A Mild and Just Defense of Certain Arguments, Tract · Part 1
THE NEXT THING TO BE CONSIDERED is his marginall Notes vponupon the preface of the author.
The firſt note with (a) I paſſe by.
G. Powelb This pretenſe unto the Chriſtian reader, is becauſe they would not ſeeme to be petitioners unto the Parliament.
Anſwer.What a ſtrange collection is this? HaueHave we expreſly directed all the ſaid argumēts vntounto the Parliament houſe, and yet would we not ſeeme to be petitioners unto thē? Nay rather ſith this anſwerer thus carpeth at theſe words the Chriſtian reader, M. Powell maketh the Parliament no chriſtian aſſembly.gatthering from the humble petition of the Author of thoſe Argumentes to the Chriſtian Reader etc. that he would not ſeeme to be Petitioner to the Parliment, may not this be better gathered that the anſwerer diſtinguiſheth the chriſtian readers from the Parliament, and the Parliament from them, and ſo maketh the Parliament no chriſtian aſſembly? But why did the author uſe thoſe wordes, the chriſtian reader? The reaſon ſeemeth double: 1 becauſe he did ſo account of every one in the Parliament houſe: 2 becauſe he thought that thoſe arguments might come to the handes of other Chriſtian readers, then onelyonly of Parliament men.
G. Powelc The ſupplicants make the profesſion of the goſpell and all religion to conſiſt in refuſing cap, ſurplice, croſſe etc. Great cry, litle wooll.
Anſwer.This etc. After the word croſſe, is well added. For otherwiſe although we hold thoſe things to be matters of religion, yet never any of us did affirme all religion to cō ſiſt in thē. without this etc. therfore, this is an unchriſtian ſlaunder, and to ſpeake according to the anſwerers learning in Ariſtotles Eleuchs, a fallacy ab eo quod eſt ſecundum quid, ad id quod eſt ſimpliciter. The adage in the end of this note is too homely for that Honorable Court to whom the anſwerer ſpeaketh, as being taken from ſwyne, which for ſome cauſes (not fit to be written) being ſometimes ſhorne, make a great cry, & yeld litle wooll. And though the anſwerer by this adage ſeeme to eſteeme us no better then ſwyne, (as alſo in his other booke De adiaphoris it pleaſeth him to compare us to Apes) yet indeed may he well ſay that the moſt of us hauehave but litle wooll on our backes, we hauehave been ſo long and often ſhorne & ſhaven, that we hage nothing left but our very skine: Yet it may be that ſome of our adverſaryes hope for wooll and fat from our livings.
G. Poweld As if his Majeſtie would be diſpleaſed if any promoted a religious or honeſt cauſe. A malepart and preſumptuous (if not a diſloyall) cenſure.
Is this man in his right minde,Anſw. that he maketh ſuch collections? The author perſwadeth all men from all ſuch un-chriſtian and diſloyall ſuſpitions of his Majeſtie, how then may this note be applyed unto him.contradiction in the anſwerer. In the laſt Argument (or rather concluſion of all the arguments) where the author ſpeaketh of ſome that are alwayes accuſing and diſgracing the miniſters (pleaded for with Nobles and Princes,) the anſwerer maketh this marginall note, An vniuſt calumny. Whether it be ſo or no let all men iudge, as by his whole anſwer, ſo particularly by this note, and them that follow, yea by his whole anſwer to all the preface before the arguments. But to returne, ſith ſometymes ſome feare that even of Chriſtian Princes which they nether need nor ought to feare, what mallepartnes, preſumption, or diſloyaltie was there in the author to prevent ſuch feare. Doth not the Apoſtle often times Rom. 7.7. and 9.14. and Galt. 3.21. and often elſe where, prevent objections that might, but needed not be made? Shall he therfore be charged with malepert preſumption againſt God and his trueth?
G. Powele I knowe not wherto all his whole Paragraph tendeth, if the Suppliants deeme not his Maieſty to hauehave forſaken his firſt louelove, and to hauehave revolted from religion, at leaſt in ſhew for a time. (f) A malitious, uncharitable and unchriſtian allegation to be applyed unto the whole State (that loyally obey his Maieſtie) eſpecially to his Nobles and ſervants.
