THE Papists have of late given us such fresh Occasions by their horrid and damnable Conspiracies against the Per­son of our King, our Government, and our Religion; to renounce and detest the Communion of that Church, which does not only allow men, but teaches them to be Murderers and Traytors. And we have yet so great Reason to apprehend the dismal Consequences of their Secret and Hellish Machinations, that I am confident no Discourse which tends to heighten and improve the just Prejudices of English men, against that impious and absurd Religion, will be thought at this time unnecessary by any good Protestant. I shall not therefore make any Apology for the Collecting and Printing this E­pitome of the three great Massacres in Piedmont, France and Ireland, which is intended chiefly for the Instruction of ignorant and unlearned People; for we fear not that Scholars and men of Sence should be made Papists, except such whose Morals are so wretchedly debauch'd, that they are ready at all times to sacrifice their Consciences to their Civil Interests: and I hope there are not so many of these desperate Pro­stitutes as the Papists are apt to imagine, and as the Manners of the Age we live in, may (I confess) give us just cause to fear: No, 'tis the ordinary Rank of men, who have not had the Advantage of Learning and a generous Education, to defend themselves against the studied Fal­lacies [Page 2] and specious pretences of the Romish Agents, who commonly be­come the Prey of those Wolves in Sheeps cloathing.

To provide therefore for their Security, that they may not fall into the snares that are laid for them, ought to be our chiefest Care, since as 'tis more Charity to strengthen the hands of the weak, than to add force to the strong; so in this case, 'tis more prudent too, in order to the support of the common cause of Protestant Religion, the igno­rant being by far the greater number. Nor is this to be done a better way, then by furnishing them with such plain Arguments as they are able to apprehend and manage themselves, to the confusion of the com­mon Enemy. And these can be no other than such as are drawn from matters of Fact, they being easiest to be understood, and hardest to be answer'd.

For this Reason it was, that this short Narrative of the bloody But­cheries and inhumane Murders heretofore committed upon the per­sons of Protestants, by Italian, French and Irish Papists, in cold blood, and by the Instigation of their▪ Church, was prepared for the Press at the desire of a worthy Gentleman, (whose Zeal for the Interest of his Country and the Protestant Religion deserves a publick mention, would his Modesty permit it) in order to the being by him bestow'd among his Country Neighbours, who, some of them perhaps have never heard of, and others may have forgot the Story of these holy Popish Cruel­ties, these religious Villanies; the design being to let such sort of Peo­ple see, what a horrid thing Popery is, when her Vernish is taken off; what a deform▪d and frightful face this gaudy painted whore, Rev. 17. 2, 5, 6. With whom the Kings of the earth have committed Fornication, this Mother of Abominations, made drunk with the blood of the Saints, and with the blood of the Martyrs of Jesus; I say, What a deform'd and frightful face she has when her Paint is laid by, and she appears by true Lights in her proper Colours: What mon­strous and abominable Actions Papists are capable of, when the Inter­est of that Idol of theirs (their Church) requires them. By which as well as by their late Plots here in England, 'tis not hard for men of the meanest Capacities to perceive, That their Religion cannot be the Re­ligion of Christ, while it justifies them in the grossest Immoralities, and engages them in the most unchristian Practices. That those detestable Doctrines of Deposing and Killing Kings, and extirpating Hereticks, which have been so often objected to the Church of Rome by Prote­stant Divines, are not Speculative Notions and Propositions Proble­matical, [Page 3] as some of the Popish Writers, and particularly the Author of that lying Libel, called Compend. pag. 77. The Compendium, would make us believe; But such settled Maxims of their barbarous Ec­clesiastical Policy, as too often have been, and again will be put in practice, whenever that proud uncharitable Church has a safe occasion to do it; though at other times they must be disown'd with the usual Popish Impudence, especially to such Protestants as have so little wit to take what they say on Trust, or so little Reading not to be able to disprove them.

I hope no man will understand me here, as if from the bare Actions of Papists▪ and nothing else, I argued to the Principles of Popery, and conclude the one from the other; this were bad Charity, and worse Logick, and one of their own constant Topicks in their Writings against Protestants: 'twere (to say the worst that can be of it) to fall direct­ly into the ridiculous way of Reasoning used by the Compendianist, when he pretends to answer the Bp. of Lincoln's Book, that admirable and learned Discourse; a Discourse of so great use at this time, and which does with such undeniable Evidence convince the Religion of Pa­pists to be guilty of all their traiterous and bloody Designs against Kings and Protestants, that I cannot but take this occasion to correct that troublesome Impertinent, who has made such a sencelesse Buzze, and rais'd such a dust about it, with design to puzzle and darken those Truths, which the Bishop has there made so plain and clear, especially since the Bishop himself has not thought him (as indeed he is not) wor­thy of his Notice, and no body else that I know off, has yet expos'd that part of his impudent Pamphlet, which concerns this truly Venerable and Excellent Person.

First then, what a foolish Flourish dos he make against the Bishop, endeavouring to throw that wicked Principle of Deposing Kings upon Protestants, with this grosse Fallacy of Arguing from mens Practices to the Principles of their Religion? Is not his Lordships meaning, says Compend. pag. 77. he, in truth this, that Protestant Principles (when really believ'd) are destructive to all Kings, especially to Ca­tholick ones? since we see that the lawful Monarchs of England, Scotland, Swaedland, Denmark, the Ʋnited Provinces, Tran­sylvania, Geneva, &c. have been actually depos'd by their Protestant Subjects. This (&c.) here I guesse to be a Lye of the lowest price in their Book of Rates for Sin; tis so pitifull and inconsiderable a trick. He puts it down, as if there were a vast and tiresome number of Coun­tries▪ [Page 4] behind, which in kindness to his Reader he forbears to mention, where Princes have been depos'd by Protestants; when he knew in his Conscience he could scarce have nam'd one more, if it had been to gain the Popedom; if he could, I doubt not but we should have had it at full length. Well; but in those Countries he has nam'd, Princes (it seems) have been actually deposed by their Protestant Subjects. And what then? Does it therefore follow, that the Protestant Religion tea­ches the Doctrine of Deposing Kings? Or, may it not indeed teach the quite contrary for all that? Did this wretched Trifler never hear of men who have acted contrary to the Principles of their Religion? where has he liv'd? In a Convent without doubt, among the most Se­raphick Saints of his Church; Dr. Stillingfleet's Fanaticisme of the Church of Rome, pag. 276. I mean those mad Fanatickes of the Sect of Abbot Joachim, who according to their New Evangelium Aeternum, have been in a state of Perfection ever since the year 1260. I wonder when his hand was in, and while he was industriously stuffing out his thin Discourse with bigge and sounding words, he did not bring all the Protestant Criminals, and o­ther ill men, who have been any way Famous since the Reformation, upon the stage, and then charge the Protestant Religion with Felony, and Murder, and Treason, and Adultery, and Perjury, and what not? The Consequence had been altogether as good, and the Triumph as just. We do not reason at this loose and absurd Rate, when we accuse the Church of Rome of Principles which justifie the Deposing and Mur­dering of Princes, and the Massacre of Millions of innocent People, whom with a ridiculous affectation she terms Hereticks. But we first prove her (as my Lord Bishop of Lincolae has unanswerably done) to have such Principles; and this not only from the Books of her most eminent Writers, upon whose Testimony we always lay the least weight) allow'd and commended by her self, but from that Law which is the Rule of Justice in her Ecclesiastical Courts, from the Authentick Bulls and Decretals of her Popes, and lastly (which is the greatest Evidence that is possible in the case) from the Cannons of her general Councils. Then we urge matters of Fact, conformable to them, to shew that they are not things of bare Speculation and dispute am [...]ng Casuists and Schoolmen, but such necessary Rules for support of her Hierarchy, as have been frequently put in practise, to the great scandal of the Chri­stinn Profession.

