A Praefatory DISCOURSE TO A late PAMPHLET, Entitled, A MEMENTO FOR English PROTESTANTS, etc.  
BEING An ANSWER to that Part of the Compendium, which reflects upon the Bishop of Lincoln's Book.  
The Second Edition, with several Additions and Amendments.  
TOGETHER With some Occasional Reflections on Mr. L'Estrange's Writings.  
LONDON, Printed by Tho▪ Dawks, for the Author. 1681.   

THIS IS HUMBLY DEDICATED TO THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD THOMAS LORD BISHOP OF LINCOLN.   

THE PREFACE.  
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 Traitors. 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 Sense should be made Papists, except such whose Morals are so wretchedly debauched, 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 and specious pretences of the Romish Agents, who commonly become the Prey of those Wolves in Sheep's clothing.  
To provide therefore for their Security, that they may not fall into the snares that are laid for them, aught 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 answered.  
For this Reason it was, that this short Narrative of the bloody Butcheries and inhuman 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 public mention, would his Modesty permit it) in order to the being by him bestowed 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 Villainies; the design being to let such sort of People see, what a horrid thing Popery is, when her Varnish 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 deformed 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 Heretics, which have been so often objected to the Church of Rome by Protestant Divines, are not Speculative Notions and Propositions Problematical, 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 disowned 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 Logic, and one of their own constant Topics 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 traitorous and bloody Designs against Kings and Protestants, that I cannot but take this occasion to correct that troublesome Impertinent, who has made such a senseless Buzz, and raised 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 exposed that part of his impudent Pamphlet, which concerns this truly Venerable and Excellent Person.  
First then, what a foolish Flourish does he make against the Bishop, endeavouring to throw that wicked Principle of Deposing Kings upon Protestants, with this gross Fallacy of Arguing from men's Practices to the Principles of their Religion? Is not his Lordship's meaning, says 
* Compend. pag. 77.  he, in truth this, that Protestant Principles (when really believed) are destructive to all Kings, especially to Catholic ones? since we see that the lawful Monarches of England, Scotland, Swaedland, Denmark, the United Provinces, Transylvania, Geneva, etc. have been actually deposed by their Protestant Subjects. This (&c.) here I guess to be a Lie of the lowest price in their Book of Rates for Sin; 'tis so pitiful and inconsiderable a trick. He puts it down, as if there were a vast and tiresome number of Countries▪ behind, which in kindness to his Reader he forbears to mention, where Princes have been deposed by Protestants; when he knew in his Conscience he could scarce have named 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 named, 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 lived? In a Convent without doubt, among the most Seraphic 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 big 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 justify the Deposing and Murdering of Princes, and the Massacre of Millions of innocent People, whom with a ridiculous affectation she terms Heretics. 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) allowed and commended by herself, but from that Law which is the Rule of Justice in her Ecclesiastical Courts, from the Authentic 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 show 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 practice, to the great scandal of the Christinn Profession.  
To come to particulars: We should not lay to her Charge the Murders of Henry III. and Henry IV. of France, because they were committed by Members of her Communion, if (besides the public Applause of the one by the then Pope, in a Set-speech to the College of Cardinals) we had not first convinced 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 beforementioned Principles) she had not actually and formally (as far as it lay in her Power) Excommunicated and Deposed them all, and absolved 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 dismal Slaughters, if, as an additional proof of her holding the beforementioned Principles, she had not 
a Thuanus Hist. l. 53. p. 837.  commended the one, giving thanks to God for it, and 
b 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 
c History of the Irish Rebellon, printed 1680.  Pope's Nuncio was known to be the chief Guide, and Romish Priests the chief Contrivers and Fomenters of that desperate and bloody Revolt) it were not most notorious, that she has always ready an Armoury 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 inhuman 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 debauched 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 justified, yet did they never go to the Church for Sanctuary. Though Protestants have been Deposers and Murderers of Princes, (there are Rogues of all Persuasions;) 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 fanatics 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 show 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 show it us, (where only it ought to be looked after, viz.) in the Confessions of our Faith, or in the Articles of our Communion? Or, lastly can he show it us in the Writings of any considerable Protestant Divines? though their private Opinions unlicenc'd and unauthorised 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 Controversy) I say, can he show it us, even here? I know indeed he does affirm, That the 
* Compend. pag. 76.  Prime Leaders (as he styles 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 myself obliged to take any more notice of this Slander of his, than if he had never vented it: What? does he expect to be believed upon his bare word? Upon the honour of a Popish Controvertist? 
