THE ADVOCATE OF CONSCIENCE LIBERTY, OR, AN APOLOGY FOR TOLERATION RIGHTLY STATED: Showing The Obligatory Injunctions and Precepts for Christian Peace and Charity.  Adversus invidiam nil prodest vera dicere; ●a est enim calumniatoris natura in crimen vocare omnia, probare vero nihil. Demosthenes. They shall be judged without mercy that have showed no mercy. James 2. 12. Thou shalt not calumniate thy Neighbour nor oppress him by violence. Levit. 19 13. 
Printed, 1673.   

PROOEMIUM.  
THe long and grand debate about Toleration (of late so oft, and so fiercely discussed pro and con) by some universally condemned and exploded: by others with as much eagerness affirmed and approved▪ One party writeth copiously of the mischiefs which will follow Toleration; the other writeth as copiously of the necessity of it▪  
How to reconcile these two extremes is hard and difficult, especially when a preposterous zeal to one side or other doth first set so great a sally in our wills and understandings. How many and h●w great have been the feuds and still are of this tottering and broken age, there is no man so happy as to be ignorant. And it is very strange and very sad; that an age which hath so much of light and faith in the pretence, should have so little love and charity in the practoce. For how much of the Christian World is now in Sects, is a thing which requireth more lamentation than proof.  
Now in this general Combustion, It's every Christian's duty to bring what water he can to throw upon the flames: it's the office of all peaceable men to endeavour t●e quenching of these intestine Conf●agrations: to supple and allay the rancour and swelling of this Epidemical evil. He that can stand unconcerned and deny his service to love and peace, and wounded Christ: may soon find he hath lost, even that which he thought to win.  
Had all that profess the Gospel in England made Conscience of Schism: forbearing to judge and despise those that are not of their opinion: loving them still as Brethren and Christians; not censuring them as profane, Antichristian-idolatrous, etc. our breaches had never been so great; nor lovers of peace and truth so much ca●se to lament.  
We have Enemies enough abroad in the world, though Christians be not at variance with themselves. Did we conscientiously apply ourselves and make it our business to practise virtue's, govern our passions, and subdue our appetites and self wills in order to the glory of God: we should find work enough in our own hearts to employ: and neither have time, nor occasion to quarrel with others; making Enemies, when we have so many within ourselves. Did we understand our danger or our duty, and seriously mind either; we should not be so eager, against those whom we ought to consider as friends, upon the account of our relation to God; and the tie of common nature, and obligations of divine precepts, and practice of the best times and hope of future happiness.  
I confess it is a thing unnatural for one Christian to afflict another, (and that which is most to be lamented) for those who think themselves the Salt of the earth, who instead of preserving the world from Putrefaction; and concurring to heal the dividing principles, rather join with calumniators encouraging them in misreports, being glad to hear of any miscarriages, and very ready to take up any light rumours: and are willing tongues of slanderous fame: as if God had need of their m●l●●●ous calumnies to his glory. These are vices and immoralities impious and detestable against which every good Christian, aught to manifest his resentment and be warned to indignation by them.  
Many confident reports, very strong presumptions, may all prove injurious and false: when it comes to the trial. This very age doth experimentally confute, how many impeaceable zealo●s have written and uttered false things, that had neither trut● nor ground at all in them? Extravagant crimes have been imputed on the most ancient Christians. And this is done without Christ's way of a regular process of a just trial and hearing; when the accused is not permitted to answer, or heard speak for himself. So that there must be a sin and injustice in the Calumniator, the believer and reporter.  
How can we think that unbelievers and Infidels, should think well of them that speak so ill of one another? to represent Christians like a company of m●d●nen that are tearing out the throats of one another? or like drunken men who one day fight and wound each other, and the next cry out of their wounds; and yet go on in their drunken fits to make them wider. I had thought that in general calamities every man should have laid his hand upon his own heart and suspect himself to be that Acham that troubles the Camp, that Jonah that occasions the St●●m: and not like guilty Ahab lay the fault of troubling Israel on good E●ias.  
Now when Bellona shakes her bloody whip over this Kingdom: it becometh all good Christians and subjects to leave their feuds, litigations, discords and animosities. To lay aside all uncomely rigour and severities. Like the good Samaritan to be free of their oil, and sparing of their vinegar. To consider some way to engage all hearts and hands in this Nation unanimously (not to multiply disincouragements by penal inflictions) to square out some mild, moderate, pacific way wherein tru● liberty of Conscience or Toleration (properly taken) 〈◊〉. Which I will prove in this following Tractate, not only lawful but necessary; and obligatory as relating to several Religions in this Kingdom. But because this virtue is better elucidated, by showing the viciousness and exorbitancies of the opposite extremes. I will first prove Persecution on the mere sore of Religion unlawful and to be condemned. To be against Policy, Piety, and our own Principles. Secondly I will show that Liberty or Toleration rightly understood is necessarily to be permitted: but improperly taken to be disavowed and condemned. Thirdly, To undeceive many weak and ignorant, I shall make it appear (against the prejudices, passions, mistakes and blind errors of these sad divided times) that the Romanists have as great a right and title to Toleration, as any other Sect whatsoever. Lastly, Solving all the Modern and common Objections to the contrary: With a conclusive exhortation to all pious well-minded and charitable Christians.  

The Question Stated.  
Note by Persecution, imposition and restraint: we only mean the strict requiring to believe this to be true, or that to be false, etc. and upon refusal to swear or conform; to incur the penalties enacted in such Cases. But by these terms we do not mean any coercive let or hindrance into public Meetings.  
By Liberty of Conscience we understand only a mere liberty of mind in believing or disbelieving this or that Doctrine, so far as may refer only to religious matters in a private way of worship: which are not destructive to the nature and grounds of Christian Faith: nor tending to matters of an external Judicature: in abetting any contrivance or disturbance to common peace or civility. Proceeding on the premises the title of the first Chapter will be.    


CAP. I. Persecution on the score of Religion is utterly Condemned and unlawful.  
IMposition, Violence, and Persecution for matters merely relating to Conscience, directly invades the divine prerogative, for God alone is Lord over the Conscience, it is his just Claim and privilege, for as Solomon saith, no man hath power over Conscience. Luther 
Eccles.  in the Book of Civil Magistrates, saith the Law of them extends no farther than Body and Goods, for over Conscience God alone ruleth: in the same Book in the building of the Temple, saith he, there was no sound of Iron heard, to signify that Christ will have in his Church a free and willing people not compelled by human Laws and Statutes, God hath exempted the soul out of your Commission, etc.  
The Cause and reason why Judicatures of men are appointed and set up, are that Magistrates should be Ministers of protection and praise to them that do good: and of terror and revenge of those that do Evil in matters to outward practice: but to exceed these limits imposing nice and doubtful oaths (not having the Conditions required in Scriptures) on the Consciences of men and other pressure, and penalties concerning their souls only (of which Christ alone Challengeth the propriety) is neither lawful nor warrantable. it is God's prerogative to punish for Conscience, who hath only propriety in the Soul, unto whom all must give account, in spiritual things. For Religion is a virtue hath God for its immediate object, when according to all Divines it is not within the verge of humane Cognizance, because the Soul is not liable to our tribunal. Keckerman a learned Writer saith, that the Bond between the Magistrate and Subject is essentially Civil. The saying of King Stephen, the wise King of Poland, is Observable that he was King of men, not of Consciences, Commander of Bodies not of Souls.  
The practice of persecution merely for conscience, hath been disavowed and condemned by divine authority, and holy writ, by the Primitive Fathers, by many of the most famous Princes in the world, by our own principles and concessions, by the wisest, greatest, and Best States in ancient and modern times, as the Jews, Romans, Egyptians, Germany, Holland, nay the Turks and Persians, Polish and Bohemian Kings. Marcus Aurelius a Pagan permitted toleration to Christians. Ant●ni●● Pius Emperor (so called for his great piety) whose Empire God blessed with greater peace and felicity, than any Pagan Empeperor had before or after him; for the favour he shown to Christians; in taking of the many and Cruel persecutions suffered under his Predecessors; Forbade no man should be accused for their Religion, affirmed that the great Earthquakes and other Calamities wherewith the Empire was afflicted, proceeded of the justice of God for the injuries done to the Christians: as it is manifested by a Copy of the edict related by Eutrop. l. 10.  
Gratian & Jovianus Caesar Emperors permitted various Religions, the old Romans offered the Jews Liberty on condition they would be faithful. Theodosius and Gratian most Christian Emperors were contented to tolerate the Arrians. At Jerusalem in Christ time were two Sects living sociable, the Pharisees and Sadduces; in Germany these hundred years Papists and Lutherans live together, in France Calvenists are permitted. How oft the French King gave Edicts of pacification is set down in Laval. l. 3. Solomon permitted the Hittites, Hivites, Perizites and Jebuzites to live quietly under his Reign, as Grotius observeth, on the 1 of Kings 19 20. The Novatians saith Baxter, were tolerated and loved by the sober Catholic Emperors, because they had tolerable principles when many others were otherwise dealt withal, and S. Martin and Sulpitius Severus refused to be of their Council for inciting the Emperor to the way of blood, & corporal violence. The Turk permitteth Christians, Persians and Aethiopians in his Dominions. Venetians suffereth Jews; amongst them, as the King of Spain did the Moors till necessity forced him to expel them by the Inquisition.  
It's a false proposition proceeding from Gall and Spleen, only to breed an exulceration in the hearts of the people that Catholics, Protestants, etc. may not be tolerated in a well governed wealth, the wiser sort will not endure so gross a paradox daily proved false before their eyes.  
It was a notable observation of a wise Father, that those that persuaded pressure of Conscience, were commonly therein interressed themselves for their own end. And most that now plead against toleration, would plead as much for it, if they were once under the hatches and their Religion discountenanced By Power, and we that once thought the imposition of a directory unreasonable; & a restraint from our way of worship ; do not the same reasons remain in vindication of indulgence to others? if you will have liberty to maintain your own opinions, why should not reason tell you, others will expect the like for themselves. Protestants, Calvinist, Presbiterians, etc. living in popish Countries will plead for toleration.  
Our first reformers were great Champions for liberty of Conscience, as Wicliffe in his remonstration to the Parliament: the Albigensis to Lewis the eleventh and twelfth of France. Calvin to Francis the First. Luther to the several Diets under Frederick and Charles the Fifth; our ancient Protestant Divines Musculus, Osiander, S●ermius. The Protestants in Swetia desired toleration as Chytraeus showeth in his Chronicle 1595. and Belloy in Apol. saith, that Melanchton consented. Erasmus laboured to prove the necessity of it.  
While Popery was prevalent in England, the Pope being then reputed Vicar of Christ in spiritual things, yet notwithstanding so much liberty was given, that no man suffered death for opposing his dictates in Religion: and then in the 2. of Henry the fourth, a Statute being made against the Lollards, the Commons petitioned the King, it might be repealed, and by complaint of the Commons it was then in part repealed in Stat. Hen. 8.  
A wise Emperor told Henry the third, King of France, there was no greater sin then to force men's consciences, for such as think to Command them, supposing to win heaven, do often lose what they possess on earth. King James in his speech to the Parliament, saith that it is a sure Rule in Divinity, that God never planted the Church by violence or Bloodshed. Much less saith the wise Sir Francis Bacon, ought the Sword to be put in the people's hands to persecute, nourish sedition, authorise conspiracies, etc. for that is but to dash the first table against the second, and to Consider men as Christians, as we forget they are men.  
The wise Romans in Case of Religion, were very tender and Cautious: for when Cato was Consul and it seemed necessary to the Senate to suppress with violence, the disordered Ceremonies of the Bacchinals, brought in by a strange Priest into the City; he withstood that sentence, alleging there was nothing so apt to deceive men as Religion, which always presents a show of Divinity; and for that Cause it behoved to be very wary in Chastising the professors thereof, lest any indignation should enter into the people's minds that somewhat was derogated from the Majesty of God.  
Others More freely, have not spared to place Religion (I mean that which is ignorantly Zealous) amongst the kind of frenzies, which cannot be cured otherwise then by time given to divert and qualify the humour of the conceit. Whence Levia said to Augustus, Visne Muliebre Concilium? Let severity sleep a while, and try what what alteration the pardonning of Cinna may procure. The Emperor harkened to her Counsel, and thereby found his enemy's mouths stopped, and their Malice abated. A soft gale of wind oft alleys a great storm, the warm Sun will prevail more with the traveller, then cold and boisterous winds. The Goat's blood will break the Adamant, which the hardest hammers cannot do: Chronical diseases are not cured by physic and motion, but by time and rest. It falls out many times that the remedy is worse than the disease, and while we go about to cure the State, we kill it, and instead of purging out the peccant humour of the body politic, we cast it into a Calenture or burning fever. This was not unknown to that wise and good Emperor Theodosius, who could not be persuaded to extirpate or use violent courses against the Arrians, knowing how dangerous it would prove to the state if the quietness thereof should be disturbed.  
Lucretius the Poet when he beheld the act of Agamemnon that could endure the sacrificing of his own daughter, exclaimed tantum Religio potuit suadere malorum? what would he have said if he had known and seen the Christian Bloodshed and Violence in Religion in these times? he would have been ten times more Epicure than he was.  
We read of Sabbacus a Heathen King of Aethiopia who being by dreams admonished, that he could not possess himself of the Kingdom, but by the slaying of the Priests: he chose rather to lay aside the Claim; and to refer the government to twelve wise men; How much more will it become Christians not to lay the foundation of Religion upon the Carcases, spoils and ruins of their distressed neighbours, relations, and fellow Subjects?  
It hath been an ancient aphorism of State and Wisdom of the greatest Princes, punire raro, it was ascribed to Augustus Caesar as a title of honour, nunquam Civilem sanguinem fudisse: and Seneca, who lived under a Tyrant saith, frequens vindicta paucorum odium reprimit, omnium irritat. Aristotle saith, those are ever held to be most godly Laws that are least Sanguinary, and yet maintain Order.  
The Kingdom of Christ is not carried on after the fashion of this World, with arms and engines of War, to be erected on the bones and Sepulchers of our Brethren and Fathers. The Throne of Christ is not supported as solomon's, on both sides with Lions and Tigers, Bears and Wolves; instead of Lambs and Doves, as if we should change our meek, patiented, crucified Messiah, and had got some Muzzian a Mahometan God of Forces, who is to be served in Buff Coats and Armour. It was a great blasqhemy when the Devil said, I will ascend and be like to the highest; but it is a greater blasphemy to personate God & to bring him, saying, I will descend to be like the Prince of Darkness with furies and persecutions: nay, what is worse to make the Cause of Religion (as is proved by experience this last Century) descend to the Cruel and inhuman murdering of Princes, butchering of the People, racking of Consciences, by Oaths and Sequestrations; surely this is to bring down the Holy Ghost instead of likeness of a Dove into the shape of a Vulture or Raven, and to set out for the Bark of a Christian Church, a Flag of a Bark of Pirates and Assassinate's, or to bring in an armatum Evangelium, Christian Religion in Complete Armour; and Christ marching like Alexander, Hannibal or Caesar: it is hard to pick out Letters of Mart, from the Gospel, or to have any Commission to kill or slay Jesus Christ in order to reform.  
Whence a learned divine of our English Church saith, it is a squalid reformation, that is besmeared with the blood of Christians, it is against the honour, order, unity and majesty of a reformed Church to persecute, and to be like those canes sepulchrales, violating the bones and ashes of the dead.  
Persecution setteth a man as far from a true Christian temper, as burning Fevers do from natural heat and health, when once a male contented member is grieved then the rest of the body is sensible and secretly arm for opposition: all cry pity any should suffer for their conscience, and silently say among themselves sors hodierna mihi, Cras erit illa tibi, there being necessary connexion between Civil Liberty and that which is Spiritual, and, who would divest any of their spiritual, do alarm them with just Causes of losing their Civil.  
The nature of man however in hot blood, it be thirsty of revenge, yet in a cooler temper it hath a kind of nausea or distaste of taking the lives even of the most Nocent insomuch that in Assizes or Sessions an Offender can hardly be condemned, whom the pity of many will not after a sort excuse, with laying of impositions on the Judge, part on the Jury, and much on the accusers. Hence the name of a Sergeant or Pursuivant is odious and the Executioner esteemed no better than an enemy of mankind, and if such as are tender of their reputations be very scrupulous personally to arrest men for civil actions of debt, they will be more unwilling instruments of drawing their Bodies to the Rack and Gallows, especially when any colour of Religion is pretended in defence.  
In Counsels concerning Religion that advise of the Apostle should be prefixed, ira hominis non implet justitiam, we are to consider we deal with men and not with beasts, man is to be treated humanly, and a Christian, christianly, with all reason and charity; and of tender Consciences ought to be had a tender respect, man is sensible of gentleness, & may be obliged to quietness, by humanity. Whereas if you take violent courses, and fight against the errors of the times with prisons, dungeons, fetters, oaths, etc. they will make men the greater hypocrites and be occasion of intestine division and bloodshed: experience can speak somewhat in this behalf, which hath evidently descried within the current of few years, that severity in Religion, hath years caused the long, known and manifest, miseries of this Nation.  
Hence one of our late Divines saith, it is sufficiently known what the immoderation of a preposterous zeal, male contentedness, ambition and force, hath both machinated, and perpetrated to the distraction well nigh destruction of Church and State. The impudence and imprudence of inconsiderable rash spirits, in their actions, passions, and pretences for the Gospel hath caused the slaughter of 200000 in Germany, hath caused, at least occasioned most of the wars, devastations, and bloodshed, the great alterations, tumults & troubles in most places of Christiandom, & our late Bishop of Exeter saith, impositions on men's Consciences and Judgements in matters of Religion, to tie them by penal and coercive Statutes (which like Persian sheep) carry tails of incurious mulcts after them, that are heavier than their bodies.  
To come with swords to put Religion into our heads with main force, is like the watering of Plants with salt streams, or the lighting of a Candle with gunpowder. Never was Christian Religion planted or propagated by wars, by the civil and martial Sword; for God is not pleased with hypocrital and unwilling worshippers forced thereto by outward violence; nor are Christian Societies bettered by such force, but ofttimes the contrary. Too much severity maketh men desperate & showeth a will to oppress the offendor, rather than cure the offence, and nothing showeth more evidently that authority inclineth to tyranny, than the multitude of Promoters, continual informations, and the name of treason made as a Livery to put upon all offences.  
Unchristian persecution like a violent Chrysis, more frequently taketh away the Patient, then Contributes to his recovery! nourisheth a wrathful devouring spirit one against another, makes us transgressors of that Royal law, which forbids us to do that one to another, we would not have them do to us, were we in their condition: and by this rule whosoever is not against the cruelty of persecution, hath nothing to say against justice, of his being a slave; for what measure he would meet unto others, he deserves himself.  
If to hate our brother is murder, as he is man, 1 John 3. 16. sure not only to hate, but even for Religion sake to kill our brother a Christian, and to be destroyers of Christians, are rather deicides, than homicides! and if nothing can have more of Christian then Charity, nothing can have more of Antichristian, than such uncharitableness, which many nourishing for zeal, mistake a Cockatrice for a Dove, and fiery Serpent, for a Phoenix.  
Outward violence in Cause of Religion is also condemned by holy Write and d●vine authority. Christ commanded both the tares and the wheat should remain together in the world, Mat. 13. 30. he reproved his Disciples who would have had fi●e come down from heaven ro destroy the S●maritans, that would not entertain him, in these word, you know what spirit you are of, the son of man came not to destroy, Luke 9 54. the servant of God must not strive but be gentle to all men, 2 Rom. 2. 24. as God hath called every one so let him walk, 1 Cor. 7. 17. they who now are tares may become wheat, who are blind may see, some there be that come not till the eleventh hour, Mat. 20. 6. let your moderation be known unto all men. Phil. 4. 5. who art thou that judgest another's servant, etc. Rom. 4. now I shall beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, 2 Corin. 10. woe unto them that make a man an offender for a word, or lay a snare for him, Esay.  
The Fathers of the primitive times pleaded against all force in Religion. The Christian Church, saith Saint Hillary, against Auxentius, doth not persecute but is persecuted. No man is forced against his will by the Christians, saith Lactantius. S. Hierom in paenit, cap. 4. saith, that heresy must be cut off by the Sword of the Spirit. And Tertullian saith, seeing he that wants faith and devotion is unserviceable to God— for God being not contentious would not be worshipped by the unwilling. The Arrians were the first introducers of persecution. Let all the Canons of the Church be examined and searched, if one be found that justifies the shedding of blood merely on the score of Religion. S. Augustine complaineth, how the Donatists filled with blood and desolation all Africa, persecuting the Orthodox under Julian the Apostate, Docendo magis quam jubendo, monendo quam minando veritatem agnoscant, Aug. Epist. 63. Fides siquidem suadenda est non imperanda, ait S. Bernard.  
The Churches of the East grievously complained of the Arrians persecution; Athan. Epist. ad Solicar. speaketh much of their inhuman cruelty. Nil tam voluntarium quam Religio, cogi non potestdiversa sunt, carnifex & charitas, non potest veritas cum vi, aut justitia cum credulitate conjungi in primitiva Ecclesia, saith learned Becanus, haeretici non puniebantur morte corporali; alius est spiritus legalis, saith he, qui consistebat in severitate, alius est spiritus Evangelicus qui consistit in mansuetudine, hunc debetis imitari. Et Apost. ad Titum 3. haereticum hominem devita post unam & secundam correptionem; Sciens quia subversus est; ubi notantur dixit devita, non occide: & Esay 11. 9 non occiderit in universo monte sancto meo, id est, in Ecclesia, ubi Propheta praedixit doctrinam Evangelii propogandam in Ecclesia sine sanguine & caede. See Becanus. Dominicus a Soto. in his 4. Sent. & dist. 5. saith every man hath a natural right to instruct others in things that are good, but cannot compel. Strifes about Religion, saith Grotius, are pernicious and destructive where provision is not made for dissenters. Persecution overturns the practice of Religion, from Abel to Moses and the Prophets, even to the meek example of Jesus Christ. The Apostles and their Successors for 300 years confirmed their Religion with their own blood and not with the blood of their opposers.  
