ABout fourscore Years ago, in a time when there were such Apprehensions of the Papists as now there are, (and howsoever they are now, surely V. Cambdeni Annales. Anno 1586. concer­ning Babing­ton's Conspi­racy. then they were not without cause) some of your Predecessors, to palliate the matter, and to make their Go­vernors more secure of them; writ a Book to this effect, that Catholicks are to imploy no other Arms against their Prince but the Arms of Christians, viz. Tears, and Spiritual Means, daily Prayers, and Watchings and Fastings▪. So you begin,

We cannot say that you writ your Book for the same End as they did. But we do not like it, that you jump so toge­ther in the same Beginning.

[Page 2]Of the Cause of your Tears, we shall say more anon. Of the Quantity of them, you say very extravagantly, No­thing can equal the infinity of those we have shed. For you might have excepted those of the Protestants in Queen Maries dayes, or of them that suffered in the late Irish Re­bellion. You ought to have excepted the Fears of your Fa­bulous Purgatory: and yet those are said to be short of Infinity. But you Jesuites love to be Hyperbolical, whe­ther ranting or whining; as if that Religion which obli­ges you to damn all other Christians, had likewise forbid­den you to speak like other Men.

In the same Roman Style you commend your owne silence and patience. You boast that you have been the Founders of the Parliaments Priviledges, and all Antient Laws. Of the first, let every man believe as he sees cause. But the second we cannot allow, in either sense, whether you mean it of your selves, or of your Predecessors.

For as now in your Church, men are of two sorts, even so they were heretofore in this Realm. There were some that wholly minded the common interests of Christian Re­ligion and Civil Government. Others were Papalini, asser­ters and promoters of the Popes usurpations. They which acted in those first capacities were not more your Predeces­sors than Ours. They which acted in the other were truly and only Yours. You say,

[Page 3]'Tis very well. And yet Answer to Philanax, p. 85 some of you sung your Ve­nite Exultemus when you saw his Blessed Father upon the Scaffold. But what of that? since the Son is King, who is not glad So Argyle said Let them take all, since my Lord the King is come home in peace. that he is King? or whom would it not grieve to have his Loyalty called in Question?

Sir, he that is Loyal, and a man of Honor, has no cause to fear Death, double or single. For our Kings have alwayes Declared K James Pre­monition, p. 336. of his Works. that they put no man to death for Religion. Therefore if you Truly fear Death, it is for Treason. If you only pretend this, it is a Calumny. Either way you are no friend to the Government, for all your pretences to Honor and Loyalty.

How far it is true, that the Kings Murtherers began with you, we shall consider anon. But it seems you take the Liberty of bestowing that Character upon whom you please; that no man hereafter may dare move for the Execution of any Law against you, for fear of being said to continue the Me­thod of the Kings Murtherers.

As for any Vows that we have made to you, whatsoever they are, you are more sure of them than we can be of any that you make to us; for we have no Pope to dispense with them. Neither is it recorded in Story, V. I [...]. K. Charles his Te­stimony in his Letter to the Prince. that English Prote­stants ever joyn'd with the Enemies of their Nation.

'Tis a Calumny of yours to call those things Calum­nies, [Page 4] which are true, and which you cannot Deny without such a Presumption as we should much admire in you if it were not so very Ordinary. Concerning your Principles, where should we look for them, but in your Councils, your Decretals, and the Books of your Divines? In each of these we are taught, that the Pope has a Power to depose Kings, and to discharge Subjects from their Allegiance: which Doctrines are utterly inconsistent with Government: for whosoever believes them, no Prince can be secure of him. But whosoever is a Papist, is bound to believe them. And he that has imbib'd this Faith, may well be thought ever prone to Rebellion.

The Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent III. ex­presly Conc. Lateran. IV. c. 3. Ordains, that in case any Prince be a favourer of Hereticks, after admonition given, The Pope shall discharge his Subjects from their Allegiance, and shall give away his King­dom to some Catholick, that may root out those Hereticks, and possess his Kingdom without contradiction. 'Tis observable, that this Pope was himself a deposer of Kings, namely of John King of England, and of Otho IV. the Emperor; and also that this Council which made Rebellion a Duty, was the first that made Transubstantiation an Article of Faith.

Next for the Bulls and Decrees of your Popes, which according to Bellarmine are sufficient to make that to be sin Bellarm. in Barclaium c. 31. which is not sin, or not to be sin which is sin: it would be tedi­ous to instance in all that could be produc'd to this pur­pose.

From Gregory VII. downward▪ such a Trade was driven of deposing Kings, that no weak Prince could wear his Crown, but at the Pope's Courtesie. And that it might never be otherwise, Pope Boniface VIII. declares it for Law in these words: Extrav. de Majoritate & O [...]ed. c. 1. Unam sanctam We say, and Define, and Pronounce, that it is absolutely Necessary to salvation, for every humane Crea­ture to be subject to the Bishop of Rome: Which Oracle is thus interpreted by Bertrand; Every humane 1 Pet. 2. 13. [...]. [...]ulg. Lat. Om­ [...] humanae [...]. Creature, ( i. e.) Every Magistrate, Must be subject, &c. (i. e.) Must sub­mit himself to be deposed, when the Pope thinks fit. And that the Gloss doth not injure the Text, it appears by the [Page 5] Tenor of the Decree; especially by those words about the middle of it, that the Spiritual Power▪ is to order the Worldly Power, and to Judge, it if it be not as it ought; according to that in Jeremy, I have set thee over Nations and over Kingdoms, Jer. 1. 10. &c. In which suppletive, &c. these words are wound up; To root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant. All which powers this Law-giver of yours endeavoured himself to exercise. He endeavour'd, saith Plat. in Vit. Bonf. VIII. Platina, to give and take away Kingdoms, to expell men, and to restore them at his pleasure.

Agreeably to this doctrine and practice your great Cano­nist Lanc. in Tem­ploomn. Judic. l. 2. c. 1. Sect. 4 Lancelottus teaches you, That the Pope may depose Kings and Emperors, and transfer their Kingdoms and Empires from one Line to another. Which wholsome Doctrine, no doubt, as well as the rest of his Book, Pope Pius IV. has made Ib. in Traef. Authentick by his unerring Approbation.

Lastly for your Divines, They have generally own'd it; and many of them have written large Books in defence of it. We do not tell you this as news, for your Clergy-men know it already; but that your Laity may not be ignorant of it, we shall quote them some few of the greatest Do­ctors of your Church in this Age. And we shall leave it upon you to shew them, when and where they were con­demned, what Justice has been executed on the Persons, what Index Expurgatorius has censur'd the Writings of these Authors. Nay, if you deal honestly, you cannot but confess, that their Works are generally approved, and that their Persons are had in admiration among you that are the guides of the Lay-mens Consciences.

We pass over the gross things of Mariana's Book▪; be­cause, they which once licens'd it for love of the Doctrine; have since condemned it, for fear of their King's heavy Displeasure.

But pray Sir, who condemned your Cardinals, Bellarmine Bell. de Rom. Pont. l 5. c. 8. Baron. Anno 800. Sect. 10. and Baronius? who teach you, that the Pope may do with any King, as Jehoiada did with Athalia; that is, he may deprive him first of his Kingdom, and then of his Life. Bellar­mine indeed elsewhere expresses it more like a Jesuite, and a [Page 6] man of distinctions, in these words; The Pope does not al­low Bell. in Bar claium c. 3. you not to obey your King, but he makes him that was your King to be not your King; as who should say, when the Pope has done His part, then you are free to do Yours.

Again, who condemn'd your great School-Men, Suarez Suar. in Reg. M. B. l. 6. c. 4. Sect. 20. and Valentia? of whom the one writes against his Majesties Grand-Father, that a King, Canonically Excommunicated, may be deposed or killed by any man whatsoever: the other says, Greg. de Val. Tom. 3. in Thomam dis. 1. q. 12. p. 2. [...]hilopater. p. 149. that an Heretical Prince may, by the Pope's sentence, be depriv'd of his life, much more of his Estate, and of all Su­periority over others.

Nay, who has condemned our Country-man Parsons, or Cresswel? (for the high-fliers of Popery have been those of our own Nation) by whom this is laid down as a Conclu­sion of the whole School of Divines and Canonists, and declar'd to be Certain, and of Faith; that any Christian Prince what­soever, that shall manifestly swerve from the Catholick Religion, and endeavour to draw off others, does immediately fall from all Power and Dignity, &c. and that, even before any Sentence of the Pope is pronounced against him; and that all his Subjects whatsoever are free from all obligation of any Oath of Obedience which they have made to him as their lawful Prince; and that they may and ought (if they be strong enough) to eject such a one from the Government of Christians, as an Apostate, an Here­tick, a deserter of Christ, and an enemy of his Common­wealth, &c.