To come to particulars: We should not lay to her Charge the [Page 5] Murders of Henry III. and Henry IV. of France, because they were committed by Members of her Communion, if (besides the publick Ap­plause of the one by the then Pope, in a Set-speech to the Colledg of Cardinals) we had not first convinc'd her of holding such Principles as justify both. We should not accuse her of the several Conspiracies of Papists here in England against the Lives of Queen Elizabeth, King James, King Charles I. and his present Majesty, if (besides the proving upon her the before-mention'd Principles) she had not actually and formally (as far as it lay in her Power) Excommunicated and De­pos'd them all, and absolv'd their Subjects from their Oaths of Alle­giance. We should not accuse her of the Massacres of Paris and Pied­mont, because her Sons were there the Brethren in Iniquity, the Sons of Violence, that acted unprovok'd those dismall Slaughters, if, as an additional proof of her holding the before-mention'd Principles, she had not Thuanus Hist. l. 53. p. 837. commended the one, giving thanks to God for it, and History of the Waldenses. commanded the other. Last­ly, we should not place to her Account the late Re­bellion of Ireland, and all those murders which were the consequences of it, because the Rebels were Papists, it (besides that the History of the Irish Rebellon, printed 1680. Pope's Nuncio was known to be the chief Guid, and Romish Priests the chief Contrivers and Fomenters of that despe­rate and bloody Revolt) it were not most notorious, that she has alwayes ready an Armory of execrable Principles, suited to such occasions, to satisfy the Consciences and encourage the Madness of her Jewish Zealots.

This I am confident all impartial men will judge fair Dealing and just discourse, and far different from the Method of the Compendia­nist; the Reader may see we ground not our Charge of Popery upon the bare Actions of Papists, but having found this degenerate Church teaching the most disloyal and inhumane Doctrines; and then observ­ing her followers in several famous Instances, to be guilty of Facts which directly answer to them: We think we have reason to conclude the one to be the cause of the other, and that many Papists had not been so bad men, if their very Religion had not debauch'd them. May we not now justly turn the Compendianist's own words of foolish Triumph upon himself and his Party? Compend. pag. 77. What Parity is there between us and our Adversaries, either in our A­ctions or Books of this Nature? Though the Acti­ons of many Protestants have [...] too had to be justifi'd, yet did they never go to the Church for Sanctuary. Though Prote­stants [Page 6] have been Deposers and Murderers of Princes, (there are Rogues of all Perswasions;) yet had they never any Encouragement from their Religion so to do? nor did any of them ever so much as pretend it, except such Bedlam Fanaticks as Fifth Monarchy men, a Venner, or a John of Leyden: and these are (properly speaking) as far from being right Protestants, as Papists are from being right Christians. But can he shew us where the Protestant Religion allows the Deposing or murdering of Princes, or gives the least intimation of such a Power in the Church? Can he shew it us, (where only it ought to be look'd after, viz.) in the Confessions of our Faith, or in the Articles of our Communion? Or, lastly can he shew it us in the Writings of any consi­derable Protestant Divines? though their private Opinions unlicenc'd and unauthoriz'd by the Church, of which they are Members, cannot properly be a Charge against the Protestant Religion, but (because we will give him more than he can justly ask in this Controversie) I say, can he shew it us, even here? I know indeed he does af­firm, That the Compend. pag. 76. Prime Leaders (as he stiles them) of the Reformation, Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, Beza, & have in express terms held, That Princes might be deposed upon the account of Religion. But he has not quoted one of their Books to direct us where this scandalous Tenet, which he fixes upon them, might be found, but leaves us to hunt after it at large among the voluminous Writings of those Authors. I do not therefore think my self oblig'd to take any more notice of this Slander of his, than if he had never vented it: What? does he expect to be believ'd upon his bare word? Upon the honour of a Popish Controvertist?

Does he think we know-them no better than to trust them? But we will not use all the Advantages that we have against so bad a Cause, and so weak an Adversary. Let us suppose then for once, That Luther, Calvin, and as many more as he has a mind to take into his, &c. have held, That Princes may be depos'd upon the Account of Religion: By what new Logick can he make this pertinent to the present Discourse? Does he thinke it the same thing to hold indefinitely, That Princes may be de­pos'd upon the Account of Religion; and to hold, That the Church has a Right to depose them upon that Account? To hold that they may be deposed by an Authority Civil, and to hold that they may be depos'd by an Authority Ecclesiastical? Let him now speak his Conscience without a Dispensation. Does he in good earnest think these two [Page 7] Propositions equivalent, or at least equivalent as to the point in contro­versie between him and the Bishop of Lincoln, and that they equally dis­grace the profess'd Religion of him who affirms them. He cannot sure be so void of the ordinary reason of a Man, though he has swal­low'd down never so many Roman Catholick Doctrines, as not to perceive a palpable difference between them. 'Tis not but that the for­mer of these Positions is a very bad Principle, dangerous to Prin­ces, and destructive to the Peace and Settlement of a Nation, though not so much as the latter, because it wants the Enforcement of Consci­ence and Religion to fix it in the Mind, and thrust it out upon occasion into action with that Violence, which usually accompanies a pretended Zeal for the Honour of God. But how bad soever it may be still 'tis a Ci­vil, not a Religious Principle; and though it may be Sedition in the highest degree, it can never be Heresie; a mans Life and Estate (who maintaines it) is answerable for it, not his Religion. To make this a little clearer, I say, 'Tis one thing to hold, That Princes may be de­depos'd by the State, though upon the Account of Religion, (i. e. for being of a Religion different from the establish'd) grounding this Opi­nion upon the Laws and Customs of some particular Civil Constituti­ons, or upon the ends of Government in general; and quite another thing to hold, that they may be depos'd by the Church, grounding this Opinion upon the Laws of Religion, and a Power suppos'd to be dele­gated to her by Christ. This last is the Principle we charge, and the Bishop of Lincoln has prov'd upon the Church of Rome, which makes her Religion it self dangerous to Princes. On the other side, though Luther, Calvin, or any other Protestant Divines should hold the first, though it be a false and a bad, yet (as I said before) 'tis a Civil Prin­ciple, and their holding it could no more reflect on the Protestant Religion, than an Error they might be guilty of in History or Mathe­maticks. The Protestant Religion therefore remaines clear from any suspicion of allowing the Doctrine of Deposing Princes (the point I un­dertook to make good) though it should be granted the Compendianist, that Luther and Calvin, &c. have had ill Principles in Relation to Ci­vil Governments. If he could prove indeed, That Luther and Calvin or any other Protestant Divines have held The Lawfulness of Deposing Princes, as a Principle of their Religion, and plac'd the power of do­ing it the Church, he would say something that were to the purpose, and parallel to what we accuse the Church of Rome off, but in the Me­thod he has taken, he does but beat the Air, and fight with Shadows.