External force in matter of Faith and Worship is repugnant to the nature of Christian Religion, which is meekness; To the practice, which is suffering; To the promotion of it, go teach all Nations. Christian Religion entreats all, compels none. Force never yet made a good Christian or a good Subject. It subverts all Religion, because men believe not, because it is true or false, but because they are Commanded for to do, their interest and security oblige them rather to obey then dispute.  
It is very unreasonable to force men to declare or swear where their judgements are not fully satisfied; to require Faith where they cannot choose but doubt, to punish them for disobedience, if they go not against their consciences; and to be punished hereafter if they do: For an erroneous Conscience bindeth a man to follow it, according to the learned of all Religions.  
Persecution destroyeth the noble principle of reason, for no man can believe before he understands; and no man can understand before he is taught: for Faith in all acts of Religion is necessary. Now to believe we must first will, to will we must judge; to judge any thing we must understand; which cannot be forced. How can the leprous disease of the mind be cured with corporal catoplasts? or men's judgements be convinced of the truth by tormenting their Bodies? the inflictions then of external punishments for mere mental errors (not wilful) is unreasonable and inadaequate, for as corporal penalties cannot convince the understanding, so neither can they be proportionable mulct▪ for faults purely intellectual.  
Before we can with justice inflict penalties upon any different profession, we ought to use all means possible to recover them to truth. Arguments to rational creatures as Christians, are to instruct, admonish, warn, and finally to reject; to come to them full of compassion of their misery, full of affection of their Salvation by reasonable and persuasive motives suitable to their own nature; by somethng can resolve its doubts answer its objections, tenets, and Propositions. Whence our first work should be to collect a Body of positive articles evidently contained in Scripture and absolutely necessary to salvation (for its improper to pen the form of Faith in the negative) because my believing Christian truths makes me a Christian, and not my disbelieving the errors that oppose it; else he that believes nothing at all would be the best Christian.  
We must fight against Antichrist by lawful ways prescribed by the Word of God, by the spirit of his mouth, in preaching, instructing in Charity, Patience, humility, according to the example of Christ and his Apostles. The weapons of Christian warfare are not Carnal but Spiritual, 2 Cor. 10. For as they were not the warlike engines of Joshua, but the trumpets of the Sanctuary, that made the walls of Jericho to fall down: So it is not the Canon, but the trumpet of the Gospel, which is required to pull down the walls of Babylon. True Religion was never advanced by these ways, but propagated by patiented sufferings: the Example of Jesus Christ is so far from persecuting, that he would not revile his persecutors; prayed for them; saith, go teach all nations, etc. The Text directs Christ's procedure in teaching, not in devouring.  
Wherefore all wise, humble, and charitable Christians should so Order their judgements and Censures, if at any time they are forced to declare them; they must above all things take heed they nourish not, nor discover any uncharitable feuds, antipathies, distances against others, after the rule of those passions, which were the common source of Schism and Heresies. The free, meek, and solid piety feeds itself on the substance of Religion, without picking quarrels at the shell; free from the superstition and hypochondriacal Zeal of some who pretend to advance the Kingdom of Christ by cutting the throats of his Disciples, and cementing his temples with blood, instead of the Cement of charity.   

CAP. II. Persecution is against Policy and Piety.  
THe grand fomenters of persecution can be no friends to the English State, for what but imposition, immoderation and restraint in the cause of Religion (as a learned divine Noteth) hath turned Episcopacy into Presbytery▪ Presbytery into Independency, Independency into Quakerism, Religion into Policy, Reformation into Innovation, Profession into Pretence, Ministry into Soldiers, Soldiers into Preachers, Churches into Stables, Pulpits into Tubs, Degrees into Parity, Pastors into Hirelings, Apostolical Hierarchy into Anarchy, with abusive fumes and flames to build Babel's of their own.  
I am not able to express (saith another great Doctor of our English Church) how high an impiety it is, that at this time when God's hand is out against us justly for our sins, to be disposed and fixed upon a resolution that to redeem external peace we will persecute, etc.— I admire to see too too many in Parliament here amongst us where is great plenty of able Gentlemen of excellent learning, worth, wit and other perfections and endowments, as any nation besides: to be inclinable if not actually resolved in all meetings to feud about the Rom. Religion especially now after this trial of their honesty— more is to be admired, the preposterous machinations, and motions even of Churchmen, who by the Canons are forbid to have any hand in blood— when they forsake the ancient refuges of Christians which were preaching and tears, and betake themselves to swords and helmets, plots, conspiracies and pursuivants.  
Wisemen have seen those obscurities and disgraces which as black shadows have attended even Churchmen. Persecution is fit for the hands of Cyclops who forged Jupiter's Thunderbolts, than the Priests of the Gods. Bishop's should always be tender of good consciences, and of the honour of Christian Religion: which was not wont to see Ministers, rough and targetted as the Rhinoceroes', b●● soft and gentle, clothed as the Sheep and Shepherds of Christ. There is not a more portentous sight then to see galeatos Clericos. Christ long ago in the person of Saint Peter commanded them to put up their Swords; nor was he ever heard to repeal that word; or Bid them draw their Swords; no not in Christ's Cause (that is merely for Religion) who hath legions of Angels, armies of Truth, gifts of Graces of the Spirit to defend himself and his true interest in Religion withal— and a little after—  
Indeed our Ecclesiastical Rulers have reason to steer us cautiously, since they sit at the Helm in such a Ship, as hath thrown very many Pilots over board— it becomes those Bishops now got up newly to be most calm, quiet, and sedate Spirits—  
The great alteration of the Body of the People since these last twenty years require that our old ends of promoting the welfare of the Church of England should be attained by the conduct of new means— Bishops should compose the affections of the People by Liberty of Conscience, and not Acts of Uniformity, for the greatest assertors of Episcopacy and Ceremonies of the Church are lodged in their Graves; and the present major part of this Land consists in those to whom the introducing of the old Church Prelatical Government, will seem an Innovation: It's the interest of the Clergy here to temper the Government of the Church: for its irrational to think that any Church Government (in a Protestant Country of Sectaries) can be accommodated to the content and satisfaction of all: which restraineth a large and almost absolute power to the heads of a few Protestant Bishops.  
It's the concern of none but Soldiers of Fortune to oppose due Liberty of Conscience. Whence the wise King James had wholly repealed the penal Statutes engaged so to do (and Papistry than was declared tolerable) had he not been diverted from it by Cecil and other Upstarts and Politicians, whose interest was begun and grounded upon Heresy and destruction of the ancient Nobility and Gentry of the Kingdom. For in his Speech, Sess. 1. Printed 161●. My mind, saith he, was ever free from persecuting and thralling my Subjects in matters of Conscience, and in his next words— I was so far from increasing their burdens with Roboam, as I have so much as either time, occasion, or law would permit me to have, lightened them. And in his Censure against Conradus Vorstius the Dutch Heretic, recounting the difference between Protestants and Catholics, he findeth not any for which Papists may be persecuted but rather the contrary.  
You may object persecution is necessary in Policy of State. I answer, who is swayed by this motive runs but the indirect way of State-Policy! and makes use of a title of that name only, to support what his ambition, malice, or interest enforces him too; and is guilty not only of his own Evils, but whatever others are thereby occasioned, in oppression of others. These mysteries of Machiavelli have been to far discovered to be of no use in this Nation for the future. This Cloak of formal Godliness is now worn threadbare, and almost all men sees it to be but a Cloak. Such specious devises appear now to be but like Flock-work upon Canvas scattered over with glittering Copper or Tinsel. Experience hath made almost every Body able to look not only on the Colours and Pretext, but the depth and motive of every such design.  
The infinite eye and wisdom of God doth pierce through all our pretences; and his justice doth require no other accuser than our own consciences; which neither the false beauty of our actions, nor all the formality (which to pacify the opinions of men) we put on, can in the least kind cover from his knowledge. We know that a good pretence cannot justify a bad action; and therefore we ought to be as sollitous about the lawfulness of the means; as about the goodness of the end: it is a maxim in morality that, bonum oritur ex integris; and in Christianity, that we must not do evil that good may come of it.  
There is nothing that God's pure and undeluded eye looks on with more abhorrence than Pseudopolicy, we may deceive men, but it's in vain to put Ironies upon God. A Counterfeit Religion shall find a real hell. And who have conspired with the wrath of God in the stupefaction of their consciences, though they may for a time struggle with those inward checks, yet there will be a day (if not in this life) when that Witness, that Judge, that Jury will not be bribed. Let it be part of our daily orisons, that God would banish this cursed Policy, out of Europe and the whole World; and damn it down to Hell from whence it originally came: and such as delight to abuse others, think of that self-cousenage, with which in the interim, they abuse themselves, God permitting the Devil to wrong the Impostor.  
Admit that for some worldly respect, Laws were necessary in State-Policy for the time wherein they were enacted; yet the time changing, and those causes entirely ceasing which made them seem necessary: now it will not only be safe but necessary to repeal them; when after such trials there is no cause of suspicion remaining n●r ●olour of jealousy, at lest none but what may easily be removed by the wisdom of the State, and plenary satisfaction in behalf to themselves.  
Wary superpoliticks are over curious Spirits, plead policy against Piety, and prefer outward safety before inward peace, subject Faith and Truth to Policy, our private and civil good to interest; Religion is suited to Government, and Conscience to connivency. What is Policy against Religion? If it be iniquity, injustice, and oppression to treat men so without cause or demerit, it is not any feigned imaginary reason of State, will excuse those who act and give counsel to such unchristian acts; lest the Blood of Souls lie upon their account another day.  
More Families have been ruined, more persons imprisoned, more moneys spent by the cruelty of persecution, than by all Law-Suits in the Courts of Judicature, or payments and ordinary Taxes. Our Churchwardens are perjured that swear to present them to every Sessions (though imposing of such an Oath is breach of the Fundamental Laws of the Land) and those Churchwardens that are not perjured, but pursue the Oath, in persecuting their neighbours are plunged with a horrid guilt of Conscience. Now there are above 9285 parishes in England, and seventy four thousand Churchwardens and Sides-men in England every year, and what a dreadful thing is it to have all these yearly either perjured, persecuted or Persecutors?  
I am by many reasons induced to conclude, that this severe ungospellary way of proceeding hath been the cause of ruin of Trade, impoverishing; and many afflictions of this Nation. It hath made us an Obloquy to all our Neighbours, hinders Traffic, becomes a prejudice to the Reformed beyond Seas, a discontenting our Friends at Home, a Scandal to all the World, a disheartening of a great many good Subjects: Persecution stops all our Friends mouths, weakens their hands, and droops their hearts; on this account many families, have left the Land to remove into some country where they may have liberty, by this means the trading stock of the Nation is conveyed away. To use external force in matters purely of Faith and Religion, you must side with and support all corrupt interest, tire and weary out yourselves with neverfailing troubles and anxious difficulties, attended with a hundred fears: and in conclusion if you prosper in such practices, you would but leave Posterity partakers of the Bondage you entail upon the People.  
What benefit or credit was ever got by persecution these eighty years? have not many noble persons on that account left the Land? many Religious men and women cloistered, to retire to spend their means and lives in other countries'? have not Princes and States of that Religion expressed much disatisfaction to see them unmercifully used? hath not a general consumption of comfort, unity, affection, settlement, and content, and many sad mischiefs befallen us the last Century on this only score? & hath not God shown his just chastisements, judgements upon the chief actors, complices, contrivers and abetters of such inhuman proceed, as in Cromwell, Cecil, Dudley, Leicester, Somerset, Walsingham, Bacon, etc.  
We deceive ourselves to promise or expect to King or Kingdom, Prince or Subject, Peace or Safety, or Deliverance from our Troubles, if we subordinate Fundamentals in Religion and necessary Truths of Faith to our private or civil Interest.  
If he be an unwise man who provides means, where he designs no end: persecutors will never be able to accomplish their end. For experience tells us, that punishments and persecutions never lessens the resolution of Christians, but always heightens Zeal and sometimes draws men into leagued Factions: which indulgence and favour would prevent.  
It is observed by all lookers into Antiquity, that Christian Religion still got ground in the world, not by persecuting but by being persecuted. And our penal Laws, rather increased then hindered the growth of Popery. Whence King James observed that Sanguis Martyrum est semen Ecclesiae, the spilling of Christian Blood is but the watering of Christ's Vineyard. This Pinetree the more it is pressed, the higher it groweth. This Camomile the more it is trodden the thicker it cometh up. This Walnut-Tree the more it is beaten, the more fruitful it waxeth.  
Yea even the Non-Conformists are likely still to increase, as from Edward the sixts time to this, they have gradually done, notwithstanding the rigour of ecclesiastics against them, and that which we cannot without horror observe, is, the not allowing of a due and regular Liberty of Conscience hath instead of advancing the Cause of Religion propagated Atheism in this Nation. It hath been an old Stratagem of Satan to oppose Religion against Religion, to leave us none at all.  
It hath been likewise observed as a shuffling hypocritical distinction of Lawyers (invented to deceive the innocent) pretending none are executed or suffer for Religion or Conscience, but for Treason; or offending the Laws. Who doth not see but by this rule those Bloody Tyrants Nero, Dioclesian, Maximine, etc. must be conscientious, because they judged according to the Law? and those glorious Martyrs must be counted Traitors? nay even the cursed Jews who crucified Christ alleged the selfsame reason; we have a Law and by our Law he ought to die, John 19 7.  
Treason must always be some action or intention discovered prejudicial to the Sovereign or State: not an Opinion or Profession of Religion. For this reason Sir John Oldcastle in the Reign of Henry the fifth, for his Treason was condemned in one Court, and for his Heresy, in another. So were Cranmer and Ridley in Queen Mary's time. And therefore also it is by the statute provided 22 and 27 Eliz. that if a Priest conforms, he is actually discharged of all imputation of treason; no further proceeding can lie against him.  
If Priesthood be no treason, a Priest in that he is a Priest can be no Traitor: unless we will account Apostles and all ancient Priests both of England & all Countries, whom Kings and Emperors have honoured, and loved; as their faithful friends and subjects. So far thought them from being enemies to their Crown; that from their hands all Princes received their Crowns, Consecrations, and Sceptres.   

CAP. III. Liberty or Toleration Rightly understood, is equitable, just or necessary to several Religions.  
I Have viewed most of the Tracts concerning Toleration, pro and con; Some I find over strict and nice, austere, and rigid: others profane and lose, arbitrary and remiss: and betwixt them both toleration ever scrapes the imputation of calumny, either of too much restriction, or profane relaxation: neither of them will know that true liberty is a middle kind of equity, indulgency, benignity, betwixt both extremes: not cursed and cruel, but tender and compassionate, hath her commendation; for moderative, rather than vindicative: minding rather to amend than confound: not rash and arbitrary dispensing with the Law as if it were but a leaden rule; but circumspectly and benignly interpreting it, that it might not prove an Iron-Rod.  
We plead then only for such a Liberty of Conscience, as preserves the Nation in Trade, Peace, and Commerce; which preserves a fair intercourse and correspondency one with another, and with their respective members: and would not exempt any man or party of men from not keeping those excellent Laws, that tend to sober, just, and industrious living in a due Christian regulation; consistent with the evident Laws of God and quiet Government; and that indulging Dissenters in the sense defended, is not only, most Christian and rational, but prudent also: and conformable to his Majesty's Gracious Declaration.  
It appears of neither pace to drive on furiously with Jehu in matters of Policy, nor that he go softly with Ahab in matters of Piety. In matters of Scruple or Controversy, it likes well of nothing but walking with a Right Conscience, Gal. 2. 24. and that also of free choice like the Israelites among the Edomites, Num●. 22. 26. above all it hates to remove the ancient Landmarks, whether of Law or Religion, Deut. 19 14. not thirsting one another's Blood, nor invading another's rights as Wolves and Tigers; but as the Apostle saith, sobrie, just, & pie.  
It being an apt Mediety or mediocrity betwixt the Rigid contention of a furious Zeal or emulation, and the Lukewarm disposition of a reachless indifferency or neutrality: and though it be tender and compassionate as a mother; yet she is far from being over- remiss, Licentious or irregular, whence some wise men take it for a Masterpiece of prudence wisely discerning 'twixt what is just and fit; and so giving sentence rather congruously then severely.  
Schoolmen and Moralists make it to be a potential part of justice bringing (not severely) the Fact home to the Law: but rather in equity the Law down to the Fact, regulating the strict words and rigour, for the common good and particular relief of pesons in certain facts, times, contingencies and circumstances. 'Tis a part of temperance amiable and amicable. 'Tis severally translated and hath many Epithets in holy Scripture, Modesty, equity, 
2 Cor. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 10. Phil. 4. 5. 2 Tim. 2.  humanity, gentleness, clemency, courtesy, patience of Spirit. 'Tis the blessing and comfort of peace and unity in the Church, of plenty and tranquillity in the Commonwealth; of plain satisfaction to the Conscience, and of plenary contentation to all sorts and conditions of rational men. Nothing can be easy, sweet, and safe, in our lives, Religion, Consciences, or liberties to God or man without it: without it we be tedious to ourselves and troublesome one to another.  
This virtue is not a little illustrated by its contrary opposite, Persecution, immoderation, austerity, rigidness, inexorableness, compulsion, imposition, etc. which is an extreme viciousness in persons, in their judgements, opinions, passions, affections, pretences, actions, and designs: of which we have been more pathetically sensible in the effects, than in the qualities.  
This medium therefore or middle kind of equity, indulgency or liberty betwixt both extremities aforesaid, is the most just and reasonable unto which all Christians have a right and title too; by virtue and purchase of Christ's Blood, Death and Resurrection, who is become sole Lord over the Soul, unto whom we are to give account only as our proper Judge, in matters purely internal and Spiritual: for in this the Judicatures of men are not capable to make a clear judgement, or declare certainly who are in the right or wrong.  
This Freedom of Conscience is of so high concern to all (and not only to be enjoyed by the strongest party) as well for the Magistrates sake as the People's common good; and it consists in the Magistrates forbearing to impose pressures and penalties in matters of Faith and Conscience, lest they intrude into the Office of Christ, to whose decision such actions are only liable.  
The ancient original Fundamental Laws (by which other Laws of less extent) are to be regulated were intended as a Defence and Protection to all: providing, one injure not another; and that Common Peace and Safety be secured; no other subsequent inferior Law can therefore debar any peaceable Christian, that answers the necessities of Church and State, Civil, Spiritual and Political) in equal justice, and in foro Conscientiae from this privilege originally due to all: For they that are contributaries to the peace and maintenance of Government, are entitled to a protection from it, according to the just nature of government which consists in a fair and equal retribution. Whence a late Presb. Divine confesseth, none ever saw any argument yet could clearly evince, why any sort of men who would profess a peaceable subjection unto the Civil Government, might not in all their Civil Rights be protected by it.  
I conceive it therefore most clear, both in right reason and true Religion: that Governors ought to move in that middle way between tolerating all differences and none at all in matters of Religion: wherein men are variously to be considered, according to the profession they own and make of Religion: as none are to be tolerated in Blasphemy, or any that have cast off all sense of justice, order, shame and humanity (seeing the nature of man is more prone to imbibe noxious things then to eject them) so true virtuous liberty is not to be infringed; nor any who can give a sober Christian and rational account for their principles and profession to Church and State. For the Power among christians should not be a hard and sharp rock dashing presently all in pieces that touch, and strike at it in the least kind though never so modestly.  
Christian Religion (saith a learned Divine) hath moderated the extremity of Servitude as to Civil things in all places where it was received, when certainly it is much more consonant to that Religion, and especially that form of Religion which hath asserted its Spiritual Liberty from the impositions of others, to allow a Spiritual Freedom to others.  
Another of our Divines saith, Christian Religion ought not to be made a snare, harrow, a rack, or heavy yoke, or an Egyptian bondage, to men's minds and consciences: this were to turn the sweetest vine into a sharp bramble, and figtree into a thorn: nor is there any thing Christians should be more tender of (as the Ephesine Fathers admonish) than their own and others true liberty, Christ hath purchased with his precious Blood: of which Christian Magistrates should be exact keepers and conscientious defenders, lest piety prove an oppression, and the bracelets and ornaments of Religion become the chains of hypocrisy and manacles of superstition binding such heavy burdens on men's Consciences which God hath not imposed, but exempted from their Commission.  
The best way to convince opposers is by instructing them in meekness in the Spirit of Love, by suitable acts of indulgency; for our dear Lord that bought us, will take nothing more kindly at this time from us (saith an ingenious Author) as to be pitiful to his Servants, who are distressed about your acts in point of Conscience, & who the more distressed they are and like to our Lord, the fit subjects they are for your Compassion. If you had no need of mercy from God, it were tolerable then for you to be extreme towards others. In point of Christianity we should be merciful unto them as our heavenly Father is merciful, Luke 6. 36. Mercy is to be preferred before Sacrifice.  
No torture, no rack or tyranny so great as when exercised on the conscience, forcing to declare or swear where their judgements are not fully satisfied Force may make an hypocrite, it is Faith grounded on knowledge and consent that makes a Christian: no war so passionate as the war of Conscience, in Factions, Conventicles, Associations, and Sects: such practices become not the Gospel, nor are suitable to Christ's meek Precepts, Sufferings and Doctrine. True Christian Concord is the consequence only of a favourable benignity or toleration as before circumstantiated.  
For a true Christian following the rules, precepts, and examples of our Saviour Jesus Christ, loveth God above all things, and his Neighbour as himself, doth injury to no man, pardoneth all injuries done to him, esteemeth and honoureth every one according to his degree and merit, represseth all concupiscence, unlawful desires, obeyeth Magistrates, Superiors and laws as the ordinance of God; Non propter ●iram Sed propter justitiam. Rom. 13. Not for fear but conscience. Yieldeth to every one his due; to Caesar, that which is due to Caesar, etc. And finally preferreth in all things the public wealth before his private Commodity: hence it followeth that in whatsoever state he liveth, he is humble, meek, peaceable, obedient, temperate, just, religious, and consequently a good and excellent member of his Commonwealth; insomuch that if the precepts of Christian Religion were followed, there should need no Political Law, which as the Apostle saith, posita est injustis & non subditis, ordained for the disobedient and unjust.  
Christian Religion in respect of the means it giveth for attaining of true perfection and virtue, and for the purity and excellency of the doctrine, and of rites and ceremonies, is truly Political, and most necessary for Government of state; whence whosoever is a true and perfect Christian, is and must needs be, Bonus Civis, a good Citizen as Aristotle termeth a good member of the Commonwealth.  
