A
RELATION
OF
THE
TRIALL
Made
before
the
King
of
France
,
vpon
the
yeare
1600.
betweene
the
Bishop
of
Eureux
,
and
the
L.
Plessis
Mornay
.
ABOVT
Certayne
pointes
of
corrupting
and
falsifying
authors
,
wherof
the
said
Plessis
was
openly
conuicted
.
Newly
reuewed
,
and
sett
forth
againe
,
with
a
defence
therof
,
against
the
impugnations
both
of
the
L.
Plessis
in
France
,
&
of
O.
E.
in
England
.
By
N.
D.
Tertullian
.
lib.
de
praescript
.
aduers.
haereses
.
Vinci
possunt
,
persuaderi
non
possunt
.
Heretikes
may
be
vanquished
,
&
yet
not
persuaded
:
Imprinted
with
licence
.
Anno
M.
DC
.
IIII.
THE
GENERALL
CONTENTS
of
this
booke
.
IN
THE
RELATION
.
-
1.
The
preface
and
aduertisment
to
the
Reader
,
conteyning
the
occasion
and
summe
of
all
.
Chap.
1.
-
2.
The
first
Chalenge
made
by
the
L.
Plessis
to
the
B.
of
Eureux
for
iustifying
of
his
bookes
,
with
the
Bishopps
acceptance
.
Chap.
2.
3.
-
3.
The
reply
of
the
L.
Plessis
,
with
the
agreement
of
the
triall
.
Chap.
4.
-
4.
Diuers
letters
both
of
the
King
,
&
others
,
about
the
successe
,
&
issue
of
the
triall
.
Chap.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
-
5.
Certayne
obseruations
of
the
Relator
,
vpon
the
former
relation
,
togeather
with
a
petition
,
that
the
like
triall
might
be
made
in
England
.
Chap.
11.
IN
THE
DEFENCE
.
-
1.
The
preface
shewinge
the
authority
of
the
Acts
&
Gests
sett
forth
of
this
conference
in
French
since
the
first
edition
of
this
relation
.
-
2.
What
is
conteyned
more
in
these
Acts.
then
was
sett
downe
in
my
former
relation
.
Chap.
1.
-
3.
The
examen
of
nine
places
chosen
by
the
L.
Plessis
,
for
his
Iustification
,
in
all
which
he
was
proued
to
haue
falsified
.
Chap.
2.
-
4.
How
the
conference
was
broken
vp
.
&
what
ensued
afterward
,
&
of
a
defence
sett
forth
by
the
L.
Plessis
after
his
retyring
from
the
combatt
,
without
a
name
,
more
dishonorable
then
the
combat
it selfe
.
Chap.
3.
-
An
examen
of
that
defence
in
French
,
as
also
of
the
answere
of
O.
E.
in
English
.
Chap.
4.
and
5.
-
The
Conclusion
with
certayne
considerations
vpon
the
whole
.
Chap.
6.
TO
THE
READER
.
Concerninge
the
causes
of
the
new
Edition
of
this
Relation
;
with
a
defence
therof
against
diuers
Impugners
.
THREE
or
foure
causes
(
good
reader
)
haue
induced
me
to
renew
this
Relation
,
and
to
sett
yt
forth
againe
,
after
three
years
space
,
that
it
was
first
wrytten
,
and
printed
,
which
was
in
the
yeare
of
Iubiley
1600.
The
first
reason
is
,
for
that
hauing
to
performe
afterward
in
this
third
part
of
the
Treatise
,
of
three
Conuersions
of
England
,
diuers
points
heere
promised
concerninge
the
vnfolding
of
sundry
falsifications
,
vsed
as
well
by
Iohn
Fox
,
as
by
some
other
English
wryters
of
our
time
;
I
thought
good
to
lay
downe
the
ground
of
my
obligation
and
promise
made
in
this
relation
,
to
the
end
yt
may
be
seene
,
whether
I
do
satisfie
the
same
or
no.
Secondly
,
wheras
my
former
narration
was
very
breefe
,
&
founded
only
vpo
certaine
letters
receaued
from
Paris
at
that
time
;
now
I
hauing
pervsed
the
whole
acts
&
gests
of
that
coferēce
,
betweene
the
B.
of
Eureux
,
&
Plessis
Morney
,
authentically
published
by
authority
,
&
by
the
approbatio
of
the
deputies
themselues
that
were
iudges
in
the
cause
;
I
haue
come
to
know
many
particulars
which
then
I
knew
not
,
&
consequently
,
I
am
desirous
,
that
the
reader
should
be
partaker
therof
in
like
manner
for
that
they
may
import
him
not
a
little
,
being
of
the
subiect
they
are
.
My
third
reason
was
,
for
that
there
hath
come
to
my
hands
since
the
forsaid
printinge
of
this
Relation
two
aduersary
wrytings
,
published
against
the
same
,
or
at
least
wise
,
against
some
principall
points
therof
,
the
one
in
French
,
wrytten
(
as
is
thought
)
by
the
L.
Plessis
himselfe
or
by
some
other
at
his
directio
,
after
the
flight
from
the
combat
,
the
other
in
English
by
O.
E.
otherwise
interpreted
Mathew
Sutcliffe
.
who
hath
taken
vpon
him
to
be
his
procter
and
aduocate
:
both
which
wrytings
I
thought
good
in
this
place
,
breefely
to
looke
ouer
,
&
by
occasion
of
printing
againe
this
Relation
,
to
lett
the
reader
see
,
what
truth
or
substance
there
is
in
them
;
but
yet
with
such
moderation
of
speach
as
we
may
imitate
therin
(
so
neere
as
may
be
)
the
courteous
proceeding
vsed
by
the
aduersary
partyes
in
this
Triall
in
France
,
as
a
little
after
you
shall
heere
,
&
in
deed
is
conuenient
to
the
subiect
handled
,
(
which
is
Religion
)
and
to
the
persons
that
treate
the
same
.
And
albeit
accordinge
to
the
information
which
men
giue
heere
of
the
nature
&
condition
of
O.
E.
little
hope
is
conceaued
of
any
good
correspondence
from
him
in
this
point
,
as
not
so
powerable
ouer
his
owne
passions
,
as
to
performe
it
:
yet
will
I
hope
the
contrary
for
this
tyme
,
presuminge
that
his
so
exorbitant
excesse
in
former
wrytings
,
proceeding
of
the
confidence
of
a
visard
,
wherby
he
thought
perhaps
to
passe
vnknowen
;
but
now
the
maske
being
taken
away
,
and
euery
child
being
able
to
read
and
interprett
what
the
words
O.
E.
do
signifie
,
to
witt
,
a
person
,
that
professeth
Ecclesiasticall
life
&
dignity
;
I
shall
expect
somwhat
from
him
agreeable
to
that
profession
,
wherin
I
promise
againe
all
due
correspondence
on
my
behalfe
,
to
the
end
,
that
matters
of
Religion
may
be
handled
in
the
stile
they
ought
to
be
.
But
if
I
be
deceaued
,
and
that
he
will
needs
follow
his
ould
veigne
still
;
I
am
like
inough
to
leaue
him
in
that
kind
and
giue
him
ouer
to
others
;
that
will
pay
him
perhaps
his
dew
,
according
to
that
of
the
ghospell
,
For
these
reasons
then
,
and
some
other
,
I
haue
byn
moued
to
sett
forth
this
Relation
againe
,
togeather
with
a
defence
therof
,
encreased
,
as
yow
will
see
,
and
confirmed
out
of
the
authenticall
acts
sett
forth
by
publike
authority
.
I
do
thinke
the
reading
,
&
pervsing
heerof
,
will
turne
thee
(
good
Reader
)
to
singular
commodity
,
if
it
be
done
with
indifferency
and
attention
.
To
Gods
euerlasting
glory
be
all
referred
,
whole
euer
preserue
thee
.
This
first
of
December
1603.
THE
OCCASION
,
ARGVMENT
,
AND
SVBSTANCE
of
the
ensuinge
triall
.
CHAP.
1.
NOtwithstanding
(
gentle
reader
)
I
may
iustly
presume
,
that
the
report
of
the
late
combat
,
and
conference
had
in
France
,
betweene
two
noble
and
famous
learned
men
,
concerning
a
triall
of
fidelity
and
falshood
in
alleaginge
authorityes
for
controuersies
in
Religion
,
hath
come
into
England
before
this
day
,
being
a
matter
of
so
notorious
memory
&
done
in
the
presence
of
so
great
a
King
,
and
of
so
many
Princes
,
and
so
neare
to
our
countrey
,
and
vpon
so
markable
preambles
and
premisses
,
as
heere
are
declared
:
But
besides
there
is
another
reason
of
more
moment
,
and
more
peculiar
to
this
place
,
to
witt
,
that
albeit
the
former
printed
chalenges
,
might
come
to
Englishmens
hands
by
other
meanes
:
yet
the
combat
it selfe
,
with
the
true
issue
therof
,
togeather
with
the
manner
of
the
triall
,
and
particulars
occurred
therin
,
which
haue
byn
wrytten
hither
by
most
authenticall
partyes
(
as
vnto
the
place
,
where
accompt
of
such
affayres
concerninge
Religion
is
wont
to
be
giuen
)
could
not
,
or
would
not
perhapps
so
fully
,
and
sincerely
be
related
in
England
,
as
the
truth
of
the
whole
action
requireth
,
the
reason
wherof
each
man
will
easily
consider
.
These
then
being
the
causes
that
moued
me
to
take
this
little
paine
,
founded
(
as
yow
see
)
in
the
zeale
of
truth
and
fidelity
,
I
haue
thought
good
to
deliuer
faithfully
vnto
you
such
letters
,
as
haue
come
to
my
hands
,
about
this
affayre
,
though
not
all
.
For
that
diuers
letters
wrytten
out
of
France
,
by
diuers
other
partyes
reportinge
the
selfe
same
thing
,
I
thought
not
needful
for
me
to
print
,
nor
to
multiply
relations
without
necessity
,
but
to
content
my selfe
only
(
for
breuityes
sake
)
with
the
letter
of
the
K.
Maiestie
himselfe
,
and
with
one
other
of
the
Bishop
(
that
was
an
actor
in
the
cause
)
wrytten
to
the
Kings
Embassadour
in
this
place
,
and
to
some
other
Cardinalls
besides
,
by
them
to
be
exhibited
vnto
his
Holynes
,
But
yet
besides
these
two
letters
,
there
was
another
wrytten
,
two
dayes
after
the
said
Bishops
letter
,
by
the
Popes
Nuntio
in
Paris
vnto
Cardinall
Aldobrandino
,
and
by
him
to
be
deliuered
to
his
holynes
,
wherin
is
related
&
verified
(
though
in
very
few
words
)
the
very
same
[
*
](A09107-e840-b)
*
All
this
is
now
confirmed
by
the
publique
Acts
printed
that
after
do
ensue
.
narration
,
which
the
Bishop
wryteth
,
as
by
the
extract
therof
heerafter
sett
downe
appeareth
.
And
this
now
were
sufficient
for
a
preface
only
to
this
matter
,
were
yt
not
,
that
I
haue
thought
expedient
also
to
touch
breifely
two
other
points
.
First
,
what
these
two
persons
are
,
which
had
the
combat
,
and
then
the
briefe
summe
of
that
which
passed
betwene
them
therein
.
For
first
the
L.
Plessis
Morney
Of
the
Church
,
and
notes
therof
,
translated
into
English
,
and
much
esteemed
by
protestants
of
that
time
,
for
that
he
wryteth
more
cunningly
and
couertly
,
and
is
more
plausible
in
shew
both
of
scriptures
&
Fathers
,
then
commonly
other
wryters
of
his
Religion
then
were
.
And
for
that
he
is
a
noble
man
borne
,
and
of
the
laity
and
not
vnlearned
in
diuers
languages
,
and
in
great
creditt
for
many
yeares
with
this
King
of
France
(
whose
Embassadour
he
was
in
England
,
whilst
he
was
yet
a
protestant
,
and
his
Maiestie
King
only
of
Nauarre
)
and
now
since
his
comminge
to
the
kingdome
of
France
much
trusted
also
,
and
vsed
by
him
in
his
ciuill
affayres
,
and
in
gouernment
of
the
towne
and
country
of
Saumur
.
For
these
causes
(
I
say
)
and
for
that
he
hath
wrytten
many
bookes
,
he
is
accompted
euery
where
for
one
of
the
cheeife
champions
and
head
pillars
of
Protestant
Religion
in
France
,
wherby
this
his
disgrace
so
notoriously
receaued
in
that
thinge
,
wherin
he
made
publike
profession
to
be
exact
,
to
witt
,
in
true
,
and
playne
dealinge
:
must
needs
open
the
eyes
of
such
,
as
are
discreet
,
and
desirous
in
deed
to
follow
truth
and
decline
from
falshood
,
and
so
it
did
vs
after
yow
see
.
The
B.
of
Eureux
on
the
other
side
,
named
Monsieur
Person
,
And
thus
much
of
these
2.
persons
,
who
being
both
of
them
so
gratefull
and
well
liked
of
the
King
,
as
I
haue
shewed
,
his
Maiesties
indifferency
in
iudgment
also
betwene
them
both
,
(
the
truth
of
the
cause
only
excepted
)
must
needs
be
voyd
of
all
suspition
,
and
consequently
his
sentence
afterward
prononced
on
the
one
side
(
as
by
his
letter
appeareth
)
must
in
reason
be
thought
to
haue
proceeded
of
the
manifest
difference
of
the
said
cause
,
and
force
of
truth
it selfe
,
which
he
discouered
vpon
that
triall
.
Now
then
to
speake
a
word
or
two
of
the
action
as
it
passed
,
you
must
vnderstand
,
that
about
Christmasse
last
,
there
came
forth
a
booke
in
Paris
of
the
aforsaid
Monsieur
Plessis
against
the
Masse
;
[
*
](A09107-e1030-b)
*
P
Fronto
Duceus
Burdeg
.
Iesuite
,
discouering
at
least
a
thousand
falshoods
of
his
part
.
All
the
preachers
of
Paris
in
like
manner
,
the
whole
lent
followinge
,
were
occupyed
for
the
most
part
in
refutinge
,
and
shewinge
the
falshood
of
this
booke
:
duringe
which
tyme
,
many
Protestants
of
accounte
were
either
conuerted
or
greately
moued
heer
with
,
Monsieur
Sainct-Mary
conuerted
.
and
amonge
other
one
Monsieur
Sainct-Mary
du
Monte
a
principal
noble
man
o●
,
Normandy
,
who
frequenting
the
preaching
of
one
F.
Angelus
a
Capuchin
friar
,
borne
a
great
noble
man
,
and
named
before
his
entrance
into
Religion
Monsieur
du
Bouchage
brother
to
the
late
Duke
of
Ioyeus
,
whose
state
he
had
of
late
inherited
(
his
said
brother
being
dead
)
but
left
the
same
for
that
other
vocation
of
a
poore
,
and
humble
seruant
of
God
.
Monsieur
Bouchage
leaue●h
a
Dukedome
to
be
a
●riar
.
And
albeit
afterward
vpon
necessity
of
the
said
temporal
state
which
he
had
left
,
he
was
forced
for
some
yeares
,
to
take
a
secular
life
vpon
him
againe
,
and
to
mennage
armes
,
as
he
did
,
by
licence
of
the
Supreme
Pastor
of
Gods
Church
,
yet
after
publike
affayres
once
accommodated
,
he
retired
himselfe
backe
to
his
Religious
habitt
,
&
habitation
againe
,
where
he
liueth
now
a
most
vertuous
life
,
&
preacheth
with
great
zeale
,
&
singular
edification
of
all
sorts
of
men
,
&
well
sheweth
that
his
mind
is
superior
to
all
wordly
welth
&
promotion
.
And
these
are
examples
that
are
not
found
lightly
among
Protestants
,
but
are
reserued
as
peculiar
to
Christs
Catholike
Church
,
where
the
dew
of
heauenly
grace
,
continually
falling
,
worketh
often
such
extraordinary
effects
.
And
thus
much
of
him
.
By
this
godly
mans
sermons
then
was
Monsieur
Sainct-Mary
at
length
conuerted
(
the
experience
of
this
triall
not
a
little
helping
thervnto
,
as
after
shall
appeare
)
and
made
a
good
Catholike
with
no
small
edification
of
all
men
,
in
respect
of
the
great
humility
,
and
zeale
he
vsed
in
his
returne
to
Gods
Church
,
and
with
much
comfort
of
the
K.
himselfe
,
to
whome
first
before
all
other
he
vttered
his
resolution
.
And
heervpon
as
well
his
Maiestie
,
as
also
the
noble
men
that
were
Protestants
,
and
namely
the
Duke
of
Bouillon
,
Monsieur
Rosny
,
Monsieur
Digiers
,
and
other
began
to
call
vpon
this
triall
of
Monsieur
Plessis
his
booke
,
for
that
it
seemed
to
touch
all
their
honours
,
and
of
their
Religion
,
especially
,
when
the
B.
of
Eureux
had
protested
vpon
his
honour
in
the
pulpit
,
that
he
could
shew
more
then
500.
falsifications
in
the
same
booke
for
his
part
.
Monsieur
Plessis
seemed
to
shrinke
,
and
to
seeke
all
delayes
possible
,
eyther
to
auoyde
the
same
,
or
to
bring
it
to
some
longer
examination
,
by
going
ouer
all
his
bookes
and
works
leafe
by
leafe
,
&
lyne
by
lyne
,
as
you
shall
heare
him
demaund
presently
:
but
this
being
denyed
by
the
B.
&
cut
of
by
the
K.
expresse
commandement
,
he
appeared
at
last
vpon
the
day
aforsaid
with
some
4.
or
5.
Ministers
on
his
side
.
But
the
day
[
*
](A09107-e1260-b)
*
All
these
things
are
more
particularly
sett
downe
in
the
defence
followinge
cap.
1.
precedent
before
this
,
the
B.
to
deale
more
plainly
,
and
shew
frendshipp
,
sent
vnto
him
threescore
places
taken
out
of
his
booke
,
vpon
which
he
meant
to
presse
him
,
and
(
as
his
words
are
)
to
begin
the
play
:
wishinge
him
to
come
well
prouided
in
the
same
.
Of
which
threescore
Monsieur
Plessis
,
chose
out
nynteene
,
that
seemed
to
him
most
defensible
,
and
vpon
which
he
said
he
would
ioyne
the
combat
,
adding
moreouer
,
that
he
would
leese
his
life
,
yf
he
were
conuinced
therin
.
But
the
next
day
the
triall
being
begon
vpon
the
first
place
,
and
that
found
false
,
he
would
haue
passed
to
the
second
,
but
the
B.
refused
so
to
do
,
except
the
deputyes
and
iudges
there
present
,
would
first
subscribe
,
and
testifie
,
that
this
first
place
was
falsified
,
which
at
length
they
did
,
as
well
in
this
,
as
in
the
rest
there
examined
;
and
Monsieur
Plessis
remayned
in
that
pittifull
plight
,
which
afterward
yow
shall
heare
by
the
B.
and
other
mens
letters
,
vnto
which
I
remitt
yow
:
beseechinge
almighty
Cod
,
that
this
so
notorious
an
accident
,
may
worke
that
consideration
with
yow
,
as
the
moment
&
importance
of
the
marter
requireth
.
And
so
to
his
holy
prouidence
I
commit
yow
from
Rome
the
10.
of
Iune
1600.
THE
CHALENGE
OR
PROVOCATION
MADE
BY
THE
L.
Plessis
Mornay
,
vnto
the
L.
Peron
Bishopp
of
Eureux
,
the
20.
of
March
.
1600.
CHAP.
II.
THE
L.
of
Plessis
doth
demaund
and
require
,
that
my
L.
Bishop
of
Eureux
,
and
all
other
,
that
blame
or
accuse
him
,
to
haue
vsed
in
his
bookes
sett
forth
,
any
false
citations
,
will
vouchsafe
to
ioyne
with
him
,
for
subscribinge
and
presenting
a
most
humble
request
vnto
the
K.
Maiestie
,
to
intreate
him
most
humbly
to
ordaine
and
name
such
and
so
many
,
as
shall
please
his
Maiestie
,
being
men
of
sufficient
learning
&
vertue
,
before
whome
the
said
L
Plessis
may
verifie
from
leafe
to
leafe
,
&
from
lyne
to
lyne
,
all
authorityes
,
which
he
hath
cited
in
his
said
books
.
And
that
this
triall
be
made
by
such
copyes
and
bookes
,
as
haue
byn
printed
in
those
places
,
and
in
those
vniuersityes
,
which
they
of
the
Roman
Church
hould
not
for
suspected
.
In
wittnesse
wherof
I
the
aforesaid
Plessis
Mornay
haue
heere
put
to
my
hand
&
seale
.
At
Paris
the
20.
of
March
in
the
yeare
one
thousand
six
hundred
.
THE
ANSWERE
OF
THE
B.
OF
EVREVX
to
the
former
Chalenge
the
25.
of
March
1600.
CHAP.
III.
HAVING
receaued
(
good
Reader
)
this
Chalenge
,
wherof
not
only
the
report
and
brute
,
but
the
copyes
also
themselues
and
already
spread
abroad
,
wrytten
and
subscribed
by
the
L.
of
Plessis
:
and
consideringe
that
this
is
not
a
chalenge
of
one
priuate
man
to
another
,
but
rather
of
one
party
or
side
against
the
other
;
it
seemed
that
the
interest
of
the
common
cause
of
Gods
Church
,
did
not
permitt
eyther
to
lett
it
passe
without
answere
,
or
to
answere
it
secretly
.
For
as
the
end
of
this
his
offer
is
,
in
case
it
be
refused
,
by
such
refusall
and
sylence
of
Catholiks
,
to
gaine
a
publike
iustification
of
his
books
and
wrytinges
:
so
ys
it
conuenient
,
that
may
answere
to
the
same
be
also
publike
,
&
that
the
enemyes
of
Gods
Church
do
not
gett
that
aduantage
,
as
to
publish
one
thing
&
conceale
the
other
.
And
therfore
to
the
end
that
both
heauen
and
earth
may
see
,
and
behould
how
I
do
proceed
in
this
matter
;
And
for
my
part
,
that
all
hinderance
therof
may
be
remoued
,
I
protest
that
I
am
presently
ready
,
and
do
desire
out
of
hand
to
come
to
the
very
point
of
shewinge
the
falshoodes
,
without
byndinge
my selfe
to
that
large
&
wearisome
methood
of
examining
his
late
booke
against
the
Masse
,
leafe
by
leafe
,
and
lyne
by
lyne
,
as
he
requireth
.
Which
demaund
of
his
;
[
*
](A09107-e1550-b)
*
This
is
seene
afterward
by
his
dealinge
in
the
defence
following
cap.
2.
passe
ouer
,
then
would
he
take
them
,
as
admitted
by
vs
for
true
,
and
so
take
wittnesse
therof
to
the
preiudice
of
the
Catholike
Church
.
And
if
we
stay
and
striue
about
them
,
he
would
then
of
purpose
settle
the
whole
disputation
vpon
the
first
of
those
,
which
he
should
thinke
might
longest
be
continued
,
to
hinder
therby
the
examininge
of
the
rest
.
For
these
causes
then
,
as
also
for
that
yt
appertayneth
notto
him
,
who
is
accused
of
falsifications
,
to
choose
out
the
points
vpon
the
which
he
is
to
be
examined
,
but
to
them
rather
,
which
do
accuse
him
,
to
propose
the
articles
,
which
they
are
to
obiect
against
him
:
For
these
causes
(
I
say
)
see
heere
(
good
reader
)
the
protestation
I
make
before
God
&
man
:
I
protest
that
I
do
bynd
my selfe
to
shew
him
in
any
place
furnished
of
bookes
,
and
in
such
company
of
capable
men
,
as
it
may
please
the
K.
Maiestie
to
ordayne
,
yea
in
the
presence
of
his
Maiestie
(
yf
it
may
please
the
same
to
take
contentment
to
be
present
at
some
part
therof
)
fiue
hundred
enormous
,
And
more
ouer
I
say
,
that
yf
after
this
our
conference
ended
,
he
will
take
vpon
him
for
his
part
,
to
choose
amongst
all
the
citations
of
his
booke
,
or
of
his
bookes
(
because●
he
speaketh
in
generall
)
any
such
authorityes
,
as
he
thinketh
most
sure
,
and
to
make
most
for
his
aduantage
,
&
most
against
vs
:
I
do
bynd
my selfe
for
conclusion
of
all
to
refute
the
whole
choice
,
Treatise
of
the
Church
,
nor
in
his
,
Common
welth
of
Traditions
,
is
there
to
be
found
so
much
as
any
one
place
among
them
all
,
which
is
not
eyther
falsely
cyted
,
or
impertinent
to
the
matter
,
or
vnprofitably
alleaged
.
And
this
will
I
shew
by
the
very
texts
of
Greeke
and
Latyn
copies
,
of
the
authors
themselues
printed
at
Geneua
,
Basill
,
Heydelberge
,
&
other
townes
of
Protestants
.
All
which
notwithstandinge
I
desyre
should
be
vnderstood
,
as
not
spoken
against
the
honour
in
particular
of
the
L.
Plessis
,
whome
in
all
other
things
,
which
concerne
not
the
interest
of
Religion
,
I
esteeme
accordinge
to
his
qualityes
and
meritts
.
Neyther
do
I
heerby
pretend
to
blame
him
for
any
other
thing
,
then
that
he
hath
byn
ouer
credulous
in
beleeuing
the
false
relations
&
collections
of
others
,
that
haue
endeauoured
to
abuse
the
industry
&
authority
of
his
pen
.
And
wheras
he
demaundeth
instantly
,
that
I
should
ioine
with
him
to
present
a
supplication
vnto
the
K.
Maiestie
for
triall
aforesaid
:
I
declare
againe
by
this
my
wrytinge
,
that
I
do
wholy
agree
thervnto
,
and
ioyne
with
him
therin
,
And
consequently
we
are
much
bound
to
the
holy
prouidence
of
almighty
God
,
that
he
hath
permitted
in
this
last
assault
of
heretikes
,
Wherfore
to
the
end
,
that
this
happy
successe
may
be
brought
to
effect
without
delay
,
not
only
I
do
subscribe
most
willingly
togeather
with
the
L.
of
Plessis
,
to
present
his
request
to
his
Maiestie
,
but
also
do
further
promise
him
in
the
execution
therof
,
to
vse
all
sweetnes
,
modesty
,
&
louing
proceeding
towards
his
person
;
Made
and
subscribed
by
me
in
the
Castle
of
Condie
being
the
house
of
the
B.
of
Eureux
the
25.
of
March
in
the
yeare
one
thousand
six
hundred
.
By
me
Iames.
B.
of
Eureux
.
This
is
the
answere
and
acceptance
of
the
Bishopp
,
full
of
considence
,
witt
,
and
medesty
,
as
to
the
reader
must
needs
appeare
:
now
lett
vs
see
the
reply
of
Plessis
Mornay
no
lesse
captious
and
subtile
,
them
this
is
plaine
,
simple
,
and
sincere
.
THE
REPLY
OF
THE
L.
PLESSIS
TO
THE
FORMER
answere
,
published
by
the
B.
of
Eureux
vpon
the
Chalenge
made
vnto
him
by
the
said
Plessis
.
CHAP.
IV.
WHEN
I
had
vnderstood
(
gentle
Reader
)
the
L.
B.
of
Eureux
gaue
forth
,
that
the
places
of
the
fathers
quoted
by
me
in
my
books
,
were
falsely
cited
:
I
sent
him
a
certayne
Chalenge
wrytten
,
and
subscribed
by
my
owne
hand
of
the
date
of
the
20.
of
March
1600.
The
which
since
that
time
,
the
said
B.
hath
caused
to
be
printed
&
published
,
though
I
sent
the
same
to
him
priuately
by
the
way
of
his
owne
brother
.
Heerevpon
notwithstanding
,
my
L.
Bishopp
hath
caused
to
be
printed
a
certayne
aduertisment
to
the
Reader
,
of
the
date
of
the
25.
of
March
,
the
which
is
now
cryed
about
the
streets
in
this
citty
;
and
this
in
steed
of
sendinge
me
his
priuate
answere
by
the
same
way
I
sent
to
him
.
And
of
this
my
priuate
chalenge
to
him
,
as
of
one
particular
man
to
another
,
he
maketh
by
&
by
a
publike
defiance
of
one
part
to
another
;
as
they
which
in
an
army
do
make
their
priuate
quarrells
,
to
be
the
publike
cause
of
the
whole
nation
.
Iudge
heere
againe
(
Reader
)
of
this
manner
of
proceeding
in
a
conference
of
Religion
,
leafe
to
leafe
and
from
lyne
to
lyne
,
and
fayneth
that
he
feareth
the
wearynesse
of
the
deputyes
.
[
*
](A09107-e1990-b)
*
See
this
afterward
contradicted
by
himselfe
.
readinge
of
that
which
is
wrytten
;
what
means
shall
I
haue
in
this
triall
to
deceaue
the
iudgment
or
rather
the
sight
of
the
deputyes
.
He
skyrmisheth
finally
,
[
*
](A09107-e2030-b)
*
Now
it
is
seene
by
the
tryall
.
what
he
can
doe
.
And
therfore
not
to
make
many
words
which
serue
for
nothinge
,
but
to
put
of
the
things
themselues
,
I
will
(
notwithstandinge
all
this
)
take
myne
offer
,
as
accepted
by
him
.
And
euen
now
to
this
intent
,
I
haue
intreated
my
L.
Mareshall
of
Bouillon
,
who
goeth
to
take
his
leaue
of
the
K.
at
his
pallace
of
Boys
de
Vincens
,
to
present
vnto
his
Maiestie
my
most
humble
request
to
this
effect
,
by
the
which
I
do
beseech
this
Maiestie
,
that
it
will
please
him
to
ordaine
some
deputyes
to
the
end
aboue
mentioned
.
Which
petition
if
it
please
God
to
prosper
and
blesse
,
I
hope
it
wil
proue
a
good
preamble
for
some
greater
designment
,
worthy
the
magnanimity
of
our
King
,
towards
some
holy
reformation
of
the
Church
in
his
Kingdome
,
by
the
meanes
wherof
,
we
shall
see
in
this
our
one
only
King
,
This
our
requeste
recommended
by
me
to
the
said
L.
Mareshall
,
HItherto
are
the
chalenges
,
answers
and
replies
of
these
two
partyes
:
which
the
K.
Maiestie
hauinge
pervsed
,
and
seeing
so
great
shew
and
confidence
to
be
in
both
for
entring
the
combatt
,
he
gaue
very
nobly
&
Christianly
,
his
royall
assent
thervnto
,
as
by
the
ensuing
letters
of
the
whole
fact
&
circumstances
therof
doth
appeare
.
And
finding
presently
some
relenting
and
drawing
backe
in
the
one
party
(
as
by
the
said
letters
yow
shall
see
)
he
further
layd
his
full
commandement
vpon
them
both
,
for
performance
of
their
offers
,
and
consequently
the
triall
was
made
at
Fontayne-blea●
some
foure
or
fiue
dayes
after
,
in
the
presence
of
his
Maiestie
&
Princes
of
bloud
,
with
many
of
the
greatest
nobility
,
with
those
particularityes
,
which
the
said
ensuing
letters
will
represent
vnto
yow
.
But
yet
before
all
,
I
haue
thought
good
to
sett
downe
the
K.
owne
letter
,
though
short
,
and
briefe
,
yet
very
substantiall
and
pithy
,
relatinge
very
prudently
in
few
words
the
successe
of
that
triall
,
with
the
good
effect
,
that
might
be
hoped
therof
for
conuersion
of
many
Protestants
,
that
are
not
peruerse
and
willfull
.
It
was
wrytten
at
Fontayne-bleau
where
the
meeting
was
,
the
very
day
of
the
triall
:
and
for
the
worthinesse
therof
and
due
respect
to
so
great
a
personage
,
yt
shall
go
both
in
French
&
English
,
for
them
that
vnderstand
both
languages
.
COPPIE
DES
LETTRES
DV
ROY
A
MONSIEVR
D'
ESPERNON
.
CHAP.
V.
Mon
amy
.
LEdiocese
d'
Eureux
agaigne
celuy
de
Saumur
,
&
la
doulceur
,
dont
on●y
a
proced●
,
oste
●occasion
a
quelque
Huguenot
,
que
cesoit
,
de
dire
que
rien
y
eut
force
que
la
verité
.
Ce
porteur
y
ostoit
,
qui
vous
contera
comme
i'y
ay
faict
merueilles
.
Certes
c'
est
vn
des
plus
grands
coups
pour
l'
Eglise
de
Dieu
,
qui
s'
est
faict
ily
long
temps
,
suyuant
l'
eclarcissement
de
cest
erreur
.
Nous
rammeinerons
plus
de
separez
de
l'
Eglise
en
vn
an
,
que
par
toute
autre
voy
en
cinquante
.
Il
y
a
vn
long
discours
d'vn
chascun
,
qui
seroit
trop
long
a
discourir
par
escript
.
Il
vous
dira
la
façon
,
que
ie
suis
d'auis
que
mes
seruiteurs
tiennent
,
pour
tirer
fruict
de
ce
saincte
oeuure
.
Bon
soir
mon
amy
.
Sachant
le
plaisir
que
vous
en
aurez
:
Vous
estes
seul
a
qui
l'on
le
mande
.
Le
5.
de
May.
1600.
Henry
.
Au
dessus
de
la
lettre
.
A
mon
Cousin
le
Duc
d'
Espernon
.
THE
COPIE
OF
THE
K.
OF
FRANCE
HIS
FORMER
LETTER
TO
the
Duke
of
Espernon
,
concerninge
the
late
triall
,
had
betwene
the
B.
of
Eureux
,
and
the
Lord
Plessis
,
translated
into
English
.
CHAP.
VI.
MY
Friend
.
The
Diocesse
of
Eureux
hath
ouercome
the
Diocesse
of
[
*
](A09107-e2400-b)
*
For
that
Plessis
is
gouernour
of
Saumur
.
Saumur
,
and
the
sweet
manner
of
proceedinge
that
hath
byn
vsed
,
hath
taken
away
all
occasion
to
any
Hugenot
whatsoeuer
he
be
,
to
say
,
that
any
force
hath
byn
vsed
,
beside
the
only
force
of
truth
:
The
bearer
heerof
was
present
at
the
combatt
,
who
will
informe
yow
what
maruayles
I
haue
done
therin
.
Certanily
it
is
one
of
the
greatest
blowes
,
that
hath
byn
giuen
for
the
Church
of
God
this
long
while
,
for
the
manifestation
of
this
error
.
By
[
*
](A09107-e2450-b)
*
would
god
these
meanes
were
vsed
in
England
.
this
meanes
we
shall
reduce
more
in
one
yeare
of
them
,
that
are
separated
from
the
Church
,
then
by
any
other
way
in
50.
yeares
.
There
were
a
large
discourse
to
be
made
of
each
of
their
actions
,
but
the
same
were
to
long
to
wryte
.
The
bearer
shall
tell
you
the
manner
,
which
I
would
haue
all
my
seruants
to
obserue
for
reapinge
fruite
of
this
holy
worke
.
Good
night
my
friend
.
And
for
that
I
know
what
pleasure
yow
will
take
heerof
,
yow
are
the
only
man
to
whome
I
haue
wrytten
yt
.
This
5.
of
May
.
1600.
Henry
.
The
superscription
.
To
my
Cosyn
the
Duke
of
Espernon
.
EXTRICT
DV
POSTSCRIPTVM
DE
LA
LETTRE
DE
CELVY
QVI
enuoy
a
ceste
Coppie
dela
lettre
du
Roy
a
Rome
.
CHAP.
VII
.
Monsieur
.
I●
vous
enuoyé
la
coppie
de
la
lettre
du
Roy
,
qu'il
a
enuoyé
a
Monsieur
d'Espernon
sur
la
dispute
de
l'Euesque
d'Eureux
,
contre
du
Plessi-Mornay
pour
verifier
son
liure
,
qui
s'est
de
tout
trouué
faulx
,
&
s'en
est
allé
cacher
comme
vn
regnard
.
Dieu
conduise
tout
a
bonne
fin
a
sa
gloire
,
&
salut
des
ames
.
An
extract
of
the
Postscript
of
the
letter
of
him
that
sent
this
coppy
of
the
forsaid
K.
letter
,
to
the
French
Embassadour
in
Rome
.
My
Lord
.
I
do
send
yow
heere
,
the
coppy
of
the
Kings
letter
wrytten
to
the
Duke
of
Espernon
,
about
the
disputation
of
the
B.
of
Eureux
against
Plessis
Mornay
,
for
iustifyinge
of
his
booke
,
found
altogeather
false
,
and
he
is
gone
to
hide
him selfe
like
a
Fox
.
God
conduct
all
to
a
good
end
for
his
glory
,
and
saluation
of
mens
soules
.
Thus
much
do
wryte
the
King
and
his
secretary
,
the
one
to
the
Duke
of
Espernon
,
the
other
to
Monsieur
Sylary
Embassador
in
Rome
,
&
both
of
them
present
at
the
conference
.
The
Kings
letter
as
yow
see
,
is
very
substantiall
:
&
yt
seemeth
his
Maiestie
was
greatly
moued
himselfe
by
the
seeing
and
hearing
of
this
combatt
.
For
so
much
as
he
affirmeth
so
resolutely
,
that
yt
was
one
of
the
greatest
blowes
,
that
had
byn
geuen
for
the
Church
of
God
a
long
while
,
&
for
discouering
the
erroneous
proceedings
of
Protestants
.
The
secretary
also
auoucheth
as
yow
see
,
the
falshood
found
in
Mornayes
booke
,
and
that
for
shame
therof
he
was
gone
to
hide
himselfe
like
a
Fox
.
Now
shall
yow
heare
three
other
letters
,
relating
more
particularly
the
circumstances
of
this
conference
,
with
the
Acts
&
successe
therof
,
though
all
very
breifely
in
respect
of
the
Acts
themselues
.
THE
COPIE
OF
THE
LETTER
OF
MONSIEVR
PERON
B.
OF
EVREVX
,
to
the
L.
Silary
Embassadour
for
the
K.
of
France
in
Rome
,
the
10.
of
May
1600.
CHAP.
VIII
.
My
Lord
.
AT
length
the
victory
of
the
combat
betwixt
the
L.
Plessis
and
me
remayneth
to
the
Catholike
Church
,
and
after
many
tergiuersations
,
which
he
vsed
for
the
space
of
5.
or
6.
dayes
at
Fontayne-bleau
,
I
sent
him
on
wednesday
the
third
of
May
,
threescore
falsifications
taken
out
of
his
booke
,
to
begin
the
play
withall
,
for
him
to
prepare
himselfe
to
answere
the
next
day
.
Of
them
he
chose
out
19.
the
which
he
went
&
told
the
King
the
next
day
,
that
he
had
chosen
forth
,
examined
,
and
found
true
,
and
that
he
would
loose
his
life
,
yf
any
one
of
them
were
proued
to
be
falsely
cited
.
After
dynner
the
same
day
in
the
same
place
,
he
came
forth
in
the
presence
of
his
Maiestie
,
and
of
7.
or
8.
Princes
,
L.
Chancelour
of
France
,
and
other
officers
of
the
crowne
,
and
Counsellors
of
State
.
Where
first
his
Maiestie
declared
both
by
himselfe
,
and
by
the
L.
Chancelour
,
that
he
would
not
in
any
wise
,
that
in
this
conference
should
be
handled
any
point
of
Catholike
Religion
,
wherof
he
doubted
nothinge
,
and
knew
also
that
the
iudgment
therof
pertained
vnto
the
Sea
Apostolike
,
but
only
of
the
particular
busynes
of
the
L.
of
Plessis
,
whether
he
had
falsified
the
texts
of
the
Fathers
or
no
?
I
added
that
when
Hunnericus
K.
of
the
Vandal●s
would
haue
had
the
Catholiks
dispute
with
the
Arrians
,
Eugenius
Archbishopp
of
Carthage
(
as
Victor
of
Vtica
rehearseth
)
answered
,
But
because
there
was
no
questions
of
Religion
heere
to
be
discussed
,
L.
Plessis
,
about
the
which
I
was
well
content
to
haue
the
iudgment
of
the
assistants
,
for
as
much
as
appertained
to
the
knowledg
of
Grammer
,
to
witt
,
whether
the
L.
Plessis
had
corrupted
the
words
of
the
authors
or
no
,
but
not
as
touching
points
of
diuinity
,
the
which
the
K.
Maiestie
had
already
very
wisely
forbidden
vs
to
treat
,
for
that
he
will
not
heerin
follow
the
example
of
K.
of
Iuda
,
which
vsurped
the
incensour
,
and
the
function
of
priesthood
,
but
rather
of
Constantyne
&
Theodose
,
and
other
religious
Emperors
in
remittinge
the
decision
of
Ecclesiasticall
matters
vnto
the
Church
.
The
King
in
this
conference
hath
shewed
himselfe
so
wise
,
L.
Plessis
goinge
from
the
combatt
pale
,
astonished
,
and
maruelously
confounded
fell
into
great
conuulsions
,
vomitinge
,
&
tremblinge
of
his
body
for
the
rest
of
that
day
;
and
for
all
the
day
followinge
was
possest
with
a
strange
vniuersall
tremblinge
of
all
the
members
of
his
body
,
and
euer
synce
hath
remayned
sicke
,
and
hath
not
byn
able
,
nor
durst
shew
himselfe
.
I
pray
God
this
may
serue
not
so
much
to
his
confusion
,
as
to
his
conuersion
:
whome
I
beseech
also
to
graunt
you
my
L.
a
good
&
a
happy
life
.
From
paris
this
10.
of
may
1600.
Your
humble
and
affectionated
seruant
.
Iames
B.
of
Eureux
.
Postscript
.
This
letter
which
I
wryte
vnto
your
honour
,
is
a
copy
of
that
which
I
wryte
,
to
Cardinall
Aldebrandino
,
and
to
the
Cardinall
of
Aux
,
because
the
bearer
,
vrged
by
the
post
,
hath
not
giuen
me
leasure
to
do
otherwise
.
The
superscription
.
To
my
Lord
.
The
L.
Silary
,
the
K.
Counselour
of
his
Counsell
of
State
,
Embassadour
for
his
Maiestie
at
Rome
.
AN
EXTRACT
OF
ANOTHER
LETTER
WRITTEN
BY
THE
Popes
[
*
](A09107-e3330-b)
*
Claudius
Ragonius
episc
.
Rhegiensis
.
Nuntio
,
resident
in
Paris
,
vnto
Cardinall
Aldobrandino
the
Popes
Nephew
in
Rome
:
the
12.
of
May
1600.
CHAP.
IX
.
I
HAVE
freshly
receaued
newes
from
Fountaine-bleau
of
the
prosperous
successe
of
the
conference
betwene
the
B.
of
Eureux
,
and
the
L.
Plessis
Mornay
.
The
Bishopp
hath
conuinced
manifestly
by
the
iudgment
and
sentence
of
all
the
assistants
,
the
falshoods
,
as
he
had
before
promised
.
Wherfore
the
said
Plessis
was
so
ashtonished
,
and
troubled
,
that
he
fell
presently
sicke
of
an
Ague
.
The
King
himselfe
in
this
conference
hath
shewed
great
vnderstandinge
,
and
no
lesse
zeale
to
the
Catholike
Religion
.
The
whole
redoundeth
much
to
the
confusion
of
the
Hugonotts
,
heere
,
who
held
Plessis
for
their
S.
Augustine
,
&c.
Paris
the
12.
of
May
1600.
THE
WORDS
OF
ANOTHER
LETTER
WRITTEN
FROM
PARIS
the
10.
of
May
,
about
the
same
matter
by
a
gentleman
of
accoumpt
.
