Reflections UPON THE NEW TEST, AND The REPLY Thereto WITH A LETTER OF Sir FRANCIS WALSINGHAM's, Concerning the PENAL LAWS Made in the REIGN of Queen ELIZABETH.  
LONDON: Printed in the Year MDCLXXXVII.   

REFLECTIONS UPON THE New Test, AND The REPLY thereto.  
THE design of the Test is to attack the Church of England's Loyalty, and the substance of it is, That she owns the King Supreme Head in Ecclesiastical Affairs, that she began under Ed. 6. and at his Death endeavoured to set up a Brat of her own, and exclude Queen Mary the only Legitimate, because she was a Catholic; after her Death Queen Elizabeth, a known Bastard, raised this Church again to support the weakness of her Title, and no sooner was this Church under her re-established, than those Cannibal Laws were Enacted of Hanging the Priests of the living God, together with other penal Laws; that she Murdered the Queen of Scots, who was the undoubted Heir to the Crown, that to Charles I. this Church was faithful, but on the other hand, to force an Universal Uniformity to her Liturgy, etc. was the occasion of that War, and she now refuses to repeal the Test, and penal Laws; that the King will no longer trust her, and that she should learn obedience from her Catholic Neighbours. Thus far the Test.  
To this is replied, That the Church of England does own the King's Supremacy; and therefore thinks herself more Loyal than the Romanists, who rob the King of that part of his Prerogative, that after Ed. 6. Death, the Kingdom was divided about the Title to the Crown; some for Queen Mary, some for Lady Jane, and Protestants on both sides, and while the Title was to them dubious, neither party could be charged with Disloyalty: That if Queen Eliz. was a known Bastard, the Romanists were the disloyal Party in setting her upon the Throne, and excluding the lawful Heir, which they did by a Popish Parliament, sitting at Queen Mary's Death, so that it appeared by their own Parliament, that Mary Queen of Scots was not lawful Heir, and therefore it could be no disloyalty in Executing her for Treason. That 'twas not the Church of England's Ambition from whence that War in Charles I. time ensued, but from the division the Romanists had wickedly made amongst Protestants, by one called Faithful Commin, and others of the Fraternity; then the Author recriminates, shows it to be the declared opinion of the Church of Rome, that she has power to Depose Princes, and gives several instances where very often they have put that opinion into practice. Thus far the Replyer.  
The Replyer, though he has sufficiently answered the Pamphlet; yet since Loyalty is almost the only thing, which at this time recommends us to our Princes' Favour; he might, and aught to have given a more ample account of our Fidelity to Princes: I shall now therefore take both the Test and the Reply into particular Examination, and show the defects of both.  
But, first, I would willingly know, what prospect the Author of the Test could have by publishing such a Pamphlet? Was it to oblige his Party by drawing us out to expose both their Principles and Practices in point of Civil Obedience? which may be with as great ease justly done, as we can through off that malicious and false charge of his; or was it to oblige the King by blowing up these Fears and Jealousies, which his Majesty, a gracious Father of his Country, has used means to allay: His Majesty tells us we are Loyal, and assures us of his Protection, the Test tells us, we are Snakes in his Bosom, and the King will not protect us: for my part, let this Fellow stare and brazen as he pleases, I shall believe the King, whatever he would have us think of him.  
When so heavy a charge was laid upon our Church, me thinks in reason the Author should have showed the World what Convocation, or at lest what private Doctor of our Communion ever acknowledged it as a Principle of our Church, that disobedience to the supreme Magistrate, was upon any score whatsoever allowable, that is, that we might refuse both active and passive obedience: for else, admit he could instance, that some of our Communion have acted Disloyally, it proves no more, than that some who have in outward appearance professed themselves to be with us, were not really so, nor did keep up to the Principles of our Church. What's more common than to see a Romanist drunk upon a Fasting Day, but unless I hear them justify the thing as allowable, shall I reason from their bare practice, that their Church allows Debauchery upon those days she has pointed out for Mortification. Wherefore the Tests absolute silence herein demonstrates, either that he is a great Dunce at Argument, or that there is no such thing to be found in our Principles, no, not from the Testimony of any single Doctor. And of this defect the Replyer takes no notice.  