This was evident to the Paynims, when they considered Christian Doctrine, without Passion and partiality: that Pliny the Second, being proconsul of Asia under Trajan Emperor, acknowledged the same in an Epistle to Trajan, written in favour of persecuted Christians in his Jurisdiction; testifying of them they were an innocent and harmless people; whose custom and exercise was to assemble themselves in the night to sing Hymns and Praises to Jesus Christ; and that they promised and vowed to Commit no offence; or do any hurt to other men: not to steal, rob, perjury, break promise, etc. upon which testimony Trajan ordained no Christian should be further punished or inquired of, for their Religion, Euseb. l. 3. Ecclesiast. c. 27. and his Successor Adrian upon Like suggestion and information given by a noble man, Called Serennio Gramiano gave order to Minutius Fundanus his proconsul; that Christians should not be punished, Euseb. l. 4. c. 8. Hist. Eccles. Thus ordained they, knowing only some points of Christian Religion: if they had understood how it reforms men's manners, how the Canons, Codes, institutes, digests out of the Corpus , are congruous & consonant with the good of Civil society, they would not have held it only tolerable, but even necessary for establishment and conservation of Government.  
As nothing is more plain and sure then that the tolerating of all Sects, errors and faults, which conscience may pretend for: or of none at all, are utterly destructive of Christian and human peace, society and safety, nor is he well in his wits that holdeth either part universally or unlimited (who thinketh all or none to be tolerated) for by the one we should have no government, and by the other in time, by death, banishments, persecutions etc. we should have no Subjects to be governed, nor have any Servant; so no Master, no Wife, so no Husband.  
So seeing an universal unity among Christians is not to be attained, a toleration of things tolerable is not only lawful but necessary: a Latitude of Liberty is left in such things as are not clearly and positively laid down in Scripture: Or in things of private practice, Rom. 14. 22. haste thou faith, have it to thyself.  
But than it may be objected, seeing toleration must have its bounds and limits, and those are almost indiscoverable, viz. what points are necessary? and what not? what Sects and Opinions tolerable? and what not? and who must be the Judge? or else we must deal partially, and unjustly condemn one Sect and tolerate others?  
I answer we must not cast away reason, because there is a difficulty in using it aright. What if be a hard thing to enumerate how many bits a man may eat and not be a glutton? or how much drink and not a drunkard? or what meats or drinks must be used to avoid excess in quality? or what cloth, silks, fashion, may be used without excess in apparel? will you thence infer that men may eat and drink any think in quantity or quality, or else nothing? or wear any thing or else go naked? as long as it is certain such a difference there is that some opinons are tolerable and some not; you must distinguish; and than you will find a necessity of discerning as you can according to right reason and grounds of Christianity, the Tolerable from the intolerable.  
The profession of the Creed and those who give some solid, succinct and apodictical account directly grounded on Scripture, rightly understood, or in right regulated reason which is able to bear a superstructure of Christian Doctrine and practice (as enumerated afore) agreeing upon the summary of Belief in positive, evident, and fundamental points suitable to the Apostolical Symbol, are conditions which require necessarily indulgency and toleration.  
In these regards then, there can be no prevalent objections urged, why a wise State may not tolerate (at least in private) different Religions: when otherwise the public may be entangled or endangered; or rather because the conscience cannot be compelled or Faith forced. And more especially if they be such Religions as do not overthrow the fundamentals of Truth. Nor such as disturb or impugn the Government established. Or if the professors thereof be such as are not factious or pertinacious, but honest, simple, tractable, obedient to Superiors having no other end in holding their Opinions in Religion, than God's glory or satisfaction of their own consciences, and withal are willing to submit to better judgements, when they are convinced to be Erroneous.  
In this respect the late gracious Declaration for Liberty doth sufficiently appear (to all impartial men) to be prudent, pious, and politic. For this purpose, the Turks and Muscovites inhibited all disputations in matter of Religion, upon pain of Death: the like inhibition was made by the Emperor and Princes in Germany after their Civil Wars; that there should be no Contention between Catholics and Protestants, to this end that there may be no breach of Peace and disturbance in the Government of the State.  
Hence Leo Emperor made an Edict of union Called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; that all the different Religions within his Dominions might live quietly and friendly together. For the same Cause Anastasius made a Law of Amnesty and accounted those the best Preachers that were moderate.  
Since there must be Heresies and our judgements are as different as our Faces; since breeding and education doth so much sway, and hath so great influence on many Religions; and that Sectaries are grown numerous; we ought to have a Latitude of Charity for those that descent, if they be not Impostors, or turbulent Incendiaries. Dissenters in Controversies are obliged to a mutual toleration. We cannot be ignorant of other States and Kingdoms (and now very lately in the Empire and Denmark) those that Dissent from the Religion publicly authorized, are permitted and secured so long, as they do not affront Civil or Ecclesiastic Laws. For true Christianity addeth such force and vigour to Civil Power by planting in men's hearts the awe of Religion (which is the main pillar of obedience) by weeding out such Errors, as humane authority would have much ado to pluck up.   

CAP. iv Toleration or Liberty improperly taken and unlimited is neither reasonable nor justifiable.  
I Dare not positively affirm that the Civil Magistrate is not to intermeddle at all in matters of Religion: but how far he is to proceed and not exceed his Commission is disputable; seeing learned Divines generally hold that the bond between the Magistrate, and the Subject is essentially Civil.  
Querulous persons have shown a Childishness in their complaints; without telling what the very thing is that troubles them, and how far they would have it removed; and so complain for want of Liberty, because they have not their Wills: cry out before they know their own minds fully, or take care the Magistrate shall know them otherwise then by inspiration.  
It's the opinion of injudicious furious Spirits that no truth is to be silenced for Peace, or forborn for spiritual advantage or true necessity. For every one to hold what he pleaseth, and publish and Preach what he holds, confined to no rule of Order, but contemning law, will rule as Transcendents. For as Plato saith, it's a temerarious Liberty, to pronounce of what is known and unknown with like confidence. Tell us of obeying the Laws of God as long as you please, I dare not believe you as long as you break the Laws of those appointed to rule over you: it is a distinction without difference, to separate and divide the Laws of Men, from the Laws of God; for unless we observe both we obey neither, saith Hooker, l. 3. c. 107.  
Here I confess Christian Governors are not to regard such pleas for private Liberty as overthrow the Public Order and Peace, nor to regard those Clamours against them and the Laws as persecuting: when they do but oppose and restrain such perilous exorbitancies; as have no savour of reason or Religion, which strikes at the foundation of Christianity, and openeth a gap to Atheism, Profaneness and Blasphemy. Here the Magistrate must interpose his Coercive Power for remedy. Nor are they in this infringers of the People's Liberty, but preservers of Freedom: not oppressors of others Consciences, but dischargers of their own.  
It's a false Liberty to imagine our Liberty consists in speaking or doing what we List, without regard to God or man. It's no freedom for a man to think what he lists, in vain, erroneous, Blasphemous thoughts, or to bolt out and vent his raw indigested and rotten fancies, or irreligious opinions to others: its far from Christian Liberty, for any Christian to start up lose Principles, destructive to Government, subverting Order, violating Laws, breaking Oaths and Covenants; contemning Authority: for every one to hold what he pleaseth, and publish and Preach what he holds; upon light popular and untried grounds: and publicly to act according to his private persuasions, passions lusts, or interests: wherein neither right reason, nor common Order, nor public peace, nor Conscience of Duty, nor fear of God have any such serious ties upon men as necessary to the common good.  
No Christian I say can religiously plead for a Liberty, seditiously and factiously, to broach to others any new opinions he pleaseth. Nor may any part of men (though never so godly) carry on any design (though it may be better than what at present may be) by any violent, irregular and disorderly ways. For every Christian duty hath its Bounds beyond which it is not true and virtuous Liberty, but inordinateness and excess. Some men's pedantic incivilities to the Consciences of others may be instructive to us, as to convince the necessity of setting out true bounds of Liberty; which should not be granted on other terms, then as far as it conduceth to God's honour and the People's good. For if public power should suffer arrogant ignorance, excess of passion, perverseness of will, to come to its full rudeness and extent: tumultuary numbers and brutish Power will soon make good private presumptions; and cover over the most impotent Lusts, passions and ambitions of men, with the pleas and outcries of Christian Liberty.  
For that is no other freedom, then that as water enjoys when it overbears and overflows her Banks and Bounds: and such as the envious and malicious Devils affects, and are most impatient not to enjoy: nor may they be touched or kerbed by any authority in Church or State, be their extravagancies never so blasphemous; but presently they make great clamours of persecution: as if all were persecutors who helped to bind a Madman, or put a roaring drunkard into the Cage.  
The vicious are not to be counted into the sort of mere Dissenters. Socinians who are enemies to the Blessed Trinity; Atheists who hold Principles destructive to Christianity, and those Parties whose Religion forbids subjection, and carries an opposition to civil Government; and Commands by Fire, and Sword to erect their new Spiritual Kingdom. And those who hold forth notions and conceptions reforming or wholly changing the state of Religion and Government; and in order to that shake even the frame of Civil things; to which they think themselves no longer bound in subjection, than they want a party strong enough for opposition: nor will they easily be persuaded that it is the sin of Rebellion, carries the face of reformation: easily dispensing with obedience to men, where they pretend amendment before God: putting on Sheep's Clothing to no other purpose but the renting of Christ's seemless Coat. Sow to themselves leaves of frivolous pretences: dispute, Preach, Plead, Clamour, about moderation and Liberty, when all the immoderation is in themselves, contend to have privileges, prerogatives, freedom regulated so and so: yet would they examine themselves, nothing needs more regulation than their own judgements, opinions and humours.  
There be others of hotter tempers, more Choleric Constitutions, and feverish complexions, have such ferocious Spirits like pampered Horses whom no ground will hold: daily neighing after novelties: who love to be moving in the troubled waters of secular affairs, who seem most impatient of any order or public rule in which they have not some stroke or influence: ready to undo whatever is done without them; their Breast is full of turbulent and seditious Spirits as the Cave of Aeolus of Winds. Forgetting what Spirit becomes followers of the Gospel: whose heads are prone to move their hearts with Specious novelties, quick excitations, and zealous resolutions, which soon after (like salt-streams) descend and fall upon their Lungs provoking them violently to the spreading their opinions to others, till they see the Children of their brains prove mere abortions. To the misguided activity of such (even Ministers) the Commonalty may owe much of its troubles.  
These only and the like most truly forfeit their Christian private Liberty, to the public discretion and power: who will not, or cannot use it, but to the public detriment. Beware then of Compliances with, and indulgence to all sorts, Sects and Schisms pleaded for: as if it were a part of Christ's Legacy and People's Liberty to be tolerated in any Actions or Opinions never so pernicious. Saint Paul beseecheth the Romans to mark those that Cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine received, Rom. 4. 6, 17.  
As an absolute unity in judgement is not to be attained in this Life: so an universal or absolute Liberty is not to be permitted or indulged in things injurious to God. Toleration of all things is a destructive principle to State and Church, a Cloak to Licentiousness, ushereth in Atheism and Libertinism; Transports Men ofttimes to such excesses beyond those bounds of duty which as Subjects we ought to observe; Hath many Latitudes, evasions, and distinctions to unravel the Cords of any Oaths, and untwist the Bonds of any Covenant or Protestations.  
Those who are most pregnant and impatient of holding in their Opinions on the pretence of Truth, do but proudly esteem their own understandings precious: to vend some raw and indigested notions. The Devil usually pretends Truth to Cover his Lies. Clamour must not prevail but reason. Is it to follow the direction of Christ to Preach on the Housetop? If there were a Nero or Dioclesian at the Helm, who should threaten to mingle our Blood with our Sacrifices, if you had your Antelencana, and should flock into Caves of the Earth to worship Christ, your zeal would be more tolerable.  
True Christian toleration extends not to matters of an extern nature: wherefore Magistrates may use a Coercive hindrance from public Meetings, without impeaching it. When Subjects have expressed a due Regulation in it, then is a King in Capacity to show a Godlike benignity and Power in granting the things they ask, as conducing to God's honour and the People's Good: nor is it rational to be granted on other terms. For Religion cannot be defended by transgression of God's Commands, which are the rule of it.  
The true Liberty of conscience of any man, consists in a Constant tendency or intention to the Supreme end, and those holy regulations which God hath prescribed; as it stands in reference to God its Creator, and its Neighbour; Wherein a Christian is free to declare and utter them, to know, consider, meditate of; and believe whatever Truth God hath revealed; When he is free to declare and utter them in such a holy way, which Charity, Sobriety, Modesty, Order and Gravity allow: or conferring so with others, as may have some savour of Reason and Religion, in an humble and holy desire to learn, or teach in a regular, not in a rude, insolent and imperious way. A wise humble Christian is never far from his refuge, and when pursued and urged, beyond what he thinks agreeablt to good Conscience, he is not to seek for, or take Foxes shifts, subtle wind, or sinful coverts: Is more willing to hear, then earnest to object, and labours to acquiesce in others satisfaction, as well as his own, becomes all things to all men in regard of things Civil and extern.   

CAP. V Whether the Romanists have not a just and equal title to Toleration?  
SUch is the multiplying of that breath giving Life, which God hath cast upon slime and dust: as every one hath received a several external figure of Face, and every one a divers internal form of mind, every one a Cogitation and fancy distant: from whence it cometh that there is so great diversity of Opinions; so strange a contrariety of inclinations; so different affections and passions in mortal men, that no ordinary means is forcible enough to persuade them to any thing to which their private Spirits or imaginations are not inclined. Hence so many Scripture interpretations, so many quarrels and divisions in Religion even to Massacres. Evils unknown to the very Heathens. Hence we have often seen good, by false representations may pass for abominable, in the sight of sober men.  
Hence the inconsiderate multitude prejudiced by education, passion, interest, or false Teachers; representing the Roman Church to them as a Monster composed of all sort of abomination, having their Ears perpetually beaten with seven Hills, Antichrist, Idolatry, Superstition: by many unchristian aspersions, false pretences, by private forgeries and public impressions wounding most Christian and innocent men. How can they otherwise but hate them, they know no better? and even suck from their first Milk such an ill Opinion, or odium of them, as if they were Turks or Jews and had principles destructive to common Society, Peace and Concord.  
What a Wonder, and what a Lamentation is it that those men who cry out so much for forbearance to Magistrates, should themselves be so rigid, and can less forbear dissenters; or see the same sin in themselves? So justify all their Cruelties and think persecution to be their Duty. Whence is persecution but from thinking ill of others, abhorring and not loving them? condemning them without hearing, bearing them down not with sincere and plain dealing, becoming Christians: with inveterate malice filling Books with trivial Stories and Fables, picked up out of Authors without discretion; make it their business to seek calumnies and reproaches in the Sepulchers and Common-shores of Schismatics; with untrue reporting of Doctrines, false and unjust Criminations; and other indirect ways unseemly and unworthy the Cause of Truth, to the dishonour of God, and disparagement of Christian Religion.  
Reading a Treatise lately Printed against Toleration, by an university Scholar. Had this Dilemma, if Liberty or Toleration may be granted, either an universal Toleration or particular: not an universal; for than saith he Papists may be tolerated: which is against all. As if all the Monsters of Egypt may be admitted so the Papists be excluded. Yet we must know if there had been no Papists in the World, no other Sect among us had ever heard of Christianity.  
If we knew all the Evils may ensue, we should then be forced to Check the People from railing; and let them feel our anger who would deceive us with Lies. Nor can we look on those men as either of wit or honesty, who are ever promoting the harassing of a faithful party, needlessly to disoblige their fellow Subjects and Sufferers.  
Wherefore to undeceive the so long abused and deluded multitude, I will endeavour in the ensuing discourse to wipe of the Paint and Fucus: that so things may appear in their true complexion unadulterated, with the slights and subtleties of deluders. I have chosen rather to expose these lines to Censure than to forbear to speak or be silent in the Cause and Defence of the Innocent. Silui a bonis, saith the Prophet, & dolour meus renovatus est? in the following lines shall be showed that the Law of God, Christian Religion, nature, reason and our own principles doth oblige us to more charitable censures of the Roman Religion, And that they are as highly (if not more) entitled to the true Christian Liberty of Conscience, than any other Sect or Religion whatsoever: all objections to the contrary cleared and evinced to any rational or impartial Reader.  
If it remains as a Probatum est; that no Christian ought to be compelled in matters of Faith or Religion (provided it broacheth forth no new Sects or Schisms, or that it be not in Case of Scandal or open blasphemy.) And if the Fundamental Laws and Government were established as a Defence and Protection to all sober peaceable Christians; that immunity and freedom of Conscience ought to be indulged to Dissenters in this sense, it being their due right; and not only granted in policy to some persons or to oblige a party; (or to be enjoyed by the strongest and subtlest only, to curb and subject the rest, as is showed before) there can be no ground able to convince any rational man why Papists should be excluded this privilege; unless we infringe the Laws and Government: by not distributing equal and impartial justice; nay the truth of this assertion is more evident and convincing for them, than any.  
Primo, It is against reason and all examples of antiquity for men to be punished for adhering to the Religion of their Forefathers. Now the Roman-Catholick Religion was the first Christian Religion planted in our native Country, from whom we had and have our very Christianity; the first universally spread and preached: by Government permitted and encouraged; by Counsels, and Parliaments confirmed and approved, a thousand years there continued; even by our deceased kindred and parents not long since professed; by our Universities established and defended against all Adversaries. From whence we derive even the Scripture ●t self, our ordinations, most of our material Churches, Colleges, Inns of Court, Hospitals, etc. and shall Charity ever be so buried in Oblivion in England, that the Posterity of those, from whom we must confess to have received these and other great advantages, never be remembered and used with equity and common Justice?  
They are linked in Religion to all Catholic Princes and Countries about us: who will be more loving Neighbours if they see their Brethren find favour from us.  
To persecute this Religion is to War against our Progenitors. It is this Church in which so many Martyrs have died; so many Doctors have taught and preached, so many Virgins have lived in flesh like Angels; so many Saints wrought wonders and miracles: so many Councils called; so many Ecclesiastical Laws enacted; so many Nations converted: so many Kings and Emperors lived and died and hope to be saved: against which so many persecutors, Machiavels and Tyrants in vain have used torments, and contrived all imaginable force, wicked policy, or cruelty could invent.  
This Faith hath the best evidence as taught and instituted by Christ his Apostles and Successors, in an uninterrupted series and delivery down to us. Set before your eyes those glorious Champions of Christ's Church. Constantine's, Theodos. Pepines, Charles, all surnamed Great, more Glorious for Victories over Heresies and Idolatries; than for conquests of Countries: more renowned for propagating Catholic Religion, than enlarging their Dominions. See the Catalogue of noble Kings of England, Lucius, Ethelbert, Egbert, Oswald, Oswine, Alfred, Edgar, before the conquest; William the Conqueror, and so many Henry's, Edward's, Richards after the Conquest: mighty of force, rich of Treasure, so noble of birth, so fortunate in Wars, zealous in Religion, who builded so many Hospitals; founded so many Monasteries, enacted such wholesome Laws and Statutes, got so many Victories in F●ance, etc. even to Palestine itself all professed Roman Catholics.  
Secundo, It deserves one observation, that when Christianity became the ruling Religion of the World under the great Constantine, and Emperors; his immediate Successors, the very Heathens themselves, were exempt from all manner of severity, upon the score of their Religion. Because they were in possession of it by descent from Father to Son, and not by usurpation or intrusion. And we have the like precedent in our own Country. For when King Ethelbert had embraced the Christian Faith by the preaching of Saint Austin, he would not force his own Subjects (though Pagans) to receive it. Bed● l. 1. c. 260.  
For this reason it was that the great Apostles treated the Synagogue (whose Religion at that time was vacuated) and consequently void of Truth, with so much respect and condescendency: and that afterwards the most primitive Fathers used so often this expression; that the Synagogue ought to be buried with honour.  
Whence one of our Protestant Divines saith, even by the Law of Seniority Catholics might expect some favour. For what privileges or immunities have we, but the old Church gave us? whence had we our Bible, Creed, Honours, Donations, commendable Ceremonies, charitable Foundations? had not they preserved them faithfully, we never had found them.  
The first possession of a man is a good title by the Law of Nature until an elder; or the Law of Reason (which with mankind is to have pre-eminence) dispossesses it. The Roman Church had a possession unquestionable for above a thousand years, and the Pope enjoyed jurisdiction a longer time, than any succession of Princes can pretend to, and submitted to by all our Ancestors. In Catholic Religion, they stand as defenders, others as invaders, they as possessors, others as disseisors; they seek to keep what de jure they had; Calvin, and others what they had not. There is a vast difference in these two Cases, to oppose by force the introducement of innovations, and to attempt by force the extinguishment of an ancient Religion of which the People are universally in a quiet and immemorial possession. The one drives others out of possession, the other maintains himself: the one invades his neighbour's rights, the other defends his own.  
Apostasy and innovation with some colour of right have been oft in several ages persecuted by rigour of Laws even by Protestants; and the reason, is because innovation in Religion most commonly breeds disturbance in the Commonwealth.  
Natural reason teaches that no particular man is to be condemned much less deprived of what he stands possessed, till his cause be judiciously heard and sentenced.— Nor ought any man to be Judge in his own Cause.  
But penal Laws and Oaths made in contempt and derogation of that Religion which through all Christendom abounds with learning civility and loyalty; whose Doctrine amongst the primitive, greatest, and most learned societies, hath been and is avouched; in most Nations and Kingdoms allowed; and more freely exercised and permitted: established by the Laws in which our Predecessors were born and continued; wherein all our Progenitors, all the Peers Ecclesiast. Nobles and Princes of our Realm in precedent ages thought themselves happy and honourable. If they had imagined that in future times their Posterity would revile that Religion with Epithets unbeseeming humane (much less) Christian Ears, what an opinion would they have preconceived of us?  