— sic notus Vlixes?  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, etc. have held, That Princes may be deposed upon the Account of Religion: By what new Logic can he make this pertinent to the present Discourse? Does he think it the same thing to hold indefinitely, That Princes may be deposed 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 deposed by an Authority Ecclesiastical? Let him now speak his Conscience without a Dispensation. Does he in good earnest think these two Propositions equivalent, or at least equivalent as to the point in controversy between him and the Bishop of Lincoln, and that they equally disgrace the professed Religion of him who affirms them. He cannot sure be so void of the ordinary reason of a Man, though he has swallowed down never so many Roman Catholic 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 Heresy; a man's Life and Estate (who maintains 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 dedeposed by the State, though upon the Account of Religion, (i. e. for being of a Religion different from the established) 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 deposed by the Church, grounding this Opinion upon the Laws of Religion, and a Power supposed to be delegated to her by Christ. This last is the Principle we charge, and the Bishop of Lincoln has proved upon the Church of Rome, which makes her Religion itself 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 Mathematics. The Protestant Religion therefore remains 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, etc. 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 placed 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.  
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 deposed 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 grossly 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 justify those proceedings. I would now a k this Collector of Impertinences, this tedious Compendianist, whether he thinks this a good reason to clear the Church of Rome from being concerned in the deposing of these two unfortunate Princes. If he says, '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 used 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 concerns 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 supposed Legal Power in the King and the Two Houses, to alter the Course of the Succession when they think fit? Have not all the Pamphlets that have been writ in Vindication of that Bill argued the Lawfulness of it from the Constitution of the Civil Government, and wholly disclaimed the Interesting of Religion at all in the business, as to the justifying of it in the least degree, endeavouring with great pains to prove, That true Religion does not meddle with the Civil Rights of Princes, but leaves them to be determined by the Laws and Customs of particular Countries? By what strange consequence than 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 maintain that childish Sophism I first took notice of, as the chief ground of all his extravagant Raving against the Bishop's 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 deposed, and the kind of Principle (i.e. whether Civil, or Religious) 'tis justified upon, that must condemn, or acquit a Church of the Gild of it; though this man endeavour all along to insinuate the contrary, by such a fallacious way of representing the Position charged 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 Business 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 (says 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, etc. Is it to be imagined now, that a man should get so far out of his way, unless he purposely designed to ramble, or write things so grossly impertinent to the matter he was treating of; unless he studied 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 what is foreign to the Question and wander from the business out of design. Never did any man take more true pains to understand a Discourse difficult in itself, than he has to misunderstand the Bishop's, which was plain and easy, or at least to make his Reader do so; for he cannot be so 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 Deposed 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 showed. And as 'tis the Roman Church, and not the Doctors, only, or chiefly, which the Bishop charges with holding, that Princes may be Deposed by her Authority, not with holding indefinitely that they may be Deposed 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 licenced and approved by that Church, they are of considerable weight in the Argument. Now what says the Compendianist to these strong and most convincing Proofs? Why in fine (as Mr. Bayes says upon another occasion) he want 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 cheerfulness goes about to invalidate what the Bishop urges from the Writings of the Popish Doctors, which yet the poor impotent Scribbler 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 disciplined 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 ourselves confess, That our Monarchy is weakened by our Religion; That Popery must be called back to support it, and that Papists are hated by many on this Account, all which is in itself 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 imagined) 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 vein of impertinent arguing, contrary to the known Rules of Discourse, and shameless affirming, contrary to the known Truth of Fact, which runs through the whole Mass of his crude and indigested Pamphlet: But this is a Nompareillo (to use Mr▪ Bayse's Phrase) of want of Modesty, and want of Sense; 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 reasoned, 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 Nonsense, Libel, and Untruth into so few Words, as long as he lives. Can it be said (says 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 always been said by Protestant Writers, and proved beyond all contradiction, except that of absurd and illogical men, from whom Saint Paul prayed 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 Egyptian Darkness, and Slavery, which neither our Fathers, nor We are able to bear.  