The Members of the Church of England, says the Test, were faithful to Charles I. but on the other hand their ambition to force Uniformity, etc. was cause of the ensuing War. He means, if to the purpose, That an ambition to force an Uniformity in Religion, is Disloyalty; which is a most admirable Discovery! especially since the Church of Rome can so easily clear herself from the guilt of that Ambition. If what he allegeth were true, his Reprehension is just like an old Drunkard in a drunken Fit railing against Drunkenness. But the Replyer has showed him a more probable and natural cause of that War, and has well referred to that Book of Foxes and Firebrands, which will give a reasonable Enquirer full satisfaction; and further, from thence well observes what excellent Subjects Romanists make to Protestant Kings. We are not now to be surprised with their Tests, and suchlike Pamphlets; we are sensible the glorious Lustre of the Church of England does so offend and dazzle their weak Eyes, that it must be darkened, though the Fog be raised from Hell; and therefore thus goes on the Test: After Edward the Sixth's death, Protestants endeavoured to set up a Brat of their own to exclude Queen Mary, because she was a Catholic, at whose death Queen Elizabeth raised this Church to support the weakness of her Title; and then they Murdered the Queen of Scots, who was the undoubted Heir to the Crown.  
A Brat, to exclude Queen Mary, because a Catholic: Nay, we were more wicked than this: for we set this Brat up too, to exclude Queen Elizabeth, because she was a Protestant: for in excluding one, we excluded both, And if we thought we had power to pull down, and put up, as the Popes assume, why did we not as well put up Elizabeth as Lady Jane? The Index Expurgatorius has not yet done the honour of a Visit to our Modern Histories, and therefore in them we find, that by a Cabal only of some of King Edward' s Council, he was prevailed upon by his last Will, and Letters-Patents, to settle the Crown upon the Lady Jane. This by the Procurers of the Settlement, was declared to the People, and she was proclaimed Queen. Queen Marry also she puts up her Title. Upon this the Kingdom was in a general distraction; but the greatest part of Protestants were with Queen Mary, and 'twas through their means she ever reached the Throne. But I shall forbear mentioning how nobly she rewarded their Services; 'tis enough to my purpose, to prove they were Protestants, and that they were so, is clear, because the Protestant Party were so considerable in the Kingdom at that time, that they might have carried whatsoever Interest they had espoused: But it appears further by the Queen's promise at that time to her Army, which was, That she would never alter the Religion established by Edward the Sixth; and 'twas very likely she should think to engage a Popish Army by a Promise never to alter the Protestant Religion. This then is the truth of the Case: The Lady Jane was put up by a small designing Party, who had got several ignorant people to believe that the deceased King had made her a good Title; but the body of Protestants were faithful to Queen Mary, and forced her way to the Crown. To whom succeeded Queen Elizabeth, whom this modest Gentleman honours with the Title of Known Bastard. If it be so, yet these things fall out a little unhappily: for the Protestants set up the Legitimate Queen Mary; and as the Replyer truly observes, The Members of a Popish Parliament, setting at Queen Mary' s death, were the first that moved in proclaiming the Known Bastard Queen Eliz. Thus 'tis taking it for granted what he affirms; but now for truth: By regular proceed in this Kingdom, Katherine Mother of Queen Mary, and Hen. 8. were divorced à vinculo Matrimonii, than he takes to Wise Ann B. of whom is born Q. Eliz. This Divorce was just, or not; if just, there's no question of Q. Eliz. Legitimation; if not just, it must be either because there is no Power in this Kingdom to determine in such cases, or that in this they had not justly determined. If these cases are not determinable here, they must be determined by a Foreign Jurisdiction, or nowhere; and to Appeal to a Foreign Jurisdiction, in any case, is a Praemunire, by a Statute made in Popish times. That they made a just Determination, they have the warrant of most of the Universities beyond Sea, for whose Opinions H. 8. scent; and the perpetual standing Law of the Nation, which in this case was always judged to be grounded upon the Law of God: for which, see Harrison and Dr. Burnwell's use in Lord Vaughan's Reports. Now let the Reader judge: But why should we be forced to dispute this matter, when by Act of Parliament tricess. quin. H. 8. 'tis settled that both Mary and Elizabeth shall inherit? What more than had we to do, but to pay our Obedience to our Lawmakers? which I hope will something excuse us, if 'twere true, as 'tis not, that Mary Queen of Scots, before that Act, had right to be Successor to our Queen Mary: But the Test will have the Queen of Scots Title preferable; yet has not somuch as endeavoured to give us a reason for that opinion: To this his Magisterial Affirmation we oppose; first, The Arguments already offered for Queen Elizabeth's Legitimation: Secondly, The Act of Parliament, just before mentioned: Thirdly, As the Replyer has urged, the unanimous Opinion of a Popish Parliament, sitting at Queen Mary's Death; and indeed he might have said, the unanimous consent of the whole Nation? For I defy this Test Writer to produce, one that publicly dissented to proclaim Queen Elizabeth: So universally then was her Title allowed, and her Person esteemed. I have yet this further reason, That at Queen Mary's Death, the Queen of Scots did not so much as put in any Claim to the Crown; but on the contrary, in the first of Queen Elizabeth's Reign, there was a very indearing, and Sisterly Correspondence between the two Queens, every Week Letters of Kindness, and Civility passed, which was very unlike the carriage of Competitors for a Crown; of the truth of this, any one will be satisfied, that so much as looks into the Memoires of Sir James Melvill, the Queen of Scots great Minister.  
