AN ANSWER TO PEREAT PAPA: OR, A Reply by way of Letter FROM A GENTLEWOMAN to a Person of QUALITY; Commending to her consideration a Paper Entitled PEREAT PAPA; Or, REASONS why POPERY should not inherit the CROWN.  Answer a Fool according to his Folly. 
SIR,  
HAD the Paper you sent me, entitled Pereat Papa, or Reasons why Popery should not usurp the Crown, come accidentally to my hands, and had not been seriously recommended to my observation by you, I should have concluded its Author had jocularly intended, or to, use his own phrase, conceived, and that very candidly, such Reason's proper to Burlesque, a late Design for altering the Succession, on account of that so often baffled a Cause called Popery. But instructed by your Letter from so wild a Reflection, I begin to consider it as the Labours of some Grand Sage— Ignoramus of the Common-Law, which furnishes its Students with Reasons intelligent to none but themselves; but Reasons, since he is pleased to call them, so let them be; for should a silly Woman venture to question that Title, she might perhaps anger some terrible Judge that daily deals out Death with the like Logic.  
Therefore with humble submission to such powerful Disputants, who can destroy by precedent those they cannot confute, I will give you my Observations thereupon, and first upon his Preamble, in these following words.  
It is conceived, and that very candidly, without prejudice to others Judgements, or troubling ourselves with that so often baffled a Cause called Popery, That a Papist ought not to inherit or succeed to the management of the Crown.  
ANS. Now as to his candid conceiving, without prejudice to his Judgement, I humbly conceive, That those acquaint words, and all the rest so ill put together, are mere Nonsense; and that without the help of his Title it would be hard to find out his meaning to be, That a Papist ought not to succeed to the Crown: His first pretended Reason is,  
R. 1. In strictness of Law, because one so qualifyed hath wilfully disabled or rendered himself uncapable of that Benefit which the Common-Law (after the usual course of descent) doth positively require, for 'tis presumable, That he that succeeds in the Office of the Crown should be legally adopted to execute so great a trust; and therefore if Minus Idoneus not sufficiently ballasted with the Notions and Intrigues of State, others are to govern in aid of him, as in case of Ideocy, Lunacy, or the like, and the Parliament is bound (as trusted to redress Grievances and secure the Nation) to place it where Religion and Property shall be adjudged most safe.  
ANS. Here he would be thought a Lawyer, a Calling I have not professed, because I observe Women are rarely made Judges; but yet I am not so ignorant of the Common-Law, but that I have heard it defined to be right reason, guided by ancient usage: Therefore if this Gentleman had brought but one Precedent where a Papist had been put by the Crown, merely for being such, he had saved himself and his Readers much trouble in composing and observing so many nothings, as his eight unintelligable Reasons amount to: But in the name of Wonder, how does a Papist Prince incapacitate himself for the Crown by the Common-law, (after the usual course of descent) when from the time of the Conqueror there has been one and twenty of that Religion, and but five of the Reformed Church, have worn the Imperial Crown of this Realm; but to speak to the purpose, it is plain that the Common-law altars not the Succession on account of Religion, nor indeed on any account whatsoever, no not if the King be Minus Idoneus, Infant, Idiot, or Lunatic: for right reason, continual usage, with numberless Precedents in this and other Hereditary Monarchies, teach us. That such alterations would do more harm to Religion and Property, than any of those Temporary Inconveniences, so that the Common-Law, both by Precedent and right reason, abhors his Reason: and what the Power or duty of Parliaments in this Case is, I am sure is a Theme too high for him or me to define; therefore I will pass on to his 6 pretended Precedents of that nature, and if any of them proves the least part of his purpose, I will submit my Reason to be the Slave of Incoherency for ever.  
Precedent the 1st. Edgar Ethling, (as Stories agree) was the undoubted Heir, yet William the Norman, commonly called the Conqueror, was called in to oppose Harold, and invested with the Crown, and Ethling for ever an Exile and disinherited.  
2dly. After him succeeded his second Son, William Rufus, and not Robert the eldest.  
