●●● but only are given, where all such sin is already pardoned by contrition and confession and virtue of the Sacrament, and that th● remaineth only some temporal punishment, in this or the next life to be remitted Neither can the Pope pardon the guilt of sin itself by indulgences, or by any other way then by the means of the Sacrament of confession & absolution (which Sacrament hath his force of the blood of Christ) as every ordinary priest authorized to hear confessions may do the like.  
And so thirdly it is great ignorance in our knight, if not malice, or both, to join together as he doth the Pope's pardon, and the absolution of his Holy Priests, which have great difference in this matter for that the pardon stretcheth not to remit sin itself (as hath been said) but only the temporal pains due unto sin; after it is remitted. But Priests absolution in the sacrament of confession is sufficient to remit any sin, if the penitent be contrite, according to commission 〈…〉 ●um remiseritis peccata 〈…〉 ●inueritis retenta sunt. who 〈…〉 shallbe forgiven, and who 〈…〉 ●ayne, shallbe retained. 〈…〉 is a different matter 〈…〉 pardon.  
Fourthly that the 〈…〉 decrees and ordinances of the catholic Church (which wickedly he nameth the Romish Synagogue) be more hardly forgiven among us, than greater sins, and those namely that be immediately committed against God himself, is a shameless slander, and never taught by any catholic man in the world, and so unworthy to be further refuted.  
Thus far the Warder in examination and refutation of Sir Francis his follies and falsehoods, 
Cath. doctrine about indulgences.  and for perspicuous declaration of ●ath, doctrine about indulgences, which consists in this, 
2. Reg. 12. 13. 14.  that seeing after the guilt of mortal sin remitted (as for example the murder and adultery of King David remitted by God and signified by the voice of Nathan the prophet) there remaineth oftentimes some temporal satisfaction and pains to be borne by him that sinned, for better satisfaction of Gods most exquisite justice, as we read that the death of David's son begotten of that adultery, as also the insurrection of his son Absalon with other afflictions following thereof assigned by God for this satisfaction, after the guilt of the foresaid sin was pardoned, 〈…〉 our Saviour Christ in his 〈…〉 which for the dignity of 〈…〉 finite valour, be●ides the 〈…〉 he did merit unto us, 〈…〉 of our sins as also grace 〈…〉 works were infinitely 〈…〉 that they were penal, and 〈…〉 nothing to satisfy for his own person, he left in his Church an infinite treasure of these satisfactory works, to be applied to satisfy for them, that cannot satisfy for themselves; to which treasures do also appertain (though in a lower degree) the satisfactory works of his saints done by his grace and virtue more than for their own persons, they had obligation to do or suffer. Out of which public treasure of Christ's Church, 
The treasure of satisfactory works remaining in Christ's Church.  Catholyks do hold, that the Bishops, Pastors and governors thereof (especially the chief & supreme Pastor of all) may upon just causes and to persons penitent, & otherways well disposed, and not so well able to satisfy for themselves in these temporal pains, dispense and distribute spiritual helps to the assistance and supply of there wants and infirmities.  
And this is properly that which we call an indulgence or pardon when any thing is remitted or released that was dew to be paid of our part, in which sense also Esay the Prophet useth the word Indulgence (though in a more general signification) when talking of Christ he saith, 
Esay. 61.  that he should be sent praedicare cap●iuis ●dulgentiam, to preach Indulgence to them that were in captivity, 〈…〉 useth in his gospel, 〈…〉 sentence 〈◊〉 Esay he 〈…〉 praedicare captivis remission 〈…〉 to them that are 〈…〉 places though they 〈…〉 of all sins, as well 〈…〉 nishment thereunto belong 〈…〉 by Christ, yet hath the 〈…〉 word indulgence, and applied the same also by use to this remission or mitigation only of temporal punishment, remaining after the ●ternal guilt of mortal sin is forgiven by the Sacrament of penance.  
So that hereby we see, that neither indulgences do serve for the remitting of the eternal guilt, 
To whom indulgence● a● auailabl●.  nor are they available to all sorts of men, but to such only as are not in mortal sin, and otherwise so piously disposed by devotion in God's service, as they are capable of this Indulgence, remission and favour in God's Church.  
And thus having briefly explained what Catholyks do truly hold about this point (which heretyks will never suffer their readers sincerely to understand) we shall come to examine what Sr. F. replieth to the discovery of all those cavils and falsehoods, wherein the Warder took him trip (they were four, if you remember, or will vouchsafe to look back upon them) to all which he answereth no one word in particular, but only this in general: What say I more in my accusation (about 〈…〉 knoweth to be true, 〈…〉 a general answer it 〈…〉 he meaneth I know not, 〈…〉 he had a world of 〈…〉 he might have alleged 〈…〉 ours in all this world, 〈…〉 one of these four, 〈…〉, which in this place are 〈…〉 his charge by the Warder, and so have saved his honour in this behalf, but having produced none after so much bragging in his Watchword, and so much battery in the Wardword, now to come and cry again, that he hath a world with him, when the time had been to have brought some forth; is a pitiful plight for so honourable a knight to see himself in.  
But what! doth he answer nothing at all in particular (think you) to all these charges of untruths laid unto him, but only, that the whole world knoweth his assertions to be true? Yes: 
Ibid. Pag. 69.  for thus it followeth in the same place: The Cath. doctrine is (as our champion saith) that the Popes and Churches indulgences avail not to remove mortal sins, etc. neither doth the pardon remove the guilt of sin, etc. But Sir whatsoever your doctrine is in this point your practice is quite contrary, etc. Mark here (gentle Reader) whereas hitherto the knight hath charged our doctrine, now being put to the proof, he saith: Whatsoever our doctrine be, yet our practice is to the contrary, as though he had said that howsoever it be false and slanderous which hitherto he hath affirmed of our 〈…〉 he show that we 〈…〉 kind of argument if a 〈…〉 use against a Christian, 〈…〉 doctrine for teaching 〈…〉 being driven from it by 〈…〉 and by showing that 〈…〉 teach the contrary if 〈…〉 (as Sr. Francis doth) from 〈…〉 and say as he saith; that whatsoever your 〈◊〉 be, yet is your practice contrary, and many wicked men are among you, ergo your religion is nought: would any man call this other then plain cavilling?  
But what doth our knight prove any one authentical point in this part also of practice (though I do not deny but that some abuses may have been committed by particular persons, 
About abuses of Indulgences.  in the use of indulgences also as there want not evil liners among Christians) doth he bring forth (I say) any one example of any one public practice to the contrary? No truly, but only saith in general, 
Pag. 70.  that the Counsels of La●eran, Vienna, and Trent have made provision ●or reformation of abuses about Indulgency, which maketh for us rather than for him, for that it showeth we desire that abuses or contrary practice should not be, or if it hath been it was not permitted by Cath. doctrine or public authority no more then wicked life is in Christian religion, though much be practised, as to our grief, we see.  
From this he passeth to allege certain old verses cited by Kennitius, as true a writer 〈…〉 as he saith) in a stone in a 〈…〉 the Bituriges in Aquitany; 〈…〉 nothing at all 〈…〉 only exhorting men to 〈…〉, in respect of the 〈…〉 by God, and 〈…〉 of scripture themselves 〈…〉 our knight lacking other 〈…〉 them in against 〈◊〉. Some of them I shall allege hear for examples sake.  