But if after all this, you will have it that this Queen did pretend to the Crown; than you have given a very good reason for her Execution; if she did not, then certainly 'twas possible for her to be guilty of Crimes deserving Death: Wherefore, if we are chargeable for that Action, 'tis our Justice, not our Loyalty, must receive the blemish: But to excuse ourselves herein, let it be considered. That when the Queen of Scots was forced by her own Subjects, to fly to England for Protection, she was received by Queen Elizabeth, and her Council, with intention to restore her to her Crown, and Country, as is evident by two Papers; one is the Advice Sir Henry Mildmay gave about it; the other, a Letter of the Earl of Leicester's to the Earl of Sussex; both which may be seen copied immediately from the Originals in Dr. Burnet's Hist. Reformation. And it can't be supposed, that 'twas for nothing that our Queen's intentions received this turn: The Queen of Scots officious Friends had a great mind to see an end of Elizabeth's Reign, nor did they leave any thing unattempted to effect it, either by secret Attempts, or public Rebellions; the Queen suspected from whence all this came, and at last was satisfied, when she sound the Queen of Scots own hand to a Letter wrote to Babington and Ballard about their Plot; and then our Queen thought 'twas high time, both for the safety of herself, & the Kingdom, to bring the Queen of Scots to her Trial, upon which she was found guilty of Treason.  
I shall now sum up this matter. Under Edward you say we first began, during whose Reign you have nothing to say, as to the point of Loyalty, against us: and I have fully proved we brought Queen Mary his Successor to the Throne. To her Successor Queen Eliz. you yourself own we were a Prop, and we did indeed help to defeat the disloyal attempts of Romanists against her. I have proved that Mary Queen of Scots was not deprived of any present Right, and of a future Right she might be deprived, without any Act of Disloyalty. Under King James, Elizabeth's Successor, the Test does not so much as affirm we were disloyal: To King Charles the First, King James' Successor, our Author acknowledges we were faithful in all his Troubles: Nor does he in the least blame us in Charles the Second time. Thus, without the least appearance of Disloyalty, have we brought ourselves to this present King, who has seen our forwardness to be as Loyal to him as to his Predecessors: 'Tis well known what sort of a Lower House that was which brought in the Bill of Exclusion; but when it came to the Lords House, (from whence the Popish Lords were excluded) they showed their Fidelity by throwing it out. How readily, at Monmouth's appearance did the Parliament protest to stand by the King, and how freely did divers Protestant Gentlemen venture themselves in the King's Cause, and this they must always upon occasion do, if they measure their actions either by the Principles, or Practices of our Church.  