In the first place the, The Monarchy has by the Reformation, gotten an absolute Freedom from the Tyranny of the Pope's 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 summoned to appear personally at Rome, and King John forced to resign his Crown to a Legate, to the high Dishonour of the Regal Majesty, and the apparent Prejudice of that Reverence it ought to have in the minds 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 Appeals can be made from his Courts, nor any sort of Persons privileged from his Justice; In a word, He is no longer a Feauditary Vassal to the Pope's▪ as in effect all Popish Princes are; since the Pope has an allowed Right to command them in whatever he will call Spiritual, or will say has any relation to Spiritual Matters, and by declaring them Heretics, he can (according to the Romish Religion) depose them, and destroy them when he pleases. Now the being delivered 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 Crown; those Hellish Papal Doctrines, which I have been hitherto discoursing off, did, in times of Popery, perpetually hang over their Heads, like Damocles' Sword, ready to do Execution upon the least irregular Motion, and they were neither of them any longer safe than the Pope pleased. But since the Reformation, the Pope's 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 again the established Religion; so that I say, The King of England has by means 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 bestowed most of the Bishoprics; and great Benefices) both for Protection and Preferment: the King had little power either to punish or reward them, as the Histories and Records of those times do sufficiently demonstrate. But 'tis notoriously known to what a degree the Reformation has altered the state of things in that point, and how much the Interests of Clergy men do now tie them, more than others, to the Service of the Crown, as also how well they undestand, and how zealously they pursue those Interests, whenas heretofore they were the constant Raiser's 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, wholly guided by their Priests, the Pope's Dependants (by Reason of the great command they had over their Consciences) in their Civil concerns also; So that the King under these and other circumstances of Popery was but a Servant to the Church, and little more in Effect than the Pope's Viceroy. But the Reformation has freed both him, and his people from this base, dishonourable Subjection, and most inconvenient Dependence 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 called a Monarchy, distinguished from all other Kinds; if I should take notice of the Advantages it has received by this change, as 'tis a Civil Government, in general, I might observe many more; as first, an Increase of the Trade, and consequently of the Riches, of the Kingdom, as well by the taking away that vast number of unnecessary, senseless Holidays, imposed on the People by the Church of Rome, which must needs be a great hindrance to the carrying on of public Business, and Commerce, as by the application of many Thousands of Persons to the ways, and means of raising a Fortune to maintain themselves, who were heretofore maintained, and lived wholly, like idle Drones, upon the labour and industry of others, and by being shut up in a Cloister, and sequestered 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 (considered in the general as a body Politic) has received by this Change, is an Increase of the Strength, and Safety of the Kingdom, by the great Increase of People (which also always increases Trade) since the Clergy have been allowed to marry, and the Folly of Monkery and Vows of pepetual Caelibacy (as they call it) in either Sex has been both forbidden and scorned.  
'Twere easy for me to enlarge upon this Argument, and further show, 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 Kingdoms 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 robs 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 issachar's, that stay behend, to bow down their servile shoulders to the Burden of an oppressive Government. But I think what I have already discoursed 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 says, would affirm the contrary.  
The Compendianist, possibly, may here object, as he seems to do, pag. 77. lib 9 That popish Princes abroad are not sensible of these Inconveniences in their Religion, nor do they perceive 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 (says 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 affirm, and maintain against all the World, That 'twas neither his own 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 pliant, and submissive to the Civil Magistrate, and more hospitable to Strangers, and Dissenters, and consequently less prejudicial to the growth of Power, and the greatness of a State than the other. The Privileges 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 tempered the Malignity of her Influence; as the most destructive Plants do sometimes lose the Virulence of their poisons by a change of Soil, and Mercury itself, by a mixture of Ingredients, is rendered innocent Physic 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 itself, in any degree contribute to, the prosperity of either Prince, or people; for 'tis plain, 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 ruin 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 mentioned, which do in France, serve to take out the sting of this monstrous beast, this Spawn of the Old Serpent, and prevent the Mischief, which it is otherwise so apt to do, the Blast it would infallibly bring upon the ordinary fruits of good Government, and the common ends of Civil Societies. To conclude this point, if any Prince or State happen (by some favourable 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.  