〈◊〉. Pag. 69.  Hic des devotè, caelestibus associate.  
Mentes aegrotae per munera sunt tibi lotae;  
Ergo veni tote gentes à sede remotae:  
Qui datis estote certi de divite dote.  
Hic si largè des in caelo sit tua sedes.  
Qui serit hic parcè parcè comprendit in arce.  
Sir Francis his translation.  
Give freely here in heaven a place prepare,  
Your sickly souls by gifts clean purged are.  
Come people then which dwell far from this place.  
Ye that do give, rest sure of much grace.  
If thou give freely here, heaven is thy hire.  
He that gives little, shall little there acquire.  
These verses allegeth Sr. Francis to make sport at indulgences; but if you take away the simplicity of the latin and poensy incident to that age, they contain no absurdity at all, but do set forth the force and virtue of alms in the very words almost that are found in scripture. For in the 〈…〉 Day & dabitur vobis, etc. 〈…〉 given unto you. In 〈…〉 words of our Saviour. 〈…〉 omnia vobis munda sunt, 〈…〉 all is clean and purged 〈…〉 the rest, ending with the 〈…〉 in the last verse: Qui parcè semini● 〈…〉 he that soweth little shall reap 〈…〉 expressly of alms. And with what folly the● are these things brought in by way of scoff against pardons and indulgences, which nothing appertain unto them? and are sentences taken out of the scripture itself.  
He addeth to this purpose a complaint of the Princes of Germany (as he calleth them) exhibited against the Pope's pardons at a counsel in Norenberg, 
Pag. 71. Malicious concealing of circumstances to deceive the reader.  but he telleth not in what year this was, nor what manner of counsel, nor that these Princes were new protestants, nor that Luther did indite this complaint, for if he had told any one of these circumstances it would have infringed the credit of his tale, 
Ibid. Pag. 72.  as that which he telleth of one Tecelius the Pope's pardon merchant as he termeth him of whom he writeth a jest how he was deceived and cozened in selling of pardons, but for that he citeth neither author book time nor place, I give it the credit as such pulpit tales of Sir Francis ministers do require.  
That old objection also of Card. Como his letter to Parry wherein he is affirmed to say: 〈…〉 pardon of all your sins as 〈…〉 answered. For first it is 〈…〉 in his letter to Pope 〈…〉 from Paris when he 〈…〉 1583. discovered no 〈…〉 any particular enterprise 〈…〉 only in general, that he 〈…〉 great matters for the 〈…〉 Cath. religion, for recompense of the ●urts which he had done divers years before by spiery for the state of England. And this appeareth as well by the letter yet extant as for that he uttering his whole plot to her Matie and her counsel at his first coming in was notwithstanding favourably handled for a great space, until falling into discontentment through want, he practised with him that discovered his teachery: Secondly the Pope's grant of Indulgence unto him was meant only with due circumstances, if he were contrite and confessed of his sins, which is wont to be added commonly in all indulgences, or is necessary to be understood. For which cause, this objection is to no purpose at all.  
Wherefore I would leave of in this place to speak any more of this argument of indulgences as unable to be disproved either in doctrine or practice, by Sir Francis, but that I must discover one trik of his more about alleging Durandus, 
pag. 70.  before I end my speech. As for the authority (saith he) whereupon your indulgences are grounded, your own men confess as namely (among the rest) Durandus: De indulgentijs pauca dici possunt per certitudinem qui 〈…〉 ijs loquitur; sancti etiam 〈…〉 Hieronymus, Augustinus, mit 〈…〉 gentijs, etc. Little can be 〈…〉 indulgences because 〈…〉 speaketh expressly of the 〈…〉 Father's Ambrose, Hilary, 〈…〉 make no mention of them. 〈…〉 confess, that you have neither warrant 〈…〉 nor of the ancient fathers for your popish 〈…〉 go they currant, etc.  
Howsoever they go currant (Sir knight) among us, yet go not you currant, but do halt down to the ground, and that in three things about this one text. First in the citation, then in the deduction or illation of the sense: thirdly in the words themselves alleged. And let the reader consider, whether falsehood may be found in more points than these in the handling or alleging of any author.  
For the first, though he name Durandus, yet quoteth he no place, 
The first shift.  where you may find it, which for the most part (as before we have noted) implieth lightly some deceit or subtle trick in the allegation, which he would not have discovered, as now by experience we have learned, and the third point shall declare.  
For the second about the illation he maketh out of the words of Durand, 
The second shift.  if they were all in all respects truly alleged, it is false and cavillous. For if any Arrian or Anabaptist in the days of S. Ambrose Hilary, and Jerome, whom 〈…〉 have made like 〈…〉, and said (as they 〈…〉 of Homoousion, 〈…〉, as also the baptism 〈…〉 to be found in 〈…〉 such and such ancient 〈…〉 justinus and others of that 〈…〉 thing of it; ergo you hold 〈…〉 neither have warrant in 〈…〉 of ancient Fathers.  
This argument (I say) or illation against these doctrines had been as good as this of Sir Francis against pardons, and yet had it been nought and deceitful and the reason is, for that albeit those doctrines for the blessed Trinity and baptism of children, were not expressly contained in scripture, yet were they sufficiently deduced thereof. And albeit those former fathers as justinus, Irenaeus and others had not occasion expressly to handle or treat of these controversies being occupied in other matters yet never taught they the contrary & other father's following after them did teach & testify that doctrine to be Catholic which was sufficient. And the very like may be answered by us in this behalf, as by the third point of Sir Francis paltry dealing shall appear.  
The third point than is his fraudulent alleging of the words of Durand, 
The 3. shift.  leaving out some, which are greatly to the purpose, and do plainly insinuate the answer that now I have given. For first after Durand had said that the scripture did not 〈…〉 indulgences, he allegeth 〈…〉 scripture as Tibi dabo claves 〈…〉 16. etc. Quodcunque ligaveris, 〈…〉 of which texts he saith: Non 〈…〉 collatione indulgentiarum debeant 〈…〉 clear than these places of 〈…〉 understood of giving 〈…〉 words being added to the word 〈…〉 the former clause, do evidently signify 〈◊〉 albeit Durand did not think that the doctrine of indulgences, was clearly and expressly contained in scripture, yet that it might be deduced out of scripture, for which cause Sir Francis cut them out. This is one trick, let us see another.  
Immediately after the words in Durand, & the Ancient Fathers S. Ambrose, Hilary, Hierome, August. made no mention of indulgences, etc. followeth Gregorius tamen loquitur, but S. Gregory speaketh of them. This Sir Francis dasheth out, which was a principal verb in this matter. For a man might answer that albeit the particular use of indulgences were not so treated of, by S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, and other former doctors occupied in other affairs and strifes with other heretics, yet soon after in S. Gregory the great his time, which was a thousand years ago, the use and exercise thereof was common in the Church, seeing Durand in this very place affirmeth not only that S. Gregory speaketh of them, but also that he is said to have ordained 〈…〉 public Stations, who 〈…〉 to have begun this 〈…〉 or to have taught and 〈…〉 contrary to antiquity in 〈…〉 Christ. All which for Sir 〈…〉 dissembled, and of purpose 〈…〉 a bad conscience both in him 〈…〉 they strive not for truth, but 〈…〉 faction and falsehood 〈…〉 by what means so ever, which shall appear also, by that which ensueth in the sequent Chapter, if first we take a short view of that which his Minister O. E. bringeth in to assist him, which is such stuff as is commonly uttered by such broken merchants. Let us hear what he saith:  
What O. E. sayeth of indulgences.  
It is most true (saith he) which Sir Francis affirmeth, 
O.E. Pag. 54.  that the Papists, when they have committed most abominable offences, and lived in all filthiness, are notwithstanding taught, that the Pope hath power to pardon them, and absolve them, etc. Mark here two words subtilely joined together of pardoning and absolving as though they were one, whereas indeed they import far different things, as before hath been showed, for that absolving implieth that it must be done by virtue of the sacrament of penance and absolution, and so reacheth to all sins never so grievous, but pardoning is proper to indulgences, and stretcheth no further but to the release of temporal punishment, as before hath but declared.  
And thus the minister 〈…〉 of purpose to have some 〈…〉 he is pressed, but all men 〈…〉 here only of the former, to 〈…〉 that it is an abominable life 〈…〉 science, to affirm as he doth 〈…〉 are taught, that all filthiness and 〈…〉 senses are remitted by the Pope's pardon 〈…〉 his life be so licentious and filthy 〈…〉 of him (and his courses of 〈…〉 do well agree thereunto) 〈…〉 come to be of our religion, he would ●ind other remedies appliable to him besides pardons, that would stick near his skin albeit in le●itate spiritus for saving of his soul.  
But how doth he prove (think you) that all sorts of sins are remitted by pardons? Two arguments he allegeth, the one of authority, the other of practice. In both which he lieth notably. His argument of authority is out of Cardinal Bellarmyne in these words: 
Bellarm● de indul. lib. 1. cap. 10.  Bellarmyne saith that indulgences are profitable to all manner of persons. Well, what of this? will you infer hereof that all sins may be forgiven by indulgences? Cardinal Bellarmyne in the place cited, goeth about to refute Luther, who affirmed Indulgentias non esse utiles nisi publicis & scelestissimis peccatoribus, 
Luth. in assert. art. 1●.  that indulgences are not profitable but only to public and most wicked sinners, which Card. Bellarmine doth refute, and show that they profit also to good men, so that this minister would infer the quite contrary to the author's meaning and 〈…〉 out fraudulently how 〈…〉 the third chapter after 〈…〉 large what manner of 〈…〉 them, that must be 〈…〉 to wit that they be out of 〈…〉 consequently it is not most 〈…〉 rather and false, which this 〈…〉, all filthiness and most 〈…〉 to be pardoned among 〈…〉 indulgences, yet hear what he appear also second proof deduced from pract●●e.  
For money (saith he) they pardon Murder of children, of men, 
O.E. Pag. 55.  of women, of wives, of near kicred, fornication adultery, incest, and all unnatural abominations, etc. To this is answered before, that Cath. doctrine neither teacheth nor alloweth any such matter and if any bad fellow or under officer hath gone about by corruption at any time to commit such abuses he was as honest a man as O. E. and should do it as lawfully as he and other such like ruffianly and ravenous companions do possess, buy & sell Cath. benesices instituted for Priests and honest men.  
And last of all that which he addeth out of Taxa Poenitentiariae noted in the margin, pro licentia erigendi de novo publicam synagogam Taxa est suron. 60. Ducat. 15. is a thing no way to be found by me that have sought for it in the paenitentiaria itself and their registers and can find no such matter ever in use, and yet if in countries, where jews are permitted, some tribute were imposed 〈…〉 to the help of poor 〈…〉 great matter, or were this to 〈…〉 as this companion would 〈…〉 divers protestant States of 〈…〉 Jews also to dwell among them 〈…〉 we leave this poor companion 〈…〉 almighty his indulgence, and 〈…〉 the Reader, seeing he hath not 〈…〉 against Catholyk indulgences, 〈…〉 is not worth the recital, as you 〈…〉   

OF TWO OTHER examples of Pardons abused by Catholyks as Sir Francis allegeth, but both of them false, with a notorious imposture about the poisoning of King john. CAP. XV.  
THE knight having fled from the point he should have proved of doctrine against indulgences, as before hath been declared, and betaken himself only to show certain abuses, (which if they were true do make nothing against the doctrine) after the former alleged examples, there do ensue in his answer others, 
Wastword. Pag. 74.  in these words: Sundry Chronicles do make mention of Simon the monk of Swinsted, who poisoned King john, that before the fact he confessed his purpose to his Abbot, who highly commended his zeal, 〈…〉 beforehand for the committing 〈…〉 I might join the 〈…〉 who murdered the K. of France, 〈…〉 hand confessed and absolved of 〈…〉  
〈…〉 two examples, as they are both 〈…〉, so I answer first to the last 〈…〉 that Sr. Francis ought to be 〈…〉, to avouch so weighty a 〈◊〉 by wh●● as this, without naming some appear also ● bad, except he esteem 〈…〉 no other than ●atling or telling of news upon every man's speech or fond imagination, as men are wont to in barber's shops, and seeing he will vouchsafe us no one author for his affirmative, I shall allege him most authentical testimonies, 