It was said by King James one of the most learned Princes (not in private, but in open Parliament represented) I acknowledge the Roman Church to be our Mother Church although defiled with infirmities and corruptions. Is it not then a kind of Spiritual Parricide in the Daughter not only to revile the Mother, or which is worse scratch her by the Face, call her Whore, Superstitious, Idolatrous, etc. on whose Knees you have been dandled, nourished by her Breasts, and carried in her Womb? Hear O you Heavens and give ear O earth, I have nourished and brought up Children and they have rebelled against me, Isa. 1. 2.  
Let it be allowed some corruptions be of our aged Mother, this should be no warrant for cruelty, but rather a motive of compassion: especially considering that (by confession of all her adversaries) those pretended failings are of no modern date; but such as they are now, such likewise they were, when first Christianity was received by Englishmen under King Ethelbert.  
The Church of England who Glory in their succession of Bishops; (and in this is singular from other Reformers) acknowledge, they immediately derive their true and lawful Ordination and mission; and from whom their first Mininistry, viz. Cranmer, Baker, etc. were Consecrated: and consequently that the Roman Church conveyed divine right and authority from Christ to them; the very essence and being of Religion. Which Church notwithstanding they call Antichristian, Idolatrous, etc. abusing tender Consciences, s●●press that which themselves confess to be divine Truth: condemn as Tray●●rs and persecute to death with praemunire, loss of fortunes, etc. those from whom such Apostolical Graces and Functions proceed and were continued and preserved. If our succession from the Roman be the glory of the English Church; it's our scorn and ignominy to persecute and revile them.  
Tertio, Penal Laws and Statutes against the Catholic Religion destroys the ground and foundation of Justice; and the form Judicature. Because the Witness can have no evidence for their Testimony, the Judges not any for their sentence, and the Legislator as little for the Law.  
Primo, There must be evidence of lawful Witnesses. In matters of Faith we go by hearing, Rom. 10. The best evidence then of any Religion, is the testimony of our deceased Predecessors and Ancestry, whose Faith and Doctrine is fresh in the memories and testimonies of the Christian posterity of the present Church. For besides the Authority of the present Church we can have no greater evidence in foro externo for the Law of God and Religion; then the testimony of precedent ages confirmed with supernatural Signs: v. g. the fourteenth Age delivered to the fifteenth, the Roman Faith which now they profess; assuring them that it was the true sense and Letter of Scripture, which they had learned from the thirteenth age and so forward to the Apostles.  
No reformers can produce one lawful Witness against Catholic Religion, and their sense of Scripture; yet the Greatest Crimes require at least one lawful Witness. For what evidence had the first Reformers to oppose the testimony of all former Ages, confirmed with so many miracles; and to make Statutes against the known practised Religion at least for nine hundred years? Antiquity affords them none, because though in divers Ages some odd men did testify sometimes an error, they were in those very times contradicted by the Church, and declared impostors and innovators. In this present Age no Sectaries can be lawful Witnesses for their own lately modelled Religion, or against the ancient Catholic, because their testimonies cannot be valid against so constant an universal Tradition and practice.  
Secundo, It's ridiculous and unjust in a Judge to pronounce sentence against Roman Catholic upon the evidence and testimony of Calvin, Luther, etc. as in open Court to condemn men to forfeit their Estates and ancient inheritances, upon the word of a mad fellow, that produceth no other evidence to confirm his claim; but interior motions of the Spirit, or some obscure Text of Law appliable to all Cases, and Subjects: for all the Protestant evidence is reduced to the private Spirit and the pretended clearness of Scripture.  
Tertio, The Legislative power ought to be subordinate to Christian Religion, but Statutes against Catholics are evidently against the Law of God and Christian Religion, if we may credit Antiquity, and stick to the Faith and practice of the Church, and Princes that went before us; not only in England but all other Christian Kingdoms. This way therefore of proceeding is different from all other Nations, and altereth the Style of natural reason, humane nature, and the practice of all Antiquity; and consequently destroys the foundation of justice and form of Judicature.  
Quarto, The common temporal Municipal Laws (which Science above all others next to Divinity) doth confirm and evince unto the understanding of an Englishman the Truth of Catholic Religion: Forasmuch as from our first Christian Kings and Queens, which must needs be the origin and beginning of all Christian Common Laws in England, unto the reign of Henry the eight, all our Princes and People being of one and the same Catholic Religion, their Laws must needs be presumed to have been conformed to their sense and judgement in that behalf; and our Lawyers to our Laws. So as now to see an English temporal Lawyer to impugn the said Catholic Religion by the antiquity of the common Laws throughout the times and reigns of the said Kings and Queens, to favour and countenance Luther, Calvin, etc. or any new Opinions, not known before: is as great an absurdity, novelty and wonder as to see a Philosopher brought up in Aristotle's School, to impugn Aristotle by Aristotle's learning in favour of Petrus Ramus, Descartes or some other new Adversary.  
Catholic Religion never prejudiced any Nation or State (where it had free passage) in the least degree; but hath ever been their safety, happiness, and honour. No People or Church in the World so great a friend to loyalty and obedience: they have the repute of honest men, patiented and charitable; carry themselves civilly and religiously; nothing is heard from their mouths of Blasphemy or Atheism: or that may have ground of not believing, or adoring God alone: or of not hoping to be saved by the merits of Jesus Christ. They have lived without just complaint sociable and amicable. If they meet you not at Church, they meet you at Market. Do they not buy and sell with you? Are ready to perform all Offices of good neighbourhood and civility? Do they refuse any kind of temporal duties or payments? Do ye not find them at home and abroad as strict to their promises as any others you converse withal? They cannot be persecuted by any Government that understands its own interest (unless first abused by false Teachers) nor can we deny them what ancient and good Laws have ever allowed; the● being no innovators, but Professors of the same Religion, which made this Nation Christian. If there were no other Apology for peaceable men but only those Pleas of Conscience tendered to public view, those ought not to be unconsidered by such as profess Christianity.  
Never any Acts of Uniformity could expel Papists out of heretical Countries. Do ye know what you ask when you are still urging the execution of pressures against Catholics? even their blood, life and fortunes? can any Christian zeal be so irregular? Can this come from the Spirit of the Gospel? Is this wisdom from above? Whence comes all this anger? What evil have they done? What maxims have they so rough and unreasonable that they must be taken away by the Sword? Why should we be so bloody in our Tenets? How can our passions be so intemperate? Our mercies so cruel? To them whose Faith was established by our Fundamental Laws, and maintenance of it, sworn to at least by twenty of our Monarches; even by Queen Elizabeth herself. Why must the Papists be thus singled out from all the rest and forced to forfeit all advantages, or forsake his Conscience? They only exposed to public hatred and rigour, though they only lest deserve it.  
Shall we extinguish all considerations of equity and charity towards them, of whose honesty we are assured by their Long and Patiented Sufferings; rather than they would renounce their Conscience towards God? who are ready to abjure what is, or may be objected as only dangerous in their Religion; who have given evidences already they will perform those Oaths, and that they cannot be absolved from them? If we apprehend their principles and doctrines are inconsistent with the Gospel or Civil Government: grant them a free Conference, about the points in question, which are those Tenets carry an opposition to either? and if upon impartial enquiry they are found so Heterodox as represented, then inflict penalties. If their ecclesiastics are not able to justify both their Religion and Principles; let them renounce all mercy.  
This offer is very fair and equal, a Vindication of Justice, and a legal proceeding against the Criminal. And the contrary (how plausible soever represented) pretending thereby to do God good service) is most injurious to the Peace, Christian meekness, Reason, Religion, or Charity: and destructive to that prudential Balance the wisest and best States have ever carefully observed. Who always after questions of Religion freely discussed, relieved the distresses of tender and innocent Consciences.  
We must not judge of them, or any other, by the private and perhaps misinterpretable assertions of some particular Doctors: but by the avowed principles of their belief. This is the basis on which they build the rule, by which they walk in point of obedience, to God and man: or if you would judge of them by their proceed, and addresses, their frequent petitions, professions, protestations of all just obedience; will sufficiently clear them. If by their practice, and manner of lives; their quiet deportment and manner of living and conversing with all men: yea even their prayers and wishes (which they daily make unto Almighty God in behalf of their Prince and Country) do show how innocent they are; and how little they deserve those black aspersions and calumnies some rash Satirists are so diligent to cast upon them. In charity we are bound to believe the best of others, and also to think they speak true when we cannot prove the contrary.  
Some destiny them to destruction and extirpation, as Agapete did the Jews, Are so eager declaimers of their corruptions, opinions; and not considering that like Gehezi, the leprosy of those Syrians c●●●ves to most of their own Foreheads. Nor taking any notice of the objections standing in force against themselves.  
The Cry against the Papists is but the Prologue: it was the Epidemical Frenzy in Germany a hundred years since, which turned into smoke and confusion. I wish it might not be truly said that those very persons, against whom you so bitterly sharpen and pen your invectives (as if none were Sinners but they) none were more dangerous; or their practices less pernicious in the Face of the Sun.  
Such is the general inclination and temper of all English Catholics that preces and lachrymae, are their only weapons: an innocent and passive People, as experience of their quiet behaviour, so many years of hard times, have clearly shown. Suffering with that patience, humility, equanimity, and resigned temper of Spirit (imitating their grand Exemplar Jesus Christ) as if those virtues were innate, and most natural ●o them. Nor can I think but those men who are so hardened in their malice and persecution against them, do often hear a voice secretly calling within them. O ye saul's, why do ye persecute me in my Servants?  
Why should you be troubled, Papists are not more troubled than yourselves? Why should you grudge at their peace and protection? So long as they are peaceable, either actively obey the Laws, or else passively ready to submit to the penalties: They are objects of pity rather than envy.  
They have formerly lived in their own native Country with less privileges than Strangers; are excluded from all Offices. By Laws obnoxious to greater sufferings than Enemies. Have suffered loss of Goods and Live. Whose Adversaries have left no Stone unrolled, no corner unsearched, no Pursuivants uncommissioned to tyrannize over their Consciences: burned their Antiquaries, consumed their Monuments, violated their Virgins, racked even the very Souls of Men with Oaths, when in humane prudence there was no fear: but God hath showed his just chastisements and judgements upon the chief Actors, contrivers and Abetters.  
Can we be such public contradictors of our own declared principles (whereby we disclaim and profess against Persecution) as still to continue our mulcts and penalties upon those whose condition have been such as every one might abuse them in the Streets: (even with satisfaction to some) discredited, contemned, trodden under every man's foot that listeth to spoil them. To lie in prisons, dungeons, felters, to be racked, bowelled, and boiled alive. We have seen their families impoverished, their houses invaded by saucy Officers; their lives forfeited as Traitors, for entertaining those, without whom they could not live but as Pagans. Have been deprived of performing any Service to God, debarred of any civil employments in the Nation, they were otherwise capable of. These miseries have they groaned under without any demerit of their own part; these sour herbs have they patiently and quietly tasted. Would it not be an unreasonable precedent and incitement, towards our brethren, and all Nations abroad; if we should begin again in the same Cup at home?  
Some have so blackened and put them in so strange and monstrous a dress, by calling them members of Babylon, Antichrist, Idolaters, etc. that I dare boldly aver that some of the seduced herd who are ignorant of their meek, humble, innocent and pious documents, (of which the whole world is to this time witness) do s●arce believe them to be Men, (or if so) yet that they are some terrible Cannibals that came out of some strange Lands.  
Be pleased to consider, you asperse not one, but many: and those who have given best evidence of being truly tender Consciences: Since they suffered so generally, so constantly so deeply. If your passion will not, at least your charity ought to think better: For if you prove not, what you say against them; you are guilty of the breach of the Mandate, of love to your neighbour, in as great a height as circumstances can improve a sin to.  
Every Christian will have a Share in the injury; and a title to be righted, and demand satisfaction. Must they carry all our Sins on their backs? Must our faults be whipped on them? and they made particular oblations for us? is not this to act the part of cursed Cham over again? or to be conformable to Core and his company? by a wilful kind of Sophistry still casting all the odium upon them? Can no Ellobore Purge this Frenzy? Shall we always like Flies dwell upon some particular Ulcers? And for some misdemeanours, miscarriages, or the lose lives of a few, traduce and defame the whole Profession and aggravate their failings? We know it were no difficulty to recriminate in this kind, and repay you with the same dirt, if it were any pleasure to scramble in such a Puddle.  
As great an aversion and Antipathy as you have against them, 'tis worth your labour herein, to make them your own examples in point of obedience and Government; and so in respect of public Peace and Tranquillity.  
It were to be wished by all honest men of what persuasion soever that a just and equal Liberty in matter of Conscience, were granted unto all; if but for this only respect, viz. that so by a free confident, and friendly conversation one with another, void of suspicion, and jealousy, fear or danger, to one party or other: and by amicable discourse and debating of things, truth might come more clearly to be discovered. But this is a work hath so much of God and goodin it, as it must expect many Adversaries. Moderation or true Liberty meets with so many enormities, exorbitancies and obstacles to resist and retard it.  
Had we but a due latitude of candour and charity towards others, or understood our own happiness; and took things in the best sense: Sure those billows and waves would cease roaring. Were men so ingenuous to promote peaceable order as they are watchful to find knots in Bulrushes, and torture their brains to find scruples in what is most plain: and stood against the tempests and shake of virulent Tongues and cankered calumnies: our heats and animosities from difference in opinion would gradually decay: and a foundation would be laid; On which to raise a considerable Structure of Peace to Church and State, and Prosperity to the Nation.   

CAP. VI Persecution of Recusants is against our own Principles and Concessions.  
PRotestant Religion doth indemnify us in the Court of Conscience for believing in matters of Religion according to the Dictates of our own private judgement; or rather doth oblige us to do it. For as Bishop Gauden a learned Protestant saith, If it be not lawful for every one to be guided by his private Spirit and Judgement in Religion, it will hardly be possible to acquit our separation from the Roman Church of the guilt of Schism. Nor doth it seem worthy of Christ who hath left us a Religion full of Mysteries, and not any visible Judge of them: to have designed about those any visible executioners. This premised, I argue thus.  
Where there is a liberty of examining and judging, there must be a freedom of election upon such judgement: but the Church of England, v. g. in her Doctrine alloweth men to search the Scriptures, and examine whether her Doctrine be agreeable to Scripture or no: Therefore the Church of England and other Reform cannot in reason and equity persecute such men as in foro conscientiae, shall upon such due examination of judgement, descent from their Doctrine.  
If this principle pass current amongst us, that every one may read, judge and interpret Scripture: (which is by us the judge of Controversies) the only rule to guide us to Faith: we are bound to give Liberty of Conscience to others. Whence one of our own Doctors saith, Our Bishops who have declared the Doctrine of giving freedom of Conscience, what every one in their private judgements, do of discretion hold to be most conformable to God's Word: yet they very inconsequently and disingenuously excite our Governors, to force their Conscience to an exterior Conformity.  
Secondly, We confess the Church of England and all Churches may err, and for aught we know do err, and lead into error: and such an uncertain and fallible guide or ground to rely on, is not proportionable to the nature and quality of Faith; which must be certain and infallible: with an internal consent of the Will, and subjection of our understandings to revealed Truths. Our Senses may be deluded, but Faith not: for it must be more firm and certain than any thing we see or feel.  
Supposing then the Reformed Churches fallible: will it not be a most unreasonable thing, to be still exacting of Recusants, by rigorous Sequestratious, Oaths and what other penalties they think fit: to leave and forsake the Church and Faith which they so groundedly hold to be the infallible guide, appointed by God himself, as the only means to direct them securely to eternal Salvation? And to yield exterior conformity to our own new moulded Church we all profess to be fallible? Or to be forced to embrace a Doctrine deduced by fallible interpretations out of Scripture, which interpretations, the far greater and learneder part of this very age reject as Heretical: and which as such were rejected by almost all visible Christianity for these thousand years. And which perhaps may shortly be rejected by us. We having ofttimes rejected that which we cried up before for verity: and the Religion now in vogue not many years ago was cried down.  
If our Church be not then infallible, in what we teach against them, but may embrace a lie, for a divine Truth: they need not to vindicate and justify their most just recusancy in refusing to submit; when we provide them no better security: but force them to refuse due submission to that infallible direction appointed by divine Writ to bring them securely to their end. To which the most religious, the most learned, and the major part of Christians ever yet thought and submitted too. If I should disobey the sentence of the Church, upon what other authority can I more prudently rely? What Labyrinths and Abysmes should I fall into? How can we force and draw others to our Churches, if we cannot agree where and how to lay our Foundation? How can we impose upon and restrain others; whom we are so far from assuring of Truth, as we pretend to be but uncertain of it: and are not able to do so much for ourselves? being liable to change, and no ways certain of our own belief to be the most infallible? as our multiplied Concessions are pregnant instances. What is this but to put certain penalties upon an uncertain Faith? And if our Teachers agree not in all points of Religion: the Dissenters in controversy are obliged to allow a mutual toleration.  
If we say the Roman Church erred for 900. years till our Reformation we exclude ourselves from all possible assurance of true Faith or Salvation. And to arrogate to ourselves, or to attribute to private persons or Pastors the all-defining Spirit; which we deny to the whole Church represented in a general Council is absurd. His presumption must needs be vast that builds more on his own tenet, than the mature judgement of all successive Fathers. While he cries down others for infallible, he lifts himself up to be so: as if God revealed more to him than all the Doctors and Propagators of his Church.  
Now let us hear what our own Divines acknowledge. Doctor Taylor saith, — but alas notwithstanding our Religion thus framed by our Divines; yet it seems not sufficiently marked; or the cognizance of Schism taken away: for yet we have no particular positive points among us settled for undoubted Truths.— those being rather a medley of all Religions and new Sects professed among us, or a negation of those tenets of the Church we went out of; and which stood a thousand years before us, as Histories and Monuments witness: which is but a negative Faith in effect: for what is positive or of Order and Government, is wholly derived and taken from that Religion which not long since we pulled down, abominated, and so violently persecuted.  
Doctor Gauden saith, I see not why Papists may not in reason of State, have and enjoy that liberty (without perturbing the Public Peace) which Presbyterians and Independents do enjoy in their new ways. For nothing will savour more of an imperious or impotent Spirit (whose Faith and Charity are Slaves to Secular Interests) than for those who have obtained liberty to their Novelties; to deny the like freedom, to other men's Antiquity; which hath Ecclesiastical practice and precedency of a thousand years: besides the preponderancy of much reason, Scripture and holy examples. All which to force godly, grave, and learned men to renounce, or comply with other ways against their judgements, must be a crying Self-condemning sin; in those men who lately approved the ancient Church way, and after dissenting; at first desired but a modest toleration. And in another place saith, To Fleece and depress Popish Recusants by pecuniary mulcts, exactions, etc. is to set Religion to sale, and make Merchandise of Conscience and men's errors; rather than fairly to persuade and win them by proper and persuasive engines of true Religion.  
Thorndike a learned Divine saith also. Certainly it may be justi●●able for the secular power to grant Papists exercise of their Religion in private places, under such moderate penalties as disobeying the Laws of a man's Country requires. For Persecution to Death in that case the whole Reformation condemns the Church of Rome. And I conceive there is no reason for that, which will not condemn Persecution to Banishment. The State may easier be secured of Papists against all such power in the Pope, then of our Sectaries against that Dispensation to their allegiance; which the pretence of God's Spirit may import when they please.  
Whereas it is manifest that many Papists hold against those equivocations and reservations which destroy all confidence in the Sovereign in Allegiance. Though not secured in those that pretend God's Spirit.— Besides Recusants being for the most part of the good Families of the Nation, will take it for a part of their Nobility freely to profess themselves in Religion; whereas the Sectaries are People of mean quality cannot be presumed to stand so much on their reputation. And in another place he saith, to proceed to divide the Church more and more with Persecutions is more destructive to the substance of Christianity; than all that corruption, Reformation pretendeth to cure.  
Osborne a Protestant, Hist. mem. Q. E. p. 17. 〈◊〉 that against the poor Catholics, nothing in relation to the generality, remaineth upon due proof sufficient to justify the severity of Laws daily enacted and put in execution against them.— All other Sects, saith he, oppose the Roman with more spleen and animosity then ordinary, yet they defend themselves and prevail against all; still continue, and have been the most grand and principal Body of all Christian Societies; and the greatest force and Fortress of Christianity against Turks, and Heathenish impieties; and chiefest Propagators of the Gospel in all Nations, etc.  
I see no reason (saith another Doctor of our English Church) why Papists in England should not as well deserve, hope and enjoy; as any other order or rank of men freedom to their Consciences. Nor can I think but those men who are so hardened in their Malice and persecution against them, do often hear a voice secretly call within them. O ye Souls why do ye persecute me in my Servants?  
It's a kind of injustice, and an uncharitable course (as I conceive saith he) when we spare them that have no Religion at all; and censure those that can give an account of somewhat tending to that purpose. Shall Atheists and Socinians Enemies of the blessed Trinity be not looked after? And shall others following the Heresy of Aerius, directly opposing the order of Bishops and their Jurisdiction; (that is the whole frame of the Church of God assembled in the first four general Councils asserted and affirmed to be of divine right by Scripture and the Church of England) be winked at? And must we only incite our Governors against Papists? Force them upon Banishments, Prisons, Persecutions, Pressures and Calamities, and use such severity against that Religion, we ourselves hold Salvation to be acquired in: who hold all the positive Articles with us.  
I may loudly proclaim (saith Bishop Gauden, with Samuel 12. 3.) this Protestation in their behalf. Behold the Servants of the Lord and his Church (O Christians causeless Enemies) witness against them and before the Lord, and before the People. Whose Ox or Ass have they taken? Whom have they defrauded or oppressed? Whose hurt or damage have they procured? Whose evil of sin or misery have they not pitied? What is the injury for which so desolating a vengeance, must pass upon them and their whole Profession? What is the Blasphemy against God or man for which these Naboths, must lose their lives, liberties, and livelihoods? Wherein have they deserved so ill of former and later Ages, that they should be so used (as Ahab commanded of Mi●heas, and the Jews did to Hieremias) to be cast into Prisons, to sordid and obscure restraints, or to be exposed to Mendicant liberty, to be fed only with Bread and water of Affliction? What necessary Truths of God or righteousness have they detained? What error have they broached, revived, or maintained? What true Christian liberty have they impeached? A little after—  
They have not light conjectures, not partial Customs, not bare Profession, not uncertain Tradition, not blind Antiquity— but evident grounds, Scripture, Succession, Conversion of Nations, planting of Churches all over the known World; crowning their Doctrine with Martyrdom. Authors of best credit undeniable; famous in Church through all the first Ages, showing us Catholic Religion. And uncontradicted consent, constant, and uninterrupted Succession— their great abilities— Add those Credential letters, the testimonies and seals which God hath given of his holy Spirit. Lastly, the Civil rights and privileges, the piety of the Nation, and the Laws of this Land have always given to them by the fullest and freest consent of all Estates in Parliament. these aught to be regarded much of men of Justice, honour and conscience; as not to break all these Sanctions and Laws asunder, by which their forefathers have bound to God, etc.  