Our Author therefore is a great Friend to the King, in calling us to learn of our Catholic Neighbours, which is to debauch this good Principle; and I shall expose to the World some of the Lessons they would teach us: at our entrance we must learn that Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction (which is a glorious part of the King's Prerogative) belongs to the Pope; so strongly does the Test fancy, that their Church of right assumes this Power; that he ridicules the contrary Opinion, as a particular Revelation to the Church of England. In answer to this, the Replyer has well referred to Dr. Barrow, and Lord Cook, but because some may not have these Books, I shall give one or two plain instances: Greg. 1. 15. Ep. 11. 56. doth allege divers Laws of divers Emperors, concerning Ecclesiastical affairs, as obligatory Rules of practice; and divers Laws concerning things Ecclesiastical, made by the Emperor, are extant in the Codes of Theodosius and Justinian. The Christian Emperors took upon them to depose Bishops and Popes, (though since the Popes are even with them) Constantius banished Pope Liberius, and put another in his room: Otho put out John the Twelfth, Justinian deposed Pope Silverius, and banished Pope Vigilius; and the same Emperor prescribed Conditions and Qualifications concerning the Ordination of Bishops; and subjoins, Si quis autem citra memora tam observationem Episcopus ordinetur, jubemus hunc omnibus modis Episcopatu depelli. Justin. Novel. 123. Ca 1. But if any Bishop be Ordained without using our foremention'd constitution, we Command, that by all means he be removed from his Bishopric. Omnes, says Leo 1. to Theodocius the Emperor. Partiam Ecclesiae nostrarum, omnes mansuetudini vestrae cum gemitibus & Lacrymis supplicant Sacerdotes, ut generalem Synodum jubeatis intra Italiam celebrari: Leo 1. Ep. 42. nor was this power usurped by the Emperors, as sometimes loyal Catholics pretend. No, quite contrary, Semper fuit Orthodoxis, & piis Imperatoribus, etc. This is what the Pious and Orthodox Emperors did. Justin in Syn. 5. Collat. 1. p. 209. but what's yet higher, Haec (says the Council of Arles) Domino Imperatori praesentanda decrevimus, poscentes ejus Clementiam ut si quid hîc minus est, ejus prudentiâ Suppleatur, si quid secus quàm se ratio habet, ejus judicio emendetur; si quid rationabiliter taxatum est, ejus adjutario divinâ opitulante Clementiâ perficiatur. Council. Arel. 4. ca 26. Ann. 813. Sub Carolo M. These things we have Decreed to be presented to our Lord the Emperor, desiring his Clemency, that if any thing be defective, it may be supplied by his Prudence; if any thing be unreasonable, it may be corrected by his Judgement; if any thing be reasonably ordered, it may, by his help, the Divine Grace assisting, be Perfected. So that it seems notwithstanding the blustering the Popes make now, it was a revelation to all the Churches of the World in the first Ages, that the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction was in the Temporal Magistrate. This also have Papist Kings and their Lay-Subjects justified in England. Xenulphus by his Letters Patents, did grant to Abbot Ruchin, Quod praedictus Ruchinus, etc. That the said Ruchin should for ever be free from all Episcopal Jurisdiction whatsoever. This was pretty well for a Temporal Prince without Ecclesiastical Power; and to demonstrate that he was not singular in assuming this Power, this Charter was confirmed by King Edwin, and pleaded the 1 H. 7. and allowed and continued till the dissolution of that Abbey in H. 8. When H. 1. founded the Abbey of Reading, the Charter run thus: Henricus Dei, etc. Statuimus tam Ecclesiasticae quam Regiae prospectu potestatis, ut, etc. We appoint as well by our Ecclesiastical as Temporal Power, etc. In the 25 Ed. 1. by a Parliament held at Carlisle, it is declared, That the Holy Church of England was founded in the State of Prelacy by the King, and his Progenitors, the Pope's Usurpations complained on; and enacted they should not be suffered. By a Statute made 16 R. 2. ca 5. It is declared, That the Crown of England is Subject to none but God. Of this opinion was Bracton, who wrote in H. 3d's time, Omnis, says he, quidem sub Rege & ipse sub nullo, sed tantum sab Deo. Lib. 1. ca 8. nu. 5. Every one owes Obedience to the King, but he to none but GOD. I must give one instance more, if it be only to show the nature of a Begotted Papist. Ed. 3. much concerned, that his Subjects would deprive him of his right by Appeals to Rome, by a Statute it was made a Praemunire, the hearty Begots did so rail and curse at the Executors of that Law, that the Kingdom was obliged to make a Statute on purpose to prevent such defamations. But when after many struggle the Popes did begin to finger this Jurisdiction, as if poisoned with their touch, it immediately swells to such a prodigious magnitude, as quite to over shadow, and crush all other Powers; now 'tis Hunc unum, etc. Pope Pius the Fifth, in his Bull that Excommunicates Queen Elizabeth, Him alone (says he, meaning himself) he made Prince over all People, and all Kingdoms, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build, etc. So that Temporal Princes are but as so many Pageants to be set up, and pulled down as the Infallible Head shall see cause; and an Emperor is no more to a Pope now, than a Pope was to an Emperor heretofore: To prove this, the Replyer has given several very true examples, to which I shall add, That in King John's time, the Loyal Popish Barons were in open Rebellion; The Pope instead of using his pretended Authority to reduce them to their Allegiance, he takes advantage of the King's necessities, and will by no means permit him to nominate a Successor to the deceased Archbishop of Canterbury; but for so doing the King was Excommunicated; this, with the King of France his appearing in the Pope's defence, encouraged the Barons to continue in their Rebellion, and to calumniate their King with the most approbrious language, as Infidel, etc. that no King ever endured the like; finding himself on all hands thus oppressed, his submission to the Pope was absolutely necessary, and therefore now tenders him his Crown, which the Pope by his Legate received; upon this (and all but reason) the King is Absolved, but still the hardy Barons refuse their duty, till the King had ratified their Privileges, etc. which he was forced upon his Oath to agree to. But the King being now a good Child of the Church, is discharged by the Pope from these condescensions to the Barons, the whole compact is declared Null, the King's Oath Dispensed with, and the Barons Excommunicated till they submitted to the Sentence. This is something like, to whip and struck them by turns! Thus the Heaven Door is opened and shut in a breath, that no man alive can be sure whether he shall go in or out.  