AnſwerO uncharitable collections. Let the reader by them judge whither this man doe not accuſe vsus, and provoke (what he can) our gracious Prince, his Nobles and all other againſt us: Yea, directly contrary to the words of the author, who laboreth by the whole Paragraph ſpoken of by the anſwerer, to perſwade all men to conceaue well & Honorably of his Majeſtie, according to many former moſt worthy teſtimonies of his Princely piety and religion. And albeit all in the ſayd Paragraph be ſpoken onelyonly to that purpoſe, yet the anſwerer wreſteth the ſame as intended alſo againſt the whole State, eſpecially againſt his Majeſtie, Nobles and ſervants. But he that iudgeth righteouſly, to whom we commend the cauſe and our ſelues, ſhall one day make our righteouſnes knowne.
G. Powelg If they had perticularly applyed theſe things, their mallice had been the more manifeſt.
AnſwerIt greeveth this anſwerer moſt, that we are not ſo maliticious as himſelfe, and that we giuegive no juſt occaſion of further quarrell with us. When they want matter of juſt accuſation, then they pretend that aliquid latet quod non patet, ſome thing is hid that is not manifeſt. But of this afterward.
G. Powelh No bolder & ſecurer cenſurers of all ſorts & degres of men, under the cope of heaven, then theſe ſingular & ſelfe conceited refractaryes.
Anſwer.Yes, this notary is a more bold and ſecure cenſurer, in as much as in his notes before he hath cenſured the author of the arguments, and all other deſiering that which he deſireth, (of what ſorte and degree ſoever) for that that is not expreſſed, neither intended, nor any wayes to be juſtly gathered from his words. When this cenſuring he ſpeaketh of, is proved by any of us, let the partie againſt whom it is proved beare the blame thereof. If any man cenſure a tree according to the fruites it bearerh, he doth no more then he may.
G. Poweli How prodigall they are of the Kings thanks.
Anſw.This note ſheweth the prodigalitie of this anſwerers mallice and words.
The k. is anſwered before.
G. Powell Is a triobular pamphlet ſuch an huge quantity or volume? It may ſeeme the pen man of this ſupplication was the worthy author of the late two leaved libels.
Seeing words (as this anſwerer ſaith in his concluſion) ought to be numbred to ſo great States, Anſwer.why ſhould reſpect of brevity be thus ſcornfully objected to the author? Eſpecially conſidering the other manifold & waighty affayres of that Honorable aſſembly, unto whom the ſayd Arguments were directed. If the Arguments were a triobular pamphlet, what would the anſwere hauehave been without them: eſpecially without all his cavils, reproches, vnjuſt colections, vayne repetitions, and that falſe ground that alwayes he buildeth upon, viz. his ſuppoſition that we are ſchiſmaticks? The anſwerer his former booke alſo De adiaphoris, what were it with a leſſe margine, without the great multiplicity of ſections, and if every bird had her owne feather. The two leaved libells wherof he ſpeaketh, are perhaps the more offenſiue vntounto him, becauſe ſome of them doe attribute more authority to his Majeſtie, then they would hauehave us to doe, or then the prelats doe, that the challenge ſo much to themſelues.
G. Powell Such preſumptuous and ſelfe conceyted Elihues, are theſe male content Miniſters, who take upon them to inſtruct ſuch, as be wiſer then themſelues. Vide Gregorium in hunc locum.
Anſwer.What a thing is this? For want of matter againſt the author, this anſwerer falleth out with the worthy Elihu, as a preſumptuous and ſelfe conceited man, whoſe wiſedome notwithſtanding, modeſtie, and ſingular humilitie are evident in holy ſcripture, by his ſilence till other (more auncient then himſelfe) had ſpoken all they could, as alſo by his pleading the cauſe of God himſelfe, when all the reſt there preſent had geiven over the ſame, (in which reſpect alſo all in theſe dayes that plead for God againſt the oppoſitions of thoſe that would be accounted the onelyonly wiſe and learned men, are likewiſe reproched as preſumptuous and ſelfe conceited) and laſtly by the elegancy & eloquence of his ſpeeches, and by the profound and divine matter therin conteyned. Finally are humble petitioners, that bow themſelues to the ground, before them to whom they doe petition, are ſuch petitioners (I ſay) before heaven and earth to be proclaimed preſumptuous and ſelfe conceited inſtructers? Is this the man that erſt now blamed other as bold and ſecure cenſurers?