[Page 8] I shall explain this Distinction a little further by some famous Ex­amples, in order to meet with the other Cavils of this idle wrangler, and make the Inconsequence of his Arguings (if it be possible) yet more apparent. He may remember then, That here in England, Edward the II. and Richard the II. were actually depos'd in times of Popery, and by Papiits; yet did our Writers never charge the Church of Rome, (though she held then the same doctrines, and had the same Pride to trample on Princes that now she has) with those two disloyal and unjust Usurpations upon the Sovereignty of the Kings of England. And for what imaginable reason but this only, viz. because they were both acts of the Civil Power, and carried on by men who grounded what they did upon Principles (though grosly false and mistaken) drawn from the Constitution of the English Government, and the Rights of the two Hou­ses of Parliament; and the Church of Rome, contrary to her Custom upon such occasions, was only a bare Spectator, neither her Authority nor her Principles being made use of to further or justifie those procee­dings. I would now a k this Collector of Impertinences, this teadi­ous Compendianist, whether he thinkes this a good reason to clear the Church of Rome from being concern'd in the deposing of these two un­fortunate Princes. If he sayes, Tis, as no doubt he will, with what face can he pretend to charge the Church of England, (as he would be under­stood to do, pag. 76 lin. 38.) with the Endeavours that were us'd to keep Queen Mary from the Crown, the Death of the Queen of Scots, and the Bill of the late House of Commons against the Duke of York's succes­sion, since the Cases are directly parellel; I mean parallel in all that concernes the present Question. Were they not every one of the Acts of the Civil Power, and carried on by men who grounded what they did on Civil, not Religious Principles; Was not the setting up of▪ the Lady Jane Grey, and the raising an Army to oppose Queen Mary, an Act of the Privy Council in persuance of King Edward's Will, and a Law made in the Reign of Henry the VIII. for the Illegitimating of this Princess, as the Lords of the Council themselves declare in their Answer to her Letter writ from Bakers▪ Chron. Framingham Castle? Was not the Death of the Queen of Scots most notoriously an act of the State, and justified by the Laws of the Land? Was she not indict­ed for Treason, and known to pretend a better Title to the Crown than Queen Elizabeth? Lastly, was not the Bill against the Duke of York grounded on a suppos'd Legal Power in the King and the Two Houses, to alter the Course of the Succession when they think fit? [Page 9] Have not all the Pamphlets that have been writ in Vindication of that Bill argued the Lawfulnesse of it from the Constitution of the Civil Go­vernment, and wholly disclaim'd the Interesting of Religion at all in the businesse, as to the justifying of it in the least degree, endeavouring with great paines to prove, That true Religion does not meddle with the Civil Rights of Princes, but leaves them to be determin'd by the Laws and Customs of particular Countries? By what strange conse­quence then can he entitle the Church of England, or the Protestant Religion, to things that are so perfectly of a Civil nature, unless he will make them answerable for all the Actions of Protestants of what kind soever, and resolve to maintaine that childish Sophisme I first took no­tice of, as the chief ground of all his extravagant Raving against the Bishops Book, viz. The concluding the Principles of a Religion from the Practices of her Professors? Which is the very Dregs of Folly, the last Running of Impertinence.

'Tis true, the Protestant Religion (i. e. the care of preserving it) was, no doubt, the great Motive of doing what was done in every one of these three Cases, but that is not here to the purpose; for, 'tis not the Reason for which, but the Authority by which, a Prince is depos'd, and the kind of Principle (i.e. whether Civil, or Religious) 'tis justifi'd up­on, that must condemn, or acquit a Church of the Guilt of it; though this man endeavour all along to insinuate the contrary, by such a falla­cious way of representing the Position charg'd on the Church of Rome, as makes that seem to be the chief Point in the Controversy between her and the Bishop of Lincoln, which is in truth no part of it, viz. the Motive or end of deposing Princes. But 'tis not the Businesse of this little Pamphleter to state things fairly, and reason clearly, but to amuse the Reader, and puzzle the Question; a close way of arguing will not suit either with his Cause or his Understanding: a good proof of which he gives us at the very first, in these words; See the Com­pend. pag. 76. If on the other-side (sayes he) the Bishop means that there have been Popish Doctors of the Opini­on, That Princes might be Depos▪d upon the ac­count of Religion, what Advantage, I would fain know, can that be to his Lordship, or his Treatise, since not only all the Prime Leaders of the Reformation, &c. Is it to be imagin'd now, that a man should get so far out of his way, unless he purposely design'd to ramble, or write things so grossly impertinent to the matter he was treating of; unless he studyed to confound it, and render it as little intelligible as was possible? This is properly playing at Cross Purposes (which he very foolishly, and very unjustly accuses the Bishop off) when men talk [Page 10] what is foreign to the Question and wander from the business out of de­signe. Never did any man take more true pains to understand a Dis­course difficult in it self, than he has to misunderstand the Bishop's, which was plain and easy, or at least to make his Reader do soe; for he cannot be soe dull himself in this point as he would seem. 'Tis not possible that he, or any man who has read the Bishop's Book, should think, it was the Bishop's meaning only to charge the popish Doctors with holding indefinitely, That Princes might be Depos'd upon the ac­count of Religion, when 'tis so palpably evident in a hundred places of his Book, that he only brings their Opinions as a collateral proof of his Charge of their Church and Religion, and that with a quite different Tenet, as I have already show'd. And as 'tis the Roman Church, and not the Doctors, only, or chiefly, which the Bishop charges with holding, that Princes may be Depos'd by her Authority, not with holding indefi­nitely that they may be Depos'd upon the account of Religion: So 'tis the present popish Canon-Law, the Bulls and Decretals of Popes, and the Canons of General Councils, which are the Testimonies he relies upon for the making good of his Charge, and not the private Opinions of Popish Doctors, though being cited out of Books licens'd and approv'd by that Church, they are of considerable weight in the Argument. Now what sayes the Compendianist to these strong and most convincing Proofs? Why in fine (as Mr. Bayes sayes upon ano­ther occasion) he wont tell us. He has not one word, not one Syllable of Answer to them, but passes them over with as deep a silence, and as good a grace, as if they were, like most of his own, not at all to the purpose. This discreet and necessary Resolution being taken, he bends all his little Wit, and with a great deal of Chearfulnesse goes about to invalidate what the Bishop urges from the Writings of the Popish Do­ctors, which yet the poor impotent Scribler is by no means able to do; as I have made appear in my Answer to his Charge of Luther and Cal­vin. The Attempt however was just as wise, and as likely to satisfy reasonable men, as if a General, who had a great and well disciplin'd Army to fight with, should neglect the Main Body, and with his whole strength set upon the Forlorn Hope.

Before I proceed any farther, I cannot but take Notice of a very extraordinary Passage, which I meet with, pag. 77. li. 12. Where the Compendianist would make the World believe, That we our selves confess, That our Monarchy is weaken'd by our Religion; That Po­pery [Page 11] must be call'd back to support it, and that Papists are hated by many on this Account, all which is in it selfe so notorious a Falsehood, and in him (who could not but know the contrary) so base a Slander of the Protestant Faith in general, and of the People of England in particular, that I am confident no true Protestant can read it with­out Indignation, nor any sensible man without Astonishment at the strange Impudence of this prostitute Writer▪ His Words are these: Can it be said, That the Monarchy has gotten by the Refor­formation, when Protestants themselves acknowledge (and what de­sperate Enemies that has created us, may be easily imagin'd) that no­thing but Popery, or at least its Principles, can make it again emerge, or lasting? Was there ever such a complication of Malice and Fol­ly as this Period affords us? There is a veine of impertinent arguing, contrary to the known Rules of Discourse, and shamelesse affirming, contrary to the knowne Truth of Fact, which runs through the whole Masse of his crude and indigested Pamphlet: But this is a Nompare­illo (to use Mr▪ Bayse's Phrase) of want of Modesty, and want of Sence; one of his bold Strokes. 'Tis usual with him to tell Tales for Argu­ments, and lay down confident Assertions in stead of Proofs: but let him now rake together all the Dirt he can meet with, and practise himself in Compendiums, i. e. in lamentable ill reason'd, lying Dis­courses; Let him make Extracts of the Lives of popish Saints, and abridge the Legends of Monks; let him take short Heads of Mr. Cres­sy's Mystical Divinity in his Sancta Sophia, and write Epitomes of the Controversies of the Schoolmen, he shall never again be able to crowd so much Nonsence, Libel, and Untruth into so few Words, as long as he lives. Can it be said (sayes he) That the Monarchy has gotten by the Re­formation, &c?) Prodigious Impudence! Can any thing else be said with the least colour of Reason, or Truth? He cannot but know too, that this has alwayes been said by Protestant Writers, and prov'd beyond all con­tradiction, except that of absurd and illogical men, from whom Saint Paul pray'd to be delivered. However since he will needs make a New Question of it, I shall take this occasion to inform the ignorant Reader (for none else can need it) how much the Monarchy has got­ten by the Reformation in point of Civil Advantage, and consequently, how great a Loser it will be every way, if by some fatal Infatuation, any Successor of his Majesty should again bring the Crown, and the Na­tion under the Romish Yoke, that worse than Aegyptian Darknesse, and [Page 12] Slavery, which neither our Fathers, nor We are able to beare.