Cardinal Perron went not altogether so high; but yet he held to the Roman Catholick Principle, that Kings may be deposed by the Pope when he sees cause. He seemed to be of an­other opinion while Henry IV. was alive: but when He was dead, and a Child was in the Throne, then he ven­tur'd to declare this publickly in his Oration Jan. 15. 1615 on behalf of the whole Clergy of France. Note that the Pope sent him thanks for it; & King James writ in answer to it, that solid Defence of the Right of Kings He maintained that this was the current Doctrine in France till the time of Calvin: and for the contrary Doctrine, viz That Kings are not deposable by the Pope, Rossaeus Ross. p. 85. calls it the Paradox of the Lutherans; Perron calls it a Doctrine that breeds Schisms: a gate that leads into all Heresie; and to be held in so high a degree of detestation, [Page 7] that rather then yield to it, he and his fellow-Bishops would chuse to burn at a Stake.

But how has this Doctrine taken among the Papists in our Kings Dominions? it has not taken with some of them: either because you have not thought it seasonable for you to instruct them in it (for Doctrines of this sort are then only proper to be Inculcated, when they may do Execution) or else because your Instruction has been over rul'd by some better Principle; as we doubt not there have always been some of your Church, in whose generous breasts the English man has been too strong for the Papist. But yet this Doctrine has taken with others; and many of them have practised according to it, as we shall shew you hereafter; and many more would have been practising, if there had not been something to hinder them or deterr them. For 'tis allowed by your Divines, as a very good Reason, for Ca­tholicks to omit the Duty of Rebellion, if they are not strong [...]nough to go through with it. So Bannez excuses our Eng­lish Catholicks, and so Bellarmin Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 5. c. 7. does the Primitive Chri­stians: Nay your Watsons Quodlibets, p. 255, and 295, &c. out of Bannez, Valen­tia, and Par­sons. Casuists say, If there be any notable dan­ger of Death or Ruin, without which you cannot perform it, that then you are not bound to endeavour it. Long may these Good Reasons continue; for if these were remov'd, we know not how far we may trust you. For one of your Brethren, another poisoner of the people, has been so forward already, since His Majesties Restauration, as to de­clare in Print, that in case your Pope should take upon him to Deprive our King, he would not meddle between them. The Exhor­tation in the afternoon, p. 22. I leave that Question, saith he, to be decided by the two Su­pream Powers, the Pope, and the King, when occasion shall be for it.

Sir, we know not how to cure your wonder, but by shew­ing you, 'tis unreasonable. For you can it a Miracle, that men judge according to good Evidence. Who doubts less [Page 8] of the dangerousness of your Principles and Practices, than they that have Read most, and had most Experience of them? We can give you no greater instance, than in King James of blessed Memory, who was no stranger to you either way, and this is his judgment of you: That as on the one part, many 1. His speech in Parlia­ment. p 504. of his Works. honest [...]en s [...]d [...]ced with some Errors of Po [...]ery, may yet remain go [...]d and fait [...]ful Subjects: So on the other part, none of those that truly know and believe [...]he whole grounds and School-conclu­sions of [...]heir Doctrines, can ever prove either go [...]d Christians or good Subjects.

But pray Sir, when was it that you govern'd the civiliz'd World? For the Eastern and Southern Churches never own'd your Government; nor yet the Western, while Learning flourished: But when Barbarity had over-run it, then Popery grew up by degrees, and made it more Barba­rous both in Ignorance and in Cruelty. Then came in those Doctrines of Transubstantiation, &c. Then came in those Papal Usurpations, &c. which the Wo [...]ld, being again Civi­liz'd, hath partly thrown off, and partly reduced into more tolerable terms.

The Reigns of those Kings whom you speak of, were in those dark times; when all Goodness declin'd, and Cor­ruptions were daily growing upon us. Richard the First, be­ing Daniel's Hist. Ric. I. in fin. told he had three wicked Daughters, Pride, Covetous­ness, and Leachery, said he could not Match them better than among your Templers, Fathers, and Friars. Edward the First out-law'd the whole Clergy of this Realm, for refu­sing [Page 9] to pay the King any Taxes, because the Pope had for­bidden Walsingham. Edw. I. 1298. them to do it. And both those other Princes whom you mention, made Laws against his Usurpations. Edward the Third made a notable one of this kind, by advice of 25. E. 3. Vide Statute of Provisors. that very Parliament, in which he enacted his Laws against Treason. And certainly, Henry the Second was more vex'd with Becket, than ever Henry V. feared Oldcastle. We doubt not, those Kings had many good Subjects, and our King hath some better than you seem to be. But they dif­fered not in Religion, as you do from ours: And yet then, your Faction was always encroaching where it was suffe­red, and dangerous where it was opposed.

Did not your Pope force King John to do him homage for England? Did he not wrestle with Edward I. Mat. Westm. 1301. for the So­vereignty of Scotland? Hath he not often laid claim to the Kingdom of Ireland? If the old Gentleman in a pet should go to turn out his Tenant, what would our King have left, when these are disposed of?

The French King will believe what he pleases, but not all that you say of him. For he cannot but know, that the Pope gave away that Kingdom from some of his Predeces­sors; and maintained War in it against his Grandfather, till he brought him to his terms. And why hath not His Holi­ness dealt so with him that now is? partly for the sake of his Religion; but chiefly for fear of a Storm, lest his Coin should do that which Lewis the Twelfth's only threatned in the In­scription Thu. Hist. l. 1. of it, PERDAM BABYLONIS NOMEN.

For the Austrian Princes that are so link'd to the Pope▪ [Page 10] and whose Subjects are all Papists; you suggest a mad way The Spaniard holds the Kingdoms of Navar and of Naples, and Sicily, only by the Popes gift; by which he should have Ireland too, and England, but that the right Heir keeps them from him. to secure themselves by firing their Countrey about their ears.

But what is this to England? where, since the exclusion of that trash, which you call the Catholick Faith, the King and the greatest part of his People are no Papists, and have had so much trouble and danger for it from them that are. May not Reason and Experience teach us to fear, that having to do with the same kind of Adversaries, we may still have some troublesome and dangerous Enemies?

No, we have none to fear but our selves, if we may believe you. For, say you,

Pray Sir, what may that be? For you have murthered Kings, and them of your own Religion, four or five in this Realm since the Conquest (not to speak of those Numbers elsewhere.) But that was in the growing Age of Popery. In latter times, have you so soon forgot our Kings Grand-Father, Henry IV. murthered by Ravilliac? or his Predeces­for Henry III. murthered by Fryar Clement? and the Peo­ple you have kill'd up by whole Families and Townships? Witness England, Ireland, France, Piedmont, which you may hear of elsewhere. These things have been done by Papists broad awake; and what must that be which the wickedst of them never dreamt of?

First, you tell us of the Queen of Scots being put to Death Walsingham, Hist. Edw. I. 1306. in Queen Elizabeths Reign. It was by the same colour of right, we suppose, that Wallis suffered in Edward the First's Reign, namely of that Sovereignty that our Princes chal­lenged [Page 11] over Scotland. But Edward I. was ere while a laud­able Papist; and Queen Elizabeth, for all this, might be a ve­ry good P [...]otestant. Sure we are, that King James and King Charles, who were nearest concerned in this matter, never im­puted the Fault of it to her Religion.

Your other instance is, of that most execrable Murther, committed on the best of Kings, by his own Subjects, and by such as you say, would fain be called Pro [...]estants. Sir, we would fain be called Christians, and Members of the Ca­tholick Church: would you take it well of a Turk, that should therefore charge our faults upon you? but you do worse than a Turk, in charging these mens faults upon us. They were neither then nor since of our Communion; but that blessed Prince was, whom they murther'd. He decla­red upon the Scaffold, I dye a Christian, according to the pro­fession of the Church of England, as I found it left me by my Fa­ther. He charged the Princess Elizabeth, not to grieve, and torment her self for him; for that would be a glo [...]ious Death which he should dye, it being for the Laws and Liberties of this Land, and for maintaining the true Protestant Religion. He died with some Care not to leave you this advantage by his Death; as it appears by these words of his last Letter to His Majesty that now is. The scandal of the late Troubles which some may Letter to the Prince. object and urge to you against the Protestant Religion established in England, is easily answered to them or your own thoughts in this, that scarce any one who hath been a beginner or an active prosecutor of this late War against the Church, the Laws, and Mee, either was or is a true lover, embracer, or practicer of the Protestant Religion established in England; which neither gives such Rules, nor ever before set such Examples.

But do you indeed know, who were the Authors of this last [Page 12] abomination? Pray Sir be plain with us, for in these doubt­ful words, there seems to be more truth than every man is aware of. The Rebellion that led to it, began we know in Scotland, where the design of it was first laid by V L'Estrange 1639. in Ha­bernfields Re­lation. Cardi­nal Richelien His Majesties Answer to the Reasons for no Ad­dress. irreconcileable Enemy. Then it broke out in Ireland, where it was blest with His Holiness's Letters, and assisted by his Nuntio, whom he sent pur­posely to attend the Fire there. Lastly here in England, you did your parts to unsettle the People and gave them need­less occasions of jealousie, which the vigilant Phanaticks made use of, to bring us all into War and Confusion.

Both in England and Scotland, the special Tools that they wrought with, were borrowed out of your Shops.