About james Clement that slew the K. of France.  to wit 4. books, for the negative, written and printed in Lions, presently upon the fact itself entitled, De justa Henrici 3. abdication●: where in the 4. book and 23. Chapter all the particularities of this jacobus Clemens and his fact are set down and evidently showed, that he conferred with no man living thereof before it was done, and much less either confessed or received absolution before hand for the fact; & if he had so done, yet had it been nothing available to him, for how could any man give absolution to him for a fact to come? Sure I am that no catholic doctrine or authority can allow thereof; & the reason is, for that the party that should propose such a matter to be done either holdeth it for lawful or unlawful. If he hold it for lawful then 〈…〉 absolution, if he hold it for 〈…〉 meaneth to do it, then is he 〈…〉 sition to receive either 〈…〉 gence, seeing he is not sorry for 〈…〉 intention, which is necessarily 〈…〉 often before hath been noted in 〈…〉 either indulgence or absolution 〈…〉 available, and this is sufficient for 〈…〉 fiction of Sir Francis.  
The other example also of 〈…〉 monk of Swynsted, which our knight, 〈…〉 that sundry authors do mention to have 〈…〉 john, 
Sir F.F. dulent 〈…〉.  and to have received absolution before hand 〈…〉 his Abbot, is no less gross and absurd than 〈◊〉 former: and our knight in good and play 〈◊〉 dealing, for saving his honour and honest 〈◊〉 should have named those sundry authors, 〈◊〉 some of them at least, and not like Hickscorner cast out the contumely, 
Fo●. ●t  and run behind th●● door, when the proof is asked. But the read●● must understand that he had this tale (as th● most of all the rest here alleged) out of Io●● Fox as true a legender, as himself is an alleged and being to proud to acknowledge this bo●●●d wing taketh the matter upon himself. Wherefore we must now try; whether Fox or he be the truer man in relating Stories, or whether both be not of one, and the same size in misreporting. john Fox hath not only a long tale● but also a full pageant printed and painted to this: to wit of the poisoning of K. john b● this monk; of the monks death, and other 〈…〉 for him; of the Abbot's 〈…〉 he did it; of other monks 〈…〉 his soul, of Symons 〈…〉 and of his giving it to the King 〈…〉, Wassa● my liege, and other 〈…〉, which are expressed in six 〈…〉, & different poeses put under 〈…〉 for the reader to see and consider the 〈…〉 And when all this pastime is ended, 〈…〉 himself confesseth that authors 〈…〉 about the death of K. Ihon. For being 〈◊〉 ●hat afraid to be taken trip (as he saw it 〈◊〉 that he should) and so be confounded by 〈◊〉 ●ent of all ancient writers against this no●●●ion, he saith thus:  
Many opinions are among Chroniclers of the death of 〈◊〉 john: some of them do write, that he died of sorrow 〈◊〉 heaviness of heart as Poli●ore: some of surfeiting in 〈◊〉 night as Radulphus Niger; some of the bloody flux 〈◊〉 Roger Hoveden; some of a burning ague; some of a 〈◊〉 sweat; some of eating apples; some of eating 〈◊〉, peaches, plums, etc. And thus you see what 〈◊〉 is among writers concerning the death of this king 〈◊〉: of which writers though the most agree in this 〈◊〉 he was poisoned by the monk above named, yet Matthew Paris something differing from the other writers, writeth that he died of an ague by surfeiting, etc.  
Mark here now (good reader) and by this one example among ten thousand consider 〈◊〉 malicious falsehood of john Fox in setting ●owne his fantastical histories to deceive the people, ●or after that he hath with a long discourse and narration of the kings pitiful poisoning by a monk, and 〈…〉 foul circumstances thereof, 〈…〉 number of monks, one dressing 〈…〉 cutting him in pieces, another 〈…〉 host over his head, as in the 〈…〉 hearing his confession, absolving 〈…〉 rer before hand & putting down 〈…〉 also, Ego absoluote, etc. another on his 〈…〉 ceaving the same, and then 〈…〉 crying, Wassail my liege as before is said 〈…〉 be seen in the pictures themselves; and 〈◊〉 to move more compassion towards the 〈◊〉 and hatred to monks and their religion, 〈◊〉 said king is brought forth in a pageant dead, 〈◊〉 a grave minister painted with a long bear● to morn over him with this sentence printe● under: king john lieth here dead of poison.  
After all this (I say) which Fox hath pu● down, partly in print and partly in painting, he cometh out at last with that blind confession, which before you have heard, that ancient authors do not agree about the death of king john, an●●o all this ado is brought in question by h●● own confession, which should have been told at the beginning in upright dealing, to the ell ● that the reader should have stayed his judgement in all this revel, that Fox maketh about this matter. And this of his malicious fraud, now hear his impudence.  
Of which writers (saith he) the most agree i● this, that he was poisoned by the monk above nimmed, etc. To which I answer that this is s●●●melesse impudence, for that not only all 〈◊〉 〈…〉 by him named, do not agree 〈…〉 poisoning, but no one of them 〈…〉 much as once mention or 〈…〉 rather do expressly deny it, by 〈…〉 manner of death happened to 〈…〉 then by poisoning of the monk, & 〈…〉 Fox himself confess in the 〈…〉 (if you mark them) for he saith, 〈…〉 affirmeth, that he died of heaviness 〈…〉 Radulphus Niger of surfeiting, Roger 〈…〉 bloody Flux, & some of a burning ague, cold 〈…〉 eating of apples, pears, peaches, plums, etc. 〈◊〉 how then do the most of these author's 〈◊〉 in this, that king john was poisoned by ●●●e monk seeing they never so much as name ●●ther poison or monk, but do recite other ●●uses of his death? Heer john Fox is taken 〈◊〉 though he be a Fox) with his own trap as ●ow see.  
Again john Stow that printed his Annals ●●●●ce Fox published his book of Acts & monuments to wit anno 1592. writing the ●hole Story and death of king john telleth it 〈◊〉 contrary to that which Fox setteth ●●wne, according to the ancient historiographers above mentioned naming neither monk nor poison, and in the end of his narration addeth this. Thus I have set down the life ●hough much abridged) and death of king john after 〈◊〉 writing of Roger Windover, Roger Hoveden, Rad. 〈◊〉, Rad. Cogshal Canon of Barnwel and Matthew 〈◊〉 is and others, who all lived when the K. reigned, 〈◊〉 wrote for that time what they saw or hard credibly reported. This is the 〈…〉 Stow which convinceth Fox 〈…〉 pudency in that the said, Fox 〈…〉 most part of the aforesaid 〈…〉 to agree about the poisoning of 〈…〉 whereas no one of them holdeth it, 〈…〉 contrary as you have hard.  
But how then cometh in this 〈…〉 call story so much urged, and diligen●t th● forth by john Fox in his lying acts and 〈…〉 You may read in john Stow 〈◊〉 the place alleged, the first author thereof, for it was an author without a name, which wrote about a hundred and seventeen years ago, and took upon him to continue the fabulous story of Geffrey of Monmouth, & among infinite other fables telleth also this of King john's poisoning, as he received it by some vulgar report; The book was caused to be printed at the charges of one William Caxton, and so commonly called Caxtons chronicle, and, in the prologue he writeth thus:  
In the year of our lord 1483. in the 22. year of the reign of K. Edward the 4. at S. Albon; so that all m●n may know the acts of our noble Kings of England are compiled in this book, etc. This went in the prologue, and then in the end again he saith thus: Here endeth this present chronicle of England with the fruit of times, compiled in a book and also printed by one, sometime schoolmaster of S. Albon, upon whose soul God have mercy Amen. And newly imprinted in Fleetstreet at the sign of the Sun by me Wi●ken de word. In the year of our Lord God. 1515.  
〈…〉 how this book was 〈…〉 withal, & many hundreds 〈…〉 in the book, set down after the 〈…〉 wives tales naming no author 〈…〉 he had it, for he lived almost 300. 〈…〉 the fact, & all the former author's 〈…〉 that lived with King john or 〈…〉 to this man's time, excepting only 〈…〉 ●onicon that mentioneth it, as a vulgar tale, 〈…〉 polidore after him with like rejection, all ●●ners (I say) former writers which best should know the truth, not only made no mention thereof, but set down expressly other manner and causes of K. Ihons' death, as you have heard, and yet would Fox of mere malice, and against his own conscience, believe this author against all the rest, and set it forth in print, pageants and paintings, as before hath been said and all other English heretyks since have followed him in the same impudence, both in books, sermons & common speeches, which showeth that they do not follow reason, nor seek truth, but only to hold the reader in error by any means of sleight or falsehood whatsoever, which ought to warn every true Christian man, who seeketh sincerely to know the verity of matters in controversy and the salvation of his own soul, not to believe so easily these cozening people but to enter into better consideration of their doings, especially of john Fox the most fraudulent and perfidious writer that ever put pen to paper in our language, if I be not greatly deceived, who have taken pains 〈…〉 many others to examine the 〈…〉 wilful falsehood of divers of his 〈…〉  
But to return again to Sir 〈…〉 Reader note one trick more of his, 〈…〉 wing this story of K. john, to be as I 〈…〉 was not only content to use Fox his frau●●●● deceive his Reader, but would needs add som● what of his own devise also: For albeit th● former Chronicle of Cax●on (if so it may be called) do recount the sum of the matter most fond, as to the Reader may appear, yet doth he not tell, that the monks name was Simon, as S. Francis calleth him, nor that his Abbot highly commended him for his zeal, as Sir Francis addeth out of Fox his invention, who forgeth also, that the monk alleged for himself the prophecy of Cayphas john. 11. saying? It is better, that one die then all the people perish; and moreover: I am well contented to lose my life, and so become a martyr, that I may utterly destroy this tyrant, and then with that the Abbot did weep for gladness, and much commended his fervent zeal, etc.  
All these speeches and circumstances (I say) are added and much more by john Fox, and S. Francis to the Story to make it up more full, for that no such word is in the author (Caxton) but rather the contrary, that both the monk and the abbot were very sorrowful. And last of all it is most false (which is the principal part of this Story & for which it was brought in by Sir Francis) that the Abbot gave him absolution before hand, for the committing of this 〈…〉 it had been committed; for 〈…〉 such matter at all in the story, but 〈…〉 he asked to be shriven and assoiled 〈…〉 of his sins, but not that the 〈…〉 yield thereunto, and much less, 〈…〉 was any mention on either part of 〈…〉 olution for the sin to come, but rather ●r his sins past, as men are wont to do, when they go to war, or to like attempts, where many sins are ordinarily committed, for which no man asketh absolution before hand, as our two masters here will needs have the monk to have done, though in deed Sir Francis is the more impudent of the two; for that john Fox durst not to avouch this manifestly of absolving aforehand for sins to come; yet our knight blusheth not to affirm yt● without all warrant or witness in the world, and so becometh the disciple worse than his master.  
Fox setteth down the words somewhat more cunningly and dexterously, 
〈◊〉 and Fox 〈◊〉 rive 〈…〉 hall 〈◊〉 most ●●dulently.  to wit. The monk being absolved of his Abbot (a forehand) went, etc. where you see that he putteth down the word a forehand with a parenthesis as added of himself, if any would urge him of falsehood: But Sr. Francis taketh quite a way the parenthesis and affirmeth the matter absolutely, saying: He highly commended his zeal and gave him absolution a forehand for committing of this wicked act. etc.  
And by this let the reader judge of them both Master and scholar, doctor & disciple; and I have been the longer in diciphering their cozenage in this one example to the end that their malice and lack of conscience being fully seen in few points, may be held suspected in the rest: For that most true it is, that they who in matters of religion do falsify and lie of purpose, cannot possibly be thought to be true or religious in any thing, nor to seek religion for religion, but faction and self will under the name of religion, let them say what they wil  
And this shall suffice for this chapter, where is nothing to be added about our minister O.E. for that he passeth over with utter silence all that the knight hath handled in this place, about the poisoning of king john, so as all the blame must light upon himself, his champion not presuming to make any defence at all for him. Now then let us pass to that which ensueth.   