CHAP.
X.
HEERE
hath
byn
some
4.
dayes
past
a
great
conference
at
Fontayne
bleau
15.
leagues
hence
,
betwene
Monsieur
Peron
B.
of
Eureux
,
&
Monsieur
Plessis
Mornay
Counselour
to
his
Maiestie
Gouernour
of
Saumur
,
and
generall
of
the
Hugonotts
.
The
K.
with
other
Princes
were
present
,
and
iudges
chosen
&
appointed
for
both
partyes
.
In
the
end
Plessis
Mornay
was
vtterly
disproued
and
confounded
by
a
generall
consent
of
both
sides
,
and
shamed
,
in
so
much
as
the
K.
Ventre
S.
Gry
,
he
had
heard
and
seene
inough
of
Plessyes
falsityes
,
&
that
by
Act
of
Parlament
he
would
cause
his
bookes
to
be
burned
,
sayinge
that
himselfe
had
all
his
youth
tyme
ben
abused
,
and
carryed
away
with
their
corruptions
.
He
presently
sent
word
vnto
the
Duke
of
Espernon
,
sayinge
that
the
B.
of
Eureux
had
gotten
the
gouernement
of
Saumur
,
and
willed
that
the
Doctors
&
Preachers
in
Paris
should
be
aduertised
therof
to
publish
yt
,
and
so
yt
is
in
pulpitts
with
great
ioy
and
thanks
to
God
.
The
Hugonotts
are
stroken
more
dead
,
with
with
this
accident
,
Plessis
Mornay
himselfe
is
fallen
sicke
vpon
yt
,
vomitts
bloud
,
and
lookes
like
himselfe
.
There
was
present
of
Plessis
side
a
great
Hugonot
of
accoumpt
among
other
,
called
Monsieur
du
Gramond
,
who
seing
the
euent
of
that
conference
,
said
,
that
he
neuer
in
his
life
durst
follow
Monsieur
Plessis
for
a
Captayne
,
but
now
he
would
lesse
follow
him
for
a
diuyne
.
It
is
hoped
that
the
said
Gramond
will
become
a
Catholike
vpon
yt
,
&
Monsieur
du
Rosney
also
;
and
heresie
was
neuer
so
likely
to
go
to
wracke
in
France
,
as
at
this
present
,
&c.
Paris
this
10.
of
May
1600.
An
addition
of
the
translatour
.
HITHERTO
are
the
letters
which
I
haue
thought
good
to
translate
out
of
French
,
&
to
sett
downe
in
this
place
concerning
the
euent
of
this
triall
and
combat
,
as
also
of
the
great
and
high
honour
,
which
the
most
Christian
King
of
France
hath
gayned
,
by
being
present
&
furthering
the
same
in
his
royall
person
.
Which
act
will
be
vnto
him
(
besides
the
benediction
of
almighty
God
t●erby
gayned
as
we
hope
)
an
euerlastinge
praise
with
all
posterity
.
And
yf
yt
might
please
the
same
mighty
hand
of
our
Sauiour
,
by
his
holy
grace
to
inspire
the
heart
of
her
[
*
](A09107-e3770-b)
*
This
petition
may
better
be
made
now
to
his
royall
Maiestie
as
more
intelligent
in
such
affayres
,
&
better
enclyned
to
heare
truth
.
Maiestie
of
England
by
the
example
of
so
famous
a
fact
of
her
neighbour
and
colleague
,
and
deare
Cosyn
the
K.
of
France
,
to
take
the
same
course
in
England
,
and
to
heare
and
permitt
the
like
triall
betweene
such
Catholiks
,
as
would
offer
to
prooue
,
&
conuince
the
like
falshoods
&
falsifications
;
(
and
greater
also
perhaps
)
in
the
chiefe
protestant
wryters
of
our
nation
,
as
Iewell
,
Fox
,
Fulke
,
&
the
like
:
and
that
some
of
the
learned
,
and
zealous
of
the
other
side
,
might
be
intreated
or
commaunded
toe
defend
the
same
;
or
if
they
refuse
this
,
then
at
least
some
competent
number
of
equall
iudges
,
might
be
assigned
on
both
sides
to
heare
the
matter
,
with
the
same
lawes
and
conditions
as
the
matter
passed
in
France
,
to
witt
,
that
no
point
of
controuersie
or
disputation
be
admitted
to
be
disputed
of
,
but
only
matter
of
fact
discussed
:
As
for
example
,
whether
such
and
such
places
and
authorityes
as
are
cyted
&
quoted
in
their
wrytings
,
out
of
Fathers
,
Doctors
,
Councells
,
and
storyes
,
and
are
auouched
by
Catholiks
to
be
falsified
,
be
so
or
no
?
If
this
(
I
say
)
might
be
obtayned
(
seeing
larger
triall
&
disputation
,
so
often
and
earnestly
by
vs
demaunded
,
cannot
be
had
)
and
that
by
the
wisdome
and
authority
of
her
Maiestie
&
her
honourable
Councell
,
this
at
last
might
be
brought
to
passe
;
yt
would
be
an
infinite
comfort
to
all
sincere
,
and
true
meaninge
men
of
all
sides
,
which
desyre
indeed
to
know
the
truth
.
And
as
for
the
triall
it selfe
,
yt
would
be
more
easy
,
breefe
and
pleasant
vnto
her
Maiestie
and
other
assistants
,
whosoeuer
they
should
be
;
For
that
as
the
B.
of
Eureux
well
noteth
before
,
yt
wil
be
sufficient
for
this
triall
,
to
bringe
only
eyes
,
and
to
open
the
books
,
whence
the
authorityes
are
cyted
.
And
to
the
end
that
some
tast
before
hand
may
be
taken
of
the
matter
,
which
would
breake
forth
in
such
a
triall
,
concerning
the
Protestants
part
;
I
haue
thought
good
to
adde
these
few
obseruations
that
do
ensue
,
which
are
of
a
person
that
would
willingly
offer
himselfe
in
this
seruice
,
or
at
least
to
send
,
and
represent
some
part
of
those
obseruations
,
which
to
this
effect
he
hath
gathered
.
CERTAINE
OBSERVATIONS
VPON
THE
FORMER
NARRATION
.
CHAP.
XI
.
THOVGH
yt
be
hard
for
any
man
to
reflect
,
and
make
obseruations
vnto
himselfe
,
of
what
may
best
be
noted
,
by
the
precedent
story
&
relation
;
yet
to
help
the
Readers
memory
,
&
to
stirre
vp
somwhat
more
his
vnderstandinge
,
and
discourse
about
the
premisses
,
I
haue
not
thought
amisse
to
resent
in
part
by
this
postscript
,
what
occurreth
vnto
me
in
this
behalfe
.
of
pure
ghospell
,
of
new
reueyled
truth
,
of
godly
reformation
,
and
other
like
pretenses
;
and
that
God
for
more
triall
and
exercise
of
his
said
Church
,
He
striketh
his
enemyes
in
the
hinder
parts
(
that
is
towards
the
end
of
their
ruffle
)
and
confoundeth
them
with
euerlasting
shame
.
Which
prophesy
of
the
Psalmist
is
principally
to
be
vnderstood
of
hereticall
enemyes
,
Tertullian
,
Epiphanius
&
other
ancient
Fathers
wryting
against
them
,
do
interprete
,
and
the
experience
of
like
end
in
all
heresies
past
doth
make
yt
playne
.
And
this
shame
and
confusion
of
heresies
&
heretiks
,
S.
Augustine
sheweth
largely
of
the
Arrians
,
Staphilus
,
Lyndanus
,
and
other
wryters
of
our
time
do
shew
the
same
of
Luthers
sect
,
diuided
into
so
many
sects
&
branches
in
so
few
yeares
,
as
all
the
world
seeth
.
And
Stanislaus
Rescius
,
a
learned
man
of
Polonia●
in
his
late
booke
of
the
Atheisine
,
of
haeretiks
,
sheweth
out
of
the
wrytings
of
protestants
themselues
,
that
in
the
yeare
1596.
when
he
wrote
his
booke
(
which
was
but
4.
yeares
past
)
that
there
were
now
extant
in
the
world
270.
different
sects
,
all
risen
out
of
Luthers
,
from
the
yeare
1517.
wherin
Luther
began
.
All
which
he
declareth
at
length
;
&
the
reason
of
this
so
great
multiplication
is
giuen
by
Tertullian
in
his
booke
Of
prescription
against
heretikes
aboue
1400.
That
for
so
much
as
euery
scholler
of
a
sectary
knoweth
,
that
his
maister
inuented
his
opinions
of
his
owne
head
,
he
will
inuent
also
somethinge
himselfe
,
therby
to
shew
that
his
witt
is
not
inferiour
to
that
of
his
Maisters
.
And
heerby
they
come
to
such
confusion
in
the
end
that
one
destroyeth
the
other
.
Wherof
Luther
himselfe
is
a
good
witnesse
,
when
he
wryteth
these
words
:
Truly
God
doth
not
fight
by
any
other
meanes
with
heretiks
,
then
by
permittinge
among
them
a
certayne
seditious
spiritt
of
dissention
,
by
which
their
ouerthrow
also
and
perdition
doeth
ensue
.
So
he
:
who
is
a
wittnesse
in
this
cause
without
exception
as
yow
know
.
The
second
reproach
followinge
sectaryes
is
Contradiction
to
themselues
,
Westphalus
Hesshusius
,
and
other
Lutheran
Protestants
,
that
wrote
against
him
.
The
third
confusion
that
followeth
commonly
vpon
heresie
,
And
thus
much
of
the
cause
of
this
third
reproach
;
For
as
for
the
effect
yt selfe
,
to
witt
,
that
these
fruits
haue
followed
in
the
world
,
since
heresies
came
in
,
much
more
then
euer
before
,
I
could
alleage
both
Luther
himselfe
,
diuision
among
themselues
,
contradiction
to
themselues
,
and
dissolution
of
life
,
or
propension
to
Atheisme
;
though
for
the
Readers
fuller
instruction
therin
(
yf
he
vnderstand
the
Latin
tongue
)
I
must
needs
giue
him
notice
of
two
famous
bookes
wrytten
of
late
of
that
argument
,
Maister
William
Reynolds
,
Caluino●
turcismus
:
that
is
of
Caluyns
Religion
leading
to
Turcisme
,
or
a
comparison
of
Turkish
Religion
with
Caluinisme
.
The
other
is
of
the
aforesaid
Polonian
gentleman
Stanislaus
Rescius
,
Embassadour
and
Treasorer
for
his
King
in
the
Kingdome
of
Naples●
,
where
his
said
worke
was
printed
4.
yeares
past
as
hath
byn
said
,
to
witt
in
the
yeare
1596.
and
yt
is
diuided
into
two
bookes
,
the
title
wherof
is
this
:
De
Atheismis
&
Phalerismis
Euangelicorum
nostri
temporis
,
libri
duo
:
quorum
prior
de
fide
,
posterior
tractat
de
operibus
eorum
.
Which
in
English
is
thus
:
Two
bookes
of
the
Atheismes
,
and
Phalerismes
(
or
crueltyes
)
of
the
ghospellers
of
our
tymes
,
wherof
the
first
treateth
of
their
faith
,
the
second
of
their
works
.
This
is
the
title
,
and
I
do
assure
the
Reader
,
yf
he
pervse
them
with
attention
and
indifferency
,
he
will
remayne
informed
by
their
readinge
,
and
not
a
little
astonished
,
to
behould
what
is
there
alleaged
out
of
the
wrytings
of
Protestants
themselues
,
and
other
authenticall
witnesses
in
this
behalfe
.
Of
the
other
worke
of
Maister
William
Reynolds
prouinge
that
Caluyns
Religion
is
worse
in
condition
,
and
lesse
probable
in
reason
,
then
that
of
the
Turke
,
&
hath
lesse
ground
&
substance
therin
,
then
the
other
:
(
for
all
this
,
and
much
more
he
declareth
in
this
worke
)
I
shall
not
need
to
treat
heere
,
nor
yet
giue
notice
of
the
booke
,
for
that
it
was
written
,
&
printed
very
lately
in
Flanders
;
&
is
(
no
doubt
)
or
may
be
easily
in
England
before
this
day
;
only
I
will
adde
this
of
the
iudgment
of
strangers
,
to
witt
,
that
by
testimony
and
asseueration
of
diuers
very
learned
men
of
other
nations
,
there
was
neuer
wrytten
a
thinge
in
that
kind
,
and
of
such
an
argument
more
excellent
in
respect
of
the
infinite
variety
of
hereticall
books
,
which
he
sheweth
to
haue
read
,
and
well
pondered
,
and
for
the
many
inuincible
reasons
&
demonstrations
which
he
alleageth
for
his
purpose
.
And
so
much
of
this
.
And
now
I
will
speake
somewhat
larger
of
the
fourth
reproach
and
shame
accompanyinge
comonly
heretiks
and
sectaryes
,
Plessis
Mornay
to
say
somewhat
;
and
the
accusation
of
ancient
Fathers
,
Martyn
Luther
their
great
Father
forseeinge
this
difficulty
,
&
not
willinge
at
the
beginninge
to
cast
himselfe
into
these
two
troublesome
labyrinthes
;
first
of
shiftinge
of
by
diuised
interpretations
those
manifold
authorityes
of
Fathers
,
that
were
to
be
brought
against
him
,
and
then
in
finding
out
other
Fathers
in
his
owne
behalfe
;
he
tooke
a
more
briefe
,
and
compendious
way
,
which
was
to
deny
and
contemne
them
all
,
for
so
he
doth
in
very
many
places
of
his
workes
,
protesting
at
the
very
beginning
almost
of
all
his
heresies
,
(
to
wit
in
the
yeare
1521.
)
in
an
epistle
wrytten
to
a
German
knight
,
that
he
was
tyed
by
the
authority
of
no
Father
,
though
neuer
so
holy
,
yf
he
were
not
approued
by
the
authority
of
holy
scriptures
:
wherof
you
must
imagine
himselfe
world
be
iudge
.
and
addeth
in
the
same
place
,
that
the
fathers
wrytings
were
full
of
errors
,
contrary
often
to
themselues
,
and
disagreeing
the
one
from
the
other
,
wrestinge
scriptures
;
and
the
like
.
The
same
also
he
saith
of
Councells
in
the
same
place
,
and
in
the
next
yeare
after
this
,
wrytinge
against
K.
Henry
the
8.
he
saith
:
I
do
oppose
against
all
the
testimonyes
of
fathers
,
of
men
neuer
so
holy
,
of
Angells
,
and
of
diuells
,
&c.
Wherby
we
may
see
,
what
accoumpt
he
made
of
Fathers
and
Councells
,
when
they
were
against
him
.
And
the
same
did
Zuinglius
,
Caluyn
,
and
others
after
him
for
a
tyme
,
when
Fathers
authorityes
plainly
were
against
them
,
and
could
not
be
shifted
of
,
by
sleight
interpretation
,
as
in
their
works
appeareth
:
and
Rescius
declareth
it
notably
and
largely
,
by
manifold
examples
,
and
places
in
his
tenth
Chapter
,
and
first
booke
aforesaid
.
But
when
this
audacity
grew
in
tyme
to
be
very
reproachfull
,
some
later
followers
of
theirs
blushinge
therat
,
and
desiringe
to
exercise
their
witts
in
a
higher
kind
of
subtility
,
Peter
martyr
in
the
●yeare
1549.
and
third
of
the
raigne
of
K.
Edward
the
6.
as
appeareth
by
Fox
in
the
last
edition
of
his
[
*
](A09107-e4740-b)
*
pag.
1549.
Acts
and
Monuments
.
And
this
perhaps
Peter
martyr
was
forced
to
do
at
that
tyme
,
by
commaundement
of
B.
Cranmer
and
others
of
the
priuy
Counsell
,
who
appointed
his
disputation
for
more
authorizing
of
their
new
decree
in
Religion
,
scarse
two
monethes
before
agreed
vpon
,
&
would
perforce
haue
the
Fathers
to
be
of
their
side
.
Peter
martyr
had
in
this
attempt
,
yt
may
appeare
su●●iciently
by
the
places
themselues
,
which
Fox
alleageth
for
him
out
of
ten
or
twelue
seuerall
Fathers
,
wherof
the
Reader
will
scarse
find
one
(
though
the
said
texts
be
breefely
alleaged
)
truly
cyted
,
in
all
respects
;
but
that
eyther
the
words
next
going
before●
or
immediatly
following
,
or
both
(
making
wholy
against
them
)
are
purposely
left
out
,
and
others
put
in
or
mistranslated
.
And
let
any
man
who
listeth
examine
the
same
,
and
conferre
them
with
the
authors
bookes
themselues
,
he
shall
find
this
to
be
true
.
part.
3.
c.
19.
&
20.
&
21.
of
the
Treatise
of
3.
counersions
of
England
.
For
I
haue
examined
them
with
some
diligence
my selfe
,
as
vpon
some
other
occasion
herafter
may
chance
appeare
,
but
now
yt
were
to
long
to
alleage
them
in
this
place
;
I
meane
the
manifest
falsifications
therin
vsed
.
But
yf
any
Protestant
in
defence
of
Peter
martyr
,
and
Iohn
Fox
h●s
honour
,
will
take
vpon
him
to
verify
the
same
,
and
their
quotations
to
be
good
,
and
without
fraud
;
lett
him
wryte
a
little
pamphlet
therof
(
as
easily
he
may
,
they
being
conteyned
in
lesse
then
one
page
)
&
he
shall
presently
be
answered
:
albeit
yf
he
do
but
sett
downe
the
whole
places
themselues
as
they
ly
in
the
Fathers
books
,
whence
they
are
cut
,
they
will
need
no
answere
,
but
will
answere
themselues
,
and
confute
the
alleager
,
and
shew
the
shamlesse
dealinge
eyther
of
Peter
martyr
or
Iohn
Fox
,
or
of
both
,
in
cytinge
them
.
The
like
deceytfull
dealinge
was
vsed
by
Nicolas
Ridley
B.
reall
presence
,
wherof
he
being
president
(
Martyn
Bucer
refusinge
vtterly
to
deale
in
that
controuersie
)
he
affirmed
to
the
whole
vniuersity
,
the
authority
,
Maiestie
,
and
verity
of
holy
scriptures
;
the
second
,
the
most
certayne
testimonyes
of
the
ancient
Catholike
Fathers
,
&c.
Wheras
the
truth
is
,
that
both
these
foundations
are
most
euidently
against
him
,
as
much
the
one
as
the
other
,
which
Bucer
well
k●ew
,
&
therfore
would
not
take
part
with
him
in
that
matter
,
though
soone
after
,
to
remedy
this
breach
,
he
putt
vp
three
other
impertinent
questions
to
be
disputed
against
Catholiks
;
but
in
this
other
article
,
he
know
that
Ridley
lyed
shamfully
against
his
owne
conscience
,
for
that
all
Farthers
are
against
him
most
euidently
;
&
so
do
the
Magdeburgians
their
cheefe
Protestant
Chroniclers
shew
&
declare
in
euery
age
,
of
doctrine
.
And
thus
much
for
K.
Edwards
dayes
,
when
Zuinglian
Religion
first
peeped
vp
in
our
countrey
.
After
this
man
,
stepped
to
Paules
Crosse
in
the
beginninge
of
this
Queenes
dayes
about
the
yeare
1559.
and
1560.
Maister
Iohn
Iewell
,
otherwise
called
B.
of
Salisbury
,
and
he
proceeded
yet
further
in
this
bragg
or
fiction
;
For
he
protested
there
,
euen
with
feigned
teares
,
that
yf
any
one
authority
,
place
,
sentence
,
or
asseueration
of
any
one
Father
,
Doctor
,
Councell
,
or
authenticall
history
,
within
the
first
600.
yeares
after
Christ
,
could
be
brought
forth
by
any
man
liuinge
for
any
one
of
those
points
of
Catholike
Religion
which
he
there
recyted
to
be
in
controuersie
,
that
then
plainely
and
sincerely
he
would
subscribe
.
Against
which
vayne
and
shamlesse
bragg
,
when
Doctor
Harding
,
and
diuers
other
learned
men
of
our
side
,
began
to
wryte
from
Louayne
,
and
to
bring
forth
authorityes
of
all
Fathers
,
Doctors
,
Councells
,
and
historyes
in
great
aboundance
,
the
first
effect
of
this
chalenge
,
that
appeared
to
the
world
,
was
a
seuere
proclamation
,
that
no
such
bookes
wrytten
in
English
by
the
Catholike
party
should
be
receaued
or
read
in
England
,
vnder
great
punishments
,
by
which
prouision
Maister
Iewell
thinking
himselfe
meetly
well
de●enced
,
he
plyed
the
pulpitt
often
,
and
renewed
his
chalenges
many
tymes
,
and
perceauing
notwithstanding
that
Doctor
Hardings
confutation
was
come
into
England
,
Maister
Iewell
pretended
to
his
cause
by
that
worke
,
knowing
full
well
,
that
this
sort
of
men
is
farre
the
greater
,
which
would
be
gayned
and
setled
in
his
doctrine
before
the
learneder
sort
(
who
are
but
few
in
comparison
of
the
other
)
could
haue
tyme
,
books
,
and
commodity
to
discouer
&
refute
him
,
&
when
they
should
do
yt
,
they
should
hardly
be
beleeued
.
And
in
this
conceate
he
was
not
deceaued
,
yf
we
respect
that
present
tyme
,
and
many
yeares
after
,
as
also
yt
is
probable
the
L.
Plessis
Mornay
had
the
like
designment
,
in
stuffing
vp
his
bookes
with
the
like
authorityes
of
Fathers
,
but
yf
we
consider
the
continuance
of
tyme
(
wherof
truth
is
said
to
be
the
daughter
)
yt
hath
succeeded
vnto
him
,
as
yow
haue
heard
,
and
will
do
more
and
more
dayly
,
as
to
such
shifts
is
wont
to
happen
,
that
is
to
say
(
accordinge
to
Kinge
Dauids
sayinge
before
recorded
)
●ppr●brium
sempiternum
dedit
eis
,
Maister
Iewells
,
&
to
examine
yt
by
the
authors
themselues
with
any
indifferency
of
mynd
;
haue
for
the
most
part
byn
therby
conuerted
to
Catholike
Religion
,
though
neuer
so
great
Protestants
before
:
of
which
sort
I
haue
heard
relation
of
many
,
but
of
some
I
can
testify
my selfe
,
for
that
I
haue
heard
it
from
their
owne
mouthes
,
who
of
earnest
Protestants
were
made
most
zealous
Catholikes
by
that
meanes
principally
;
of
which
number
I
thinke
yt
not
inconuenient
to
name
h●●re
some
2.
or
3.
omittinge
others
which
for
iust
respects
may
not
to
be
named
.
The
first
of
them
is
Syr
Thomas
Copley
,
Maister
Iewells
booke
was
newly
come
forth
,
he
being
also
learned
himselfe
in
the
Latyn
tongue
,
tooke
paines
to
examine
certayne
leaues
therof
,
and
findinge
many
falshoods
therin
,
which
were
in
excusable
(
as
they
seemed
to
him
)
he
conferred
the
same
with
the
said
Earle
,
who
willed
him
that
the
next
tyme
Maister
Iewell
dyned
at
his
table
,
he
should
take
occasion
after
dynner
to
propose
the
same
,
which
he
did
soone
after
;
and
receauing
certaine
triflinge
answers
from
Maister
Iewell
,
he
waxed
more
hoate
,
and
vrged
the
matter
more
earnestly
:
which
Iewell
perceauinge
,
That
Papists
were
Papists
,
and
so
they
were
to
be
dealt
withall
,
and
other
answere
he
could
not
gett
;
which
thinge
made
the
good
Gentleman
to
make
a
new
resolution
with
himselfe
,
and
to
take
that
happy
course
which
he
did
to
leaue
his
countrey
,
and
many
great
commodityes
,
which
he
enioyed
therin
,
to
enioy
the
liberty
of
conscience
,
for
saluation
of
his
soule
:
and
so
he
both
liued
and
died
in
voluntary
banishment
for
confession
of
that
truth
,
which
his
Sauiour
by
occasion
of
Maister
Iewells
falshood
,
had
reueyled
vnto
him
.
The
second
example
,
which
I
remember
of
my
owne
knowledge
,
Maister
Doctor
Steuens
,
a
learned
man
yet
aliue
,
who
being
Secretary
or
Chaplyn
to
Maister
Iewell
(
for
I
remember
not
well
whether
)
and
a
forward
man
in
Protestant
Religion
at
that
tyme
,
espied
certayne
false
allegations
in
his
Maisters
booke
,
whilst
yt
was
yet
vnder
the
print
in
London
,
wherof
aduertisinge
him
by
letters
(
for
that
he
supposed
yt
might
be
by
ouersight
)
the
other
commaunded
notwithstandinge
the
print
to
goe
forward
,
and
passed
it
ouer
as
it
was
,
which
this
man
seeing
,
that
had
a
conscience
,
and
sought
the
truth
indeed
,
resolued
to
take
another
way
of
findinge
yt
out
:
and
hauinge
found
yt
in
the
Catholike
Church
where
only
it
was
to
be
found
,
he
resolued
also
to
follow
yt
,
and
so
he
did
,
and
went
voluntarily
into
banishment
for
the
same
,
where
yet
he
liueth
vnto
this
day
in
France
,
with
good
reputation
both
of
learninge
and
godlynes
.
The
third
example
that
I
call
to
mynd
,
is
the
worthy
man
before
named
Maister
William
Reynolds
,
Maisters
Iewells
booke
,
and
did
translate
some
part
thereof
into
Latyn
:
but
before
he
had
passed
halfe
ouer
,
he
found
such
stuffe
,
as
made
him
greatly
mislike
of
the
whole
Religion
,
and
so
he
leauing
his
hopes
,
&
commodityes
in
England
went
ouer
the
sea
into
these
parts
,
and
the
last
yeare
of
Iubiley
,
to
witt
,
1575.
he
came
to
Rome
,
and
brought
that
booke
with
him
,
Maister
Iewells
wrytyngs
,
wherof
,
he
that
will
see
more
,
lett
him
read
Maister
Hardings
returne
of
vntruthes
,
but
especially
yt
would
import
him
that
hath
learninge
,
leasure
and
commodity
,
to
examine
the
quotations
themselues
by
a
good
library
:
but
in
this
kind
of
false
dealinge
,
I
can
giue
Maister
Iewell
a
compagnion
as
good
as
himselfe
,
yf
not
exceedinge
him
,
which
is
Iohn
Fox
,
who
aboue
all
that
euer
wrote
perhaps
,
may
be
recorded
for
notorious
in
this
behalfe
.
I
haue
had
occasion
these
[
*
](A09107-e5590-b)
*
This
may
appeare
by
the
Treatise
of
3.
conuersions
of
England
.
sett
●orth
in
three
Tomes
.
monethes
past
to
peruse
a
great
part
of
his
last
edition
of
Acts
and
Monuments
,
printed
the
fifth
tyme
in
the
yeare
1596.
and
do
find
it
so
stuffed
with
all
kind
of
falshood
,
and
deceytfull
manner
of
telling
tales
,
as
I
could
neuer
(
truly
)
haue
beleeued
yt
,
yf
I
had
not
found
yt
by
my
owne
experience
.
And
I
do
persuade
my selfe
fully
(
notwithstandinge
all
his
hypocriticall
words
and
protestations
,
which
are
more
,
and
oftener
repeated
by
him
,
then
in
all
the
wryters
togeather
,
that
I
haue
read
in
my
life
)
that
there
is
scarse
one
whole
story
in
that
huge
volume
,
told
by
himselfe
,
except
when
he
relateth
other
mens
words
out
of
records
,
and
therby
is
bound
to
the
formality
therof
,
Maister
Fox
his
falshoods
,
do
I
make
accompt
of
any
errors
or
ouersights
(
though
neuer
so
grosse
)
that
are
found
in
him
,
as
to
reckon
some
for
Martyrs
that
were
aliue
at
the
making
of
his
booke
:
(
for
this
he
excuseth
in
his
later
edition
,
in
that
he
was
deceaued
by
false
informations
)
nor
do
I
vrge
that
others
are
made
Calendar-martyrs
by
him
,
whome
he
cannot
gainsay
,
but
that
they
were
malefactors
,
and
some
of
them
eyther
[
*
](A09107-e5630-b)
*
See
the
story
of
Collyns
and
Co●bridge
10
&
11.
Octobris
part.
1.
madde
or
denyed
Christ
himselfe
,
and
yet
placeth
he
them
in
his
Calendar
,
for
Saints
:
These
escaped
(
I
say
)
are
not
heere
to
be
vrged
by
me
now
,
but
rather
in
another
place
.
The
points
that
I
for
the
present
accuse
him
of
,
are
willfull
corruptions
,
and
falsifications
that
cannot
be
excused
:
as
among
other
things
(
and
for
examples
sake
)
when
he
recyteth
any
point
in
controuersie
of
the
Catholiks
doctrine
,
he
putteth
yt
downe
commonly
in
plaine
contrary
words
&
sense
,
to
that
which
he
must
needs
know
that
they
holde
and
teach
,
for
so
much
as
their
publike
books
are
extant
in
euery
mans
hands
to
testifie
the
same
.
Of
this
kind
,
[
*
](A09107-e5670-b)
*
Now
they
are
found
to
be
quadruple
to
witt
aboue
●20
.
Se
part.
3.
cap.
22.
of
the
Treatise
of
3.
conuersions
of
England
.
double
the
former
number
;
and
I
do
offer
to
proue
them
one
by
one
,
yf
any
frend
of
Iohn
Fox
will
ioyne
issue
with
me
vpon
this
point
.
And
then
yf
by
Arithmetique
a
man
will
multiply
these
lyes
&
falsifications
of
two
leaues
only
,
with
a
thousand
and
more
,
which
Fox
hath
in
this
last
volume
,
and
will
adde
afterward
to
euery
two
leaues
so
many
falshoods
;
the
number
will
rise
to
so
huge
an
accoumpt
,
as
were
a
shame
to
sett
downe
;
and
would
much
surpasse
Iohn
Sley●ans
Story
in
this
kind
(
though
he
be
the
Protestants
Protochronicler
)
out
of
which
an
eleuen
thousand
lyes
were
only
gathered
by
the
Catholike
wryters
of
Germany
.
The
end
of
the
relation
;
there
followeth
the
defence
.
A
DEFENCE
OF
THE
PRECEDENT
RELATION
against
the
shiftes
,
calumniations
,
and
tergiuersations
,
as
well
of
the
L.
Plessis
himselfe
,
and
some
of
his
Hugonotes
in
France
;
as
of
their
Proctor
O.
E.
in
England
.
The
Preface
,
concerninge
the
authority
of
the
Actes
sett
forth
in
France
.
THE
former
relation
being
sett
downe
wholy
and
entirely
as
yt
was
printed
in
the
yeare
1600.
(
though
somwhere
more
explaned
,
and
towards
the
end
made
s●orter
)
I
am
first
to
yeld
a
reason
in
this
place
,
why
the
passages
or
points
accused
of
falshood
that
were
handled
in
the
conference
ensue
not
heere
,
as
they
did
in
the
former
edition
:
wherof
the
cause
is
,
for
that
those
passages
indeed
,
were
neuer
seene
or
viewed
by
the
relator
himselfe
,
but
added
only
by
a
frend
(
as
in
the
preface
therof
is
signified
)
according
to
his
wrytten
copy
receaued
from
Paris
;
which
copy
,
though
it
agree
in
truth
and
substance
,
with
the
publike
Acts
themselues
,
of
that
conference
which
afterward
haue
byn
authentically
〈◊〉
sorth
,
yet
for
that
the
points
are
not
so
cleerly
laid
open
,
as
some
men
perhaps
would
require
,
I
haue
thought
good
to
relate
the
same
againe
in
this
my
defence
,
out
of
the
said
Acts
themselues
.
Concerning
which
Acts
,
yow
are
to
consider
,
that
about
some
two
or
three
monethes
after
the
said
conference
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
Monsieur
Plessis
and
his
Hugonote
Ministers
,
hauinge
departed
and
broken
vp
the
said
conference
,
in
the
manner
and
sort
which
a
little
after
yow
shall
heare
,
and
findinge
themselues
extreemely
gauled
,
with
so
dishonourable
an
euent
;
resolued
for
some
remedy
,
to
sett
forth
a
certayne
discourse
in
French
without
name
of
the
Author
,
the
Title
heerof
was
.
A
true
discourse
of
the
conference
held
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
Secondly
they
diuised
,
S.
Aug●
〈◊〉
Breuiculo
.
vpon
better
deliberation
,
new
defences
for
the
points
wherin
they
had
byn
condemned
in
the
conference
,
as
both
the
Arrians
did
after
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
wherin
they
were
condemned
,
and
the
Donatists
after
their
conference
with
the
Catholiks
at
Carthage
,
and
as
euery
man
condemned
at
our
English
barres
would
do
,
yf
they
might
haue
replyes
allowed
them
,
after
their
condemnations
.
The
third
point
of
euasion
vsed
by
them
is
,
recrimination
,
that
is
to
say
,
to
shew
that
others
also
do
falsifie
besides
them
,
and
haue
vsed
fraud
in
their
quotations
,
which
though
yt
were
true
(
as
in
the
particulars
obiected
,
is
shewed
by
the
defender
that
they
are
all
false
)
yet
were
it
no
honourable
defence
as
each
man
will
confesse
.
And
this
is
the
summe
of
that
discourse
,
and
the
confutation
therof
.
Now
then
for
so
much
as
Plessis
,
and
his
frends
had
published
this
false
discourse
;
yt
was
thought
good
by
the
K.
&
his
Councell
vpon
request
of
the
Catholiks
,
that
the
authenticall
Acts
of
the
said
conference
,
and
all
particularityes
passed
therin
,
and
taken
fourth
by
seuerall
publike
notaryes
appointed
for
that
purpose
before
hand
,
and
one
of
them
of
the
new
religion
,
should
be
examined
anew
,
vpon
the
depositions
as
well
of
the
said
notaryes
,
as
also
of
200.
more
,
and
so
published
to
the
world
,
which
was
done
,
and
the
whole
presented
to
the
K.
by
the
B.
of
Eureux
vpon
the
29.
of
August
in
the
same
yeare
1600.
which
epistle
,
for
that
it
is
short
&
very
substantiall
,
I
haue
thought
good
to
relate
heere
for
a
foundation
of
all
that
is
to
●ollow
,
&
for
creditt
of
the
Acts
themselues
.
Thus
then
he
wryteth
to
the
King
himselfe
that
was
present
,
and
an
eye-witnesse
of
all
.
To
the
Kinge
.
Sire
.
I
would
neuer
haue
beleeued
,
Aug.
an.
1600.
that
so
publike
&
renowned
an
action
,
as
that
of
the
conference
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
represented
in
one
of
the
most
illustrious
Theaters
of
the
world
,
and
adorned
with
the
presence
of
your
Maiestie
,
of
so
many
Princes
&
officers
of
the
crowne
,
Counsellours
of
Estate
,
and
other
Lords
&
nobles
of
great
marke
;
could
haue
bin
called
in
question
,
or
that
any
man
could
haue
byn
found
,
that
will
dare
to
take
vpon
him
to
peruert
,
or
disguise
the
knowne
verity
therof
,
for
which
cause
I
haue
abstayned
hitherto
to
wryte
any
thinge
of
that
matter
,
least
by
publishinge
my
priuate
testimony
therof
,
I
should
seeme
to
enfeeble
the
depositions
of
200.
persons
of
more
authenticall
creditt
then
myne
owne
:
but
yet
seeing
now
that
Monsieur
du
Plessis
contrary
to
the
saith
and
witnesse
of
so
many
eyes
&
eares
,
as
were
there
present
,
and
contrary
to
the
testimony
both
of
the
mouth
and
pen
of
your
Maiestie
,
hath
cast
forth
into
the
field
a
certayne
new
discourse
,
wherin
by
his
eloquence
of
Pe●icles
,
he
will
needs
go
about
to
persuade
those
that
were
present
at
the
Conference
,
contrary
to
that
which
they
saw
,
and
those
that
were
absent
contrary
to
that
which
so
credibly
they
haue
heard
:
I
haue
thought
conuenient
by
your
Maiesties
permission
,
to
lend
him
the
paines
of
a
few
dayes
labour
for
settinge
forth
the
true
description
of
the
fact
it selfe
,
as
yt
passed
,
and
therby
to
dissolue
all
his
cunninge
illusions
,
and
inchauntments
.
Wherfore
,
Soueraigne
Lord
,
I
do
offer
heer●
vnto
your
Maiestie
the
simple
verity
of
the
history
as
she
lyeth
in
the
Acts
in
her
naturall
white
habyt
,
without
colours
or
paintings
,
most
humbly
beseechinge
your
highnesse
,
that
yow
will
vouchsafe
to
see
the
same
,
or
cause
yt
to
be
seene
and
examined
by
such
,
of
whose
wisdome
&
grauity
your
Maiestie
standeth
most
assured
;
and
yf
it
shal
be
found
to
be
such
,
as
heere
I
do
qualifie
yt
,
that
then
permission
may
be
giuen
to
publish
the
same
for
a
faithfull
image
and
representation
to
posterity
,
of
that
which
there
fell
out
.
And
yf
Monsieur
du
Plessis
do
hold
himselfe
content
with
that
which
passed
in
this
conference
,
he
hath
in
his
hands
other
52.
articles
to
be
examined
as
the
remnant
of
those
60.
which
were
agreed
vpon
for
the
first
Conference
,
from
which
he
departed
without
bidding
any
man
fare
well
,
and
hath
had
tyme
inough
since
that
to
study
better
vpon
them
:
I
for
my
part
am
ready
to
giue
him
the
same
exercise
vpon
the
said
articles
,
as
I
did
vpon
the
other
9.
handled
at
Fountayne
bleau
,
and
after
these
ended
to
come
to
the
other
that
do
remaine
of
the
500.
falsifications
,
which
I
haue
bound
my selfe
to
proue
against
him
;
and
so
much
the
more
willingly
would
I
passe
to
the
examination
of
those
other
articles
;
by
how
much
more
graue
the
authors
are
,
and
the
matters
more
important
,
&
his
deprauations
more
enormous
then
those
we
haue
handled
as
chosen
out
by
himselfe
,
and
in
the
meane
space
I
shall
lifte
vp
my
hands
to
heauen
,
&
pray
almighty
God
to
continue
his
grace
towards
your
Maiesty
from
better
to
better
,
and
to
establish
his
Kingdome
togeather
with
yours
,
&c.
At
Condie
this
29.
of
August
.
1600.
This
was
the
letter
and
request
of
the
B.
of
Eureux
for
examination
and
publishinge
of
the
Acts
;
whervnto
the
K.
agreeing
,
commytted
the
reuew
therof
vnto
certayne
of
his
Counselle
,
which
had
byn
present
at
the
said
conference
,
and
findinge
the
same
to
be
sincere
,
and
true
in
all
respects
,
as
his
Maiestie
testifieth
,
gaue
order
for
the
publication
therof
by
his
letters
patents
,
signed
at
Lyons
in
France
the
22.
of
December
1600.
Wherfore
out
of
these
acts
,
as
most
true
and
authenticall
,
I
shall
frame
this
my
defence
,
though
very
breifely
,
against
the
extrauagant
ouerlashings
of
O.
E.
in
his
answere
,
who
saith
&
denyeth
at
his
pleasure
without
authority
,
wyttnesse
,
reason
,
or
probability
,
as
after
shall
appeare
by
that
which
ensueth
.
WHAT
IS
CONTEYNED
MORE
IN
PRINT
ABOVT
THE
fact
it selfe
of
the
Conference
had
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
then
is
comprehended
in
my
former
Relation
,
CHAP.
I.
FOR
that
my
briefe
narration
before
recited
,
was
founded
only
vpon
certayne
letters
sent
from
Paris
to
Rome
presently
after
the
conference
had
,
as
by
pervsing
therof
yow
haue
seene
,
and
my
purpose
also
was
to
be
very
briefe
;
I
could
not
sett
downe
so
many
particularityes
,
as
these
acts
do
now
represent
:
yet
do
I
find
that
whatsoeuer
I
related
before
,
is
now
confirmed
againe
by
these
acts
,
and
diuers
things
added
,
wherof
some
principall
I
shall
heere
touch
in
few
words
,
cytinge
the
leafe
of
the
said
Acts
,
wherin
they
may
be
read
more
largely
.
The
title
of
the
said
Acts
is
this
:
Actes
de
la
conference
tenue
,
&c.
Acts
of
the
conference
held
betweene
the
L.
Bishop
of
Eureux
,
and
the
L.
Plessis
in
presence
of
the
King
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
the
fourth
of
May
1600.
published
by
the
permission
and
authority
of
his
Maiestie
,
&c.
the
same
yeare
1600.
And
thus
much
of
the
title
,
now
to
the
contents
.
The
first
occasion
of
this
combatt
,
Act.
fol.
1.
sett
downe
in
these
Acts
is
,
that
vpon
the
20.
day
of
March
anno
1600.
a
great
noble
man
of
Normandy
named
,
Lord
Sainct-Mary
du
Mont
,
a
Protestant
at
that
tyme
,
but
soone
after
conuerted
,
meetinge
with
Monsiear
Plessis
at
the
lodginge
of
the
Lady
Princesse
of
Orange
in
Paris
,
told
him
how
he
was
cryed
out
of
euery
where
about
the
falsifications
found
in
his
booke
lately
printed
against
the
Masse
,
&
that
himselfe
had
seene
some
shewed
vnto
him
by
the
B.
of
Eureux
which
he
could
not
solue
.
Heervpon
Monsieur
Plessis
thinkinge
himselfe
touched
greatly
in
honour
,
did
iudge
yt
the
best
way
to
make
a
publike
Chalenge
to
the
said
B.
of
Eureux
,
which
he
wrote
and
gaue
abroad
the
very
same
day
,
and
the
L.
Sainct-Mary
sent
one
of
them
presently
to
the
B.
wherevnto
he
made
answere
,
acceptinge
of
his
Chalenge
,
vpon
the
25.
of
March
,
which
letters
before
I
[
*
](A09107-e6490-b)
*
Supra
cap.
3.
haue
alleaged
;
and
soone
after
the
said
Bishopp
thinking
yt
conuenient
to
print
and
publish
the
same
,
did
so
,
and
sent
a
copy
therof
to
the
King
,
togeather
with
a
letter
of
his
owne
hand
of
the
28.
of
March
,
wherin
amongst
other
words
he
saith
thus
:
I
do
send
vnto
your
Maiestie
a
Chalenge
of
Monsieur
Plessis
made
about
the
examen
of
his
allegations
in
his
booke
against
the
Masse
,
Act.
fol.
5.
togeather
with
my
answere
to
the
same
.
I
should
be
vnworthy
to
serue
so
great
and
noble
a
King
,
and
of
so
high
courage
at
your
Maiestie
is
,
yf
I
should
refuse
such
a
Chalenge
,
especially
in
a
quarrell
that
may
be
ended
without
bloud
,
and
tend
much
to
the
glory
of
almighty
God
,
and
to
the
saluation
os
him
that
shal
be
ouercome
,
and
therfore
I
do
most
humbly
beseech
your
Maiestie
to
permitt
this
triall
,
&c.
Heervpon
Monsieur
Plessis
vnderstandinge
that
the
B.
had
wrytten
to
the
King
,
he
wrote
also
another
to
his
Maiestie
to
the
same
effect
,
&
returned
likewayes
an
[
*
](A09107-e6570-b)
*
Supra
cap.
4.
answere
to
the
Bishop
,
shewinge
himselfe
willinge
to
goe
forward
in
the
said
triall
,
but
with
diuers
exceptions
and
diuersions
,
as
in
the
said
letter
appeareth
,
which
we
haue
related
before
.