It was His Majesties own Observat on (by which you may guess whose spawn they were) Their Maxims, saith he, Large Decla­ration con­cerning the tumults in Scotland, p. 3. were the same with the Jesuites; their Preachers Sermons were delivered in the very phrase of Becanus, Scioppius, and Eudae­mon Johannes; their poor Arguments, which they delivered in their seditious Pamphlets printed or written, were taken almost verbatim out of Bellarmin and Suarez.

In Ireland, where you durst do it, you imploy'd Iron and Steel against him; with which you might as well have preserved him, if you had pleased; but you denyed to do that, (as he tell us) Answer to the Reasons for the Votes of no Address only upon account of Religion. Then fol­lowed the accursed Fact it self, agreed to in the Coun­cils of your Answer to Philanax, p. 59 Clergy, contriv'd and executed by the Phana­ticks. In vain did the poor Royallist strive against it, for what could he do? when two such streams met against him; of which the deepest was that which came from Rome, where the false Fisherman open'd all his Flood-gates, to over­whelm us with those troubles, which, for the advantage of his trade, he had often before endeavoured, but could ne­ver prevail till now to send them pouring in upon us.

That many Gentlemen of your Church were not of your Party, we do willingly acknowledge; and that some of them in that critical day of Danger, did the King very eminent Service. But so did Protestants too; therefore you cannot ascribe this to Your Religion. Nor does it seem reasonable, that to requite particular persons for their service, we should abandon those Laws which may secure the publick against as great a danger.

To question his Life that had freely exposed it for our Sovereigns, were too great a Barbarity for any Christians but of your Sect, or any Age but Queen Maries dayes; Dolemans Conference of Succession, part 2. p. 237. for then Sir Nicholas Throgmorton was indeed so dealt with; but we do not more detest those times than such examples. And we know that His Majesty, without any trespass on his Laws, may protect and reward those persons whom he judgeth deserving it; as well as his Royal Predecessors did, in whose Reigns the penal Laws were made.

Pray be you as favourable to the stigmatized Man, (whom sure you are not angry with for his Offence against King and Church, whatsoever you say;) and if he be now a promoter of any thing that displeaseth you, bear with him, as His Majesty doth; for whom he lately did his utmost against Phanaticks toward the bringing of him in: and he would not willingly live to see the Pope turn him out again.

For the Regicides, be as severe with them as you please; only beware how you tax His Majesty's Mercy, for fear you may have need of it.

[Page 14]Your fawning upon the Parliament, and commending of your selves, we pass over as things of course. And we equal­ly believe you now, as you did the Phanaticks heretofore, when they called us Papists; or as we did you e'rewhile, when you called them Protestants. For pray Sir, what did they to be called Protestants? or what did we to be judged Popishly Affected? And if all Papists, as you say, were deemed Cavaliers; we hope some of them have had the grace to be ashamed of it. In Ireland there were whole Armies of Irish and English, that fought against His Majesty, solely upon the account of your Religion. In England it is true, some came in voluntarily to assist him; but many more of you were Second Mo­derator, p. 43. hunted into his Garrisons, by them that knew you would bring him little help and much hatred. And of those that fought for him, as long as his Fortune stood; when that once declined, a great part, even of them, fell from him. From that time forward, you that were, always, all, deemed Cavaliers, where were you? In all those weak Ef­forts 1647, 1656, 1659. of gasping Loyalty, what did you? You complied, and flattered, and gave sugar'd words to the Rebels then, as you do to the Royallists now. You addrest your Petitions First Mode­rator, p. 59. to the Supream Authority of this Nation the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England You affirmed Second Mo­derator, p. 41. V. Answer to Philanax, p. 63. of Father Bret.. that you had gene­rally taken, and punctually kept the Ingagement. You promi­sed, that if you might but enjoy your Religion First Mode­rator, p. 31. you would be the most quiet and useful Subjects in England. You prov'd it in these words. First Mode­rator. p. 36. The Papists of England would be bound by their own Interest (the strongest obligation amongst wise men) to live peaceably and thankfully in the private exercise of their Consciences; and becoming gainers by such compassions, they could not so reasonably be distrusted, as the Prelatick Party that were losers. You prov'd it more amply by real Testimonies; which we have no pleasure in remembring, and you would have less in hearing of them. These things were too lately done to be talk't of.

If after all this said and done for your own Vindication, you were still deemed Cavaliers, the more was your wrong. But who could help it? all the right we can do you, is, Not to believe it.

As for Religion, we agree with you in all that is truly Ca­tholick: We differ from you only in not admitting your In­novations. And whether justly, we say also, let the last day Judge. Your Converse, Breeding, &c. we heartily respect as far as 'tis English. But we suspect every thing that Leans toward a Forreign Jurisdiction. And we would be loth, by our kindness to those things wherein we agree with you, to be drawn into the danger of those things in which we differ from you.

By that flam of your having twice converted England from Paganism, sure you mean that we in this Land have been twice converted by persons sent to us from Rome. Which you will never perswade any one to believe, that dares trust himself to taste of Church-History without one of your Fa­thers chewing it for him. But, supposing this to be true, pray what would you infer from it? that because we recei­ved good from the Primitive Christians of that place, there­fore we should lay our selves open to receive any evil that may happen to us from their degenerous Successors.

[Page 16]What is generally said of the Popish Persecutions, is also generally believed. But Sir, you answer it deceitfully. For you tell us of the manner; first, of those Countries where the Name of Protestant is unknown: and next, of those Countries where liberty is given: but you slip over a third sort, namely, of those where the Name of Protestant is well known, and yet no Liberty is given. Pray what Liberty have the Protestants in Flanders? we are told they have none: and yet the Name of them is very well known there. The like may be said of divers other Countries: Nay in Eng­land, while it was Yours, did you give any Liberty at all? yet the Name of Protestant was very well known here, and was sufficient for the burning of any one that was known by it. But you say, you will only instance France for all. Very wise­ly resolved: for it would not have been for your credit to instance any other. In France then, whatsoever Liberty the Protestants enjoy, it is by vertue of their Edicts: which how they were obtained, we shall have occasion to mind K. James De­fence of the Right of Kings p. 479, 480. you; and how they are observed, let the poor Hugonots tell you. But if they were observed to the full; should we therefore grant You that Liberty which is against Law? be­cause they are allow'd that which you say is not against Law.

In Holland, the Papists may have some reason to com­plain, if their Masters allow them no more Liberty than you speak of. For, it was chiefly by their hands, that the Spanish yoak was thrown off: which, on the contrary, our Papists were so fond of, that for divers years together, we had much ado to keep them from pulling it on upon our necks.

The French Massacre, which you next speak of, was a thing of so horrid a Cruelty, that, as Thuanus Thu. Hist. l, 53. tells us, [Page 17] Considering-men, having turn'd over the Annals of the Nations, could find no example of the like in all Antiquity. Thu. Hist. l. 52. It was cloak'd over with shews of the greatest Amity in the world; namely of a Marriage between the Houses of Valois and Bourbon; to which all the chief of the Protestants were most lovingly invited. There, after the Jollity of Mirth, and caresles of Entertainment, in the dead-time of the night, the whole City was in Arms about them; they fell upon all the Protestants Houses and Lodgings; they butchered them without distinction, Men, Women and Children, till the Channels ran down with Blood into the River: And scarce a Protestant was left alive, except the Guignard, in his Oration said, It was ae great error that they had not cut the Basilick vein. Bridegroom and the Prince of Conde; who turned Papists to escape their hands, and yet they could not escape them; the one being poisoned, and the other stabb'd by men of your Religion. This hellish Stratagem, you say, was condemned as wicked by Catholick Writers. It was likewise extoll'd as glorious by Catholick Writers. But pray Sir, what think you of it? you are bashful in company, but one may guess at your meaning. First, you say it was a Cabinet-Plot: a fine soft word, for the butchering▪ Id. l. 53. of 30000 persons. Next, in answer to them that call it murther, you seem to blame it as a thing done to Halves; for what else can you mean, by cal­ling it an ill-machinated Destruction? Lastly, whatsoever it was, that which drew it upon them, you say, was their Re­bellion (let their Faith have been what it would.) Nay Sir, it was their Faith (let their Obedience have been what it would.) For neither had that King better Subjects than those which were Massacred; nor had his Successor erranter Re­bels than those that did Massacre them. Brave Coligni was the first murthered; and his Head was sent to Rome, while his Body (according to his own ominous Thu. Hist. l. 52. saith, that being fore­warn'd of the Plot, & advi­sed to stand upon his Guard; He wisht rather to have his Body drag'd, &c. than to see any more Civil Wars in Franc. wish) was man­gled and dragged about the Streets of Paris. The Duke of Guise was chief of the murtherers; whose factious Autho­rity, as you sweetly style it, was as black a Rebellion as ever that Kingdom saw. But to end this Question, whether these men were massacred for Protestant Religion, or for Re­bellion; let us take judges between us: for possibly, We [Page 18] may be partial for the one, and You for the other.