Whence Doctor Tailor in his Book concerning the unreasonableness of prescribing to other men's Faith in liberty of prophesying, §. 2. 249. that Considerations to a charitable Toleration concerning the Roman Church, which, saith, he may easily persuade persons of much reason, and more piety, to retain that which they know to have been the Religion of their forefathers, which had actual possession and seizure of men's understanding before the opposite Profession had a name.  
Another learned Protestant Doctor saith, the humble peaceable and discreet carriage of them, may justly plead for favour and protection against this calumny of proneness to Sedition, Faction or illegal disturbance in civil affairs: Even in all the unhappy troubles of the late years.— have generally behaved themselves and shown they had no other design than to live a quiet life in all godliness and honesty. If they could not help in fair ways to steer the Ship as they desired; they did not seem to set it on fire and overwhelm it. If at any time relating to public variations and toss they could not act with satisfied and good Consciences; they humbly bear with silence, and suffer with patience.— Intentive chief and fearful to offend God; tender of Conscience and their own Religion. Whence.  
The late Bishop of Exeter saith, in these christian bounds of peaceable subjection, humility and holiness: if the Papists in England may but obtain so much declared favour and public countenance (which all other fraternities and Professions have) as to be sure to enjoy their callings, liberties, and properties; (which seem to be so many times in great uncertainties) under the protection and obedience of the Laws) it would encourage them;— and redeem them from those menaces, insolences and oppressions, of unreasonable men; who look upon them like public Enemies and perdue; because they have little of public favour and encouragement.  
Christian usage will no doubt win more upon them, than those rough storms and winds, wherewith they are daily threatened, and are still distressed. Which makes them wrap themselves up, as Elias in his hairy Mantle: when they think their lives, liberties and livelyhoods are sought after; and no such protection like to continue over them they thought in a Christian State and Church, they might have obtained; and deserved through their quiet conversation. As a just protection infers our due subjection: so no men pay more willingly than they; who besides the Iron-rod of fear have softer cords of love and favour upon them. How can we with justice, honour, or humanity inflict severe penalties upon Papists as refusing to conform to our Church and Religion, when they protest with so much truth to our faces; they cannot see any Church, any Religion, among us as uniform, public, authentic, Constant?  
We might consider that the enacting of laws penalties, and impositions against Papists, is but a knotting Whipcord to lash our own posterity: Seeing now there be so many Opinions in the World, God knows upon whose children it may fall next: For the Church of England is not a Manna that relisheth in every man's palate. Secondly, To use severity against Papists overturns the very ground of our retreat from Rome. It is against Protestant sincerity; for how can they exclaim against them for persecutors, and are now the men themselves? Was it an instance of weakness in their Religion, and is it become a demonstration in ours? Is it Antichristian in them and Christian in us? For if men must be restrained upon prudential pretended considerations, for their Religious exercise; why not the same in France, Germany, Holland, Constantinople, etc. where matters of State may equally be pleaded? And if Protestant's who maintain that no Councils or Church without tyranny may require belief or internal consent from their subjects to their definitions or Articles of Religion (a practice much exclaimed against in the Church of Rome) why then do they of the Church of England so inconsequently exact in practice, such consent blamed in the Roman.?   

CAP. VII. That by our own Concessions true Salvation is acquired in the Roman Church, and therefore not to be persecuted.  
THe most eminent Divines of the English Church, allow the Church of Rome to be a true Church: whence they acknowledge and derive their Orders, Ordination, Calling, Mission, Jurisdiction, Authority to Preach, etc. wherein they agree Salvation may be had and all Fundamentals of Faith are professed, v. g. Papists hold all positive Articles of Faith settled among Protestants, as divine and undoubted Truths. Protestants and Catholics both are Christians, Both Baptised in that holy name, both lay hold on the promises of the Gospel; have the Lords Prayer, Belief, the same three Creeds, Apostolical, Nicene, Athanasian; The first four General Councils.  
They believe with the Roman Church Articles of Doctrine, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son; terms of Trinity, substantiality, virginity of our Blessed Lady, Scripture, all Laws, Canons, Ordinances, forms of Liturgy, Prayer, Service, Discipline, etc. And though the Roman Church doth declare many doctrinal points as necessary to be believed (being deduced from holy Writ, and practice of the primitive times) which the Reformists deny: Yet seeing they acknowledge all the necessary articles fundamentally required to Salvation; as is by their Adversaries granted. What reason or justice is it to condemn them to so great cruelties for matters of their Belief.  
I could produce innumerable testimonies from the best Authors and Writings of the English Church; who teach the Roman notwithstanding her supposed errors, to be the Church of Christ, and therein perfect Christianity, and hope of Salvation to be found. To avoid prolixity I will mention a few.  
Doctor Morton in his Treatise of King of Israel and the Church, p. 24, Papists, saith he, are to be accounted of the Church of God; because they hold the Foundation of the Gospel. Hooker 5. Book of Eccles. Policy, saith, The Church of Rome is reputed a part of the House of God, and of the Family of Jesus Christ. Doctor Covel in defence of Hooker p. 17. saith, We affirm them of the Church of Rome to be part of the Church of Christ, and those that live and die in that Church may be saved. Master White in defence c. 41. in the name of his Brethren saith, We profess the Church of Rome itself, in all Ages to have been the visible Church of God. Field lib. 3. c. 8. saith, We most firmly, believe all the Churches of the World, wherein our Fathers lived and died to have been the true Churches of God, in which undoubted Salvation was to be had. And after in the same Book, We never doubted but that in the Churches wherein those holy men St. Bernard and St. Dominick lived were the true Churches of God. Osiander witnesseth Bede had all Popish errors, yet Dr. Humphrey in his Jesuitism acknowledges him to be in the number of the godly: so doth Fulk of St. Bernard, Luther, the Centurists, Tindal and Pantaleon title St. Francis and St. Dominick holy men; though they bleieved all Papistical errors: therefore Papists may be saved, if Protestants may be believed.  
Dove persuas. saith, in fundamental points of Doctrine the greatest Papists in the world agree with us. Prot. rel. affirmeth the Roman Church hath still inviolably the foundation of Religion l. 48. Downam l. 2. Antichr. granteth it was a note of a good Christian to cleave to the Romish and Apostolical Church, and p. 103. l. Antichr. he yieldeth to Bellarmine, that S. Augustine and Victor Oticensis were of opinion, to adhere to the Church of Rome was a mark of a true Catholic in those times.  
Our Stars of the first magnitude, as Luther in Epist. against Anabap. saith, we confess that all Christian good is in the Papacy, and from them it came down to us; and ibid. I say in the Papacy is the true Christianity, yea the true Kernel of Christianity: and on the 28 of Genes. we confess the Church to be among the Papists: for they have Baptism, Absolution, the Text of the Gospel, etc. and there are many godly men among them. Calvin Instit. l. 4. confesseth in the Roman Church in the deepest of her supposed errors, there ever remained inviolabile foedus Dei: the Covenant of God inviolable.  
Doth not Bunny, Whitaker, Junius, Zanrchius, Seravia and almost all Protestants generally hold as much, at least, that we agree in fundamentals, that the Roman Church is a true Church, the Mother C-hurch.  
A thousand of learned Reformists confess in general, Antiquity and the Fathers are for the Roman Church. Whence a learned Writer noteth in some things or other; yea in every particular Controversy Protestants grant their Assertions, and there is no assertion by the Papists defended, but some of the reform yield too and confess, as of great reason and authority.  
Magdeburgenses 4. Cent. dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, & ad Jacobum Regem; that the first & purest times of the Church, taught Sacramental Confession, Tradition, Invocation of Saints, Purgatory, Mass, a propitiatory Sacrifice, Miracles obtained at the relics of Saints, Images in Churches for the first 200 and 300 years. Concerning the Primacy that one must be Chief in the Church is taught by Melancton, Luther, in loc. come. Covel in examen. Jacobus Andreas related by Hospivian.  
Mr. Perkins Prob. p. 237. saith, Appeals were often made out of Africa to Popes of Rome in primitive days. Middleton Papist p. 39 that the first general Council of Nice, taught the Dignity of Rome over the West Provinces, and hold, p. 200. Papias, living in the time of the Apostles taught Peter's Supremacy. Field. lib. Church saith, the Title of Constantinople was but intruded and usurped, and when the Council of Nice gave such honour to the Church of Rome; there was not so much as mention made of Constantinople. Doctor Sutcliffe subver▪ p. 51. is witness Irenaeus saith, that every Church ought to have respect to the Church of Rome for h●● eminent principality: and Subvers. 19 telleth, how Saint Gregory commanded in England, instituting Saint Augustine Archbishop of Canterbury a See of that preeminency. Downam lib. Antich. c. 3. doth not deny but that Justinian the Emperor and the general Council of Chalcedon did attribute to the Pope of Rome to be head of the Church.  
For the real presence Jacobus Accontius, a learned Protestant, saith, though one part err, yet both are in the way of Salvation. Whitaker, Bucer and Hooker say the Body is really given to the Mouth of the faithful. So Doctor Reynolds in his Conference 722. Prayer for the dead and free will, Cartwright, Fulke and Spark say are not so necessary. Worship of Images is indifferent, saith Master Bunny and Bilney, and is defended by Protestants in Germany, as Beza relates. Bowing at the Name of Jesus is affirmed and commanded by Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions. By Doctor Whitgift in defence; Mus●●lus in loc. come. Zanchius in Epist. ad Ephes. etc. But if bowing at th● Name of Jesus being read or heard be lawful; it followeth, the honoving of Christ's Image is also lawful: since the Name of Jesus is to the Ear, as his Image is to the Eye. Communion in one kind, Luther in Epist. ad Bohem. saith, is of indifferency.  
That the present Roman Church and Religion continued and flourished during the whole time of the primitive Church in the first six hundred years after Christ: from Christ and his Apostles to Constantine the great, and from Constantine to Gregory the great. Calvin, Zuinglius, Z●nchius, Danaeus, Beza, Brocord, N●pper, Perkins, Whitaker, Powel, Fulke, Reynolds, Cartwright, Field, Willet, Whiteguift, Midleton, Morton, the most renowned Protestant Writers acknowledge in their Words and Books; as I could easily show, and cite their words and places to that purpose, if it were not for brevities sake: you may find it at large in a Treatise dedicated to Dr. Morton of the Progeny of Catholics and Protestants. And the continuance of the Roman Religion, those last 1000 years, is acknowledged by Oslander, Danaeus, Magdeburgenses, Holinshed, Stow, Cambden, Fox, Bale, Bilson, Whitaker, Mason, Cartwright, Godwine, Martin, etc. it being evident to all that do not stupidly deny whatever was said or done in former ages.  
To conclude, I propose this Dilemma, either with extreme impiety you damn the Souls of the whole race of your Progenitors, who, till the later end of Henry the Eighth, lived and died Roman Catholics: or else, with no less cruelty, you punish them for professing the Religion of your forefathers; in which, by your own Concessions, Salvation may be attained. Whence a learned Protestant saith,  
The wrong which Protestants commit in afflicting Catholics, and unnaturally trampling upon their dejected Estates, only for matters of Religion.— Alas! by our own Doctrine, they are neither▪ Babylonians nor Egyptians, but they and we (as we teach) being Israelites. Why then should Israel thus persecute Israel? are we not become a gaze of Christendom, thus to fight without an Enemy, for kindred to wound his own kindred?— inciting our Governors to great severity in Religion; in which we ourselves teach they may be saved. I speak sincerely I hold morally, it's most improbable that such as have been conversant in Study of Controversies, must have a respect to Catholic Religion, unless they break with all Authority, humane and divine.  
Bishop Gauden, in the Sighs of the Church p. 202. saith, The Dilemma and distressed choice of Religion is now reduced to this: that peaceable and well-minded Christians, wise, etc.— so long harassed and wearied with novel Factions and pretended Reformations, would rather choose their posterity should return to the Roman Party, which hath something among them settled, orderly, & uniform, becoming Religion, than to have them ever turning and towering upon Ixius Wheel; catching in vain, at fanciful reformations, as Tantalus at the deceitful waters: rolling the reformed Religion like Sisyphus his Stone; (sometimes asserting it by Law and power; otherwise exposing it to popular liberty and looseness) then to have them tossed to and fro with every wind of Doctrine, with the foedities, blasphemies, animosities, Anarchies, danger and confusions, attending fanatic fancies, and quotidian Reformations; which like Botches and Boils from surfeited and unwholesome bodies, so daily break out among those Christians, who have made no rule of Religion, but their own humour; and no bounds of reformation, but their own interests. The first makes them ridiculous, the second pernicious to all sober Christians. whereas the Roman Church (however tainted with errors) yet it cannot be denied without a brutish blindness and injurious slander, (which only serves to gratify the gross Antipathies of the gaping vulgar) that the Church of Rome, amongst its tares and cockles, hath many wholesome herbs, and holy Plants growing: much more of Reason and Religion, of good Learning and sober Industry, Order and Polity, of Morality and Constancy, of Christian Candour and Civility, of common Honesty and Humanity; becoming grave men and Christians; by which to invite after-ages, and your posterity to adhere to it and them, rather than to be everlastingly exposed to the profane babble, endless janglings, miserable wranglings, childish confusions, atheistical indifferencies, and sacrilegious furies of some later spirits; which are equally greedy and giddy, making both a play and a prey of Religion; who have nothing comparable in them to the papal party, to deserve yours or your posterities admiration or imitation, but rather their greatest caution and prevention.   

CAP. VIII. Roman Catholics are not guilty of Practices or Principles destructive to Government.  
Protestant's have set it down as a Decree against Catholics and labour to imprint it, as an eternal scandal in the hearts of the People: that Catholic Doctrine and Religion, is dangerous to the State and Sovereignty: and therefore not allowable. This being a matter of great importance; I will endeavour, not so much to justify them, as to inform myself, in a point which hath made so many stagger: Being one that desires to defend the loyalty of innocent men, rather than their Opinions or Doctrines; which they are best able to defend themselves.  
In this grand charge and Hyperbolical accusation, I find the contrary is proved by evidence of Fact: that the Treasons, Seditions, factions, tumults which have filled all Christendom with blood and calamity; sprung not from the doctrine of Catholics, but from the Opinions and practices of Reformists; not from Rome but from Wittenberg, Smalcald, Geneva, etc.  
Was it the Papists that induced them of Geneva to expel their Lord and Bishop? That moved them of Swedeland to deprive their lawful King? That procured Holland to depose their Sovereign? That solicited Subjects to depose their Emperor? King of Bohemia and Poland? That imprisoned Mary Queen of Scots? That authorised Mountebank and Rochel to stand in defiauce against their King? That begot so many conspiracies against Queen Mary of England as appears in our Chronicles? That ravished from their lawful Governors the Low Countries and Transylvania and many Towns now called free? Was it from any of their Books, you have drawn these vile Maxims, viz. that the authority of the Sovereign Magistrate is of humane right? That the People are above the King? That the People can give Power to the Prince and take it away? That Kings are not anointed of the Lord? That if a King fail in performing his Oath at Coronation, the Subjects are absolved from their allegiance? That if Princes fall from the grace of God, the people are loosed from their subjection? Do not these doctrines proceed from Wickliff, Waldenses and other Sectaries? Doth not Belforrest sufficiently prove the like maxims from Luther, Calvin, Melancton, Peter Martyr, & c.? What Buchanan and Knox did against Queen Mary their lawful Sovereign is evident in History, and Beza in Epist. 78. ad Buchanan approves their actions. Calvin l. 4. c. 3. Instit. from his high Consistorian gives this absolution to all Oaths of that nature. Quibuscunque hujus evangelii lux effulgeat & ab omnibus laqueis juramentisque absolvitur. And the famous Minister Surean called Rosiers writ a Book expressly, that it was lawful to kill Charles the ninth, and the Queen Mother if they would not obey the Gospel. Belforrest is sufficient witness. See more in Althusius Politics c. 35. Dausus l. 6. Polit. c. 3. In all the Councils, Synods, writings of any Roman Divines, no such matters are found and allowed; but only such as teach Subjects loyalty, humility, obedience.  
More Princes have been deposed by Sectaries in sixty years, than by Papists in six hundred years: and that deposing of Kings is no doctrine nor practice of Catholics shall be proved hereafter: and that others have been more faulty in each of their respective Sects in all kind of disorders at home or abroad, History and experience testify. In no Country or City in Christendom but Catholic Religion ever entered by meekness and suffering: in no Country of Christendom but other Sects entered by sedition, rebellion, disobedience: or murdering of great Princes or Persons; by vast destruction of Cities, Countries, Kingdoms. As in France, Holland, several States in Germany, Scotland, twenty years in England, etc. Consider what was done against France, Holland, several States in Germany Mary Queen of Scots; or the late unparallelled Rebellion.  
In Catholic Religion I find they learn their duty towards God cannot be complied with, without an exact performance of their duty towards their Sovereign: to obey him not for advantages, or temporal concerns; but out of Conscience. For no Roman Catholic can be true to his Religion, who is not true to his Prince. Whom they obey for Conscience sake; whose Person they love and honour; and whose prosperity they always pray for; Though stripped of their Estates or loaden with stripes. It is in the power of great ones to make them suffer; but not to make them guilty. Their Religion tells them that Caesar's due ought not to be kept from him be he of what religion he pleaseth.  
This is the will of God in Scripture, preached by the Apostles and from them derived to us: this doctrine is instilled in their Catechisms; confirmed by their Sermons and conferences: Insomuch that a Papist that is not truly loyal, is not truly a Papist, if to believe not, what they are taught by the Church, makes a man cease to be of it.  
From the Saxons to Edward the sixth, to be a Catholic was never taken as a bar to loyalty. Nor doth it seem possible a Religion which governed England with glory so many hundred years; can teach a doctrine destructive to Princes; or infuse Maxims that will breed Commotion in the People.  
They are ready by Oath in the face of Heaven to profess loyalty a divine command, and an indispensable duty: and any who pretend to know what Catholic doctrine is; must know this to be a part of it. In matters of fact their actions have given indubitable testimonies even by their Enemies own Concessions. If Catholics had been disloyal, either the King or his Council; or at least the Statesmen under Cromwell or the Rump must know it. They appeal to the Council in all discoveries of their Treacheries against the King whether ever any constant Catholic was accessary or concurred in any design against his Majesty. They appeal and challenge all the black Catalogue of Cromwell's favourites and the whole Rumpists, to discover, if they can, any Papist who concurred in any plot or action.  
If Catholics refuse to go to Protestant Churches in respect of Conscience, They will far more refuse for Conscience sake to commit Treason; a sin of a higher degree; will hardly attempt or consent to any desperate act against their State and Country: and commit such Crimes as hazard Body and Soul. Nay what other Sectaries will boggle at, If the King should be a Heathen and make Laws against them; they hold it not lawful to resist, but peaceably to endure.  
During the time of the late King of France, there was proposed by an Assembly of Catholic Divines and Bishops, this question or Problem: If it were supposed the King of France became a Mahometan, and by his Power endeavoured to force his Subjects to that infidelity: whether they might lawfully according to the Principles of Christianity by arms resist him? to which question the unanimous consent of the Assembly was, that such a resistance would be unlawful: since Christian Religion allowed no other way of maintaining Faith against lawful Sovereigns, but prayers, tears and sufferings.  
When shall we find such a result from a Synod of Presbyterians? Compare these primtive Doctrines, with new the Evangelists; and we shall find them quite contrary to the rules of Wi●liffians, Waldenses, Paraeus, Knox and Buchanan, etc. who teach that Subjects may not only defend by Arms their Religion; but offend also. And lately Baxter in lib. of Rest. p. 258. saith we may fight against Kings if it were for cause of Religion; to purge the Church from Idolatry and Superstition. The Genova Notes of the Bible, 2 Chron. c. 5. allow the deposing of Queen Macha. See more in Belforrest.  
On the contrary the Doctors and Casuists of the Roman Church hold it as an Article of Faith; that neither Heresy nor Turcism can be opposed by Rebellion. Belloy in Apol. part. 2. plainly saith, Arms against Princes have no warrant. Orationibus tantum pugnandum. Navarre, Cunerus and all other Catholic Doctors agree in the same; as most conformable to the doctrine and practice of the Primitive Fathers. The General Council of Constance, Sess. 5. concludes it an error in Faith to maintain Subjects may kill their Kings being Tyants, nuper accepit Synodus, etc.  
Cardinal Tolet in his Summolies l. 3. c. 6. affirms it not lawful to attempt the life of a Prince: although he never so much abuse his Power. And that it is flat Heresy to maintain the contrary. So Greg. de Valent. part. 2. Bellar. l. 3. of his Apology. Learned Lessius lib. de Scientia & jure. Serarius in cap. 3. Azor. in his Instit. Becanus in his answer to the 9 Aphor. Gretzer. in his Vespertilio Heretico confutes all Mariana's grounds. Saint Thomas tells expressly Tyrannus non potest a quopiam privatâ Authoritate occidi. The Canon Law and Decrees, Decret. 2. part. 10. de Episcopis ac clericis quod nec sua authoritate, nec authoritate summi Pontificis arma valeant accipere, etc. And the Canon Law of England explains it more fully in the Council held at Oxford by Stephen of Canterbury 1228. and anno Hen. 3. where Excommunication is decreed against those who perturb the peace and tranquillity of our Lord the King and Kingdom. Bellarmine himself maintains the Laws of Magistrates bind even the Consciences of Christians, Lib. de Laicis. So the Rhemenses in this Annotat. in 1 Pet. c. 2. Condemn treason and disobedience, and say, Subjects are bound in temporal things to obey the Heathens being lawful Kings; and even for Conscience sake to keep their temporal Laws, pay tribute, pray for them, and other natural duties. And Doctor Kellison in his Learned Survey gives a good reason for it; because, saith he, Faith is not necessarily required to jurisdiction; nor is authority lost by the loss of Faith.  