The
King
hauinge
receaued
these
letters
from
both
partyes
,
and
conferred
the
same
with
his
Counsell
,
resolued
to
permitt
the
triall
demaunded
,
as
also
to
be
present
theratt
himselfe
,
and
so
gaue
order
to
the
L.
Chancelour
of
France
vpon
the
second
of
Aprill
,
to
warne
the
partyes
to
prepare
themselues
,
and
to
be
ready
for
the
beginninge
of
the
next
moneth
with
all
prouision
necessary
for
that
Triall
.
In
the
meane
space
the
Popes
Nuntius
that
lay
in
Paris
hearinge
of
an
appointment
for
triall
of
matters
in
Religion
,
began
to
make
some
difficulty
to
permitt
any
such
publike
act
,
appertayning
to
the
vniuersall
cause
of
Christendome
,
without
licence
and
approbation
of
the
Sea
Apostolike
,
and
proofe
of
the
persons
that
must
dispute
,
alleaginge
that
it
was
a
thinge
inconuenient
to
lay
the
creditt
of
so
great
and
generall
a
cause
of
Religion
vpon
the
learning
of
any
particular
man
whatsoeuer
,
Actes
fol.
8.
9.
10.
without
necessity
.
But
when
he
was
answered
by
the
B.
and
after
by
the
K.
himselfe
,
and
others
,
that
their
meaninge
was
not
to
dispute
of
controuersies
,
but
only
to
examine
places
cited
by
Monsieur
Plessis
whether
they
were
truly
and
faithfully
calleaged
or
no
?
and
that
this
should
be
sett
downe
and
obserued
as
the
first
law
of
this
conference
,
the
Nuntius
was
satisfied
,
and
so
the
day
was
appointed
,
his
Maiestie
commandinge
expressely
,
that
the
conference
should
be
made
with
all
sweetnesse
and
courtesie
,
&c.
So
in
the
meane
space
diuers
things
were
set
in
order
necessary
for
that
conference
,
as
namely
for
choosinge
the
iudges
on
both
sides
,
and
principall
assistance
without
all
partiality
,
to
witt
,
learned
,
wise
and
graue
men
,
to
the
end
that
all
might
passe
with
indifferency
,
loue
,
and
charity
,
as
much
as
might
bee
;
&
namely
for
the
Catholiks
,
was
chosen
the
president
of
Tou
,
a
great
learned
man
,
vpright
&
constant
,
and
a
neere
kinsman
and
frend
to
Monsieur
Plessis
.
Monsieur
Pitheu
,
aduocate
in
the
Court
of
Parlament
of
Paris
a
man
both
graue
and
generally
well
learned
,
and
a
●amiliar
frend
also
to
Monsieur
Plessis
.
The
third
was
Monsieur
le
Feure
Maister
of
the
Prince
of
Condie
.
And
on
the
other
side
were
named
the
President
Calignon
,
Chauncelour
of
Nauarre
,
and
the
Lord
de
Fresne
Canaye
president
of
the
Chamber
of
Parlament
appointed
for
them
of
the
new
Religion
in
Languidoc
,
and
Monsieur
Cazaubon
Reader
of
his
Maiestie
in
Paris
,
all
earnest
,
learned
and
iuditious
Protestants
.
The
K.
departed
from
Paris
the
21.
of
Aprill
to
Fountayne
bleau
to
hold
there
the
conference
,
leauing
order
with
the
L.
Chancelour
,
that
the
next
weeke
followinge
,
he
with
the
rest
of
the
iudges
and
deputyes
should
follow
,
and
bringe
the
B.
of
Eureux
with
them
;
&
so
they
did
,
arriuing
at
Fountayne-bleau
the
27.
of
Aprill
,
and
the
next
day
arriued
also
Monsieur
Plessis
,
Against
the
Masse
,
and
therby
infamed
the
same
,
that
yt
might
be
examined
page
by
page
,
and
leafe
by
leafe
,
as
before
he
had
demaunded
,
but
the
B.
refused
this
for
the
same
reasons
which
he
had
alleaged
before
in
his
[
*
](A09107-e7010-b)
*
Supra
cap.
3.
letter
to
Monsieur
Plessis
,
principally
for
that
yt
was
but
a
refuge
to
draw
out
tyme
,
he
well
knowinge
that
yt
would
neuer
be
ended
.
The
second
demaund
was
,
that
all
such
places
of
his
booke
,
as
the
B.
did
not
accuse
of
falsity
,
might
be
esteemed
as
allowed
and
approued
after
this
conference
.
But
this
also
the
B.
said
was
no
reason
,
for
that
perhapps
other
men
would
find
other
faults
in
other
places
,
which
he
had
not
examined
,
and
that
after
these
first
500.
now
obiected
,
were
examined
,
he
offered
to
be
bound
to
go
ouer
his
whole
booke
,
page
by
page
,
and
lyne
by
lyne
as
Plessis
desired
.
The
third
petition
was
,
that
if
this
might
not
be
graunted
,
that
at
least
the
Bishopp
would
giue
him
in
wrytinge
,
the
first
500.
places
,
that
he
had
noted
togeather
with
his
proofes
,
against
the
same
,
and
that
he
might
haue
tyme
to
examine
them
before
hands
,
to
cutt
of
long
disputes
before
his
Maiestie
.
But
to
this
the
Bishopp
aunswered
in
like
manner
,
that
if
he
did
so
,
the
other
would
aske
so
much
tyme
to
examine
them
,
as
he
would
delude
this
conference
now
appointed
.
Wherfore
he
offered
,
that
yf
the
present
triall
might
go
forward
,
he
would
send
him
50.
places
the
day
before
to
prouide
himselfe
for
the
first
day
,
and
so
50.
the
next
day
,
for
the
second
conference
,
and
so
forth
for
10.
dayes
togeather
,
vntill
all
the
500.
were
examined
.
The
fourth
demaund
was
,
that
the
same
order
might
be
held
in
examininge
his
booke
,
which
he
had
held
in
wrytinge
the
same
,
to
witt
beginninge
from
the
first
part
therof
,
&c.
But
this
also
the
Bishopp
refused
,
sayinge
that
it
was
only
a
shift
,
for
that
Plessis
comonly
had
handled
only
light
points
in
the
first
part
of
his
booke
,
wheron
it
was
no
reason
to
stand
and
leese
tyme
,
but
rather
as
an
accuser
he
might
begin
where
he
would
,
and
that
Plessis
was
bound
to
aunswere
him
:
yet
for
the
last
vpshott
&
to
end
all
,
he
offered
the
King
,
to
giue
the
whole
500.
places
presently
into
his
Maiesties
hands
in
wrytynge
,
&
so
to
take
them
from
him
euery
day
by
50.
at
once
,
to
be
examined
in
ten
dayes
,
as
is
afore
said
,
and
after
this
he
said
,
he
would
bynd
himselfe
to
remaine
a
whole
moneth
with
him
in
Paris
or
els
where
he
should
thinke
best
,
to
examine
the
rest
of
the
4000.
After
this
vpon
the
second
day
of
May
all
the
iudges
and
comissaryes
being
now
arriued
(
except
the
President
Calignon
,
that
remained
sicke
in
Paris
)
Monsieur
Plessis
gaue
vp
another
Memoriall
to
the
King
,
requyring
yet
once
againe
,
that
the
Bishop
would
giue
him
in
wrytinge
the
500.
places
gathered
against
him
,
or
at
least
wayes
deliuer
them
vp
into
the
hands
of
the
Iudges
,
Monsieur
Plessis
to
the
king
.
with
commission
that
yf
this
conference
were
broken
of
,
they
should
deliuer
them
into
the
hands
of
the
said
Plessis
,
and
that
duringe
the
conference
,
they
should
deliuer
him
only
50.
a
day
.
Whervpon
the
King
calling
the
Bishop
into
his
great
gallery
in
the
presence
of
the
Chancelour
,
and
of
Monsieur
Rosny
president
of
the
finances
,
as
also
of
the
president
of
Tou
,
Cazaubon
,
and
others
,
asked
him
why
he
would
not
yeld
to
this
demaund
;
whervnto
he
answered
as
before
,
saying
that
this
was
but
a
new
delay
,
therby
to
gett
into
his
hands
the
whole
500.
places
,
and
then
to
seeke
to
answere
them
rather
by
wrytinge
,
then
by
present
conference
,
which
he
might
breake
of
by
diuers
occasions
,
Whervpon
the
Lords
present
as
well
Protestants
as
Catholiks
said
,
that
the
Bishopp
had
good
reason
in
his
answers
to
Plessis
his
demaunds
,
and
thervpon
the
Chancelour
was
commanded
by
the
King
to
goe
&
pronounce
this
arrest
vnto
the
said
L.
Plessis
,
and
that
yf
he
would
not
go
forward
,
Monsieur
Plessis
threatened
by
the
king
.
as
he
had
promised
,
his
Maiestie
would
take
another
course
,
&
proceed
to
the
examination
of
his
booke
in
his
absence
,
Monsieur
Plessis
;
and
namely
two
noble
men
Protestants
named
Castelnau
&
Chambaret
,
as
also
the
president
Fresne
Canay
cheefe
deputy
of
their
side
,
tooke
in
hand
to
deale
betwene
the
King
,
Plessis
&
the
Bishop
,
&
after
many
goings
&
commings
,
messages
,
answers
&
replyes
,
Syr
,
of
the
60.
passages
sent
me
by
the
Bishop
of
Eureux
,
I
haue
had
tyme
only
to
examine
and
verifie
19.
and
of
these
I
will
leese
my
honour
,
and
life
,
yf
he
fynd
one
false
.
I
shall
proue
my selfe
this
day
before
your
Maiestie
,
to
be
another
manner
of
man
,
then
he
esteemeth
me
.
These
were
his
words
.
Which
being
heard
,
the
King
sent
presently
for
the
Bishop
,
and
gaue
him
the
list
of
the
19.
places
,
which
Plessis
had
chosen
to
defend
,
which
list
when
the
Bishopp
had
read
,
he
tould
the
King
&
the
deputyes
,
that
stood
present
with
him
that
he
found
deceatfull
dealinge
in
euery
point
,
for
that
these
60.
places
being
gathered
in
hast
and
tumultuously
,
Monsieur
Plessis
,
and
put
togeather
as
they
lay
in
order
,
he
had
chosen
to
defend
them
,
not
as
they
stood
in
the
Catalogue
,
but
by
particular
election
,
to
witt
the
27.
39.
44.
50.
53.
56.
&c.
And
whereas
there
were
most
of
the
ancient
fathers
named
in
this
list
as
corrupted
by
him
,
&
only
two
schoolmen
among
the
rest
for
example
sake
,
to
witt
Scotus
and
Durandus
,
he
had
gui●fully
placed
them
in
the
first
ranke
of
his
19.
placed
to
begin
withall
,
as
captaynes
of
the
rest
therby
to
disauthorize
the
whole
conference
,
and
to
weary
the
hearers
,
as
though
the
cheefe
moment
of
the
triall
had
byn
about
Scotus
and
Durandus
.
After
dynner
about
one
of
the
clocke
,
the
said
conference
was
begone
in
presence
of
his
Maiestie
,
and
of
a
great
number
of
the
cheefe
nobles
of
France
,
which
were
long
to
name
;
for
before
the
K.
L.
Chancelour
and
the
deputyes
of
both
partyes
before
named
;
and
at
his
right
hand
satt
the
Archbishopp
of
Lyons
and
sundry
other
Bishopps
,
and
on
his
left
hand
the
4.
secretaryes
of
State
,
&
behind
the
King
sate
the
Princes
,
namely
the
Dukes
of
Vaudemont
,
Nemeurs
,
Mercury
,
Dumayne
,
Niuers
,
Elbeuse
,
Aignilon
,
Ianuile
,
and
others
,
and
after
them
againe
the
officers
of
the
crowne
,
Counselors
of
State
.
and
others
of
the
nobility
,
and
about
200.
other
hearers
within
the
chamber
,
&
aboue
500.
in
a
gallery
and
garden
without
,
expecting
the
resolution
from
passage
to
passage
,
wherof
there
were
many
Protestants
and
diuers
Ministers
of
the
new
Keligion
.
All
being
sett
,
the
L.
Chancelour
made
first
a
briefe
speech
,
confirmed
afterward
by
the
King
himselfe
,
that
the
meaning
of
this
meeting
was
to
try
out
the
truth
of
certaine
allegations
,
that
were
called
in
controuersy
in
the
L.
Plessis
booke
,
and
not
to
dispute
of
any
article
of
Religion
at
all
;
to
which
effect
also
the
Bishop
had
a
breefe
speech
,
alleaging
the
example
of
Eugenius
Archbishop
of
Carthage
,
Monsieur
Plessis
also
,
made
a
very
short
preface
,
saying
that
as
he
had
wrytten
his
books
with
intent
to
do
God
seruice
for
the
reformation
of
his
Church
,
and
would
thinke
himselfe
happy
,
L.
Plessis
speach
&
protestation
.
yf
he
could
help
any
thing
therin
:
so
was
he
so
farre
of
from
all
intention
of
willfull
falsifyinge
,
that
yf
he
knew
his
right
hand
to
haue
done
yt
,
he
should
be
the
first
to
burne
the
same
.
He
made
mention
againe
,
and
shewed
greefe
,
The
B.
repeated
againe
the
matter
of
4000.
places
corrupted
,
and
offered
to
stand
vnto
yt
,
and
to
verifie
them
as
well
,
as
those
500.
new
agreed
vpon
,
and
repeated
againe
breifely
the
whole
story
of
this
action
,
and
how
guilfully
Plessis
had
proceeded
in
cullinge
out
19.
places
only
of
60.
offered
him
,
and
of
these
had
put
in
the
first
ranke
Scotus
and
Durand
two
schoolemen
,
about
the
controuersie
of
the
Sacrament
,
S.
Cyprian
,
S.
Cyrill
,
S.
Chrisostome
,
&
other
ancient
Fathers
,
obiected
to
haue
bin
corrupted
by
him
in
the
very
same
controuersie
of
the
reall
presence
amongst
the
number
of
these
three
score
:
which
fraud
,
to
the
end
the
iudges
and
deputyes
might
see
and
behould
,
he
laid
downe
vpon
the
table
that
stood
before
them
the
whole
Catalogue
of
the
said
60.
places
sent
the
day
before
to
Plessis
:
which
being
done
,
the
King
comaunded
the
foure
secretaryes
of
the
crowne
,
to
wryte
only
the
conclusions
and
iudgments
that
should
be
giuen
,
and
not
the
whole
speaches
,
for
yt
would
be
ouerlonge
.
and
so
the
conference
began
,
the
B.
sayinge
at
the
opening
of
the
first
booke
Domine
labi●
mea
aperies
.
&
os
meum
annunciabit
laudem
tuam
.
Monsieur
Plessis
also
prayed
briefly
with
his
hatt
before
his
face
,
&c.
OF
NINE
PLACES
EXAMINED
IN
THIS
FIRST
DAYES
conference
,
and
how
they
were
all
iudged
by
sentence
of
the
deputyes
to
haue
byn
corrupted
by
Monsieur
Plessis
.
CHAP.
II.
IN
this
first
dayes
conference
,
which
endured
6.
houres
,
there
could
be
examined
only
9.
places
of
the
19.
which
Plessis
had
chosen
to
defend
,
of
which
nine
also
the
first
two
by
his
art
and
fraude
,
(
as
in
the
former
Chapter
hath
byn
seene
)
were
of
2.
schoolemen
,
or
scholasticall
wryters
,
Scotus
,
and
Durandus
,
which
being
only
named
for
example
sake
by
the
B.
of
Eureux
in
his
catalogue
of
60.
places
,
(
but
yet
after
many
more
important
then
they
of
the
ancient
Fathers
)
which
Plessis
thought
good
to
thrust
backe
,
S.
Cyprian
,
S.
Cyrill
of
Ierusalem
,
S.
Iohn
Christostome
and
others
cited
in
the
same
controuersie
,
and
many
more
in
other
questions
,
&
to
aduance
forward
to
the
first
&
second
places
of
triall
the
said
Scotus
and
Durandus
,
thinking
therby
partly
to
weary
his
Maiesty
&
the
audience
,
and
to
make
the
conference
lothsome
and
contemptible
,
by
so
base
a
beginning
;
partly
also
presuming
,
that
he
might
more
easily
trifle
out
the
tyme
in
wranglinge
about
these
,
as
he
did
a
whole
houre
about
the
first
place
only
of
Scotus
,
and
would
haue
done
the
whole
day
,
yf
he
might
haue
byn
permitted
,
but
the
Bishop
discouering
this
fraud
vnto
the
auditorye
,
shewed
withall
,
that
his
deceyt
and
false
dealing
was
all
one
in
corrupting
meane
authors
as
the
best
,
and
greatest
,
&
therfore
that
it
was
not
so
much
to
be
considered
by
the
iudges
what
the
wryter
was
that
was
falsified
,
but
how
much
,
&
with
how
great
fraud
he
is
falsifyed
.
And
with
this
they
passed
to
the
particulars
.
The
first
place
examined
out
of
Scotus
about
the
reall
presence
.
This
preamble
being
made
,
the
B.
began
to
read
out
of
Plessis
booke
pag.
869.
accordinge
to
his
forsaid
edition
in
4.
printed
at
Rochell
by
Hierome
Hautin
,
these
words
out
of
Scotus
,
about
the
Sacrament
of
the
Altar
.
Iohn
Duns
(
saith
he
)
called
Scot
,
almost
100.
yeares
after
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
was
not
afraid
to
call
in
question
,
if
the
body
of
Christ
be
really
conteyned
vnder
the
species
,
or
accidents
(
of
bread
)
and
he
disputeth
that
it
is
not
,
and
his
arguments
are
,
for
that
the
quantity
doth
not
permitt
yt
,
nor
yet
the
locality
and
circumscription
annexed
to
the
nature
of
a
true
body
,
such
a
one
as
Christ
had
,
&c.
Thus
he
.
And
then
for
proofe
he
quoteth
in
the
margent
.
Scotus
vpon
the
4.
booke
of
Sentences
dist.
10.
quaest.
1.
Out
of
which
place
the
B.
did
inferre
two
willfull
and
malitious
deceyts
of
Plessis
,
est
simpliciter
de
substantia
fidei
:
I
do
say
that
it
is
simply
a
substantiall
article
of
our
faith
,
to
beleeue
that
Christs
body
,
is
truly
&
really
there
,
vnder
these
accidents
.
And
he
proueth
the
same
by
two
places
of
scripture
,
to
witt
Math.
26.
where
Christ
saith
:
This
is
my
body
,
and
Iohn
.
6.
where
he
saith
:
My
flesh
is
truly
foode
.
This
then
is
the
first
imposture
which
Plessis
is
proued
to
haue
vsed
in
alleadginge
Scotus
against
his
owne
meaninge
,
discourse
,
and
resolution
.
The
second
is
,
for
that
he
saith
,
that
Scotus
arguments
against
the
reall
presence
,
were
the
quantity
,
locality
,
and
circumscription
annexed
to
a
true
body
;
wheras
these
are
not
arguments
of
Scotus
,
but
of
heretiks
refuted
by
Scotus
,
as
appeareth
by
himselfe
in
the
same
places
,
where
he
addeth
also
these
words
:
If
heretiks
would
expound
the
forsaid
words
of
Christ
:
to
be
vnderstood
figuratiuely
,
yt
is
quite
against
the
intention
of
our
Sauiour
.
These
2.
corruptions
then
,
being
so
manifestly
laid
forth
out
of
this
first
place
of
Scotus
,
and
shewed
that
they
could
not
be
of
ignorance
,
but
of
willfull
malice
to
deceaue
the
reader
,
reall
presence
,
but
rather
of
the
manner
of
Christs
body
being
there
,
to
witt
,
by
Transubstantiation
,
and
for
that
respect
he
named
the
Councell
of
lateran
in
his
speach
,
which
Councell
first
of
all
had
determined
the
said
article
of
Transubstantiation
:
But
the
Bishopp
shewed
this
to
be
a
very
sleight
euasion
,
reall
presence
,
as
of
Transubstantiation
,
as
appeareth
in
the
said
Councell
,
and
that
Scotus
was
as
resolute
in
the
one
as
in
the
other
.
And
finally
that
Plessis
words
before
recyted
are
plaine
inough
without
a
comentary
,
that
Scotus
durst
to
call
into
question
whether
the
body
of
Christ
were
really
in
the
Sacrament
or
no
,
vnder
the
●ormes
of
bread
&
wyne
,
yea
&
to
dispute
that
yt
was
not
,
which
words
do
speake
plainly
,
as
yow
see
,
of
the
reality
.
Soe
as
these
shifts
,
are
but
a
new
abusing
of
the
Reader
.
And
as
for
the
places
he
would
seeme
to
alleage
out
of
Scotus
,
as
somwhat
soundinge
against
Transubstantiation
,
yt
was
told
him
first
,
that
yt
was
from
the
purpose
,
for
so
much
as
his
citation
of
Scotus
was
against
the
reall
presence
;
and
secondly
that
these
other
places
made
no
more
for
him
,
then
the
former
,
but
wholy
against
him
,
and
so
yt
was
proued
by
readinge
and
examininge
publikely
the
said
places
,
wherin
there
was
an
houre
spent
.
And
the
Bishopp
perceauinge
that
Plessis
desired
to
draw
out
the
tyme
,
vrged
the
deputyes
to
giue
sentence
vpon
the
falsisication
of
the
places
alleaged
,
which
they
differred
to
do
,
vntill
the
next
place
of
Durand
was
examined
,
for
that
they
vnderstood
the
case
was
in
a
manner
all
one
,
or
much
like
in
both
schoolemen
:
And
so
yt
was
in
deed
,
that
Plessis
had
taken
the
obiection
for
the
resolution
,
which
was
a
great
a
disgrace
,
The
second
Place
examined
out
of
Durandus
about
Transubstantiation
.
The
next
place
of
the
19.
chosen
by
Monsieur
Plessis
to
be
examined
,
was
out
of
Durandus
,
Plessis
his
words
as
they
ly
in
his
booke
pag.
870.
are
rhese
:
Durandus
called
by
our
Sorbonists
the
mostre
solute
Doctor
,
hath
these
words
in
his
4.
booke
vpon
the
sentences
dist.
11.
To
the
contrary
(
saith
he
)
supposinge
the
substances
of
bread
and
wyne
(
after
the
consecration
)
do
remayne
;
there
ensucth
therof
but
one
difficulty
,
and
this
neyther
very
great
nor
indissoluble
,
to
witt
,
that
two
bodyes
remayne
togeather
(
vnder
the
same
accidents
)
but
yf
yow
put
the
contrary
(
to
witt
that
there
is
Transubstantiation
)
there
ensue
more
difficultyes
,
that
is
to
say
,
how
those
species
or
accidents
(
without
their
substance
)
can
nourish
or
be
corrupted
,
and
how
any
thinge
can
be
generate
therof
,
seing
all
generation
is
of
matter
or
substance
,
&
therfore
it
seemeth
that
we
ought
to
sticke
rather
to
the
first
way
,
(
to
witt
against
Transubstantiation
,
&c.
So
he
.
Out
of
this
place
the
B.
of
Eureux
did
argue
Plessis
of
the
same
falsity
and
deceytfull
dealinge
as
before
in
Scotus
,
First
we
must
say
and
hold
(
notwithstandinge
the
former
obiections
&
arguments
to
the
contrary
)
that
the
substance
of
bread
and
wyne
,
are
turned
into
the
substance
of
the
body
of
Christ
.
This
is
his
resolution
,
quite
contrary
,
to
that
which
Plessis
would
haue
him
seeme
to
hold
.
And
then
hauing
set
downe
this
resolution
accordinge
to
the
common
faith
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
he
passeth
to
answere
the
former
obiection
,
sayinge
to
the
former
argument
to
the
contrary
(
about
difficultyes
)
:
we
must
answere
,
that
in
those
thinges
that
appertayne
vnto
faith
,
we
must
not
allwayes
choose
that
which
seemeth
(
to
humayne
sense
)
to
haue
lesse
difficultyes
;
but
we
must
hould
that
which
is
consonant
to
the
sayings
of
holy
Fathers
,
and
to
the
tradition
of
the
Church
.
So
Durand
.
Which
words
being
recyted
in
the
hearing
of
all
,
yow
must
imagine
in
what
a
pittifull
plight
poore
Plessis
was
,
to
see
one
man
looke
vpon
another
,
and
ether
smile
or
byte
their
lippes
at
such
manifest
grosse
trumpery
;
but
yet
necessity
made
him
take
hart
,
&
to
aduenture
a
new
euasion
,
saying
,
that
albeit
this
were
but
an
obiection
in
Durand
,
yet
it
seemed
to
him
such
an
obiection
,
as
might
hould
the
place
of
a
resolution
,
yf
the
authority
&
decision
of
the
Church
had
not
withheld
him
.
And
for
proofe
of
this
,
he
would
needs
cite
diuers
other
places
out
of
Durand
,
where
he
saith
;
that
yf
God
would
he
could
haue
made
his
body
to
be
in
the
Sacrament
,
togeather
with
the
substance
of
bread
without
Transubstantiation
,
and
that
yt
should
be
temerity
to
hold
the
contrary
:
but
the
Bishop
refuted
this
presently
as
impertinent
matter
,
and
nothinge
to
the
purpose
to
help
his
cause
:
For
albeit
Durand
did
hould
,
that
God
out
of
his
omnipotency
might
haue
appointed
yt
so
yf
he
would
,
that
both
substances
,
(
to
witt
both
of
his
body
&
bread
)
should
haue
byn
togeather
;
yet
did
he
it
not
so
de
fact●
,
as
Durand
proueth
out
of
his
owne
words
,
when
he
said
of
bread
,
this
is
my
body
,
&c.
Therfore
the
first
way
is
to
be
followed
,
wheras
the
true
words
of
Durand
in
Latyn
were
,
Well
then
after
all
textes
read
at
large
,
and
examined
by
the
iudges
,
when
Plessis
would
haue
cauilled
yet
further
&
drawne
out
the
tyme
,
as
he
did
in
the
former
place
of
Scotus
;
the
B.
desired
the
K.
that
the
law
of
this
triall
might
be
obserued
,
and
sentence
giuen
vpon
the
matter
yt selfe
already
proposed
,
without
further
excursions
,
whervpon
the
King
willed
the
deputyes
to
giue
sentence
,
which
they
did
by
the
Chancelour
,
after
he
had
asked
euery
mans
voyce
in
particular
,
and
the
sentence
was
in
these
words
in
French
.
Que
le
Sieur
de
Plessis
auoit
pris
la
obiection
pour
la
resolution
.
That
the
L.
Plessis
had
taken
the
obiection
(
in
Scotus
and
Durand
)
for
the
resolution
.
And
this
was
the
end
of
this
second
triall
,
with
shame
inough
,
yow
may
imagine
,
to
him
that
professed
more
learning
,
then
to
be
deceaued
in
such
a
matter
,
yf
he
had
not
listed
to
haue
byn
both
deceaued
and
to
deceaue
.
The
third
place
examined
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
about
Prayer
to
Sainctes
.
After
the
former
two
places
of
Scotus
and
Durand
dispached
,
Monsieur
Plessis
,
to
be
defended
,
was
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
in
his
homily
,
vpon
the
first
of
Saint
Paules
epistles
to
the
Thessalonians
,
where
handling
those
words
of
Ieremy
the
Prophet
:
If
Moyses
and
Samuell
stood
before
me
,
my
affection
should
not
bee
vnto
this
people
,
&c.
Plessis
saith
,
that
wheras
the
Papists
do
alleage
this
sayinge
of
the
Prophett
to
proue
prayer
vnto
Saints
,
S.
Chrysostome
draweth
a
quite
contrary
conclusion
from
thence
,
his
words
are
these
pag.
537.
of
his
booke
against
the
Masse
:
S.
Chrysostome
doth
draw
from
these
words
of
the
Prophett
a
quite
contrary
conclusion
,
to
witt
that
we
must
not
rest
our selues
vpon
the
prayes
of
Saints
,
but
must
worke
our
saluation
(
as
S.
Peter
saith
)
in
feare
and
trembling
.
&c.
Out
of
which
allegation
of
S.
Chrysostome
the
Bishopp
did
shew
,
and
plainly
declare
,
that
Plessis
had
depraued
S.
Chrysostomes
meaninge
,
for
that
he
did
not
inferre
any
such
conclusion
at
all
against
prayer
to
Saints
,
but
manifestly
the
contrary
in
these
words
in
the
very
same
place
,
sayinge
for
his
conclusion
after
a
long
discourse
:
These
things
then
being
so
(
as
we
haue
shewed
)
we
must
neither
neglect
the
prayer
of
Saints
for
vs
,
nor
yet
putt
all
our
hope
therin
,
for
that
the
one
would
depriue
vs
of
great
succours
,
the
other
would
make
vs
idle
and
neglect
.
Wherfore
we
must
pray
to
them
,
to
make
intercession
,
and
hould
vp
their
hands
for
vs
,
and
we
of
our
part
must
liue
vertuously
.
These
are
the
words
of
S.
Chrysostome
truly
alleaged
,
which
do
euidently
shew
,
that
Plessis
did
notoriously
corrupt
both
S.
Chrysostome
his
words
and
meaning
in
his
forsaid
allegation
:
S.
Chrysostome
to
say
:
that
we
must
not
rest
our selues
vpon
the
prayers
of
Saints
:
which
he
doth
not
say
,
but
that
,
we
must
not
put
all
our
hope
therin
.
Secondly
he
leaueth
out
those
words
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
where
he
exhorteth
vs
to
pray
vnto
Saints
,
and
to
liue
vertuously
.
He
corrupteth
also
S.
Chrysostomes
meaning
,
for
that
he
enforceth
vpon
him
the
quite
contrary
conclusion
,
to
that
which
he
maketh
,
to
witt
,
that
we
must
not
pray
to
Saints
at
all
,
wheras
S.
Chrysostome
saith
,
we
ought
to
pray
to
Saints
,
&
not
to
depriue
our selues
of
so
great
a
succour
.
Heere
Plessis
was
in
a
great
Bracke
againe
,
&
could
not
tell
which
way
to
wynd
himselfe
out
,
yet
two
leapes
he
gaue
,
but
neyther
did
serue
his
turne
.
Saint
Chrysostomes
words
formally
as
they
lay
in
the
text
,
for
that
his
discourse
was
longe
,
and
indured
for
diuers
pages
,
but
only
to
put
downe
the
some
therof
.
But
this
was
beaten
backe
by
the
B.
asking
him
first
,
why
then
he
sett
downe
those
words
in
a
different
letter
,
as
proper
words
of
S.
Chrysostome
?
Secondly
,
why
he
left
out
Saint
Chrysostomes
true
words
before
recyted
,
and
put
in
other
of
his
owne
,
of
a
contrary
sense
?
Thirdly
why
he
changed
,
&
falsifyed
Saint
Chrysostomes
whole
meaning
,
drifte
,
and
conclusion
,
as
hath
byn
shewed
;
and
finally
he
told
him
,
that
albeit
S.
Chrysostomes
discourse
were
large
in
expounding
the
forsaid
verse
of
Ieremy
the
Prophett
;
yet
was
his
conclusion
about
praying
to
Saints
very
short
,
and
vttered
in
no
more
words
then
before
was
sett
downe
;
so
as
this
helped
him
nothing
.
His
second
skip
therfore
was
to
say
,
that
S.
Chrysostome
in
this
place
spoke
of
prayinge
to
liue
Saints
only
,
and
not
to
dead
Saints
,
but
the
Bishop
replied
,
that
albeit
this
were
true
(
as
it
appeareth
euidently
to
be
false
by
the
examples
of
Dauid
and
Iob
,
whome
Saint
Chrysostome
there
nameth
)
yet
that
this
releeued
him
and
his
falshood
nothing
at
all
:
For
yf
he
spoke
of
liue
Saints
only
,
then
could
not
Plessis
draw
an
argument
from
that
his
speach
against
the
Catholike
vse
of
praying
to
Saints
desceased
;
S.
Iohn
Chrysostome
to
be
brought
of
diuers
impressions
,
the
one
at
Heidelberge
,
the
other
at
Verona
,
&
conferringe
them
togeather
,
found
the
Fathers
words
to
be
iust
as
before
they
haue
byn
sett
downe
by
vs
,
and
falsified
by
Plessis
in
his
booke
,
and
therfore
after
euery
mans
opinion
required
,
&
conferred
among
themselues
,
the
Chancelour
pronounced
in
all
the
deputyes
names
in
these
words
:
Que
le
Si●ur
du
Plessis
auoit
obmis
en
ce
passage
ce
que
y
deuoit
estre
mis.
that
is
to
say
:
That
the
Lord
Plessis
had
left
out
in
this
passage
,
that
which
ought
to
haue
byn
put
in
:
which
in
effect
,
is
to
call
him
a
falsifier
in
good
and
honourable
tearmes
.
And
so
much
of
this
place
.
The
fourth
place
examined
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
about
prayer
in
like
manner
to
Saints
.
The
fourth
place
was
another
of
S.
Chrysostome
about
the
same
argument
of
praying
to
Saints
cyted
falsely
by
Plessis
in
the
574.
page
of
his
booke
against
the
Masse
,
where
he
maketh
S.
Chrysostome
to
speake
thus
against
praying
to
Saints
:
Chrysostome
saith
he
)
seemeth
to
haue
attempted
the
ouerthrow
of
this
abuse
assaultinge
the
fundament
therof
by
all
occasions
,
for
so
much
as
he
saw
,
that
the
people
did
thinke
more
how
to
help
themsel●es
by
suffrages
of
others
,
then
how
to
amend
their
liues
;
wherfore
he
did
endeauour
to
batter
this
opinion
;
saying
we
are
much
more
assused
by
our
owne
suffrages
then
by
the
suffrages
of
others
;
and
God
doth
not
so
soone
graunt
our
saluation
at
the
prayers
of
others
,
Out
of
which
words
,
besides
that
which
was
before
obiected
vpon
the
precedent
place
,
the
B.
accused
Monsieur
Plessis
,
that
he
had
dealt
fraudulently
also
in
cytinge
these
words
,
for
that
he
had
cutt
of
the
very
next
words
ensuing
,
which
made
against
him
,
&
declared
plainly
S.
Chrysostomes
whole
meaning
,
to
witt
:
And
this
we
say
(
saith
S.
Chrysostome
)
not
to
the
end
we
should
not
make
our
prayers
or
supplications
vnto
Saints
,
but
that
we
should
not
therby
become
slothfull
in
doing
also
for
our selues
.
To
which
charge
Monsieur
Plessis
answered
,
that
Chrysostome
in
this
place
did
not
speake
of
dead
Saints
,
but
of
liuinge
Saints
,
for
proofe
wherof
,
he
alleadged
certayne
coniecturall
reasons
,
S.
Chrysostome
spoke
only
of
lyuing
Saints
,
yt
was
against
himselfe
,
and
proued
two
absurdityes
in
steed
of
one
,
the
first
,
that
he
deduced
a
conclusion
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
against
prayinge
to
dead
Saints
,
wheras
the
Father
spake
of
liuinge
Saints
only
:
the
second
,
that
he
cutt
of
from
the
text
,
the
principall
words
that
should
haue
declared
the
Fathers
meaninge
.
To
this
replyed
Plessis
,
that
he
brought
not
this
place
of
Chrysostome
against
praying
to
Saints
,
but
against
them
that
would
help
themselues
by
the
suffrages
of
others
.
Vpon
this
answere
the
K.
himselfe
began
to
speake
,
saying
,
that
the
word
others
,
was
a
generall
word
,
that
might
be
extented
aswell
to
the
dead
,
as
to
the
liue
,
and
that
Plessis
should
remember
,
that
he
had
said
a
little
before
in
cyting
S.
Chrysostome
,
that
Chrysostome
attempted
the
ouerthrow
of
this
abuse
.
S.
Chrysostome
:
which
instance
of
his
Maiestie
was
confirmed
by
the
B.
cyting
diuers
places
of
Plessis
booke
,
where
by
name
he
auoucheth
S.
Epiphanius
and
S.
Chrysostome
in
the
Greeke
Church
to
be
aduersaryes
of
prayinge
to
Saints
,
S.
Chrysostome
in
this
place
,
that
we
must
not
put
our
confidence
in
the
meritts
of
other
men
.
Wherto
the
Bishop
answered
,
that
S.
Chrysostome
said
not
absolutely
,
that
we
must
not
rely
at
all
vpon
other
mens
prayers
,
but
that
we
must
not
so
rely
,
as
we
be
negligent
of
our
owne
parts
;
which
speach
doth
neyther
directly
nor
indirectly
impugne
prayer
to
Saints
,
especially
being
ioyned
with
his
plaine
declaration
before
mentioned
,
cutt
of
by
Plessis
.
Wherfore
after
diuers
such
vayne
,
&
impertinent
replyes
of
Monsieur
Plessis
,
the
B.
required
sentence
to
be
giuen
;
whervpon
the
texts
alleaged
being
openly
read
,
both
in
Greeke
and
Latyn
of
diuers
editions
printed
both
in
Paris
and
Basill
,
and
one
Greeke
copy
of
hand
wrytinge
out
of
the
Kings
library
,
the
words
were
found
as
before
hath
byn
cyted
,
and
sentence
was
giuen
by
the
consent
of
all
deputyes
in
the
same
words
that
the
other
was
before
,
to
witt
,
that
the
L.
Plessis
had
left
out
in
this
passage
,
that
which
he
ought
to
haue
putt
yn
.
And
with
this
ended
their
examen
of
the
fourth
place
,
&
the
blushing
remayned
to
Plessis
as
yow
may
imagine
,
seeing
all
his
Protestants
to
hange
downe
their
heads
at
this
successe
.
The
fifth
place
examined
out
of
S.
Hierome
about
the
same
argument
,
of
prayer
to
Saints
.
After
the
two
forsaid
places
of
S.
Chrysostome
discussed
,
as
yow
haue
heard
,
there
came
in
order
a
place
of
S.
Hierome
vpon
Ezechiell
,
cyted
by
the
said
Plessis
in
the
583.
page
of
his
booke
against
prayer
to
Saints
,
and
put
as
yt
were
for
an
antidotum
to
other
sayings
of
S.
Hierome
in
fauour
of
prayings
to
Saints
,
in
his
books
against
Vigilantius
.
The
place
is
cyted
in
Plessis
booke
in
these
words
:
But
Saint
Hierome
(
saith
he
)
in
his
commentaryes
,
when
he
was
out
of
choler
and
greife
,
did
wryte
thus
:
If
we
haue
confidence
in
any
one
,
lett
yt
be
in
God
only
,
for
yt
is
wrytten
,
that
the
man
is
cursed
that
confideth
in
men
;
albeit
they
be
Saints
,
&
albeit
they
be
Prophets
,
yet
must
we
not
confide
in
them
,
nor
yet
in
the
Princes
of
the
Church
,
who
though
they
be
iust
,
yet
shall
they
deliuer
but
their
owne
soules
,
and
not
those
of
their
children
.
Out
of
this
place
the
B.
obiected
,
that
Plessis
had
alleaged
these
words
with
fraud
&
corruption
,
leauing
out
the
clause
which
made
all
cleere
,
and
vtterly
marred
Plessis
markett
,
to
witt
,
Si
fuerint
negligentes
,
yf
their
children
be
negligent
,
then
cannot
Saints
saue
them
:
filios
autem
&
filias
(
saith
S.
Hierome
)
quos
in
Ecclesia
genuerim
,
si
●uer●t
negligentes
,
saluare
non
poterunt
.
That
is
,
Saints
cannot
saue
their
sonnes
and
daughters
,
whome
they
haue
be
gotten
,
by
their
preachinge
in
Gods
Church
,
yf
the
said
children
be
negligent
on
their
parts
.
And
the
same
very
exception
or
restriction
had
S.
Hierome
repeated
in
other
words
before
in
the
same
Chapter
,
The
very
cheefest
and
principall
Saints
of
the
Church
cannot
deliuer
vs
,
except
we
their
children
do
giue
our
consent
thervnto
,
&
except
we
do
ayde
,
by
our
owne
good
endeauours
,
their
prayers
made
for
vs
.
Which
two
clauses
she
winge
euidently
,
that
S.
Hieromes
former
speach
was
but
conditionall
,
&
not
absolute
,
when
he
said
,
that
we
must
not
put
our
trust
in
others
,
(
euen
as
that
of
S.
Chrysostome
was
before
)
yt
followeth
that
the
leauinge
out
of
these
clauses
that
conteyne
the
principall
point
of
all
the
speach
,
was
willfull
fraud
,
and
falsification
,
endeauouringe
to
make
Saint
Hierome
to
speake
against
himselfe
,
about
prayinge
to
Saints
,
which
he
neuer
meant
.
Heere
now
Plessis
being
strayned
,
as
before
,
ran
to
his
ordinary
shift
,
of
sayinge
,
that
S.
Hierome
spake
not
of
dead
Saints
,
but
of
liuinge
only
,
which
though
it
were
euidently
false
,
as
the
Bishop
shewed
by
other
plaine
words
of
S.
Hierome
in
the
same
place
,
and
by
Plessis
himselfe
,
S.
Hierome
.
that
cyted
this
place
as
an
anti●otum
to
other
places
of
his
,
against
Vigilantius
,
where
Plessis
himselfe
confessed
,
that
he
talketh
of
prayer
to
Saints
deceased
:
besides
all
this
(
I
say
)
wherby
this
refuge
was
euidently
knowne
to
be
but
a
shift
,
the
Bishop
pressed
him
most
with
this
;
that
of
what
sort
of
Saints
soeuer
S.
Hierome
speaketh
heere
,
quicke
,
or
dead
,
he
speaketh
not
simply
or
absolutely
,
that
they
cannot
saue
vs
by
their
prayers
,
but
with
this
expresse
condition
,
twise
repeated
by
him
,
and
left
out
by
Plessis
:
If
we
be
negligent
of
our
owne
parts
;
or
as
S.
Chrysostome
said
before
;
yf
we
rely
wholy
vpon
them
,
and
do
nothing
of
our selues
.
Wherfore
he
prayed
the
iudges
to
giue
sentence
concerninge
this
place
,
as
of
the
former
;
whervpon
Plessis
began
to
cauill
againe
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
that
he
alleaged
not
this
place
of
Saint
Hierome
directly
against
Saints
deceased
,
but
indirectly
.
But
the
B.
proued
that
neyther
directly
,
nor
indirectly
this
place
of
S.
Hierome
made
any
thinge
against
prayers
to
Saints
,
but
rather
for
the
same
.
For
he
that
saith
,
that
prayinge
to
Saints
auayleth
not
him
,
that
is
negligent
of
his
owne
part
,
signifieth
in
effect
,
that
yf
he
be
diligent
,
he
may
be
holpen
therby
,
which
is
S.
Hieromes
doctrine
against
Vigilantius
,
as
Plessey
confesseth
,
though
he
saith
that
he
was
then
in
choler
but
now
out
of
choler
,
when
he
spoke
the
contrary
as
he
would
haue
him
to
seeme
.
After
this
,
Plessis
leapt
to
another
place
of
S.
Hierome
in
his
commentaryes
vpon
S.
Paules
epistles
to
the
Corinthians
,
Monsieur
Plessis
.
where
he
saith
:
That
Saints
shall
not
be
able
to
help
at
the
day
of
iudgment
,
&c.
Which
the
Bishop
expounded
,
and
graunted
,
for
that
then
there
shal
be
no
more
place
for
prayer
or
intercession
,
but
euery
one
to
receaue
his
reward
:
yet
he
added
further
,
that
this
place
of
S.
Hierome
,
was
brought
into
examination
out
of
the
order
of
those
19.
that
Plessis
had
chosen
,
and
that
yf
he
would
be
content
,
to
continue
the
examination
of
this
one
page
of
Saint
Hierome
,
Que
le
passage
auoit
deu
estre
mis
entier
.