'Tis now left to the Reader to judge, upon a due considerate 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 useless Lump of Formality, and Foppery, this discovered Cheat, this Insulter and Braver of Crowned Heads, this Usurper upon the Rights of Princes, this Enemy to God's Anointed. I say what kind of Creatures must these be? They are certainly a Species by themselves, and have not the same common Faculties, and ways 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 Catholics as himself. Does he indeed think to put this upon us, that Protestants are for the bringing in Popery? He may as well hope to make us believe Transubstantiation itself, 'tis a Contradiction in Terms, an errand Bull. However, upon this occasion, I cannot but reflect that I have sometimes met with a sort of ridiculous Animals, commonly called Protestants indeed, whose Heads are giddy, and whose Brains turn round with the Notion of a Catholic 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 odd, superstitious Zeal, with not one grain of true sense, Disciples of Heylin, and Thornedike, in a word, a kind of L'Estrange Protestant's, men who have listed themselves in our Service, and ranked on our side only to betray our cause, and give our Enemies the Victory. They seem to have no other design in the Church of England than Samson had in the Philistines Temple, viz. to pull it down upon our Heads, and bury us in the Ruins▪ Now what discourse these sort of men have had with the Compendianist, I cannot tell, nor am much concerned, I will not dispute, but that 'tis possible, they may have acknowledged some such thing as he affirms, for their Politics 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 heinously ill to be thought Papists, and particularly Mr. L'Estrange seems more than ordinarily disturbed, when he finds himself charged with this Imputation; how does he fling, and flounce in his late Pamphlets, like a gaulled Hackney, who can neither bear the whip, 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 Libels throw about the empty Froth of his Anger; Let him fret himself never so lean, and talk like a mad man in the overboiling 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 so notoriously promotes the Designs, 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 kind of means, and artifices, to turn off the Public Odium (under which they have so justly suffered) as much as was possible, from Themselves upon the fanatics, and to stir up an ignorant, outrageous 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 engaged in their Service as Nevil-Payne; he could not have more effectually assisted them in the carrying on of this base and Villainous Project than he has along done. How earnestly has he laboured to revive the Memory of forty, in contemptof the Act of Oblivion, and terrified the people with groundless Apprehensions of a new Fanatic War? How constantly has he patched up his loose Discouses with unseasonable threadbare Comments on the Disorders of the late times, and coloured his malicious enmity to the Liberties of England with violent Invectives against fanatics? Their Defamation has been the chief aim of all his Writings since the Plot, the Burden of his overflowing Impertinence, and the Common place Topick of his Railing. Now let us suppose the fanatics as errand 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 Majesty's Restanartion, nay since the PLOT, (I mean the fanatics of England,) that we should thus fall upon them Pell Mell, without either Fear or wit, Rhyme 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 sudden be hounded on Fanatickes? There is sure some Mystery in this. Alas! The Artifice is evident and gross. Who sees not that the Design of it is, to save the Papists from the growing Rage of the People's Hate, with which their whole Faction was almost run down, 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 Jesuit, the chief Manager.  
Can there be any Doubt then, however he appear a Protestant, in show 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 Panegyric of the Religion established, and his high Expressions of Zeal for it, with which at every turn, he flourishes his Mischievous Pamphlets, and guilds the poison he would have the People Swallow, they are like the Compliment of Judas when he betrayed his Master, and like the Courtesy of Joab when he murdered Abner. But, God be thanked, Protestants now know him too well, to believe in his flattery, or be wheadled to their Ruin by his soft Words. His Writings have discovered so palpable an illwill 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 pursued his Malice with so restless a diligence, and so furious a Zeal, that he's grown a Common Nuisance to all good Englishmen, and ripe for 〈◊〉 Correction.  
I doubt not therefore (besides what he may expect from a Parliament) but some new marvel 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 shall crush his little Plausibilities with a Masterly Reason, and shame him into silence by the Justness of his Satire. I shall leave him then to the Fate of Bays, 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, return to the Compendianist. And, as to what concerns the present Argument between him and me, I question not, but upon an impartial weighing of what is here offered, 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 so just abhorrence spewed up that filthy Load of Superstition, and Idolatry, with which she was so long oppressed, she should be forced, either by conquest from abroad, or by a Popish Succession at home, to return once more like the Dog to his Vomit, or like the Sow when she has been washed 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 answered; and when he can show 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 tyre his Reader with the Repetition of such fulsome Sophistry.  