THE SPEECH OF THE warder is defended where he calleth the way of salvation by only faith, the common Cart way of protestants, the truth of which doctrine is examined. CAP. XVI.  
AND thus have I followed Sir Francis and his Wastword throughout this second Encounter, foot by foot, and step after step, as you have seen, losing much time in answering many impertinent points that might have been overslipped and contemned, but that I would omit nothing in these two first Encounters, and now with the like patience will we hearken also to his conclusion of this second Encounter uttered by the Warder thus:  
Now than the knight having set down these four absurd grounds of religion in our name, 
Wardword Pag. 26.  feigned by himself, and acompanyed with so many other lies and falsehoods as you have heard, you shall see how he maketh his conclusion and triumpheth as though he had done somewhat of importance, these are his words:  

A fond conclusion.  Thus have you (saith he) the blind course they sought to breed us in, by debarring us the clear light of the holy written word of God, and the carelessness they sought to settle in us of all religion, by making it a thing impertinent to us, as though we had no souls to care for, etc. Thus saith the knight in his watchword whervuto the Warder answereth in these words.  
This conclusion to him that hath read the former foolish positions, with their confutations, may serve for some disport and recreation, to behold how this silly knight bestirreth himself upon castles builded in the air, by false imaginations and sottish apprehensions of his own, especially in a long ridiculous discourse that he maketh immediately upon these words in his book, where imagining that all goeth by pardons with us, and that pardons may be had for money he inferreth that all rich men may easily be saved in our religion, without any difficulty, & yet saith he, Christ taught us, that it was as easy for a Camel to pass through a needle's eye, as for a rich man to go to heaven, and so he marveleth how these things can stand together.  
To which I might answer, that it seemeth as easy to teach a bear to play upon a tabor, 
The knight understandeth not divinity.  as to learn Sir Francis to be a good divine, and that I would more easily take upon me to make a camel to go through a needles eye (in that sense that Christ spoke it) or any rich man in the world to enter into heaven (if he would follow my counsel) then to frame Sir Francis old head to understand the depth of Catholic religion.  
And therefore amidst his ridiculous doubts I leave him to his Ministers to resolve him, except he will determine to be a Catholic, repent, go to confession, and do satisfaction, for then his ghostly father by the penance he may chance to enjoin him, will let him see and feel, that all goeth not by pardons, nor yet by money among us; And that there is another straiter needles eye for him to enter (though he be rich) then the buying of pardons, if he will go to heaven after the Catholic manner, to wit by the 3. parts of penance before touched, contrition, confession, & satissaction, unto which course towards heaven God incline our knight, for otherways he will never come thither, seeing that the open and easy cartway of his only faith is far different from the needle's eye, & narrow path, that Christ speaketh of (in the gospel) as necessary to salvation.  
Thus endeth the Warder his second Encounter all which the knight letteth pass in peace, 
The controversy of justification by only faith.  until the very last words, of the open and easy Cartway of only faith, whereunto he maketh an assault as followeth: 
Waste. Pa. 75.  As for that which you blasphemously call (saith he) the open Cartway of only faith, you shall find a straiter & narrower passage, than you would bear the world in hand, if you conceive not an historical faith, which may be dead, but a true, lively and justifying faith, for though we be justified by faith only, apprehending Christ his obedience and merits, etc. Yet are we not justified by an only faith, such as is void and destitute of good works but in the person of them that are justified faith and good works are united & coupled together, though in the act of justifying they are severed, it being the proper duty of faith alone, as a hand to apprehend and take hold of Christ, etc.  
Thus he saith, and in these words he speaketh plain contradictories, and maketh a difference without a diversity as if a man man should say: albeit we hold that jack is john, 
Faith only & only faith.  yet must you not think that john is jack. Though we be justified (saith he) by faith only; yet are we not justified by an only, faith. But I would ask you (Sir) what doth sola fides signify▪ which are the very words of your solemn assertion, both out of Luther & Caluyn against Cath. doctrine sola fides iust●ficat, faith alone justifieth: doth not sola fides in the latin tongue signify rather faith alone, or an only faith, than faith only, which in the Latyn is expressed rather by the adverb fides folùm vel solummodò● And if this be true (as all gramers and lexicons will teach you that it is) then is your distinction (whereby you say that we are justified by saith only and not by an only saith) not only vain, but absurd also and against yourself, 
 who hold that sola fides justificat faith alone or an only faith justifieth. And thus much for the contradiction in your own words.  
But now if we go to the substance itself of the controversy, wherein some later Protestant's also do hold that good works are absolutely necessary to salvation, according to our knight's assertion in this place, you must understand the fraud of this shift which consisteth in this, 
The disagreeing of Lutherans & Caluenists about this controversy.  that whereas Luther the first founder of the proposition only faith justifieth, so defendeth the same, as he not only excludeth but detesteth and abhorreth both the concurrence & presence of any good works towards a man's salvation: some later Protestant's (especially Caluinists) being ashamed of the absurdity of the doctrine, and desiring withal to disgrace Luther, and his fellows in this point as in many others, have taken upon them to mitigate the matter, and to say, that albeit good works can help nothing indeed in the act of justification (and consequently also neither to salvation) yet they are necessary as fruits, and so necessary; as that no salvation can be without them, wherein though, in words they would seem to say somewhat, yet is it but a mere shift and evasion, and first contradicteth Luther and Lutherans plainly, whom they would make show to expound and interpret, and then it is evidently false also in itself as briefly I shall declare.  
And first touching the contradiction, which this new invention of Caluinists hath with the doctrine of their father Luther, 
●l●●c. Illyr. praefat. ad Rom. Pag. 634. 6●5. N●●●●pistae.  and their elder brethren the Lutherans; hear the matter set down clearly by Flaccus Illyricus himself their chiefest Centuriator; thus he saith.  
Now I come to the doctrine of the new Papists (so he calleth Sir Francis & his fellows that will bring in any necessity of works whatsoever) which is as pernicious as the old. They say that the Apostle means to exclude good works from justification non simpliciter sed ratione debiti, not simply but as due, but only as meritorious and causes efficient, whereupon these doctors or rather seducers, do divers ways elude that proposition of S. Paul, we are justified by faith gratis without works, each one according to his own ●ead, and as his private spirit suggesteth to him, and most of them covet diligently to mingle works, as a certain harmful leaven, with justification and the lamb of God, etc.  
And then again.  
But the true sense of Paul's words is, that without all merit, condition or necessity of our works by only faith in Christ, we are justified before Christ, and saved; so as our salvation doth in no sort depend of our works neither be they any way necessary to salvation, etc. Scripture, Luther, and all doctors of sound judgement think thus:  
Lo here Sir Francis you are called a new Papist by your elder brethren or rather godfathers for holding this opinion. You are called a seducer for only excluding works as meritorious and causes efficient of salvation, and not simpliciter, simply and every way. You are called an eluder of the proposition of S. Paul interpreting it by your private spirit other ways than he meant it, and different from the sense of Martin Luther and all doctor's of sound judgement. You are accused for coveting so diligently to mingle good works ●● a certain harmful leaven with justification and the lamb of God, defend yourself if you can from these arrows of your own men, and to the end you may do it better, and more properly to the purpose, hearken what the same writer saith of you and yours in the beginning of this very controversy.  
Some there are, who drowsily weighing the matter, ●●ink this to be the controversy properly between us and the Papists, 
Flac. Illyr. praef ad Ro. Pag. 636.  whether good works justify, or be the ●erit and cause efficient of justice and life, and not whether they be in any respect necessary to Salvation, etc. Lo Sir Francis you are one of these drowsy ●●llowes that understand not properly the controversy according to Illyricus his judgement, for ●ow say that works are in some respects necessary to salvation, to wit as necessary fruits and ●●●nesses, and that Salvation cannot be without them though not as any cause meritorious or efficient of justice.  
And thus much for the controversy itself, which S. Francis understandeth not. But if I would stand upon alleging the infinite sentences of other protestants quite opposite and contradictory to that flattery of good works which Sr. Francis here and in other places of his Wastword useth for deluding the people, I should never make an end, for in this they are as contrary one to another as in any other point.  
For first their grandfather Martin Luther that was the founder of this opinion and laid it for the foundation of all his new gospel: 
Lutheran speeches against góod works joined with faith.  sayeth Caveamus à peccatis, sed multò magis à legibu● & operibus bonis. Let us take heed of sin, but much more of laws and good works. 
Luther. serm. de novo testam. siuè de missa.  And according to this doctrine his scholars in a certain counsel say thus: adeò non esse necessari● opera bona, 
In colloq. Altemb. vid. Canis l. 1. de corrupt. verb. Dei. Cap. 10.  ut etiam ad salutem incommodent, sint● perniciosa. Good works are so far of from being necessary to salvation, as that they rathe● hinder, and are pernicious. And again in th● same. 
Ibid.  Precari nos oportet, ut in fide sine operib● omnibus bonis, usque in finem perseveremus: we mu●● pray that we may persever in faith without all good works unto the end.  
And finally to conclude Sr. Francis here, 〈◊〉 as he may not escape, 
Colloq. Altemberq. col. 4 fol. 75. & 76.  let us hear their conclu●sion which is in these words: After all this 〈◊〉 conclude with that worthy saying of Luther in his fi● Tom, printed at Wittenberg: If works be necessary salvation than salvation cannot be without works, & then we are not saved by only faith. This conclus●on we see, is plain contradictory to Sir Francis, which holdeth works needful in some respect, as before hath been showed, which contradiction Luther himself urgeth yet much more, 
Luth. tom. 1. prop●sil. 3.  when he saith: Fides nisi sit sine ullis etiam minimis operibus non justificat, imò non est fides. Faith if it be not without all good works, even the least that may be, it justifieth not, yea it is no faith. So as when Sir Francis annecteth good works to his Protestant faith, as a handmaid, without which faith is no faith; Luther on the contrary saith, that if this handmaid be there she killeth the mistress. And so enough of this contradiction which was the first absurdity of this Calvinian shift, to cover the nakedness of their bare faith, which Luther toileth to discover as fast, and will not have her covered, or as he saith: defiled with the ●ttenragges of any good works.  
To the second point of this Calvinian shift, ●hat works are necessary, 
The second point of Calvinian imposture about only faith.  but yet must not ●elp or cooperat any thing at all to our salvation, but only attend upon faith as a hand ●ayd so as faith only must save, but not faith ●lone, albeit that which I said in the beginning of the idleness of this devise and mathematical illusion be sufficient to overthrow it, ●nd the reasons of Luther and his Lutherans 〈◊〉 evident against it; yet may the vanity thereof 〈◊〉 seen also by this: that when a protestant hath the faith, that either Luther or Caluyn could teach him, and as vehement and fervent as both of them together if he should l●ue noughtly he can not by Sir Francis doctrine be saved, for that faith only saveth nor, Luther saith he hath the more faith for that, how do these two stand together?  
Again when we see thieves and murderers go to the gallows (as often is seen in England) with as strong a faith as any minister or preacher can have, & professing the the English faith, and religion openly singing our Psalms lustily and assuring themselves and the people that stand by, that they are o● the elect, and to go presently to, heaven, and that albeit their break fast of hanging b● sharp, yet shall their supper be sweet with th● Lord in his glory, which faith and assurance th● ministers standing by with the rest do approve and highly commend:  
Here now I would ask is this faith a goo● and saving faith or no, which these theeve and murderers have, or only historical, as Sy● Francis calleth it, for that it lacketh work● No protestant I suppose will deny it to be ● good and lively faith, and consequently a ● a justifying and saving faith, for that other ways those good saints that are thus ha●●ged should be deceived, or in doubt of the supper, which they are taught in no case ● do, but to rest most assured thereof, throu●● the merit of this faith, and yet can no m● say, that this their faith had fruits, or was a●●compained with good works. And consequently that either faith alone, and only faith, as well as faith only doth save these men after the manner that such good fellow Protestant's are saved, or else they are not saved at all, seeing works they had none.  
And this being so, that all malefactors whatsoever remaining in their wickedness may be saved by this only faith, 
The com●●● cartway of Protestants only faith.  as well as these that live well and have good works, yea much better, and more surely: (if we believe Doctor Luther) let the reader judge whether I rightly called it, an open easy cart-way or no. And so much of this controversy, whereof the minister also O.E. keepeth silence, and saith not a word in defence of his knight and master. And so shall we end this second whole Encounter.   

THE WARNING AND admonition about this second Encounter, first to Sir Francis Hastings, and then to O. E. his chaplain and champion. CAP. XVII.  
TO continue my former purpose & promise (Sir Francis) which was to recount with you, and briefly to lay out both to your own and your friends view, in the end of every encounter what principal points had passed between us in our combat, and how well or evil you had behaved yourself therein, I am now by way (as it were) of some short recapitulation to refresh your memory in that behalf, and thereby also to make matters more clear in the sight of our diligent and attentive reader.  
First then to pass on with some order, whereas at the very first entrance of the former encounter I complained of a certain shift of yours, that being charged with flattering her Majesty and the state of England, with so many new devised blessings, as you affirmed to have been brought in by change of Catholic religion, 
E●c. 1. cap. 2.  you did run presently to charge, canonists and Roman courteours with flattering also the Pope, so have I now the same complaint in the beginning of this second Encounter, that you being charged with divers notorious untruths uttered in your Watchword about the doctrine of catholics, avouching them to hold that which they hold not; you do use the very same shift by running to accuse friars, and telling us that in king Richard the 2. his time according to Tho. Walsingham, 
A common stift of S. Francis to accuse others for excusing himself.  Friars were brave liars, etc. which as if it were in all respects true, as you allege the story, it would be no just defence or excuse for your defaults in that kind, so the whole narration thereof being perverted in your allegation (as before we have declared) it must greatly diminish your credit, 
Cap. 2. num. ●. 7.13 etc.  for all the rest that was or is to ensue after from you.  
And this you treat (as it were) by way of preface or preparation to your poor defence of those untruths which are objected against you, wherein also you discredit yourself not a little by bringing in other impertinent and forged matters to fill up paper and help out withal, and among other of certain devised challenges of disputation said to be made on your side by john hus in the council of Constance, and by Martin Luther at Worms and Augusta, and by Simon Grinae●● at Spire, 
Protestant disputers.  and by Peter Martyr and Theodore Beza at the conference of Pa●sy in France, etc. In all which examples, there being discovered many untruths, as well in the narration itself, as in the application, and further declared, 
Cap. 3. & 4.  that none of all these five disputing champions alleged by you for founders, pillars, and defenders of your religion, church, and doctrine, were truly indeed of your religion in all points, and consequently also neither of your church, you wi● easily see, what credit you have gained by bringing them in.  
But when you come to your defence it self of the first two untruths objected against you, 
Cap. 5.  by the Warder, to wit, that we hold, reading of scriptures in any vulgar tongue, whatsoever for heresy, & that for this cause only we brandle men to the slaughter, how do you stand (Sir Francis) in this defence? do you bring any one sufficient proof at all, for any one of these two absurdities? The warder setteth down a plain & sensible discourse, how & in what languages, scriptures are permitted to all, as also why and upon what causes, reasons, arguments or utility, of what hurt or necessity our Church hath, or aught to make restraint or limitation thereof to some who are not to profit thereby? 
●eaping over the adversaries chief matter.  which considerations (containing indeed the substance and very sinews of this whole controversy) you (Sir knight) like a good Encounterer, do leap over without answering any one word, urging only against us for the second point of this controversy, that some of your people have been examined sometimes or called in question for suspicion of heresy, for that against order and commandment of their superiors, and without licence they have taken upon them to read and interpret the sacred scriptures in vulgar languages and that hereof followeth (say you) that we hold the very act itself of reading scriptures to be heresy, which how fond a sequel it is, every man of mean understanding conceiveth, and you are made ridiculous for this fond inference by divers examples alleged in other things more clear to all men.  
And then furthermore whereas it liketh you to be pleasant with the Warder, affirming that by adding (only) to your words (that for only reading of scriptures men were brandled to the slaughter) he made one lie of his own while he sought to prove the same against you the said one lie is redoubled upon yourself, by showing that, only is fond in your own words, and consequently, that this word only hath not proved one lie against the warder, but two or three lies against yourself.  
And all this (as I said) is handled in your preamble to this second Encounter, 
4 Forged maxims obtruded by the knight.  the bulk and corpse whereof consisteth (as you know) in the verifying of four other false propositions forged by yourself, & assigned for grounds rules, and Maxims of our Religion, which are nothing so, to wit that we hold ignorance to be the mother of devotion and that lay men must not meddle with matters of religion, and that the Pope or any Priest coming from him, is to be obeyed though he teach blasphemies: and finally that our chief remedy against all sins consisteth in buying of pardons, etc. In defence of which obtruded positions how you behave yourself, and what your carriage is, both by flying every where from the true state of the question, cogging & dissembling and bringing in other odd matters little or nothing concerning the controversy itself, and by other such sleights and fhifts, 
See cap. 7.9.12.14. etc.  I may not here stand to repeat again but do remit the Reader, to that which is written in every chapter of this affair, yet cannot I but put you in mind, & the Reader also, that all defaults may better be borne and digested, then wilful corruptions and falsifications of authors, whom you allege, I mean either in words you cite, or in sense when you allege them quite contrary to their own meaning, purpose and drift, as you are often showed to have done in sundry places, and upon fundry occasions, whereof some we shall take the pain to repeat briefly in this place, for better establishing the reader's memory about your manner of proceeding.  