ANS. By his leave, Stories do not agree, that William was called in, though Edgar the right Heir 'tis true was put by, but 'tis as true (that Stories agree) that Liberty and Property were thereupon destroyed; for William divested whom he pleased of their Lands, to gratify his Fellow Conquerors: Nor did the second William deal Kindlier with any whom he suspected had the least Eye to his Brother Robert's Signiority; nor was the Nation freed from this Tyranny until the Blood of the right Saxon Heir Edgar was again inocculated into the Crown by the Wife of Henry the First. Would any Man then in his right wits write such Precedents in order to preserve Religion and Property?  
3dly. King John not only laid aside Arthur Plantagenet, his elder Brother's Son, but likewise put him to death.  
ANS. By this Precedent Ignoramus discovers his Morals; For that King John usurped against his Nephew Arthur none denys; and that thereupon ensued Bloody Intestine Broils, with the loss of Normandy etc. with other National Miseries, the constant consequences of such mutations, but that he murdered his Nephew he ever denied; though had our Lawyer been of his Council, he might have boasted it, because 'tis two to one, the young Prince stood Popishly affected.  
4thly. In Sicily there was lately a great Contest between the two Sons of Charles the Second, Martellus and Robert, and I find the Crown awarded to Robert the youngest, as, Magnus dignus ad Regandum.  
5thly. Alexander was demanded to whom he would bequeath his Sceptre, he said, To the worthiest, and to him whose Sword hath the sharpest point; meaning, to him whose Virtues were most Luculent, and of the brightest Integrity, according to the disposition of Jacob, passing by Manasses, and conferring the Blessing on Ephraim the younger, as most deserving and acceptable to God.  
ANS. Now would I defy your Author, or the most cunning Sophister on Earth, to make these two Precedents, or any part of them, to quadrate in the least with his Title to them: There are several Precedents of this nature, but he is extreme lucky in his choice, both of words and matters which are nothing to the purpose, and above all in the next.  
6thly. The State of France rejected the King of Navarr, and appointed Henry the Fourth to reign over them, because of another Religion, in leaving God, and complying with their Church, to gain a Crown, with what a Tragical end did they reward him?  
ANS. Would not this Precedent give me just cause to believe, That the Gentleman was burlesqueing his Cause; for who could think a man so ill versed in History, should pretend to quote Precedents from it; They rejected, says he, the King of Navarr for Henry the Fourth; and why could he not have said, They rejected again Henry the Fourth for the King of Navarr; and so it had been a noble Precedent to such as did not know that Henry the 4th, and the King of Navarr, were one and the same Person: But why should I concern myself with so impertinent a Paper; for indeed all his Precedents are as much to the purpose, as the reply to ones demand, Why the Devil was generally painted with Horns? how says the other, did you never read in Scripture, that the Devil goes about like a roaring Lion, seeking whom he may devour. Therefore, not much to combat a Nothing. I will only observe the Gentleman strangely forgot one Precedent, proper indeed to his Principals and Morals, that is, the Deposal and Murder of Charles the First, on pretence, amongst other Falsehoods, that he favoured Popery; This truly, as to his design, is worth a thousand such as he hath quoted.  
Reas. 2. Can it be thought but that he that succeeds in the Crown, should not succeed Concurrentibus his qui in jure requiserunt, as the Civil Law expresses it, That in all the concerns thereof, which are the Laws, principally those that relate to Religion, and not for one man led away with a purblind perverseness, renouncing the Religion he knows not why, (and so wilfully attainting himself) to enthral the Nation in Superstition and Tyranny; for regularly in all parts, where Popish Lords are in the Church, there Tyranny of course rages in the State.  
ANS. Can this be thought to look to any reasonable man like Reason, for, except a scrap of Latin, (whereby the Gentleman pretends to the Civil Law, of which he understands as much as of the Common, or History) there is not one word to the purpose; for, what can purblind perverseness, or wilfully attainting himself mean more than malice, as the whole Sentence indeed is intended for, concluding with a positive falseness, since it is well known we owe our thanks for Magna Charta, and other Franchises to Popish Princes.  
Reas. 3. 'Tis a Maxim amongst Lawyers, that, Lex facit Regem; and Maxims must not be denied; if so, then to speak out after the true intendment of the Law; he that comes not to the Crown satiatim, as the Law notifies, and prescribes, 'tis no lawful Succession, but downright usurpation, and without scruple it is in the Devoir of every good Christian to withstand an Usurper, it being undoubtedly more pleasing to God to put one man by who thus wilfully disables himself, and withal most shamefully usurps, than expose Millions of Souls to Damnation, and the Streets to flow with Blood, by suffering that Religion to creep in, whose Reformation (at the milder rate) will certainly prove Fire and Faggot.  