First, of Rebellion, a King should be the most compe­tent Judge: hear therefore what King James saith, who li­ved in the fresh memory of those dayes. I could never yet Defence of the right of Kings, in his Works, p. 479, 480. learn (saith he) by any good and true Intelligence, that in France, those of the Religion took Arms against their King. In the first Civil Wars they stood only upon their Guard, they stood only to their lawful Wards, and Locks of Defence. They armed not, nor took the Field, before they were pursued with Fire & Sword, burnt up and slaughtered. Besides, Religion was neither the root nor the rinde of those intestine Troubles. The true ground of the Quarrel was this; during the Minority of King Francis II. the Protestants of France were a refuge and succor to the Princes of the Blood, when they were kept from the King's Presence, and by the Power of their Enemies were no better than plainly driven and chased from the Court. I mean the Grandfathers of the King now Reigning, and of the Prince of Conde, when they had no place of safe Retreat. In regard of which worthy and honora­ble Service, it may seem the French King hath reason to have the Protestants in his gracious remembrance. With other Com­motion or Insurrection the Protestants are not justly to be char­ged. Certain it is, that King Henry III, &c. by their good Service was delivered from a most extream & eminent peril of his Life, &c. they never abandoned that Henry III. nor IV. in all the heat of Revolts and Rebellions raised by the Pope, and the more part of the Clergy, &c.

Then of Religion, since you will allow none but the Pope to be Judge, let us hear his Judgment from Thuanus, who was a Roman Catholick, and a most authentick Historian. Thu. Hist. l. 53. He tells us, the Pope had an account of the Massacre from his Legate at Paris, that he read his Letter in the Consi­story of Cardinals, that there it was decreed that they should go directly to St. Marks, and there solemnly give thanks to Almighty God for so great a blessing conferred upon the Roman See, and the Christian World. That soon after a Jubilee should be publisht through the whole Christian World, and these causes were exprest for it, To give thanks to God for destroying in France the Enemies of the Truth, and of the [Page 19] Church, &c. In the Evening, the Guns were fired at St. Angelo, and Bonefires were made, and nothing was omitted of all those things that use to be performed in the greatest Victories of the Church. Some dayes after, there was a Pro­cession to St. Lewis, with the greatest resort of Nobility and People. First went the Bishops and Cardinals, then the Switzers, then the Ambassadors of Kings and Princes: then under a Canopy, went His Holiness Himself, with the Emperor's Ambassador bearing up his Train for him, &c. Over the Church-Door was an Inscription set up, in which the Cardinal of Lorain, in the name of the King of France, congratulated his Holiness, and the Colledge of Cardinals, &c. for the plainly stupendious effects, and alto­gether incredible events, of their Councils given him, and of their Assistances sent him, and of their twelve Years Wishes and Pray­ers. Soon after, the Pope sent Cardinal Ursin in his name, to congratulate the King of France, who in his Journey through the Cities, highly commended the Faith of those Citizens that had to do in the Massacre; and distributed his Holiness's blessings amongst them. And at Paris, being to perswade the reception of the Council of Trent, he en­deavoured it with this Argument, That the memory of the late Action, to be magnified in all ages, as conducing to the Glo­ry of God, and the Dignity of the Holy Roman Church, might be as it were sealed by the Approbation of the Holy Synod: for that so it would be manifest to all men that now are, or hereafter shall be, that the King consented to the destructi­on of so many lives, not out of hatred or revenge, or sense of any injury of his own, but out of an ardent desire to propagate the Glory of God. That, what could not be expected whilst the Faction of Protestants stood, now since they were taken away, the Catholick Apostolick Roman Religion which by the Synod of Trent is cleared from the venom of the Sectaries, might be established without Controversie, and without Exception, through all the Provinces of the French Dominion.

Well spoken, worthy Head of the Church! we will take thy Judgment about cutting of throats at any [Page 20] time; thou dost not mince the matter, as this English limb of thee doth: who yet is thus far to be commended; that since he durst not say of it as he desir'd, for fear of provo­king us, yet he would not call it as it deserved, for fear of too much contradicting thee.

The Duke of Guise and his Brother, were not killed for their Religion; for they were killed by Henry III. of France. one of the same Religion, and one that was bent against the Protestants as much as they. Only because he spared the blood of the Protestants your Zealots hated him; and so much the more, because a Protestant Henry IV. being his Heir, he would not declare him uncapable of the Succession. For these causes, by the Popes consent, these Guises (whom he called the Maccabes Thu. Hist. l. 91. of the Church) entred into an Holy League against their King; and called in the Succors of Spain and Savoy, which they paid for with the Rights of the Crown; they main­tained a sharp War against him, and did all that was in their power to deprive him of his Kingdom and Life. Where­upon that jealous Prince (as you favourably Rossaeus, one of your Pre­decessors, calls him a thou­sand times worse than Mahomet, p. 170. & saith, From the begin­ning of the world, no Na­tion or State e­ver endured such a Tyrant, p. 171. call him) for his own preservation, was urged to deal with them, as they had dealt with the Protestants; from whose case, this of the Guises is so vastly different, that one would wonder why you should mention it.

But since you have led us thus far out of the way, let us invite you a little farther. The Pope Excommunicated the King for this Action, and granted 9 Years of true In­dulgence to any of his Subjects that would bear Arms against him; and foretold, Sixtus [...]. quoted his own Predi­ction in his Oration that follows. (as a Pope might do without A­strology) that e're long he should come to a fearful Death. The Subjects took Arms, and earned the Indulgence. A Friar took his Knife, and fulfilled the Prediction; by ripping up those Bowels that were always most tenderly affected with kindness to the Monkish Orders. But what joy was there [Page 21] at Rome for this! as if the news of another Massacre had come to Town, one would think so, by the Popes Oration Printed at Paris, 1589, by the Printers of the Holy League, and approved by the Sorbon. to his Cardinals: in which he sets forth this work of God (the Kings Murther) for its wonderfulness to be compared with Christs Incarnation and Resurrection. And the Friars Ver­tue, and Courage, and fervent Love of God, he prefers before that of Eleazar in the Maccabees, or of Judith kil­ling Holofernes: and the murthered King (who had profest himself to dye in the Faith of the Roman Catholick Aposto­lick Church) he declared to have died in the Sin against the Holy Ghost. Pray Sir, may it not well be said, that Papists cannot live without persecuting Protestants? when we see a Po­pish King stabb'd and damned for not persecuting them e­nough, or for doing the work of the Lord negligently.

You say, if this were true, then this Hanghty Monarch would soon destroy his Hugonots now. No such consequence, Sir, for he may persecute them, and not destroy them; he may destroy them, but not so soon. Princes K. James works, p. 483. use to go their own pace, whilst they are upon their legs; but if any mis­fortune throws them upon all four, then the Pope gets up and rides them what pace he pleaseth. Nor is this Mo­narch yet so Catholick as Charlemain was; if he were, he Canon Agatho Dist. 63. would do as Charlemain did. He would be Patron of all the Bishopricks in his Empire, even of Rome it self, if it were there. He would make the Pope himself know the [Page 22] distance between a Prelate and an Emperor. He would Fauchet. Anno 801. c. 10. that the Pope ador'd him, not he the Pope. maintain the Rights of his Crown; and not chop Logick about Gallicane Priviledges, which you say, like a sly Jesuite, that perchance he may lawfully do. He would call a Council when he pleased, to separate Errors from the Faith; as Charlemain himself called a Council Council of Frankford, An. 794. against Image-Wor­ship, which was then creeping into the Church. This were a good way of destroying the Hugonots, by taking away all causes of strife amongst Christians. By any other way than this he cannot destroy them, without the violation of his Laws: which, as they are the only Forces and Towers, where­by Subjects ought to be secured against their King; so, since he is pleased to allow them no other, these Laws, backt with his puissance, are forces enough to secure them against their fellow-Subjects.

We cannot pass this Paragraph, without observing your Jesuitical ingenuity; how you slight those favours that you have; how you complain of those hardships that you have not; and how you insult over the poor Hugonots, by comparing with them, who generally would mend their condition by changing with you. Pray Sir, do not Popish-Peers sit in our English Parliaments, as well as Protestants in the French? or have you not as free access to our Kings Brother, as they have to theirs? or would you have his Highness to Catechise, as the Abbot had the Duke of Glo­cester? perhaps that you would have. Otherwise we know nothing but His Highness's Wisdom, and care of his Con­science, that guards him from you.

Of the Laws you complain hideously, Worthy Patriots con­sider our hardship. And yet, those very Laws you complain of, you never knew executed in your life; and you tell us soon after, that you know they never will be.

For what cause then were they enacted? Plainly for this cause, to guard the lives of our Princes against your traite­rous practices.

[Page 23]Your Misdemeanors! We cry you mercy, if they were no more; but that comes next to be argued, Whether they were Misdemeanors or Treasons?