The Bishop of Armagh confesseth the English Papists in Ireland were faithful in all the Invasion of Spain or Pope Sand. K. C. p. 88 Calvin himself their greatest enemy on the first of Hosea and ninth of Amos, saith, quam multi sunt in Papatu qui regibus accumulant quicquid possint juris & potestatis. Whence King James in his Basilicon doron Epist. to the Reader, saith, Puritans had put out many Libels against all Christian Princes; and that no body answered them, but the Papists: that they were their only Vindicators. And the late King himself in his excellent Book of Meditations, saith, I am sorry Papists should have a greater sense of their allegiance than many Protestants.  
The Loyalty and Obedience of Catholics towards Princes appears undeniable in all things; by their constant and general conformity unto temporal Government. Have showed all the duty that men can fancy to own. Where shall we find better Subjects? How much they are faulty, and how much others have been: let the world judge. They may lay to our charge, ten Seditious Authors for one: and that more Villainies have been perpetrated since the Reformation than in nine hundred years before.  
I must provoke both Angels and men (saith a Divine of the English Church) to consider their wrong. How we load them with Crimes of which they are innocent. I might wonder how so wild calumnies could be laid to their charge. When their constant Doctrine teacheth, and their own persons have showed all duty imaginable. Experience hath proved their great integrity, that no advantages offered can betray their fidelity to their King or Country.— what wrong have done? what peace have they broken? what plots have they fomented to the prejudice of the present Government? or occasions given to hatch new jealousies? treason is now left out of their charge. What discoveries were made against them, either in the Rump or oliver's time when the Press was free? were they not still owned as the most loyal and constant Royalists? and none of them could ever be suspected for the least defection from our Sovereign. And yet these are the men that are traduced, as inconsistent with civil polity and regality. Yet none more inoffensive than they. Judge then whether it be not a superlative injustice to incense the world against them. As if they delighted in blood, and persecuting of men were a part of their doctrine.  
Now because the contrary opinion hath possessed the imaginations of so many, by a self-deceiving wilfulness, predominant passion or partiality. I shall clear and lay open the truth of this assertion in the sequent Chapter: So plainly and Orthodoxally; that none but who can lay aside all reason, charity, honesty and morality, may contradict and oppose.   

CAP. IX. Principles and Doctrines of Roman Catholics are consistent with Peace and Government, wherein a different Religion is established by Law.  
LEt Politicians say what they will, there is no greater support to Monarchy than Catholic Religion: whence one of our own Doctors saith, The fanatics did conjecture, and were tenacious of opinion, that the late Acts put out against Papists and Priests, were but to bring others more easily into the snare. So good and deserving opinion, they know Papists merited from those times, that no security need to tie them deeper.  
How all the Catholics of England have comported themselves, at least, these sixty years last passed, needs no further vindication; those that have been witnesses of their actions can testify. I shall only intimate, that I have heard them profess, that if at any time they have exposed their lives and fortunes, in defence of their Sovereign and Country; they did but do that duty which they shall be ready to do again, notwithstanding any disincouragement can be put upon them.  
Now in this Chapter I adventure to fight against a popular prejudice, and the obstinacy of long verted opinions: considering the number of my Adversaries, who so loudly and resolutely charge them with destructive Doctrines and Principles to the public good and safety, that they seem to make it an Article of their Creed: objecting Positions of some private and disavowed persons and words only (when others rebelled indeed, and their Battles were real:) but every man's work will bear a better testimony of him than other men's words do against him.  
I know great difficulties may be overcome by truth and time. And vulgar and very general errors have oft been easily detected by prudent and unbiasled men. Whence to overthrow from the very foundation all such aspersions; let all impartial men consider, first, these calumnies proceed originally from enemies. Secondly, they are untruths forged against them, and taken upon trust, what their Antagonists teach you. For it hath been a course often practised against them, by many of their opponents:  
First to frame Articles of their belief according to their own fancy, or out of private and unapproved Authors; as if they were the true and real Articles of their Faith. Who being oft pressed to justify the accusations could never do it: or durst not show their faces in a free or public conference, about the points in question.  
This way of proceeding is against all Law and Equity, to condemn them before you hear them. No Judge sends men to be hanged before they speak for themselves, and Sentence given.  
Secondly, According to the rule of reason; they themselves should make the Confession and Profession of their own Faith, and that of others, especially their adversaries should not take it upon them: For any indifferent Judge would wonder you should have better intelligence of their Religion than they themselves.  
Thirdly, All examples and practices of the Primitive Churches mentioned in the Ecclesiastical Histories, the custom was, when any Dispute did arise, concerning the integrity of the Doctrine professed in any particular Church, that Church so questioned did always set down in writing a Confession of their Faith; and transmit it either to the Patriarch or some general Council: that so the sincerity of their belief might be tried by the touchstone of the Church universal.  
Fourthly, Faith being an internal consent of our will, and subjection of our understanding to truths revealed, in absolute justice none but we ourselves can make an authentical manifestation of what passeth in our souls of that nature. And besides it being the duty of every Christian, not only to make open profession of his Faith when occasion requires it, but also to make such a profession with all possible sincerity and truth: (for to use any falsity or dissimulation in a case of this concern, were not only to deceive men, but even to belie the holy Ghost.) It will necessarily follow, first, no judgement can be made of another's faith, but by the confession of the party himself: and secondly, that a greater assurance cannot be given between man and man of veracity and secret dealing, than when we publicly declare our faith upon any point of Controversy.  
Upon these grounds and these circumstances, I presume, their Antagonists will be so reasonable as not to question the truth and reality of their meaning in what they declare concerning their Tenets in the points of Allegiance or Doctrine. Here I will set them down, submitting to the honour and conscience of all sober men, and to any indifferent Judges (who will not retain the animosity and prejudice of parties) to give sentence, whether they are not consistent with loyalty and the duty of good Subjects and Christians. v. g.  
They hold CHARLES the II. is their true and lawful Sovereign. Secondly, that no Power on earth shall absolve them from their natural Allegiance. Are ready by Oath in the face of Heaven to profess their loyalty indispensable, from which no power can free them. Thirdly, that they are bound with their lives and fortunes to defend the sacred Person of his Majesty in his just Rights against all opposers whatsoever, domestic or foreign. Fourthly, that Faith is to be kept with all men indifferently and equally, whether they be Roman Catholics, or of any other Religion. And that our engagements, promises and contracts cannot lawfully be broken, or dispensed with by any power on earth to the prejudice of any third Person.  
They believe the holy Scriptures to be of infallible authority, and assent to it, as the word of God. They believe the sacred mystery of the blessed Trinity; one eternal, almighty and incomprehensible God, whom only they adore and worship, as alone having sovereign dominion over all things: to whom only is due from Men and Angels, all glory, service and obedience: abhorring to give their CREATOR'S honour to any creature whatsoever.  
Whence they solemnly profess, that by the Prayers they address to Angels and Saints, they intent no more, but to solicit their assistance before the throne of God; as we desire the Pravers of one another here upon earth; not that they hope any thing from them as original authors thereof; but from God through Jesus Christ our only Mediator and Redeemer.  
Neither do they believe any Divinity or Virtue to be in Images, for which they ought to be worshipped, as the Gentiles did their Idols. But they retain them with due and decent respect in their Churches; as instruments which we find by experience do often assist our memories and excite our affections. Pictures may be of good use (saith our learned Bacon) if the representation of divine stories, as well work upon them to contemplate those things, as lascivious Pictures do Obscenity. Charity obligeth us no other construction of the words of men than what they profess to be their own sense: but I never heard or read Images absolutely to be worshipped, or Saints absolutely prayed to.  
They firmly believe that no force of nature or dignity of our best works can merit our justification; but we are justified freely by grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: and though we should, by the Grace of God, persevere in a godly life: yet are our hopes of eternal Glory built upon the mercy of God and the merits of Christ Jesus.  
All other merits (according to the sense of that word) signify no more, than actions done by the assistance of God's Grace; to which it has pleased his Goodness to promise a reward. A Doctrine so suitable to the sense of holy Scripture, that nothing is so frequently repeated in it, as his gracious promises to recompense with everlasting Glory the Faith and Obedience of his Servants. 1 Tim. 4. 8. Rom. 2. 6, 8, 13, Heb. 6. 10. Luke 16. 38. thus we believe the merit or rewardableness of holy living, (both which signify the same with us) arises not from the value even of our best actions: but from the grace and bounty of God. And for ourselves we sincerely profess, when we have done all we are are able, or commanded, we are unprofitable servants. Luke 17. 10.  
These they sincerely and solemnly profess, as in the sight of God, the searcher of all hearts, taking the words plainly, without any equivocation or mental reservation. And now let them that judge so severely, lay their hands on their hearts, and with the same justice and equity with which they expect to be judged themselves at the last day: Let them pronounce whether or no their Doctrine or Principles are inconsistent with the duty of good Christians, or Subjects, and the peaee and safety of Government.  
In Law and Reason every man, à fortiori, a society of men ought to be esteemed honest and just, till the contrary appear to be proved: but nothing hath hitherto appeared to be proved against the loyalty of Catholics: therefore in reason and justice they ought to be esteemeed good Subjects and Neighbours: and it is a mere Calumny to asperse them.  
That nothing can be proved is evident, their accusers being often pressed thereunto, were never able to produce any particular; or any proof sufficient to satisfy any rational man: But dwelling in vain, general suspicions, triflings and false presumptions; laying to their charge extravagant crimes, that have not the least proof or probability: objecting positions of some private and disavowed persons; the crimes and indiscretions of particular men to all the party, to traduce and defame the whole, we aggravate the failings of a few.  
The world knows it were no difficulty to recriminate in this kind, and repay them with the same dirt. If such accusations pass current, who would or could be innocent? No people on the earth can be safe at this rate. Would not this Logic make the Church of England guilty of Fanatic Principles; because, Taylor, one of their renowned Doctors and Bishops writes for liberty of Prophesying? And of Murder and Theft, etc. because some of them are condemned every Sessions?  
Whence an English Divine ingenuously speaketh; We cast an aspersion on a sort of people, whose tried loyalty in all vicissitudes of dangerous troubles, as it should have altered your judgements (so their grievous sufferings for loyalty) should from the Charity of our Profession, have found rather pity for their afflictions than aspersion on their innonence.— So good deserving an opinion they know Papists deserve from these times that no security needs to tie them deeper.— Nor can there be any apprehension of the least danger from them to his Majesty's Person or State; for in point of fidelity they have given unquestionable proofs by their actions; as their enemy's witness.  
Needham, in his Book Interest will not lie, saith, ' Papists adhered generally 'to the King. Oliver, pressed by Cardinal Mazarine for liberty to Papists, said, they were his greatest enemies, lib. Of Treaty at St. John de Luze. They can say two things no profession else can: viz. that no person of Honour or Estate among them was ever against the King: and on the contrary, hardly any one so qualified but did assist him. Who can therefore look on those men, as to have any honesty, wisdom or charity, who are ever grudging and repining at the least favour indulged to a faithful, loyal and sociable people? and can never rest satisfied with their own unlimited immunities; unless they see others contemned, afflicted and abused? When by all the Apostolic Rules of Christianity, we should help and compassionate: and not make it our business to supplant one another.  
Before I answer the vulgar objections, and undeserved clamours so confidently (though without any legal examination and process, according to justice and judgement) laid upon them, and so frequently, though disingenuously; urged against them. I will show more largely what they teach concerning loyalty and fidelity to their King and Country.  
1. It is an undoubted verity, generally taught in all their Councils, Canons, Synods, Divines, Civilians, etc. that our duty to God cannot be complied with, without an exact performance of our duty towards our Sovereign: to obey him not for advantage, private interest or temporal concerns, but of Conscience. Nay what other Sectaries have bogled at; if the King should be a Heathen, and make Laws contrary to the Gospel, we ought not to resist, but patiently endure.  
No Roman Catholic can be true to his Religion, who is not true to his Prince and Country. Saint Peter and Saint Paul did vehemently press obedience to the Emperors in Nero and Claudius times, who were Idolaters. No Divinity can be warranted from Scripture against evil Princes, but Prayers and Tears. Whatsoever they command, which is not contrary to the great Charter of the word of God, I am bound in Conscience to obey. If they command any thing repugnant evidently to Gods revealed Will; I must obey them still; though not actively in doing what they command, yet passively in submitting to those penalties they shall inflict. He that proclaimed the Prerogative of Kings, vos estis Dii, taught the World, People are to obey. Xephlon in vita Mar. Anton. tells us, Solus Deus est Index Principum, God alone is the Judge of Kings.  
I know no sin against the second Table, set forth in more bloody colours by Catholic Authors, than this of disobe dience to Governors: they saying it is compounded of Homicide, Parricide Christicide and Deicide. They compare it to Witchcraft where the party intends and covenants with the Devil himself.  
God commanded the Amalekite, who had a hand in saul's death, to be slain before his eyes. Sheba blowing a Trumpet against David, is styled a Son of Belial. What made Jeroboam so infamous in Scripture, but because he lifted up his hand against the King. 1 King. 11. 26. an irreverent or wry word against the King is in Scripture called Blasphemy, Proverb. 27. thou shalt not blaspheme the Gods. And Naboth was accused in that he did blaspheme God and the King. Curse not the King, no not in thy thoughts; for a bird in the air shall carry the voice: is it fit to say to the King, thou art wicked, and to Princes, ye are ungodly? Job. 34. 18.  
It hath been observed God hath signally punished those wrongs have been done to his Vicegerents. What an unlucky time was it, and accompanied with a deluge of miseries when Kings were taken away from Rome and Consuls set up? We read in our Annals after Richard the Second was deposed followed a War, wherein a hundred thousand were slain, besides what of late in our memory.  
What more hurtful and hateful Creature than the Locusts? Y●● they are observed only to have no King: if we obey not the King, who is a visible God: how shall we obey God, who is an invisible King? Since the lines of our peace and happiness do meet and centre in him, as in our common Father. Who can think that any natives of a Land professing themselves followers of Christ (who in the days of his humiliation was obedient to Caesar, that he wrought a miracle to give him his due) and expecting a protection from a lawful Prince, should once demur to swear and yield Obedience?  
men's ears are open, saith a learned Divine, to receive any tragical complaints concerning their Governors. Sheba's Trumpet is pleasant Music to that great Beast, the common people: they harken with both ears to Detractions and Calumnies against Governors; that they are tyrannical Bishops, are Antichristian, Popery is coming in apace; the Gospel is adulterated, Justice obstructed, Profaneness countenanced. What Hurricanes will these men raise? I even tremble any should profane the Pulpit, poison the Air, or (which is worse) the very hearts of men with such seditious and devilish Doctrines.  
Who can choose but renounce that way of Discipline, which startles at renouncing War with the King?  
For my part, as Lactantius said to Constantine, the same say I of our Sovereign's Restauration. Ille dies foelicissimus illuxit, etc. Whose Person (if we be not worse than Heathens) we ought to love and honour, and whose prosperity we ought to pray for. His unquestionable Title and most noble and high Descent and Birthright cannot but strike a reverential awe upon us: for it may lineally and successively be derived from the British, Scottish, Danish, Saxon and Norman Princes above two thousand years, which is more ancient and truly noble than any Prince in the World ca● show. A Prince, whose great Judgement, Gentility, Educarion, candid Nature, Meekness, Generosity, Benignity and justness in Dealing all the world cannot but know and may imitate: And his very enemies (if he can contract any) must (if not injudiciously passionate, or deserve in some measure to be ranged in the Categories of fools and mad men) acknowledge. But we ourselves, his Subjects, are more pathetically sensible of the effects, in his gentle protection to us of the Laws, Lives and Liberties: Every one quietly living under and possessing his own Vine, without the least suspicion of being harrassed or disturbed: as they were in the late times of Anarchy and Democracy. And most Nations daily feel more heavy Yokes, and exactions under their (though moderate) Governors. In this where there is so much truth and justice to own, it cannot be esteemed any Adulation, but rather our duty to acknowledge.  
Let's study then to be quiet, to fear God and honour the King, and not spend ourselves in national and trifling Disputes, be so pragmatical, econtrical, and magisterail, as to meddle with things above us, by lying in lurking places, watching and meditating Ambuscadoes for the downfall of those we ought to pray for. It looks like a studied piece of malice to be so angry one with another for Religion, our own Nation and Natives; as Hypocrates was with the Persians, who refused to give them Physic, or heal their Maladies when they sent for him.  
Gold is the best metal, and 'tis also most ductile and malleable. If you are Englishmen, of generous dispositions, and of a golden nature, you will be pliable, to be advised, and aim at nothing but your own and the Nations happiness. What though every pin in the Sanctuary doth not stand point size, as you would have it? must all Europe echo with your bellow? must an unwarrantable Covenant or pretence of Spirit hinder our cementing and soddering together? do you think, like Sea-Pies, to rise by going against the wind? or, which is worse, to rise by the fall of your Brethren and fellow Christians? do you think to flourish in your private capacities? must the public suffer? You know the Apologue the Members conspired against the Belly, and were starved themselves. 'Tis impossible but private interest must sink, when public falls.  
You are not such strangers in our Israel, as to be ignorant, how the waters have swelled, the winds blue, the waves have beaten against the ship of the whole Kingdom. You well know what Confederacies and Combinations are abroad against our Tranquillity. Gabel, Ammon, Ameleck, all are bend upon our ruin. Is this a time to cavil one with another, dispute in trifles, when Hannibal hath been so lately at your gates? What makes ye now again so inveterate to preach down Charity, to curse, O ye Meroz! to stand so stiffly upon, in a rash and false censuring of your Brethren?  
Is this thy Kindness to thy Friend? as Absalon said to Hussey, Is this your love to your native Country? that you had rather, barbaras has segetes, that the Satyrs should dance here? and Foreigners should inhabit our dwellings, rather than you will come short of your wills? What makes you now so spleenish? have you felt the shaving of Selimus his Beard? or been subject to Nero's or Dioclesian's, who would threaten to mingle your blood with your Sacrifices? Whose Ox or Ass was taken from him? Why should you grudge at Papists peace and protection, when they give no just occasion to violate yours? Is it not a mere piece of Sophistry, or Satanical stratagem, if any thing be amiss still to cast all the odium and imputation upon them? like those Heathens that sent the Christians to the Lions, if Nilus did not swell high enough to make their fields fruitful; or if their legions miscarried in the field. So unhappy are they, if their Teeth must be ●et on edge as oft as the people eat sour grapes.  
When Pyrrhus proposed to himself to win Rome, Sicily and Carthage, Cyneus asked him, what he would do at last? Pyrrhus' said, be merry: Cyneus replied, So you may be already, if you would be contented with what you have. I must, like another Cyneus, tell you, if you would rest satisfied with that spacious liberty allowed you already, you may be as religious as you will, who hinders you? Why should you murmur at the least indulgency to others, that are as studious of a virtuous life as yourselves? Why should you then still suspect Popery and Superstition? and cry to Magistrates for Oppression to others? Charity thinketh no evil. It is a strong suspicion, where there is no evident cause of such Envy, it doth rather proceed from, or argue, guilt.  
Thus we are still afraid of shadows, and by our active fancies frame such Chimeras of danger, which have no footing in nature. Like untoward and unhappy Children help forward to our own affliction. As the perfidiousness of the Donatists and Manichees in Hippo, by their surmised jealousies were the cause it was made a prey to the Vandals.  
Thus having proved that the Doctrine and Principles of Roman Catholics are not repugnant to any Government whatsoever; but very consonant to all moral and pious living, and Christian peace and society. I shall now, in the sequent Chapters, search (without partiality) and with all sincerity, into the depth and bottom of the usual and common aspersions, mistakes and objections so often and undeservedly cast in their teeth, taking measures of their manners, actions, etc. without any due regard or examination.   

CAP. X. Shows how widely we are deceived in our undue measures and censures.  
I Am not so unadvised as to think their innocence stands in need of my pen: since it's strong enough to rescue itself from the usual accusations and tempestuous Hurricanes of Calumnies groundlessly imputed. Yet being by justice and title of this Apology obliged to this duty, my chief design in this Treatise being true Charity; I shall speak more freely and candidly, to justify the innocent, to remove that popular odium, to allay that plebeian passion, to wipe away such impious Stains, Maculations and polluted Characters: and take away those unjust jealousies; and rectify those unlearned prejudices, which by so many are taken up and urged daily against them. Whereby Christian Charity, according to the Gospel, our Profession, and promise in Baptism, by which we are graduated Christians, may be maintained; that we as true Servants of our great Master, may wear the Badge and Livery of Unity, Peace and Concord.  
Suppositions and mere conjectures have been the best measures that most have taken of them, their Practices, Principles or Doctrines. Whatever is said of Papists is generally believed: how a●e they traduced? what Stories are told of Pope's▪ how many things of the whole body of Catholics? and all taken for Gospel? yet have no solid foundation of truth in them? Whence one of our English Church truly noteth; saying,  
We heighten little things of concern to Religion to make them odious, fill Books with trivial Stories and Fables, picked out of Authors without any discretion; make it our business to seek out Calumnies and Reproaches (which good Authors cannot furnish us with) in the sepulchers and common shores of Schismatics, of private and disavowed persons.  
Controversies in our time (saith Doctor Field) are grown so many in number and in nature so intricate, that few have time and leisure, fewer strength and understanding, to examine them. It's hard for the most judicious and learned men to give a right judgement of many points; and yet notwithstanding many engaged persons are ready to force Dissenters by coercive Power, or blacken them with opprobrious terms.  
The Controversies of Justification by faith or good works hath filled volumes with Arguments, Definitions and Distinctions: but it is hard to find, whether the difference be not de nomine, and of words only. The Controversy of freewill, since neither part doth absolutely exclude Divine Grace, or concurrence of the will with it, may be called verbal; if understood cum grano salis, and by those who carry no partial bias on their judgements. Some rigid Calvinists indeed (though not all) conclude an absolute fate by Predestination to Salvation or Reprobation: to those I answer, they need not trouble themselves, but let every one go quietly to his destiny; since, by their own Principles, all their Praying, Preaching, etc. can neither help nor hurt: Seeing it is not in their power to avoid evil or do good.  