When Queen Elizabeth came to this Crown, Sir Edward Karn was by her direction to inform the Pope thereof, who made this humble and obliging return, That England was held in fee of the Apostolic See, that she could not succeed, being illegitimate; nor could be contradict the Declarations made in that matter by his Predecessors, Clement the Seventh and Paul the Third: He said it was great boldness in her to assume to the Crown without his consent or which in Reason she deserved no favour at his hands; yet if she would renounce her Pretensions, and refer herself wholly to him, he would show a fatherly affection to her, and do every thing for her that could consist with the Dignity of Apostolic See; so far the Servus Servorum. In this haughty speech 'tis not so much the Queen's illegitimation is complained on, as her great boldness to assume the Crown without consent of his Holiness: for if she will at last submit, here's great hopes for her, notwithstanding her Illegitimation. But his Successor Pius iv leaves her in no manner of doubt. He sent one Parpalias to her to promise, that if she would join herself to the See of Rome, he would disannul the Sentence against her Mother's Marriage, etc. Hence I observe, that the Popes what e'er they said, did not believe Q. Eliz. Illegitimate, or else what's worse, they declare that for their Temporal Interest they would make that lawful which the Law of God had made unlawful for if Q. Eliz. was a Bastard, she was so, because Hen. the 8's. Marriage with his first Wife was lawful, who was living when Eliz. was born of another woman; if so, nothing is plainer than that this second Marriage was against the Law of God. But 'tis all nothing, there had been no harm done, no rightful heir disseized, no title of a Bastard set up, had Eliz. made her acknowledgements that England was held in fee of the Apostolic See. So speaks the Shepherd, and the sheep know his voice.  
In fine, the King deposing Doctrine is not only practised by one or two wicked Infallible Heads; but 'tis the settled Doctrine of their Church; 'tis that their Lateran Council, and a long Succession of Popes have declared, and that which their best men have employed their Pens to maintain; for which see the Bishop of Lincoln's Brutum Fulmen.  
Whether the Test or Penal Laws ought to be abolished is a subject more proper for the King and Parliament than us: But when you call us Cannibals for making them, you speak like a man of sense, and aught to be considered, though the Replier has taken but little notice of it: their words are these And they (meaning the Church of England) no sooner found themselves re-establisht, than they Enacted those bloody Cannibal Laws to hang, draw and quarter the Priests of the living God: Imprisonment, Banishments, and Confiscation of Goods were the moderate Church of England's Laws, etc. No sooner, he says, were they reestablisht, etc. Now one would think by this representation, that this Law he so abhors, was made the next hour after the Queen was proclaimed, and yet in truth, 'twas the 27 year of the Queen's Reign before this Law had birth. Well, but if Cannibals they must be, who Enact Sanguinary Laws against those that purely descent in matters of Religion, I know no Church deserves the honour of that title but yours: your lenity towards Heretics (and all are Heretics with you, that are not of your faith) is so universally known, that 'tis in vain to trouble the world with particular instances: however if you please, you may look in Qu. Mary's days, look into the Bishop of Lincoln's Book, and when you are looking, look into France: But why do I cry look here, or look there, when 'tis impossible to look amiss? However, since to recriminate is no justification, and since we hear that you pride yourselves to talk of our Penal Laws, endeavouring to render us extremely cruel, I should apply myself particularly to show the reasons and steps of those Laws, did I not find it incomparably well done to my hands by a Letter, which 'tis great pity the whole Kingdom has not read; and though it be long, yet there being not a sentence in it not full of weight, I will for the public good transcribe the whole, which fully vindicates us in this point.   