But perhaps it may not be amiss 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 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 justify their abominable Villainy 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 lawfulness 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 showed himself, and reasoned 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 business. 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 grossly 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, Traitors, etc. Does He not know that they are all mortal men too, and subject to many other Vices, which he might very clearly have proved upon them (if he he had pleased) by undeniable Examples? There's not a Sin the Pope pardons, of what Price soever, but 'tis 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 ails the man? he has sure been combating some Giant in imagination, like Don Quixote when he hacked down the Walls of his Chamber. Well, whoever he be, though it were Malambruno himself, I'll warrant him he's killed 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 (named in the Compendium's margin) writ (it seems) by the Catholics of England since the King's 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 citys 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. Bays and this Compendianist would have made a couple of rare Disputants, if they had not been spoiled by their Tutors, and ill-grounded at first; they have both an admirable natural talon at Reasoning, all the difference between them is, Bays loved it in Rhyme, and this man's altogether for it in Prose. But without Raillery, does he believe the Bishop of Lincoln obliged to take particular notice of every idle Pamphlet of theirs, that keeps a Pother 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 a Scholar as the Bishop of Lincoln. For the Pamphlets he mentions, they are more than answered▪ in the Bishop's 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 citys 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 showed to the people in the Fool's 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 censured 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 forced by the necessity of their Affairs to disavow the Actions of their Ministers, though done by their most express Command; so is this interested Church frequently reduced to connive at Books which she does by no means like, and to Censure others which she does not only approve, but (underhand) directs. A good instance of this we have in the case of Sanctarellus' Book (one of those he mentions) which though at first Printed by the Approbation and special Licence of 
* See Sanctarellus himself.  Mutius Vittellescus, than General of the Jesuits, and by the Order of the Master of the Pope's Palace; yet when the Pope found it would not be endured in France, but that both the Sorbonne had condemned it, and the Parliament of Paris had ordered 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 of this gentle nature was Becanus' Correction at Rome, not for the Doctrines he maintained, but for Overlashing, (as Bishop Montague expresses it in his Preface to King James' 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 Heretics, are thought too precious Truths, and too high Points to be ordinarily exposed to the Vulgar, and pressed upon all Occasions; that they are the Arcana Imperii of their Kingdom of Darkness, and kept like Warrants Dormant among the Cabala of their wicked Mysteries, to justify 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 enslaved to the Pope, are forced 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 magnify upon all occasions to our reproach, but cannot signify any thing to the purpose, for which the Compendianist here intends it, viz. to show the Bishop of Lincoln, in Answer to his Challenge at the end of his Book, That the Church of Rome has by public Acts and Declarations disowned and condemned 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 positiveness 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 Logic enough to distinguish between the Parts and Branches of a Church, and the Church her self in her public Authority and Representations? Does he indeed imagine, that he can at this time of day make the Judgements of particular Universities and Civil Assemblies pass upon us for public 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 public Acts and Declarations of the Church of Rome; and he has not so much as pretended to show either of these, for the Condemnation of those Principles which the Bishop has proved 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 terms 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 College of the Sorbonne, Paris, Caen, Rheimes, etc. 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 passed by his Quibble upon the Bishop's Title, 'tis so very senseless 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 Lordship's Heat against us should force him even to a Title that has confuted his whole Book, viz. That Popish Principles and Positions (when really believed) are destructive and dangerous to all Kings, especially Protestant's; for he cannot term them Principles of Faith, because they were never thus Believed, etc. 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 senses: 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 proved 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 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 believed by any Catholic, nor never thus approved 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 enquiring 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 termed them Principles of Faith, if he had pleased, 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'll 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 believed) are destructive, etc. has confuted his whole Book. Why? Because he cannot term them (pray mark the Reason) Principles of Faith, etc. Can any unprejudiced 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 sense 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 sense of those Terms, a point necessary to Salvation) though it was not so before: which is certainly the most extravagant Whimsy that ever got hold of any man's Imagination, but our confused 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 Schoolboy, but knows that Christian Religion teaches many useful and true Doctrines, which are not necessary to Salvation, that yet are really believed 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 itself in some may check at their harshoesse and a particular sweetness of temper in others, very much allay the Malignancy of their Poison, 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 Bishop's, 