Worship of Images exclaimed as Idolatrous, the scandal is chief, as I conceive, taken from the word Adoration, which in the Grammar sense is but adorare, to pray to: but the generality of Rome disown that acceptation, and told them chief as Memorials, as I shown before.  
The Pope to be Antichrist, the Etymology of the very word is repugnant to it: the being by us acknowledged likewise the great Patriarch of the most Christian and Western Church; and every one that hath but an ordinary reason, sense or knowledge of Scripture can own but one Antichrist to come, the Prophet Daniel spoke of. And that he should give pardon for Sins or Sinners whatsoever; without first having remission from God, by Sorrow, Repentance and Amendment, is so great a Calumny, that I pray God to pardon such malicious ignorance. I tremble to hear such horrid blasphemies out of Christian mouths to derogate and scandalise their fellow Christians with more than Heathenish impleties.  
Many and other great things have been objected against them through ignorance, weakness, mistakes or malice: which unjust men scatter too and fro as chasse to blind the eyes of simple and credulous people. The crimes of a few miserable wretches (by none more detested than themselves) are made their guilt: but it is the fashion Papists and Popery must be brought in by head and shoulders, and sit down under any affronts; what ever the difference be, to exasperate men's spirits, and make odious and suspected those whom we can never confute. It is hard they should always lie under such undeserved imputations, and be persecuted without liberty of a just defence. The Morality of the Heathens was more equitable and less envious: where the Emperor Adrian commanded unto Minutius his Proconsul of Asia, as a thing of great importances, ne nomen condemnaretur sed crimen.  
A Divine of our English Church exclaiming against such proceed, saith, Our affections change our thoughts, and our imaginations fit the scene; and what we call reason is many times but a chain of phantasms: and we are guided by prejudices, and overwhelmed by Authority, and form by education, and suck in opinions carelessly,— are deeply settled before we examine them; and when we examine them it is but by halves; we see but few things, and judge all things by them; and either seek not truth at all, or are unable to manage a due and impartial search. When we stumble upon it, we are afraid, and run away from it, or stand to pelt it with dirt and vile names. In the mean time we catch at shadows, and grow fond of the imaginations of our own fancies.  
Doctor Taylor, one of our late and most eminent Divines, in Treatise of Liberty of Prophesying §. 2. & 10. p. 249. Collecting some considerations inducing persons (saith he) of much reason and more piety to retain the Religion of their forefathers.— Their Doctrines having had a long continuance and possession of the Church; which therefore cannot easily be supposed in the present Professors, to be a design (for Covetousness, Ambition, etc.) since they have received it from so many ages: and it is not likely, that all ages should have the same purposes; or that the same Doctrine should serve the several ends of divers ages. It's long prescription, which is such a prejudice as cannot be retrenched, as relying upon these grounds; that truth is more ancient than falsehood: that God would not for so many ages forsake his Church and leave her in error. I add not such gross errors as are imputed on them, as Idolatry, etc.— Again, the beauty and splendour of that Church, their pompous Service, the stateliness and solemnity of the Hierarchy, their name of Catholics, which they suppose and claim as their own due, and to concern no other Sect of Christians. The antiquity of many of their Doctrines; the continual succession of their Bishops; their immediate derivation from the Apostles; their title to succeed Saint Peter (and in this regard chief honoured and submitted to by antiquity,) the supposal and pretence of his personal prerogatives (much spoken of by the Fathers;) the flattering expressions of minor Bishops (in modester language honourable expressions) which by being old records, have obtained credulity. The multitude and variety of people which are of their persuasion, apparent consent with elder ages in many matters doctrinal: the advantage which is derived by entertaining some personal opinions of the Fathers:— the great consent of one part with another in that which they affirm to be de fide. The great differences which are commenced among their adversaries— their happiness of being instruments in converting divers Nations: The advantage of Monarchical Government, the benefit of which they daily enjoy: The piety and austerity of their religious Orders of men and women: the single life of their Priests and Bishops, the severity of their Fasts, and their exterior observances: The great Reputation of their Bishops for Faith and Sanctity: The known holiness of some of those persons, whose institutes the religious persons pre●end to imitate: Their Miracles false or true, substantial or imaginary; The causalities and accidents that have happened to their adversaries: the obliqne acts and indirect proceed of some of those who departed from them.  
To which, join that of Sir Edwine Sands, in his relation of the western Religion, p. 29. saying, Beside the Roman Church and those Churches united with her; we find all other Churches to have had their end and decay; as Hussits, Sollards, Waldenses, Albigenses, Berengarians, etc. or their beginning but of late. This being founded by the Prince of the Apostles with promise to him by Christ, etc. much more to that purpose, ibid. What Church but one can show the fulfilling of innumerable Scriptures touching the Church's Infallibility, Universality, by time, place and person? Which can spread before your eyes her Line and Pedigree, descending from the Apostles to these times? which can declare that in all ages she hath had some glorious company professing her Religion, even in points their adversaries now impugn?  
There makes for them all that may or can be of any Christian man required: Literal Text of holy Scripture, approved Tradition, general Councils, ancient Fathers, Ecclesiastical Histories, Christian Laws, Conversion of Nations, divine miracles, heavenly Visions, Unity, Universality, Antiquity, Succession, their true Mission, Ordination, etc. all Monuments, all Substance, all accidents of Christianity.  
No wit of man can find out Arguments more convincing in themselves, the truth of Religion, than plain Texts and literal Sense of holy Writ, the infallible Decrees of Church and general Councils, the indubitable Writings and unanimous consent of ancient Fathers, the credible Histories of all times and places, and often the common light of Nature and Reason itself. And ad hominem, for prevention of all evasions, no victory more certain, no objection more unanswerable than the plain confession of their adversaries themselves. The Volumes of Fathers and Councils in the eldest and purest times, be so clear in themselves for Romish Faith, that the primest and most learned Reformists studying the same, are enforced through evidence of their words and deeds, to acknowledge, as Master Bierly in King James' time produceth clear testimonies.  
If that Church erred, or changed by little and little, or that the true Church was invisible, etc. they require some humane reason to show it catigorically: In what time? in what Articles? what Pope changed? what tumults rise thereupon? what Councils withstood? etc. which in all innovations they can show easily a total change, and in what particular points, as by Arrians, Sabellians, Donatists, Pelagians, Protestants, etc. What places, what Countries changed with them, what Catholics set against them, what kept the old paths? To say the Church was extinct a thousand years, or unknown, is expressly against the Scripture, Christ's Promises and Providence, and Reason it self. If the Church were invisible whether should Gentiles address for their Conversion? or the doubtful for resolution? or all faithful for their direction? was our Saviour who was promised to all Nations brought to that straight, that he had not a visible Chapel reserved to him in the whole world? Is it not good reason, God would preserve his Church which he had planted and watered with his Blood? Is it not a denial of God's Providence? and to say Jesus Christ was unjust, or an Impostor, to oblige all men to indispensible obedience to her, if erroneous or invisible? if men were changed into beasts they may be thus persuaded.  
Is not the Church compared to a City, to a Light, to the Sun, etc. can the Church, which is a Sun, be drawn into a chink? or all her Beams into the centre of a Burning-glass? Can any Proposition be more reasonable, than to ask of those who maintain a thing to be in former ages to produce some marks thereof? to show where they had a being, or a Company successively holding the same Articles with them? The Building is perpetual where God layeth the Foundation.  
The Church is the Pillar of truth, 1 Tim. 3. cannot err, Irenaeus l. 3. c. 4. Mat. 28. Act. 3. Go teach all Nations— and I am with you all days to the consummation, John 17. Father keep them in ●hy name whom thou hast given me. See his Petition to keep his Church, gathered of all Nations, and his continual protection, I will give you another Comfor●●●▪ ●o a●i●e with you for ever. John 16. When the spirit of truth cometh he shall ●●ach you all truth. This assistance promised was ever in all ages; no Heresy or Jew could ever prevail against it.  
The guard and strength of Truth in point also of antiquity is ever such, that she resteth still accompanied, attended and fortified with surest friends, strongest towers and best munition. Priority and ancestry is so specially affected by the Wisdom of God, and maligned by the enemy of man; that in first planting the Church it's said Mat. 4. 13, 24, 25. 5. Mat. 13, 17. Luk. 8. 12. that he first sowed good seed in the field, and after the enemy came and oversowed Cockle; not obscurely intimating true Faith and Religion, that is, good seed was first and ancient to Sects and Heresies. Even as temporal nobility is most honourable which is derived from the ancientest Blood: and in earthly possessions that Title strongest, which pleadeth longest prescription, or ancientest evidence. So it cannot be denied but truth was before falsehood, substance before shadows; the Gospel, Faith, Religion, etc. which is first and eldest is only the true Gospel, Faith, Church: and other Congregations afterwards arising or going out from thence are only malignant inventions of the enemy.  
In which respect to find out truth in all occurring difficulties we are specially forewarned to recurre to antiquity, to suspect novelty, Moses, Deut. 32. before his death, leaving documents to the Children of Israel, saith, Remember the old days, ask thy Father, etc. so Bildab Jobs friend 1 Job 8. advised him in greatest extremities— ask the old generation, and search diligently, Solom. Eccl. 9 8. 11, 12. let not the ●●rration of the ancient escape thee, etc. and Jer. c. 16. stand upon the ways and ask the old paths, which is the good way, etc.— on the contrary God reproveth such as walk in a way not trodden: and Solomon's lesson is Transgress not the ancient bounds which thy Father hath put. So Saint Paul to Timothy to keep the Depositum, avoiding profane novelties.  
It's very ordinary with the Fathers to confute Heretics, by their innovation. So Tertullian reproveth Novelists of his time, saying to them, who are you? when and from whence came you? what do you in my grounds? by what right, Martion, didst thou cut down my woods? by what licence, Valentine, dost thou overthrow my Fountains? etc. It is my possession long since I possessed it, I possessed it first.— So Saint Hierom. of the Luciferians, — Why do you go about after four hundred years to teach that we knew not before? until this day the world was Christian without that Doctrine. So Athan. confuteth the Arrians, Saint Hilary and Saint Aug. Donatists. These reasons may induce us to take new measures of that ancient Church, and may easily persuade persons (as Doctor Taylor in his Treatise of Liberty of Prophesying) of much reason and more piety, to retain that which they know to have been the Religion of their forefathers; especially when her Sovereign Rights, Titles and Prerogatives are admitted and acknowledged by her professed enemies. Whence,  
Chillingworth confesseth, that Protestants cannot with coherence to their own grounds, require of others the belief of any thing besides Scripture, and the plain irrefragable and indubitable consequences of it, without most high and schismatical presumption. Dr. Bramh. Reply, p. 264. We do not (saith he) hold our 39 Articles to be such necessary truths, extra quas non est salus, without which there is no salvation, nor enjoin ecclesiastical persons to swear to them; but only to subscribe to them as theological truths. And Stilling. p. 153. saith, men are herein to judge for themselves according to the Scripture; because, saith he ' every one is bo●nd to take ' care of his Soul and all things that tend thereto.  
Now if there be no absolute assent required to the 39 Articles of the Church of England, as to matters of Faith; as Ar●●●bishop La●d, Bramhal, Chillingworth, Fulk▪ St●llingfleet, etc. confess: do not we take hard measures of Romanists, to force them ●●● renunciation of their positive points revealed by literal texts of Scripture; Gods holy spirit residing in general Councils, confirmed by much reason and authority of all persons and ages: to put any abuses and reproaches upon them because they do not conform to our negative points not the fide.   

CAP. XI. Answereth more particularly all other vulgar objections and aspersions so confidently (though erroneously) cast upon them.  
IN the sequent Pages I judge it little to the purpose to observe any order by Chapters or Sections. Seeing these usual imputations hang together like the Tails of Sampsons' Foxes; being by their Antagonists urged against them with more bitterness and spleen than sincerity or verity. I will therefore refer the Reply to the Censure of all judicious and honest-minded Souls: how weakly and uncharitably these objections are taken up? how inconclusive is the inference from them? and how unreasonably they are continued and urged against peaceable people; to an abusive credulity and delusion of many other sober Christians.  
¶ I will take the first Objection and Answer from a Divine of the Church of England. Their Adversaries object (saith he) against the Papists, as Tertullus and the Jews did against Saint Paul, Act. 2. Papists are Pestilent fellows, stirrers up of the People, factious, turbulent, seditious, will not conform, nor are well affected to the present constitutions of power and public affairs.  
Against this calumny which with much cunning and eagerness is every where by some leveled against them. And it is like to the policy of Julian the Apostate, who to ensnare the Christians; set the Statues of the Emperors with the Idols of the Gods: that if Christians did civil reverence as to the Emperors; they should be defamed as Idolaters; if not they should be accused as despisers of the Emperors.  
To this sharp and poisoned arrow; I shall only oppose the Shield of plain dealing; that in a matter so much concerning the satisfaction of others, and Papists civil safety there may be no such obscurities as may harbour any jealousies.  
The humble, peaceable, and discreet carriage of them may justly plead for favour and protection against this calumny; of proneness to sedition, faction, or illegal disturbance in civil affairs; who even in all the unhappy troubles of the late years have generally behaved themselves, as shown they had no other design than to live a quiet life in all godliness and honesty, etc.  
¶ Next may be objected that Papists scruple to take the OATHS of ALLEGIANCE and SUPREMACY.  
I answer as for the Oath of Allegiance were it not for some incommodious expressions nothing pertaining to the substance or design of the Oath it would generally be admitted. There is nothing in the Oath of Allegiance which purely concerns the practical part of Allegiance, but what Catholics will most willingly swear unto. But they that attentively consider the several parts of that Oath, shall find that some of them are speculative points, and general: others practical and particular which relate, to the actions and demeanour of him that swears, of which he is Master and consequently can answer for them.  
To all the propositions of this second sort relating to the practice of allegiance; there is no Catholic in England but will swear unto them. But as to the first sort therein contained which involve speculative points and general notions, and withal controverted by several learned men, I must confess I think it would be very hard to excuse such an Oath from rashness and ambiguity.  
I humbly therefore entreat the Reader to consider: An Oath is by which God is invoked as a witness to what we affirm. Three Conditions are required to it, expressed by the 
Eccl. 9 2.  Prophet, jurabis mihi in aequitate, veritate & judicio & justitia; Thou shalt swear in truth, judgement and justice. So that if an Oath be ambiguous or false it wants the first condition, viz. truth, if used rashly without discretion, good advice, and not of just necessity, it will be destitute of judgement. 3. It must be sincere and conform to the eternal Law of God, lest it want justice. So that it is a breach of solemn Oaths if they be ambiguous, entangled, or contradicting one another, etc.  
Now when we come to swear in general to the speculative points of the Pope's Power in deposing Princes excommunicated, and authorising one Prince to invade another, etc. although we suppose the assertion to be true that the Pope hath no such Power; Yet how can they with a safe Conscience swear point blank thereunto? It being a matter of fact, nor in our power to make true or false. Secondly, they cannot swear that position of the Pope's deposing power is absolutely Heretical: because the contrary is not evident in Scripture nor condemned by the Church. Any other ill names o● epithets they will be content to give it. Thirdly, In doing so they seem to profess a Declaration of a point of Faith which a particular Christian cannot presume to do, and make himself a judge and decider of a point of Faith. Fourthly, They would then by Oath testify that all Popes that have exercised and all Writers that have written or maintained such a power even in some extraordinary cases and emergencies are to be esteemed Heretics; which is very rash for any particular to presume.  
There is a great difference in swearing that I believe such a thing to be true, and swearing absolutely such a thing is true, in the first, I swear, only to my own Opinion (which any that is so persuaded may lawfully do.) In the second I positively swear to the Truth of the thing. And to do this the greatest probability in the world is not sufficient to warrant me: for the greatest probability doth not amount to an absolute certainty without which an Oath is rash.  
Papists refuse the Oath of Allegiance (as 'tis now worded) framed by one PERKINS an Apostate Jesuit, purposely mingled with uncertain speculative points ambiguous and difficult to be interpreted; to make them fall within the Law of refusal: charged with expressions not pertinent to the substance or intention of the Oath, or relating truly to the obedience of the King; nor King James ever intended to entangle the Consciences of his Subjects, if he had foreseen a few unnecessary words and expressions rendered it so. Nor would Catholics as to Allegiance (if an Oath were worded a hundred times more strong than this) make the least scruple of it.  
This argument I urge no further than to evince in their justification that their unwillingness to swear, is no evidence to prove their want of allegiance, or any backwardness to lay down their lives and fortunes in his Majesty's service: For the practical part of the Subjects allegiance is that which only concerns the security of a Prince, which all Catholics will gladly swear unto. Therefore I hope a true and real tenderness of Conscience (which can have no ill consequence with it in relation to his Majesty's safety) will give no offence to them that are over them; nor be a motive to hold a rigorous hand upon them. Especially seeing these threescores years since▪ the Oath was first established, it hath been refused by Catholics to be taken upon the score of Conscience though universally taken by others of any dignity conferred upon them in Church or State. Yet no Catholic in England of any note or quality that all this time did act contrary to their allegiance sworn unto in the Oath. On the other side I could wish it were as difficult to name those amongst the takers of the Oath, who have so fatally broken them; half the Kingdom being in rebellion contrary to what they had sworn, to the ruin of the best King and the best man which perhaps this Nation had ever cause to glory in.  
As for the Oath of Supremacy, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Gilby all pretended Reformers disliked it. Calvin in his Commentary on Osee, saith, who advanced Hen. 8. to such a height did not well, for they no less than blasphemed, when they called him Supreme Head under Christ. Chemnitius a learned Lutheran in his Epist. ad eloc. Briard. of Queen Eliz. Supremacy, saith, quod foeminae & a saeculis inaudito fastu se papissam & caput Ecclesiae facit. So Gilby in Admonit. ad Angl. Our Cartwright also teacheth against Supremacy. So do Presbyterians generally hear and beyond Sea. Henry the eighth once acknowledged the Supremacy more than ever any King did, as appeared by Cardinal Campeius and Wolsey Legates (he being called before them.) After his will being not executed made the Oath against Supremacy.  
This Oath of Supremacy as it is worded and according to the sense of the first Lawgiver, cannot lawfully be taken by any Christian or assembly without contradicting his belief, understanding it Grammatically according to the proper and natural sense of the words at least ambiguous if not formally contradictory.— or the cause or reason of framing this Oath by Hen. 8. and what power was exercised by virtue of it, and of the Parliament enjoining it, appears to be a jurisdiction purely spiritual was communicated to him, and assumed by him. It's evident also by the many practices it was only a spiritual by-title of Supremacy he sought for, to deprive the Pope: for he stood in need of such a power to justify his divorce and dispense with his intention of taking Ecclesiastical live of Abbeys & Monasteries into his hands. The Protection in King Edward the sixth continued the Oath to make new Church-Laws, Institutions and commit new Sacrileges, changes, ubique arti contrary to which King He●. 8. published and declared. Queen Mary renounces this jurisdiction and restores it to▪ the Church. Queen Elizabeth reassumes it, having a greater necessity for it then her Brother, because her marriage was declared null by the Pope.  
This Oath consists of two parts, the affirmative, as that the King is only Supreme Head as well in Temporal as Spiritual, etc. Secondly, the Negative that no Prince, Prelate, etc. hath any jurisdiction or spiritual Power, etc. This Negative part of the Oath is contrary to a point of their Faith wherein not only all spiritual authority of the Pope, but of a general Council or Western Church is disclaimed. Is all jurisdiction purely spiritual only in the King's right? are Prince's Pastors of Souls? hath not a Heathen King the same spiritual right? How could King James then call the Pope Patriarch of the West? or how can a free general Council oblige Christians, and to which learned Protestants, profess to submit to as the chiefest authority under God?  
And although in Queen Elizabeth's time the Oaths were explicated, that only civil and Kingly authority in causes Ecclesiastical, was intended) yet this negative clause cannot be by such expositions eluded. Secondly, An Oath to Catholics and tender Consciences, is so dreadful that they dare not call God to witness they sincerely swear the Pope ought not to have any Superiority in spiritual causes; unless it might be permitted them at the same time, and the same breath to signify that it is intended of civil and Kingly authority in causes Ecclesiastical. They tremble to swear at words ambiguous but formally contradictory. Thirdly, In the thirty nine Artticles of the Church of England it is defined that the Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Kingdom, and these Articles are confirmed by Act of Parliament. Whereby it appears their intention is to require a renuntiation of a Catholic point of Faith, and the Pope's being Head of the Western Church. This Act being made since the said exposition.  
The Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, if the former were so expressed as to require an acknowledgement of a civil Supremacy in his Majesty, and Ecclesiastical to the Church-governors: and if the unfortunate word Heretical, and speculative points were left out of the other, no Catholic would refuse either. And more than this no Protestant, Presbyterian, etc. that freely take them can intent by them: an Oath being in itself, a religious affirmation with God's Seal.  
Whosoever takes these Oaths absolutely must swear to take Almighty God to witness as he shall answer at the dreadful day of Judgement, that he believes the Pope hath no Power, etc. now this word believe (being in a matter of Religion and Profession of the same) can signify nothing but a Christian belief or Faith: and imports thus much, I N. N. do swear in the presence of Almighty God that the Pope hath no Power, etc. As I believe there is a God in Heaven, or any other Article of Faith: all this is virtually and really comprehended in the word believe.  
Now what man of Conscience, of what Opinion soever, that feareth an Oath to use the Preachers words, Eccles. 9 2. will venture his Soul so far as to swear all this? are we all of us so certain that no foreign jurisdiction, etc. or that its Heretical, etc. as we are certain there is a God, Heaven, Hell, etc. and so make it a part of, and Article of our Belief, when it is not expressly nor plainly revealed in Scripture or declared by the Church; and so not fundamental to our Belief or absolutely necessary to our Salvation?  