Sir Fr. Walsingham's Letter to Monsieur Critoy, concerning the Queen's proceed against both Papists and Puritans.  
SIR,  
WHereas you desire to be advertized, touching the proceed here in Ecclesiastical Causes, because you seem to note in them some Inconstancy and Variation, as if we inclined sometimes to one side, and sometimes to another; and as if that Clemency and Lenity were not used of late, that was used in the beginning: All which you imputed to your own superficial Understanding of the Affairs of this State, having, notwithstanding Her Majesty's doing in singular Reverence, as the real Pledges which She hath given unto the World of her Sincerity in Religion, and of the Wisdom in Government, well meriteth.  
I am glad of this occasion, to import that little I know in that Matter unto you, both for your own Satisfaction, and to the end you may make use thereof, towards any that shall not be so modestly and reasonably minded, as you are.  
I find Her Majesty's Proceed to have been grounded upon two Principles.  
The one, that Consciences are not to be forced, but to be won and reduced by force of Truth, with aid of time, and use of good means of Instructions and Persuasion.  
The other, That Causes of Consciences, when they exceed their bounds, and grow to be matter of Faction, lose their Nature, and that Sovereign Princes ought distinctly to punish their Practices and Contempt, though coloured with the Pretences of Conscience and Religion.  
According to these Principles, Her Majesty coming to the Crown, utterly disliking the Tyranny of Rome, which had used by Terror and Rigour to settle Commandments of men's Faith and Consciences; Tho as a Princess of great Wisdom and Magnanimity, She suffered but the Exercise of one Religion; yet her Proceed towards the Papist, was with great Lenity, expecting the good Effects which time might work in them; and therefore Her Majesty revived not the Laws made in the 28th and 35th of her Father's Reign, whereby the Oath of Supremacy might have been offered at the King's pleasure to any Subject, so he kept his Conscience, ne●er so modestly to himself, and the refusal to take the same Oath, without further Circumstances, was made Treason. But contrariwise, Her Majesty not liking to make Windows into men's hearts and secret thoughts, except the abundance of them did over flow into overt and express Acts or Affirmations, tempered Her Law so as it restraineth every manifest Disobedience in impugning and impeaching; advisedly and maliciously, Her Majesty's Supreme Power, maintaining and entolling a Foreign Jurisdiction: And as for the Oath, it was altered by Her Majesty, into a more grateful Form: the hardness of the name and Appestation of Supreme Head, was removed, and the Penalty of the refusal thereof, turned only to disablement to take any Promotion, or to exercise any charge, and yet of Liberty to be reinvested therein, if any man should accept thereof, during his Life. But after, when Pius Quintus Excommunicated Her Majesty, and the Bulls of Excommunication were published in London, whereby Her Majesty was in a sort prescribed, and that thereupon as upon a principal motive or preparative, followed the Rebellion in the North, yet because the ill humours of the Realm were by that Rebellion partly purged, and that she feared at that time no foreign Invasion, and much less the attempt of any within the Realm, not backed by some potent power and secure from without, she contented herself to make a Law against that special Case of bringing in, and publishing any Bulls, or the like Instruments; whereunto was added a Prohibition, upon pain, not of Treason, but of an inferior degree of punishment, against the bringing of the Agnus Dei's, and such other Merchandise of Rome, as are all known, not to be any essential part of the Romanists Religion, but only to be used in practice, as Love tokens, to inchant and bewitch the people's affections, from their Allegiance to their natural Sovereign. In all other points her Majesty continued her former Lenity: But when about the Twentieth year of her Reign, she had discovered in the King of Spain an intention to invade her Dominions; and that a principal part of the Plot, was to prepare a Party within the Realm, that might adhere to the Foreigner; and that the Seminaries began to blossom, and to send forth daily Priests, and Professed men, who should by Vow taken at Shrift, reconcile her Subjects from their Obedience, yea, and hind many of them to attempt against her Majesty's Sacred Person; and that, by the Poison which they spread, the humours of most Papists were altered, and that they were no more Papist in Conscience, and of Softness, but Papist in Pactiou: Then were there new Laws made, for the punishment of such as should submit themselves to such reconcilements, or renunciation of Obedience. And because it was a Treason