In the first place the, The Monarchy has by the Reformation, gotten an absolute Freedom from the Tyranny of the Popes Spiritual Supremacy, and his pretended Temporal Power in ordine ad Spiri­tualia, to which it was before subject, and in persuance of which seve­ral of our Kings have been summon'd to appear personally at Rome, and King John forc'd to resigne his Crowne to a Legate, to the high Dishonour of the Regal Majesty, and the apparent Prejudice of that Reverence it ought to have in the mindes of the People: Nay further, all that Part of the Pope's Spiritual Power, which was either Necessary, or useful for the Government of the Church, is, by the Reformation, become the King's, so that no Authority but God Almighty's is now above him, nor any in England independent of him. He is equally Head both of the Church & the State: No Appeales can be made from his Courts, nor any sort of Persons priviledg'd from his Justice; In a word, He is no longer a Feauditary Vassall to the Popes▪ as in effect all Popish Princes are; since the Pope has an allow'd Right to com­mand them in whatever he will call Spirituall, or will say has any relation to Spiritual Matters, and by declaring them Hereticks, he can (according to the Romish Religion) depose them, and destroy them when he pleases. Now the being deliver'd from such a low, unwor­thy Servitude, and the acquiring such a large Increase both of Honour, and Power is certainly no small addition to the Monarchy, yet this it has gotten purely by the Reformation.

Secondly, The Monarchy has by the Reformation gotten a greater Security than it had before, both for the King's Person, and his Crowne; those Hellish Papal Doctrines, which I have been hitherto discoursing off, did, in times of Popery, perpetually hang over their Heads, like Damocles's Sword, ready to doe Execution upon the least irregular Motion, and they were neither of them any longer safe than the Pope pleas'd. But since the Reformation, the Popes Ex­communications, and Bulls of Deposition are of no Force, and can have little effect in England; some they will have while Papists are suf­fered to live among us, and, by enjoying Estates, to have an Interest in the Kingdom, as the present popish PLOT does but too plain­ly prove, however by many degrees less than if Popery were [Page 13] again the establish'd Religion; so that I say, The King of England has by meanes of the Protestant Religion, at least a greater Secu­rity for his Life, and his Crown, than he had before, an absolute one he must not expect while he has any popish Subjects.

Thirdly, The Monarchy has by the Reformation gotten to the King of England, the Government of all English men, of what Order or Profession soever, which heretofore he had not, the Cier­gy being exempt from the Civil Jurisdiction, and depending chiefly on the Pope (who bestow'd most of the Bishopricks; and great Bene­fices) both for Protection and Preferment: the King had little power either to punish or reward them, as the Historyes and Re­cords of those times do sufficiently demonstrate. But 'tis notori­ously knowne to what a degree the Reformation has alter'd the state of things in that point, and how much the Interests of Clergy men do now tye them, more than others, to the Service of the Crowne, as also how well they undestand, and how zealously they pursue those Interests, whenas heretofore they were the constant Raisers of Factions against their Princes, in favour of Rome, and obstinate maintainers of the Pope's Encroachments upon their Regal Rights. Nay, the Laity themselves were the Pope's Sub­jects in Spiritual matters, and for the most Part, wholely guided by their Priests, the Pope's Dependants (by Reason of the great com­mand they had over their Consciences) in their Civil concernes al­so; Soe that the King under these and other circumstances of Popery was but a Servant to the Church, and little more in Effect than the Popes Vice-Roy. But the Reformation has freed both him, and his people from this base, dishonorable Subjection, aud most in­convenient Dependance on a foreign Power.

These are things which all the World must acknowledge to be very considerable in themselves, and very great acquisitions to the Monarchy, yet are they such as have naturally, and necessarily fal­len into it upon the establishment of Protestant Religion in the room of Popery, and that too, as 'tis this particular form of Government call'd a Monarchy, distinguish'd from all other Kindes; if I should take notice of the Advantages it has receiv'd by this change, as 'tis a Civil Government, in general, I might observe many more; as first, [Page 14] an Increase of the Trade, and consequently of the Riches, of the Kingdom, as well by the taking away that vast number of unneces­sary, sencelesse Holydaies, impos'd on the People by the Church of Rome, which must needs be a great hinderance to the carrying on of publick Business, and Commerce, as by the application of many Thousands of Persons to the waies, and means of raising a For­tune to maintain themselves, who were heretofore maintain'd, and liv'd wholely, like idle Drones, upon the labour and industry of others, and by being shut up in a Cloyster, and sequestred from the common Employments of other men, were made every way use­less Members of the State, and a burden to it. Secondly, Another advantage the Monarchy (consider'd in the general as a body Poli­tick) has receiv'd by this Change, is an Increase of the Strength, and Safety of the Kingdom, by the great Increase of People (which also alwayes increases Trade) since the Clergy have been allow'd to marry, and the Folly of Monkery and Vowes of pepetual Cae­libacy (as they call it) in either Sex has been both forbidden and scorn'd.

'Twere easy for me to enlarge upo this Argument, and fur­ther shew, how friendly an Institution, and how highly serviceable the Protestant Religion, when rightly understood, is to the Civil In­terests, both of this and all other Kingdomes and States as well by the great gentleness, and moderation of her external Discipline; as by the peaceable temper, and Loyalty of her Doctrines: And that on the other side Popery does not only make the Prince himself a Dependant, and unsafe, but his people few, ignorant and poor; She robbes him first of his Authority, and then of his Subjects; her Monasteries decoy the zealous, her Inquisitions drives away the wise, and both together enslave and beggar the foolish Issachars, that stay behend, to bow down their servile shoulders to the Burden of an oppressive Government. But I think what I have already dis­cours'd is more than enough to prove the present Point, viz▪ That the Monarchy of England has gotten by the Reformation, and that no body, but a man, who either understands not, or cares not what he sayes, would affirm the contrary.

The Compendianist, possibly, may here object, as he seemes to do, pag. 77. lib 9. That popish Princes abroad are not sensi­ble of these Inconveniences in their Religion, nor do they perceive [Page 15] any such ill Consequences to arise from the Profession of it, as the Bishop of Lincoln's Book, and this Preface charges it with, but alto­gether the contrary; For, Who (sayes He) find themselves so flou­rishing, and great as they? I suppose he speaks this of the French King (for I know no other popish Prince that is at present, either flourishing, or great) and if he means that Popery has been the cause of his Greatness, I shall not dispute it with him, but this, I will affirme, and maintaine against all the World, That 'twas nei­ther his owne Popery, nor that of his Subjects; though every Body knows the French Popery is much gentler, and more converseable sort of thing than the Spanish, or Italian: more plyant, and sub­missive to the Civil Magistrate, and more hospitable to Strangers, and Dissenters, and consequently lesse prejudicial to the growth of Power, and the greatness of a State than the other. The Priviled­ges of the Gallican Church, and the Doctrines of the Sorbonne, to­gether with the manners of the people, and the Exclusion of the In­quisition, have a little qualified this pernicious Imposture; and temper'd the Malignity of her Influence; as the most destructive Plants do sometimes lose the Virulence of their poisons by a change of Soyle, and Mercury it selfe, by a mixture of Ingredients, is ren­dred innocent Physick I grant therefore that Popery in some places, and under some Circumstances of alloy, may not absolute­ly hinder, but it can never be the cause, nor of it self, in any degree contribute to, the prosperity of either Prince, or people; for 'tis plaine, That the Principles it teaches, and the Consequences it draws after it, do evidently tend (as I have already made appear) to the lessening of the one, and the impoverishing of the other, indeed to the ruine of both; and if Popery have not at all times, and in all Pla­ces so bad an effect, it must be attributed to some such causes as I have now mention'd, which do in France, serve to take out the sting of this monstrous beast, this Spawn of the Old Serpent, and prevent the Mischiefe, which it is otherwise so apt to doe, the Blast it would infallibly bring upon the ordinary fruites of good Govern­ment, and the common ends of Civil Societies. To conclude this point, if any Prince or State happen (by some favorable conjun­cture, and fortunate Accidents) to be great with, or, rather not­withstanding, Popery, there is no doubt but they would be either of them, much greater without it.