For this very cause Mecha was removed from being Queen, by her Son King Asa, for making an Idol in a Grove, incited thereunto by the Prophet Azariah.  
ANS. I will believe it is a Maxim, and by it is only meant: That by the Law, the next of blood, is made King; for as to his inference, 'tis malicious, Traitorous, and Ridiculous, setting up in every pretended good Christian, a power to depose any Prince he pleases to call an Usurper; for his Fire and Faggots they are merely Wildfire in his own Brains, as his Example of King Asa is, who only took from his Mother the dignity of a Queen: for the Regal Power was before in himself, and sure he had reason to suppress in his first Subject so great an Example of Idolatry.  
Reas. 4. The succession of the Crown and a common descent much differ, for if an Heir that's a subject prove loose and debauched it little damnifies the Public, more deserving persons may haply step into his Possession, and be more serviceable to the Public; the damage is still but private to his own Family. But in case of the Crown, there is none so senseless but must needs conceive the damage most fatal, because universal, the whole Nation must inevitably suffer, Religion be subverted, and Property destroyed, and the whole people in danger of their lives.  
'Tis well known in the private case, the Heir is usually thrown off and disinherited, if an Entail, it may be destroyed, and the Law justifies it. The like in the public of the Throne (the Grand Inquisitors of State and Conservators of the Liberties of England) the Parliament may for weighty Causes refuse the Heir presumptive, and for the safety of the Nation, settle it where they in honour and prudence conceive most proper.  
ANS. What shall I say more to all this New-Nothing, but that 'tis not fit he or I should limit the power of the King in his Parliament; but 'tis to be supposed that they will know best how to obey new Laws, who are not factious against the Old, as your Author most impudently appears to be, notwithstanding his Golden Rule.  
Reas. 5. We read in Scripture, which is the Golden Rule we must walk by; That Libnah revolted from Jehoram because he had forsaken the God of his Fathers, and so we had better forsake man and adhere to God in keeping our Religion, than trust to man and lose God, to be unavoidably destroyed here, and hereafter irrecoverably damned in serving Baal, and parting with the Divinity now established.  
ANS. This might have past as well for a Precedent, as a Reason, but that he infers from it a necessity to revolt from the worship of Baal, for the Divinity established, which privilege by my consent no body shall deny him, since he has already made a revolt from Commonsense and Humanity, by so many vain and Chimerical suppositions as are put together in this and his next Reason.  
Reas. 6. When Rehoboam had prepared a huge Army to reduce the Israelites, he was forbidden by the Prophet, Thus saith the Lord, ye shall not go up nor fight against your brethren, for this is for me, mark, he calls them Brethren not Rebels.  
Passive Obedience therefore is simple and fit for tame Owls that know no better, now God has discovered the Snare and the Pit of Ruins that the Pope and the Devil has prepared for us, if we do not timely countermine it by cautionary Laws to suppress those that digged it, we may in a short space be thrown into it headlong and no one pity us.  
But the Right Line with some shallow pated talkers, is a Noli me tangere, so sacred forsooth, that we must venture Body and Soul in subjecting ourselves to all the curses imaginable that Hell itself can inflict on us, rather than in the least alter or control it, a very frivolous Caveat, and not to be heeded, humane examples, as I showed before, have voted against it, and the Scripture warrants it, Samuel foretold in the Case of Saul that he would be rejected for his disobedience, though not his Person degraded or Deposed, yet that the Kingdom should both be removed from his Line and Tribe, which was done accordingly, and transferred on David.  
This proves very fully that Heirs, or next in Succession, are not so immovably placed, but that they may lawfully (on just Cause) be displaced, if not legally Qualified, and others put up for God's glory in their Rooms.  
God raised Jehu to purge Idolatry against the House of Ahab, all the Sons of Ahab were beheaded, and in a manner his whole Line cut off, for his good Service he had a Promise of a special Blessing for his Issue to continue the Throne to the fourth generation, several other instances I could give, but this may suffice.  
In brief there is no Reformed Church, from the first Waldenses of Lions and Languedock to this very day, but have held it lawful.  