That
this
place
or
passage
on
S.
Hierome
ought
to
haue
byn
sett
downe
by
Monsieur
Plessis
wholy
,
and
entyre
,
as
yt
lay
in
the
author
,
and
not
mangled
or
dismembred
,
as
it
was
found
to
be
.
And
yow
may
imagine
how
Plessis
blushed
at
this
sentence
.
The
sixt
place
examined
,
out
of
S.
Cyrill
,
about
honouringe
the
holy
Crosse.
The
sixt
place
was
out
of
S.
Cyrill
cited
by
Monsieur
Plessis
pag.
223.
of
his
booke
in
these
words
:
S.
Cyrill
answered
the
Emperour
Iulian
when
he
reproached
Christians
for
honour
done
vnto
the
crosse
,
that
Christians
did
not
giue
adoration
nor
reuerence
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse.
So
saith
Plessis
:
But
the
Bishopp
charged
him
,
that
the
last
words
of
this
sentence
,
to
witt
,
that
Christians
did
not
giue
adoration
nor
reuerence
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
were
not
in
S.
Cyrill
,
and
willed
him
to
shew
them
.
Plessis
answered
,
that
in
deed
they
were
not
S.
Cyrills
owne
words
,
and
therfore
he
did
not
put
them
in
a
different
letter
of
quotation
,
but
yet
that
the
sense
of
them
was
to
be
found
in
S.
Cyrill
.
The
B.
replyed
,
that
neyther
the
words
nor
sense
were
there
,
and
yet
that
Plessis
pag.
89.
booke
against
the
Masse
had
sett
downe
the
same
thinge
as
of
S.
Cyrills
owne
words
in
a
different
letter
of
quotation
thus
:
Cyrill
likewise
reproached
by
Iulian
the
Emperour
doth
answere
flattly
,
that
the
Christians
did
neither
adore
,
nor
honour
the
signe
of
the
Crosse.
So
as
heer●
yow
see
not
only
these
words
alleaged
as
S.
Cyrills
in
a
different
letter
,
but
also
often
vrged
by
Plessis
,
that
for
so
much
as
he
could
not
bring
forth
the
words
,
at
least
he
should
shew
the
sense
therof
in
S.
Cyrill
.
Plessis
answered
,
that
the
sense
might
be
gathered
out
of
Cyrill
,
S.
Cyrill
denyeth
yt
not
,
but
endeauoureth
to
giue
a
reason
,
why
they
did
so
;
Ergo
it
is
more
probable
,
that
Christians
did
worshipp
the
Crosse
of
Christ
indeed
in
those
dayes
.
And
heere
the
King
tooke
vp
the
argument
againe
sayinge
,
S.
Cyrill
did
reprehend
the
Emperour
Iulian
,
for
charginge
falsely
Christians
to
worshipp
the
Crosse
,
yt
is
not
likely
,
that
other
Christian
Emperors
followinge
soone
after
,
as
Iustinian
and
others
,
would
in
their
lawes
haue
called
the
same
,
Adorandam
&
honorandam
verè
crucem
,
Rusticus
Diaconus
,
Sedulius
presbyter
,
Athanasius
,
and
S.
Chrysostome
.
Which
being
done
,
Plessis
came
out
with
another
obiection
of
Minutius
Foelix
,
who
answeringe
to
one
Cecilius
,
a
pagan
,
said
,
Cruces
nec
colimus
,
nec
optamus
.
We
do
neither
worshipp
nor
wish
for
Crosses
;
but
the
Bishop
shewed
this
to
be
but
a
rest
,
and
quite
against
himselfe
.
Christiani
adorant
&
merentur
Crucem
,
Christians
do
adore
,
and
do
deserue
the
gibbett
,
in
which
sense
Minutius
answered
him
:
Nos
Cruces
nec
colimus
,
nec
optamus
,
we
do
neyther
worship
nor
wish
Crosses
in
your
sense
,
that
is
to
say
,
gibbetts
.
And
all
did
maruayle
at
Plessis
,
that
he
would
bring
in
this
deceatfull
obiection
:
out
of
which
notwithstandinge
the
Bishop
inferred
,
that
except
the
Pagan
Cecilius
had
knowen
in
those
dayes
,
that
Christians
worshipped
Crosses
,
he
would
neuer
haue
obiected
the
same
so
confidently
against
them
,
eyther
in
iest
,
or
in
earnest
.
And
this
being
done
the
B.
demaunded
iudgment
vpon
the
place
,
but
there
stept
vp
one
Monsieur
Mercier
,
Monsieur
Mercier
the
Protestants
secretary
.
one
of
the
secretaryes
of
the
conference
for
the
Protestants
side
,
sayinge
that
by
the
text
of
S.
Cyrill
there
lyinge
on
the
table
,
before
them
,
yt
was
manifest
,
that
he
obiected
vnto
Iulian
extremam
imperitiam
,
extreme
ignorance
or
lacke
of
skill
in
Christian
affayres
,
for
obiectinge
to
them
that
they
honoured
the
Crosse
,
and
made
the
signe
therof
vpon
their
foreheads
and
dores
,
which
by
likelyhood
he
would
neuer
haue
done
,
yf
Christians
had
vsed
to
do
so
indeed
.
Whervnto
the
Bishop
answered
,
that
S.
Cyrill
did
not
obiect
ignorance
about
the
fact
,
and
custome
of
honouringe
the
Crosse
,
and
makinge
the
signe
therof
,
as
is
aforesaid
,
for
that
this
thing
was
so
notoriously
knowne
,
as
yt
had
byn
rather
lacke
of
witt
or
shame
,
then
skill
in
Iulian
to
obiect
yt
,
yf
no
such
vse
had
byn
:
but
S.
Cyrill
accused
him
of
ignorance
,
and
folly
for
his
illation
made
thervpon
,
which
was
,
that
Christians
were
miserable
&
contemptible
therby
,
to
witt
,
for
yelding
so
much
honour
to
the
signe
of
a
crosse
or
gibbett
,
so
odious
to
them
as
nothinge
more
.
And
this
to
be
his
meaninge
is
plaine
by
S.
Cyrills
whole
discourse
,
which
was
there
read
both
in
Greeke
and
Latyn
in
these
words
:
Furthermore
(
saith
he
)
Iulian
calleth
vs
miserable
,
who
are
so
carefull
alwayes
to
signe
our
houses
and
foreheads
with
the
signe
of
the
pretious
Crosse
,
but
we
shall
easily
demonstrate
vnto
him
,
that
such
kind
of
speaches
do
proceed
from
wicked
cogitations
,
and
do
sauour
of
extreme
ignorance
,
&c.
Which
text
being
pondered
,
S.
Cyrill
before
alleaged
.
Que
le
passage
allegué
par
le
Sieur
du
Plessis
ne
se
trouoit
point
dans
S.
Cyrille
.
That
the
passage
alleaged
heere
by
the
L.
Plessis
out
of
S.
Cyrill
is
not
found
at
all
in
Cyrill
.
Of
which
sentence
yow
see
the
consequence
that
ensueth
,
to
wit
,
that
Plessis
had
made
or
diuised
yt
of
himselfe
.
The
seauenth
Place
examined
out
of
the
Code
or
Imperiall
lawes
,
about
paintinge
or
caruings
the
signe
of
the
Crosse.
After
the
place
of
S.
Cyrill
examined
and
found
falsified
about
worshipping
the
crosse
(
as
you
haue
heard
)
there
was
brought
into
triall
,
another
place
concerning
the
same
argument
,
about
a
law
of
the
two
Emperors
Theodosius
,
&
Valens
cyted
by
Plessis
in
the
223.
page
of
his
booke
,
against
paintinge
or
caruing
the
image
of
the
crosse
in
these
words
:
What
wil
these
men
say
,
(
to
wit
the
Catholiks
)
of
the
Emperors
Theodosius
&
Valens
,
that
prohibited
expressely
by
edict
,
this
custome
of
painting
or
caruing
images
of
our
sauiour
.
For
so
much
(
say
they
)
as
we
haue
care
of
nothing
more
then
of
the
seruice
of
God
,
we
forbidd
all
sorts
of
persons
to
make
the
signe
of
our
Sauiour
Iesus
Christ
,
either
in
colours
,
stone
,
or
other
matter
,
either
to
engraue
paint
or
cutt
the
same
,
but
rather
whersoeuer
any
such
thing
shal
be
found
,
that
yt
be
taken
away
vnder
paine
of
greuous
punishment
.
So
cyteth
Plessis
the
words
of
the
law
.
But
the
B.
of
Eureux
shewed
that
this
cytation
is
full
of
willfull
fraud
,
and
corruption
,
for
that
among
other
things
it
leaueth
out
the
words
humi
&
in
solo
,
which
signifie
on
the
ground
:
which
words
conteyne
the
very
life
and
sense
of
all
the
whole
text
,
&
law
alleaged
,
&
do
declare
the
true
meaning
of
the
law-makers
therin
,
for
that
the
true
text
of
the
law
in
the
code
lyeth
thus
:
Cùm
sit
nobis
cura
diligens
,
&c.
it
shall
not
be
lawfull
,
for
any
man
to
carue
or
paint
the
signe
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
either
on
the
ground
,
or
in
any
stone
or
marble
lyinge
vpon
the
ground
,
&c.
Which
ordination
the
Bishopp
did
shew
to
haue
byn
made
by
the
Emperors
,
In
Trullo
,
where
it
is
said
:
we
commaund
that
all
the
figures
of
the
Crosse
,
that
are
made
vpon
pauiments
be
taken
away
or
defaced
,
to
the
end
that
the
triumphant
signe
of
our
victory
,
be
not
vnworthily
defiled
by
mens
feete
.
And
at
this
sore
charge
Monsieur
Plessis
seemed
much
ashtonished
,
and
had
no
other
refuge
,
but
to
say
that
he
alleaged
the
text
as
he
found
yt
alleaged
by
Petrus
Crinitus
:
but
the
Bishopp
replyed
,
that
it
had
byn
conuenient
for
a
man
of
Plessis
quality
and
profession
in
learning
,
before
he
had
wrytten
and
printed
this
thing
,
and
especially
before
he
had
so
insolently
asked
the
question
,
what
Catholikes
would
say
vnto
it
,
to
haue
seene
the
place
it selfe
,
knowinge
that
Petrus
Crinitus
was
but
a
rash
grammarian
of
later
tymes
,
reprehended
of
this
very
falsification
by
sundry
learned
men
of
our
dayes
,
and
namely
by
Alanus
Copus
,
Doctor
Sanders
,
Cardinall
Bellarmine
and
others
.
Which
Plessis
could
not
but
know
,
and
haue
seene
;
and
moreouer
the
very
title
of
the
law
yt selfe
is
extant
in
the
Code
in
these
words
:
Nemini
licere
signum
saluatoris
Christi
humi
,
vel
in
scilice
,
vel
in
marmore
,
aut
insculpere
aut
pingere
;
But
he
persisting
in
denyall
,
that
he
was
bound
to
looke
the
law
it selfe
in
the
Code
,
but
that
it
was
sufficient
to
follow
Crinitus
his
allegation
therof
,
the
iudges
for
compassion
(
as
it
seemeth
)
after
consultation
among
themselues
gaue
this
sentence
:
Que
il
auoit
veritablement
allegué
Crinitus
,
mais
que
Crinitus
●'estoit
abusé
.
That
Monsieur
Plessis
had
truly
alleaged
Crinitus
,
but
that
Crinitus
was
abused
.
Which
had
byn
some
excuse
yf
Plessis
had
byn
a
simple
yonge
scholler
;
but
being
the
man
he
is
,
and
taketh
himselfe
to
be
,
yt
is
hard
to
say
where
the
abuse
was
greater
,
eyther
in
him
,
or
Crinitus
;
for
so
much
as
in
his
text
he
alleaged
not
Crinitus
,
but
the
Emperors
themselues
,
and
insulted
therby
ouer
Catholiks
,
as
yow
haue
heard
,
though
in
his
margent
he
quoted
Crinitus
,
which
was
little
to
the
purpose
,
knowinge
that
he
lyed
,
as
must
be
presumed
that
he
did
,
and
cannot
well
be
auoyded
.
The
eight
Place
examined
out
of
S.
Bernard
about
honouringe
our
Lady
.
The
L.
Plessis
being
desirous
to
make
a
florish
against
Catholiks
,
for
geuing
to
much
honour
(
as
he
saith
)
to
our
Lady
,
he
alleageth
a
sentence
out
of
S.
Bernard
in
the
604.
page
of
his
booke
,
in
these
words
:
S.
Bernard
(
saith
he
)
wryteth
of
the
virgin
her selfe
in
his
174.
epistle
,
that
she
hath
no
need
of
false
honours
,
for
so
much
as
she
is
full
of
true
;
and
this
is
not
to
honour
her
,
but
to
take
away
her
honour
;
the
feast
of
her
conception
was
not
well
inuented
.
So
he
.
In
which
words
the
B.
accused
Plessis
to
haue
vsed
as
great
falshood
as
in
the
former
passages
,
for
that
he
had
guilfully
patched
togeather
two
different
sentences
of
that
epistle
,
wrytten
in
seuerall
places
,
to
make
one
to
his
purpose
,
after
the
fashion
of
Centons
of
Homer
,
Virgill
and
other
poets
,
and
had
so
recyted
them
,
as
they
might
seeme
but
one
,
and
moreouer
had
cutt
of
the
sentence
that
went
betwene
them
,
&
was
immediatly
annexed
to
the
former
,
&
conteyned
the
decision
of
the
whole
question
,
to
witt
,
inventrix
of
grace
,
S.
Ansel.
accused
of
impiety
by
Plessis
.
mediatrix
of
saluation
,
&c.
For
better
understanding
wherof
must
be
noted
,
that
Mensieur
Plessis
a
little
before
had
accused
S.
Anselme
of
impiety
,
for
calling
the
blessed
Virgin
Inuentricem
gratiae
,
mediatricem
salutis
,
restauratricem
saeculorum
:
sayinge
that
these
praises
,
and
honours
were
false
and
immoderate
.
For
proofe
wherof
he
alleaged
Saint
Bernard
,
as
though
he
had
byn
of
a
contrary
opinion
to
Anselmus
,
and
to
the
Catholiks
of
these
dayes
,
in
that
he
disallowed
false
honours
giuen
to
our
Lady
,
for
which
he
cyted
the
passage
before
mentioned
,
S.
Bernard
.
made
of
2.
seuerall
sentences
,
tied
togeather
,
&
cutting
out
from
the
middle
therof
these
words
of
S.
Bernard
:
Magnifica
gratiae
inuentricem
,
mediatricem
salutis
,
restauratricem
saeculorum
,
&c.
Do
thou
magnifie
this
inuentrix
of
grace
,
this
mediatrix
of
Saluation
,
and
restorer
of
the
world
,
&c.
Which
are
the
very
same
words
that
Anselmus
did
vse
before
him
,
and
for
reprouing
wherof
S.
Bernard
was
alleaged
:
so
as
two
or
3.
falshoods
were
vrged
out
of
this
place
against
him
:
First
that
of
two
sentences
are
guilfully
made
one
;
Secondly
that
the
principall
clause
was
left
out
of
purpose
;
and
thirdly
that
S.
Bernard
was
alleaged
to
ouerthrow
that
,
which
expressely
he
confirmeth
.
To
the
first
Plessis
answered
,
that
in
leauinge
out
that
sentence
,
he
did
no
more
,
then
the
Apostles
did
,
who
alleaged
some
tymes
seuerall
sentences
of
the
old
testament
,
togeather
as
one
text
.
S.
Bernard
.
To
the
second
&
third
points
,
about
clippinge
of
the
sentence
in
the
middle
,
and
alleaginge
S.
Bernard
against
his
owne
meaninge
;
Plessis
endeauoured
to
make
certayne
answers
,
&
to
shew
that
the
sentence
which
he
had
left
out
,
made
nothinge
to
the
purpose
which
he
had
in
hand
;
which
the
Bishopp
graunted
,
yf
his
purpose
was
to
deceaue
his
Reader
(
as
no
doubt
but
yt
was
)
but
otherwise
,
yf
he
had
meant
truth
,
yt
must
needs
be
much
to
the
purpose
to
putt
yt
in
;
for
that
it
ouerthroweth
directly
(
as
yow
see
)
all
that
which
Plessis
would
haue
proued
,
by
S.
Bernards
authority
against
S.
Anselme
.
And
finally
the
Bishop
after
diuers
other
cauills
answered
,
returned
to
the
first
matter
againe
,
and
to
affirme
as
at
the
beginning
,
that
Monsieur
Plessis
had
not
dealt
truly
and
sincerely
in
this
allegation
of
Saint
Bernard
,
but
that
he
should
haue
alleaged
the
sentences
seuerally
,
as
they
lay
in
the
booke
,
and
not
haue
left
out
the
principall
clause
,
that
went
betwene
them
,
yf
he
had
dealt
truly
.
Wherfore
he
desyringe
iudgment
vpon
this
passage
,
Monsieur
le
Chancelier
,
auec
l'aduis
des
deputés
pronon●a
qu'il
eust
esté
bon
que
il
eust
fait
.
Monsieur
Plessis
had
done
so
;
(
as
the
Bishop
of
Eureux
required
)
which
is
as
much
to
say
that
in
not
doinge
so
,
he
behaued
himselfe
but
badly
,
which
was
a
checke
of
no
small
moment
in
such
a
matter
.
The
ninth
Place
examined
out
of
Theodorete
about
Images
.
The
last
place
that
was
tryed
in
this
first
daies
conference
,
was
out
of
Theodorete
vpon
the
113.
Psalme
cyted
by
Monsieur
Plessis
in
the
118.
page
of
his
booke
against
the
vse
of
Images
in
these
words
:
God
maketh
what
he
pleaseth
,
but
Images
are
such
as
pleaseth
men
to
make
them
;
they
haue
the
places
or
habitations
of
senses
,
but
haue
no
sense
indeed
,
and
in
this
much
lesse
them
flyes
and
fleas
and
such
other
vermine
,
and
yt
is
iust
that
all
that
adore
them
do
leese
both
reason
and
sense
,
and
be
like
vnto
them
.
Heere
the
Bishopp
obiected
two
manifest
and
willfull
falsifications
:
adored
by
pagans
,
and
adored
for
Gods
,
so
as
this
declared
euidently
,
that
he
had
no
true
meaninge
.
To
this
Plessis
answered
,
that
as
for
the
words
Idoll
and
Image
,
they
were
all
one
,
Hierusalem
,
Idolls
;
nor
do
the
scriptures
call
man
the
Idoll
of
God
,
but
the
Image
of
God
;
nor
did
euer
any
Christian
wryter
dare
to
speake
otherwise
,
nor
to
call
our
Sauiour
the
Idoll
of
his
Father
,
but
only
the
Image
of
his
Father
,
and
other
like
examples
,
wherby
is
euident
,
that
both
the
scriptures
,
and
holy
Fathers
did
obserue
a
strict
distinction
betwixt
these
words
:
And
heervpon
was
there
spent
some
tyme
in
certayne
vayne
replies
vsed
by
Plessis
,
but
no
one
example
could
he
giue
out
of
the
scriptures
to
the
contrary
,
nor
yet
out
of
any
Father
to
this
purpose
.
And
on
the
other
side
the
Bishop
pressed
him
with
the
words
of
Theodorete
the
Religious
history
,
he
recounteth
in
the
life
of
Saint
Symeon
Stilites
,
that
the
Christian
Romans
in
his
tyme
did
set
vp
Images
for
deuotion
to
the
said
Stilites
,
and
therby
procured
to
themselues
both
safegard
and
protection
,
as
the
authors
words
are
,
wherof
the
Bishopp
inferred
,
that
for
so
much
as
Theodorete
did
prayse
the
Romains
for
this
Act
,
yt
cannot
be
imagined
that
he
held
Images
to
be
the
same
that
Idolls
,
which
before
he
so
much
detested
in
the
place
heere
alleaged
by
Monsieur
Plessis
,
for
that
so
he
should
prayse
the
Romans
for
idolatry
.
Heere
the
deputyes
called
for
Theodorete
in
Greeke
,
[
a
](A09107-e13680-b)
a
Orat.
de
S.
Barl●am
.
Basill
,
S.
[
b
](A09107-e13700-b)
b
Orac.
in
B.
Theod.
Gregory
Nissen
,
[
c
](A09107-e13720-b)
c
In
Biblioth.
cap.
52.
Photius
,
[
d
](A09107-e13740-b)
d
In
hym
.
de
S.
Cassiano
.
Prudentius
,
[
e
](A09107-e13760-b)
e
Ad
S●uerum
sulpit
.
Paulinus
and
others
,
which
textes
were
there
brought
forth
,
read
,
and
allowed
.
And
all
this
ended
he
required
Monsieur
Plessis
to
confesse
this
first
abuse
against
Theodoretes
owne
meaninge
,
and
to
answere
to
the
second
,
why
he
had
left
out
those
words
,
that
declared
his
meaning
,
to
witt
,
Idolls
adored
by
the
pagans
,
and
adored
for
Gods
?
He
aunswered
that
he
had
left
them
out
for
breuityes
sake
,
and
had
sett
downe
only
the
substantiall
clauses
of
Theodoretes
text
.
But
the
Bishop
replyed
,
that
this
breuity
was
not
commendable
,
and
that
the
clause
left
out
was
the
most
substantiall
of
all
the
rest
,
for
declaringe
the
truth
,
and
Theodoretes
meaninge
in
the
matter
in
hand
.
Plessis
answered
,
Que
ce
Passage
ne
se
deuoit
entendre
que
des
Idoles
des
payens
,
&
non
des
Images
de
Chrestiens
:
comme
il
paroissoit
par
ces
mots
;
Ador●es
par
les
payens
,
&
adorées
pour
dieux
,
que
auoient
esté
obmis
.
Which
is
to
say
,
that
this
passage
of
Theodoret
must
be
vnderstood
of
Painim
Idols
,
and
not
of
Christian
Images
,
as
is
plaine
by
the
words
:
adored
by
Paynims
,
and
adored
for
Gods
,
which
were
left
out
.
By
which
sentence
(
giuen
also
by
his
owne
men
)
he
remayned
condemned
as
yow
see
of
both
the
falsityes
obiected
at
the
beginninge
by
the
Bishop
.
And
heere
now
it
being
vpon
the
point
of
seauen
of
the
clocke
at
night
,
the
K.
dismissed
the
company
for
that
tyme
,
and
remitted
the
continuation
of
the
same
conference
,
to
begin
againe
the
next
day
at
seauen
of
the
clocke
in
the
morning
,
Monsieur
du
Plessis
,
to
prepare
himselfe
in
the
other
passages
,
that
were
to
be
examined
the
day
followinge
.
WHAT
HAPPENED
AFTER
THE
END
OF
THIS
FIRST
DAYES
Conference
;
of
Monsieur
Plessis
his
demeanor
,
and
departure
:
Of
the
booke
he
sent
forth
for
his
excuse
;
and
what
successe
hath
ensued
of
mens
conuersion
thervpon
.
CHAP.
III.
As
soone
as
the
K.
Maiestie
was
departed
from
the
place
of
conference
,
euery
man
began
to
talke
&
reason
of
that
which
had
passed
,
but
especially
those
that
had
expected
without
in
other
Chambers
,
and
Galeryes
round
about
,
and
in
the
K.
garden
beneath
,
and
could
get
no
place
within
the
Chamber
,
where
the
conference
was
holden
;
these
,
I
say
,
as
well
Catholiks
,
as
Protestants
,
pressed
greatly
to
know
what
had
byn
done
,
&
what
had
byn
the
issue
of
that
tryall
.
And
so
earnest
sute
was
made
vnto
the
Secretaryes
,
for
copyes
of
the
sentences
,
as
that
very
night
they
were
geuen
abroad
in
wryting
,
conteyning
as
before
yow
haue
heard
,
to
witt
that
vpon
the
first
2.
places
of
Scotus
and
Durandus
,
the
sentence
was
;
that
Monsieur
Plessis
had
taken
the
obiection
for
the
resolution
.
Vpon
the
second
places
of
S.
Chrysostome
;
that
he
had
left
out
that
which
he
should
haue
put
in
.
S.
Hierome
;
that
he
ought
to
haue
alleaged
the
passage
entyre
,
as
yt
was
in
the
author
.
Vpon
the
sixt
place
of
S.
Cyrill
:
That
the
passage
alleaged
out
of
S.
Cyrill
was
not
to
be
found
in
him
.
Vpon
the
7.
place
out
of
the
Emperors
Theodofius
and
Valens
;
That
Plessis
had
alleaged
truly
Crinitus
,
but
that
Crinitus
was
abused
.
Vpon
the
8.
place
out
of
S.
Bernard
:
That
it
had
byn
well
,
Plessis
had
cyted
the
place
distinctly
as
yt
lay
in
the
author
,
without
cuttinge
of
any
thinge
in
the
middest
.
And
finally
vpon
the
9.
place
out
of
Theodorete
against
Images
:
That
the
passage
alleaged
,
was
not
to
be
vnderstood
of
Images
,
but
of
Idolls
,
and
that
this
appeared
by
the
words
which
Plessis
had
omitted
in
his
allegation
.
Which
iudgments
being
read
and
considered
,
yt
was
wonderfull
to
behould
the
great
diuersity
of
affections
,
which
they
styrred
vp
,
to
witt
of
comfort
,
and
alacrity
in
the
Catholiks
,
and
of
confusion
&
greife
in
the
Hugonotts
there
present
,
who
being
in
number
aboue
200.
considered
,
that
these
sentences
had
passed
by
the
consents
aswell
of
their
owne
iudges
,
as
of
the
other
,
&
that
there
was
no
way
left
of
tergiuersation
.
And
further
that
Monsieur
Plessis
being
one
of
the
cheefest
men
simply
of
their
Religion
in
France
,
and
most
accoumpted
of
for
his
learninge
,
this
his
disgrace
was
the
disgrace
of
all
their
Religion
,
and
his
error
inexcusable
,
in
respect
of
his
former
bragges
,
and
Protestations
,
and
of
the
willfull
falshood
now
found
in
him
.
The
Kings
Maiestie
also
was
exceedingly
moued
in
mynd
,
to
see
what
had
passed
,
as
may
appeare
by
his
affectious
speaches
,
and
letter
wrytten
to
Monsieur
Espernon
that
very
night
after
his
departure
from
the
conference
,
which
letters
we
haue
recyted
[
*
](A09107-e14220-b)
*
Supra
cap.
5.
before
,
and
the
causes
of
his
motion
we
shall
touch
a
little
afterward
,
when
we
haue
sett
downe
what
ensued
immediatly
vpon
this
first
dayes
conference
,
which
was
a
great
reason
also
to
mooue
his
Maiesty
the
more
,
as
presently
yow
shall
see
.
Wherfore
we
shall
relate
the
same
in
the
very
words
of
the
printed
Acts
,
which
are
these
that
follow
.
The
next
morrow
,
Monsieur
Plessis
had
byn
very
euill
that
night
,
&
that
he
prayed
the
Bishop
to
be
content
to
haue
the
conference
differred
for
that
morninge
;
Monsieur
Plessis
should
be
in
state
of
health
to
prosecute
the
same
.
Soone
after
this
,
there
came
to
the
Kings
chamber
Monsieur
de
la
Riuiere
cheefe
phisitian
to
his
Maiestie
,
tellinge
him
that
the
conference
was
like
to
be
broken
vp
,
by
reason
of
the
L.
Plessis
indisposition
,
whome
he
said
,
that
he
had
left
very
sicke
,
with
violent
vomitts
,
and
tremblings
of
all
the
parts
of
his
body
;
which
he
King
hearinge
,
comaunded
him
presently
to
go
,
and
tell
the
same
to
the
L.
Chancelour
,
to
the
end
that
he
and
the
deputyes
should
not
take
their
iorney
in
vaine
that
day
to
the
pallace
;
which
being
told
vnto
them
,
and
they
imagininge
,
that
perhaps
Monsieur
Plessis
his
sicknesse
might
endure
longe
,
sent
that
very
night
late
to
his
Maiestie
,
to
know
his
iudgment
&
pleasure
,
whether
they
should
remayne
still
in
Fountayne-bleau
,
or
returne
to
Paris
.
The
King
that
he
might
giue
them
more
certayne
answere
,
willed
the
Chancelour
at
ten
of
the
clocke
at
night
,
to
go
and
see
Plessis
,
&
to
know
from
his
owne
mouth
,
what
he
would
do
concerning
the
prosecution
of
this
conference
.
The
Chancelour
hauing
with
him
at
that
tyme
,
the
L.
President
Fresnes
Canay
,
cheefe
deputy
for
the
Protestant
party
in
the
said
conference
,
desyred
him
to
go
to
him
which
he
did
,
and
brought
answere
,
that
Plessis
was
not
in
state
to
go
forward
now
,
but
he
would
aduise
vpon
it
in
Paris
:
which
answere
being
related
to
the
Chancelour
,
by
the
President
,
and
from
the
Chancelour
,
to
the
King
;
his
Maiestie
gaue
licence
to
the
iudges
,
&
deputyes
to
depart
to
Paris
,
which
they
did
the
next
morninge
,
being
the
sixt
of
May
,
except
only
the
President
Fresnes
,
who
remained
at
Fontayn-bleau
with
the
King
.
But
the
next
day
at
noone
,
about
six
houres
after
the
departure
of
the
said
deputyes
,
the
President
Fresnes
,
hauing
byn
to
visitt
Monsieur
Plessis
againe
,
came
,
and
aduertised
the
Chancelour
,
that
he
was
much
better
in
health
,
&
that
for
his
part
the
conference
might
beginne
againe
,
which
the
Chancelour
hearinge
,
Monsieur
Mercier
chosen
for
the
part
of
Plessis
,
and
willed
him
presently
to
go
and
signifie
vnto
him
,
that
he
had
vnderstood
,
that
he
was
better
in
health
,
&
content
to
returne
to
the
conference
,
which
if
it
were
so
,
the
B.
was
also
ready
&
his
bookes
not
yet
sent
away
,
&
though
some
of
the
deputyes
were
departed
,
yet
the
president
Fresues
their
chiefe
deputy
remained
,
&
others
might
be
nominated
at
,
or
vpon
the
very
place
it selfe
.
But
Monsieur
Plessis
answered
,
that
he
was
not
maister
of
his
owne
sicknes
,
which
grew
more
and
more
vpon
him
,
and
that
he
was
goinge
to
Paris
from
whence
he
would
not
depart
without
seing
the
L.
Chancelour
,
Monsieur
Plessis
departed
to
his
gouerment
of
Saumur
without
takinge
his
leaue
of
his
Maiestie
or
seing
the
L.
Chancelour
(
as
he
had
promised
)
and
without
sending
any
word
at
all
to
the
B.
of
Eureux
,
about
the
conference
or
further
triall
.
Thus
farre
goeth
the
narration
of
the
printed
Acts
,
published
by
authority
of
the
King
&
deputyes
that
were
present
,
wherby
we
see
the
end
of
this
action
,
and
how
the
L.
Plessis
behaued
himselfe
therin
:
But
about
2.
monethes
after
,
came
forth
the
aforesaid
little
discourse
with
out
name
of
author
,
true
discourse
of
the
conference
at
Fontayn-bleau
,
full
of
elusions
,
disguisments
,
and
inuectiues
(
saith
the
B.
of
Eureux
)
sett
forth
by
Plessis
himselfe
,
though
dissemblinge
his
name
,
to
the
end
he
might
enioye
the
fable
vnder
this
maske
and
ly
with
out
blushing
,
obtruding
to
his
Reader
what
he
thought
best
:
For
so
are
the
words
of
the
said
Bishopp
in
the
refutation
of
this
michinge
discourse
,
which
conteyned
,
as
before
hath
byn
shewed
three
principall
points
;
the
one
in
peruerting
the
story
of
the
Acts
themselues
:
the
second
in
diuising
new
shifts
and
euasions
,
which
occurred
not
vnto
him
while
he
was
in
the
triall
:
the
third
,
in
recriminations
,
or
obiectinge
other
mens
falsityes
in
like
manner
.
Which
kind
of
proceedinge
did
more
yet
discreditt
Plessis
with
the
wiser
sort
of
men
,
then
his
former
ouerthrow
in
the
field
,
for
that
this
did
shew
indeed
that
to
be
true
which
Tertullian
saith
;
that
heretiks
may
more
easily
be
ouercome
,
then
persuaded
;
and
that
Plessis
had
an
obstinate
mynd
to
go
forward
,
notwithstandinge
whatsoeuer
was
,
should
,
or
might
be
proued
against
him
,
but
yet
diuers
other
of
the
more
learned
and
grauer
sort
of
his
owne
side
,
began
,
as
hath
byn
said
,
to
enter
into
another
cogitation
,
&
to
thinke
whether
yt
were
not
best
by
this
occasion
,
to
seeke
out
the
truth
of
matters
indeed
,
and
that
without
pertinacity
or
passion
,
for
so
much
as
yt
was
a
matter
concerninge
the
eternall
saluation
or
damnation
of
their
soules
.
And
this
happy
course
amonge
others
,
tooke
,
(
as
in
part
before
yow
haue
vnderstood
)
the
aforsaid
noble
man
of
Normandy
,
Monsieur
Sainct-Mary
du
Mont
,
who
being
a
great
Protestant
before
,
was
first
moued
towards
Catholike
Religion
,
partly
by
the
Sermons
of
Monsieur
Buchage
brother
to
Duke
Ioyeus
made
afterward
a
Capuchin
friar
,
as
hath
byn
[
*
](A09107-e14830-b)
*
Supra
cap.
1.
declared
(
which
Sermons
were
principally
against
the
falsifications
of
Plessis
in
his
booke
against
the
Masse
)
partly
also
by
the
sight
of
some
of
the
said
falsifications
themselues
,
The
conuersion
of
Monsieur
du
Mont
,
and
of
Monsieur
Fresnes
.
shewed
vnto
him
in
priuate
by
the
said
B.
of
Eureux
before
the
conference
,
but
he
was
fully
conuerted
by
the
trialll
it selfe
,
and
became
afterward
a
zealous
Catholike
.
But
more
notorious
and
admirable
was
the
conuersion
of
the
L.
Fresnes
Canay
cheife
president
for
the
Protestant
party
,
in
the
parlament
Chamber
called
Demy
party
in
Languedocke
&
chosen
by
Monsieur
Plessis
himselfe
for
chiefe
deputy
on
his
party
for
this
conference
:
who
taking
the
same
course
in
enforminge
himselfe
,
found
matters
so
euident
,
as
he
became
a
Catholike
vpon
the
sight
of
this
triall
,
and
that
with
such
feruour
,
as
he
would
not
be
absolued
secretly
of
his
heresie
before
held
,
(
as
for
respect
vnto
his
dignity
and
place
was
offered
)
but
would
needs
abiure
publikely
in
the
hands
of
the
B.
of
Paris
,
and
so
he
did
,
being
a
very
learned
man
in
his
profession
,
&
at
this
day
is
Embassadour
for
his
Christian
Maiestie
with
the
State
of
Venice
,
where
his
wife
in
like
manner
the
last
yeare
,
by
his
owne
especiall
meanes
(
she
being
a
Lady
of
much
nobility
)
was
conuerted
also
,
&
both
of
them
remayned
most
zealous
Catholiks
.
Which
two
examples
of
Monsieur
Sainct-Mary
and
Mousieur
President
Fresnes
(
both
of
them
being
learned
and
earnest
Protestants
all
their
life
before
)
did
greatly
mooue
the
King
himselfe
,
for
his
comfort
and
confirmation
in
Catholike
Religion
,
but
no
one
thing
so
much
,
as
his
being
present
at
the
forsaid
Conference
,
and
so
he
is
said
to
haue
often
confessed
afterward
,
for
that
he
saw
there
,
that
which
he
could
neuer
haue
imagined
,
to
witt
that
men
of
learning
&
iudgment
,
would
willfully
for
maintayninge
of
faction
,
wryte
and
publish
that
,
which
they
must
needs
know
in
their
consciences
to
be
false
.
He
considered
that
these
9.
places
there
examined
,
Monsieur
Plessis
would
not
haue
chosen
them
.
Wherfore
hauinge
seene
by
experience
,
that
no
one
of
those
9.
was
able
to
be
defended
from
plaine
and
willfull
falshood
,
he
imagined
what
would
fall
out
in
the
rest
,
if
the
conference
had
gone
forward
,
and
if
all
should
passe
as
in
these
9.
throughout
the
500.
there
ready
to
be
exhibited
,
yea
in
3500.
more
which
the
Bishop
said
he
had
gathered
out
,
and
offered
to
bynd
himselfe
to
conuince
them
,
of
no
lesse
falsity
and
imposture
,
then
those
nyne
,
and
all
this
out
of
one
boooke
.
These
things
(
I
say
)
laid
togeather
,
his
Maiestie
had
good
cause
to
thinke
,
what
may
be
thought
of
that
mans
conscience
,
that
wryteth
and
printeth
such
a
booke
in
matters
of
Religion
.
Moreouer
his
Maiestie
could
not
but
remember
what
tales
the
said
Plessis
,
and
other
such
fellowes
had
told
him
against
Catholiks
&
Catholike
Religion
for
many
yeares
,
whilst
he
was
yet
a
Protestant
,
to
witt
,
that
they
had
no
truth
on
their
side
,
no
antiquity
,
noe
true
ancient
authority
,
but
all
was
for
them
,
and
their
new
pretended
Religio●
.
Wherfore
this
hauing
so
fallen
out
,
and
the
Bishop
of
Eureux
protestinge
of
his
side
,
that
the
places
of
greatest
corruption
remayned
yet
behind
,
aboue
twenty
fold
more
in
number
,
then
those
that
had
byn
examined
,
seing
also
the
shamfull
flight
of
Monsieur
Plessis
from
the
continuation
of
the
combatt
,
Neyther
did
this
euent
of
Plessy
Mornayes
conference
,
worke
those
effects
only
for
the
openinge
his
Maiesties
eyes
and
vnderstanding
in
Religion
,
but
of
many
more
besides
throughout
France
,
wherof
though
I
be
not
so
particularly
informed
,
as
many
others
bee
;
yet
diuers
persons
of
marke
could
I
name
besides
the
former
two
,
that
receaued
like
light
&
grace
from
almighty
God
,
by
the
same
meanes
,
and
of
great
Hugonots
became
good
Catholiks
;
as
the
L.
Baron
Saligniac
Liefetennant
for
the
K.
of
the
countrey
of
Lymoge
togeather
with
his
wife
,
Del
Hospital
,
and
sister
to
the
Archbishopp
of
Ais.
The
L.
Baron
du
Bonneuald
a
great
noble
man
in
Lymosin
,
togeather
with
another
Baron
of
Gascoigne
,
whose
name
occurreth
not
at
this
present
,
though
I
haue
seene
the
narration
of
his
conuersion
wrytten
out
of
France
.
Monsieur
du
Sansay
Entendent
ouer
the
Kings
Finances
in
France
.
Diuers
cheefe
learned
men
also
,
and
among
them
some
Ministers
,
as
namely
Monsieur
Caiette
late
Minister
and
Preacher
to
the
Kings
sister
,
marryed
to
the
Prince
of
Loraine
,
togeather
with
diuers
of
her
cheefe
officers
,
amongst
which
,
was
Monsieur
du
lac
de
Barn
,
Monsieur
Rebeul
,
&
Monsieur
Sponde
th'
elder
,
two
great
learned
men
,
and
another
Sponde
brother
to
the
former
,
no
lesse
learned
,
who
at
this
day
hath
the
care
of
the
Popes
library
in
Rome
,
togeather
with
a
nephew
of
Iohn
Caluyn
conuerted
,
&
entertayned
like
wise
by
his
Holynesse
.
And
in
this
very
yeares
,
wherin
we
wryte
this
,
to
witt
1603.
we
haue
diuers
letters
and
relations
out
of
France
,
by
which
we
heare
of
sundry
conuersions
of
many
,
wherof
before
there
was
little
hope
,
as
for
example
of
one
Aluarez
a
learned
Spaniard
,
that
had
preached
many
yeares
heresie
in
Languedocke
,
of
one
Tirius
a
Scottishman
,
Maister
of
a
Colledge
in
the
Citty
of
Nimis
;
of
a
cheefe
Minister
in
Gascoigny
Preacher
in
times
past
vnto
his
Maiestie
of
France
,
when
he
was
King
of
Nauarre
.
And
of
a
learned
schoolemaister
,
whoe
amonge
other
schollers
brought
vp
the
children
of
the
cheife
Preacher
,
and
Minister
of
all
those
parts
named
Chamier
.
I
haue
seene
letters
also
,
relating
the
particular
conuersions
of
diuers
chee●e
Protestants
in
the
Citty
of
Metz
in
Lorayne
,
and
in
the
cittyes
of
Nimis
and
Mompelier
in
Languedock
,
which
later
two
cittyes
are
in
the
hands
of
Hugonotts
,
and
were
wont
to
haue
few
or
no
Catholiks
in
them
,
and
now
are
so
many
,
as
his
Christian
Maiestie
hath
byn
entreated
of
late
,
to
name
them
seuerall
Catholike
Bishops
.
And
the
same
letters
do
report
,
that
there
is
no
one
moneth
lightly
passed
,
but
that
in
Auinion
for
example
(
from
whence
one
of
these
letters
were
wrytten
)
some
20.
25.
30.
or
40.
persons
,
comminge
from
other
parts
abroad
of
their
owne
accord
,
where
heresies
do
raigne
,
do
abiure
the
same
in
the
hands
of
the
Catholike
Inquisitor
,
with
great
zeale
and
feruour
,
and
detestation
of
heresie
.
And
that
in
the
Citty
of
Aubenas
,
where
one
P.
Iacobus
Salesius
a
Iesuite
was
martyred
by
the
Hugonots
a
few
yeares
gone
,
aboue
200.
haue
byn
of
late
conuerted
,
&
so
in
other
townes
there
about
,
where
heresies
were
wont
to
raigne
,
&
on
the
other
side
scarse
any
one
Catholike
is
heard
of
,
to
be
peruerted
(
God
be
thanked
)
in
many
yeares
togeather
.
All
which
in
great
part
is
ascribed
both
to
the
euent
of
this
conference
with
Plessis
Mornay
,
&
to
the
diligence
of
other
Catholike
wryters
and
preachers
,
who
euery
where
in
their
bookes
and
sermons
do
discouer
the
falshood
of
heresie
,
and
hereticall
authors
,
which
no
doubt
is
a
principall
point
to
be
vrged
against
them
,
though
themselues
would
seeme
to
make
yt
a
matter
of
small
consideration
:
But
the
truth
is
,
that
no
one
thinge
doth
gaule
them
more
,
nor
mooue
discreet
,
and
ingenuous
men
to
forsake
them
,
then
to
see
that
they
deale
not
sincerely
,
but
deceytfully
and
with
false
consciences
,
be
they
subiect
neuer
so
little
concerning
Religion
.
WHAT
MONSIEVR
PLESSIS
DID
ANSWERE
,
AND
CAVSED
to
be
cast
abroad
after
his
returne
home
,
from
the
Conference
at
Fontayne-bleau
.
CHAP.
IV.
WE
haue
shewed
before
how
that
Monsieur
Plessis
,
after
his
secrett
departure
from
Paris
,
and
returne
to
Saumur
,
calling
his
Ministers
,
&
frends
about
him
,
diui●ed
how
he
might
repaire
the
losse
of
credit
receaued
at
Fountayne-bleau
by
the
conference
;
and
yt
seemed
good
in
their
eyes
,
full
of
passion
,
&
greife
,
to
sett
forth
a
certayne
wrytinge
intituled
:
A
true
discourse
of
the
conference
at
Fountayne-bleau
,
putting
no
certayne
name
thervnto
,
but
only
these
4.
letters
F.