[Page 16] 'Tis now left to the Reader to judge, upon a due considerat i­on of the Whole, what an excellent Engine this Popery would prove to buoy up a sinking Monarchy, and make it again emerge (as the Compendianist calls it in his pedantical Latin phrase) were ours in that desperate low condition to need it, which I hope 'tis far from, or, if it do at present decline, I am sure no man in his right wits, except this Author, will say, 'tis for want of Popery. What kind of men are those Protestants then, who (if we may take the Compendia­nist's own word for it) would recommend to his Majesty, in a case of extremity, this dry antiquated Drugge, this uselesse Lump of Formality, and Foppery, this discover'd Cheat, this Insulter and Braver of Crown'd Heads, this Usurper upon the Rights of Princes, this Enemy to God's Annointed. I say what kind of Creatures must these be? They are certainly a Species by themselves, and have not the same common Faculties, and wayes of understanding with other Christian people; if at least there be any such, which I will not be overpositive in, upon the Authority of this Writer; for some of his stories are as unlikely (to use his own words about the Plot) as any Romance Extant. But Protestants does he term them? It is impossible! Why will he abuse his Friends at this Rate, and call them out of their Names? I'll warrant them they are as good Ca­tholicks as himself. Does he indeed thinke to put this upon us, that Protestants are for the bringing in Popery? He may as well hope to make us believe Transubstantiation it self, 'tis a Contradiction in Terms, an errant Bull. However, upon this occasion, I cannot but reflect that I have sometimes met with a sort of ridiculous Animals, commonly call'd Protestants indeed, whose Heads are giddy, and whose Brains turn round with the Notion of a Catholicke Church, and a visible succession of Bishops ever since the Apostles, Who run stark mad in love with reverend Words, holy Places, consecrated Habits, and godly Gestures, who have abundance of odde, supersti­tious Zeale, with not one grain of true sence, Disciples of Heylin, and Thornedike, in a word, a kinde of L'Estrange Protestants, men who have listed themselves in our Service, and rank'd on our side only to betray our cause, and give our Enemies the Victory. They seem to have no other designe in the Church of England than Samp­son had in the Philistines Temple, viz. to pull it downe upon our Heads, and bury us in the Ruines▪ Now what discourse these [Page 17] sort of men have had with the Compendianist, I cannot tell, nor am much concern'd, I will not dispute, but that 'tis possible, they may have acknowledg'd some such thing as he affirms, for their Poli­ticks are much of a pitch with their Divinity, and I know they will say, or confess any thing, that tends to undermine, and weaken the Protestant Faith, and Interest, though it be never so foolish, and ab­surd. Yet do they take it hainously ill to be thought Papists, and particularly Mr. L'Estrange seems more than ordinarily disturb'd, when he finds himselfe charg'd with this Imputation; how does he fling, and flounce in his late Pamphlets, like a gaull'd Hackney, who can neither bear the whipp, nor mend his dull Dog-Trot. But let him bestow the foamings of his Rage never so fast among the Rabble, and in hasty, uncorrect Libells throw about the e [...]pty Froth of his Anger; Let him fret himself never so lean, and talk like a mad man in the overboyling of his Passion; Let him make never so many professions of a Protestant Faith, and never so many Good-Morrows to the Church of England, we shall still believe him a Pa­pist, while he soe notoriously promotes the Designes, and serves the Interests of that Party. I think nothing is plainer than that the great Endeavour of the Papists, ever since the Discovery of the Plot, has been by all kinde of means, and artifices, to turn off the Pub­lick Odium (under which they have so justly suffer'd) as much as was possible, from Themselves upon the Fanaticks, and to stir up an ignorant, outragious clamour against them; the Presbyterian Plot sound in the Meal Tub, and all the late Pamplets, and dis­courses of the popish Agents, are, but so many continued, and un­deniable Proofs of this. Now were L'Estrange their Pensioner (as 'tis not improbable but he is) and as much ingag'd in their Service as Nevil-Payne; he could not have more effectually assisted them in the carrying on of this base and Villanous Project than he has along done. How earnestly has he labor'd to revive the Memory of for­ty, in contemptof the Act of Oblivion, and terrifi'd the people with groundlesse Apprehensions of a new Fanatick Warr? How con­stantly has he patch'd up his loose Discouses with unseasonable thread-bare Comments on the Disorders of the late times, and co­lour'd his malicious enmity to the Liberties of England with violent Invectives against Fanaticks? Their Defamation has been the chief aime of all his Writings since the Plot, the Burden of his overflow­ing [Page 18] Impertinence, and the Common place Topick of his Railing. Now let us suppose the Fanaticks as errant Devils as this Inquisition­man has a mind to paint them, yet what have they done of late, what new provocation have they given since his Majesties Restan­artion, nay since the PLOT, (I meane the Fanaticks of England,) that we should thus fall upon them Pell Mell, without either Fear or wit, Rhime or Reason. I say, what is the matter, That just after the Discovery, and in the midst of the Examination of a Horrid Po­pish PLOT, we should all of a suddain be hounded on Fanatickes? There is sure some Mystery in this. Alas! The Artifice is evident and grosse. Who sees not that the Designe of it is, to save the Papists from the growing Rage of the Peoples Hate, with which their whole Faction was almost run downe, and brought to a Bay, by starting, and inviting their Prosecutors to fresh Grame? This, it seems, is the Under-PLOT to their great Tragedy, and Mr. L'Estrange, next to some Provincial Jesuite, the chief Manager.

Can there be any Doubt then, however he appear a Protestant, in shew and Profession, but that he is a PAPIST, either in Prin­ciple or Interest, if not in both: and these Interest-Papists are the most dangerous ol all. For his Panegyrick of the Religion estab­lish'd, and his high Expressions of Zeale for it, with which at eve­ry turne, he flourishes his Mischievous Pamphlets, and guilds the poyson he would have the People Swallow, they are like the Com­plement of Judas when he betray'd his Master, and like the Courte­sie of Joab when he murder'd Abner. But, God be thank'd, Pro­testants now know him too well, to believe in his Flatery, or be wheadled to their Ruine by his soft Words. His Writings have disc­over'd soe palpable an ill-Will to the true Interest of the true Pro­testant Cause, and the Constitution of the Government (for they are at present both wound up in the same Bottom) and he has pursu'd his Malice with so restlesse a diligence, and so furious a Zeal, that he's grown a Common Nusance to all good Englishmen, and ripe for [...] Correction.

I doubt not therefore (besides what he may expect from a Par­liament) but some new Marvell will rise, to bridle the Intemperance of his Mercenary Pen, and put his poor prostitute wit out of counte­nance, an Adversary who shall baffle him more notoriously than Mr. Bagshaw, and persecute him worse than my Lady Boltinglasse, who [Page 19] shall crush his little Plausibilities with a Masterly Reason, and shame him into silence by the Justnesse of his Satyre. I shall leave him then to the Fate of Bayes, which he cannot long escape, and to the severe Reprimands of his own Conscience▪ that full confutati­on of all his Works, and that only one too which he wants confi­dence to reply to, and begging the Reader's pardon for this long (but perhaps useful) Digression, returne to the Compendianist. And, as to what concernes the present Argument between him and me, I question not, but upon an impartial weighing of what is here offer'd, it will appear to every reasonable man, That nothing is more perfectly opposite to our Civil, as well as Religious Interests than Popery, that nothing could be more prejudicial to the Mona rchy, nor more fatal to the prosperity of England, than if, after having with soe just abhorrence spew'd up that filthy Load of Superstition, and Idolatry, with which she was so long oppress'd, she should be forc'd, either by conquest from abroad, or by a Popish Succession at home, to returne once more like the Dog to his Vo­mit, or like the Sow when she has been wash'd to her wallowing in the Mire.