† Compend. pag. 79.  That he himself will turn Protestant, if the Bishop shows him but one single Paragraph in all his Book, in relation to their dangerous Principles that he has not fully answered, etc. 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 performed, 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 answered one single word of it to any purpose, as I have already showed 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 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 reduced 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 implicitly throws the same dirt upon the Bishop; maliciously insinuating as if neither of them believed their own Books. His words are these; To conclude (says He) let me once more remind 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 Dissuasive from Popery, viz. That though 'twere liked, yet 'twas but turning the Tables, and he could write a Book twice as good. This Story has the very complexion of a Popish Lie, 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 disguised to men, who have the use of their Faculties, their despair 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 die either in their Acquaintance or Neighbourhood are sure to be of their Faith after their Deaths, though all their lives they abhorred it? the Dead are as constantly reported theirs, as if they had been Baptised in their Names, according to the custom of the Primitive Corinthians, or as is they were to be reckoned 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 hooked within the Toils of their Universality; no sooner does a man's Reason and his Sense begin to leave him, but presently the Catholic Religion lays claim to him; and indeed he is then most fit for that Communion, and a proper Tool for Priests and Jesuits 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 die quietly in their Beds, nor so much as rest in their Graves for the unwearied practices of the Pope's 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 success has forced 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 Spoil and Havoc they make of men's 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 lawless Church Corsairs, these desperate Picaroons for Popery, rob with modesty, and be satisfied with making private men their Prize, we should perhaps content ourselves to despise their little Piracies, and laugh at their feeble Inroads. 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 Gaolers' Prisoners, and erect their ridiculous Trophies upon the Tombs of their Conquerors. When nothing will serve their turns but that Chillingworth himself must be believed to die a Papist, and Bishop King to be reconciled 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 intolerable, and their Lies grow mischievous; 'tis then necessary to expose the folly of their vain Pretences, and warn the people of their large Dispensations.  
I shall now appeal to the Judgement of any unprejudiced man, who has read Dr. Tailor's Dissuasive from Popery, and if 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 Jesuits can speak Truth, and that Popish Controvertists may be sometimes in the right, Dr. Tailor's 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 so foul a scandal as that of being a concealed 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 myself into the business. 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 Morals of a Jesuit, and the Christianity of a Romish Zealot.  
For what is intended in this malicious Passage to reflect on the Bishop of Lincoln, as if he were as bad a Hypocrite, as Dr. Taylor is here represented to have been, and could have writ (if he had pleased) 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 lived 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 Lies, 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, 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 gauled 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 satisfied 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 deformed, it has at last outlived the help of Art. The Writings of their best Wits, and their most eminent Scholars have, in my Opinion, done it more hurt than good; when they have adorned it all they can with strained pieces of Rhetoric out of the Fathers, and daubed it as much as possible with the forced Flatteries of Councils; when they have set it forth in the specious colours of pretended Union and Universality, and covered it all over with School-distinctionns, what can an indifferent man conclude but that such vast pains would not, nor need not be taken, except it were to hide some notorious Defects; such extreme studied Ornaments are evident proofs of great want of natural Beauty: in a word, this Spiritual Whore does but appear the more Strumpet through the gross 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 join 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 fruitless the contrary Endeavours and Contrivances of wicked and unreasonable Men; fallacious Writers, and Traitorous Plotters; that He would keep the most knowing, and best civilised Nation in the World from falling again under the Barbarism of Popery, from being Oppressed by the Tyranny, and cumbered with the Weight of this huge unwieldy Mass of Nonsense, and Puppetry. This farce of Ceremonies, this Counterfeit Christianity, this Enemy to true Learning, and free Philosophy; this Discourager of Trade and useful 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 convinced her of, has not only overthrown the Foundations of real Goodness and true Piety, but even of necessary Faith, and common Honesty, loosening the very Bands and Ligaments, and undermining the Props of Civil Communities.  
FINIS.