D.
L.
M.
and
this
discourse
was
printed
,
and
diuulged
with
such
diligence
,
for
sauing
the
honour
of
their
cause
,
as
with
in
3.
monethes
after
,
there
were
3.
seuerall
editions
extant
therof
,
as
appeareth
by
the
B.
of
Eureux
his
citation
of
the
third
edition
.
The
contents
of
this
discourse
consisted
in
three
things
,
Monsieur
Plessis
manner
of
proceedinge
both
in
that
and
all
the
rest
,
enforceth
a
man
oftentymes
to
shamefull
attempts
.
First
then
(
saith
the
Bishop
)
besides
a
perpetuall
deprauation
to
be
seene
in
this
discourse
of
Monsieur
Plessis
of
whatsoeuer
passed
in
the
conference
,
and
besides
his
silent
passing
ouer
and
dissemblinge
so
many
aduantagious
conditions
,
as
were
made
vnto
him
,
Refut.
fol.
108.
besides
many
intolerable
slaunders
and
calumniations
laid
by
him
vpon
the
K.
himselfe
,
as
also
vpon
the
Chancelour
&
deputyes
as
partiall
against
him
:
he
obiecteth
diuers
things
in
particular
so
manifestly
false
,
&
to
be
conuinced
by
the
records
themselues
,
as
yt
easily
declareth
,
that
he
had
sett
vp
his
rest
to
continue
the
defence
of
his
cause
,
by
the
same
meanes
of
shameles
lying
,
wherby
he
had
begonne
yt
.
As
for
example
in
the
34.
page
of
his
discourse
&
third
edition
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
vpon
the
first
epistle
to
the
Thessalonians
,
that
he
had
left
out
of
the
text
,
these
words
:
(
yf
we
our selues
be
negligent
)
and
heervpon
he
insulteth
,
for
that
these
words
are
not
in
S.
Chrysostome
.
But
this
is
great
folly
:
for
the
Bishopp
obiected
the
leauinge
out
of
those
words
in
the
sentence
of
S.
Hierome
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
as
before
hath
byn
seene
in
the
examination
of
those
places
:
and
the
words
obiected
to
be
left
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
were
others
no
lesse
malitiously
cutt
of
then
these
.
As
before
yow
haue
seene
in
the
examination
of
the
said
third
place
.
Then
passinge
to
the
page
38.
of
his
discourse
,
Plessis
saith
(
talking
of
the
same
place
of
S.
Chrysostome
)
,
and
vpon
this
ignorance
(
saith
he
,
for
so
he
qualifieth
the
iudgment
of
all
that
were
present
)
they
gaue
an
applause
,
&c.
Which
is
altogeather
false
,
for
that
the
applause
giuen
,
was
not
vpon
this
first
place
of
S.
Chrisostome
vpon
the
epistle
to
the
Thessalonians
,
but
another
out
of
his
homilyes
vpon
the
second
epistle
to
the
Corinthians
,
brought
in
vpon
the
examen
of
the
fourth
place
of
the
nyne
before
examined
.
And
the
cause
of
this●
said
applause
of
laughter
of
the
auditory
was
this
:
That
Plessis
pretending
to
bring
two
places
out
of
Saint
Chrysostome
against
prayinge
to
Saints
,
which
were
the
third
and
fourth
before
examined
,
and
then
yt
being
proued
by
the
Bishopp
that
both
those
places
were
falsified
by
him
,
and
that
they
made
expressely
for
prayer
to
Saints
,
yf
he
had
put
them
downe
wholy
,
and
truly
,
he
had
no
other
refuge
,
yf
yow
remember
,
but
to
say
,
that
he
had
putt
downe
the
true
sense
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
though
not
his
words
:
&
then
being
beaten
from
that
with
other
places
of
Saint
Chrysostome
,
declaring
his
owne
meaning
for
prayer
to
Saints
,
Plessis
was
forced
to
confesse
against
himselfe
(
that
had
alleaged
him
for
impugning
prayer
to
Saints
)
that
indeed
Chrysostome
allowed
prayer
to
Saints
,
but
yt
was
to
liue
Saints
only
,
and
not
to
dead
:
against
which
shift
the
Bishopp
recyted
this
place
followinge
out
of
his
26.
homily
vpon
the
second
epistle
to
the
Corinthians
,
talking
of
the
pious
deuotions
of
the
Emperors
of
his
tyme
,
in
prayinge
to
S.
Peter
,
and
S.
Paul
,
&
highly
praysing
the
same
in
these
words
:
He
that
is
apparelled
in
purple
doth
make
supplication
to
Saints
,
that
they
wil
be
his
intercessors
to
God
,
and
he
that
weareth
a
diademe
,
doth
pray
to
a
tent-maker
,
and
to
a
fisher-man
now
dead
,
to
be
his
protectors
:
and
will
yow
dare
then
to
say
that
their
maister
is
dead
,
whose
seruants
now
after
their
deathes
,
are
the
Protectors
of
Emperors
liuinge
vpon
earth
?
Which
place
being
recyted
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
Furthermore
the
same
Plessis
passinge
on
to
handle
the
decision
,
and
sentence
geuen
vpon
the
foresaid
fourth
place
,
telleth
his
reader
for
certayne
,
that
the
iudges
did
not
determine
that
there
was
any
omission
vsed
therin
in
cytinge
Saint
Chrysostomes
words
.
Which
is
such
an
impudency
,
that
Monsieur
Plessis
had
left
out
that
which
he
should
haue
putt
in
:
but
the
very
layinge
open
of
the
text
of
Saint
Chrysostome
doth
conuince
the
same
,
to
him
that
hath
eyes
and
skill
to
read
.
It
followeth
vpon
the
examination
of
the
same
fourth
place
before
mencyoned
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
there
cyted
out
of
his
homily
vpon
S.
Mathewes
ghospell
,
ought
to
be
vnderstood
of
Saints
deceased
,
wheras
they
gaue
no
such
sentence
at
all
,
as
the
records
of
all
foure
secretaryes
do
testifie
,
that
Plessis
had
left
out
,
that
which
he
should
haue
put
in
:
and
the
Bishop
grauntinge
in
that
place
,
that
those
words
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
S.
Chrysostome
to
impugne
prayer
to
dead
Saints
.
So
as
this
doth
only
shew
a
mynd
in
Plessis
to
ly
,
cauill
,
and
calumniate
without
releeuing
himselfe
therby
,
but
rather
encreasing
his
dishonour
and
shame
.
About
the
fifth
place
examined
out
of
S.
Hierome
vpon
Ezechiell
,
S.
Hierome
vpon
the
epistle
to
the
Galathians
,
where
he
hath
these
words
:
At
that
day
when
we
shal
be
before
the
tribunall
of
Christ
,
neyther
Noe
,
Iob
,
nor
Daniell
,
can
pray
any
more
for
any
man
,
&c.
Which
charge
is
euidently
false
,
as
before
[
*
](A09107-e16420-b)
*
Suprae
cap.
2.
loc.
4.
yow
haue
heard
declared
in
the
examination
of
this
place
,
and
may
see
in
the
Acts
themselues
.
For
that
albeit
the
Bishopp
told
him
,
that
this
place
was
brought
in
against
order
,
besides
the
number
of
those
19.
which
Plessis
had
chosen
to
be
first
examined
:
yet
he
was
content
to
stand
vpon
the
examination
therof
,
yf
Plessis
would
,
&
of
other
places
cited
in
his
booke
,
and
to
bynd
himselfe
to
proue
,
that
in
that
only
one
page
he
had
committed
4.
notorious
falsifications
;
but
Plessis
refused
to
ioyne
with
him
in
that
point
;
S.
Hierome
,
that
yt
was
meant
of
the
day
of
iudgment
,
when
no
more
praying
to
Saints
shal
be
,
nor
of
Saints
for
vs
,
which
doth
not
impugne
our
present
prayinge
to
them
,
but
rather
confirme
the
same
.
For
that
S.
Hierome
affirming
heere
,
that
there
shal
be
no
more
prayinge
to
Saints
,
or
of
Saints
for
vs
at
the
day
of
iudgment
,
doth
euidently
signifie
that
before
that
tyme
,
both
may
be
vsed
.
About
the
examen
of
the
sixth
place
,
S.
Cyrill
,
concerning
the
honouring
of
the
Crosse
,
Plessis
deceaueth
notably
his
Reader
,
in
tellinge
him
,
that
falsity
being
obiected
vnto
him
by
the
Bishop
,
Vpon
the
very
same
place
he
falsifieth
also
the
Chancelour
pronounced
simplely
,
that
the
words
alleaged
out
of
Cyrill
,
were
not
found
in
him
,
leauing
yt
easy
to
the
hearers
(
saith
he
)
to
inferre
,
that
the
sense
notwithstandinge
was
to
be
found
in
him
.
Which
is
a
great
vntruth
,
for
that
the
sentence
registred
by
all
4.
secretaryes
comprehendeth
the
whole
passage
in
these
words
:
The
passage
cyted
by
Monsieur
Plessis
out
of
Cyrill
,
is
not
found
in
Cyrill
;
which
sentence
conteyneth
as
yow
see
both
sense
and
words
.
And
it
is
a
poore
shift
of
Plessis
,
to
go
about
to
help
himselfe
by
so
childish
an
inference
,
as
for
that
they
gaue
sentence
,
that
the
words
alleaged
by
him
were
not
in
Cyrill
,
yt
might
be
inferred
,
that
the
sense
was
.
After
this
the
Bishopp
sheweth
diuers
other
grosse
vntruthes
in
this
kind
,
as
namely
,
that
in
reportinge
the
sentence
of
the
Chancelour
,
adored
by
Paynims
,
and
adored
for
Gods
,
contrary
to
the
faith
of
the
records
themselues
,
vniformally
taken
by
all
4.
secretaryes
;
&
then
againe
to
excuse
himselfe
from
a
foule
disgrace
,
happened
in
the
examination
of
the
first
place
about
the
reall
presence
out
of
Scotus
,
that
the
B.
of
Eureux
had
vsed
a
certayne
fraudulent
sleight
to
disgrace
him
,
which
was
to
bring
two
editions
of
Scotus
,
the
one
fayre
to
be
read
,
which
he
sent
him
ouernight
with
the
60.
places
to
prepare
himselfe
,
the
other
he
retayned
with
him
of
an
euill
print
,
which
he
obtruded
to
him
in
the
conference
.
But
this
shamelesse
fiction
the
Bishop
refuteth
first
by
the
testimony
of
them
,
that
brought
backe
againe
the
bookes
from
Plessis
house
to
the
conference
,
and
then
by
the
wittnesse
of
4.
seuerall
Frenche
gentlemen
,
Monsieur
du
Bertant
,
du
Beaulien
,
du
Berulle
,
and
du
Salettes
,
that
came
with
him
from
Paris
,
&
knew
that
he
brought
but
one
only
edition
of
Scotus
with
him
,
which
was
in
folio
of
the
print
of
Badius
Ascensius
in
the
yeare
1519.
and
lent
vnto
him
by
the
college
of
Sorbone
in
Paris
for
this
conference
,
which
booke
being
giuen
to
Plessis
to
verifie
his
place
alleaged
out
of
him
,
he
could
not
so
much
as
read
,
nor
turne
the
booke
,
for
that
there
were
some
abreuiations
therin
after
the
manner
of
schoole-doctors
,
and
therby
all
the
lookers
on
,
and
hearers
well
perceaued
that
he
was
vtterly
ignorant
in
reading
schoole-doctors
,
though
euery
where
for
ostentation
of
learning
,
he
was
accostomed
to
cyte
them
in
his
bookes
.
And
this
shame
Plessis
had
no
other
way
to
couer
,
at
that
present
,
before
all
the
auditors
,
but
to
say
that
he
was
not
practised
but
in
his
owne
bookes
only
,
though
afterward
vpon
more
deliberation
,
he
thought
good
to
deuise
this
other
shift
of
changinge
the
booke
by
the
Bishopp
,
which
yet
being
so
malitiously
conuinced
of
calumniation
by
the
wittnesses
before
mentioned
,
did
exceedingly
tend
to
Plessis
discredit
.
And
this
shall
suffice
for
the
first
point
of
Plessis
reply
,
wherin
yow
see
,
that
for
defence
of
his
9.
places
before
conuicted
of
falsification
,
he
vttereth
9.
other
great
vntruthes
,
for
doublinge
the
number
.
As
for
the
other
two
points
of
new
shifts
and
recrimination
,
O.
E.
in
England
can
say
for
him
.
And
yf
yow
find
him
by
this
little
,
a
man
with
out
faith
or
spiritt
of
truth
in
his
assertions
,
then
shall
yt
be
wisdome
to
beware
not
only
of
this
his
booke
against
the
Masse
,
wherout
so
many
falsifications
haue
byn
gathered
,
but
of
others
also
wrytten
in
the
same
spiritt
,
and
namely
of
one
,
that
for
many
yeares
hath
gone
in
English
,
intituled
of
the
Church
,
which
being
smothely
wrytten
,
and
stuffed
out
with
great
shew
and
ostentation
of
Scriptures
,
Fathers
,
Historyes
,
and
other
such
furniture
,
hath
dazeled
the
eyes
of
many
,
as
did
also
this
other
against
the
Masse
,
vntill
yt
was
sifted
and
examined
by
learned
men
.
But
for
the
other
in
English
,
I
can
assure
the
Reader
,
that
yt
is
a
most
deceytfull
booke
,
and
may
be
well
brother
to
this
against
the
Masse
.
Plessis
Mornay
his
booke
of
the
Church
.
And
yt
is
now
very
neere
twenty
yeares
gone
,
that
the
late
Earle
of
Lecester
gaue
one
of
them
to
a
kinsman
of
his
,
named
Guilford
,
to
read
for
his
satisfaction
in
Religion
,
who
conferring
the
same
with
another
learned
gentleman
a
frend
of
mine
,
desired
that
yt
might
be
examined
,
which
my
said
frend
began
to
do
with
such
comodity
of
bookes
,
as
he
could
procure
at
that
tyme
,
and
found
so
full
stuffed
with
all
kind
of
deceatfull
impostures
,
and
falsifications
,
as
he
remayned
astonished
therat
,
and
conferred
the
same
with
a
learned
Baron
of
the
Realme
now
dead
,
and
he
with
another
yet
liuinge
,
and
neere
to
his
Maiesties
person
,
who
did
all
wonder
at
so
notorious
treachery
,
though
th'
examen
passed
not
through
the
greater
part
of
the
booke
,
for
that
it
was
interrupted
by
some
trouble
fallinge
to
the
examiner
;
but
he
hath
affirmed
many
times
since
,
and
doth
at
this
day
,
that
yt
is
incredible
to
beleeue
,
what
corrupt
dealinge
there
is
therin
,
and
exhorteth
all
those
that
haue
meanes
,
to
try
the
truth
of
this
his
assertion
,
which
I
cannot
do
at
this
present
,
for
that
I
haue
not
the
booke
by
me
;
yet
I
thought
it
conuenient
to
giue
a
note
therof
,
for
stayinge
of
them
,
that
haue
,
or
may
be
deceaued
therby
,
and
for
styrringe
vp
of
others
to
make
this
examen
.
And
so
for
this
tyme
we
leaue
Plessis
to
himselfe
,
and
to
his
shifts
in
France
,
and
shall
passe
ouer
to
consider
what
O.
E.
his
aduocate
can
say
for
him
in
England
.
WHAT
O.
E.
(
OTHERWISE
MATHEW
SVTCLIFFE
)
HATH
wrytten
for
defence
of
Plessis
Mornay
,
concerning
the
9.
places
handled
in
the
former
Conference
:
and
how
he
committeth
farre
greater
faultes
then
Plessis
himselfe
.
CHAP.
V.
HAVING
pervsed
what
Monsieur
Plessis
hath
byn
able
to
say
for
himselfe
,
both
in
the
conference
and
after
,
vpon
better
deliberation
:
we
must
now
examine
briefly
what
our
ould
frend
O.
E.
(
for
vnder
that
vizard
he
masketh
hitherto
)
hath
diuised
for
his
defence
:
For
that
my
forsaid
breife
relation
,
fallinge
into
his
hands
,
he
thought
yt
to
appertayne
to
his
manhood
,
as
a
martiall
minister
,
to
proclayme
himselfe
champion
in
Plessis
quarrell
,
therby
to
fullfill
the
prouerbe
;
that
none
so
bold
as
blynd
bayard
:
and
though
he
be
not
able
to
defend
his
owne
head
(
as
after
yow
shall
see
)
from
the
same
or
like
blowes
which
Plessis
hath
receaued
:
yet
will
he
needs
be
doing
,
&
intrude
himselfe
for
a
shylde
to
the
other
;
and
this
with
such
violence
,
or
rather
virrulency
of
speche
raginge
and
rauinge
at
all
those
,
that
will
seeme
to
touch
Plessis
fidelity
,
in
the
places
alleaged
,
as
he
may
seeme
to
need
rather
byndinge
then
answeringe
:
yet
somewhat
shall
we
say
to
him
,
as
the
straitnesse
of
this
place
and
tyme
will
permitt
;
and
therby
shew
sufficiently
what
manner
of
aduersary
he
is
,
and
that
hauing
lost
or
laid
aside
(
as
it
seemeth
)
all
manner
of
respect
to
shamfastnes
and
modestie
,
he
may
easily
lend
out
his
tongue
&
pen
for
small
hire
to
any
man
.
And
truly
I
can
not
but
maruayle
,
that
a
man
of
his
profession
&
place
,
can
persuade
himselfe
that
so
excessiue
a
raylinge
and
opprobrious
stile
,
against
all
whome
he
aunswereth
,
should
gayne
him
credit
with
any
modest
or
sober
sort
of
men
:
he
will
find
some
in
the
end
that
will
returne
him
legem
talionis
&
then
he
may
count
his
gaine
.
I
for
my
part
am
resolued
not
to
be
drawen
by
him
to
that
veine
,
but
to
vrge
him
only
with
substantiall
points
of
the
controuersy
in
hand
,
as
the
reader
shall
see
by
that
which
ensueth
.
Wherfore
to
come
to
the
matter
,
wheras
Monsieur
Plessis
diuided
his
refuge
into
three
points
,
as
before
yow
haue
heard
.
The
first
concerninge
the
history
of
the
conference
it selfe
;
O.
E.
setteth
before
vs
the
same
Coleworts
sodden
againe
,
but
guised
after
another
fashion
;
puttinge
recriminations
in
the
first
place
of
all
,
but
much
more
vaynely
then
Plessis
did
in
the
third
.
And
in
the
second
he
taketh
vpon
him
to
defend
the
truth
and
fidelity
of
Plessis
in
all
the
places
before
examined
.
And
for
that
in
this
point
consisteth
in
deed
the
only
substance
of
the
controuersie
:
I
shall
only
examine
the
same
in
this
place
,
leauing
the
other
to
a
more
full
and
larger
aunswere
,
when
we
shall
haue
vewed
a
second
edition
,
which
O.
E.
is
said
to
haue
made
of
his
new
chalenge
,
in
fiue
seuerall
controuersies
to
N.
D.
now
to
the
places
as
they
lye
in
order
,
with
this
only
aduertisment
premised
,
that
it
shall
be
good
for
the
Reader
first
to
looke
ouer
the
examen
of
each
place
,
handled
before
in
the
second
Chapter
of
this
defence
,
where
all
the
9.
places
are
examined
seuerally
,
and
I
do
meane
to
remit
me
often
for
more
breuityes
sake
,
thervnto
.
The
first
Place
out
of
Scotus
.
Yow
haue
heard
[
*
](A09107-e17390-b)
*
Suprae
cap.
2.
before
how
Monsieur
Plessis
,
was
argued
by
the
Bishop
of
two
seuerall
impostures
in
alleaginge
one
place
of
Scotus
about
the
reall
presence
,
sayinge
:
that
Scotus
was
not
afrayd
to
call
in
question
,
yf
the
body
of
Christ
be
really
conteyned
vnder
the
species
or
accidents
(
of
bread
)
and
he
disputeth
that
yt
is
not
,
&
his
arguments
are
,
for
that
the
quantity
doth
not
permitt
yt
,
&c.
Hence
,
I
say
,
two
deceatfull
falsifications
are
obiected
:
the
first
,
in
that
he
maketh
his
reader
beleeue
,
that
Scotus
his
obiection
is
his
resolution
:
the
other
,
that
the
arguments
of
heretiks
,
brought
in
by
Scotus
against
the
reall
presence
,
and
refuted
by
him
;
are
Scotus
his
owne
arguments
.
Of
which
impostures
,
sentence
was
giuen
of
the
deputyes
against
Plessis
,
as
before
yow
haue
seene
,
neither
could
the
impertinent
replies
and
euasions
attempted
by
him
,
deliuer
him
from
the
shame
therof
.
Now
lett
vs
heare
what
O.
E.
his
spokesman
,
hath
diuised
for
a
new
supply
of
holes
to
run
out
at
.
O.
E.
in
his
Refutation
.
pag.
12.
First
(
saith
he
)
though
Scotus
had
not
so
spoken
(
as
Maister
Plessis
hath
set
downe
)
yet
could
not
Maister
Plessis
be
charged
with
falsification
,
seing
he
doth
not
quote
his
words
,
but
setteth
downe
his
owne
collection
:
The
most
that
could
be
said
,
was
,
that
he
had
mistaken
the
meaning
of
Scotus
.
O.
E.
would
haue
to
by
so
called
)
cannot
be
censured
for
lesse
then
willfull
imposture
.
For
yf
he
had
not
so
much
iudgment
,
as
to
discerne
an
obiection
from
a
resolution
,
then
was
he
a
simple
fellow
to
wryte
books
:
and
yf
he
did
discerne
yt
,
and
yet
sought
to
deceaue
his
Reader
in
so
weighty
a
matter
,
as
is
the
controuersie
of
the
reall
presence
,
he
was
and
is
a
willfull
imposter
.
These
then
are
the
2.
first
points
of
our
English
Aduocates
defence
;
lett
vs
heare
how
he
goeth
forward
.
And
yet
(
saith
he
)
yf
Peron
had
charged
him
only
with
mistakinge
,
himselfe
bad
byn
mistaken
,
and
greatly
had
he
wronged
his
aduersary
.
For
that
yt
cannot
be
denyed
,
but
that
Scotus
did
indeed
call
into
question
,
whether
Christs
body
be
really
,
(
by
[
*
](A09107-e17750-b)
*
These
two
words
are
put
in
by
O.
E.
Transubstantiation
)
conteyned
vnder
the
formes
of
bread
and
wyne
,
and
disputeth
that
yt
is
not
;
which
is
all
that
the
L.
Plessis
doth
say
of
Scotus
,
for
which
he
is
chalenged
by
his
wrangling
aduersary
,
&c.
Is
it
all
Syr
Mathew
?
As
truly
as
yow
are
trew
of
your
word
.
reall
presence
,
or
disputed
against
yt
after
the
fashion
of
schoolemen
;
but
for
that
persidiously
he
alleaged
the
place
,
as
though
Scotus
had
byn
of
that
negatyue
opinion
,
and
that
the
arguments
obiected
had
byn
his
owne
,
and
not
of
heretiks
,
&
solued
by
him
.
This
is
the
charge
of
the
Bishop
against
him
.
And
what
will
yow
say
to
Maister
Sutcliffe
auouchinge
the
contrary
?
But
lett
vs
see
what
manner
of
proofe
he
will
bring
for
his
assertion
,
for
that
he
durst
not
lett
so
grosse
an
absurdity
passe
without
some
shadow
of
reason
,
which
yet
yow
shall
see
to
be
farre
worse
,
then
if
he
had
passed
it
ouer
in
silence
.
Heare
then
his
euasion
.
Neyther
is
it
materiall
(
saith
he
)
that
this
is
the
vse
of
schooles
,
first
to
obiect
against
the
truth
,
and
afterward
to
resolue
what
is
true
,
and
to
answere
the
obiections
,
for
that
doth
not
disprooue
Monsieur
Plessis
his
assertion
,
seeing
Scotus
,
doth
not
only
in
his
obiections
,
but
also
in
his
resolution
of
that
question
,
say
as
much
as
M.
Plessis
collected
out
of
him
,
&c.
Yf
this
can
be
proued
I
will
call
O.
E.
a
cunning
aduocate
indeed
.
But
if
it
cannot
,
then
is
he
to
to
forgetfull
of
his
credit
to
auouch
this
againe
so
boldly
,
after
he
hath
seene
yt
conuicted
before
out
of
Scotus
owne
words
,
I
do
affirme
,
that
yt
is
simply
a
substantiall
point
of
our
faith
,
to
beleeue
that
Christs
body
is
truly
and
really
vnder
those
accidents
of
bread
,
&c.
Which
resolution
he
hauing
proued
out
of
diuers
places
of
scripture
,
as
namely
Math.
26.
and
Iohn
6.
he
dissolueth
the
arguments
made
before
to
the
contrary
.
Which
being
so
,
what
shall
we
say
of
Maister
Sutkliffe
that
after
all
this
seene
and
read
,
auoucheth
the
very
same
againe
,
that
M.
Plessis
did
before
?
But
how
doth
he
go
about
(
thinke
yow
)
to
proue
,
that
Scotus
in
his
resolution
touchinge
the
reall
presence
did
hold
the
same
,
that
in
his
obiection
against
yt
?
Yow
shall
heare
his
owne
words
immediatly
following
in
the
same
matter
.
Scotus
seemeth
rather
to
dislike
Transubstantiation
then
otherwise
.
Behold
heere
the
trew
dealinge
of
M.
Sutkliffe
who
giueth
vs
quid
pro
quo
as
Apothecaryes
are
wonte
.
He
should
haue
proued
that
Scotus
determined
in
his
resolution
against
the
reall
presence
,
and
now
he
saith
that
Scotus
seemeth
rather
to
dislike
Transubstantiation
then
otherwise
.
So
as
for
the
reall
presence
,
in
a
seeminge
to
dislike
rather
then
otherwise
.
Was
there
euer
any
such
good
Apothecary
that
gaue
quid
pro
quo
?
And
if
heere
to
help
himselfe
out
he
will
say
,
that
the
reall
presence
and
Transubstantiation
is
all
one
controuersie
,
he
impugneth
himselfe
in
the
very
next
place
of
Durand
,
as
you
shall
see
when
we
come
to
it
,
where
he
affirmeth
Durand
to
hold
(
and
yt
is
true
)
and
Scotus
holdeth
the
same
also
,
that
the
reall
presence
of
Christs
body
in
the
Sacrament
,
might
haue
byn
by
other
meanes
,
then
by
Transubstantiation
,
yf
God
would
haue
had
yt
so
:
and
consequently
are
distinct
things
.
And
heereof
also
I
do
conuince
O.
E.
of
another
false
tricke
of
thrustinge
in
the
words
(
by
Transubstantiation
)
a
little
before
in
recytinge
the
question
of
Scotus
,
which
is
not
in
S●otus
himselfe
,
nor
in
his
words
more
truly
alleaged
in
this
behalfe
by
Plessis
as
before
yow
may
see
,
for
that
Scotus
question
is
,
whether
Christs
body
be
really
conteyned
vnder
the
formes
of
bread
and
wyne
?
Whether
Christs
body
be
really
by
Transubstantiation
conteyned
,
&c.
And
this
to
the
end
he
might
deceaue
his
Reader
,
as
heere
he
doth
by
leapinge
from
the
one
to
the
other
,
when
he
is
pressed
or
gauled
,
wheras
Scotus
doth
handle
these
two
controuersies
of
the
reall
presence
,
and
Transubstantiation
as
different
and
distinct
things
,
not
only
in
sundry
questions
,
but
in
sundry
distinctions
also
,
to
witt
the
first
in
the
tenth
,
the
second
in
the
eleuenth
distinction
vpon
the
Maister
of
the
Sentences
:
So
as
heere
I
must
represent
vnto
you
the
boldnes
or
ignorance
of
O.
E.
to
exceed
much
that
of
Maister
Plessis
his
Client
.
And
thus
much
of
the
controuersie
about
the
reall
presence
.
But
now
least
yow
might
thinke
he
had
somewhat
more
to
say
,
to
proue
Scotus
to
be
against
Transubstantiation
then
against
the
reall
presence
,
that
Scotus
seemeth
rather
to
dislike
Transubstantiation
then
otherwise
,
and
his
arguments
are
two
obiections
of
Scotus
against
Transubstantiation
as
the
other
were
before
against
the
reall
presence
.
The
first
obiection
against
himselfe
is
,
for
that
bread
,
togeather
with
his
accidents
or
species
,
do
more
represent
vnto
vs
the
nature
of
spirituall
food
without
Transubstantiation
,
then
the
bare
accidents
by
and
after
Transubstantiation
;
ergo
the
nature
of
the
Encharist
in
this
respect
of
nourishment
,
might
haue
byn
conserued
,
though
God
had
not
appointed
Transubstantiation
,
but
his
body
to
haue
byn
togeather
with
the
substance
of
bread
.
Which
argument
yow
see
maketh
against
the
alleager
O.
E.
flatly
,
for
that
yt
proueth
the
Reall
presence
,
and
Transubstantiation
to
be
distinct
things
,
and
that
the
one
might
haue
byn
without
the
other
,
and
therfore
it
was
folishly
brought
by
O.
E.
seing
it
is
not
only
an
obiection
and
no
resolution
,
but
also
an
obiection
that
impugneth
his
assertion
.
The
second
obiection
Transubstantiation
,
is●
that
in
misteryes
of
our
faith
,
that
interpreta●ion
seemeth
most
to
be
admitted
,
which
requireth
least
miracles
for
maintayninge
therof
;
but
fewest
miracles
seeme
to
be
required
without
Transubstantiation
,
then
with
Transubstantiation
,
ergo
we
should
rather
admitt
the
reality
of
Christs
body
,
togeather
with
bread
without
Transubstantiation
,
then
the
same
body
with
only
accidents
of
bread
by
Transubstantiation
.
These
be
two
obiections
among
others
made
by
Scotus
against
Transubstantiation
,
aboue
fifty
leaues
after
his
former
obiections
against
the
reall
presence
.
Which
obiections
after
his
resolution
sett
downe
for
Transubstantiation
he
answereth
&
solueth
,
beginning
thus
:
Ad
argumenta
,
&c.
Now
must
we
answere
the
arguments
made
to
the
contrary
,
&c.
But
yet
about
the
first
obiection
he
repeateth
againe
:
Dico
quod
bené
fuisset
Deo
possibile
instituisse
,
I
say
that
if
God
would
,
he
had
byn
well
able
to
haue
appointed
his
body
to
haue
byn
present
in
the
Sacrament
togeather
with
the
substance
of
bread
,
without
Transubstantiation
,
&c.
But
hauinge
appointed
otherwise
(
as
appeareth
by
the
declaration
of
the
Church
)
we
are
not
to
respect
more
or
fewer
miracles
,
&c.
And
hence
now
yow
see
,
that
O.
E.
endeauoringe
to
deliuer
Plessis
from
the
shame
of
cytinge
Scotus
his
obiection
for
his
resolution
,
in
the
controuersie
of
the
reall
presence
,
himselfe
bringeth
forth
tow
more
obiections
for
resolutions
,
without
seeing
the
shame
therof
about
the
article
of
Transubstantiation
,
That
Scotus
plainly
misliked
that
interpretation
,
that
without
diuers
miracles
cannot
be
maintayned
,
&c.
And
that
albeit
he
was
content
to
subscribe
to
the
Popes
determination
,
&
durst
not
do
otherwise
;
yet
that
he
himselse
thought
otherwise
,
&c.
O
Iesus
!
what
shall
a
man
say
of
these
manner
of
people
?
Let
vs
heare
Scotus
his
owne
words
,
in
the
same
place
where
he
talketh
of
the
Churches
determination
&
exposition
of
scriptures
,
for
this
point
of
Transubstantiation
.
Dico
(
saith
he
)
quod
eo
spiritu
expositae
sunt
scripturae
quo
conditae
;
I
do
day
that
the
scriptures
are
expounded
by
the
same
spiritt
,
by
which
they
were
wrytten
,
and
so
we
must
suppose
that
the
Catholike
Church
hath
expounded
them
vnto
vs
(
to
wit
the
scriptures
that
concerne
this
mistery
of
Transubstantiation
)
with
that
spiritt
wherwith
our
faith
was
deliuered
vnto
vs
,
that
is
to
say
,
by
the
spiritt
of
truth
,
&c.
Lo
heere
,
Scotus
foundeth
the
truth
of
Transubstantiation
not
vpon
the
Popes
determination
,
or
vpon
the
authority
of
the
Church
only
,
as
falsely
O.
E.
chargeth
him
;
but
vpon
the
truth
of
scriptures
expounded
by
the
Church
,
with
the
same
spiritt
of
truth
wherby
they
were
wrytten
,
and
consequently
is
farre
of
from
plainly
mislikinge
this
interpretation
,
as
O.
E.
affirmeth
,
but
for
that
amonge
other
arguments
,
Scotus
named
the
determination
of
the
Church
,
the
calumniator
,
that
could
not
abide
the
word
,
charged
him
presently
,
to
be
moued
only
with
that
reason
.
What
would
he
haue
babled
against
him
yf
he
had
left
written
as
S.
Augustine
hath
done
,
that
he
would
not
beleeue
the
ghospell
,
yf
the
authority
of
Church
did
not
mooue
him
thervnto
?
And
do
you
note
further
that
Scotus
in
the
same
place
affirmeth
,
that
albeit
this
verity
about
Transubstantiation
,
was
declared
first
in
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
yet
was
the
substance
therof
beleeued
also
from
the
beginning
,
vnder
other
words
of
conuersion
Transmutation
,
Exchange
of
substances
,
and
the
like
.
Which
he
sheweth
out
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
yea
and
that
yt
was
included
implicite
in
all
th'
old
creeds
of
th'
Apostles
,
&
others
Ponitur
(
saith
he
talkinge
of
the
Councell
of
Lateran
)
veritas
aliquorum
credendorum
magis
explicitè
,
In
this
decree
of
the
Councell
of
Lateran
the
truth
of
certayne
articles
belonging
to
faith
,
is
more
cleerly
&
particularly
set
downe
,
then
yt
was
before
in
the
Creed
of
the
Apostles
,
or
of
S.
Athanasius
,
or
of
the
Nicene
Councell
.
So
as
by
this
it
appeareth
,
that
Scotus
did
not
beleeue
the
truth
of
T●ransubstantiation
as
a
thinge
determyned
only
by
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
but
as
conteyned
in
the
scriptures
,
and
beleeued
in
substance
from
the
very
beginning
,
and
declared
or
expounded
only
by
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
directed
by
the
spiritt
of
God
.
And
this
is
sufficient
to
conuince
O.
E.
of
plaine
calumniation
;
and
though
he
say
in
the
end
of
his
defence
,
that
Dominicus
Soto
and
Iosephus
Angles
,
are
at
some
difference
about
Scotus
his
meaning
:
yet
are
his
words
&
whole
discourse
cleare
inough
,
without
any
commentary
of
others
,
as
yow
haue
seene
.
And
quently
this
shall
suffice
for
the
examen
of
this
first
place
.
The
second
Place
out
of
Durand
.
For
that
we
haue
byn
longer
in
the
first
place
,
to
shew
therby
some
portrayture
of
O.
E.
his
manner
of
answeringe
and
defendinge
his
Clyent
;
so
shall
we
be
bree●er
in
the
remnant
.
The
charge
vpon
the
second
place
was
(
yf
you
remember
)
that
Plessis
had
abused
Durand
,
as
he
had
before
done
Scotus
,
but
most
of
all
his
Reader
by
them
both
,
in
alleaginge
an
obiection
for
a
resolution
;
which
is
euident
,
for
that
Durand
beginning
to
comment
vpon
the
11.
distinction
of
the
fourth
booke
of
the
Maister
of
Sentences
,
which
distinction
is
about
.
Transubstantiation
(
as
the
former
is
about
the
reall
presence
)
he
frameth
his
first
question
thus
:
Primo
quaeritur
,
&c.
li.
4.
sent.
dist.
11.
q.
3.
First
yt
is
demaunded
,
whether
the
body
of
Christ
be
in
the
Sacrament
by
conuersion
of
the
substance
of
bread
into
yt
,
&c.
Et
arguitur
quod
no●
,
&c.
And
yt
is
obiected
that
yt
is
not
,
but
rather
the
substance
of
bread
remaineth
,
for
that
sewer
difficultyes
do
follow
that
way
,
then
by
putting
Transubstantiation
,
&c.
And
after
this
he
setteth
downe
his
resolution
to
the
contrary
,
Sup.
cap.
2●
and
answereth
this
obiection
as
before
yow
haue
heard
:
whervpon
after
diuers
shifts
attempted
by
Plessis
for
some
euasion
,
he
found
none
to
the
purpose
,
and
so
had
sentence
against
him
.
And
what
now
doth
his
aduocate
thinke
yow
bring
to
releeue
him
?
truly
nothing
at
all
.
For
first
he
doth
not
so
much
as
mention
this
place
of
Durand
,
wherof
the
controuersie
was
;
but
another
where
Durand
saith
(
as
Scotus
also
did
before
)
that
God
by
his
omnipotency
might
haue
ordayned
,
that
his
body
should
haue
byn
in
the
Sacrament
without
Transubstantiation
,
yf
he
had
would
.
Which
no
man
denyeth
.
But
heare
his
words
:
The
second
place
(
saith
O.
E.
)
O.
E.
his
reply
Refut.
pag.
13.
was
taken
out
of
Durand
,
who
saith
that
yt
is
rashnesse
to
affirme
that
the
body
of
Christ
,
may
not
by
the
power
of
God
be
in
the
Sacrament
,
by
other
manner
,
then
by
the
conuersion
of
bread
into
his
body
,
neither
can
it
be
denyed
that
Durand
hath
these
words
,
and
why
then
is
Maister
Plessis
charged
with
falsification
?
Fersooth
because
they
say
he
tooke
the
opposition
for
the
resolution
.
Thus
he
.
Wherto
I
answere
,
that
he
is
grossely
deceaued
,
for
that
Plessis
is
not
charged
for
settinge
downe
the
obiection
in
steed
of
the
resolution
out
of
this
place
of
Durand
,
but
in
the
former
place
by
me
alleaged
,
which
he
hath
heere
omitted
.
For
of
this
place
there
was
neuer
any
question
or
difficulty
of
the
Conference
,
though
yt
was
alleaged
to
another
purpose
,
as
before
is
mentioned
.
Yow
will
aske
me
perhaps
,
&
why
then
doth
O.
E.
O.
E.
his
errour
in
parte
excused
,
&
in
parte
aggrauated
.
alleage
this
wronge
place
of
Durand
,
leauinge
out
the
other
,
wherof
the
controuersie
is
?
Surely
I
must
in
part
excuse
him
,
for
that
he
erred
also
heerin
,
who
set
forth
the
particular
passages
without
the
Relators
knowledge
,
after
the
relation
ended
and
printed
,
as
before
hath
byn
signified
,
and
is
testified
in
the
preface
to
the
said
passages
:
yet
was
his
error
much
more
pardonable
then
this
of
O.
E.
for
that
he
had
only
a
wrytten
copy
of
a
particular
frend
from
Paris
,
&
had
not
seene
the
publike
Acts
printed
,
nor
Plessis
reply
,
as
this
other
had
done
,
writing
more
then
a
whole
yeare
after
they
were
published
;
&
therfore
for
him
to
come
now
,
and
dissemble
the
true
place
in
controuersie
,
and
deceaue
his
Reader
with
a
new
fraud
,
sayinge
that
we
accused
Plessis
with
falsification
,
for
takinge
the
obiection
for
the
resolution
in
this
place
,
(
wheras
as
all
men
do
know
yt
was
in
another
)
sheweth
as
well
his
condition
deuoted
to
continuall
shiftinge
,
as
also
his
weaknesse
to
defend
his
clyent
in
the
former
charge
,
he
being
glad
to
slipp
out
&
runne
away
vnder
the
shadow
of
an
other
mans
error
.
And
yet
to
leaue
behind
him
some
sente
of
what
he
is
,
he
would
needs
vtter
two
other
notorious
vntruths
that
yt
may
plainly
be
gathered
by
Durands
words
,
that
the
determination
only
of
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
&
the
Romish
Church
moued
him
to
hould
Transubstantiation
.
Wherof
there
is
no
such
word
in
Durand
but
rather
the
plaine
contrary
,
for
so
much
as
he
proueth
[
*
](A09107-e19750-b)
*
Primum
patet
authoritate
Sanctorum
,
&
ex
determinatione
Ecclesiae●
dist.
11.
q.
1.
n.
9.
Transubstantiation
not
only
by
the
Councell
of
Lateran
,
but
also
by
diuers
cleere
sentences
of
ancient
Fathers
,
namely
S.
Ambrose
,
S.
Augustine
,
Prosper
and
Eusebius
which
were
long
before
the
Councell
of
Lateran
.
The
other
vntruth
is
,
where
he
saith
,
that
not
only
they
,
but
Bellarmine
also
doth
note
the
same
in
Durand
,
taxinge
him
for
hard
beleefe
of
Transubstantiation
.
Wheras
Bellarmine
in
the
place
cited
doth
expressely
say
,
O.
E.
not
hauinge
releeued
his
client
any
thinge
at
all
in
this
point
,
hath
loaded
himselfe
with
2.
or
3.
faults
more
then
he
had
on
his
backe
before
,
And
so
he
passeth
from
this
place
to
the
other
that
followeth
.
The
third
Place
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
.
The
charge
giuen
vpon
Plessis
in
this
place
,
is
as
before
yow
haue
seene
,
for
that
he
going
about
to
alleage
S.
Chrysostome
against
prayer
to
Saints
,
that
we
ought
not
to
rest
our selues
vpon
the
prayer
of
Saints
,
but
worke
our
saluation
with
feare
and
tremblinge
;
wheras
the
true
words
and
meaning
of
S.
Chrysostome
are
quite
contrary
,
who
saith
in
the
very
place
:
Let
vs
not
contemne
the
prayers
of
Saints
for
vs
,
nor
yet
place
all
our
hope
therin
:
the
first
not
to
depriue
our selues
,
of
so
great
a
succour
,
the
second
not
to
make
our selues
negligent
,
&c.
As
before
yow
haue
[
*
](A09107-e20010-b)
*
Supra●
cap.
2.
heard●
which
words
being
discussed
,
and
all
Plessis
shifts
and
turnings
examined
,
sentence
was
giuen
of
falshood
against
him
.
Now
lett
vs
see
how
O.
E.
will
releiue
his
cause
:
The
third
place
(
saith
he
)
was
drawne
out
of
Chrysostome
,
but
neyther
can
his
aduersary
proue
this
place
to
be
falsified
by
him
,
not
impertinently
alleaged
:
not
the
first
,
for
that
he
doth
not
alleage
Chrysostomes
words
,
but
maketh
a
collection
vpon
them
:
not
the
second
,
for
that
as
Maister
Plessis
affirmeth
,
yt
may
euidently
be
gathered
out
of
his
words
;
that
we
must
not
rely
vpon
the
prayers
of
Saints
,
but
worke
our
saluation
with
feare
and
tremblinge
.
Behould
heere
a
quicke
dispach
of
matters
,
and
no
maruayle
yt
is
,
though
O.
E.
do
lend
his
labour
to
many
in
answeringe
for
them
,
seing
yt
costeth
him
so
little
,
and
he
doth
yt
with
so
great
facility
:
but
I
must
returne
vpon
him
in
both
these
points
,
and
do
say
to
the
first
,
that
Plessis
in
his
collection
hath
falsified
both
the
words
and
sense
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
S.
Chrysostome
did
make
.