For his Objections of the Protestant Rebellion in Hungary, the late Rising in Scotland, the Murder of the Archbishop of Saint Andrews, and that Home-Blow of his, the Gazette Advertise­ment of The Tryalk of twenty nine Protestant Regicides, they are of the same nature, and grounded on the same pitiful Fal­lacy with those I have already answer'd; and when he can shew us any Principle of the Prostant Religion that justifies Rebellion or Murder, especially that of Princes, or does but in the remotest degree encourage men to commit those Detestable Crimes, I shall again consider them: In the mean time, let him not waste his Pa­per, and tire his Reader with the Repetition of such fulsome So­phistry.

But perhaps it may not be amisse to give a more particular Answer to his Home-blow, because he has such an opinion of its force, and does so triumph with the conceit of his Victory: I shall endeavour therefore to take him down in the height of his Rapture, and shame his ignorant Malice. The Reader will remember the [Page 20] Point he should prove, is, That Protestant Principles are destru­ctive to Kings; for those are the very words of the Introduction to his terrible Argument of Instances of Fact. Now did the Twenty nine Protestant Regicides ever pretend to justifie their abominable Villany by any Principle of their Religion? Nay, did they not pre­tend the quite contrary, and ground it wholly upon a Civil Autho­rity? Did they not argue the lawfulnesse and justice of it from a Power they fancied in the People, to call the King to an Account for his Actions? Though in this they were as absurd Logicians as the Compendianist has all along shew'd himself, and reason'd not only against the very first Principle of Civil Policy; but point blank con­trary to the most fundamental Maxims of the Law of England, which says, That the King can do no wrong; and therefore makes his Ministers questionable for the miscarriages in Government, because he himself is in his own Person, inviolable and sacred: but this con­cerns not the present businesse. These men, I say, (as bad as they were) had not the impudence to interest the Protestant Religion, or any Protestant Church whatever, in the guilt of their impious Trea­son, by pretending to derive any Warrant or Encouragement for it from them; or if they had, it would have signified nothing to the Compendianist's purpose, since there is no King-Deposing, or King-Killing Principle to be found in any Protestant Confessions of Faith, or Articles of Communion, (which are the only proper Evidences to convince a Protestant Church of any Principle or Doctrine that is laid to her Charge) and so it would have amounted to no more than their particular mistaking or perverting the Principles of their Reli­gion, as grosly and as wilfully as they did the Laws of their Country. But this is not the Case; for they did not so much as pretend any Warrant from the Protestant Religion for what they did:

How then can He charge Protestant Principles with the Perso­nal Crimes of these men? Or what does his Home-Blow, and all his other Instances prove, except this only, viz. That several Pro­testants have been Rogues, very great Rogues, Murderers, Rebels, Traytors, &c. Does He not know that they are all mortal men too, and subject to many other Vices, which he might very clearly have prov'd upon them (if he he had pleas'd) by undeniable Examples? There's not a Sin the Pope pardons, of what Price soever, but 'tis [Page 21] too sadly true, that Protestants have been guilty of it at some time or other, if that will do him any service. But now in the name of a little common sense, Who, or what does this Raver oppose in this strenuous Argument? Did ever any of our Writers assert that all the Protestants in the World were good Men, and pious Christians? Or is there any sort of people among us besides Quakers, i. e. mad men, who hold a state of Absolute Perfection in this Life? He has put himself into an extraordinary Heat, and made strange violent Assaults, and yet no Enemy appears near him. What ayles the man? he has sure been combating some Giant in imagination, like Don Quixote when he hack'd down the Walls of his Chamber. Well, whoever he be, though it were Malambruno himself, I'l war­rant him he's kill'd outright, this La Mancha has so laid about him with Home-Blows.

Another great quarrel he has to the Bishop is, that he does not answer four Books (nam'd in the Compendium's margin) writ (it seems) by the Catholicks of England since the Kings Restoration, about the Deposing Power of the Church; Compend. pag. 78. His Lord­ship (says he) is so far from answering these Authors, that he never so much as cites them to this purpose, (a great fault indeed) so that we must conclude them unanswerable. Well argued o' my word; I see he deals in nothing but Home-Blows. Mr. Bayes and this Compendianist would have made a couple of rare Disputants, if they had not been spoil'd by their Tutors, and ill-grounded at first; they have both an admirable na­tural talent at Reasoning, all the difference between them is, Bayes loved it in Rhime, and this man's altogether for it in Prose. But without Raillery, does he believe the Bishop of Lincoln oblig'd to take particular notice of every idle Pamphlet of theirs, that keeps a Pudder about the Deposing Power of the Church, (with design to make the business intricate and dark) and to think them as consi­derable, as his Party always do their own Books? No doubt he takes it monstrous ill too, that the Bishop has not thought him worth his Answering, and perhaps concludes himself unanswerable. But I hope I shall hinder him from falling into that mistake, and make him sensible what an Impar Congressus Achilli, what a poor con­temptible thing he is, when he appears in the Lists against so great [Page 22] a Scholar as the Bishop of Lincoln. For the Pamphlets he mentions, they are more than answered▪ in the Bishops Book, though it does not particularly name them; and when he, or any other Factor for Popery, gives a tolerable Answer to those clear Testimonies I told him of before, (and which he never so much as cites to this purpose) by which the Bishop does so plainly prove the Doctrine of Deposing Kings upon the Church of Rome, I here engage my word to him, these Pamphlets shall be made ridiculous by name, and their Au­thors shew'd to the people in the Fools Coat they deserve.