Under Queen Elizabeth, you wish your Party had more patience; and we think they Needed none; for in the first ten Years of her Reign they had no Business for it. In all that space of time, which was twice as long as Queen Maries Reign, though it was fresh in memory what the Papists had done, yet not one of them suffered Death: till the Nor­thern Philopater. p. 103. Rebellion: which being raised against her, only up­on the account of her Religion; it appears that She was the persecuted person: She had the occasion for Patience; and you would have wished Them more Loyalty, if any such thing had been in your thoughts. But perhaps you wish they had so much patience, as not to have discovered their design before it was fully ripe for execution. Not un­like. For it appears, you account Rebellion no fault; by this, that you say, you excuse not their faults, and yet you do excuse their Rebellion.

You excuse them, by saying, it was a very hard Question, whether the Right of the Crown lay in her, Ross. p. 223. saith of them that were pre­tended to die for your Reli­gion, Where was it ever heard that they denied her to have been the lawful Queen. or in the Queen of Scots; for that many thought Queen Elizabeth Illegitimate. Pray Sir, who Thought it? or when arose that Question? The Arch-Bishop of York though a Papist, in his Speech at the publishing of Queen Maries Death, said, No man could doubt of the justness of the Lady Elizabeths Title to the Succession. The whole King­dom received her, and owned her as Queen, more ge­nerally and freely than eyer they did Queen Mary. The [Page 24] Neighbour Kings of Spain and France, and the Emperor offered Philip II. and Henry III. for themselves, & the Emperor Maximilian for his Brother Charles. Marriage to her, in hopes to have got the Crown by her. The Queen of Scots her self did acknowledge her, and claimed nothing more than to be Heir to her, and so did King James that was her Successor. So that whoso­ever opposed Queen Elizabeths Right, if they were Eng­lish, 'cis apparent they were Rebels; and if they were Pa­pists, we may guess what led them to it For the first that Questioned her Title, was Pope Council of Trent. l. 5. An: 1558. Paul IV. who would not ac­knowledge her for sundry causes; the chief that he alledg­ed, were these: First, Because this Kingdom is a Fee of the Pa­pacy, and it was audaciously done of her to assume it without his leave. The second was, because she was Illegitimate: for if her Fathers Marriage were good, the Pope must let down his Mill. But after all this, his Successor Pius IV In his Letter by Parpaglia, dated 1560. May 5. did own her, and would have done any thing for her, so she would have owned him. Which because she would not, the next Pope Pius V. issued out his Bull Dated 1570. Feb. 25. against her, and deposed her; not for Bastardy See the Bull it self, there is not the least mention of Bastardy in it. but for Heresie; that is, for being a Protestant; for which Heresie it was, that the Northern men Rebelled against her, and many more of her Subjects disowned her: and some or other were every foot plotting how to take away her life.

True it is, that some of these pretended to do it in favour of the Queen of Scots. But how if that Queen had not been a Catholick? or Queen Elizabeth had not Been thought Illegitimate? would a legitimate Protestant have been so con­tended for? or would a Popish Bastard have been rejected by them?

Pope Gregory XIII. had occasion to consider this. For his Holiness had a Bastard James Buon­compagno. of his own to provide for, and another Don John. of the Emperors; no doubt good Catholicks both of them. To one he gave the Kingdom of Ireland, and set out Stukely Whom his Holiness had created Mar­quess of Lem­ster, Earl of Wexford, &c. Thu. Hist. l. 64. with Forces to win it for him. To the other he gave the Kingdom of England, and gave him leave to win it for himself. But what was all this to the thrice Noble Queen of Scots? Possibly she might have been pre­ferred to have married one of the rwo? but then it must [Page 25] have been expresly with this condition, That her Son King James (who was a Heretick) should have nothing to do with the Succession.

When their bubbles were broken, and she was dead, all her Right descended to King James, who being as little to the Pope's mind, as Q. Elizabeth was, Sixtus V. only took no publick notice of Him, but he proceeded with all his might against Her. He curst her afresh, and publisht a Croysade against her, and gave the whole Right of Her Kingdoms to Philip the II. King of Spain. But neither that Popes Bounty, nor his three Successors Blessings, nor the Spanish Arms, nor the Italian Arts (for no way was left un­tried) could ever prevail against Gods Providence; which, till the end of her days, kept that Queen always fast in her Possessions.

At last, Pope Clement VIII. seeing there was nothing to be done against her, resolv'd to let her go like a Heretick as she was; and to take the more care that another Heretick should not succeed her. For which cause he sent over two Breves into England, one to the Clergy, and the other to the Laity, commanding them not to admit any other but a Catholick, though never so near in Blood, to the Succession: Cambden, Eliz. 1600. that is to say, in plain words, not to admit King James to Reign after Queen Elizabeths death. So 'tis clear, that your Popes never stuck at that hard Question that you speak of.

Let us see what our Country-men did, who, as you say, suffered for it in those days. They did like obsequious Mem­bers, at every turn, as their Head directed them. They acted for the Papal Interest as far as they were able. They made the House of Scotland the Cloak for it, as far as it would reach. And it reacht pretty well, as long as the Title was in Queen Mary. But after the Title came to be in King James, Pray Sir, name us those Papists, or but one single person of them, that either died or suffered for Him: and then you bless us with a discovery.

What then? were they idle for so many years as past be­tween the commencing of his Title, and the Death of [Page 26] Queen Elizabeth? Nothing less. For they were as busie as Bees, in contriving how to hasten her Death, and how to put him by the Succession. And if it were for his Service, that they would have destroyed Her; pray for whose ser­vice was it, that they would have defeated Him? but that will be known by the story.

Soon after his Mothers Death was the Spanish Invasion; which would have defeated him with a Witness, if it had sped; and yet our Papists, both Negotiated Cambden E­liz. 1588. it, and writ in Defence Cardinal Al­len's Admoni­tion. V. Watson's Quodl. p. 240. and 247. of it. Afterwards in Scotland your Jesuites procured the Earl of Huntley Cambden E­liz., An. 1589. Watso. Quodl. p. 150. and others to raise a power­ful Rebellion against him. In England, they endeavoured to perswade the Earl of Derby Cambden Ib. Anno 1593. Watson Ib. p. 154. to set up a Title to the Crown; who honestly revealing it, was poisoned soon after, accor­ding to the prophetical threatning of Hesket whom they had made use of to perswade him.

When these single shots failed, Father Parsons Cambden Ib. Anno 1594. Dolmans Con­ference about the next suc­cession to the Crown. gave a broad-side to the Royal House of Scotland. For he publisht a Book under the name of Dolman, wherein he set up di­vers Competitours for the Succession, and consequently so many Enemies to the unquestionable Right of that Family. And to provide one sure Enemy upon the place, he found out a Title for the Earl of Essex, the most ambitious and popular Man in the Nation, to whom also he craftily dedi­cated his Book. In which he mentions, Dolman. part. 2. p. 9. among other Books of this nature, one written by Lesley concerning the Queen of Scots Title; another by Heghinton for the King of Spains Title; and another concerning the Prince of Parma's; But for his part, before these and all others, he prefers the Title of the Infanta. And, to shew that he meant as he said, Cambden Ib. 1602. Watson. Ib. p. 279. he caused their Scholars in the Seminaries abroad to sub­scribe to it, and made them swear to maintain it, and bound the Missionaries to promote it in those places whither they were to be sent. Whereas for King James his Title, he preferrs several others before it, and tells us, Dolman Ib. p. 109. I have not found very many in England that favour it: meaning sure of your Catholicks, with whom his converse chiefly was; and concerning whom he gives this remarkable testimony, that [Page 27] Ib. p 110. the Catholicks make little account of his Title by nearness of Succession.

We have reason to believe he did not wrong them, be­cause when an answer was written to his Book, VVatson. Ib. p. 107. the Arch-Priest Blackwel would not suffer it to be published. And your next Head-Officer, the Provincial of the Jesuites, Tortura Torti. p. 197. de­clared he would have nothing to do with King James his Title; and 'twas the common voice of the men of his Order that Watson. Ib. p. 150. if King James would turn Catholick, they would follow him; but if not, they would all die against him.

Which pious Resolutions were seconded with agreeable Actions. For they endeavoured, as far as Catholicks are obliged by their Principles, viz. as far as they durst and were able; at first; to hinder him from coming in, and af­terwards to throw him out again, or to destroy him in the place, as we shall have occasion to shew you in the answer to the next Paragraph.

The mean while out of this present discourse, in which you cannot deny any thing that is material to our purpose; It appears that this hard Question of Right to the Crown, was not between the Parties themselves in one or t'other of whom you confess the Right was. It appears that your In­fallible Judge of Controversies very easily and impartially resolv'd it, by denying both sides of the Question, and as­suming the whole right to himself. It appears that your Catholicks, who are said to have sided with one against the other, did in truth side with the Pope against them both. And lastly it appears that their Misdemeanors were inexcu­sable Treasons, if any Treason can be inexcusable that is befriended with such an Apologist.

Sir, we have found you notoriously False in that which you Affirm: Pray God you prove True in that which you Promise.

This Character would better agree with many a Head of a Church whom we could name you, than with Henry VIII. of whom better V. Thu. Hist. l. 1. Historians speak better things. But if he were such a Monster as you would make him, perhaps it was for want of a better Religion; for he was Philopater, p. 308. and 323. & v. Thu. Ib. perfectly of Yours, except only in the point of Supremacy. And you had no occasion for this flurt at him; unless that, having undertaken to put the best colours upon Treason, you might think you did something towards it in bespattering of Kings.