For
that
he
exhorteth
men
to
pray
to
Saints
to
be
intercessors
for
them
,
and
withall
to
liue
well
themselues
:
but
Plessis
by
including
the
one
would
exclude
the
other
.
And
as
for
impertinency
,
there
is
little
accoumpt
to
be
made
,
where
there
is
imposture
,
and
open
contrariety
to
the
authors
meaning
,
as
heere
,
and
therfore
impertinently
doth
O.
E.
goe
about
to
excuse
impertinency
,
where
we
obiect
greater
crimes
:
but
marke
his
reason
,
why
yt
is
not
impertinent
,
O.
E.
for
that
(
saith
he
)
it
may
be
euidently
gathered
out
of
Chrisostomes
words
,
that
we
must
not
rely
vpon
prayers
to
Saints
.
But
why
doth
the
craftie
minister
,
leaue
out
the
word
(
wholy
)
which
maketh
or
marreth
the
whole
sense
,
for
to
rely
,
and
to
rely
wholy
are
two
different
things
.
Why
also
doth
he
leaue
out
the
other
words
added
by
Saint
Chrysostome
for
explication
of
his
owne
meaninge
,
So
as
we
be
not
negligent
of
our
owne
part
?
Yow
shall
heare
his
graue
answere
.
Neither
is
it
materiall
(
saith
he
)
that
these
words
:
are
omitted
,
for
they
are
not
to
purpose
,
seing
Chrysostome
would
not
haue
vs
rely
vpon
the
intercession
of
Saints
,
albeit
we
be
diligent
to
do
our
endeauour
our selues
.
This
now
is
to
to
shamelesse
,
for
yt
is
the
quite
contradictory
to
that
which
S.
Chrysostome
in
expresse
words
exhorteth
,
to
witt
:
to
the
end
we
do
not
depriue
our selues
of
so
great
a
succour
,
lett
vs
pray
vnto
Saints
to
be
intercessors
for
vs
,
and
of
our
owne
parts
,
lett
vs
liue
vertuously
,
&c.
And
who
then
is
more
shamelesse
heere
,
eyther
the
clyent
or
the
aduocate
?
but
let
vs
heare
out
the
rest
of
this
defence
.
It
is
also
obiected
(
saith
he
)
That
Chrysostome
aloweth
intercession
of
Saints
,
but
be
yt
he
did
so
,
yet
doth
not
this
conuince
that
he
is
falsely
alleaged
by
Maister
Plessis
,
seing
that
which
he
gathered
,
may
be
true
,
albeit
this
were
graunted
,
&c.
Heere
I
would
haue
the
Reader
to
stand
attent
,
and
marke
the
conueyance
of
these
deceytfull
maisters
in
deludinge
men
.
Plessis
gathered
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
that
he
impugned
prayer
to
Saints
deceased
:
and
now
faith
O.
E.
that
albeit
Chrysostome
did
allow
prayer
to
Saints
,
yet
that
which
Plessi●
gathered
may
be
true
:
But
I
would
aske
how
Plessis
could
truly
gather
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
that
he
impugned
prayer
to
Saints
,
O.
E.
yf
he
allowed
intercession
to
Saints
,
except
yow
will
say
that
S.
Chrysostome
both
allowed
and
impugned
one
and
the
selfe
same
thing
.
It
followeth
in
O.
E.
for
the
conclusion
of
his
defence
.
How
much
then
(
saith
he
)
is
it
more
vnlikely
,
O.
E.
and
Plessis
.
that
Maister
Plessis
shal
be
conuicted
,
seing
Chrysostome
in
that
place
hath
nothinge
which
doth
not
appertayne
rather
to
the
prayers
of
holy
men
liuing
,
then
of
holy
men
departed
.
These
are
the
last
words
of
his
defence
immediatly
followinge
vpon
the
former
,
and
all
that
he
saith
in
this
cause
.
And
yow
will
easily
consider
how
they
hange
togeather
;
I
only
will
say
this
.
That
yf
this
place
of
S.
Chrysostome
alleaged
by
Plessis
against
prayer
to
Saints
departed
,
doth
rather
appertayne
to
lyuinge
Saints
then
to
dead
,
as
O.
E.
heere
affirmeth
(
and
hath
byn
[
*
](A09107-e20580-b)
*
Supra
cap.
2.
loc.
3.
before
refuted
)
then
eyther
Plessis
was
ignorant
or
maliious
to
alleage
yt
against
prayers
to
Saints
departed
as
he
did
:
so
as
yow
see
,
that
O.
E.
doth
rather
impugne
his
client
then
defend
him
;
&
so
not
worthy
any
see
at
all
.
The
fourth
Place
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
.
The
falsifications
obiected
vnto
Plessis
vpon
this
other
place
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
out
of
his
commentary
vpon
S.
Mathew
,
was
,
that
the
said
Plessis
hauinge
told
his
reader
in
his
booke
against
the
Masse
,
S.
Chrysostome
was
carefull
euery
where
to
ouerthrow
the
foundations
of
the
abuse
of
prayer
to
Saints
,
said
:
that
we
haue
more
assurance
by
our
owne
prayers
,
then
by
the
prayers
of
others
,
&c.
leauing
out
his
words
immediatly
followinge
,
which
declared
his
meaning
,
to
witt
;
we
do
not
say
this
to
the
end
we
should
not
make
our
prayers
to
Saints
,
but
to
the
end
wshould
not
be
slouthfull
,
our
we
selues
.
Which
being
proued
after
diuers
euasions
in
vayne
attempted
by
Plessis
,
to
be
a
plaine
willfull
corruption
and
falsification
of
the
authors
meaninge
;
sentence
was
geuen
against
him
,
as
before
yow
haue
heard
.
Lett
vs
heare
what
the
poore
Aduocate
hath
to
bringe
of
new
.
And
first
yow
must
note
,
O.
E.
seeketh
to
be
obscure
oftentymes
of
purpose
.
that
whensoeuer
he
is
puzeld
,
&
findeth
himselfe
entangled
,
so
as
he
seeth
not
which
way
to
turne
or
gett
out
;
his
custome
is
,
to
make
himselfe
obscure
of
purpose
,
that
so
by
casting
some
mistes
before
his
Readers
eyes
,
he
may
escape
away
;
&
heerof
you
shall
haue
frequent
examples
yf
yow
stand
attent
.
Now
then
O.
E.
hauing
recyted
part
of
the
former
text
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
as
Plessis
had
sett
yt
downe
;
he
entreth
thus
into
his
defence
:
This
(
saith
he
)
the
aduersary
himselfe
cannot
deny
to
be
truly
alleaged
(
by
Maister
Plessis
)
how
then
came
yt
to
passe
,
that
he
dealinge
thus
iustly
and
truly
,
he
should
notwithstanding
be
charged
with
falsification
?
Forsooth
saith
his
aduersary
for
that
he
left
out
the
words
followinge
;
to
witt
and
this
we
say
not
,
that
we
would
deny
prayer
to
Saints
,
&c.
And
for
that
he
applyed
Chrysostomes
words
against
prayers
,
to
Saints
departed
.
Lo
heere
,
yow
haue
first
a
Iustification
of
Plessis
,
that
he
had
dealt
iustly
and
truly
videlicet
in
alleaginge
S.
Chrysostome
,
and
then
two
obiections
of
his
aduersary
brought
in
with
a
forsooth
,
as
though
they
had
byn
trifles
.
The
first
was
,
that
he
had
cut
of
certaine
words
of
the
sentence
that
made
most
to
the
matter
:
the
other
,
that
he
had
alleaged
S.
Chrysostomes
words
quite
against
the
authors
drift
&
meaning
,
&c.
Let
vs
see
how
his
aduocate
will
answere
the
two
charges
:
yow
shall
heare
him
in
his
owne
words
:
As
yf
(
saith
he
)
yt
were
so
haynous
a
matter
,
not
to
set
downe
words
altogeather
impertinent
.
This
is
to
the
first
obiection
,
&
he
hath
no
one
word
more
.
Wherfore
it
is
to
be
considered
,
whether
the
aforsaid
words
left
out
were
altogeather
impertinent
or
no
,
which
we
shall
briefly
examination
.
The
question
was
whether
S.
Chrysostome
in
his
commentaryes
vpon
S.
Mathew
did
go
about
to
ouerthrow
the
foundation
of
prayinge
to
Saints
,
O.
E.
his
impertinency
.
as
Plessis
said
that
he
did
,
&
for
proofe
therof
he
alleaged
the
forsaid
words
:
that
we
haue
more
assurance
by
our
owne
prayers
&
good
life
,
then
by
the
prayers
of
others
,
&c.
And
presently
after
the
said
Father
adioyneth
for
his
explication
the
other
words
left
out
by
Plessis
:
we
do
not
say
this
,
that
we
should
not
pray
to
Saints
,
but
to
the
end
that
our selues
be
not
slouthfull
for
our selues
.
And
now
I
would
aske
:
were
these
words
altogeather
impertinent
to
haue
byn
put
in
or
no
?
Or
is
not
O.
E.
an
impertinent
fellow
,
not
to
blush
to
make
such
an
aunswere
?
Seing
these
words
yf
they
had
bene
expressed
,
doe
vtterly
ouerthrow
Plessis
whole
drifte
&
argument
.
And
thus
is
the
first
obiection
aunswered
or
rather
shamelesly
shifted
of
by
him
,
lett
vs
see
the
second
,
whither
he
will
aunswere
it
more
substantially
.
The
second
obiection
was
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
(
we
must
haue
more
assurance
in
our
owne
prayers
,
then
in
other
mens
)
against
prayer
to
Saints
desceased
,
wheras
S.
Chrysostome
expressely
protesteth
in
the
very
same
place
,
as
now
yow
haue
heard
,
that
he
meaneth
not
so
,
and
so
consequently
Plessis
did
abuse
him
egregiously
to
force
him
against
his
owne
meaninge
,
words
,
&
protestation
.
How
aunswereth
O.
E.
vnto
this
thinke
yow
?
yow
shall
heare
:
As
yf
(
saith
he
)
yt
did
not
follow
,
that
we
are
not
to
rely
vpon
Saints
prayers
,
and
therfore
we
are
not
so
continually
to
pray
to
Saints
,
and
so
to
trust
in
their
intercession
as
the
Church
of
Rome
doth
,
that
maketh
prayer
to
Saints
a
great
peece
of
their
Church
seruice
.
Marke
heere
two
points
(
gentle
Reader
)
first
that
albeit
S.
Chrysostome
do
say
and
protest
,
that
by
his
words
;
we
must
confide
more
in
our
owne
diligence
,
then
in
others
,
he
meaneth
not
against
prayer
to
Saints
:
yet
O.
E.
saith
that
yt
followeth
of
his
words
,
that
we
must
not
rely
vpon
Saints
prayers
,
whome
shall
we
beleeue
,
either
Chrysostome
of
his
owne
meaninge
and
intent
,
or
O.
E.
that
will
force
him
to
say
that
which
he
denyeth
?
Secondly
do
yow
marke
that
O.
E.
seemeth
heere
to
admit
some
certaine
measure
of
prayer
to
Saints
,
so
yt
be
moderate
:
for
he
saith
that
,
we
must
not
so
continually
pray
to
Saints
,
nor
so
trust
in
their
intercessions
,
as
the
Church
of
Rome
doth
,
&c.
But
heere
(
perhaps
)
some
man
will
aske
me
,
is
it
possible
that
O.
E.
hath
so
little
iudgement
as
not
to
see
this
absurdity
,
to
force
S.
Chrysostomes
meaninge
against
his
owne
protestation
?
Wherto
I
aunswere
that
at
length
he
saw
yt
,
and
went
about
to
remedy
the
same
,
thus
:
But
were
yt
(
saith
he
)
that
the
argument
were
not
good
(
to
witt
of
Plessis
collection
out
of
S.
Chrysostome
)
and
his
consorts
do
commit
falsifications
,
as
often
as
they
bring
weake
or
euill
shapen
arguments
.
Wherto
I
aunswere
,
that
yf
they
should
be
so
mishapen
as
yours
(
Syr
Mathew
)
are
,
that
do
bely
the
author
to
his
face
,
and
will
beare
him
downe
that
he
meaneth
the
plaine
contrary
to
that
which
he
protesteth
in
expresse
words
,
I
would
not
only
say
that
they
were
weake
and
mishapen
,
but
false
and
malitious
also
;
and
the
authors
worthy
to
leese
their
creditt
for
euer
.
Finally
O.
E.
hauing
no
more
to
say
about
this
place
,
Yt
was
also
(
saith
he
)
further
answered
(
videlicet
in
the
conference
by
Plessis
)
that
Chrysostome
had
nothinge
in
this
place
,
that
might
force
vs
to
beleeue
that
he
taught
or
beleeued
prayers
to
Saints
departed
,
which
may
serue
fully
to
answere
all
the
aduersaryes
vaine
cautillations
.
Wherto
I
reply
,
that
I
know
not
what
may
be
sufficient
to
force
O.
E.
and
his
faithlesse
bretheren
,
to
beleeue
that
S.
Chrisostome
approued
prayers
to
Saints
:
but
yf
his
owne
words
often
repeated
may
be
sufficient
,
yow
haue
heard
them
before
sufficiently
out
of
him selfe
,
&
consequently
the
iudicious
Reader
will
easily
discerne
,
where
substantiall
proofes
and
where
vaine
cauillations
do
lye
&
so
much
of
this
place
.
The
fifth
Place
out
of
S.
Hierome
.
The
fraud
and
vnfaithfull
dealinge
obiected
vnto
Plessis
vpon
this
place
,
S.
Hierome
vpon
the
Prophett
Ezechiell
as
makinge
against
prayer
to
Saints
,
leauinge
out
those
words
that
immediatly
followed
,
and
declared
his
whole
meaning
.
The
words
alleaged
were
:
that
we
must
confide
in
God
,
and
not
in
other
mens
prayers
:
for
albeit
they
be
Saints
and
Prophetts
,
yet
shall
they
deliuer
but
their
owne
soules
,
and
not
those
of
their
children
,
yf
their
children
be
negligent
.
Which
last
words
(
if
their
children
be
negligent
)
Plessis
craftily
cutt
of
,
and
being
pressed
therwith
and
not
able
to
cleere
himselfe
,
had
finally
,
after
many
shifts
reiected
,
iudgement
geuen
against
him
of
falshood
,
as
before
you
haue
heard
.
Let
vs
see
now
,
O.
E.
will
recouer
his
creditt
againe
,
and
remember
what
I
noted
before
of
his
willing
obscurity
,
when
he
hath
no
list
to
be
vnderstood
,
as
I
presume
the
ordinary
Reader
will
hardly
vnderstand
him
in
this
passage
,
The
fifth
obiection
was
(
saith
he
)
for
that
in
Plessis
citing
these
words
out
of
Hieroms
comment
aryes
vpon
Ezechiel
lib.
4.
cap.
14.
bonum
est
confidere
in
Domino
,
&c.
He
left
out
those
words
.
Sincgligentes
fuerint
.
But
no
falsifications
can
be
without
fraude
:
now
what
fraud
could
be
immagined
in
omitting
words
that
make
nothing
for
his
aduersary
,
nor
against
himselfe
?
Thus
he
,
O.
E.
had
sett
downe
the
true
words
of
the
controuesie
,
as
I
did
before
,
his
question
had
byn
aunswered
of
it selfe
:
for
who
but
a
simple
fellow
will
put
in
doubt
,
but
that
the
words
before
rehearsed
(
yf
their
children
be
negligent
)
be
of
cheife
importance
to
be
putt
in
,
or
left
out
,
seing
they
do
solue
all
the
difficulty
?
For
yf
the
children
of
Saints
be
negligent
(
saith
Saint
Hierome
)
then
will
not
the
only
prayers
of
their
parents
saue
them
:
then
will
they
auayle
them
,
as
S.
Chrysostome
in
like
manner
declared
in
the
former
passage
.
Consider
then
how
true
,
&
substantial
this
first
defence
of
O.
E.
is
,
which
maketh
his
entrance
with
so
blynd
&
false
relation
of
the
controuersy
it selfe
,
and
how
well
he
deserueth
to
be
an
aduocate
for
others
,
that
so
marreth
his
clients
cause
euen
at
the
beginning
.
But
let
vs
heare
his
second
defence
of
the
same
charge
,
or
rather
his
second
euasion
yf
it
be
better
then
the
first
.
Besides
(
saith
he
)
the
ordinary
glosse
doth
rehearse
these
words
no
otherwise
then
the
L.
Plessis
quoteth
them
,
whome
I
thinke
the
Mathureux
Bishopp
of
Eureux
will
not
charge
with
falsification
.
O.
E.
had
read
the
same
,
and
therby
is
inexcusable
when
he
dissembleth
yt
,
as
before
in
voluntary
mistakinge
the
second
place
out
of
Durand
,
and
vpon
diuers
other
occasions
,
but
to
the
point
.
Yf
the
glosse
vpon
Ezechiel
did
cyte
the
words
of
S.
Hierome
dismembred
as
Plessis
doth
,
yt
were
in
no
wise
a
iust
excuse
for
him
.
First
,
for
that
the
glosse
vseth
to
cyte
short
peeces
of
sentences
,
as
yt
serueth
to
purpose
for
explication
of
words
in
the
text
,
but
Plessis
tooke
vpon
him
to
sett
downe
a
whole
place
out
of
S.
Hierome
,
for
impugning
prayer
to
Saints
desceased
,
and
so
cyted
them
verbatim
and
at
large
,
vntill
he
came
to
the
words
that
made
against
him
:
that
Saints
prayers
will
not
help
their
children
,
yf
they
be
negligent
,
which
condition
yet
the
glosse
omitteth
not
but
expresseth
yt
in
other
equiualent
words
thus
:
yf
they
follow
not
the
faith
and
works
of
their
parents
.
Wherfore
this
shift
helpeth
neyther
Plessis
nor
his
proctor
any
thing
at
all
.
And
as
for
the
Malheureux
B.
of
Eureux
,
And
this
is
all
which
O.
E.
can
diuise
to
bring
forth
for
defence
or
excuse
of
the
falsification
obiected
in
leauinge
out
S.
Hieroms
restriction
(
yf
children
be
negligent
)
:
but
now
let
vs
heare
another
obiection
made
by
the
Bishop
&
answered
by
O.
E.
It
was
also
heere
obiected
(
saith
he
)
that
Hieromes
words
in
Ezechiel
make
nothing
against
prayers
to
Saints
:
but
it
must
be
remembred●
that
the
controuersy
heere
was
not
whether●
M.
Plessis
had
well
concluded
out
of
that
place
but
whether
he
had
rightly
alleaged
yt
,
&c.
Well
Syr
;
and
we
haue
shewed
now
,
that
he
alleaged
it
not
rightly
,
hauinge
left
out
the
principall
clause
,
that
he
should
haue
put
in
:
and
if
yow
graunt
also
,
(
as
yow
seeme
thervnto
enclyned
)
,
that
he
hath
not
rightly
concluded
;
then
is
he
dooble
false
,
to
witt
,
both
in
alleagation
&
conclusion
:
but
somwhat
I
hope
yow
will
diuise
to
excuse
his
collection
and
conclusion
,
though
the
authors
words
themselues
be
against
it
.
Lett
vs
see
then
what
yt
is
.
O.
E.
taken
in
most
cleere
absurdity
.
Besides
that
(
saith
he
)
we
answere
,
that
it
is
no
weake
argument
to
conclude
thus
:
(
as
Plessis
doth
out
of
S.
Hierome
)
we
must
not
trust
in
the
prayers
of
men
,
and
therfore
are
not
to
rely
vpon
the
prayers
of
men
departed
this
life
.
But
I
say
to
the
contrary
,
that
it
is
a
weake
and
wicked
argument
to
conclude
thus
,
as
the
words
lye
in
S.
Hierome
,
we
must
not
rely
vpon
the
prayers
of
men
though
neuer
so
holy
,
yf
we
be
negligent
of
our
owne
parts
,
ergo
we
must
not
trust
in
the
prayers
of
Saints
departed
,
though
we
be
neuer
so
diligent
,
to
liue
vertuously
our selues
;
this
I
say
were
an
absurde
manner
of
argument
and
conclusion
,
&
de
inceps
.
and
yet
this
is
the
argument
and
conclusion
of
Plessis
and
of
O.
E.
for
impugning
prayers
to
Saints
deceased
,
against
which
false
conclusion
the
Bishop
in
his
refutation
of
Plessis
reply
,
doth
alleadge
aboue
a
dozen
most
plaine
and
effectuall
places
,
out
of
S.
Hierome
,
S.
Chrysostome
,
and
other
Fathers
,
which
plainly
and
perspiciously
do
approue
the
doctrine
and
practise
of
prayer
to
Saints
deceased
in
their
dayes
,
and
O.
E.
durst
not
take
vpon
him
to
aunswere
any
one
of
them
,
but
pullinge
downe
his
hatt
ouer
his
eyes
,
passed
by
them
as
he
had
not
seene
them
.
But
let
vs
heare
his
last
conclusion
.
Dum
in
hoc
saeculo
sumus
,
&c.
Whilst
we
are
in
this
world
,
we
may
help
one
another
by
prayers
or
counsells
,
but
when
we
come
before
the
trihunall
of
Christ
neither
Iob
,
nor
Daniell
,
nor
N●●
can
pray
for
any
man
,
but
euery
one
shall
beare
his
owne
burden
.
And
do
you
see
what
plaine
places
these
fellowes
bring
forth
and
how
flatly
they
conclude
?
This
place
yf
yow
remember
,
was
alleaged
by
Plessis
in
the
conference
&
answered
by
the
Bishop
,
that
being
meant
euidently
of
the
day
of
iudgement
,
made
nothinge
against
prayer
before
that
day
,
nor
could
he
reply
any
thinge
at
that
tyme
,
nor
did
he
afterward
in
his
discourse
,
as
appeareth
by
the
Bishops
refutation
fol.
146.
of
lyuinge
and
dead
Saints
,
which
shift
to
auoyde
most
euident
authorityes
of
the
Fathers
,
the
Bishopp
refuteth
dy
diuers
places
alleaged
out
of
S.
Hierome
himselfe
,
&
one
namely
against
Vigilantius
,
where
he
obiecteth
to
that
heretike
the
very
same
words
,
vsed
heere
by
his
scholler
O.
E.
Hier.
ep.
2.
cont.
Vigilant
Anotable
place
of
S.
Hier.
against
the
heretiks
of
this
time
.
Dicis
in
libello
tuo
,
quod
dum
viuimus
,
&c.
Thou
saist
(
saith
he
)
in
thy
booke
,
that
whilst
we
are
in
this
life
we
may
pray
one
for
another
,
but
that
after
death
no
mans
prayer
shal
be
heard
for
other
,
&c.
but
yf
the
Apostles
and
Martyrs
being
vpon
earth
in
flesh
,
could
pray
and
be
heard
for
others
,
when
they
had
need
,
yet
to
pray
also
for
themselues
,
how
much
more
now
after
their
victoryes
,
crownes
,
and
triumphes
,
&c.
S.
Paul
saith
of
himselfe
,
that
276.
soules
,
were
geuen
him
at
his
prayers
in
the
shipp
,
when
he
was
aliue
,
and
dost
thou
think●
he
will
be
mute
now
after
he
is
gone
to
Christ
,
and
will
not
dare
to
open
his
mouth
for
them
that
haue
beleeued
his
ghospell
throughout
the
world
?
and
shall
Vigilantius
a
liue
dogge
,
be
better
then
Paul
a
dead
Lyon
?
So
S.
Hierome
:
meaning
that
Vigilantius
presumed
,
that
himselfe
being
a
liue
Saint
could
be
heard
for
others
,
but
S.
Paul
being
a
dead
Saint
,
could
not
,
and
O.
E.
presuminge
the
same
also
of
himselfe
(
as
yow
may
well
imagine
that
he
doth
)
may
in
like
manner
apply
the
same
aunswere
of
S.
Hierome
to
himselfe
,
being
in
this
point
no
lesse
a
barkinge
dogge
against
prayer
to
Saints
,
then
was
Vigilantius
.
And
so
much
of
this
place
.
The
sixt
Place
out
of
S.
Cyrill
.
The
falshood
obiected
to
Plessis
vpon
this
place
,
S.
Cyrill
against
worshippinge
the
Crosse
,
sayinge
:
S.
Cyrill
answered
the
Emperour
Iulian
,
who
reproached
the
honour
done
to
the
Crosse
by
Christians
:
that
Christians
did
not
geue
adoration
nor
reuerence
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
&c.
It
was
obiected
,
I
say
,
that
the
last
words
of
this
sentence
,
which
are
of
most
moment
,
to
witt
;
that
Christians
did
not
giue
adoration
or
Reuerence
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
;
are
not
in
S.
Cyrill
,
albeit
Plessis
vsinge
often
to
repeate
those
words
as
the
words
of
S.
Cyrill
,
had
putt
them
downe
also
(
in
one
place
)
in
a
different
letter
:
which
charge
Plessis
being
not
able
to
auoyde
,
after
diuers
shifts
,
turnings
,
and
wyndings
,
was
condemned
as
before
yow
haue
seene
,
neyther
was
he
able
to
reply
any
thing
of
moment
afterward
in
his
discourse
from
Saumur
,
O.
E.
hauing
perused
,
and
thought
well
vpon
,
lett
vs
see
what
he
bringeth
for
releefe
of
his
clyent
,
and
I
shall
sett
downe
all
his
words
togeather
,
as
they
ly
in
his
answere
,
for
that
they
conteyne
not
many
lynes
,
he
knowinge
not
well
which
way
to
turne
himselfe
,
but
yet
must
needs
say
somewhat
,
for
that
he
could
not
well
hold
his
peace
.
The
sixth
place
(
saith
he
)
which
the
L.
of
Plessis
was
charged
to
haue
corrupted
,
Cyril
contra
Iulian
,
1.
6.
&
why
was
he
charged
thinke
you
?
forsooth
by
cause
he
alleaged
him
to
proue
that
adoration
was
not
to
be
yealded
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
O.
E.
but
heerin
there
could
not
be
any
falsification
vsed
:
and
that
first
,
for
that
he
did
not
alleage
the
authors
words
;
and
secondly
for
that
he
doth
well
conclude
according
to
Cyrills
meaning
;
for
where
Iulian
obiected
to
Christians
that
they
worshipped
the
crosse
;
Cyril
answereth
,
that
these
words
proceeded
of
badd
thoughts
&
extreeme
ignorance
;
so
likewise
saith
Minutius
Foelix
in
his
Apologie
Cruces
nec
adoramus
,
nec
optamus
,
that
is
we
neyther
worshipp
nor
desire
Crosses
.
This
is
his
whole
discourse
,
full
wise
and
learned
as
yow
see
,
which
the
poore
man
hauinge
seene
refuted
particularly
in
the
Acts
themselues
of
the
conference
,
and
after
more
largely
in
the
refutation
of
Plessis
michinge
discourse
without
a
name
,
he
bringeth
it
in
heere
againe
,
as
though
it
had
neuer
byn
heard
of
or
refuted
before
,
without
adding
one
word
of
help
or
new
supply
for
poore
Plessis
,
but
only
some
new
vntrew
lyes
of
his
owne
,
as
his
fashion
is
:
as
first
of
all
,
where
he
saith
,
that
forsooth
Plessis
was
charged
with
falsification
,
O.
E.
to
help
out
his
client
.
because
he
alleaged
Cyrill
to
proue
;
that
adoration
was
not
to
be
yelded
to
the
signe
of
the
Crosse.
I
say
forsooth
yt
is
an
euident
vntruth
;
for
he
was
so
charged
for
that
he
alleaged
that
out
of
S.
Cyrill
which
was
not
in
Cyrill
.
And
againe
it
is
another
vntruth
,
to
affirme
;
that
Cyrill
obiected
extreeme
ignorance
to
Iulian
,
for
that
he
reproached
Christians
for
honouring
the
Crosse.
Seing
it
was
for
another
distinct
cause
,
as
[
*
](A09107-e23020-b)
*
Supra
cap.
2.
lo●
.
6.
A
fraudulent
equiuocation
of
the
word
Crosse
taken
of
the
author
for
a
gibbet
or
gallowes
.
before
hath
byn
shewed
:
to
wit
,
for
a
false
inference
or
collection
made
therof
.
And
it
is
a
third
vntruth
,
that
Minutius
Foelix
did
say
in
our
sense
,
we
neyther
worshipp
nor
desire
Crosses
,
that
is
to
say
,
as
they
signify
,
the
Crosse
of
Christ
,
&
not
gibbets
as
his
pagan
aduersary
obiected
vnto
him
;
&
O.
E.
deserueth
some
such
Crosse
,
for
impugninge
the
other
of
Christ
,
and
for
deluding
his
Reader
in
this
place
with
so
grosse
an
equiuocation
,
yf
his
other
Acts
and
Gests
by
sea
and
land
do
not
meritt
also
the
same
.
And
I
do
call
these
later
two
,
proper
vntruthes
of
O.
E.
though
they
were
obiected
before
by
Plessis
in
the
Conference
,
for
that
he
hauinge
seene
them
euidently
answered
,
&
refuted
before
,
bringeth
them
in
againe
,
and
dissembleth
the
refutation
,
as
yow
haue
seene
in
the
second
Chapter
of
this
defence
,
where
all
these
nine
places
are
examined
particularly
,
as
they
were
handled
in
the
conference
it selfe
.
The
seauenth
Place
out
of
the
law
of
the
Emperours
Theodosius
and
Valens
.
The
legerdemayne
obiected
vnto
Plessis
vpon
this
place
,
was
,
as
before
yow
haue
seene
,
that
pretending
to
alleage
a
certayne
law
or
imperiall
institution
against
paintinge
and
caruinge
of
imoges
,
he
left
out
the
words
humi
&
in
solo
,
Petrus
Crinitus
a
new
author
of
our
tymes
,
whome
he
had
quoted
in
the
margent
,
but
not
named
in
the
text
,
he
was
condemned
at
length
of
this
forgery
.
Lett
vs
see
how
his
aduocate
will
defend
him
,
I
shall
sett
downe
his
whole
defence
togeather
as
in
the
former
place
.
The
seauenth
place
(
saith
he
)
was
out
of
Petrus
Crinitus
where
the
Lord
of
Plessis
is
charged
to
leaue
out
the
word
(
humi
)
alleaginge
the
lawe
of
Theodosius
and
Valens
against
the
making
of
the
signe
of
the
Crosse
,
Petrus
Crinitus
which
cyteth
the
law
out
of
authenticall
records
.
Our
wise
relator
heere
,
O.
E.
to
make
the
matter
seeme
more
heynous
,
saith
,
he
falsifyeth
the
law
of
Theosius
,
Valens
,
and
Iustinian
,
as
if
they
had
byn
ioint
authors
of
that
law
:
when
as
Iustinian
was
not
yet
in
the
world
,
when
that
law
was
made
.
Neyther
is
it
much
materiall
if
Tribonian
,
in
the
Emperours
name
,
had
putt
in
the
word
(
humi
,
)
for
wee
are
rather
to
rely
vpon
the
Originals
then
vpon
Tribonians
honesty
,
that
put
words
in
&
out
,
and
altered
lawes
at
pleasure
.
O.
E.
Neyther
was
the
law
of
Theodosius
and
Valens
to
be
reputed
new
,
albeit
the
word
(
humi
)
had
bin
left
out
,
seing
both
Epiphanius
,
and
the
Councell
of
Eliberis
in
Spaine
,
and
diuers
other
Fathers
had
condemned
paintinge
of
images
.
Thus
pleadeth
O.
E.
for
his
client
,
but
in
such
sort
,
as
I
thinke
verily
heerafter
few
will
entertayne
him
for
their
aduocate
,
and
though
he
thrust
himselfe
in
,
as
he
hath
done
in
this
cause
,
he
wil
be
reiected
and
thrust
out
againe
,
and
barred
of
all
practise
,
as
a
puny
pettifogger
,
that
doth
more
hurt
then
help
his
clients
cause
,
we
shall
make
a
few
notes
vpon
this
his
answere
,
wherby
,
and
by
readinge
the
examen
made
before
vpon
this
place
,
Petrus
Crinitus
,
though
he
quoted
his
name
in
the
margent
,
there
being
great
difference
betweene
allegation
and
quotation
.
what
will
they
say
(
to
witt
the
Papists
)
to
the
Emperors
[
*
](A09107-e23550-b)
*
This
is
false
for
it
was
Theodosius
the
second
&
.
Valentinian
the
third
.
Theodosius
and
Valens
,
who
by
an
expresse
edict
,
did
forbidd
the
paintinge
of
images
.
Thus
he
did
triumphe
,
with
the
Emperors
themselues
in
the
text
,
though
in
the
margent
he
quoted
Crinitus
for
his
refuge
,
when
he
should
be
pressed
.
Secondly
,
where
he
saith
;
that
Crinitus
cyteth
the
law
out
of
authenticall
records
,
and
not
as
they
are
found
now
falsified
by
Idolators
,
yt
is
a
notorious
vanity
,
and
this
audacious
Iconoclast
should
haue
cyted
some
proofe
out
of
some
one
author
or
other
for
yt
,
and
not
so
boldly
of
him selfe
,
without
all
reason
or
authority
auouch
so
vntrew
a
paradox
.
Plessis
himselfe
in
the
conference
,
could
only
say
that
Crinitus
alleaged
them
Ex
libris
Augustalibus
,
out
of
the
Emperors
bookes
,
which
bookes
the
Bishop
shewed
euidently
,
to
be
no
other
,
but
the
Codes
now
extant
,
Si
quis
(
saith
he
)
authorem
desiderat
,
&c.
Yf
any
require
the
author
of
this
●
alleage
,
lett
him
reade
the
decrees
and
Edicts
of
the
Emperors
,
gathered
by
most
learned
men
Trebonianus
,
Basilides
,
Theophilus
,
and
Dioscorus
,
especially
vnder
Iustinian
,
&c.
Thus
Crinitus
of
the
Emperors
constitutions
.
Out
of
which
he
cyteth
this
law
by
memory
as
yt
seemeth
,
erringe
as
well
in
the
Chronologie
,
as
also
in
the
names
of
Theodosius
and
Valens
,
who
did
not
liue
togeather
,
nor
made
lawes
togeather
,
wheras
he
should
haue
said
in
deed
Theodosius
and
Valentinian
,
as
also
leauing
out
the
words
humi
&
in
solo
.
And
yt
is
a
desperate
defence
of
O.
E.
to
call
in
doubt
the
truth
of
all
the
Emperiall
lawes
for
this
thousand
yeares
&
more
,
gathered
by
Trebonianus
and
other
learned
men
,
before
named
,
&
read
in
all
schooles
&
vniuersityes
without
note
or
corruption
,
vntill
now
that
this
new
academike
minister
O.
E.
will
needs
call
them
all
in
question
and
suspition
,
so
as
nothing
heerafter
shal
be
of
certayne
credit
.
And
yf
this
had
byn
so
as
O.
E.
affirmeth
,
that
the
Emperiall
lawes
had
bin
corrupted
,
and
that
Trebonian
that
liued
aboue
a
thousand
yeares
past
vnder
Iustinian
the
Emperour
,
had
pu●
in
,
and
put
out
,
and
altered
lawes
at
his
pleasure
,
was
there
no
man
to
haue
noted
yt
in
so
many
ages
before
Sutcliffe
?
Cuias
a
learned
lawyer
noted
only
,
that
Trebonian
by
consent
of
the
Emperour
Iustinian
changed
the
word
crux
,
O.
E.
against
Trebonian
.
that
before
Constantine
,
signified
a
gibbett
or
gallowes
in
the
old
pagan
Emperors
lawes
,
into
the
word
furca
.
But
what
is
this
,
that
O.
E.
should
say
so
boldly
,
that
he
altered
lawes
at
his
pleasure
?
but
this
is
the
spiritt
of
heretiks
to
bring
all
things
in
doubt
,
&
to
take
away
fidem
publicam
all
creditt
from
all
things
but
their
owne
sayings
,
and
then
he
that
can
talke
most
,
shal
be
most
credible
;
&
this
is
one
ground
of
their
new
ghospell
.
Thirdly
wheras
O.
E.
endeauoureth
to
tripp
the
Relator
for
ascribinge
this
law
to
three
Emperours
iointly
,
Theodosius
Valens
,
&
Iustinian
,
which
Iustinian
liued
after
the
former
two
;
he
sheweth
more
will
then
skill
to
be
reuenged
,
for
as
Iustinian
could
not
make
a
common
law
with
the
former
two
Theodosius
and
Valens
,
Iustinians
Code
,
O.
E.
and
by
that
reason
this
law
also
may
be
called
in
this
respect
Iustinianus
Law
,
and
consequently
O.
E.
was
much
ouerseene
in
running
so
hastily
vpon
the
relator
,
who
yet
was
not
he
that
did
sett
forth
these
particular
passages
in
print
,
as
before
hath
byn
said
.
Fourthly
I
would
haue
yow
to
note
,
the
arrogancy
of
hereticall
writers
in
contemning
learned
men
when
they
stand
in
their
way
,
O.
E.
as
heer
Trebonian
.
Vir
doctissimus
(
saith
Crinitus
)
a
most
learned
man
that
gathered
the
lawes
togeather
with
others
,
vnder
Iustinian
.
But
what
saith
O.
E.
of
him
?
yow
shall
heare
.
Neyther
ys
yt
much
materiall
(
saith
he
)
yf
Trebonian
in
the
Emperors
name
had
putt
in
the
word
humi
,
for
we
are
rather
to
rely
vpon
the
originalls
,
them
vpon
Trebonians
honesty
,
&c.
Heere
to
say
nothinge
of
the
difference
of
honesty
,
honour
,
learninge
&
dignity
,
betweene
Trebonian
and
Sutcliffe
,
for
that
comparisons
are
odious
,
I
would
aske
what
originalls
are
those
that
O.
E.
saith
we
must
rely
vpon
?
Crinitus
out
of
whome
he
would
seeme
to
gather
them
saith
(
as
yow
haue
heard
)
that
they
are
the
Emperiall
constitutions
conteyned
in
the
Code
,
Azo
,
Salicet
,
&
others
,
haue
the
same
words
and
do
note
no
difference
euer
to
haue
byn
in
this
point
.
Whence
then
or
where
are
Mathew
Sutcl●ffes
originalls
,
by
Idolators
&
Crosse
worshippers
?
Crinitus
is
but
a
late
writer
,
and
saith
he
hath
none
but
out
of
the
Code
,
and
these
are
all
against
the
Minister
;
what
will
he
do
?
or
what
shall
we
say
to
such
people
?
are
not
our
poore
deceaued
contreymen
in
a
good
state
,
to
depend
vpon
these
mens
words
and
assertions
in
matters
of
Religion
.
But
let
vs
see
the
end
of
his
defence
vpon
this
place
.
Neyther
was
(
saith
he
)
this
law
of
Theodosius
and
Valens
,
to
be
reputed
new
,
albeit
the
word
hum●
had
byn
left
out
,
seing
both
Epiphanius
,
and
the
Councell
of
Eliberis
in
Spaine
&
diuers
other
Fathers
had
condemned
Images
before
.
But
why
had
not
O.
E.
cyted
the
places
out
of
Epiphanius
,
&
those
other
Fathers
which
condemned
paintinge
of
Images
,
that
we
might
haue
read
them
.
O.
E.
as
the
law
of
Theodosius
and
Valens
)
to
witt
,
the
authorityes
of
Eusebius
,
Chrysostome
,
Hierome
,
Cyrill
,
Prudentius
,
Paulinus
,
S.
Gregory
Nissen
,
S.
Gregory
Nazianzen
,
and
others
,
all
allowinge
the
pious
vse
of
images
in
their
dayes
;
yea
and
an
other
expresse
law
of
the
same
Emperors
Theodosius
and
Valentinian
,
And
as
for
the
Councell
of
Eliberis
in
Spaine
,
yt
being
a
prouinciall
Councell
of
19.
Bishops
only
,
about
the
yeare
305.
they
prohibited
nothing
,
but
that
Images
should
not
be
painted
in
those
dayes
vpon
walles
,
both
in
respect
of
the
indecency
&
corruption
that
came
therby
vnto
them
,
O.
E.
hauing
borrowed
this
obiection
of
the
Councell
of
Eliberis
,
out
of
Plessis
reply
in
his
discourse
vpon
the
place
,
though
in
the
Conference
he
came
out
with
yt
,
O.
E.
heere
dissembleth
and
replyeth
no
one
word
,
(
as
hath
bene
said
)
to
this
or
to
any
of
the
authorityes
alleaged
there
by
the
Bishop
,
for
the
auncient
vse
and
honour
of
Images
.
The
eyght
Place
out
of
S.
Bernard
.
First
yt
is
to
be
noted
that
this
8.
passage
,
being
by
error
of
the
aforsaid
french
wrytten
copy
sent
from
Paris
,
placed
in
the
9.
roome
by
him
that
sett
forth
the
said
passages
,
is
restored
heere
by
vs
againe
vnto
his
proper
place
,
accordinge
to
the
Acts
of
the
conference
,
and
Plessis
reply
,
which
O.
E.
also
followeth
without
mencioninge
the
error
,
which
is
an
argument
that
he
had
read
all
,
and
so
much
greater
is
his
shame
,
that
he
commeth
so
bare
&
weake
to
play
the
Aduocate
,
after
much
better
matter
vttered
before
by
Plessis
himselfe
,
who
was
accused
vpon
this
place
(
as
before
yow
haue
seene
)
for
tyinge
togeather
fraudulently
two
different
places
of
S.
Bernard
,
as
making
against
the
honouring
of
our
blessed
Lady
,
and
persidiously
leauinge
out
in
the
myddest
that
clause
of
the
Father
,
Magnifie
the
inuentrix
of
grace
,
the
mediatrix
of
Saluation
,
and
the
restorer
of
the
world
.
Vpon
which
deceytfull
dealing
,
after
many
corners
sought
in
vaine
to
runne
out
and
escape
,
Plessis
had
sentence
against
him
.
But
lett
vs
see
what
releefe
the
new
attorney
bringeth
.
As
yf
yt
were
necessary
(
saith
he
)
where
diuers
places
are
alleaged
out
of
one
author
,
to
wryte
out
all
that
cometh
betwixt
one
&
the
other
.
Lo
a
quicke
dispatch
of
the
matter
.
But
I
would
aske
O.
E.
a
case
of
conscience
as
professinge
also
diuinity
,
which
is
this
:
yf
when
that
which
goeth
betweene
,
conteyne
the
very
substance
&
soule
of
the
matter
or
controuersy
(
as
heere
yt
doth
)
whether
in
such
a
case
yt
be
lawfull
to
leaue
yt
out
,
or
noe
?
or
whether
this
be
properly
falshood
and
falsification
?
For
yf
yt
be
not
,
then
we
may
peruert
the
Pater
noster
or
any
prayer
,
or
peece
of
scripture
,
and
make
yt
seeme
blasphemous
.
And
let
the
reader
marke
that
O.
E.
hath
no
euasion
heere
,
but
most
absured
.
Yet
lett
vs
heare
him
further
for
Plessis
excuse
.
He
alleageth
Bernard
(
saith
he
)
not
as
an
authenticall
witnesse
,
Well
Syr
,
and
for
that
S.
Bernard
did
not
fauour
him
in
Religion
(
as
no
Saint
euer
did
)
is
it
therfore
lawfull
to
falsifie
and
corrupt
his
words
and
sense
?
We
know
well
that
both
yow
and
hee
do
alleage
the
words
of
S.
Bernard
,
and
other
Catholike
wryters
,
as
the
diuell
doth
scriptures
,
which
bynd
not
him
,
but
others
against
whome
he
alleageth
them
;
A
man
should
not
bely
the
diuell
.
And
no
lesse
falshood
,
and
corruption
of
mynd
is
discouered
,
in
falsifyinge
authors
whome
they
creditt
not
,
as
others
whome
they
credit
.