divers author's abused.  First than you are showed in the second Chapter of this Encounter to have greatly abused the story of Th●. Walsingham, 
Cap. 2. nu. 7.8. etc.  in alleading him fraudulently about the lying of corrupted friars in K. Richard the 2. his time concealing craftily both the time & occasion of his writing and the men corrupted by Wicliffe, 
Cap. 3. n●. 3.4. & 5. etc.  of whom he wrote. And then immediately in the very next chapter, you are proved to offer no less injury to the authority of S. Bede, as though he should allow and testify the promiscuous reading of holy scriptures in vulgar languages in his days, the truth being nothing so, but rather the quite contrary appearing by his words, and no less violence are you declared to use in the same place to Arnobius an ancinent author, 
Ibid. 9 nu 7.  as though he had reproved the pious use of Christian Images, whereas indeed he speaketh only and expressly of idols made Gods among Gentiles, the title also of his book concealed by you, being Aduersus gentes.  
S. Chrisostome also is proved to have been egregiously misused by you in the 9 chapter, 
Cap. 9 nu. 1●.  not only by perverting his whole sense and meaning in the matter, for which you allege him, but by cutting of also and mangling his very words and sentences alleged; about which point, the Warder noteth no fewer, than 8. several abuses and falsifications in that place, and not unlike injury is showed to be offered also to Index expurgatorius Hispanicus in the same place, concerning the note objected by you in your answer, 
Cap. 9 nu. 15.  deleatur dictio solumodò in Gregory Nissen his sentence, where you both conceal the reason alleged by the Index of that deletion or putting out, to wit, for that it was an error in the copy and wholly from the author's argument, drift and meaning in that place, as also for that you father that sentence upon Gregory Nissene, which is none of his as there is showed.  
But of all other your dishonourable dealing (Sir Francis) in this kind of abusing authors; 
Cap. 10.  that doth most exceed, which you do use in the 10. Chapter against that holy renowned man S. Tho. of Canterbury, 
Falsifications against S. Tho. of Canterbury.  where you join perfidiously with john Fox your master (the most shameless corrupter of authors that ever perhaps took pen in hand) to disgrace that worthy Saint and Prelate, both in his person and cause with the king; and for that you are often taken & attainted of this trick throughout the whole said tenth chapter and in the other that ensueth (especially where you are showed to falsify most egregiously Caesarius Heislerbacius about S. Thom. his miracles) I shall not need to set down here more particulars, 
Cap. 11. nu. 12.13. etc.  but rather will end, putting you in mind only thereby to move you a scruple (if it might be) of these many and notorious corruptions and falsifications used by you, and your said schoolmaster john Fox concerning the feigned poisoning of king john by a monk, and the absolution for the fact before hand, in which narration there are so many shameless impostures used by you two combined companions in lying, 
About the poisoning of K. john sup. Cap. 15.  as I persuade myself the revewing thereof will make you blush, or at leastwayes your modest reader for you: & if he love his soul he will take heed of you and yours for the time to come. And so for brevities sake I will pass no further in this recital, but only use a word or two of advise to your proctor O.E. and so an end.  
Neither yet will I enter into any more particulars with him at this time, 
About the minister O. E.  for that this admonition would grow overlong, and I am full wearied already with repeating so much dross of corrupted minds, that have no conscience what they say or affirm: but yet assure yourself that this minister is far worse than the knight in shameless manner of proceeding, though somewhat more wary in citations, and he that will know him or take a scantling of his turbulent spirit in writing, let him read, the sixth, eight, and thirteen Chapters of this encounter, where he is dealt withal alone, and singled into his jerkin (to use his own phrase) and many of his tricks discovered and laid open, and if by this examen and by the rest of the former Encounter and the Epistles going before, the man come not to be sufficiently known, 
A new match for O. E. in hand.  then shall I remit me to that which after also is to ensue, especially in the several answer to his new challenges, which I understand some friend of mine, seeing my present lets & occupations is like enough to take in hand, and to buccle with him alone singulari certamine; which if my friend do perform, as O.E. himself desireth and craveth I dare fortel (having considered well the subject which they are to discuss) that O. E. willbe left in a very poor pickle, and made a ridiculous companion, as one that understandeth neither himself nor his adversary, nor the true state of the question he handleth, and if this prove not so (the match going forward) then let me be condemned both of temerity and vanity for making that prophecy so long before hand.  
And so to the proof I remit me, beseeching in the mean space the moderate and indifferent reader which hath care of his salvation, and readeth not so much for curiosity, contention or love to parts and faction, as sincerely to be instructed in matter of truth concerning religion, that he weigh seriously with himself what good meaning or conscience can there be in such men as use so many frauds and utter so manifest falsehoods, as in this our answer we have plainly demonstrated; and then (good reader) when thou hast once discovered this point of singular importance, which is, that truth indeed is not sought by them that pretend to seek truth, nor religion by them that treat of religion, but only that shifts are sought to make a show of saying ever somewhat, than I doubt not but thou wilt resolve with thyself, what is behooful for thee to do, for saving of thy own soul, not leaving it upon the waves of uncertain disputes and altercations of men, but staying it upon the sure rock of Christ's Catholic and visible Church, which is left and appointed as an infallible stay, for all men, whereunto I implore his heavenly grace and divine assistance.   

AN ADDITION BY the publisher of this book; wherein he showeth first a reason why these two Encounters are set forth alone: then the difference he findeth in the writers and their writings: thirdly how a man may use this which here is said to the decision of any Controversy of our tyme. CAP. XVIII.  
THREE things do I promise (good Christian Reader) as you see in the title of this my addition, which I shall endeavour to perform with the greatest brevity and perspicuity that I may. And as for the first, which is the reason why after the expectation of so many months, (wherein the defence of the whole eight Encounters, that lie in dispute between the watchman, and Warder, S. F▪ Hastings and N. D. should have appeared) we now set forth only two of the first. The cause ●nd reason of this is easily declared, for it was ●s followeth.  
More than a full year hath now passed ●ince the whole rejoinder of N. D. to Sir F. Hastings reply about the foresaid eight Encounters, and the remitter to the LL. of her majesties most honourable Council was en●●ed, 
The cause of delay.  and sent to be put in print: but then was ●here received a new advise, that another answer was in print also to the watch word, whose author was figured by the two letters ●. E. And albeit the work was said to be of such quality as it merited not a several answer (and much less the man) yet for that was not expedient, to let it pass without ●ome check of examination, the Warder N. ●. resolved to defer the publishing of his ●ormer work, until he might have a view of ●his book also, which being more hardly procured and longer expected then at the beginning was presumed, caused also the stay of ●his edition.  
But when at length it came to sight, and ●hat the author N.D. had taken it in hand to unswere jointly with the other of Sir Francis, intermingling and coupling them together, 〈◊〉 ●yow have seen by experience in these two encounters, 
The reason why these ● Encounters are set forth alone.  than fell there new difficulties & ●nterruptions, as namely divers months licknesse and divers other lets and impediments of unexpected business to the author, ●●d beside this the corpse of these two Encounters grew to so great a bulk, as of themselves they seemed to be sufficient for one book, especially considering the many difficulties that we have in printing greater volumes in these days, and all commodity of our own country prints, printers and other helps being debarred us.  
Wherefore upon these and other like reasons I began to deal effectually with the author of this work that he would be content to yield unto the publishing of these two Encounters alone, promising him that as the other should come to be ready and thoroughly polished (which I hope willbe very shortly) I would set them forth also either all together or two or three Encounters in a book, as these go according to the quantity or bigness which they shall grow unto. And this is so much as is needful to be said of this first point.  
The second also may be dispached with the like brevity, 
The 2. point of this addition.  which is about the difference of the writers and writings of these Encounterers, for so much as I do not mean to stand upon all differences observed by me in reading over their books, but to note some few only, referring me also in these to that which before hath been set down in the Encounters themselves, especially in the several admonissions and warnings ensuing upon every Encounter, and containing as it were a brief recapitulation of the whole, only then I will say that two notorious differences me thinketh I have observed in conferring these books and writers together.  
The first is touching truth and falsehood, plain dealing and shifting, 
The first difference about true dealing & falsehood.  discovered almost in every leaf of the former Encounters, which is a difference of somuch quality, as wheresoever it is found on the worse part it ought greatly to move, and make deep impression in the Reader, that is careful of his own salvation, for that the matters in controversy concerning true faith, being of the highest importance that may be to our soul and everlasting good or hurt, every man ought to be attended, & wheresoever he findeth falsehood or deceit to be wilfully and purposely intended, and that it cannot be excused by error or ignorance or heat of speech or other like infirmities there he ought to stay his foot & stand fast and not to pass further without firm resolution never to believe him again.  
And for that in all the reply both of Sr. F. and O.E. his defendant, I do not find that the Warder is so much as charged to my remembrance and much less convinced of any one such wilful falsification as before I have alleged, and that both the knight and minister are accused almost in every leaf of this crime, and that with such manifest proofs and demonstrations as I see not how possibly they can quite themselves: here hence I do infer that it importeth exceedingly every wise and discreet Reader to remember well this difference.  
Another difference also there is not a little to be marked in the very substance of their writings, 
The 2. difference, idle or profitable matter handled.  concerning the profit, or loss of time which the reader may reap by perusing them over, for that Sr. F. and O.E. if you look attentively into their books, do treat nothing either methodically or substantially throughout their replies but following the Warder up and down, do wrangle here and jangle there, taking exceptions against these or those words, without handling any one point learnedly or with substance throughout all their whole discourses, neither confuting sound their adversaries, nor confirming well their own parts, so as when a man hath red over their whole books, he remaineth, with more doubts and darkness, than before, feeling only his spirit of incredulity and contradiction more increased by this reading, but his brains more weakened and wearied, and his understanding less clear than before; and I appeal to the indifferent Readers testimony, whether it be so or no, whereof yet we that are Catholykes ought not to complain but rather in a certain manner to rejoice at these effects as less hurtful, for so much as it must needs drive many from reading their books and weary others, before they be half way in them, having neither order nor substance, and those that persever to the end remain as wise as before, proving the proverb to be true concerning these books: Ex stultis insanos.  
But on the other side I find all contrary for first I see that of a wild vagrant discourse which the watchman Sir F. made at the first under the name of a Watchword wherein there was neither head nor heel, 
S.F. wachword without order or substance.  top nor toe order nor coherence, but only a certain lose invective against all sort of catholic men and their religion, the Warder brought it into a good method of 8. several Encounters containing so many principal heads & branches of the dispersed points therein touched which the said knight and his Minister O. E. though they be drawn to follow in their replies, yet do they return again to thesayd vagrancy or inanity rather in the matters they handle, treating no one thing substantially as before hath been said, whereas the Warder by a contrary spirit draweth all things to some profitable & serious m●tter for the reader to make his gain thereof, 
The substantial dealing of the Warder.  by which industry of his are come to be handled so many weighty and important points of controversies as above in the table prefixed before these Encounters are to be seen, & albeit the brevity of this rejoinder would not permit to handle every one of them so largely as they might, yet is there sufficiently said thereof for framing any intelligent man's judgement therein or in any other points of controversy, as presently more at large shallbe declared.  
And further for a special proof of this point I had once purposed (besides the particular matters handled before) to have joined to these two Encounters a several Treatese of 3. conversions of our land from Paganism to Christian 
A treatese o● of 3. conversions of England.  religion by the special help of the Roman Sea and Bishops thereof, which treatese containing some 9 or 10. chapters was framed by the Warder in his rejoinder to the 7. Encounter against S.F. & his fellows, who deny or diminish by all means possible this singular benefit received from Rome, and for that this treatese (though but a parcel of the answer to that Encounter) liked me exceeding well, and seemed a thing worthy to be printed a part without expecting his place or turn, when the said 7. Encounter shallbe published, I had thought with licence of the author to have joined it to this work but being dissuaded afterward, and considering the treatese to be of ●ufficient bigness to go by itself alone I have so caused it to be printed, which I wish thee (gentle Reader) to procure & read with attention for that I doubt not but the variety of the matter therein handled will delight thee, and the clear deduction of Cath. faith from the beginning within this Island will greatly instruct thee, especially being conferred and compared, as it is, with john Fox his new Church brought down by leaps from one broken heretic to another, though never so different in time, place, function and other circumstances, yea though they were contrary to him and among themselves, in most points of their faith and belief.  
The third point mentioned before, is how any man, by that which is set down & disputed in these two Encounters, may resolve himself thoroughly in all matters that lie in controversy between us and Protestants at this day, 
The 3. point of this addition how to determine.  a point no doubt of very great importance if it be well considered, and greatly to be wished by all those that love their own salvation & do not read books as some are wont to do for curiosity, or passing only the time, but to profit thereby, and once to be resolved in that which is only truth & absolutely necessary to their eternal good, whereof so long as they remain doubtful, irresolute, wavering, and seeking only, they have no benefit, and consequently if they should die in that state their case no doubt were most dangerous and lamentable, they being in the number of them of whom S. Paul saith: 
2. Tim. ●.  semper discentes, & nunquam ad scientiam veritatis pervenientes, always learning, but never attaining to the knowledge of the truth.  
Moreover it is to be considered, that all men have not always such variety of books, as to see all controverses discussed therein, 
The dangerous estate of many in England at his day.  & if they had, yet have not all such leisure or learning to read or discuss all, nor capacity or understanding to discern or judge: so as if their everlasting salvation must depend of reading over all controversies, and making resolution upon the same, it must needs be impossible to many thousands both men and women in our country at this day to be saved, who have not either time or other fit means and abilities for the same as before we have said, and yet is it true, and most true which holy Athanasius in his creed authorized by the first council of Nice above a 1200. years ago, saith and pr●nounceth, and protestants do repeat the ●ame in their English Churches every sunday throughout the year: 
Athan. in Symbol Qu●cunque vult, etc. vers. 1. & 2.  that whosoever willbe saved, it is necessary for him before all other things to hold the Catholic faith, which faith except every man do keep wholly and inviolate without all doubt he shall perish everlastingly. Thus saith that creed showing us the dreadful danger of him that erreth, or doubteth of any one article of the Cathol. faith, which infinite people of England must needs do at this day, who have no other guide, direction, or certainty to bring them to resolve in matters of controversy, but either their own reading, or to believe some other as uncertain as their own judgement in this behalf.  
But on the other side, Catholic doctors considering the great and high importance of this point and that the far greater part of christian people that are in the world have not commodity to read controversies by themselves, 
 nor capacity to judge thereof, and yet (according to S. Athanasius and the council of Nice) cannot be saved, except they believe all and every part and parcel of the Catholic faith, they have taught them another more short and sooner way left by Christ and his Apostles, for avoiding this gulf of damnation, which way is to know and believe fide explicita, that is, 
● E●c. 2. ca 7.  clearly and distinctly (as before is declared) the chief points of Cathol. faith, and all the rest fide implicit●, by an implied faith, in that they believe the holy Catholic Church, and all that she believeth, which implieth so much as is necessary to any man's salvation. And how sure and safe a way this is, you have heard out of S. Augustine 
* Ibid. cap. 7.  before that simplicity of believing maketh the common people most safe.  
Wherefore according to this self-same way also, 
The short & sure way of Cath. belief.  the said Catholic doctors do teach us how that in these troublesome and contentious times of disputes and controversies, a man that is in errors or doubts may come to be a perfect Catholic in resolving himself upon the truth of very few particular questions and controversies, believing the rest in general terms, and being ready to accept and admit whatsoever the Catholic Church doth ●each albeit he be not yet instructed in the particulars, nor knoweth the arguments that be on both sides, nor be able to solve them, but desireth to be instructed as time and occasion shallbe offered thereunto.  
To this resolution when any man arriveth, and is content in these things which he knoweth not, to follow the council of S. Paul, 
2. Cor. 10.  which is to captivate his understanding to the obedience of Christ and his faith, taught in the Catholic Church, he is now at a good stay, and may be held for a sound Catholic though in many particular points, he know not the reasons to and fro, but may afterward inform himself as time and ability, and other occasions shall permit him: standing fast and firm in this principle that he will not guide his faith by his own judgement knowledge or persuasion, nor of any other particular man, but only by the received sentence, and determination of that visible Catholic Church, 
Matth. 16. joh. 14. Marc vlt. 1. Tim. 3. 1. joh. 2.  to whom only Christ hath promised the assurance of his holy spirit, and in which Church though his promise of divine help were not, yet are there so many human helps of true knowledge also, considering their number, universality, continuance, descent, and consent, as every wise man would rather cast himself upon them, then upon any particular sect of new upstarts that want all these helps, and agree neither with themselves nor others.  
Well then you will ask me perhaps; what are those few principal points, which being well understood would suffice to make a man a good Catholic? Whereto I answer with S. Augustine and other holy Fathers, that one only were sufficient if a man hold it perfectly, 
Aug. lib. 2. ca 25. cont. Ep. G●●dentij Ecl. 3. c. 64. contra Cres.  which is to renounce his own fancy, and to believe the visible and universal christian Church, and all that she believeth and teacheth us to believe, as before we have declared, and for that between us and protestants the question is moved (though with little or no probability at all on their side) which and where is the Catholic christian Church at this day, I may refer the reader to divers substantial treateses handled in this book before, whereby he may easily resolve himself in that matter.  
As for example the Treatese before set down in the beginning of the first 
* Cap. 2.  Encounter, who are properly catholics, and who are heretics by the old laws of ancient Catholic Emperors made expressly against heretics. And if it so fall out, 
Who are Catholykes.  that all points set down in those laws do agree fully to protestants and nothing at all to us that are called catholics at this day, but rather that we agree fully with those that then were called Catholics, and distinguished by that name and nature, then is it evident where the Catholic Church standeth, seeing that the body of Catholic people maketh the true Catholic Church.  
In like manner, there is another treatese in the same Encounter about, 
About the rule of faith.  The rule of faith whereby men ought to be guided in all contro●ersyes, doctrines and disputations, 
Enc. 1. ca 15. & 16.  yea as S. Paul saith in the exposition of scriptures themselves, 
Rom. 12.  which rule being nothing else but the very corpse or body of christian belief, left by Christ and his Apostles, and carefully defended from age to age by the Fathers and doctors of all times unto ours; if this rule be proved to be only among us Roman catholics, as it is, and that the protestants of our days have neither this nor any other certain rule at all of agreement in faith, beside the particular decrees of several countries where this or that sect doth bear sway: then is it evident, that where this certain rule i● found, there is the true Catholic Church, 〈◊〉 no where else, for that unto her only this rul●● was delivered to be kept unuiolate unto th● world's end, for it is the depositum, pawn, o● pledge, 
2. Tim. 6.  so carefully commended by S. Paul t● Timothy, and by him to all Catholic bishop● for ever.  
Again whereas the Catholic Church 〈◊〉 faith is but one, and we demonstrate, that th● same hath continued by succession in the Roman Church for fifteen hundred years 〈◊〉 more, 
Enc. 1. c. 3.4. & 5.  without disagreeing in any one article of faith once defined; 
Union and Succession.  and that the Protestant have not been able to hold this unity of one and the self-same doctrine among their offspring forlesse than 50. years together, bu● that maugre their masters teeth their successors divided themselves into different opposite sects of Lutherans, Anabaptists, Swinglian● Caluinists Brownists, and the like (a thing proper to all heresies, as holy Fathers do note most evident it may be, on which part the Catholic Church standeth, and God with her● who is God of unity and not of division.  
And lastly not to be overlong in this matter nor to seek many examples, 
False & true dealing.  the principal point handled throughout all the second Encounter, touching falsityes, falsehoods, falsifications, fictions and other notorious wilful corruptions used by these two protestant writers, the knight and his minister, in defence of their bad cause, do easily testify of what Church they be, and any one of these things well considered and maturely pondered is sufficient to make any man resolve himself that hath discretion to discern, or care to procure his own salvation.  
FINIS.  
The end of the second Encounter.    