In the next place he tells us, Compend. pag. 78. That the Venetians have openly in their very Writings denied this Deposing Power of the Church without Censure: And, That several Au­thors have been censur'd in France and elsewhere for writing for it. In answer to which, First, we know very well, that the Church of Rome does always accommodate her Allowing and Condemning of Books to the Circumstances of her present conditi­on; and as Princes are sometimes forc'd by the necessity of their Affairs to disavow the Actions of their Ministers, though done by their most expresse Command; so is this interested Church fre­quently reduc'd to connive at Books which she does by no means like, and to Censure others which she does not only approve, but (un­der-hand) directs. A good instance of this we have in the case of Sanctarellus's Book (one of those he mentions) which though at first Printed by the Approbation and special License of See Sanctarel­lus himself. Mutius Vittellescus, then General of the Jesuits, and by the Order of the Master of the Popes Palace; yet when the Pope found it would not be endur'd in France, but that both the Sorbonne had condemn'd it, and the Parliament of Paris had order'd it to be burnt, he thought fit (after it had been out so long, that the Copies were almost all bought up) to forbid the Sale of it at Rome, but without any manner of Censure, either upon the Author or Doctrine, See more of this in the Preface to the Jesuits Loy­alty. which is generally their way of condemning these kind of Books, when Civil Considerations at last oblige them to it, viz. a bare prohibition of them, after every body has read them that cares for them. Such a Condemnation as this did Mariana meet with in Spain; and [Page 23] of this gentle nature was Becanus's Correction at Rome, not for the Doctrines he maintain'd, but for Ove [...]lashing, (as Bishop Montague expresses it in his Preface to King James's Works) i. e. for speaking the mind of their Church more plainly than was at that time convenient. For, Secondly, we know well enough that those Principles of Deposing and Killing Kings, and Extirpating Hereticks, are thought too precious Truths, and too high Points to be ordinarily expos'd to the Vulgar, and press'd upon all Occasions; that they are the Arcana Imperii of their Kingdom of Darknesse, and kept like Warrants Dormant among the Cabala of their wicked Mysteries, to justifie Rebellions, As­sassinates, and Massacres, when the Church has very great need of them, and finds it her Interest to own these Doctrines of Devils; at other times it may suit better with her Designs to preach up Loyalty and Obedience to Princes, and universal Cha­rity to Mankind. Lastly, we know that the Venetians and the French have been always Opposers of the Pope's Encroachments upon civil Sovereigns, and that they do not submit to these sort of Doctrines, which are so directly calculated for his attaining an Absolute Dominion over the Christian World, a long proje­cted Fifth Monarchy, at least in the same degree, that other Countries which are more Jesuited and enslav'd to the Pope, are forc'd to do; which by the way may serve for a good Argu­ment to convince them of Differences among themselves, and o­verthrow their glorious pretence of Union, which they do so magnifie upon all occasions to our reproach, but cannot signi­fie any thing to the purpose, for which the Compendianist here intends it, viz. to shew the Bishop of Lincoln, in Answer to his Challenge at the end of his Book, That the Church of Rome has by publick Acts and Declarations disown'd and condemn'd those Principles which His Lordship charges upon her. He very confi­dently indeed affirms, that the Censures of those Authors he mentions p: 78. l. 32. are such. But what? does he hope by positivenesse to face us down, that the Venetians and the French are the Roman Church? Or that the Universities of France and the Parliament of Paris are her Representatives? Is it possible he should believe we have not Logick enough to distinguish be­tween the Parts and Branches of a Church, and the Church her [Page 24] self in her publick Authority and Representations? Does he in­deed imagine, that he can at this time of day make the Judg­ments of particular Universities and Civil Assemblies passe upon us for publick Acts and Declarations of the Church of Rome? He must needs pardon us; we have been too often told it upon other occasions; to be ignorant now, that nothing but the De­crees of a Pope or a General Council are the publick Acts and Declarations of the Church of Rome; and he has not so much as pretended to shew either of these, for the Condemnation of those Principles which the Bishop has prov'd upon his Religion by both. What scorn then can be vile enough to throw upon his impudent Claim of the Bishop's conditional promise of turning Papist, when the termes upon which that promise was given are so far from being made good? And why does he run over such a Bead-role of names— The Colledge of the Sorbonne, Paris, Caen, Rheimes, &c. I say to what end does he stun us with this vast Din of insignificant Words, and rattle in our ears with empty Sounds?

I thought to have pass'd by his Quibble upon the Bishop's Title, 'tis so very sencelesse and thin a conceit; but because I find he is apt to think every thing unanswerable that is not particularly taken notice of, I shall do him the favour to make the Reader observe this ridiculous Criticism: Who could think (says Compend. pag. 76. he) that His Lordships Heat against us should force him even to a Title that has confuted his whole Book, viz. That Popish Principles and Positions (when really believ'd) are destructive and dangerous to all Kings, especially Protestants; for he cannot term them Principles of Faith, because they were never thus Believ'd, &c. I suppose by Principles of Faith here, he means what is com­monly understood by Articles of Faith, i. e. Points necessary to Salvation; for the words are equivocal, and may bear several sences: but because this is most favourable to his Objection, I shall understand them so. Now why cannot the Bishop term these Positions Principles of Faith? He has prov'd them to have been decreed both by Popes and Councils; and if that be not e­nough to make any Point a Principle of Faith in their Church [Page 25] I know not where or how we shall find any Principles of Faith among them. He says indeed here (and in other places would insinuate the same) That they were never thus believ'd by any Catholick, nor never thus approv'd of by the Church. But that's only his word against the Bishop's Proof, and signifies nothing but to convince the World of the shameless Impudence of Popish Writers, who can even in Print, and in the face of a learned and inquiring People, affirm things contrary to direct Proofs, without ever so much as endeavouring to answer those Proofs. I see no reason therefore why the Bishop might not have term'd them Principles of Faith, if he had pleas'd, but that it was not at all material to the design of his Discourse so to do; 'twas enough for his purpose to prove them Principles of their Re­ligion, (which he has most clearly done) no matter whether they hold them necessary to Salvation or not; their very holding them as Principles of their Religion, does make that suf­ficiently dangerous to Princes, which was what the Bishop un­dertook to show. But let us suppose now, that the Bishop cannot term these Positions Principles of Faith, I'le engage it shall do his Title no more hurt, than 'tis plain it would his Book; indeed neither of them any at all. This Title (says he) That Popish Principles and Positions (when really believ'd) are destructive, &c. has confuted his whole Book. Why? Because he cannot term them (pray mark the Reason) Principles of Faith, &c. Can any unprejudic'd man now, whose Brains lie in their right place, perceive any sort of Consequence in this Argument? for my own part I can find none. But if there be any little sence at the bottom of this awkard blunder, it must be this, viz. a supposal, that the real Belief of any Prin­ciple of Religion makes it immediately a Principle of Faith, (i. e. in his sence of those Terms, a point necessary to Salvation) though it was not so before: which is certainly the most extra­vagant Whimsey that ever got hold of any mans Imagination, but our confus'd Compendianists; and if this be not his mean­ing, he talks Wild Irish, and is utterly unintelligible. I think I need not go about to confute such self-evident Foolery as this; the very Offer were an affront to the meanest Readers Understanding; there's hardly a School-boy, but knows that [Page 26] Christian Religion teaches many useful and true Doctrines, which are not necessary to Salvation, that yet are really believ'd by all those that are really of the Christian Religion. The Bi­shop's Title therefore is very proper, and very consistent with the design of his Book, and this man's exception to it most ab­furd and frivolous. 'Tis indeed not only proper, but charita­ble and modest; it implies the Bishop does not believe, that all who live in the external Communion of the Church of Rome, are either so disloyal to their Prince, or so unmerciful to their Friends and Neighbours, as those Doctrines he charges upon her, really and heartily assented to, must needs make them. He hopes possibly, that Humane Nature it self in some may check at their harshoesse and a particular sweetnesse of temper in others, very much allay the Malignancy of their Poyson, and hinder them from having their full effect upon the Under­standing, at least such an effect as is justly to be dreaded from them, when they seize upon the minds of Melancholy Recluses, or sink deep into the affections of her ignorant hot headed Devoto's, those Christian A Sect of Religious Murderers among the Turks. See an Ac­count of them in Tavernier's Six Voyages, pag. 199. Faquirs.

For the Promise he makes us at last, in imitation of the Pi­shop's, Compend. pag. 79. That he himself will turn Prote­stant, if the Bishop shews him but one single Pa­ragraph in all his Book, in relation to their dan­gerous Principles that he has not fully answer'd, &c. I will be so civil to him at parting, to let him know he need not be in any pain about it; for though the Condition of his Obli­gation be not in the least measure, nor is ever likely to be per­form'd, yet I can assure him there's no body intends to take any advantage of the Forfeiture. Though he has been so far from answering every single Paragraph of the Bishop's Book, that he has not in truth answer'd one single word of it to any purpose, as I have already show'd him; yet we will not be so unmerciful­ly rigorous to require a Person of his Form of Parts to turn Protestant, and force him to be a reasonable man, and a good Christian against his Conscience; no, no, let him stay [Page 27] where he is; we are not at all fond of his Company, and the Religion he has will best suit with his Wit.