carried in the Clouds, and in wonderful secrecy, and come seldom to light, and that there was no presuspition thereof so great, as the Recusancy to come to Divine Service, because it was set down by their Decrees, that to come to Church before Reconciliation, was to live in Schism; but to come to Church after reconcilement, was absolutely heretical and damnable. Therefore there were added Laws containing punishment Pecuniary, viz. such as might not enforce Consciences, but to enfeeble and impoverish the means of those about whom it resteth indifferent and ambiguous, whether they were reconciled or not: And when, notwithstanding all this provision, the Poison was dispersed so secretly, as that there was no means to stay it, I ut by restraining the Merchants that brought it in: Then Lastly, there was added a Law, whereby such seditious Priests, of new Erection, were exiled; and those that were at that time within the Land, shipped over, and so commanded to keep hence upon pain of Treason. This hath been the proceeding, though intermingled, not only with sundry Examples of her Majesty's Grace towards such as in her wisdom she knew to be Papist in Conscience, and not Faction and Singularity, but also with extraordinary mitigation towards the offenders in the highest Degree, committed by Law, if they would but protest, that if in Case this Realm should be invaded with a Foreign Army, by the Popes' authority, for the Catholic Cause, as they term it, they would take part with her Majesty, and not adhere to her Enemies.  
For the other Party, which have been offensive to the State, though in another Degree, which named themselves Reformers, and we commonly call Puritan, this hath been the proceeding towards them. A great while, when they inveighed against such abuses in the Church, as Pluralities, Nonresidence, and the like; their Zeal was not Condemned, only their Violence was sometimes Censured. When they refused the use of some Ceremonies and Rites, as Superstitions, they were tolerated with much Connivency and Gentleness; yea, when thy called in Question the Superiority of Bishops, and pretended to a Democracy in the Church; yet, their Propositious were here considered, and by contrary Writings debated and discussed; yet all this while, it was perceived that their Course was dangerous, and very popular: As, because Papistry was odious, therefore it was ever in their Mouths, that they sought to Purge the Church from the Relics of Papistry; a thing acceptable to the People, who love ever to run from one extreme to another.  
Because multitudes of Rogues, and Poverty, was an Eyesore, and a dislike to every man; therefore they put into the People's head, that if Discipline were planted, there should be no Vagabonds nor Beggars, a thing very plausible: And in like manner they promised the People, many of the impossible wonders of their Discipline; besides, they opened to the People a way to Government, by their Consistory and Presbytery; a thing, though in consequence no less prejudicial to the Liberties of private men, than to the Sovereignty of Princes, yet in first show very Popular. Nevertheless this, except it were some few that entered into extreme contempt, was born with, because they pretended in Dutiful manner to make Propositions; and to leave it to the Providence of God, and the Authority of the Magistrate. But now of late years, when there issued from them that affirmed, the consent of the Magistrate was not to be attended; when under pretence of a Confession, to avoid Slander and Imputations, they combined themselves by Classes and Subscriptions, when they descended into that vile and base means of defacing the Government of the Church by ridiculous Pasquil's; when they began to make many Subjects in doubt to take Oaths, which is one of the Fundamental parts of Justice in this Land; and in all places, when they began both to vaunt of their strength, and number of their Partisans and Followers, and to use Comminations that their Cause would prevail, though uproar and Violence; than it appeared to be no more: Zeal, no more Conscience, but mere Faction and Division: and therefore, though the State were compelled to hold somewhat a harder hand to restrain them than before, yet was it with as great moderation, as the Peace of the State or Church could permit. And therefore, Sir, to conclude, consider uprightly of these matters, and you shall see Her Majesty is no more a Temporizer in Religion: It is not the success Abroad, nor the Change of Servants here at home, can alter her; only as the things themselves alter, She applied her Religious Wisdom to Methods correspondent unto them; still retaining the Two Rules before mentioned, in dealing tenderly with Consciences, and yet in discovering Faction from Conscience, and Softness from Singularity. Farewell.  
Your loving Friend, F. Walsingham.  
FINIS.