Wherfore
let
vs
heare
his
conclusion
vpon
this
place
.
He
saith
that
S.
Bernard
and
we
do
not
agree
about
honors
to
be
giuen
to
our
lady
,
as
in
the
feast
of
her
conception
,
in
callinge
her
Mediatricem
salutis
,
and
that
both
he
and
Epiphanius
wrytinge
against
the
heretiks
called
Collyridians
,
do
much
mislike
the
honours
which
we
giue
to
the
blessed
Virgin
.
All
which
are
toyes
,
&
answered
before
in
the
examen
of
this
place
,
for
so
much
as
concerneth
S.
Bernards
agreement
and
ours
;
but
for
the
foolish
women
called
Collyridians
condemned
by
Epiphanius
,
and
by
the
whole
Church
for
offeringe
sacrifice
to
our
Lady
,
this
cauiller
hath
byn
answered
[
*
](A09107-e25130-b)
*
See
the
confutation
of
O.
E.
his
chalenge
by
W.
R.
Chal.
3.
●
.
9.
n.
61.
62.
and
3
conuers
.
of
England
part.
2.
cap.
2.
●
.
21.
22.
so
often
(
to
witt
that
yt
appertayneth
nothinge
to
our
controuersie
)
and
this
in
diuers
bookes
now
out
against
him
,
as
only
lacke
of
iudgment
&
matter
(
as
it
seemeth
)
haue
induced
him
to
obiect
yt
heere
againe
,
he
hauinge
byn
foyled
therin
,
and
made
to
see
,
that
Epiphanius
expressely
in
that
place
honoureth
highely
our
El.
Lady
.
and
denyeth
only
diuine
honour
vnto
her
.
And
not
that
which
the
Catholike
Church
doth
giue
vnto
her
.
The
9.
and
last
Place
out
of
Theodorete
.
The
charge
of
falsifying
laid
to
Plessis
vpon
this
passage
of
Theodorete
,
Idolls
,
Plessis
did
fraudulently
so
alleage
the
same
,
as
yf
he
had
spoken
yt
of
Christian
Images
,
for
which
purpose
he
vsed
two
sleights
,
the
first
in
translating
the
Greeke
word
Idoll
by
the
Latyn
word
Image
;
the
second
by
cutting
of
these
words
:
Idolls
adored
by
pagans
,
and
adored
for
Gods
.
For
excuse
of
which
two
fa●sifications
,
when
Plessis
had
vsed
diuers
shifts
as
well
by
some
shew
of
proofe
,
that
Idolls
and
Images
may
somtymes
be
taken
for
the
same
,
and
then
that
the
clause
omitted
was
not
of
such
importance
,
&
after
both
these
refuges
largely
confuted
by
the
Bishopp
,
O.
E.
would
now
gladly
haue
reuersed
.
Let
vs
see
his
good
reasons
and
arguments
he
bringeth
for
the
same
.
To
the
first
obiection
of
Translating
falsely
Images
for
Idolls
,
of
his
Refut.
O.
E.
first
answereth
thus
:
As
yf
euery
one
(
saith
he
)
that
doth
translate
amisse
,
were
to
be
charged
with
falsification
,
or
as
yf
all
badd
translations
of
the
old
Latyn
interpreter
of
the
Bible
,
were
so
many
falsifications
.
And
is
not
this
a
substantiall
answere
?
we
do
not
say
(
Syr
Mathew
)
that
all
erroneous
translations
be
falsifications
,
yf
they
be
of
meere
error
,
without
malice
,
but
yf
yt
be
with
plaine
intention
to
deceaue
the
reader
,
and
to
make
him
apprehend
one
thing
for
another
in
fauour
of
their
heresies
,
then
can
yt
not
be
denyed
,
but
that
yt
is
falsification
and
wicked
deceyte
,
as
heere
now
to
translate
the
word
Idoll
in
Theodorete
by
the
word
Image
,
&
leauinge
out
those
other
words
,
adored
by
the
pagans
for
Gods
,
wherby
his
meaninge
was
declared
,
that
he
meant
not
of
Christian
Images
,
but
of
pagan
Idolls
.
Was
not
this
deceyt
in
Plessis
,
and
was
not
this
cosenage
in
willfull
corruption
?
resolue
yow
the
case
out
of
your
diuinity
.
And
where
our
English
Sectaryes
at
this
day
in
their
translations
of
scripture
,
in
their
Bibles
do
translate
one
and
the
selfe
same
word
out
of
Hebrew
,
ordinances
,
instructions
,
&c.
Whersoeuer
Priests
are
reprehended
or
spoken
euill
of
,
there
the
word
Priest
is
neuer
omitted
,
but
where
they
are
spoken
well
of
,
there
must
come
in
the
words
Elders
,
Ministers
and
the
like
.
Though
the
Greeke
&
Hebrew
words
be
the
selfe
same
as
in
the
other
place
.
And
almost
infinite
other
such
examples
you
may
read
,
learnedly
laid
togeather
in
the
discouery
of
Maister
Gregory
Martyn
,
M.
Martins
discouery
printed
as
1582.
cap.
1.
of
hereticall
corruptions
in
translation
of
the
scriptures
.
And
thus
much
to
O.
E.
his
first
answere
,
let
vs
see
his
second
.
Besides
this
(
saith
he
)
Maister
Plessis
offered
to
prooue
,
and
most
true
it
is
,
that
euery
Image
hauing
idolatrous
or
heathen
worshipp
done
vnto
yt
,
is
Idolum
.
And
who
denyeth
this
(
Syr
Mathew
)
?
can
yow
or
yours
proue
that
the
reuerence
we
do
to
the
sacred
Images
of
Christ
,
&
his
Saints
is
idolatrous
or
heathenist
?
Then
may
yow
condemne
all
those
auncient
Fathers
,
with
the
vniuersall
Church
of
their
tyme
for
heathenist
Idolators
,
which
are
alleaged
by
the
Bishop
in
his
reply
to
Plessis
discourse
,
and
shewed
out
of
their
owne
words
&
testimonyes
,
Prudentius
,
Cassianus
,
Paulinus
,
Gregorius
Nissenus
,
Basil
,
Theodorete
,
Hierome
,
Gregorius
Turonensis
,
Gregory
the
great
,
Euagrius
,
Chrysostome
Bede
,
Damascen
;
and
others
,
to
whose
authorityes
and
sentences
O.
E.
answereth
heere
not
one
word
,
but
letteth
them
slipp
,
as
though
he
had
neuer
heard
of
them
;
and
this
is
his
common
tricke
when
he
hath
nothing
to
reply
:
yet
notwithstanding
shall
yow
heare
him
bragg
,
and
vaunt
anon
when
the
skyrmish
is
ended
,
as
yf
he
had
fully
answered
all
,
and
playd
his
prise
with
great
manhood
.
And
thus
much
about
the
first
falsification
in
translatinge
Image
for
Idoll
,
wherin
O.
E.
hath
valiantly
holpen
his
client
as
yow
see
.
Lett
vs
now
examine
what
succour
he
geueth
him
for
the
second
charge
,
to
witt
,
for
leauinge
out
the
words
:
adored
by
pagans
for
Gods
,
which
should
haue
explicated
Theodoretts
plaine
meaning
,
that
he
vnderstood
not
of
Christian
Images
,
when
he
spake
against
such
kind
of
Idolls
.
To
the
second
(
obiection
)
is
answered
(
saith
he
)
words●
gentibus
culta
being
sett
downe
in
the
allegation
,
do
rather
hurt
,
then
help
the
Papists
,
that
worshipp
Images
with
kissinge
,
croachinge
,
censinge
prayinge
,
as
the
gentills
did
their
Idolls
:
those
reasons
therfore
that
are
forcible
against
the
Idolls
of
the
Gentills
,
are
also
most
forcible
against
the
Popish
worshipp
of
Images
.
So
saith
he
.
And
this
is
all
the
substance
of
his
aunswere
to
this
obiection
,
wherin
to
omit
his
intemperat
raylinge
I
would
haue
euery
man
of
reason
to
consider
the
folly
&
falshood
of
his
answere
;
falshood
in
tellinge
vs
only
that
these
words
à
gentibus
culta
,
were
left
out
,
wheras
Theodoret
saith
à
gentibus
culta
,
&
pro
dijs
culta
,
worshipped
by
pagans
,
and
worshipped
for
Gods
,
wherin
standeth
the
whole
point
of
the
controuersie
.
His
folly
is
apparant
,
in
telling
vs
,
that
if
these
words
had
byn
truly
sett
downe
,
and
not
left
out
by
Plessis
,
yt
had
byn
worse
for
vs
,
geuinge
vs
therby
to
vnderstand
,
that
Plessis
of
compassion
not
to
hurt
vs
more
left
them
out
;
but
yet
at
leastwise
this
good
we
should
haue
had
therby
,
yf
he
had
left
them
in
,
as
he
found
them
;
that
the
place
of
Theodorett
cyted
by
him
against
Images
,
would
plainly
haue
appeared
impertinent
to
the
purpose
,
for
that
yt
treated
only
of
pagan
Idolls
,
and
this
had
b●n
help
inough
for
the
Papists
against
Plessis
and
O.
E.
who
from
this
place
of
Theodorete
corrupted
by
them
,
would
impugne
Christian
Images
,
now
let
the
Christian
reader
iudge
what
help
Plessis
and
O.
E.
had
need
to
haue
to
deliuer
them
from
the
note
of
so
false
dealinge
.
And
this
shal
be
sufficient
for
this
briefe
examen
of
the
9.
places
aforesaid
,
out
of
which
O.
E.
being
once
gotten
;
harken
I
pray
yow
how
he
craketh
,
If
then
(
saith
he
)
the
aduersary
could
not
gett
any
ground
of
Maister
Plessis
in
these
places
,
which
were
[
*
](A09107-e26090-b)
*
See
this
to
be
fal●e
cap.
1.
chosen
as
principall
,
and
placed
first
as
places
of
most
aduantage
,
we
may
well
suppose
yf
the
triall
had
proceeded
,
that
he
would
haue
receaued
farre
more
disgrace
,
And
againe
yf
a
gentleman
no
professed
diuine
,
vpon
such
vnequall
tearmes
,
was
able
to
make
[
*
](A09107-e26140-b)
*
A
broken
head
.
head
against
his
aduersaryes
;
much
better
I
hope
should
we
be
able
to
resist
,
yf
professed
diuines
might
procure
an
indifferent
triall
,
&c.
And
yet
further
:
most
ridiculous
it
is
to
thinke
,
that
this
Thrasonicall
Chalenger
was
able
to
make
good
that
cause
,
which
neyther
with
lyinge
,
forginge
,
facinge
,
nor
any
witt
or
pollicy
,
the
greatest
clarks
of
that
faction
are
able
to
maintayne
.
And
in
his
preface
to
the
refutation
of
my
relation
:
It
will
plainly
appeare
by
examination
of
the
particulars
,
that
the
L.
of
Plessis
was
most
vniustly
charged
with
falsification
,
&c.
And
we
will
plainly
proue
that
the
Popish
sect
hath
gained
nothing
by
this
conference
,
but
shame
,
and
confusion
,
&c.
And
finally
(
saith
he
)
yf
Persons
meane
to
reply
,
let
him
pull
of
his
vizard
,
and
come
barefaced
into
the
field
,
and
he
shall
not
want
those
that
will
encounter
him
,
&c.
Thus
he
,
as
a
cocke
of
the
game
that
croweth
when
his
head
bleedeth
;
and
yow
must
further
note
,
that
whilst
he
cryeth
heere
to
other
men
,
to
put
of
vizards
,
and
to
come
bare
faced
into
the
field
,
himselfe
lay
yet
hidden
vnder
the
vizard
of
O.
E.
so
as
that
which
he
reprehendeth
in
others
,
he
practiseth
in
himselfe
,
which
is
the
worst
,
and
weakest
kynd
of
persuasion
,
that
may
be
.
Christ
Iesus
inspire
his
harte
with
his
holy
grace
,
&
myne
also
to
consider
,
not
so
much
what
maketh
for
the
maintenance
of
any
part
or
faction
,
as
for
simple
truth
,
wherby
both
of
vs
must
be
saued
,
which
saluation
I
desire
to
him
,
as
to
my selfe
,
and
this
is
all
the
hatred
I
beare
him
,
notwithstandinge
all
his
scolding
,
&
with
this
would
I
end
,
but
that
an
others
booke
of
his
is
come
to
my
hands
,
wherof
I
must
say
a
word
or
two
briefly
in
the
next
Chapter
for
conclusion
of
all
.
THE
CONCLVSION
OF
THIS
TREATISE
,
WITH
THE
notice
of
another
booke
sett
forth
by
Mathew
Sutcliffe
,
and
the
contentes
and
partes
therof
examined
.
CHAP.
VI.
AS
I
was
drawinge
towards
the
end
of
this
Treatise
,
I
had
the
sight
of
a
second
edition
of
O.
E.
his
chalenge
,
printed
againe
vnder
the
name
of
Mathew
Sutcliffe
,
wherby
we
see
,
that
now
at
length
himselfe
confesseth
,
to
haue
gone
hidden
hitherto
vnder
the
veyle
of
those
two
letters
,
which
he
so
much
obiected
to
others
for
a
fault
in
his
wrytings
.
I
had
heard
of
this
new
edition
before
,
but
had
not
had
the
vew
vntil
now
,
and
I
do
thinke
,
that
yf
the
author
had
stayed
a
little
longer
,
and
seene
the
answere
that
is
now
out
against
yt
,
he
would
haue
lost
much
of
his
appetite
to
publish
yt
againe
;
E.
O.
opposinge
himselfe
to
O.
E.
sett
forth
a
certaine
detection
,
of
diuers
notorious
vntruthes
,
corruptions
,
and
falsifications
,
found
in
the
former
edition
of
this
vayne
chalenge
,
which
so
greatly
troubled
O.
E.
being
otherwise
cholerike
&
impatient
,
both
by
nature
and
custome
,
as
yt
draue
him
not
only
to
runne
out
of
his
name
O.
E.
but
neere
also
out
of
his
witts
&
right
senses
,
in
diuulginge
that
which
must
needs
turne
to
his
vtter
discreditt
,
yf
I
be
not
deceaued
:
I
meane
his
former
ridiculous
chalenge
,
very
learnedly
&
substantially
refuted
as
I
haue
said
by
W.
R.
&
therewithall
this
his
new
answere
to
E.
O.
who
if
he
reply
againe
(
as
I
presume
he
will
,
if
the
inequality
of
tyme
&
place
,
or
contempt
of
the
author
,
do
not
let
him
)
he
is
like
to
take
exceedinge
aduantage
against
him
,
as
in
part
may
be
seene
by
that
little
,
which
afterward
I
do
examine
out
of
the
first
two
or
three
places
obiected
by
him
.
And
wheras
to
make
vp
a
more
complet
ostentation
of
defence
,
O.
E.
turned
now
into
Mathew
Sntcliffe
,
hath
thought
good
to
adioyne
another
supplement
also
of
recriminations
against
diuers
sorts
of
men
:
this
of
all
other
things
is
like
most
to
disgrace
him
,
when
yt
commeth
to
examination
,
for
heere
wil
be
fulfilled
the
poets
sayinge
:
Vana
&
sine
●iribus
ira
;
much
malice
and
little
power
;
all
which
will
in
part
appeare
by
some
short
notes
,
O.
E.
and
the
recriminations
against
diuers
.
To
begin
then
with
the
first
part
,
Sr.
Robert
Cecill
,
now
L.
Cecill
,
but
with
what
reason
,
euery
man
will
easily
consider
,
that
knoweth
the
author
,
and
whome
and
what
courses
he
hath
followed
,
and
is
acquainted
with
his
speaches
of
him
,
whilst
his
best
maister
was
in
authority
.
For
my
part
I
refuse
not
the
noble
mans
iudgement
in
this
controuersie
betweene
vs
,
of
false
and
true
dealinge
,
for
that
I
assure
my selfe
,
that
howsoeuer
otherwise
in
affection
he
may
stand
auersed
from
our
Religion
:
yet
cannot
his
vnderstanding
(
being
such
as
yt
is
)
swarue
in
so
euident
a
matter
of
fact
,
as
heere
we
are
to
handle
.
Wherfore
lett
vs
make
(
yf
he
please
)
the
L.
Cecill
iudge
,
and
vmpire
in
this
our
contention
de
crimine
fal●i
,
desiringe
his
honour
to
take
so
much
paines
,
as
first
to
looke
backe
vpon
that
,
which
hath
hitherto
byn
treated
about
Monsieur
Plessis
,
and
then
to
stand
attent
to
that
,
which
in
this
Chapter
we
are
to
handle
of
Mathew
Sutcliffe
,
and
so
to
giue
sentence
,
accordinge
to
his
wisdome
,
and
verity
of
the
cause
.
One
principall
point
in
his
epistle
dedicatory
,
as
also
in
his
preface
to
the
Reader
is
,
extraordinary
vauntinge
,
as
though
no
man
could
match
him
,
or
durst
appeare
in
his
sight
,
wherof
you
haue
seene
what
cause
hitherto
he
hath
had
,
&
shall
do
more
heraafter
.
I
haue
wrytten
diuers
treatisses
(
saith
he
)
not
only
against
Robert
Parsons
,
but
also
against
Robert
Bellarmine
,
and
their
consorts
the
Papists
;
yet
do
I
not
find
any
that
dare
incounter
me
hand
to
hand
,
nor
haue
I
receaued
any
answere
to
any
purpose
,
nor
haue
I
yet
encountred
any
,
that
hath
opposed
himselfe
to
any
discourse
or
argument
of
myne
,
&c.
This
to
Syr
Robert
;
but
much
more
earnestly
after
in
his
preface
to
the
Reader
:
Yf
Persons
haue
not
leasure
to
answere
me
,
let
Garnet
or
Blacke
well
that
are
neerer
supply
for
him
;
yt
is
a
shame
to
beginne
a
quarrell
and
to
giue
yt
ouer
first
;
for
one
bout
they
haue
no
reason
to
refuse
me
.
Heere
now
I
suppose
my
L.
Cecill
must
needs
smile
,
to
see
the
man
so
earnest
to
haue
one
boute
,
especially
when
he
shall
haue
vnderstood
,
that
some
fiue
or
six
books
are
out
against
him
vpon
the
suddayne
,
&
each
one
of
them
geuinge
him
so
many
boutes
,
as
at
length
by
reelinge
,
the
poore
fellow
is
on
the
ground
:
albeit
I
must
confesse
,
that
Catholike
writers
are
come
now
in
such
a
loathinge
and
contempt
of
this
mans
works
&
writings
,
both
for
the
vanity
of
the
matter
therin
conteyned
,
and
perpetuall
scurrility
of
words
infecting
the
same
,
as
few
are
willing
to
leese
tyme
in
answering
him
,
he
bringinge
nothinge
commonly
but
absurd
shifts
,
foolish
euasions
,
old
worn-out
allegations
of
others
,
and
such
excessiue
turpitude
of
tongue
,
as
is
loath
some
to
any
man
to
aunswere
him
,
wherof
yow
are
like
to
haue
some
little
last
in
this
place
,
as
occasion
is
offered
.
There
followeth
in
the
same
epistle
dedicatory
another
complaint
,
apprtayninge
to
the
same
veyne
of
vauntinge
,
to
witt
,
that
Catholiks
do
now
fly
the
mayne
point
of
ioyninge
with
him
,
and
his
fellowes
vpon
the
triall
of
controuersies
,
and
do
runne
to
trifles
&
by-matters
;
let
vs
heare
his
words
:
My
base
and
vnworthy
aduersaryes
pleasure
is
(
saith
he
)
to
contend
with
me
about
certayne
small
quyrks
,
and
questions
,
about
certayne
pretended
vntruthes
,
and
falsifications
,
&c.
And
againe
.
Your
honour
shall
perceaue
the
great
weaknesse
of
our
aduersaryes
,
and
the
pouerty
of
the
principall
actors
in
the
same
,
who
abandoninge
the
mayne
points
in
controuersie
,
begin
now
to
picke
quarrells
at
words
,
allegations
,
points
,
quotations
,
and
other
by-matters
,
and
ceasing
to
ioyne
with
vs
and
like
diuines
to
argue
and
dispute
,
fall
to
plaine
calumniation
and
rayling
.
Thus
he
.
And
heere
againe
I
doubt
not
but
the
Lord
Vmpyre
,
will
laugh
to
heare
Sutcliffe
accoumpt
the
falsification
of
Fathers
,
Doctors
,
and
auncient
wryters
,
and
this
both
in
words
&
sense
,
alleaging
them
expressely
against
their
owne
meaninge
,
to
be
but
quirkes
,
quarrells
and
questions
about
words
,
points
,
quotations
,
and
other
such
by-matters
,
as
yf
two
contending
about
some
great
inheritance
,
and
the
one
obiectinge
that
his
aduersary
had
falsifyed
the
euidences
,
whereby
the
whole
controuersy
must
be
tryed
;
the
other
should
answere
,
that
these
are
but
quirks
and
by-matters
.
And
this
is
the
accoumpt
,
which
Maister
Sutcliffe
and
his
people
do
make
of
false
or
true
dealinge
,
or
changinge
,
choppinge
,
alteringe
,
or
peruertinge
the
authors
,
whome
they
alleage
,
as
yt
maketh
best
for
their
purpose
:
But
we
on
the
contrary
side
must
heere
professe
,
as
men
bound
to
strict
truth
,
Maister
Sutcliffe
,
that
which
in
this
epistle
to
Syr
Robert
he
demandeth
for
himselfe
sayinge
:
Do
what
a
man
can
,
yet
may
●ther
marginall
notes
be
misplaced
,
or
words
stand-disorderly
,
or
things
be
mistaken
.
This
I
say
we
easily
graunt
;
neither
was
there
euer
(
I
thinke
)
any
controuersie
hitherto
betweene
vs
,
about
misplacinge
of
marginall
notes
,
or
disorderly
standinge
of
words
(
so
they
altered
not
the
true
sense
of
the
authors
)
which
yet
yt
hath
pleased
Maister
Sutcliffe
disorderly
to
bring
in
,
to
the
end
he
might
seeme
,
that
the
accusations
laid
against
him
,
are
for
such
trifles
:
but
neither
these
trifles
,
nor
the
mistakinge
of
matters
themselues
(
so
yt
be
without
fraud
)
are
vrged
by
vs
against
them
,
but
only
where
wilfull
deceyt
is
euident
,
and
where
the
deceauer
cannot
morally
be
thought
to
haue
byn
ignorant
of
his
deceyt
.
These
(
I
say
)
are
the
faults
which
we
obiect
vnto
Maister
Sutcliffe
and
his
fellowes
,
and
not
misplacing
of
marginall
notes
,
or
mistandinge
of
words
,
points
,
or
quotaetions
;
nay
we
may
ad
a
further
degree
of
false
dealinge
,
that
hath
no
excuse
in
the
world
,
which
is
,
Maister
Plessis
in
his
reply
after
his
first
confutation
;
and
much
more
by
Maister
Sutcliffe
his
aduocate
in
his
broken
defence
,
and
the
like
we
shall
see
practised
againe
by
him
afterward
in
this
Chapter
,
vpon
like
occasions
of
defendinge
himselfe
,
and
his
owne
wrytings
.
Concerninge
which
wrytings
,
he
demaundeth
in
his
said
epistle
to
Syr
Robert
Cecill
,
as
also
in
his
preface
to
the
reader
a
certaine
priuiledge
from
the
ciuill
law
,
which
is
,
that
when
diuers
cases
are
proposed
by
one
party
in
law
to
be
admitted
,
or
excepted
against
by
the
other
,
and
that
the
other
excepteth
only
against
some
,
and
letteth
passe
the
rest
;
then
yt
is
to
be
vnderstood
(
saith
the
law
)
that
those
which
are
not
excepted
against
,
are
admitted
.
Which
benefitt
Maister
Sutcliffe
would
haue
allowed
to
his
chalenge
;
that
is
,
wheras
E.
O.
hath
excepted
only
against
some
26.
places
of
Fathers
and
Doctors
corrupted
and
falsifyed
by
him
;
all
the
rest
besides
these
26.
might
be
held
as
free
from
corruption
.
Yf
lawyers
say
true
(
saith
he
)
that
exceptions
confirme
the
rule
in
cases
not
excepted
,
then
hath
my
aduersary
confirmed
the
mayne
discourse
against
Persons
,
and
his
adherents
,
hauinge
not
said
any
thing
vnto
yt
,
but
only
excepted
against
a
few
places
,
wherof
he
taketh
13.
to
be
vntruly
alleaged
,
and
13.
to
be
falsifyed
.
And
againe
in
his
preface
to
the
reader
:
yf
he
be
not
able
to
except
against
more
places
then
26.
or
ther
about
,
yt
is
cleere
that
I
haue
said
true
in
the
rest
,
and
that
I
haue
argued
and
alleaged
authorityes
to
good
purpose
.
Wherfore
Maister
Sutcliffe
can
not
shroud
himselfe
by
this
,
but
that
other
men
also
may
examine
his
chalenge
E.
O.
as
we
haue
seene
that
W.
R.
hath
done
,
and
gathered
out
an
infinite
huge
heape
of
vntruthes
,
and
if
I
ghesse
not
amisse
,
not
much
lesse
then
a
hundred
in
one
Chapter
.
Wherfore
seing
Sutcliffe
is
so
earnest
to
prouoke
&
intreate
aduersaryes
to
wryte
against
him
,
yt
is
reason
he
prepare
himselfe
to
answere
all
commers
,
&
not
to
slipp
away
vnder
the
shaddow
of
a
Ciuilian
rule
or
priuiledge
,
for
so
much
as
he
is
an
Englishman
,
&
consequently
must
be
tryed
by
the
common
law
of
the
land
.
And
this
may
suffice
for
this
first
part
of
his
new
worke
,
standinge
in
epistles
&
prefaces
,
except
yow
would
haue
a
breefe
example
represented
yow
heere
at
this
very
beginning
,
of
the
manner
of
answering
and
shiftinge
,
which
he
meaneth
to
vse
afterwards
in
his
whole
discourse
,
and
therby
know
the
man
&
his
talent
euen
at
his
first
entrance
.
Heare
then
how
he
answereth
a
speach
of
his
aduersary
touching
the
continuance
of
Catholike
Religion
.
My
aduersary
(
saith
he
)
calleth
Popish
Religion
Catholike
,
&
affirmeth
it
was
planted
heere
by
Gregory
the
great
,
&c.
and
that
it
was
alwayes
visible
since
Christ
,
&c.
but
he
should
do
well
to
shew
how
true
Religion
can
be
visible
,
for
our
Sauiour
Christ
saith
:
that
true
worshippers
worshipp
God
in
spiritt
,
and
truth
,
but
spirituall
worshipp
and
true
internall
deuotion
,
is
not
so
easily
seene
;
vnlesse
therfore
our
aduersary
suppose
Popish
Religion
to
consist
in
the
Popes
myter
,
and
in
cooles
of
monks
,
and
such
like
externall
matters
,
he
shall
hardly
proue
Religion
to
be
visible
.
And
is
not
this
matter
subtilly
shifted
of
thinke
yow
?
or
may
not
this
man
play
his
prize
in
this
kind
of
fensinge
,
in
what
place
soeuer
?
True
Religion
(
saith
he
)
is
not
visible
.
What
then
?
yet
men
that
professe
true
Religion
are
visible
,
Maister
Sutcliffe
.
and
by
them
may
the
continuance
of
true
Religion
be
visibly
deduced
;
and
this
was
that
which
his
aduersary
meant
when
he
said
,
that
the
visible
Church
or
Congregation
of
Englishmen
,
comming
downe
visibly
from
the
tyme
of
S.
Gregory
vnto
oures
,
and
professing
alwayes
one
and
the
selfe
same
faith
&
Religion
,
did
make
a
visible
Church
,
and
therby
a
visible
deduction
of
Catholike
Religion
,
for
the
space
of
a
thousand
yeares
to
geather
,
and
that
this
was
not
only
to
be
seene
or
proued
by
the
Popes
myter
,
or
cooles
of
monkes
,
(
as
this
merry
madd
minister
iesteth
)
but
by
all
English
Kings
crownes
,
and
coronations
,
by
all
parlament
robes
,
and
other
honourable
testimonyes
of
our
nobility
both
spirituall
and
temporall
,
and
by
whatsoeuer
other
most
authenticall
proofe
this
scoffer
can
diuise
.
And
who
then
will
not
laugh
to
see
him
,
for
ouerthrow
of
all
this
demonstration
,
to
start
out
behind
a
bush
,
and
say
:
Lett
him
shew
vs
yf
he
can
,
that
true
Religion
is
visible
.
Wherby
yow
may
somewhat
see
into
the
man
,
and
his
witt
&
talent
;
Let
vs
passe
to
the
second
part
of
his
booke
.
The
second
part
of
this
new
edition
conteyneth
(
as
before
hath
byn
shewed
)
a
renewinge
of
his
former
chalenge
,
[
*
](A09107-e27250-b)
*
Intituled
a
briefe
&
cleere
confutation
of
avaine
&
vaunting
chaleng
of
O.
E.
minister
,
&c.
By
W.
R.
1603.
answere
of
W.
R.
against
the
same
,
and
the
multitude
of
errors
,
ignorances
,
lyes
,
and
frauds
therin
conuinced
,
he
will
blush
in
Sutcliffes
behalfe
,
yf
he
be
his
frend
,
or
laugh
and
insult
ouer
him
yf
he
be
his
enemy
:
and
whensoeuer
he
shall
make
his
reply
for
the
first
edition
already
answered
,
I
do
not
thinke
but
that
W.
R.
(
yf
the
thinge
it selfe
be
not
to
contemptible
)
will
vouchsafe
to
returne
his
full
reioynder
,
both
to
that
and
this
,
or
at
least
wise
to
the
most
principall
points
of
them
both
.
Wherfore
we
shall
leaue
this
,
&
passe
to
the
third
part
,
wherin
we
shal
be
forced
to
stay
and
entertaine
our selues
somwhat
longer
,
for
examination
of
certayne
places
obiected
against
Maister
Sutcliffe
by
E.
O.
and
therby
see
his
talent
in
answe●inge
for
himselfe
,
whether
yt
be
better
then
for
his
client
before
,
and
albeit
I
shall
not
be
able
to
stand
vpon
the
siftinge
of
many
places
heere
;
yet
will
the
vew
of
some
two
or
three
of
the
first
,
giue
a
good
coniecture
of
all
the
rest
.
Wherfore
the
third
part
of
this
new
edition
comprehendeth
(
as
before
hath
byn
signified
)
the
shew
of
a
certayne
answere
,
Maister
Sutcliffe
his
truth
and
honest
dealing
in
26.
places
,
or
therabout
,
obiected
to
him
by
E.
O.
as
fraudulently
handled
.
And
albeit
before
he
come
to
the
combat
,
he
do
send
forth
those
excessiue
vaunts
,
and
bragges
,
which
in
part
you
haue
heard
:
yet
in
the
conflict
yt selfe
,
yow
are
like
to
see
the
poore
man
not
a
little
daunted
,
and
encumbred
.
The
difference
also
of
speach
betweene
him
&
his
aduersary
will
appeare
notoriously
markeable
,
asse
,
dolt
,
dizard
in
grayne
,
franticke
,
lunatike
,
estaticall
,
owleglas
,
and
like
tearmes
,
And
surely
yf
he
be
the
man
in
deed
,
whome
Sutcliffe
aduentureth
to
name
in
some
partes
of
his
annswere
,
that
is
to
say
Maister
Ph.
W.
I
haue
knowne
him
for
such
,
many
yeares
,
and
he
may
hold
Sutcliffe
to
Schoole
,
as
many
yeares
more
in
discretion
,
vertue
,
and
true
skill
of
diuinity
,
yf
a
man
may
iudge
of
him
accordinge
to
his
wrytings
:
but
this
shall
appeare
better
by
the
examination
of
the
places
,
which
I
●aue
promised
to
discusse
.
And
yet
heere
yow
must
be
aduertised
,
that
we
shall
not
be
able
to
make
this
examen
so
exactly
in
all
points
as
otherwayes
we
would
desire
,
for
that
we
haue
not
the
treatise
yt selfe
of
E.
O.
his
accusations
,
for
which
cause
we
are
forced
to
alleage
things
only
as
Sutcliffe
is
content
to
cyte
them
,
whome
in
euery
thinge
lightly
we
find
both
faulty
,
false
,
and
faithlesse
,
and
therfore
yf
he
be
conuinced
heere
by
his
owne
relation
,
yow
must
be
sure
that
yt
is
with
more
then
euident
reason
.
The
first
place
then
obiected
by
E.
O.
against
O.
E.
(
now
discouered
to
be
Mathuw
Sutcliffe
)
ys
taken
out
of
this
chalenge
of
the
first
edition
cap.
1.
pag.
20.
num.
10.
that
the
vse
of
exorcisuis
,
blowinge
,
salt
,
spittle
,
ballowed
water
,
annoyntments
,
lights
,
and
other
such
ceremonyes
(
as
his
words
are
)
were
not
practized
by
the
auncient
Church
,
&c.
Against
which
false
assertion
E.
O.
Iohn
Caluyn
his
maister
,
who
confesseth
these
ceremonyes
to
be
very
ancient
.
And
secondly
he
alleageth
diuers
Fathers
,
that
make
mention
of
the
same
,
each
one
in
their
tymes
,
Origen
,
Nazianzen
,
Ambrose
,
and
others
.
Lett
vs
see
now
how
this
minister
will
deliuer
himselfe
of
this
first
charge
,
and
do
you
marke
his
shifts
,
for
neuer
mouse
in
a
trapp
,
nor
dogge
in
a
cannase
did
seeke
more
holes
to
runne
out
at
,
th●●
this
slippery
fellow
.
First
about
Caluyn
he
seemeth
to
be
most
troubled
,
esteeminge
more
of
his
authority
perhaps
,
then
of
all
the
rest
alleaged
,
and
therfore
he
saith
.
Howleglasse
doth
affirme
(
for
so
he
teasmeth
his
aduersary
,
without
comparison
more
learned
then
himselfe
)
that
Caluyn
doth
confesse
yt
(
to
witt
the
antiquity
of
these
ceremonyes
)
but
what
yf
yt
be
true
?
and
what
yf
Maister
Caluyn
do
not
confesse
that
which
I
say
to
be
vntruth
?
Marke
good
reader
,
do
you
not
see
heere
a
sound
beginninge
of
answeringe
by
contrary
interrogations
,
to
witt
,
what
yf
yt
be
true
?
and
what
yf
yt
be
not
true
?
but
yow
will
aske
me
what
in
the
end
is
his
resolution
about
Iohn
Caluyn
.
Yow
shall
heare
yt
many
lines
after
,
for
in
this
place
he
saith
no
more
.
But
neyther
doth
Caluyn
,
(
saith
he
)
nor
any
of
these
Fathers
mention
eyther
the
vse
of
the
Apostles
,
or
practise
of
the
auncient
Church
;
nor
doth
any
Fathers
speake
of
all
these
ceremonyes
togeather
,
nor
can
the
practise
of
the
Roman
Church
,
in
the
signes
and
formes
of
these
ceremonyes
be
iustified
by
Fathers
.
Lo
heere
3.
or
4.
holes
opened
to
runne
out
at
;
And
it
is
as
good
a
manner
of
answering
,
as
a
merry
good
fellow
is
said
to
haue
vsed
at
Oxford
,
that
is
true
when
the
gates
be
open
:
and
then
being
vrged
by
another
statute
forbiddinge
vnder
the
same
paines
to
beare
any
weapons
;
he
answered
:
that
bearinge
is
vnderstood
in
mens
hands
,
but
not
as
hanginge
at
their
girdills
.
And
by
these
meanes
was
he
able
to
answere
fully
all
obiections
made
against
him
for
breach
of
statutes
.
And
so
is
Sutcliffe
for
falsifyinge
of
Fathers
by
the
like
manner
of
answeringe
.
And
this
shall
suffise
for
the
first
place
.
In
the
end
wherof
notwithstanding
he
returneth
againe
to
Caluyn
as
being
more
troubled
with
his
authority
,
then
all
the
other
Fathers
brought
against
him
.
Maister
Caluyn
(
saith
he
)
doth
not
affirme
any
thinge
contrary
to
my
words
,
except
.
pag.
5.
for
albeit
he
saith
,
that
he
knew
how
ancient
some
of
these
ceremonyes
are
,
which
I
deny
to
haue
bene
vsed
in
the
first
Churches
;
yet
doth
he
not
expresse
how
auncient
they
are
,
nor
speake
any
thinge
of
their
seuerall
formes
,
&c.
Lo
shiftinge
&
shufflinge
vpon
Caluyn
also
.
He
did
graunt
,
they
were
auncient
,
but
did
not
tell
how
ancient
;
and
Sutcliffe
said
before
,
that
they
were
not
practised
in
the
ancient
Church
,
and
now
he
saith
;
that
he
denyed
them
to
be
vsed
in
the
first
Churches
;
and
though
thirdly
yow
should
proue
that
they
were
vsed
as
Caluyn
saith
in
the
ancient
Church
;
yet
will
he
say
that
Caluyn
doth
not
affirme
them
to
haue
bene
in
the
first
Churches
of
all
;
nor
doth
he
specify
the
perticular
formes
of
words
,
now
vsed
by
the
Roman
Church
.
And
so
will
he
scape
out
that
way
;
but
now
I
would
aske
the
discreett
reader
in
good
sadnes
what
scriptures
,
what
Fathers
,
what
most
euident
truth
,
may
not
be
shifted
of
,
and
deluded
by
these
kind
of
illusions
.
Let
the
reader
but
looke
ouer
the
sixt
Chapter
of
ceremonyes
,
The
second
place
obiected
by
E.
O.
to
O.
E.
is
in
the
same
page
,
where
he
saith
:
It
is
no
Catholike
doctrine
of
the
Councell
of
Trent
,
to
denounce
them
accursed
,
that
shall
not
hold
baptisme
to
be
necessary
to
Saluation
.
The
words
of
the
Councell
are
these
in
the
fourth
Canon
concerning
baptisme
:
Si
quis
dixerit
baptismum
liberum
esse
,
Yf
any
man
do
affirme
that
baptisme
is
free
,
that
is
to
say
,
not
necessary
to
saluation
,
lett
him
be
accursed
.
And
it
is
to
be
vnderstood
re
vel
voto
,
as
generally
all
Catholike
diuines
do
expound
,
to
witt
that
a
man
be
eyther
really
or
actually
baptized
,
or
at
least
wise
haue
a
desire
therof
,
which
desire
is
to
be
vnderstood
in
them
that
haue
yeares
of
vnderstandinge
,
and
are
letted
otherwise
by
some
extrinsecal
meanes
from
actuall
receauinge
the
same
.
And
what
Christian
man
would
reprehend
this
doctrine
,
or
call
it
vncatholike
,
as
Sutcliffe
doth
?
E.
O.
assaulteth
him
with
three
sorts
of
weapons
,
as
himselfe
confesseth
.
First
the
authority
of
ancient
Fathers
,
that
affirme
baptisme
to
be
necessary
to
saluation
;
secondly
the
words
of
their
owne
communion
booke
,
where
talking
of
the
Sacrament
of
Baptisme
,
they
say
,
that
none
is
saued
that
is
not
regenerate
by
water
.
Thirdly
out
of
his
owne
words
,
diuers
tymes
repeated
in
other
places
vpon
other
occasions
,
where
he
saith
,
that
children
by
baptisme
are
receaued
into
the
arke
of
Christ
his
Church
.
And
againe
;
that
want
of
baptisme
sendeth
infants
to
hell
fire
.
Wherof
his
aduersary
inferreth
:
ergo
yt
is
necessary
to
saluation
;
for
that
neither
out
of
the
arke
,
nor
in
hell
fire
,
can
they
be
saued
,
which
is
the
same
doctrine
that
the
Councell
of
Trent
doth
teach
,
and
addeth
a
curse
to
them
that
deny
yt
.
And
these
are
the
charges
giuen
;
now
lett
vs
see
how
Sutcliffe
seeketh
to
runne
out
of
the
lists
.
First
he
standeth
much
vpon
the
words
lett
them
be
accursed
,
and
willeth
vs
to
shew
out
of
the
Fathers
that
they
do
vse
the
word
accursed
:
except
.
pag.
5.
Neither
doth
any
Father
(
saith
he
)
affirme
,
that
such
are
accursed
that
hold
not
baptisme
to
be
necessary
.
Is
not
this
an
egregious
foolery
?
as
though
the
controuersie
were
of
the
word
accursed
,
&
not
of
the
doctrine
yt selfe
,
seing
that
Sutcliffes
owne
words
in
his
accusation
are
:
Which
doctrine
(
of
the
Councell
)
doth
not
(
saith
he
)
appeare
to
be
Catholike
,
and
yet
now
would
he
hide
himselfe
vnder
the
word
accursed
,
as
though
the
controuersie
were
not
about
the
doctrine
,
but
about
the
word
,
and
yet
of
we
will
stand
also
vpon
the
curse
,
Sutcliffe
cannot
so
escape
,
but
must
vndergoe
the
said
curse
in
like
manner
,
for
he
shall
find
the
same
both
condemned
and
accursed
expressely
in
the
Councells
of
Carthage
and
Miliuitanum
,
at
which
S.
Augustine
was
present
:
and
vpon
both
the
said
Councells
earnest
request
,
the
same
was
accursed
also
by
Pope
Innocentius
the
first
,
as
testifyeth
S.
Augustine
epist.
90.
92.
&
93.
And
this
is
the
first
shift
.
Secondly
,
of
all
the
Fathers
that
spake
of
this
matter
against
him
,
and
S.
Augustine
by
name
in
almost
infinite
places
,
he
maketh
his
aduersary
to
alleage
only
one
text
out
of
the
said
Father
(
and
we
must
beleeue
him
for
that
we
haue
not
his
aduersaryes
treatise
)
S.
Augustines
place
is
lib.
3.
de
anima
cap.
9.
To
S.
Augustine
I
answere
,
that
he
speaketh
of
such
as
dy
in
originall
sinne
,
and
seeme
to
contemne
baptisme
.
S.
Austen
.
and
the
rest
of
the
Fathers
.
This
is
the
most
blockish
refuge
,
that
possibly
can
be
imagined
:
for
first
all
men
before
baptisme
dy
in
originall
sinne
,
and
secondly
S.
Austen
speaketh
of
infants
that
haue
not
capacity
to
contemne
baptisme
,
his
words
are
these
:
Noli
credere
,
noli
dicere
,
noli
docere
,
&c.
do
not
thou
beleeue
,
do
thou
not
say
,
do
thou
not
teach
,
yf
thou
wilt
be
a
Catholike
,
that
infants
preuented
by
death
,
before
they
be
baptized
,
can
come
to
receaue
pardon
of
originall
sinne
.
Behould
then
the
forehead
of
Sutcliffe
that
would
wype
of
both
this
,
and
infinite
places
of
S.
Augustine
more
expressely
auouchinge
the
same
doctrine
by
such
a
sensles
sleight
.
Damnari
animas●
(
saith
he
wryting
to
S.
Hierome
)
●
S.
Augustine
without
lookinge
vpon
him
:
yf
he
did
and
aunswered
as
he
doth
,
then
is
he
both
malitious
and
shameles
.
But
now
thirdly
to
the
authority
of
their
communion-booke
brought
against
him
by
E.
O.
sayinge
;
that
none
is
saued
,
that
is
not
regenerate
by
baptisme
,
he
answereth
thus
:
It
is
impious
to
tye
Gods
grace
to
Sacraments
,
&c.
We
exclude
not
extraordinary
courses
.