His little Stroke of Common Place Arguments being now spent, he is at last reduc'd to Story telling, and the conclusion of his loose Ramble in this Paragraph against the Bishop is an in­credible scandalous Tale about a Friend of his, and Doctor Tay­lor, by which he represents that late famous and worthy Divine, not only as a Papist but a Knave, and implicitely throws the same dirt upon the Bishop; maliciously insinuating as if neither of them believ'd their own Books. His words are these; To conclude (says He) let me once more reminde his Lordship of his Promise, and then tell him (for I know he is a man of Parts) what Dr. Taylor said to a Friend of mine concerning his Dis­su [...]sive from Popery, viz. That though 'twere lik'd, yet 'twas but turning the Tables, and he could write a Book twice as good. This Story has the very complexion of a Popish Lye, all the Lineaments and Features of [...] Jesuitical Slander, 'tis a known Artifice of the Romish Agents, when they cannot deal with their Adversaries Reasons, to assault their Reputations by all kind of unjust Calumnies, and impudent Forgeries; and finding that the absurdness of their Tenets cannot be disguis'd to men, who have the use of their Faculties, their despaire to proselyte the Living, sends them among the Charnel Houses to make Con­verts of the dead. This is a trick they have perpetually put upon us ever since the Reformation; all Protestants of any note who dye either in their Acquaintance or Neighbourhood are sure to be of their Faith after their Deaths, though all their lives they abhorr'd it? the Dead are as constantly reported theirs, as if they had been Baptis'd in their Names, according to the cu­stome of the Primitive Corinthians, or as is they were to be reckon'd natural Escheats to that Church, which (contrary to the Scripture) prays for them; and most commonly the dying too, when they are no longer able to contradict their whispers, are hook'd within the Toyls of their Ʋniversality; no sooner does a man's Reason and his Sence begin to leave him, but presently the Catholick Religion lays claim to him; and indeed he is then most fit for that Communion, and a proper Tool for [Page 28] Priests and Jesuites to work their ends by, and Sanctify'd Rogues to make their Markets of. Wheresoever the Carcase is, there will these Roman Eagles be gathered together for their Prey. Protestants cannot dye quietly in their Beds, nor so much as rest in their Graves for the unwearied practises of the Popes Emissa­ries, and the endless Persecution of their false Tongues, who think it meritorious to Lie for the Propagation of their Faith, and a piece of Godly Zeal to defame their Neighbours for the Honour of their Church. But this is one of the small Games their ill successe has forc'd them to play at, rather than stick out, a despicable shift to keep up some little rest of Credit to their baffled Cause; and would they observe any sort of Bounds in the Spoyl and Havock they make of mens good Names, and their Invasions of the best and most lasting Pro­perty of Mankind in their Unchristian Violations of the Ho­nour of the Dead; Would these lawlesse Church Corsairs, these desperate Picaroons for Popery, robbe with modesty, and be sa­tisfy'd with making private men their Prize, we should perhaps content our selves to despise their little Pyracies, and laugh at their feeble Inroades. But when they endeavour to sink our strongest Men of War, and take our very Admirals in the Port; when they will needs have our chief Leaders to be their Followers, and our most famous Champions at the Wheels of their Triumphal Chariots, when like the Tartar's Scotch Captive, they will pretend to hold their Goalers Prisoners, and erect their ridiculous Trophies upon the Tombes of their Conquerours. When nothing will serve their turns but that Chillingworth him­self must be believ'd to dye a Papist, and Bishop King to be reconcil'd to their Church in Articulo mortis; when Dr. Taylor must now after his Death be thought a Friend to Popery, who in his life was both an Honour and a Defence to the Protestant Faith, their impudence is intollerable, and their Lyes grow mischievous; 'tis then necessary to expose the folly of their vain Pretences, and warne the people of their large Dispen­sations.

I shall now appeale to the Judgement of any unprejudic'd man, who has read Dr. Taylors Dissuasive from Popery, and if [Page 29] he thinks there is the least probability that the Author of that excellent Book should say he could write one twice as good against Protestants, or indeed any possibility that either He, or any man else, though never so willing, should be able to do it. I will hereafter believe that Jesuites can speak Truth, and that Popish Controvertists may be sometimes in the right, Dr. Tay­lors Relations, and those who did particularly know him (which I had not the happiness to do, otherwise than by his Reputa­tion and his Writings) are able; without doubt, to say much more upon this Subject than. I can pretend to, and I question not but some of them will take care in convenient time to vin­dicate his Memory from soe foule a scandall as that of being a conceal'd Papist, and of Writing what he did not think. I shall therefore leave it to them, whose proper concern it is, not having at present the means to make any enquiry my selfe into the businesse. In the mean time let us suppose this Story to be true, which, according to all appearance is next to impossi­ble, what is here pretended to have been said by Dr. Taylor, was I perceive, a thing said in private conversation, and proba­bly, in great trust and confidence of the person to whom 'twas spoke; how to Print this to the World, with Design to blast the Reputation of a Divine, after his Death, is such a piece of hone­sty and good nature, as is no where to be met with, but in the Moralls of a Jesuite, and the Christianity of a Romish Zealot.

For what is intended in this malicious Passage to reflect on the Bishop of Lincolne, as if he were as bad a Hypocrite, as Dr. Taylor is here represented to have been, and could have writ (if he had pleas'd) a better Book on the Papists side, 'tis so witless a Libel, such silly Slander, that I think there is no need of answering it to any, who have ever heard of his great Name, and he must have liv'd very remote from Company, who is in England a Stranger to that. His Life is a sufficient proof of the honesty of his Writings, and a full confutation of this, and all other Lyes, which the Instruments of Rome or Hell can invent to asperse him; in vain do they think to answer him, as they have done other men, by reflections on his Per­son, [Page 30] and to overthrow his Reasons by ridiculous Stories, and absurd Romance: these Argumenta ad Hominem, which are usu­ally their best Refuge, will miserably fail them here? they look like the frettings of a gaul'd Faction, and do but betray an impotent Spite; the Bishop of Lincolne's Honour is as much above the reach of their malice, as their deserts, and they may then hope to make the World think ill of him when they can so far cozen it as to be thought well off themselves. 'Tis true his Abilities are extraordinary enough to recommend almost any thing he would appear for, though never so unreasonable, and no doubt, he knows how to write Sophistries as well as to confute them; but we are satisfyed his Piety▪ will no more suf­fer him to plead a bad Cause than his Learning will let him prejudice a good one. Besides, let them not flatter them­selves, the Knavery of theirs is now so palpably obvious, their Religion has, by long and constant delays, grown so monstrou­sly deform'd, it has at last out-liv'd the help of Art. The Writings of their best Witts, and their most eminent Scholars have, in my Opinion, done it more hurt than good; when they have adorn'd it all they can with strain'd pieces of Rhetorick out of the Fathers, and daub'd it as much as possible with the forc'd Flatteries of Councils; when they have set it forth in the specious colours of pretended Union and Universality, and co­ver'd it all over with School-Distinction̄s, what can an indiffe­rent man conclude but that such vast paines would not, nor need not be taken, except it were to hide some notorious De­fects; such extream studyed Ornaments are evident proofes of great want of natural Beauty: in a word, this Spiritual Whore does but appeare the more Strumpet through the grosse Arti­fice of her Dress, and the thickness of her Paint.

I have now done with the Compendianist, and shall enlarge this Discourse no farther but to joyn with all good English men in offering up my hearty prayers to God Almighty, that He would still preserve the Protestant Religion among us, and con­tinue to render fruitlesse the contrary Endeavours and Contri­vances of wicked and unreasonable Men; fallacious Writers, and Traiterous Plotters; that He would keep the most knowing, and [Page 31] best civiliz'd Nation in the World from falling again under the Barbarism of Popery, from being Opprest by the Tyranny, and cumber'd with the Weight of this huge unweildy Mass of Non-sense, and Puppetry. This farce of Ceremonies, this Counterfeit Christianity, this Enemy to true Learning, and free Philosophy; this Discourager of Trade and usefull Indu­stry, this Troubler of agreeable Conversation, and reasonable Living, this Prohibiter of good Sense, and this Extinguisher of good Nature; in a word this Un-Christian, and this Immoral Religion, or rather this new Species of Irreligion, which by her Doctrines of dispensing with Oaths, and absolving from all manner of Crimes upon slight and ridiculous Penances, as well as by those the Bishop of Lincoln has convinc'd her of, has not only overthrown the Foundations of real Goodnesse and true Piety, but even of necessary Faith, and common Honesty, loosening the very Bands and Ligaments, and undermining the Props of Civil Communities.