We have a touch of the same Art in the next Paragraph. Where having undertaken to excuse the Gun-powder-Treason, you call it first a Misdemeanor, then the Fifth of November, and then a Conjuration; soft words all of them: but you deal wicked hardly with the great Minister of State; whom you make to have been the Author of it; as if the Traitors had not conspired against the State, but the State against them.

But before we come to answer this, It will be needful to set down the story, as it appears out of the Examinations and Confessions of the Traitors themselves.

The rise of this Treason, was from the before-mention­ed Breves of Pope Clement VIII. in which he required all his Catholicks, that after the death of that wretched Woman Queen Elizabeth, they should admit none but a Catholick to reign over them. These Breves were by Garnet the Pro­vincial of the Jesuites, communicated to Catesby and others: who in Obedience thought best to begin their Practices in her life time. So they sent Father Tesmund and Winter into Spain to crave the assistance of that Crown. The Spaniard sent them back with the promise of an Army. But soon af­ter Queen Elizabeth died, and no Army came. Therefore [Page 29] again they sent Christopher Wright into Spain to hasten i [...] and Stanley out of Flanders sent Fawks thither upon the same errand; who finding the Councils of Spain at this time wholly enclined to peace, returned quickly back, and brought nothing but despair along with them.

Yet the Breves had so wrought upon Catesby, that he could not find in his heart to give over; but still casting about for ways, he hit upon this of the Powder-Treason, which as being much out of the common Rode, he thought the most secure for his purpose He communicated this to Winter, who approved it, and fetcht Fawks out of Flanders to assist in it. Not long after Piercy being in their company, and offering himself to any service for the Catholick Cause, though it were even the Kings Death: Catesby told him, that that was too poor an Adventure for him: but, saith he, if thou wilt be a Traitor, there is a Plot of greater advantage; and such a one as can never be discovered. Thus having duly prepar'd him, he took him into the Conspiracy. And the like he did with so many more as made up their Number thirteen of the Laity.

But where were the Jesuites all the while? rot idle, you may be sure. The Provincial Garnet was privy to it from the beginning, so were divers Baldwin, Hammond, Tes­mund, and Gerard, were named by the Conspirators, as privy with them. more of the Society. Inso­much that when Watson endeavour'd to have drawn them in­to his Plot (for the setting up of the Lady Arbella's Title, in opposition to King James his) they declin'd it, V. VVatsons Confession. saying, They had another of their own then afoot, and that they would not mingle designs with him for fear of hindering one another.

But Watson miscarried with his Plot, and the Jesuites went on with theirs. They absolv'd the Conspirators of the Guilt, and extenuated the Danger of their design; they perswaded them how highly Beneficial it would be in the Consequences of it; they gave them their Oath, by the Holy Trinity, and the Sacrament which they did then re­ceive, that none of them should reveal it to any other, or withdraw himself from it without common consent: and for the pittiful scruple of destroying the Innocent with the Guilty, Garnet answered, they might lawfully do it in order [Page 30] to a greater good. Yet it seems there was a spark of Hu­manity in some of them. which the Divinity of this Casuist had not quite extinguish't; as appear'd, either by the ab­senting of some Lords that were afterward fined for it in the Star-Chamber, or certainly by that Letter of warning to my Lord Monteagle, which was the happy occasion of the Discovery of the whole Treason.

In Warwick-shire, where the Princess Elizabeth then was, they had appointed a meeting, under the pretence of a Hunting-Match, to seize upon her, the same day in which the King and his Male Issue were to have been destroyed. There met about fourscore of them, which was a number sufficient for that business. But the news of the Discovery coming among them, they were so dismayed at it, that they desisted from their enterprize, and fled into Stafford-shire; where, the Countrey being raised against them, they were some of them kill'd, and the rest taken; and those which were left alive of the prime Conspirators were sent up to London, and there Executed.

This is the plain story, now let us see how you colour it.

What is it that you abominate and detest? That day which is the Festival of our Deliverance? We can believe you without your hands lifted up to Heaven. Or mean you the Treason which was to have been acted upon that day? why then do you not speak out and call it so? For if you cannot afford to call it Treason, it is not the lifting up of your hands that can make us believe you do heartily abominate and de­test it.

It was a good caution of a Philosopher to the Son of a [Page 31] common Woman, that he should not throw stones among a multitude, for fear of hitting his Father. You might have had that caution when you threw out this curse; for your Father the Pope stands fairest for it of all men that we know in the World.

Having spit and wip't your mouth, now you make your speech. And it begins with a mixture of Apostle and Poet; to shew what we are to expect from you; namely, with much Gravity, much Fiction: and so far you do not go a­bout to deceive us.

The scope of your speech is to make the world believe that your Catholicks were drawn into this Plot by Secreta­ry Cecil. You are so wise, that you do not offer to prove this; but you would steal it into us by an example, that we are concerned in. As Cromwel trepann'd many faithful Cava­liers, even so Cecil drew in some few Desperadoes. Compari­sons (they say) are odious: But to the business.

First, admitting your Fiction, as if it were true, that Cecil did draw in those wretches into this Treason. Was it ever the less Treason because he drew them into it? For, according to your own supposition, they did not know that they were drawn in by him. But they verily thought that they had followed their own Guides; and they zealously did according to their own Principles. They did, what they would have done, if there had been no Cecil in the world; provided there had been a Devil in his room, to have put it into their heads. For your excuse only implies, that they had not the Wit to invent it: But their progress in it shews, that they wanted not the Malice to have executed it. So that according to your own illustration: As those faithful Ca­valiers [Page 32] whom Cromwel drew in, had their Loyalty abused, & were nevertheless Faithful still; so those Powder-Traitors whom you say Cecil drew in, had their Disloyalty outwitted, and were nevertheless Traitors still. For as well in the one case as in the other, this very thing that they could be drawn in, is a clear demonstration that they were before-hand sufficiently Disposed for it.

Secondly, When you have considered the absurdity of your excuse for your friends, you may do well to think of an excuse for your Self. For that which you affirm of Ce­cil's having drawn them into this Plot, is a very groundless and impudent Fiction, and you are properly the Author of it. For though others perhaps may have spoken this in rail­lery; yet you are the first, that we know of, that has asser­ted it in Print.

Pray Sir, whence had you this tale? By what Tradition did you receive it? Or had you some new Revelation of the Causes threescore years after the Fact? For 'tis plain, that King James V. His speech in Parliament 1605. and his Relation, &c. Warmington, p. 7. saith▪ None were therein culpa­ble, but only Jesuites and Catholicks. knew nothing of it. Bellarmin and his fellow Apologists in that Age never pretended it. The parties themselves, neither at their Tryal, nor at their Execution, gave any intimation of it. Can you tell us which of the Con­spirators were Cecil's Instruments to draw in the rest? Or can you think he was so great an Artist, that he could per­swade his Setters to be hang'd, that his Art might not be su­spected? For 'tis well known that he sav'd not any of those wretches from suffering. And they which did suffer, char­ged none other, but themselves, in their Confessions. Par­ticularly, Father Garnet said, before Doctor Overal, and di­vers Casaub. Epist. ad Front. Du­ [...]um. others, that he would give all the World, if it were his, to clear his Conscience, or his Name from that Treason,

These are strong presumptions of the Negative; but you ought to have proved your Affirmative, or at least to have offered something toward it. For if barely to say this, be enough, then here is an excuse indifferently calculated for all Treasons in the world that miscarry: (and if they pros­per, who dares call them Treasons?) Here is a never failing Topick for any one that would write an Apology in behalf of [Page 33] any Villany whatsoever. For if the Traitors be discover'd by any kind of accident, this will alwaies remain to be said for them, that the then great Minister drew them in.

But why did you not say this for those Conspiracies in Queen Elizabeths daies? You might have said it perhaps with less improbability. But then had you a higher Game to fly at, namely the Queens Title to her Crown; and if you durst have made so bold with King James his, you would not have stoopt at so low a Quarry as a Minister of State.

But by the way we cannot but acknowledge, that you Je­suites are a sort of most obliging Gentlemen. If men will believe what you Say, nothing that you do can fall amiss. In your attempts against the life of Queen Elizabeth, you ob­liged his Majesty that now is, as being Martyrs for the Royal House of Scotland. And in your Plot to blow up that Royal House, you were a kind of Fellow-sufferers with the Faith­ful Cavaliers; for as they us'd to be trapp'd by Cromwel, even so you were drawn in by Secretary Cecil.

It is worth observing in this Paragraph, how you diminish that hellish Plot, by calling them that were engag'd in it, a few Desperadoes.

The Fewness of them will be considered in your next.