THE THIRD TABLE OF CERTAIN NOTORIOUS SHIFTS, SLIEGHTES, DECEITS and impostures used by Sir F. and O. E. in their answers and replies.  
MANY and sundry are the devices, sleights and shifts which the poverty and necessity of the protestant cause doth force he●● def●nders to seek out and use for some show of probable defence when they are pressed, as throughout this whole book you will find noted and observed. Here only we shal● make a certain brief Catalogue of the most ordinary and known shifts, that do every where occur, and by them you may guess of the rest, and of our protestants whole manner of writing and answering our books.  
The first is to pass over and dissemble with silence the principal and most substantial points of their adversaries writings and to answer more largely other points that are of far less difficulty, whereof the reader shall find many complaints made by us, throughout this whole work.  
The second shift is, when the whole matter cannot be dissembled nor put of by silence, then to give as it were a nod unto it, answering it only in general by a word or two, and then to pass on as though all were sufficiently answered, whereof you shall find store of examples noted by us in this our answer.  
A third shift is, when they are charged with any fault committed, not so much to defend themselves, as to accuse others of the like fault on out side, as though this did clear them, as for example when Sir F. in the first Encounter is argued for absurd flattering her Majesty and the State, he telleth us again, for his excuse, that Canonists in Rome, do much more flatter the Pope. And again in the second Encounter, when he is accused to avouch many lies, he objecteth to us again, that Friars were brave liars in king Richard the 2. his days, and other such like.  
A fourth shift, is running behind the cloth of State, to wit when out adversaries having the time and state favourable unto them, do upon every little occasion, cover themselves with that buckler. As for example when they have be haved themselves in temperately against us in words, and do either fear or feel a round reply, they step presently behind the cloth of state putting● both her Majesty & the common wealth between them and us; as though we might not answer them, but by impugning the other.  
The fifth shift is to repeat their adversaries words still with some untruth or advantage, altering the same for their purpose and yet setting them down in a different letter, as though they were their own words, of which fraud I am forced to complain often though more of the minister then of the knight in this behalf.  
The sixth shift is, that when they name authors, and allege their testimonies against us, and yet would be lo●h to have them examined, their custom is never lightly to quote book, work or chapter, but only the author in general, leaving to us to seek out, where it is to be found, why, how, or in what sense it was spoken, if it were spoken at all:  
The seventh shift is to allege authors contrary to their own meaning, and to their whole discourse and purpose, which could not be unknown to them, that alleged them; And this is very malicious dealing and oftentimes used as after you shall see proved.  
The 8. shift, or deceit, or rather imposture is, not only to allege authors against their own intentions, but wittingly also to corrupt their very words, & text, leaving out somethings and adding, and altering others, as by examination you shall find.  
The ninth shift is a kind of bold impudence in denying things notoriously known to all men. As for example to deny (as Sir F. and O. E. do) that there is any substantial point of difference in religion, between Lutherans, Suinglians & Caluinists: or that the Protestants of our time have been troublesome or rebellious against their lawful Catholic princes, or that there is any division at all, or disjunction between Puritans and protestants in England. And the like.  
The tenth shift is impertinent and ridiculous answering matters wholly from the purpose, as for example the question being whether England be blessed at this day by change of Catholic religion? Sir F. answereth that she was once blessed, though she be not now. And many other such examples you shall find.  
The eleventh shift is, to allege rather matter expressly against themselves and their fellows, when they are sore pressed, then to seem to say nothing: As when O.E. allegeth the constitution of Archbishop Arundel in England, about reading scriptures in a vulgar tongue quite contrary to himself. And again the same man having seen and read, that Sir F. in the 6. Encounter affirmeth S. Augustine to have said, that it never pleased any good man in the Church, that heretics should be put to death, yet he allegeth S. Augustine to the contrary, as praising the punishing of heretics by the Imperial laws; and such other like.  
The tweluth and last shift (for I will go no further) is plain cozenage, falsifying and lying, and this upon every occasion: whereof there are so many offered, and the kinds and forms are so divers, as it were overlong to allege particular examples for every one, yet by those few that do ensue, the reader may make a guess of the rest, especially if they should be taken out of all the eight Encounters, as those that follow are out of two only.  

Examples of false dealing.  
ENcont. 1. cap. 2. n. 7.8, etc. Sir Francis wilfully abuseth Panormitan, and wittingly slandereth other Canonists, affirming them to say, Dominus noster Deus Papa, etc.  
Enc. 1. cap. 9 n. 3.4.5.6, etc. Sir F. falsifieth and notably abuseth two places, the one of S. Hierome, the other of S. Augustine to prove thereby public service in vulgar languages, which neither of them ever meant.  
Enc. 2. cap. 2. n. 9 Sir F. abuseth Thom. Walsingham against his own meaning, and deceiveth therewith his reader deceitfully, accusing friars to be liars, not telling that they were corrupted by Wickliff.  
Enc. 1. cap. 3. n. 10. 11, etc. O. E. falsely affirmeth Augustinus Stenchus to have written against the donation of Constanryne, and therein to have adored the Pope as God, both points being notorious lies.  
Enc. 2. cap. 3. n. 4. 5, etc. Sir F. corrupteth the authority both of S. Bede and Arnobius by alleging them both against their own meaning: the first for service in the vulgar tongue, the second against images.  
Encount. 2. cap. 8. n. 2. & 3. A famous cozening trick of O. E. is to be found, where he allegeth the words of S. Hilary for the words of Hosius, thereby to make them less esteemed.  
Encount. 2. cap. 8. num. 4. Another shameful deceit of the same O. E. is discovered, in alleging Tertullian his words for the words of Hosius to the same fraudulent end.  
Encount. 2. cap. 9 n. 8.9.10, etc. Sir F. perverteth maliciously without all conscience a discourse of S. Chrisostome about reading scriptures in vulgar languages.  
Enc. 2. cap. 10.11.17.18.19. & deinceps, Intolerable false dealing of Sir F. john Fox and O. E. concerning S. Thomas of Canterbury.  
Enc. 2. cap. 13. n. 18. A notable cozenage of O. E. in citing a Canonist, making him to say; that no man must say to the Pope. Domine cur ita facis? Lord why do you so?  
Enc. 2. cap. 14. n. 24. O. E. abuseth egregiously Cardinal Bellarmine, and others, in citing them about pardons.  
Enc. 2. cap. 11. n. 14.15.16. A shameful corruption used by S.F. and john Fox in alleging the authority of Caesarius, against the miracles of S. Thomas of Canterbury.  
Encount. 2. cap. 12. num. 12. Sir F. convinced of a notorious wilful calumniation about our ladies conception.  
Encount. 2. cap. 14. num. 23.24, etc. Sir F. abuseth Dura●d in alleging him about pardons.  
Enc. 2. cap. 15. n. 3.4, etc. A notorious imposture of Sir F. and john Fox about the devised poisoning of King john by a monk.    