Wherin
first
(
as
yow
see
)
he
reiecteth
plainly
the
authority
of
the
said
Communion-booke
,
that
tyeth
saluation
to
regeneration
by
baptisme
,
&
secondly
yow
must
remember
,
that
the
question
,
whether
this
doctrine
of
Sutcliffe
of
extraordinary
courses
,
and
sauinge
men
without
baptisme
be
Catholike
,
&
conforme
to
the
vniuersall
doctrine
of
ancient
Fathers
or
noe
,
wherof
he
speaketh
not
one
word
,
nor
alleageth
any
one
testimony
to
prooue
his
opinion
Catholike
,
that
is
to
say
generall
and
vniuersall
,
but
only
saith
:
we
exclude
not
extroordinary
courses
,
and
telleth
vs
not
who
these
:
(
we
)
are
,
for
that
it
cannot
be
the
Church
of
England
which
set
forth
the
said
communion
booke
,
and
consequently
hauing
neyther
the
auncient
Church
,
nor
our
Church
at
this
day
,
nor
the
Church
of
England
to
stand
with
him
,
I
would
gladly
know
how
he
will
make
his
opinion
Catholike
,
that
is
vniuersall
.
And
thus
much
of
the
third
shift
.
The
fourth
is
in
his
answere
to
his
owne
words
,
alleaged
against
him
by
E.
O.
whervnto
he
aunswereth
thus
:
I
do
confesse
that
infants
dyinge
in
originall
sinne
are
damned
to
hell
fire
,
but
I
hope
no
man
will
say
,
that
all
that
dy
before
baptisme
,
albeit
they
much
desired
yt
,
and
beleeued
in
Christ
Iesus
,
died
in
originall
sinne
.
O
slippery
euasion
?
our
question
heere
is
Sir
Mathew
of
infants
that
cannot
desire
baptisme
.
For
as
for
others
that
be
of
age
,
and
do
desire
yt
,
they
may
be
saued
by
baptisme
in
desire
,
as
before
is
graunted
.
Againe
your
immediate
words
before
in
this
very
sentence
,
doe
speake
of
infants
:
for
you
say
;
I
do
confesse
that
infants
are
damned
to
hell
fire
;
and
what
a
fellow
are
yow
then
,
which
say
in
the
second
part
of
the
same
sentence
,
albeit
they
much
desire
yt
and
beleeue
in
Christ
Iesus
.
Thirdly
yow
said
a
little
before
,
that
want
of
baptisme
did
soud
infants
to
hell
,
and
now
yow
say
,
that
infants
dying
in
originall
sinne
are
damned
to
hell
fire
,
which
though
in
our
sense
is
all
one
,
that
hold
infants
dying
without
baptisme
,
do
dy
in
originall
sinne
,
yet
in
your
sense
,
that
hold
that
infants
may
dy
before
baptisme
,
&
yet
freed
from
originall
sinne
,
is
altogeather
different
,
&
consequently
a
meere
consenage
,
so
to
alter
your
words
for
deceauing
your
reader
.
But
now
we
come
to
the
last
shifting
answere
of
all
,
which
is
such
,
and
so
vnintelligible
,
as
no
man
reading
&
considering
the
same
can
otherwise
thinke
,
but
that
the
author
was
either
distempered
,
or
bereaued
of
his
senses
,
when
he
framed
it
.
I
shall
relate
it
in
his
owne
words
,
&
lett
the
reader
iudge
of
it
.
He
concludeth
finally
(
saith
he
to
wit
E.
O.
)
that
seing
the
want
of
baptisme
doth
send
infants
to
hell
(
these
are
Sutcliffes
owne
words
before
recyted
)
ergo
baptisme
is
necessary
to
Saluation
;
but
his
consequent
is
weake
and
of
no
valew
,
except
.
section
.
4.
pag.
13.
for
many
dy
for
want
of
knowledge
,
and
for
want
of
small
matters
and
not
only
of
baptisme
;
and
yet
God
is
not
necessarily
tied
to
saue
none
,
but
such
as
are
baptized
:
sicke
men
dody
for
want
of
phisicke
,
and
yet
is
not
phisicke
absolutely
necessary
.
In
this
place
therfore
the
detector
wandreth
out
of
his
way
,
&
yet
effecteth
nothinge
.
Thus
he
;
and
heerwith
endeth
his
whole
defence
vpon
this
second
charge
giuen
him
by
E.
O.
and
suerely
yf
he
wrote
yt
not
more
then
halfe
a sliepe
,
or
when
he
was
greatly
distracted
in
other
matters
,
I
know
not
what
to
thinke
or
say
of
yt
.
Many
(
saith
he
)
dye
for
want
of
knowledge
&
for
want
of
small
matters
,
&
not
only
of
baptisme
.
Eyther
he
meaneth
heere
of
eternall
or
temporall
death
?
yf
of
eternall
,
how
can
yt
be
caused
by
the
want
of
small
matters
?
yf
of
temporall
,
how
is
it
caused
by
want
of
knowledge
?
or
how
agrees
it
with
the
death
caused
by
want
of
baptisme
,
which
is
eternall
?
how
agreeth
yt
also
with
sendinge
to
hell
,
which
is
to
endure
euerlastingly
?
againe
yf
a
man
dy
precisely
or
only
for
want
of
phisicke
,
then
was
phisicke
absolutely
necessary
to
saue
that
mans
life
,
otherwayes
he
did
not
dy
absolutely
for
want
of
phisicke
;
&
so
wheras
he
accuseth
the
detector
for
wandringe
out
of
the
way
,
and
effectinge
nothinge
,
this
man
reeleth
vp
and
downe
in
the
way
,
and
effecteth
his
owne
disgrace
and
shame
with
all
readers
and
lookers
on
.
And
now
by
the
examination
of
these
2.
places
yow
may
see
the
fashion
of
this
mans
answering
,
and
how
easy
a
matter
it
is
,
and
may
be
for
any
man
to
take
vpon
him
the
answering
of
all
aduersaryes
whatsoeuer
in
this
manner
;
and
by
these
two
examples
yow
may
ghesse
at
all
the
rest
.
And
albeit
I
would
gladly
end
heere
,
hauing
byn
longer
then
I
purposed
;
yet
can
I
not
without
examining
one
place
more
,
which
is
the
fourth
in
order
,
concerning
prayers
&
sacrifice
accustomed
to
be
offered
in
ould
time
,
Maister
Sutcliffe
,
being
taken
trip
by
E.
O.
and
much
pressed
with
the
authorityes
of
diuerse
ancient
Fathers
about
that
matter
,
he
beateth
himselfe
vp
and
downe
pittifully
;
to
gett
out
of
the
lists
,
but
cannot
,
and
as
a
hare
in
the
nett
mesheth
himselfe
more
and
more
by
struglinge
:
Yow
shall
haue
the
commedy
(
for
so
it
is
in
deed
)
as
himselfe
setteth
it
downe
in
his
owne
words
,
which
we
must
beleeue
,
for
that
(
as
often
hath
bene
aduertised
)
we
haue
not
the
treatise
it selfe
of
E.
O.
and
albeit
the
falshood
of
this
minister
discouereth
yt
selfe
by
so
many
wayes
in
euery
thinge
,
as
I
am
forced
to
stand
in
iealosy
of
all
that
he
relateth
of
others
,
yf
yt
be
not
for
his
owne
profitt
;
yet
must
we
take
his
word
,
as
I
haue
said
,
and
therfore
lett
vs
he
are
him
tell
the
story
.
Where
I
affirme
(
saith
he
)
that
the
Papists
say
masses
and
prayers
for
soules
departed
,
Except
.
pag.
11.
and
for
the
dead
haue
appointed
speciall
offices
,
and
that
my
aduersary
shall
neuer
be
able
to
proue
,
that
such
masses
,
prayers
,
and
offices
haue
ben
frequented
by
true
Catholiks
,
there
howleglasse
stormeth
and
sheweth
great
impatience
.
This
is
the
beginning
of
his
narration
,
which
I
cannot
otherwise
but
suspect
of
calumniation
,
in
that
he
talketh
of
impatience
in
his
aduersary
,
for
that
he
sheweth
no
particulars
at
all
of
any
such
matter
;
and
he
that
shall
see
the
euent
of
this
combatt
will
iudge
(
I
trow
)
the
cause
of
impatience
to
fall
rather
vpon
Sutcliffe
then
his
aduersary
,
yf
shame
and
confusion
may
cause
impatience
:
lett
vs
passe
then
to
the
matter
and
points
themselues
as
Sutcliffe
relateth
them
.
First
E.
O.
alleageth
(
saith
he
)
the
testimony
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
S.
Chrysostomes
sentence
of
prayinge
for
the
dead
in
the
masse
.
Chrysost.
hom.
69.
ad
Pop.
that
saith
,
that
not
without
cause
it
was
ordeyned
by
the
Apostles
,
that
in
the
dreadfull
misteryes
commemoration
should
be
made
of
the
dead
,
knowinge
therby
that
much
gayne
and
profitt
doth
come
vnto
them
:
secondly
he
alleageth
Epiphanius
that
seeme
to
say
,
that
Aërius
was
condemned
for
denying
that
sacrifices
and
oblations
were
to
be
offered
for
the
dead
,
or
that
prayers
were
to
be
made
for
them
.
Thirdly
he
alleageth
Caluyns
confession
,
that
saith
yt
was
a
receaued
custome
thirteene
hundred
yeares
agoe
,
Willett
for
a
wittnes
against
me
,
in
that
he
saith
,
that
diuers
ancient
wryters
enclyned
to
maintayne
and
commend
prayers
for
the
dead
.
Hitherto
Sutcliffe
,
relatinge
the
words
of
his
aduersary
E.
O.
now
lett
vs
see
how
handsomely
he
will
aunswere
the
same
,
and
do
yow
note
his
art
,
for
yt
is
excellent
,
and
to
the
purpose
.
First
(
saith
he
)
in
all
these
proofes
is
no
mention
of
speciall
offices
for
the
dead
.
speciall
offices
for
the
dead
,
and
not
whether
we
ought
or
may
pray
for
the
dead
or
noe
?
But
yet
do
yow
heare
more
of
these
his
escapes
,
for
he
setteth
them
forth
by
articles
.
there
can
no
masses
be
shewed
like
vnto
the
masses
of
Requiem
aternam
.
Do
yow
see
the
folly
of
the
man
?
Tell
me
,
(
I
pray
yow
)
what
importeth
yt
,
with
what
words
the
masse
beginnes
or
endes
(
which
the
Church
vpon
particular
deuotion
may
institute
,
change
,
or
alter
diuersly
)
so
that
the
substance
remayneth
,
which
is
,
that
soules
departed
were
prayed
for
in
S.
Chrysostomes
dayes
in
tremendis
mysterijs
,
in
the
dreadfull
misteryes
,
as
his
words
are
?
and
that
deduced
from
the
Apostles
tyme
,
as
by
this
very
place
of
his
heere
alleaged
is
euident
:
so
as
the
particular
forme
of
the
masse
,
little
importeth
,
but
only
for
Sutcliffe
to
runne
out
vnder
the
shaddow
therof
,
for
that
neyther
Catholike
Priests
now
at
this
day
,
are
bound
to
say
masses
beginning
with
Requiem
aeternam
.
when
they
pray
for
soules
departed
,
so
they
do
remember
the
substantiall
point
,
which
is
to
pray
for
them
in
the
masse
,
ad
altare
(
as
S.
Augustines
phrase
is
)
dum
offertur
pro
eis
sacrificium
,
S.
Cyprian
before
them
both
said
,
dum
sacrificium
pro
dormitione
corunt
celebratur
,
whilst
sacrifice
is
celebrated
or
solemnized
for
their
departure
.
And
these
two
examples
shal
be
sufficient
to
shew
in
generall
his
manner
of
euasions
,
what
they
are
and
how
wittily
inuented
.
For
albeit
he
go
forward
in
diuisinge
diuers
other
,
as
that
there
were
no
Speciales
missae
votinae
at
these
tymes
,
and
that
the
commemoration
made
for
the
dead
then
,
was
but
a
bare
recytall
of
their
names
,
&
other
the
like
,
without
so
much
as
offering
to
prooue
any
one
point
therof
,
or
to
alleage
any
one
author
before
himselfe
;
yet
do
I
not
meane
to
stand
vpon
these
toyes
to
refute
them
in
particular
,
the
iudicious
reader
will
easily
discerne
of
himselfe
what
substance
they
haue
,
wherfore
lett
vs
passe
to
see
how
he
answereth
the
foresaid
authorityes
of
Fathers
alleaged
against
him
.
To
the
place
of
Chrysostome
(
saith
he
)
I
do
answere
,
that
he
meant
only
that
the
dead
should
be
remembred
in
celebration
of
the
misteryes
,
&
was
vncertayne
what
good
yt
did
vnto
them
.
But
this
last
part
of
the
comentarye
is
plaine
contrary
to
the
text
yt selfe
,
which
saith
yf
yow
remember
,
that
much
gaine
and
profit
doth
come
vnto
them
therby
,
though
the
words
themselues
as
they
ly
in
S.
Chrysostome
are
yet
more
significant
,
for
that
talking
of
the
Apostles
,
whome
he
affirmeth
to
be
the
authors
of
this
custome
of
praying
for
the
dead
in
time
of
the
deadfull
misteryes
,
he
saith
:
Sciunt
enim
indè
illis
multum
contingere
lucrum
,
vtilit
atem
magnam
.
The
Apostles
did
know
,
that
the
soules
departed
were
to
receaue
much
gaine
,
and
great
vtility
by
that
remembrance
made
for
them
.
The
former
part
also
of
the
aunswere
,
is
cleerly
false
,
to
witt
,
that
S.
Chrysostome
meant
only
,
that
the
dead
should
be
remembred
without
praying
for
them
,
which
the
whole
text
,
&
his
drift
in
the
same
place
doth
euidently
conuince
,
and
the
very
next
words
immediatly
followinge
vpon
his
former
by
me
alleaged
are
these
:
Cum
enim
,
&c.
For
when
all
the
whole
people
meetinge
togeather
and
holdinge
vp
their
hands
(
in
the
Church
)
as
also
the
[
*
](A09107-e29610-b)
*
Sacerdotalis
plenitudo
constiterit
.
fullnes
of
Priesthood
being
there
with
them
,
and
that
the
dreadfull
sacrifice
is
proposed
,
how
can
yt
be
but
that
we
shall
mooue
God
,
when
we
pray
for
them
;
to
witt
the
dead
,
of
whome
he
speaketh
.
Consider
then
good
Reader
)
the
shamelesse
dealinge
of
this
cauiller
in
peruertinge
S.
Chrysostome
so
manifestly
:
and
yf
thou
wilt
see
more
places
,
where
that
Father
explaneth
himselfe
at
large
in
this
matter
,
read
the
41.
homily
vpon
the
first
to
the
Corinthians
,
and
his
21.
vpon
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
,
and
then
yow
will
confesse
,
that
these
are
egregious
companions
,
in
so
deluding
their
readers
by
shamefull
shiftinge
.
And
this
of
S.
Chrysostome
:
now
lett
vs
see
what
he
saith
to
S.
Epiphanius
and
S.
Augustine
about
Aërius
condemned
of
heresie
well
neere
1300.
yeares
past
for
denying
sacrifice
and
prayers
to
be
offered
for
the
dead
.
Vnto
the
places
(
saith
he
)
of
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
(
I
answere
)
that
Aërius
was
condemned
for
disalowinge
the
order
of
the
Church
in
this
commemoration
for
the
dead
,
S.
Augustine
about
Aërius
&
prayer
for
the
dead
.
and
geuing
thanks
for
their
blessed
end
,
and
this
is
that
prayer
which
Caluyn
and
we
confesse
to
haue
byn
in
the
Church
a
long
tyme
.
Heere
yow
see
that
he
taketh
vpon
him
to
aunswere
to
three
seuerall
partyes
,
to
witt
S.
Epiphanius
,
S.
Augustine
and
Iohn
Caluyn
,
and
that
with
the
same
truth
that
he
answered
before
S.
Chrysostome
:
to
witt
,
with
plaine
cosenage
and
shiftinge
.
For
vnto
the
two
Fathers
he
saith
(
yf
he
say
any
thinge
)
that
they
affirmed
Aërius
to
haue
bin
condemned
as
an
heretike
,
not
for
denyinge
sacrifice
or
prayer
for
the
dead
,
but
for
disallowing
the
order
of
the
Church
in
their
commemoration
&
geuing
thanks
for
their
blessed
end
,
which
comme
moration
he
expoundeth
a
little
before
,
to
haue
byn
a
recytall
only
of
dead
mens
names
,
without
any
prayer
for
remission
of
sinnes
,
which
yf
yt
were
so
,
and
that
Sutcliffe
will
graunt
as
he
seemeth
to
do
,
that
Aërius
was
iustly
condemned
and
held
for
an
heretike
,
for
disallowinge
this
commemoration
or
recytall
of
dead
mens
names
,
why
do
the
Protestants
also
disallow
the
same
,
or
at
leastwise
do
not
vse
yt
in
England
in
their
communion
,
and
so
by
omittinge
the
same
doe
participate
with
him
in
the
same
heresie
.
But
all
this
is
shamefull
shifting
,
turning
and
wyndinge
of
a
leud
and
lost
conscience
to
deceaue
the
reader
,
for
the
words
of
Saint
Epiphanius
and
S.
Augustine
are
most
plaine
&
euident
that
Aërius
was
condemned
of
heresie
,
for
denyinge
prayers
and
sacrifices
to
be
offered
for
the
dead
:
S.
Augustine
)
he
held
that
prayers
and
oblations
ought
not
to
be
made
for
the
dead
,
and
do
yow
note
that
this
was
not
yeasterday
but
in
the
tyme
of
Constantine
the
great
,
when
Aërius
was
condemned
as
an
heretike
by
the
whole
Church
of
that
tyme
,
for
denyinge
these
points
which
our
Protestants
deny
also
,
&
blaspheme
at
this
day
.
Magnum
mundo
malum
(
saith
Epipbanius
of
Aërius
)
suriosus
mente
,
elatus
opinione
,
&c.
Aërius
was
a
great
plague
of
the
world
,
furious
in
mynd
,
and
proud
in
his
opinion
,
&c.
What
would
he
haue
said
of
Sutcliffe
at
this
tyme
,
who
sheweth
himselfe
no
lesse
proud
then
he
,
and
auoucheth
the
same
heresyes
,
and
many
more
besides
?
But
to
returne
to
Sutcliffes
answere
to
the
forsaid
two
Fathers
concerning
Aërius
.
First
yow
may
see
&
consider
,
that
in
his
former
relation
of
the
matter
,
he
vseth
a
sleight
of
his
budget
,
when
he
saith
:
that
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
seeme
to
say
that
Aërius
was
condemned
,
&c.
for
they
do
not
only
seeme
to
say
so
,
S.
Epiphanius
maketh
a
longe
discourse
therof
,
shewinge
the
beginninge
and
occasion
of
Aërius
fall
into
this
heresie
,
to
witt
,
that
he
being
a
Priest
,
could
not
be
made
a
Bishopp
(
which
S.
Augustine
also
toucheth
)
and
that
vpon
this
enuy
,
spite
&
mallice
,
he
beganne
to
obiect
against
the
cleargy
,
that
they
ought
not
to
offer
sacrifice
or
prayer
for
the
dead
,
but
only
for
the
lyuinge
,
and
consequently
for
the
same
was
condemned
,
and
held
alwayes
after
for
an
heretike
by
the
Church
of
that
,
and
all
other
ensuinge
ages
.
Secondly
yt
is
another
sleight
to
say
,
that
Aërius
was
condemned
for
disallowing
the
order
of
the
Church
in
this
commemoration
of
the
dead
,
as
though
Aërius
his
fault
had
not
byn
against
any
point
of
Catholike
and
vniuersall
doctrine
of
the
Church
,
but
disobedience
only
against
some
Ecclesiasticall
order
;
and
therfore
yf
yow
marke
yt
,
he
neuer
nameth
him
heretike
,
as
indeed
disobedience
to
orders
is
not
properly
heresy
,
if
it
be
not
against
some
article
of
doctrine
.
S
Chrysostome
,
as
you
haue
heard
,
before
alleaged
,
affirmeth
the
contrary
doctrine
of
prayinge
for
the
departed
in
tyme
of
the
dreadfull
misteryes
,
to
haue
come
downe
from
the
Apostles
themselues
,
and
the
same
in
effect
saith
Epiphanius
,
The
third
shift
is
,
that
Sutcliffe
in
this
his
shufflinge
aunswere
foisteth
in
these
words
,
commemoration
of
the
dead
,
and
geuinge
thanks
for
their
blessed
end
:
as
thongh
Saint
Epiphanius
or
S.
Augustine
had
said
or
meant
so
:
which
is
quite
contrary
,
for
they
expressely
affirme
,
that
this
commemoration
was
to
pray
for
them
,
that
is
to
say
for
those
that
are
synners
,
and
haue
need
of
our
prayers
,
which
Epiphanius
expresseth
in
these
words
:
S.
Chrysostome
distinguisheth
in
the
place
before
alleaged
of
his
69.
homily
to
the
people
of
Antioch
:
that
some
are
greater
sinners
,
some
lesse
,
some
perfect
and
holy
.
But
S.
Augustine
(
accordinge
to
his
manner
)
more
cleerly
&
perspicuously
in
these
words
:
Non
omnibus
prosunt
,
our
prayers
and
sacrifices
offered
for
the
dead
,
do
not
profitt
all
sorts
of
men
;
And
why
do
they
not
profitt
all
but
only
for
the
difference
of
life
,
which
euery
man
hath
lead
in
this
body
?
Wherfore
when
sacrifices
eyther
of
the
Altar
,
or
of
any
other
almes
are
offered
vp
for
Christians
departed
,
yf
they
be
very
good
men
,
for
whome
they
are
offered
,
they
are
thanke
geuings
,
So
S.
Augustine
,
who
explaneth
as
yow
see
most
perspicuously
the
Catholike
doctrine
,
and
cutteth
of
all
shifts
from
cauillinge
heretiks
,
about
the
different
sorts
&
qualityes
of
men
desceased
,
&
with
what
distinction
the
Catholike
Church
doth
make
commemoration
for
them
in
the
publike
sacrifice
,
either
by
praying
,
or
praising
God
for
them
.
And
thus
much
of
his
shuffling
and
shifting
away
the
Fathers
authorityes
,
lett
vs
now
come
to
consider
,
how
he
will
put
of
his
Maister
Caluyn
,
Brother
Willet
alleaged
also
yf
yow
remember
against
him
.
But
as
for
Willett
he
maketh
him
not
worthy
of
a
seuerall
answere
,
but
presumeth
him
to
be
of
his
opinion
in
all
points
,
and
the
like
he
would
also
force
Caluyn
vnto
,
for
that
hauinge
said
,
that
the
commemoration
of
the
dead
(
for
deniall
wherof
Aërius
was
condemned
)
was
but
a
thankesgeuing
for
their
blessed
end
,
he
saith
immediately
:
And
this
is
the
prayer
which
Caluyn
and
we
confesse
to
haue
ben
in
the
Church
a
longe
tyme
,
but
maketh
nothinge
for
Howleglasse
his
purpose
.
Which
I
thinke
also
,
nor
yet
for
Sutcliffes
purpose
,
yf
he
haue
any
purpose
but
only
to
play
the
foole
,
and
to
mocke
and
delude
his
Reader
.
For
first
we
haue
shewed
,
that
Aërius
was
not
condemned
for
denying
thankesgiuing
,
but
sacrifice
&
prayer
for
the
dead
.
And
secondly
Caluyn
is
not
alleaged
by
E.
O.
as
confessinge
only
the
vse
of
thankesgeuing
,
or
bare
recytall
of
their
names
to
haue
byn
in
vse
aboue
thirteene
hundred
yeares
past
,
but
of
prayinge
for
the
dead
,
and
for
reprouing
S.
Austen
,
and
S.
Monica
for
that
custome
,
and
how
chaunceth
then
that
Sutcliffe
aunswereth
not
vnto
this
obiection
,
which
himselfe
had
sett
downe
before
with
his
owne
pen
,
but
slideth
away
in
silence
,
as
though
he
had
neuer
spoken
yt
,
nay
he
dissembleth
and
omitteth
the
quotation
of
Caluyns
place
,
to
the
end
we
should
not
find
yt
out
,
but
I
haue
thought
good
to
note
the
place
in
the
margent
,
whose
words
are
;
that
they
were
all
deceyued
in
that
doctrine
.
Now
then
do
yow
looke
in
Sutcliffes
face
,
and
see
what
countenance
he
will
set
vpon
this
notorious
cogginge
:
this
is
that
prayer
(
saith
he
)
which
Caluyn
,
and
we
confesse
to
haue
byn
in
the
Church
a
long
tyme
,
but
maketh
nothinge
for
howleglasse
.
What
prayer
Syr
?
commemoration
only
of
names
with
thankesgeuinge
?
This
first
is
no
prayer
at
all
.
Neyther
do
eyther
the
Fathers
aforecited
,
or
Caluin
call
this
a
prayer
,
or
treat
of
this
,
as
by
there
words
yow
haue
seene
.
How
then
can
it
be
said
that
Caluyn
,
Sutcliffe
,
and
his
brother
Willett
,
doe
agree
in
this
confession
of
this
prayer
to
haue
bene
in
the
Church
for
so
longe
time
?
But
if
he
speake
of
true
prayer
in
deed
for
the
dead
,
as
both
Caluyn
and
the
Fathers
do
,
then
how
maketh
this
nothinge
for
his
aduersaries
purpose
,
whome
fondly
he
tearmeth
by
the
name
of
Howleglasse
;
himselfe
being
the
true
owle
indeed
,
and
worthy
to
be
bayted
by
all
the
byrds
of
the
ayre
,
for
his
ridiculous
behauiour
in
this
his
answere
;
for
yt
maketh
expressely
and
directly
for
E.
O.
his
purpose
and
principall
conclusion
,
to
witt
that
prayers
for
the
dead
,
were
frequented
by
true
Catholiks
aboue
thirteene
hundred
yeares
gone
,
except
Sutcliffe
will
say
,
that
the
cheefe
Fathers
of
that
age
were
no
true
Catholiks
,
or
that
Aërius
was
no
true
heretike
.
And
this
shall
suffice
for
this
tyme
and
place
,
though
I
might
presse
the
poore
fellow
with
many
other
absurdityes
,
and
ridiculous
refuges
in
his
defence
of
this
charge
,
as
that
he
leapeth
disorderly
to
a
place
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
that
iust
men
whether
lyuinge
or
dead
are
with
Christ
.
Which
is
true
in
spiritt
,
and
then
to
another
place
,
where
he
saith
;
that
iust
men
dying
,
see
God
face
to
face
;
which
is
true
in
the
first
sort
of
those
three
before
mentioned
by
Saint
Augustine
,
which
is
yf
they
be
very
iust
.
And
yet
out
of
these
two
places
would
this
simple
disputer
inferre
,
that
Saint
Chrysostome
beleeued
not
purgatory
,
which
is
expressely
agaidst
S.
Chrysostomes
owne
words
and
discourse
,
in
this
very
place
by
Sutcliffe
alleaged
,
but
lett
vs
passe
to
his
conclusion
&
so
make
an
end
.
Lastly
(
saith
he
)
in
auncient
tyme
,
they
made
commemoration
of
the
patriarks
,
of
the
blessed
Virgin
,
of
the
Apostles
,
Martyrs
,
and
others
,
now
they
pray
to
them
,
not
for
them
as
in
tymes
past
.
And
why
doth
not
this
simple
shamelesse
fellow
alleage
some
one
author
,
some
one
testimony
,
wittnesse
,
or
authority
for
so
bold
an
assertion
?
Now
they
pray
to
them
,
and
not
for
them
(
saith
he
)
as
in
tymes
past
:
But
what
auncient
Father
,
Doctor
or
historiographer
can
he
cite
,
that
euer
said
so
,
or
mentioned
any
such
practise
eyther
of
himselfe
or
others
,
that
prayed
for
the
blessed
Virgin
,
Apostles
,
Martyrs
,
or
the
like
in
those
ancient
dayes
?
But
we
haue
manifest
proofes
to
the
contrary
,
that
they
were
prayed
vnto
in
the
masse
of
old
tymes
,
not
prayed
for
.
S.
Cyrill
B.
of
Hierusalem
that
liued
aboue
twelue
hundred
yeares
agone
,
hath
these
words
talking
of
the
masse
:
Cùm
hoc
sacrificium
offerimus
,
&c.
When
we
offer
vp
this
sacrifice
,
we
do
make
mention
by
name
of
those
which
died
before
vs
,
and
first
of
Patriarks
,
Prophetts
,
Apostles
,
and
Martyrs
,
that
God
vuill
receaue
our
petitions
by
their
prayers
and
deprecations
for
vs
:
Behould
heere
,
S.
Cyrill
did
make
a
commemoration
of
the
Patriarks
,
Prophetts
,
Apostles
and
Martyrs
,
as
praying
vnto
them
,
and
not
for
them
,
in
his
masse
and
sacrifice
.
The
like
saith
S.
Basill
both
in
his
liturgy
and
elswhere
affirminge
the
very
same
,
for
that
speakinge
of
the
forsaid
commemoration
of
Patriarks
,
Prophetts
,
Apostles
,
&c.
in
his
masse
he
prayeth
thus
:
S.
Augustine
,
not
only
affirmeth
this
doctrine
,
but
yeldeth
a
reason
also
therof
,
to
witt
of
the
different
commemoration
,
that
is
made
in
the
masse
of
desceased
Saints
,
and
disceased
sinners
in
these
words
:
Ideo
quippe
ad
ipsam
mensam
,
&c.
Therfore
do
we
not
at
the
Altar
make
like
commemoration
of
Martyrs
,
as
we
do
of
others
that
are
desceased
in
peace
;
so
as
we
pray
not
for
them
,
but
rather
that
they
do
pray
for
vs
.
So
S.
Augustine
.
And
the
same
he
repeateth
againe
in
diuers
other
places
;
so
as
this
is
cleerly
conuinced
against
Sutcliffe
by
testimony
of
antiquity
which
he
presumeth
to
name
,
but
cyteth
no
wittnesse
at
all
.
Now
then
to
conclude
this
whole
matter
,
E.
O.
should
be
discussed
?
yea
the
whole
chalenge
diligently
skanned
?
consider
also
I
pray
thee
good
reader
,
whether
in
defence
of
these
9.
places
Sutcliffe
haue
not
vsed
the
highest
degree
of
falshood
before
described
of
witting
&
willing
deceyte
,
seing
that
before
he
did
sett
downe
this
article
in
his
first
chaleng
about
masses
and
prayers
for
the
dead
,
yt
is
probable
,
that
he
had
read
some
auncient
Fathers
that
made
mention
therof
,
and
yet
would
he
auouch
that
no
true
Catholike
had
vsed
the
same
,
but
being
reprehended
for
yt
,
and
told
of
his
lyinge
by
his
aduersary
,
&
diuers
Fathers
cited
for
proofe
therof
,
and
his
owne
Maister
Caluyn
,
and
his
brother
Willett
for
acknowledginge
the
same
,
yet
commeth
he
now
to
affirme
and
print
yt
againe
in
his
second
edition
of
his
chalenge
,
and
dissembleth
,
peruerteth
and
shifteth
of
the
authorityes
both
of
the
said
Fathers
,
&
Caluyn
himselfe
,
as
though
they
had
neuer
ben
obiected
against
him
.
And
what
will
yow
say
to
this
manner
of
dealinge
?
will
you
aduenture
your
soule
with
such
a
man
?
or
will
yow
giue
creditt
any
more
to
his
fond
crakinge
or
vauntinge
aboue
mentioned
?
But
we
are
ouerlong
in
this
third
part
,
Cardinall
Bellarmyne
,
Cardinall
Baronius
and
F.
Parsons
;
by
which
ostentation
of
names
and
authors
,
he
would
make
men
beleeue
,
that
all
the
world
were
full
of
corruptions
and
falsifications
in
wrytinge
,
and
consequently
that
those
of
his
,
and
of
his
fellowes
are
little
to
be
respected
;
but
when
the
occasion
shall
come
to
aunswere
this
second
edition
at
large
,
the
differences
wil
be
shewed
,
and
how
vainly
this
little
enuious
mouse
,
hath
gone
about
to
gnibble
at
Catholike
authors
edges
of
their
garments
,
&
particularly
at
the
wrytings
of
the
most
famous
,
learned
,
and
honourable
men
of
our
tyme
,
Cardinall
Bellarmine
,
and
Cardinall
Baronius
,
who
haue
so
beaten
downe
heresy
with
their
most
excellent
works
,
as
by
allusion
we
may
say
of
them
in
respect
of
Sutcliffe
,
ipsi
conterunt
caput
tuum
,
tu
vero
insidiaris
eorum
calcaneis
,
they
haue
broken
thy
head
,
and
thou
doest
byte
at
their
heeles
.
Of
the
third
which
is
F.
Persons
and
the
obiections
heere
brought
against
his
wrytings
,
we
had
thought
to
haue
spoken
somewhat
more
particularly
,
but
lacke
of
tyme
and
roome
maketh
vs
also
to
albreuiate
this
,
yet
somewhat
for
example
sake
shal
be
said
.
Sutcliffe
nameth
two
books
of
his
,
F.
Persons
bookes
.
the
first
entituled
.
A
briefe
discourse
conteyninge
reasons
,
why
Catholiks
refuse
to
go
to
Church
.
The
next
is
called
:
A
Christian
directory
,
and
commonly
knowne
by
the
name
(
saith
he
)
of
Parsons
Resolution
.
Against
the
former
booke
he
bringeth
two
reasons
,
as
wise
as
his
head
can
deuise
:
the
one
,
that
he
promised
to
make
three
parts
of
that
booke
,
and
performed
but
one
,
except
.
pag.
182.
abusinge
(
saith
he
)
both
his
frends
and
aduersaryes
with
his
false
promises
:
The
other
reason
is
(
saith
he
)
for
that
to
persuade
men
not
to
go
to
Protestants
Church
must
needs
stand
vpon
this
supposition
,
that
the
Popes
Religion
is
true
,
and
therfore
he
should
first
haue
proued
this
principle
before
he
had
gone
about
to
giue
reasons
,
to
stand
stedfast
therin
.
But
now
(
saith
he
)
yf
Parsons
can
say
nothinge
why
the
Religion
in
England
is
not
Catholike
and
Apostolicall
,
then
all
his
reasons
fall
to
the
ground
.
These
two
reasons
do
well
declare
what
a
man
of
worth
Sutcliffe
is
.
And
not
to
shew
on
my
parte
distrust
in
the
Readers
iudgement
,
I
will
not
go
about
to
refute
such
vanityes
.
For
if
this
last
reason
haue
any
force
,
yt
proueth
also
that
no
Protestant
Preacher
or
wryter
,
may
exhort
any
of
his
Religion
to
constancy
,
perseuerance
,
patience
,
humility
,
or
any
other
vertue
,
except
he
proue
first
all
that
Religion
to
be
true
.
But
lett
vs
passe
to
the
other
booke
,
perhaps
his
obiections
wil
be
stronger
against
that
.
His
directory
also
(
saith
he
)
is
a
most
idle
,
except
.
ibid.
and
vayne
discourse
(
so
idle
and
vaynè
do
seeme
all
treatises
of
piety
to
this
prophane
minister
)
yt
should
consist
of
three
parts
,
but
as
the
fashion
is
,
of
three
promised
,
he
keepeth
backe
two
,
performeth
the
third
very
simply
.
Which
rather
doth
hinder
a
man
(
saith
Sutcliffe
)
from
leading
a
Christian
life
,
then
help
him
to
resolue
.
The
second
.
That
the
greatest
part
(
saith
he
)
is
taken
out
of
Loartes
,
Stella
,
Granatensis
,
and
other
such
authors
.
The
[
*
](A09107-e31530-b)
*
This
was
only
set
downe
for
yow
and
yours
to
draw
them
from
atheisme
third
.
for
that
yt
argueth
Catholikes
to
be
badd
Christians
,
that
they
must
be
taught
there
is
a
God
,
hell
,
heauen
,
and
the
like
.
The
fourth
:
That
Sutcliffe
doth
not
find
,
that
yt
hath
made
hitherto
any
one
Christian
,
or
directed
him
to
the
way
of
lyfe
,
but
many
yong
men
to
the
gallowes
.
The
fifth
that
yt
hath
not
brought
Father
Persons
him selfe
yet
to
a
good
resolution
,
nor
to
enter
into
Religion
.
The
sixt
.
For
that
his
discourse
to
proue
that
there
is
a
God
,
and
but
one
true
Religion
,
and
that
there
is
a
heauen
,
&
hell
among
Christians
already
well
persuaded
,
is
impertinent
.
The
seauenth
.
For
that
yt
is
diuided
into
speculation
and
practice
:
as
yf
(
saith
he
)
a
man
could
practise
that
is
not
entred
into
the
exercise
of
Religion
;
or
as
yf
resolution
were
not
farre
different
from
practise
.
The
eight
&
last
,
for
that
yt
is
fraught
with
idle
discourses
,
&
the
principall
point
so
weakely
proued
,
that
yt
will
rather
make
Christians
to
doubt
of
Religion
,
then
atheists
to
beleeue
.
These
are
Sutcliffes
reasons
,
Iewell
,
Fox
,
Peter
Martyr
,
Ridley
,
Fulke
,
Plessis
Mornay
,
&
whome
els
yow
will
besides
,
but
when
yt
cometh
to
the
triall
,
he
is
able
neither
to
make
good
for
them
,
nor
for
himselfe
,
and
is
iust
like
a
knight
of
the
post
,
that
will
offer
to
be
surety
for
ten
thousand
pounds
,
when
all
his
owne
substance
is
not
worth
ten
shillings
.
His
writings
are
loose
,
ragged
,
negligent
,
barr●n
,
obscure
,
and
vnsauery
,
without
substance
either
of
learning
,
prudence
,
sharpnes
,
or
good
stile
:
Plessis
Mornay
&
himselfe
:
and
yow
may
see
the
same
confirmed
more
largely
,
by
only
lookinge
ouer
the
pages
of
his
feeble
defence
of
Syr
Francis
Hastings
,
now
battered
againe
to
the
ground
by
the
recharge
of
the
Warn-word
.
The
principall
talents
then
of
this
man
seeme
to
be
extreeme
vaunting
and
rayling
,
wherof
I
haue
laid
yow
downe
some
examples
before
,
and
might
do
many
more
especially
in
the
later
,
to
witt
of
rayling
,
for
I
thinke
scarse
euer
any
ciuill
man
tooke
pen
in
hand
to
wryte
,
with
that
a
cerbity
&
scurrility
of
stile
,
which
this
man
vseth
against
all
with
whome
he
dealeth
,
and
seemeth
to
putt
his
cheefest
glory
therin
.
And
not
to
goe
out
of
the
present
example
in
hand
of
his
answere
to
E.
O.
who
being
a
modest
man
hath
dealt
with
him
very
temperatly
,
for
so
much
as
we
can
gather
by
Sucliffes
owne
reply
:
yet
harken
I
pray
yow
what
manner
of
speech
and
threat
he
vseth
towards
him
,
and
to
all
Catholikes
for
his
cause
,
and
this
for
some
kind
of
rusticity
(
as
yt
seemeth
)
committed
against
Sutcliffes
person
:
I
will
sett
(
saith
he
)
a
fellow
to
answere
him
,
(
to
witt
Maister
Sutcliffe
that
shall
so
curry
him
,
and
his
consorts
the
Papists
,
and
that
shall
in
such
sort
ripp
vp
their
villanyes
,
that
the
whole
fraternity
of
asses
shall
curse
him
for
brayinge
so
vnciuilly
.
Consider
I
pray
yow
,
whether
this
be
not
a
fitt
speach
for
a
minister
of
malediction
?
yf
E.
O.
should
returne
vpon
him
againe
and
say
:
I
could
ripp
vp
also
for
my
part
,
yf
I
were
delighted
with
this
kind
of
reuenge
,
for
I
know
what
hath
passed
both
in
England
,
Ireland
,
and
other
Ilands
,
I
know
of
the
matter
of
Castle
Cary
;
of
the
arraignment
and
sentence
geuen
in
Dublyn
;
the
knights
that
did
accuse
or
beare
wittnesse
;
the
words
touching
the
bowling
greene
of
Exceter
,
what
they
were
,
whome
they
concerned
,
the
manner
of
the
mans
returne
from
Ireland
,
&
dep●rtement
in
England
,
and
other
such
particularityes
:
Yf
E.
O.
(
I
say
)
should
make
such
a
reply
,
&
offer
to
stand
to
yt
in
deed
,
and
to
take
out
records
as
he
may
;
what
would
O.
E.
gaine
by
this
vnciuill
prouocation
,
of
the
whole
fraternity
of
asses
?
but
these
so
vntemperate
and
vnaduised
speaches
,
are
but
impotencyes
of
an
vnbrideled
mynd
,
and
therfore
rather
to
be
pittyed
or
contemned
,
then
reuenged
or
further
answered
,
except
further
necessity
be
laid
vpon
vs
therof
.
Wherfore
to
end
all
at
this
tyme
,
cap.
13.
we
do
pardon
also
his
vncharitable
conclusion
,
exhortinge
the
prince
that
then
was
,
and
the
State
to
shed
more
bloud
of
Priests
,
Iesuits
,
and
Catholiks
;
impiety
proceedinge
of
the
same
passion
,
and
distemperature
of
iudgement
and
affection
which
the
other
did
,
we
passe
ouer
with
like
contempt
:
we
disdayn
in
like
manner
his
false
and
wicked
,
yf
not
madd
accusation
,
that
the
last
noble
Queene
of
Scotland
of
most
pious
memory
,
was
ruyned
by
Priests
and
Iesuits
;
wheras
no
man
knowinge
the
affayres
of
England
can
be
ignorant
,
but
that
whilst
Priests
and
Iesuits
,
and
all
other
English
Catholiks
forrowed
hartily
,
&
prayed
most
earnestly
for
her
Maiestyes
preseruation
,
this
fellow
and
his
companions
barked
dayly
at
her
most
bitterly
and
spitefully
,
and
neuer
ceased
or
could
be
satisfied
vntill
they
had
seene
her
most
noble
blood
shed
for
stoppinge
their
mowthes
,
yea
and
for
drawinge
her
into
more
certaine
daunger
therof
,
their
custome
was
to
vrge
Priests
and
other
Catholiks
at
their
very
deathes
,
and
places
of
execution
,
when
they
prayed
for
the
Queene
,
to
explane
what
Queene
they
meant
,
either
that
of
Scotland
,
or
the
other
of
England
,
so
iealous
they
were
of
Catholike
Priests
affections
towards
that
renowned
Princesse
,
now
with
God
in
glory
,
whose
death
and
other
iniuryes
,
yf
his
diuine
iustice
shall
thinke
conuenient
not
to
leaue
vnpunished
:
we
beseech
him
,
that
yt
may
fall
rather
vpon
such
as
were
the
styrrers
thervnto
,
then
vpon
others
deceaued
by
them
,
and
vpon
those
also
rather
in
this
life
temporally
,
then
in
the
next
euerlastingly
;
and
so
to
his
high
tribunall
we
commit
the
whole
.
FINIS
.
Notes, typically marginal, from the original text
Notes for div A09107-e410
Notes for div A09107-e690
Notes for div A09107-e1430
Notes for div A09107-e1870
Notes for div A09107-e2330
Notes for div A09107-e2800
Notes for div A09107-e3310
Notes for div A09107-e3430
Notes for div A09107-e3830
Notes for div A09107-e5730
Notes for div A09107-e6260
Notes for div A09107-e7920
Notes for div A09107-e14010
Notes for div A09107-e15550
Notes for div A09107-e17160
Notes for div A09107-e26260