But in what sense do you call them Desperadoes? Were they such in respect of their Fortunes? That is so well known to be false, that it needs no Answer. Were they such in respect of their Discontents? that seems to be your Meaning. But there was little Reason for any. For at the time of this Conspiracy, there was none of your Priests in Prison, there was no Mult taken of any Lay-man, Nor was there a man of them, as King James. King James Speech in Parliament, 1605. said, that could alledge any pretended cause of grief. And yet they were continually Restless, as we have shewn you in their story. Was it be­cause they had not all the Liberty they would have had? This is so far from excusing them, that it rathet gives us oc­casion of suspecting You.

'Tis no wonder that you, who cannot afford to call this Conspiracy a Treason, are not willing to allow the Disco­very of it a Miracle. Yet you might have forborn Scof­fing [Page 34] at it, in respect to king Ib. James, who was pleas'd to Name it so. Especially when his adversary Bellarmin Tortus, p. 85. Edit. Colon. ac­knowledges that it was not without a Miracle of Divine Pro­vidence. And sure our King makes a better use of this word Miracle in the thankful acknowledgement of Gods great Mercy in his deliverance; than your Pope Sixti Orat. Sixtus V. did in his insolent Oration upon the King of France's Murder; by which we may guess what Some body would have called this Plot, if it had Sped.

The design it self was understood but by Few, because it was neither safe nor needful to impart it to many. But the Papists generally knew that there was a Design in hand; and though they did not know the horrid nature of it, yet many of them pray'd for the success of it: and if the Plot had taken effect, and the Hunting-Match had gone on, we should then have been better able to have judg'd how your Catholick Party stood affected toward it. Sure enough though there were but a 5 Jesuiteb 13. Lay-men, be­sides Owen and Stanley▪ Score in the Treason, yet there appear'd fourscore in the Rebellion: and it cannot be imagin'd, that so small a Number could Expect, without any other Assistance, to have made any great Advantage by surprizing the Lady Elizabeth. But when the Treason had miscarried, as hateful as it was, (for who does not hate Treason when it is unsuccessful?) yet many of you had a high Veneration for some of those Wretches that were deeply engaged in it. What a Coil here was about the Mi­racle of Father Garnet's straw? And perhaps you have seen his Picture, and Gerard's too among the At La Fleche, and else­where. Martyrs of your Society. Nay his Holiness himself shew'd his good Will to them, when after all this, he made Tesmund Penitentiary at S. Peters in Rome.

You suppose that which is False, to avoid that which is True. For who ever said, that All the Papists of that Age were Consenting to the Gun-Powder-Treason? Or who can deny that some Papists in this Age retain the Principles of them that were consenting to it? Who, although they are not to be Punisht for what their Predecessors did; yet they ought to be so restrained, that they may not do like their Predecessors.

And though, by that long word Unanimously, you en­deavour to shuffle in the men of these Principles, amongst them that served his Majesty in that Glorious Quarrel: Yet we think it no hard matter to distinguish them. For those among you which did the King Service, are not so many but that they may be Numbred. And as for the rest of you, which Only suffer'd with us, we thank you for your Love, but not for your Assistance. For we could not well have sunk lower than we did. But some of you floted the while▪ like Cork; and others of you swum upon the Bladders of Dispensations. So that as we received no Help from you in your Swimming; so we can apprehend no Assurance of you by your Sufferings.

Sir, our Anger is only a Necessary Care, that what you now call your Indiscretions, may not grow to be such as you lately call'd your Misdemeanors.

[Page 36]We know he may upon a Fast-day; For then you use to ring your Vesper- Bell before Dinner. And how can a simple Heretick tell, whether it calls you, to Pray, or to eat Fish? But we do not know that ever any of you was brought in trouble about this Question.

Possibly he May be glad of it. For it was your Jesuiti­cal distinction between Person and Office, that first holp him to be a Sequestrator. And now he sees that Distinction come in play; he may hope, within a while, to have his Place a­gain.

What an Ambush you have laid here for the Bishops! to have them thought Popish, because you Reverence them, and Obnoxious, in such matters, as (you say) it may be far better to conceal. But as in the one, your kindness to them is sufficiently understood. So they are able to defie your Malice in the other. 'Tis for a Bishop of Donna Olympia's V. Her Life. p. 61. and p. 156, 157. to need concealment. Our Bishops in England are of ano­ther make, than to hold their Credit at any one's Cour­tesie.

For the Manifesto that troubled you, what could the Parliament do less, when the Complaints of you were great in all parts of the Nation, than to Invite men to bring their Grievances to the proper place of Redress? But then say you, men were not upon Oath, for what they said against you. What a Hardship was this, that the House of Commons [Page 37] would not do that for your sakes, which no House of Com­mons ever did upon any occasion?

The King will never be out of your debt, if a Jesuite may but keep the reckoning. Your old Treasons you put upon the account of his Family and Friends, and your late Insolencies upon the score of his most Happy restauration. But would you seriously perswade us, that, at six years di­stance, so many men of heat and youth were still transported with the Joy of that Blessing? That there were some fresh­er causes of this Jollity, has been vehemently suspected by many, who considered the great Unseasonableness of it, in so Calamitous a time, while the Fire was ranging in our Metropolis, and a French Army lay hovering upon our Coasts.

There can be nothing charged on you, more extravagant than those things were, which your Predecessors committed, and which here, You have taken upon you to justifie or ex­cuse. The Particulars of your Charge, whatsoever they are, we leave to the Consideration of the Parliament: where we heartily wish there may appear more Reason on your side, than there is to be found in this Apology. For as to the Firing of the City, if according to your words (which [Page 38] we have not hitherto found to be Gospel) you have lost so vastly by it; yet that will not Acquit you from the suspicion of the Fact. in the judgment of any one that considers the Determination of your late Provincial, Garnet in the Case of the Powder-plot. viz. that it is law­ful to destroy the Inrocent with the Guilty in order to a greater good. And it seems this vast loss goes not near your Heart; one would think so by your pleasantness in the very next passage. For there you call Hubert your Enemy, and a Hugonot Protestant: which Hubert, after Father Harvey had had him at Confession, did indeed affirm himself to be a Pro­testant; but then being askt whether he meant a Hugonot (which it seems was beyond his Instruction to say) he ear­nestly denied that, as he very well might, for he then also de­clar'd that he believed Confession to a Ptiest was necessary to his salvation: and being admonish'd to call upon God, he repeated an Ave-Mary, which he said was his usual Prayer. So that it evidently appears, he was neither Hugonot, nor Protestant, nor Your Enemy upon any account of Religion. And yet you, being about to avouch this knot of Falshoods, are pleased to usher them in with this Preface, (either in Praise of your Brother Harveys Pious Fraud, or of your own Proper Vertue) Truly in this, our ingenuity is great.

He that complains without a cause, must be heard without redress.

[Page 39]We only desire to be Safe from those dangers, to which your Principles would expose us, and against which neither Affableness nor Hospitality will secure us. The Protestants of Ireland were never so treated and caressed by their Popish Neighbors, as they were the very year before▪ they cut their throats.

The best Means of our security, is, that which his Maje­sty has been pleased to require, viz. The discreet Execution of his Laws. By which (if others shall please to distin­guish themselves from the rest by renouncing their disloyal Principles) only the disloyal and seditious will be kept weak, that they may be harmless.

We have answer'd your Instances, of the French Prote­stants, and the Dutch Papists; and your unjust upbraiding us with the greatness of your Duty, and with our want of compassion and pity. And yet, as if all these were Unanswer­able, you come over with them again and again.

These barbarous people, you say, sequester none for their Faith; but pray what did you, when you govern'd the Civi­liz'd World? you hang'd and burn'd men, for no other cause but their Faith; and this you did with abundance of Civi­lity; so it seems we may be worse than Barbarous, and yet much better than you.

[Page 35]But that were little for our credit, unless we had this to say more; that not the worst of you suffers any otherwise than by known Laws, or any more than is of pure Necessi­ty. For, we hold it Necessary to maintain the Authority of the King, and the Peace of the Nation. If you call any thing Religion, that is contrary to these; must we therefore alter our Laws? or ought you to mend your Religion?

You put the Effigies of Cromwel upon any thing that you would render odious; as your Inquisition bedresses one with Pictures of Devils, whom they are about to burn for his Religion. For such Disguizes are apt to work much up­on the weak judgements of the multitude. But he must be very weak indeed that cannot perceive the wide Difference, between the Edicts of Cromwel, that were design'd to Ruine men for their Loyalty, and those Laws that our Princes have made to Restrain them from Treason and Rebellion.

Sir, if we may judge by your Works, there is nothing less studied in your Colledge.

This is no Argument of Your Duty; for, sure, You are no Lord. Nor is it likely that these Lords follow'd Your di­rection in the doing of this Duty.

If you mean this of Papists in General, that which you call morally impossible, is Experimentally True. For in Venice, Genoa, Lucca, and the Popish Cantons of Switzerland, where [Page 41] they very well approve of Monarchy in the Church; yet they are not fond of it in the State also. But if you mean this of the Jesuitical Party, then it may be true in this sense, that you would have the Pope to be sole Monarch both in Spi­rituals and Temporals.

We can now allow you to complain, and commend your selves without Measure; having prov'd already, that you do it without cause.