THE FOURTH TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL PARTICULAR MATters contained in this book.  


A.  
ANGELS whether they may be prayed unto. Enc. 2. cap. 6. num. 8.  
Archbishop of Aix, a most learned prelate greatly abused by S. F. and john Fox. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 21.  
Arnobius abused by S. Francis, as though he spoke against Christian Images. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 17.  
Augustinus Stenchus falsified by O. E. the minister. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 10. & 11.  
S. Augustine abused greatly by S. Francis. Enc. 1. cap. 8.    


B.  
BAssinet a French Apostata friar made Doctor by Fox and S. Francis. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 20.  
S. Bernard his judgement of the Pope's titles of honour. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 15.  
S. Bernard his sentence touching man's merits and God's grace. Enc 1. cap. 10. num. 8. & 9  
About a Cath. man beyted in a bears skin. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 4.  
S. Bede his testimony notably abused by S. Francis. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 4.  
Blessings of England by the new gospel, are not present but past according to S. F. Enc. 1. cap. 2. num. 15.  
Blessings of Protestants religion of 2. sorts and neither of them true. Enc. 1. cap. 4. num. 4.  
Blessings of unity among protestants. Enc. 1. cap. 4. per totum. Item the blessings of Reading service in English. Enc. 1. cap. 8. per totum.  
Item the 4. and 5. blessings: abundance of good works, and freedom from persecution. Enc. 1. cap. 10. per totum. Five other blessings. Ibid. cap. 11. & 12.  
Bookeseller of Avignon put to death for heresy. Enc. 2. cap. 5. num. 5.  
No books of old heretyks have remained to posterity and why? Enc. 2. cap. 9 num. 19  
Buccanan the Scottish Caluinist, what desperate doctrine he teacheth about deposition of Princes. Enc. 1. cap. 6. num. 3. & 4.    


C.  
CAyetan Card. beguiled by Luther's flattery at Augusta. Enc. 2. cap. 4. num. 3.  
Caluyn, how he raileth against Lutherans. Enc. 1. cap. 5. n. 5.  
What himself is called by Hesshusius, ibid. n. 7. and by Ochinus and Westphalus, ibid.  
Who are true catholics at this day according to the decrees of Ancient christian Emperors, observat. n. 17. 18.19, etc.  
Catholic faith manifestly deduced and demonstrated against new sectaries by the decrees of ancient Emperors, observat. n. 27.28.29. etc.  
Charles the Emperor his decree and determination about Luther after he had heard him. Enc. 2. cap. 4. nu. 8.  
Chemnitius his censure of English religion. Enc. 1. c. 5. n. 9.10, etc.  
S. Chrisostome his testimony of priest's authority. Enc. 1. cap. 3. n. 13.  
Communion-book of English protestants, how it is esteemed by the Puritans. Enc. 1. cap. 6. n. 9  
Commons and nobility miserably corrupted by Wicliffes' doctrine. Enc. 2. cap. 2. n. 10.11, etc.  
Clanmer and Cromwel's actions against Q. Anne Bullen. Enc. 1. cap. 3. n. 7.  
Cursing brought in by the new ghospellers in steed of blessings. Enc. 1. cap. 12. per totum.  
Eight temporal curses or maledictions ensued by the change of Religion in England. Enc. 1. cap. 18. per totum.    


D.  
Darkness devised by S. F. and pitifully described to be in the Cath. Church. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 15.  
Devotion whether she be the daughter of ignorance or no? Euc. 2. cap. 7. num. 3.4. etc. What true devotion is, ibid. num. 17. How devotion may be hindered more by a known, than an unknown tongue Encount. 2. cap. 7. num. 18.    


E.  
Earl of Essex pitifully seduced by Puritans. Notes upon the epist. of S. F. num. 5. & 6. Item of the same observat. num. 5. The hope of his followers and of O. E. the minister in particular. Enc. 1. cap. 13. num. 13.  
Emperors Christian their laws and decrees against heretyks, do touch protestants and not Catholyks, obseru. num. 10.  
English Religion what it is according to Chemnitius. Euc. ●. cap. 5. num. 10.  
English service, no blessing to the common people, but rather unprofitable and hurtful to devotion. Enc. 1. cap. ●. num. 7.  
Erasmus what he saith of the protestants good lives in his tyme. Euc. 1. cap. 10. num. 1.2.3. etc.    


F.  
FIdes explicitae and implicita, how necessary the disjunction thereof is to be known. Enc. 2. cap. 7. num. 7.3. etc. More things needful to be believed by some men, then by others. ibid. num. 10.  
Fox taken in plain calumniation. Enc. 1. cap. 11. num. 4.  
Fox defendeth the most dangerous doctrine of john hus about deposing of Princes. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 24.  
Friars how deceitfully they are proved to be liars in K. Richard the 2. his tyme. Euc. 2. cap. 2. num. 3.   

S. Francis Hastings.  
His Puritanical presbytery at Cadbury, and their ilfa●ored names. In the answer entitled, certain notes numb 4.  
He will not tell plainly whether he be a puritan or no. ibid. nu. 7. & Enc. 1. cap. 12. nu. 7.  
He flieth the true combat in the first Encounter. Enc. 1. cap. 1. num. 6.  
He deviseth 10. new fresh blessings of his gospel. Enc. 1. cap. 1. num. 4.  
He agreeth not in his blessings with O. E. the minister and his Champion, but ridiculously differeth from him. ibid. num. 8.  
He is contrary to himself. Enc. 1. cap. 2. num. 14.  
He leapeth over four parts of five of his adversaries argument. Enc. 1. cap. 12. num. 1. And when he speaketh he saith nothing of the points of most importance. Ibid. num. 6. Et Enc. 2. cap. 8. num. 6.  
He denieth division or difference between puritans and protestants. ibid. num. 6.7. etc.  
He excuseth his own lying by the lying of friars in K. Rich. the 2. his tyme. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 6.7.8. etc.  
He abuseth the testimony of Walsingham notoriously in the former place.  
He doctoreth Bassanet an Apostata friar and disableth the Archb. of Aix. Ibid. num. 20.21. etc.  
He is taken with falsehood, in that he allegeth of john Husse his condemnation in Constance. Enc. 2. cap. 3. as also about Luther's disputation in Augusta, and Worms. ibid. cap. 4.  
He is worthy to lie for the whetstone. Enc. 2. cap. 5. n. 11.  
He perverteth S. Chrysostome notoriously about reading scriptures in vulgar tongues. Enc. 2. cap. 9 nu. 8.9. etc.    


G.  
D. Gifford deane of Lisle defended. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 16.    


H.  
HEshufius, a German Lutheran calleth Caluyn and Beza Epicures of Geneva. Enc. 1. cap. 5. num. 7.  
Heretyks, who are at this day according to the sentence of Ancient Christian Emperors, observat. num. ●8.  
Heretical writers, their confusion and vanity in writing discovered. Enc. 1. cap. 1. num. 8.9. etc.  
S. Hierome his words much abused by S. F. Enc. 1. c. 9 n. 2.  
His great humility in subjecting his judgement to Pope Damasus. Enc. 1. cap. 16. num. 18.  
S. Hilary his judgement of the Pope's heavenly authority. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 14.  
Hosius egregiously abused & falsified. Enc. 2. c. 8. n. 2.3. etc.  
Host●ensis abused by S. Francis. Enc. 1. cap. 2. num. 7.  
hus and his whole cause examined in the council of Constance. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 15.16.17. etc. His dangerous doctrine, that, No man is a Prince, prelate or Magistrate while he is in mortal sin. Ibid. num. 17. Two famous heretical lies proved there against him. ibid. num. 20.  
Husse contrary to S. F. in doctrine E●c. 2. cap. 3. nu. 21.  
hus his doctrine rejected by Luther for ever and ever. ibid. num. 22.  
hus his leather breeches kept at this day for relics among the Huss●ts in prague. ibid. num. 24.    


I.  
IDolatry and Idolatrors agreeing only to heretics in the Christian Church, observat. n● 1●. 12; etc.  
Ignorance, whether she be the mother of devotion. Enc. 2. cap. 7. n. 3.4, etc.  
Index Expurgatorius, why and how it is to be made▪ Enc. 2. cap. 9 n. 21.22, etc.  
justification, how greatly Lutherans and Caluinists do disagree about the same, whether it be by works or faith only. Enc. 2. cap. 16. n. 8.9.10, etc.    


K.  
KIng john feigned by protestants to have been poisoned by a monk, against the testimony of all antiquity. Enc. 2. cap. 15. n. 3.4.5, etc.  
Knocks founder of Caluinisme in Scotland. His wicked & dangerous doctrine about the deposition of Princes● Enc. 1. cap. 6. nu. 3.4.5. etc.    


L.  
LAteran Counsel falsified by the minister O. E. Enc. 1. cap. 13. num. 10.  
Lay-men, whether they be forbidden by Catholyks to meddle in matters of religion. Enc. 2. cap. 7. And more largely cap. 9 per totum.  
Lies historical and doctrinal how they differ. Enc. 2. ●ap. 2. num. 3.  
Lutherans and Sacramentaries, their war one against the other. Enc. 1. cap. 5.4. etc. per totum.  
Luther his judgement and sentence of the Sacramentaries. ibid. cap. 5. num. 1. & 2.  
Luther what manner of man he was according to the judgement of Zwinglians and Caluinists. Enc. 1. cap. 5. num. 5.  
Luther Canonised by john Fox. ibid. num. 4.  
Luther's prophecy of the destruction of protestants especially, Caluinists, by division amongst themselves. Enc. 1. cap 7. num. 4.  
Luther his going to Angusta and Worms and dealing there. Enc. 2. cap. 1. num. 8.  
Luther his condemnation by the Emperor and his council, wherein he was said, to be a devil and not a man. Ibid. n. 8.  
Luther writeth of himself, that one cried to him: Beatusventer, qui te portavit, etc. Ibid. n. 9    


M.  
Martyr's tombs frequented with great devotion by christians in Rome in S. Hieromes tyme. Enc. 1. c. 9 n. 3.4. etc. what diligence was used in old time in registering the lives of martyrs and the days of that suffefering. Enc. 2. cap. 11. n. 5. What manner of martyrs Fox setteth down of his Church, the one contrary to the other in belief. Enc. 2. cap. 11. n. 8.9.10.11. etc.  
Mass and the sacrifice thereof confessed by antiquity. Enc. 1. cap. 13. n. 12.  
Mass in the latin tongue and fruit of the hearing thereof, though it be not understood by the people. Enc. 2. cap. ● n. 6.7, etc.  
Merits of good works, what they are, and how they may stand with God's grace and Christ's merits. Enc. 1. cap. 10. num. 6.7. etc.  
Miracles of S. Thomas of Canterbury and the authentical proof thereof. Enc. 2. cap. 11.  
Miracles how fond and heathen-like they are jested at by protestants. Enc. 2. cap. 11. num. 20.  
Miracles defended by S. Ambrose & S. Augustine. Enc. 2. cap. 11. num. 26.27. etc.    


N.  
NObility and commons corrupted pitifully by Wickliff his doctrine. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 10.11 etc.    


. O.  
OBedience spiritual to the Pope may stand with temporal to the Prince. observat. num. 5.  
Ochinus that taught in England in K. Edward his days his sentence of Caluyn and Beza. Enc. 1. cap. 5.   

O. E. Minister.  
His extreme pride malice and folly: In the answer to his epistle.  
He is proved a noddy, by spelling the word Noddy. ibid.  
He is described what fellow he is. ibid.  
He is a bloody fellow, poor and needy, and hopeth for scraps by other men's ruin, observat. num. 1.2. etc.  
He is proved to be a notorious firebrand of sedition. observat. num. 7.  
He excuseth his railing, by confessing it to be weakness in him. obseru. num. 37.  
The manner of his writing is laid open, as impertinent; impudent and impotent. Enc. 1. cap. 1. num. 7.  
He is showed to be a most shameless and impudent flatterer. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 23.24. etc.  
He is proved also to be a true Oedipus and hungry parasite ibid. num. 6.  
He is desperate in denying when he is pressed, saying among other things, that there is no division at all among Protestants. Enc. 1.  
He damneth his ancestors that were Catholyks, as having only the bare name of Christians. Enc. 1. cap. 13. n. 6.  
His contemptuous speeches of Luther and Caluyn together with plain Atheism. Enc. 1. cap. 17. num. 10. 11.12. etc.  
He braggeth that he will go to Syvil or Paris to dispute with Catholyks, if he may have leave. Enc. 2. cap. 4. n. 22.    