ANS. Through all the railing and no Reason of this long Reason, I will only pick out these Observations; First, That the Author is no true Son of the Church of England, who has always taught her Children Passive Obedience at least, for which they are by our mannerly Statists branded with the Titles of Tame Owls and shallow pated Talkers.  
Secondly, That he has cast an Aspersion on all the Reformed Churches, from the first Waldenses, etc. to this day, for holding his Wild Principles and bloody Examples lawful.  
Thirdly, What greater advantage he could have given the Jesuits, falsely charged with such Principles, to retort them on the Reformers, I cannot tell, but this am sure, if it be true, it is a fair Caveat to all Princes, not subject to such Doctines, to be careful of their spreading in their Dominions, for at worst 'tis less dangerous to have one Mad Deposer, called the Pope, at a distance, then to have every Town in ones Dominions crowded with such Sovereign Judges, whose Sentences may be executed according to this Divinity by every desperate hand.  
Reas. 7. 'Tis conceited by half-witted Statesmen, that Restrictive Laws may prevent all mischief, and secure the Protestants: A very vain Opinion, and most fallacious; for Laws will never bind, but more enrage, shackle him as you will, and load him with ne'er so many Laws, when King, he and his Party will be restless, till they have set themselves at liberty, and to have the Protestants under; when King he is not Impeachable, and the posse Regni will then be at his disposal.  
When the Wolf is Shepherd, the Flock is very safe indeed, and like to be well looked to; after all denounceable at will; for if his Party now commit such outrages, that no Age can parallel, what will they do then? now no man safe in his Bed, than none safe at all; they will adventure to murder people covertly, and in their houses, for they hold it no more sin than to kill a Dog.  
ANS. The Gent. might have been more mannerly in his Character, if it be considered what Statesman has lately in Council, or rather to the Parliament, declared his Opinion for the Restrictive Laws under a right Succession; whose Declaration ought to have made that matter, A noli me tangere, at least to any private person: But he that dare speak evil of Dignities, and brand Superiors with the Title of half-witted Statesmen, would, had he but half the courage that he has malice, commit greater outrages, than Fancy can make the others guilty of.  
Reas. 8. In fine, be sure he and his Party (which will daily increase, and the Protestants decline) will soon get an opportunity, either by Stratagem, or open force, to avoid all Laws, though they are ne'er so strong and wary, and so impossible to be safe without a Protestant Successor.  
ANS. This Prophetical Reason, in fine, is at best but one Doctor's Opinion, and, I doubt me, but a mere Mountebank at the Pulse of a Kingdom: of which I will assure you, Sir, I perceive by his Paper he knows so little, that a better Discourse often comes ex tempore from a good Woman at a Gossipping upon the same Subject. For the whole, 'tis an unconnext Rhapsody of mere words, interlaced with scraps of Latin, brought in to as little purpose as his Precedents; so that if he be your Acquaintance (for Friend he cannot be to so worthy a Person) persuade him to keep his Ignorance out of Paper hereafter; and his Impudence, to treat of Subjects so much above his comprehension, will pass off well enough in Coffeehouses, where to rail sufficiently against Popery, is policy to the purpose: To which Crowds of unthinking Praters, I freely bequeath him, as I do myself, to be for ever,  
Yours.   

SIR,  
SInce my Answer to yours, in slight observations, on Pereat Papa, I find the Author so fond of his folly, as to put it in print, though with a little alteration, I suppose by direction from the Printer, for he has changed his first Precedent; not into better sense, nor a jot more to his purpose, but into something that shows he has been told by some body, that Henry the Fourth of France, was the rejected King of Navarre; but his Historian, it seems, could not inform him, that the Crown was settled on his Head, and that he had a long, glorious, and prosperous Reign, till assassinated by a desperate, barbarous, and irreligious Villain, upon a private revenge as was ever believed, and has been since confessed by Ravillacks' Brother on his Deathbed in Germany. The Printer too had the manners, I suppose, against the Authors will, to leave out the witty Epithet of tame Owls, given to the passive obedience in his sixth Reason; other material change there is none, and you must pardon this, being printed since: 'Tis pity the World should see the Coxcomb uncorrected, and that by the hand of a Woman, the provocation whereof, I suppose, made him appeal to the more Judicious in print, and has forced me to do the same, with this addition to my first Sentence— Bray a Fool in a Mortar, and he will not return from his folly.