To swell up the Bill of the Merits of your Party, you take in the Services of the Irish and Scottish Soldiers, as if they were a part of the English Catholicks, whom you pro­fess to plead for in the Title of your Apology. And that you may seem to have done this, in kindness to Them, and not to your Selves; you exhort us to Consider them, in such terms, as if You were the first that had ever thought of them. God forbid but they should be consider'd as they de­serve; and he is neither good Christian, nor good Subject, that would grudge to contribute his proportion toward it.

But you seem to have a farther drift in the mentioning of these Loyal Irish. For you immediately mingle them with the worst of that Nation; namely with those infamous But­chers, that in times of as great Peace and Liberty as ever [Page 42] that Nation enjoyed, and in the Name of that gracious King under whom they enjoyed these, cut the throats of above an hundred thousand of his Protestant Subjects of all Sexes and Ages. It was so black a Villany, that You, the Apolo­gist Lord Orory's Answer to W [...]lsh, p. 20. saith. Within few months about two hundred thou­sand. of such Actions, knew not how to mention in its pro­per place, viz. after the French Massacre, because you had not wherewith to colour it. And yet being conscious to your self that this lay as a blot upon your Cause, you thought fit to place it among these brave Men; as if their Names would mend the hue of an Action that will make the Names of all that had to do in it, look black, and detestable to Mankind, throughout all Generations.

Nor do you deal much better with our Royallists them­selves; of whom you do not stick to affirm, that in their ad­mired Clemency, (and if this were true, who would not ad­mire it?) they pardon'd Many English, whose Acted Villanies were so wicked, that the worst of the Irish Nation could be but Intentionally so wicked in their Villanies.

You proceed, concerning the Irish and Scottish Soldiers, in these words; How commonly is it said, that the Oath of Renouncing their Religion is intended for them! Pray Sir, can you tell who are said to intend this? For if they are such as have no Authority, it is frivilous. If they are such as have Authority, it is false. And we do verily believe it was never said, wisht, or thought of, by any one that lov'd the King, and the peace of the Nation.

But what trick had this Jesuite in his head when he fram'd this? One may guess at his design: But let it pass. Per­haps [Page 43] he only imagined this, to heighten his Fancy, that he might think and write the more Tragically toward the end of his Oration.

Here you un-imagine for the Souldiers, and imagine for your self; and, as if you really thought your self in danger, you beg for mercy of the Royalists, in such words as your Predecessor First Mode­rator, p. 76. Your own Kin­dred and Allies, your own Countrymen, born to the same freedom with your selves; who have in Much less measure (than the Scots) offended in matter of Hostility, nay divers of them not at all. us'd to the Rebels. Only for the last strain, we do not know that any one hit upon it before, nor do believe that any one will ever use it again.

It seems Committee-men are intrusted with his Majesties Authority; or that none must use it against Papists for fear of being accounted Committee-men.

It is time to have done, when we are come to the dregs of your Rhetorick.

Sir, though you set your self before to speak Tragically, this does rather seem a piece of Drollery. But you Have your design either way. For no man can read it, but he must either Laugh, or Shake his head.

Sir, in answer to this Paragraph, you oblige us to speak plainer, what before we only intimated to you.

It was the policy of the Rebels in the beginning of the late War, to harrass the Papists in all parts of the Kingdom. One Reason of it was to make his Majesty Odious; for, the Papists being his Subjects, and having none but him to fly to, it was certain he would do what he could to Protect them, and this would make many Zealous People believe▪ that what the Rebels pretended was true, viz. that his Ma­jesty was a Friend to Popery. Another Reason was to en­rich themselves with their Spoils, and to invite the Needy * Second Mo derater, p. 43. Most of them in the begining of the late War (seeing them­selves unpro­tected by the Parliament, & exposed to the plunder of the then Soldiery) fled into the King's Garri­sons, to save their own lives, without taking up Arms to of­fend others. Rabble with a Prospect of Booty; among which, if they found a string of Beads, or a Crucifix, it serv'd them upon both Accounts, both to fill their Pockets, and to justifie the Cause.

By this Means you were driven into his Majesties Garri­sons; where, besides those that Voluntarily offer'd them­selves to his Service, many of you were Necessitated to it for a subsistance, and many more of you did not serve him at all, but only shrowded your selves under his Protection. Whereas the Protestant Royallists had no such Necessity, for they might have been welcome to the Rebels, to do as They did; or they might have been Permitted to live quietly at their home. But they chose to do otherwise, and were hated the more for it by the Rebels, because they preferr'd their duty before those Considerations.

[Page 45]From this account of the Motives that brought us toge­ther, it is easie to Judge how far we are in Debt to one an­other.

First, As for them which lost their Estates with us, We remember those things were alledged in their Defence, Second Mo­derator, p. 43. which we would have been loth to have admitted in ours. But possibly it was not their Fault that these things were Alledg'd, nor was it to our Advantage that they were not Accepted. For the Rebels, having devour'd these Gen­tlemens Estates, fell to ours, with the more Colour, and never the less Appetite.

In your Catolague of those Papists which were Slain in the Service, you have Omitted some names which we are able to Reckon. But perhaps you did this in Design, that you might the more excusably Reckon some names that you ought to have Omitted. So you begin with my Lord of Carnarvon, the onely noble man in your Catalogue, who was indeed too negligent of his Religion, till he came to be in view of Death; But then, in his extremities, he Re­fus'd a Priest of yours, and Ordered the Chaplain Mr Langford of his Regiment to pray with him. If you take this libert of stealing Martyrs, we have Reason to wonder, that you had not taken in one that would have adorn'd your Cause in­deed, viz. his Majesty himself; since Militiere In his Victo­ry of Truth. was not a­sham'd to publish, that that Blessed and Glorious Prince died of your Religion. Him alone we might weigh against All that ever was good in your Church. But besides, we could reckon you a far greater number of Protestants, than you pretend to do of Papists, that lost their lives also in the Day of Battle. They lost them joyfully, in hopes to have sav'd his Majesty's Life; and 'twas an Accession to their Joy, if perchance they sav'd any of yours.

But did they ever intend their sufferings should go for nothing, or become Ciphers to yours in the day of Reckon­ing? or that their blood should be made use of to stop the Execution of those Laws for which they shed it? Did they think your condition was so deplorable, or their own was su­perfluously fenced and secured against you before the late troubles?

[Page 46]Pray Sir do not perswade us to believe a thing so incredible, or to do at the rate as if we did believe it. Rather if you have such an o­pinion of your own Faculty; Try what you can do with your own Party, and perswade them to do what is fittest & best for Themselves.

But because the Genius of your Writing does not give us any such Hopes of You: We shall rather make bold to say something from our selves, by way of Advice, to as many of them as may happen to need it, and are capable to receive it.

We desire them to content them selves with that condition which they enjoy'd under his Majesties Royal Predecessors: and neither to Disparage those dayes, by endeavouring to perswade the world that they which suffered then for Treason died for Religion; Nor to Un­dervalue all the Liberties which they now Enjoy, if they may not be allow'd to Exceed the Measures of their Fathers. We wish they would not, for the paring of their nails, make all Christendom ring with Cries of Persecution. We wish them deeply to lay to Heart, the Ho­nor, and Peace, and Welfare of their Nation. To abhor him, that could D. of Medina in 88. said his Sword knew no distinction between Ca­tholick and Heretick, wish to see it in Troubles, in hope that at next Turn it would settle in Popery; or that could finde in his heart to bid a Foreigner wel­come upon the terms of restoring Catholick Religion. We desire them to keep their Religion to themselves: and not lay about them, as some do, to make Proselytes; of which they have had a plentiful harvest in the late Confusions; and if they should think to go on at that rate, we have reason to fear, it would be a means to bring us into Confusion again. We desire them at least not to abuse the weakness of dying persons: nor under pretence of carrying Alms to condemn'd Prisoners, to Convert some of them with Drink, and to Cheat others with hopes of Salvation upon easier tearms than ever God yet de­clar'd unto Men. We desire them not to hinder the course of Justice, by interposing in the behalf of any Criminal, because he is a Catho­lick. We desire them to content themselves, as their Fathers have done, with such Priests as are known and protected V. Cambden's Eliz. 1602. by the Civil Power; and that They would be pleas'd to demean themselves as Priests ought to do: not disguising themselves like Hectors, or ming­ling with Gentlemen, to poyson the Clubs and Coffee-Houses with Phanatick Discourses, or even with Atheism it self, to destroy all Re­ligion that they may have their will upon ours. We desire them not to fill the World with their Pamphlets, Parallels, Philanaxes, Exhorta­tions, Apologies, &c which tend only to the fermenting of Mens Passi­ons, not at all to the conviction of their Reason. If they please to come into the fair Field of Controversie, we shall not decline them; and we think we are not in Debt to them upon that Account. But for Books of the other sort which are apt only to inflame Parties, and make the People Jealous, and the Government Uneasie, We wish they would spare their Own pains, and consequently Ours. If they will not; let them bear their own blame, and let them Answer it to the world what Occasion they had to give us this trouble of Answering them.