P.  
PAnormit●● & Hostiensis two learned Canonists greatly abused by S. F. Enc. 1. cap. 2. num. 17.  
Parliament what it may do in matters of Religion, and did both in Q. Mary and K. Edward's times. Enc. 1. cap. 16. num. 8.9. etc.  
Pardons, and for what sins they are used by Cath. doctrine. Enc. 2. cap. 14. num. 6.7. etc. and to whom they are available, ibid.  
F. Pa●sons defended against the raging malice of the minister O.E. Books and treateses written by him. In Epist. to O.E.  
Persecution against Catholyks. Enc. 1. cap. 10. num. vlt.  
Ples●is Mornay his lies discovered before the K. of France. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 3.  
Poysy colloquy or conference between Catholyks and protestant ministers. Enc. 2. cap. 4. num. 12. The dissolution of the Protestant ministers in that meeting ibid. n●m. 16. Their dissension in points of Religion ibid. nnm. 19 The good that came by that disorderly meeting and conference, ibid.  
Popes their most honourable titles taken out of aunc●nt Doctors. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 13.14. etc.  
Prayer to Saints. Enc. 2. cap. 6. num. 8.  
Priest's authority in absolving sins according to Chrisostome. Enc. 1. cap. 3. num. 13.  
Protestants and Puritans how they agree in Christ crucified, & what comfort they take one of the other. Notes upon the epist, of S. F. num. 8.9.10. etc.  
Protestants more divided then before by their synods and counsels. Enc. 1. cap. 4. num. 12.  
Protestants books and writings one against the other in general Enc. 1. cap. 5 & 6. per totum.  
Protestants shall perish finally by division among themselves according to Luther's prophecy. Enc. 1. cap. 7. nu. 4.  
Protestants of how good life commonly they be according both to Erasmus and Luther. Enc. 1. cap. 10. num. 1.2.3. etc.  
Protestant clergy, poor and miserable. Enc. 1. cap. 11. num. 3.  
Puritans fear greatly toleration of Cath. Religion, and why? notes upon the Epist. of S. F. num. 8.9.10. etc.  
Puritans books and judgements against English Protestants. Enc. 1. cap. 6. per totum.  
Puritans do complain grievously of protestants for persecution. Enc. 1. cap. 10.  
Puritan and Protestants contempt of their own Doctors, when they make against them. Enc. 1. cap. 17. nu. 13.14. etc.    


R.  
ROman faith and the practice thereof in visiting martyrs sepulchres in S. Hieromes tyme. Enc. 1. cap. 9 nu. 3.4. etc.  
Religious men corrupted by Wickliff. Enc. 2. cap. 2. num. 10.11. etc.  
Rule of faith what it is among Catholyks, & that protestants have none at all, whereby to have any certainty. Enc. 1. cap. 14. per totum.  
What Rule of faith O. E. doth appoint by the parliament of England, and what authority the Parliament hath or may have in that case. Enc. 1. cap. 15. per totum, & cap. 16. num 8.    


S.  
SAcrifice of the mass acknowledged by ancient Fathers, by the Magdeburgians own confession. Enc. 1. cap. 13. num. 13.  
Saints, what process is needful in the Cath. Church for their Canonization. Enc. 2. cap. 11. num. 15.16.17. etc. Fox-made Saints not comparable to Pope-made Saints. Ibid.  
Saint's blood and merit, how it may be named in our prayers to God. Enc. 2. cap. 12. num. 9  
Scriptures expounded diversly by protestants and Puritans one contrary to the other. Enc. 1. cap. 6. num. 11.  
Scripture Reading in vulgar tongues hath been occasion of ruin to many of the simpler sort. Enc. 1. cap. ●. num. 2.3. etc.  
Scriptures in the vulgar tongue permitted in England with moderation and licence in former ages. Enc. 2. cap. 3. num. 7. See the same handled more largely. ibid. cap. 6. nu. 14.15. Et cap 9 per totum. Intricate dealing of heretics about understanding of Scripture. ibid. cap. 6. num. 22. who are properly Lucifugi scripturarum, heretics or Catholyks? ibid. num. 25. How Scriptures must be interpreted. ibid. nu. 26. How the jews of Berrea did read the Scriptures act. 17. Enc. 2. cap. 9 num. 4.  
Sectaries sprung up from Luther; and their divisions among themselves. Enc. 1. cap. 4. num. 7.8. etc.  
Sectaries burned by Protestants when they are against them, though they condemn burning by the Catholyks. Enc. 1. cap. 8. num. 3.4. etc.  
Stankarus a Polonian Sectary. His contumelious words against Peter Martyr, Bullinger and others. Enc. 1. cap. 5. num. 6.  
Synods and Counsels held by Protestants with more disagreement than before. Enc. 1. cap. 4. num. 11. & 12. etc.    


T.  
S. Thomas of Canterbury, how egregiously he is abused by S. F. and john Fox. Enc. 2. cap. 10. nu. 17.18.19.20.21. etc.  
S. Thomas his constancy much like to that of S. Ambrose and Nazianzen and other Bishops with their Princes. Ibid. num. 13.14. etc.  
S. Thomas his Miracles and how authentical they are pro●ed. Enc. 2. cap. 11. per totum.    


V  
Virtue, what effects thereof hath new religion brought into England. Enc. 1. cap. 18. n. 2.  
Unity between Protestants and Puritans what? note● upon the ep. of S. F. n. 9.10. etc.  
Union of doctrine among Protestants what it is, and how falsely affirmed by Sir F. Enc. 1. cap. 4. n. 3.4.5.6, etc. No means of union among Protestants, ibid. n. 10.  
Unity in Catholic Religion in S. Bedes time among different and opposite nations, that were in war with themselves: A great argument for the truth of that religion. Enc. 2. cap. 3. n. 5.6. etc.    


W.  
War of Protestants among themselves in matter of doctrine. Enc. 1. cap. 5. per totum.  
Westphalus, what he saith against Caluyn and Caluynists, Ibid. n. 5.  
Good works are not only not profitable but pernicious also to salvation and justification, as Luther holdeth. Enc. 1. cap. 10. n. 3. About good works what is the Catholic doctrine, ibid. n. 6. & Enc. 2. cap. 16. n. 11.12, etc.  
Wickliff his doctrine, what horrible stir it made in England at the very beginning. Enc. 2. n. 10.11.12, etc.  
Wickliff, not only made a saint by john Fox but a martyr also, though he died in his bed. Encont. 2. cap. num. 13.     

THE FIRST TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS OF THE FIRST ENCOUNTER.  
A Brief Summarie of all that before hath been said, or now is to be added about this first Encounter of blessings, & cursings by change of Catholic religion. 
Cap. 1.  Of the first charge of flattering the state of England, laid to Sir Francis, and of his own contradiction to himself therein, about the devised blessings of his new gospel. 
Cap. 2.  Proctor O. E. is called up the stage to tell his tale, & to help out Sir Francis in this matter of flattering the state, and how he playeth his part far worse, and more ridiculously than the knight himself. 
Cap. 3.  Of ten new devised blessings brought in by Sir. F. as peculiar to his gospel; whereof the first is union in doctrine, termed by him, unity, in verity, And how false and vain this is. 
Cap. 4.  ●he same matter is prosecuted, and the disunion of Protestants is proved, and declared by divers other means, out of their own books and writings especially of foreign Protestants Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Caluenists. 
Cap. 5.  The continuation of the same narration about unity in verity among ridged, and soft Caluenists named Protestants & Puritans in England & Scotland. 
Cap 6.  An answer to three fond objections or interrogations of Sir ●rancis with an addition about O.E. 
Cap. 7.  Of the second, & third blessings which are, reading of scriptures, & public service in English. 
Cap. 8.  The second part of the answer about Church service in English containing some authorities alleged for it, but much corrupted, and abused by the knight. 
Cap. 9  Of the fourth and fifth blessings affirmed to have been brought in by Protestants, which are abundance of good works, & freedom from persecution. 
Cap. 10.  Of the other five imagined blessings that remain, to wit, deliverance from exactions, long peace, power in foreign countries, wealth of the land, multitude of subjects increased. 
Cap. 11.  How the contrary effects to blessings that is to say, of great damages, and cursings brought in by change of religion, both spiritual and temporal and how Sir F. and his Proctor O. E. do answer them. 
Cap. 12.  What Proctor O. E. saith to this matter of cursings, and how absurdly he behaveth himself therein. 
Cap. 13.  That Protestants have not only no agreement, or unity among themselves in matters of religion, but also are deprived of all sure means, and certain rule whereby to attain thereunto. 
Cap. 14.  What O.E. answereth to the former chapter about division, and uncertainty in religion. 
Cap. 15.  Of the English rule of belief set down by O. E. and what substance, or certainty it hath, and how they do use it for excluding Puritans, and other Protestants. And of divers shameful shifts of O. E. 
Cap. 16.  It is further showed by divers clear examples that O. E. and his fellows do plainly despair of all certain mean of rule to try the truth among themselves, or with us. 
Cap. 17.  Of the fruits, virtue, and good works by change of religion, as also of eight temporal inconveniences, which may be called curses, or maledictions ensued by the same, and how O. E. behaveth himself in this controversy. 
Cap. 18.  The Warning or admonition to Sir F. H. and his, as also to his advocate, & proctor O. E. upon this first Encounter of blessings. 
Cap. 19    

THE SECOND TABLE OF THE CHIEF CONTROVERSIES HANDLED in this book.  

The first Encounter.  
WHo are properly Catholics, and who heretics by the old laws of Catholic Christian Emperors? and whether the laws made against heretics by those Emperors, do touch Protestants or Papists at this day. Encount. 1. cap. 2. num. 2. and an●it. upon the Epistle of O. E. to the reader.  
How Catholics & heretics may be easily, & evidently tried by the old rule of faith among the Fathers. Encount. 1. cap. 15.  
Whether the English Parliament rule set down by O.E. be sufficient to discern Cathol. from heretics or one sect of heretics from another. Enc. 1. cap. 16. and 17.  
Whether Canonists do call the Pope God, or no? and how false Sir F. and his chaplain O. E. are found in this point. Enc. 1. cap. 2. & 3.  
Whether there be any certain rule of faith to try matters in controversy, and what that rule is. Enc. 1. cap. 15.  
Whether Protestants have union among them, or any mean to make union, or to find out certainty in matters of faith. Enc. 1. cap. 4. num. 10. Item cap. 5.6.14.15.16.17.  
Whether Lutherans, and Caluinists may any way be said to be brethren, or of one Church? Encount. 1. cap. 3.4. & 5.  
Whether English Protestant's & Puritans do agree i● jesus Christ crucified, as Sir F saith, or may be accounted true brethren, and of one Church? Enc. 1. cap. 6. & cap. 10. num. 8. &. cap. 12. ●●m. 6.  
Whether liberty for all unlearned to read scriptures in English without difference, or restraint be a blessing or a curse to the people. Encount. 1. cap. 8. and Enc. 2.  
Whether public service in English be a hurt or benefit to all sorts of people. Enc. 1. cap. 8. nu. 7. & cap. 9 at large.  
Whether abundance of good works be a peculiar blessing of Protestants. Encount. 1. cap. 10. num. 2.3.4.5. & cap. 17. & 18.  
Whether it be a special grace, and blessed nature of Protestant's to persecute no man for religion. Enc. 1. c. 10.  
Whether freedom from exactions, long peace, great power in other countries, great wealth of the land, and more abundant multiplying of children, than before, be special benefits, and benedictions brought into England by change of religion? Enc. 1. cap. ●1.  
Whether the sacrifice of the Mass be a new invention or no, and whether the number of 7. Sacraments were not agreed on before the late council of Trent, as O.E. affirmeth. Enc. 1. cap. 13. num. 7.8.9.10.11.12. etc.  
How far Catholic men do depend of the Pope for the certainty of their religion? Encount. 1. cap. 16. num. 17.18.19.  
Whether there be any one new or old heresy can be proved to be in the doctrine of Papists at this day, and how many there be properly, and formally held by Protestants. Encount. 1. cap. 16. num. 20.  
How contemptuously the protestants do speak not only of the old Fathers, but also of their own writers, when they make against them. Enc. 1. cap. 17.  
What manner of trial Robertson the Anabaptist would have by staying the Sun for proof of his religion against Caluinists. Enc. 1. cap. 17. num. 17.  
Whether temporal blessings entered into England, & other countries round about with the new gospel, and change of the old Religion? Encount. 1. cap. 12. & 13.14. & 18.  
How many and how great inconveniences in matter of state, and otherwise have ensued in England by change of religion, since K. Henry the 8. his departure from the union of the Roman Church. Encount. 1. ●ap. 17. & 18.   
FINIS.