If you say it may be obscurely delivered in Scripture, then at least the unlearned cannot be able to discover it. How then shall such dare to swear; as in effect they do when they take the Oaths that they are revealed and contained in Scripture? when by reason of obscurity they are not certain whether it be revealed there or no? Is it not a just matter of scruple and fear for a timorous Conscience to swear a thing not to be which he is not certain of? Secondly,  
May the very learned in points not necessary to Salvation, or obscurely delivered venture to swear that such a thing is not certainly in Scripture, only because he himself conceives it not there? will he make his private judgement rule of his Faith and his Conscience as he must do who makes those propositions in the Oaths Articles of his Belief? can it be denied that other men no less learned dispute the case doubtfully? whence we can neither swear to be or not be, because we have no sufficient certainty pro or con concerning them. Though we may use such expressions as to avouch; we really think and are fully persuaded that the Pope hath no power, etc. But it is most rash and temerarious to swear positively to such inevident propositions exposing ourselves to an eminent peril of taking a false Oath and thereby committing a sin to God.  
'Tis pity such slender evasions should satisfy us, as have been scorned by Heathens: 'tis much that a moral Conscience should more check them, than a clearer light can awe us; as if we honoured more the Genius of a Caesar, than we reverence the presence of a God. They had their perjury-revenging Gods. Our God hates false Oaths as appeared in his severity to Zedekias for breaking Covenant with the Babylonish Monarch though a Tyrant of the first magnitude. Were all Subjects duly solicitous about the weight of this bond, we should be less prone to take Oaths and more studidious to observe them.  
Matter of an Oath ought to be plain and obvious to our understanding without obscurity and intricacy: I must know what to swear otherwise I take God's name in vain in swearing without judgement. They must have the aforesaid three conditions, viz. to swear in judgement, righteousness and truth, the matter must be lawful, not rash, obscure, etc. it must not entrench on the authority of Superiors temporal or spiritual; for Oaths are so sacred that 'tis a piacular offence to break them. No sin is so followed at the heels with more signal judgements than this of perjury, as might be convinced by a million of examples.  
I will now conclude this question with the censure of two learned Divines of the English Church concerning these Oaths: the first objecting Papists scruple to take the Oaths.  
Answereth saying— they think it is a Pill which will choke their Conscience if they swallow it; or purge them out of their live if they do not. For contrary to other Physic this operates most strongly on those that never take it.  
Remember how cruel a thing it is to make men's consciences pass as Gideon did the men of Succoth, or David the Ammonites under briers and thorns; under saws and harrows of either sharp contradictions, or prickly distinctions; unsafe Salvoes. God hath oft exacted the forfeiture of perjury as of Saul and Zedekias: and howsoever God in his providence may put suspensions of Oaths as to their actual execution, yet they cannot find any absolution from the obligation which goes with inconditionate Oaths, so long as they are within our moral possibility of keeping them. How any man can swear and promise to be true and faithful to two different interests without being forsworn, or false and unfaithful to the one or the other, seems a Gordian knot which only the Sword dissolves by cutting not untying.  
The State of humane affairs have been most fully represented in the glass of our times with as many variating faces as the Moon. We have seen the threefold cords of Oaths, Protestations, Covenants could not resist those Tides and Storms which have driven the whole Nation (as to extreme events and affairs) from grounds of fidelity and allegiance, both as to civil and ecclesiastical obedience.  
Furthermore mens refusing to take Oaths seems to be a great fortifying of Power established. For experience hath taught us how easily men are absolved from such public ties, seem they never so strict. Neither is there any reason to think they will be any stronger for the future than they were in former times. Public security doth not consist in any verbal formalities but in that efficacious power we have by the Sword.  
Public authority and safety riseth from the satisfaction of men's judgements to the justice of men's proceed, winning respect and love by that equity in Government and moderation which according to God's ancient Laws is settled and known, not by arbitrariness of will and mere force; which as to the principle is tyrannical, be it never so tempered in the exercise.  
Under such Government, wise Christians know how with humility, peace and patience to submit so far to piety as is necessary for public peace. Strictness of Religion terrifies Christians with fear of false Oaths (one of the blackest Stains and most indelible Spots and unpardonable sins of the Soul, if it be a blaspheming denying and renouncing of God) yet allows latitude of peaceable subjection as may not always force them upon banishments, persecutions, forfeitures▪ etc.  
Whence Thorndike saith, I conceive there is great reason the Kingdom: should enact a new Oath. For they make limitations for the sense of the Oath to which Oath, non obstante, they take in the full latitude of its words though they express not any of the said limitations— when the Oaths required bear two senses in the proper signification of the words and are at least ambiguous but formally contradictory; and destructive to one Article of the Creed: to the being, viz. of any visible Church (if no supreme Head) as founded by God in it.  
What can be more just, more conduce to God's honour, more benign in the King and Parliament, and more for reputation and future blessing to the Kingdom, than that such ambiguous expressions in the Oaths should be cleared, and taken away? that Oaths might be taken uniformly and cordially by all: that all tender consciences need not scruple, when care is taken that men may clearly understand what they are compelled to swear.  
It will deeply concern us, saith Thorndike, to avert God's indignation from our Nation, which involves Kingdoms in guilt and punishment for rash oaths;— whence he calls them the crime and sin of the Nation.  
What burden and guilt lies on the Kingdom by occasion of oaths so solemnly imposed on the whole people, which if we regard the natural force of the words, no man can take them sincerely, being ambiguous, and grammatically signify more than intended; as they are explicated: seeing there is no necessity for it, for what necessity is it to use such obscure phrases, and dubious acknowledgements, which contribute nothing to safety or security to his Majesty; but on the contrary infinite prejudice to his afflicted Subjects. And we have experienced great disloyalty from them that have freely taken them, and none in Catholics that have refused. For the Oaths by none more readily taken and earnestly imposed on others, than by those who began the Wars, and promoted the Covenant; and on the contrary, by none more scrupled and refused than by those who always assisted the King.  
¶ Thirdly it may be objected, as lately by Doctor Denton, etc. That Papists suffer not for Religion, but because they are not obedient to the Laws, etc.  
Resp. 1. By a Proviso of the Act 25, and 27. of Eliz. if any Priest committed shall submit to the Laws, and take the Oaths, they shall be freed from the penalty; and not adjudged Traitors, if they renounce their Religion.  
Resp. 2. Suppose that in the Apostles time a Law had been made by any King or Emperor of a contrary Religion to them: that if any of the said Apostles or Priests should enter into their Dominions, to preach a contrary Doctrine to to the Religion there received, and to exercise any of their Apostolical or Priestly Functions, it should be treason, and under pain of death.  
Would or could the Apostles have obeyed those Laws? or did they obey the Governors of the Jews, their lawful Superiors, when they commanded them to preach no more in the name of Jesus Christ? or to disperse Christian Doctrine, which they held for Treason? or did they fly out of their Dominions? lest their sufferings should be imputed to disobedience, and not for the name of Christ? Is there not another blood to be respected, called by the Prophet, the blood of the Soul, whereof the Pastor shall be guilty if he fly for fear, or forsake his flock in time of danger and persecution? Have not the English Priests the same Obligation of Conscience to help their Countrymen in spiritual necessities, as had the Apostles and Apostolic men to strangers, for whose help they were content to offer their lives, and incur any danger whatsoever?  
¶ Fourthly, It may be demanded why cannot Papists come to our Churches?  
Resp. Unity and Uniformity are two things, one being internal, the other external; therefore if they should conform, yet they can have no verity, faith or truth but as forced; by which Religion is never bettered. Truth and falsehood are like the clay in Nebuchadonosors' Image, they may cleave, but they will never incorporate. Christ's Coat had no seam, though the Church's vesture was of divers colours: whence a learned Father saith, in veste varietas sit, scissura non sit. The true God hath this attribute, that he is a jealous God, and therefore his worship and religion will endure no mixture, or partner.  
¶ Fifthly, To say or object the Pope's Supremacy is dangerous.  
This reflects not only upon the honour of Catholics, but the safety of all the Professors of it. They acknowledge the Pope, as Successor to Saint Peter, is head of the Church, and hath supreme Authority in matters spiritual: but how this can be offensive to the Temporalities of Princes is not understood by me, nor those great Monarches that are of his Church, and submit to his authority, and and yet are zealous and jealous of their own power and temporal Regalities as any Princes can possible be.  
Our graver and more learned Divines distinguish between the inward power of the Keys and the outward jurisdiction, by temporal penalties: this they assign to the King, in all causes and over all persons: that they reserve to the Clergy, as neither derived from or dependent of the Civil Magistrate. And if I rightly understand the Religion of the English Church, although they allow the King to be supreme Governor of their Church; yet they do not confer any Pastoral Office or Jurisdiction upon him; and consequently he is one of the Flock, and therefore as such he is subject to Pastors. Wherefore if this be not looked on by Protestants as derogatory to the King's authority, I hope, by the same reason Roman Catholics will not be found guilty for owning the Pope's Supreamacy in matters merely spiritual. There can be no just fear or jealousy, that spiritual jurisdiction should supplant secular obedience, because the Church-Discipline in itself is so innocent and passive.  
We ourselves acknowledge a spiritual authority in the Bishops, promise a Canonical obedience to them and not to the King; admit Jurisdiction in their spiritual Courts, etc. nay the Presbyterians in their Consistory and ecclesiastical Courts will allow the King no authority at all, more than the meanest Subject; and so do other Sects. Now if a Subject v. g. the Bishop of Canterbury may be supreme in Spirituals, without any derogation to the Prince, may not the Pope with less danger and inconvenience be truly called (as King James did) the Patriarch or Superintendent of the West?  
For if that power be purely spiritual, being of a different nature (as is said before) it cannot in the least degree be prejudicial to the King's civil power, but rather oblige those that acknowledge it faithfully to obey the King. Therefore it ought to be no obstacle to Toleration; otherwise no Christians or Sect whatsoever ought to be tolerated: for let them be Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, etc. do not they depend upon and own a power distinct from his Majesty's Civil Power? I mean a Power merely spiritual or pastoral, not subordinate to the King, but to which the King himself, if he be of your Religion, aught to be subject, as no Pastor but a Sheep, no Teacher but a Hearer, no Administer of Sacraments but a Receiver. Such a Power all Sects and Religions seem to own, no Catholic depends on or can own more.  
The spiritual Primacy of the chief Pastor preserves peace and unity, and is a greater defence to them than many Armies, in subduing their minds to civil obedience, without such a spiritual authority there is no influence on the people, all preaching and Laws are but shaking Bulwarks to support Monarchy. No Kingdom hath been more happy at home, or glorious abroad, than when the Pope was their spiritual Father. When such a Primacy, purely spiritual, was acknowledged in England, the Church here was never torn in pieces with Schisms, nor poisoned with Heresies: the honour and safety of our Dominions were far from being prejudiced or invaded.  
It is denied then the owning Supremacy should worse their condition: shall notions convince experience? when a demonstration itself often gives way to practice? Let's summon the Kings of Europe of Catholic Profession to decide the contrary unanimously, and proclaim their people are not rebellious by reason of any ecclesiastical dependence abroad.  
Roman Catholics did ever renounce any temporal power or jurisdiction belonging to the Pope over any Subject of his Majesties. But since there is a Power purely spiritual (as is showed before) from which Princes are not exempted. Is it not more for their temporal security, that the spiritual power should reside in one single person, that usually is both learned and discreet, and withal is a thousand miles removed, than in many thousand within his own Kingdom, not all of them Angels? The King of France esteems it a privilege, granted him in a Concordate by the Pope, that no particular Bishop should have power, in any case, to excommunicate him.  
Never was there greater supporters to the Crown than English Catholics have been ever against the least encroachment offered by the Bishop of Rome himself; as it is to be seen in the Stat●t▪ Laws of King Richard the Second, wherein you find in many businesses (the Pope was interessed) the Roman Catholics flatly denying the Crown of England to be subject to any immediately, but to God: yet acknowledged in the very same Parliament the Bishop of Rome's spiritual Jurisdiction. And Bishop Bilson, in his Defence between Christ and Antichrist, brings in the Parliament consisting then altogether of Roman Catholics, expressing their loyalty to their Sovereign Prince in these words, we will with our said Sovereign the King and his said Crown and Regality, in cases aforesaid, and in all other cases, attempted against Him, his Crown or Dignity in all points, live and die. p. 3. p. 243.  
And in Holinshed 2. Volume of the last Edition, p. 309. we find in the Reign of King Edward the First, all the Catholic Lords assembled in Lincoln in Parliament in the name of all estates did answer, the Pope's right to judge, etc. that they would not consent their King should do any thing tending to the disinheriting of the Crown or right of England. And that it was never known (and consequently never practised) that the King of this Land had answered or ought to answer for their rights in the said Realm, before any Judge ecclesiastical or secular. Yet at the same time they styled Pope Boniface the high Bishop of the Roman universal Church, and themselves his devout sons, etc. Therefore Catholic Religion hath no headship prejudicial to temporal Supremacy. If this were a Check to the Glory of Kings, why do the Kings of France, Spain, Poland, Portugal, the Emperor and other great Princes in Germany uphold it, and glory in it? the Duke of Savoy with the Florentine and the rest of Italian Princes, living under the Pope's Nose, absolute and arbitrary in their Dominions, dispute with Sword in their hand for their Temporalities.  
And for the Catholic Church in England, in Catholic times Stat. 25. Edward 3. & Statut. 16. Richard, did not admit the Pope's deposing power in temporals; made it a preeminence to appeal to Rome, or to submit to a Legates jurisdiction, without the King's Licence; or on the Pope's summons to go out of the Kingdom, or receive any mandates or brief from Rome, or purchase Bulls for Preferments to Churches, etc. and the reason was given because the Crown of England is free from earthly subjection, and immediately subject to God.  
Our Catholic Lords of England have in the name of the whole Body made oft protestations of eternal fidelity to the King, and renouncing all dependence of any foreign power, that can any way be prejudicial to him. Many Protestations, Professions, Declarations have been printed by several Catholics, that no authority on earth can absolve them from their necessary and natural Allegiance: and that his fidelity was a duty of their Religion, have made and will be ready to give all security of peaceable obedience and sincere integrity, that any words or actions can confirm.  
But you will object, and say, they allow a power in the Pope, to excommunicate Princes, and thence follows a train of pernicious consequences of deposing, raising his Subjects against him, etc.  
Resp. That the power of Excommunication is indeed necessarily annexed to the pastoral Function; and therefore to be allowed in the chief Bishop over his Flock. But they deny and renounce any further extent of that power unto those things which appertain to Caesar 5 and therefore they declare as firmly, that notwithstanding any such excommunication they will bear true faith to our Prince, and him maintain and defend against all opposers whatsoever.  
You may again object the Council of Lateran decreed, Princes that savoured Heretics after admonition given; the Pope might discharge the Subjects from allegiance, and give away the Kingdom to some Catholic to root out Heresy.  
Resp. 1. Councils are not infallible in every point, even in matter of fact; and other Constitutions (not concerning faith or doctrine) being but human Laws are changeable and oft admit exceptions.  
2. Council's Ordinations are to be taken according to the prudent meaning of the Legislators, which bear another sense than the words taken lie.  
In this case suppose the Emperors of the East and West, Kings of England, France, Hungary, Jerusalem, Cyprus, Arragon, etc. agree together to purge their Kingdoms of Heresies; and upon forfeiture the Church should give their Dominions to another that will perform their Compact: these Princes being present (by their Ambassadors) at the Councils, and what was there done, was done by their consent. The Albigensian Heresy beginning to be so numerous, and even dangerous, those Monarches thought themselves in no worse a condition for that decree, nor did any Catholic King since complain or protest against this Council for it.  
3. Note, the Decrees of some Councils not received or acknowledged universally by the Catholic Church are not obligatory, but that which is principally to be considered is, that in the Decree of this Lateran under Innocent the Third, it is ordained (not Supreme Princes) but temporales potestates & dominos, which bear Offices in States and Kingdoms, to take Oaths to root out all Heretics, under the penalty of being denounced to be deprived of their Estates, etc. yet reserving the right of the supreme Lord.  
4. This pretended Article of Faith hath been disclaimed by a world of unquestionable Catholics, and all allegations confuted by learned Authors of our Nation, Doctor Bistop writ a Book purposely against it.  
5. No proof can be given, that it was ever received or executed by any Catholic Kingdom out of Italy. The reason is, because those decrees were never published by Pope Innocent, nor a Copy of them extant either in the body of the Councils or Vatican Library or elsewhere, till a certain German three hundred years after said, he found them in a Manuscript, compiled he knows not by whom.  
6. By testimony of all Historians at that time, Pope Innocent suffered in Reputation, having convoked so many Prelates to no purpose. 60 Capitula were recited in the Assembly, and many penned in a stile as if they had been concluded; but nothing at all could plainly be decreed; no Conciliary determinations, made but one or two, viz. about the recovery of the holy Land, and subjection of the Greek Church to the Roman: for a War began then between them of Pisa and Genua, which called the Pope from the Council.  
7. Be it granted a conciliary decree, it is so far from looking like an Article of Faith, which (saith Bellarmine and Canus) may easily be discovered by the stile. Here is nothing proposed to be believed, no Anathema fulminated, no signification that the contrary is against the Scripture, etc. therefore at most it is a mere ecclesiastical ordinance touching external discipline, and as such, what is more ordinary, and permitted, than for Princes to refuse admittance therein? we see some Churches of France reject the decrees of reformation made in the Council of Trent; and also practised in England.  
8. Suppose it be an ordinance, yet supreme Princes and Kings are not named: but excluded and only their Officers and Substitutes, etc.  
9 No example can be produced in the Empire or other Catholic State that such an Oath in succeeding times was imposed or threatened. But on the contrary we know Charles the fifth by a Law of the Empire publicly permitted Lutherans in several Provinces, and all the Kings of France sin●e Hen. 3. permitted the Calvinists: yet the Pope never threatened deposition▪ or they feared it.  
Therefore this doctrinal point of Faith is shamefully pretended to be involved on that or the like Decrees, viz. the Pope's power of deposing, etc.  
What State, Kingdom or City received or taught the People this, even as a probable Opinion? It is well known in practice and doctrine, other Sects and their accusers have been more faulty in this point than they, as History and experience testify of Princes actually deposed in Scotland, Denmark, Sweden, Geneva, etc. and absolute rebellion following their doctrine in Poland, Bohemia, England, France, Hungary, Germany, etc.  
Obj. Innocent the third who presided in this Council actually deposed King John and Otho the Emperor.  
Resp. Popes as private Doctors may err in matters of fact; their Decrees and Bulls are not always held as infallible, and may be opposed (as often they have been by Papists) nor will they scruple to do it especially about temporal affairs. We do not approve whatsoever Pope● do in fact in deposing, etc. If some Popes have been exorbitant, have not Papist themselves defended their Princes against all pretended illegal impositions of Rome? If some Popes have transgressed and been passionate men, it doth not follow all have, as some Princes have been Tyrants, not all.  
This King John, Protestant Histories conclude (passing by his youthful Rebellion, murdering his Nephew, his Atheism, etc.) they record he lost our whole interest in France, discontenting all his people, not defending their Rites and Privileges, etc. So Heylin, Daniel, Martin, Sir Robert Cotton Hist. And,  
Stow in his Chronicle 170. relates it thus: King John being dissolute and perfidious, and would not grant the Laws or Liberties of the Charter, had as many enemies as Nobles; Clergy and Layty petitioned against him for the Pope to depose him (an opinion then in practice) the Pope would not but sent Paendulph his Legate who comes over to Dover to King John, to counsel the King's peace, and reconcile him to God and the Church. The King living then in great jeopardy to lose his Kingdom. The King of France being invited by the Nobles and Clergy to invade the Kingdom, saved the Kingdom by it, after this the Clergy came over, and all was in peace.  
The Pope after this excommunicates the Barons, for the disobeying the King, and calling in the French King Lewis into the Realm. And Gaul the Legate was sent from the Pope to forbid Lewis to go into, or invade England, to excommunicate him if he did: But  
Lewis of France arrived in England, whom the Barons assisted against King John. John soon after died; his eldest son, Hen. 3. at nine years old was crowned King by the Bishops of Winchester and Bath, etc. and the Government of the King was committed to the Pope's Legate, the Bishop of Winchester and Earl of Pembroke. The Legate maintained the King's part, admonished, prayed and commanded the disobedient to do as he did; called a Council at Bristol, caused the Bishops to incline to the King's part, notwithstanding Lewis did what he could to the contrary. Seeing Lewis and his complices were excommunicated every Sunday by the Legate, though they had London and all the East parts of England.  
Lewis had notice from Rome, except he went out of England, the sentence of excommunication of the Legate should be confirmed by the Pope. For this cause, saith Stow 175. a truce was taken between Lewis and King Henry. Philip of France called his son Lewis to return; he being passed over: the Earl of Salisbury, Earl Warren, etc. revolted to the King's side, and this by industry and virtue of the Pope's Legate. Lewis, being absolved from the excommunication, went into France, but his complices, were by the Legate deprived of all benefit by their disobedience▪ See Stow 170.  
Thus we see how for want of knowledge things are carried on, and reported very frequently in the worst sense and construction: it may be easily collected out of our own Authors and Chronicles, that Popes have been great friends to our Princes, and this Nation. Take in short out of Stow 883. that Pope Adrian the fourth, an Englishman, invested Hen. 2. with the Dominion of Ireland, and had it confirmed with an Assembly at Waterford. Pope Vrbane who sent a Legate, the Bishop Sabrine into England, with sentence of excommunication against the City of London and Cinque-Ports, and all those that troubled the King's peace.  
King Richard of England being taken Prisoner unjustly by Leopold Duke of Austria, in return from the Wars with the Saladine; demanding a great ransom and misusing him. The Pope excommunicated the Duke of Ostrich, and enjoined him to release the Covenants that he constrained our King to make; and send home the Pledges. The Duke refusing this Order shortly after broke his Leg, and in great anguish ended his life; and was kept unburied till his Son released the English Pledges. Thus were the Pledges restored and the money behind released.  
How oft did the Pope grant to the King of England the Tenth of all Ecclesiastical Goods, as to Edward the first and second? Sent the Abbot of Saint Denis, Legat, to request Edward the second to remove from him Pierce Gaveston, without which the Kingdom could not be in peace, nor the Queen enjoy the King's true love, Vide Stow 213. Edw. 2. The Pope sent Ganelinus and Lucius de Flisco (by the King's request) to make peace between England and Scotland, and reconcile to the King Thomas Earl of Lancaster— who brought Bulls from the Pope to excommunicate the Scots, except they returned to peace with the King of England.  
William Longshamp Bishop of Ely and Legate to the Pope and Chancellor of England was made Governor of the Realm by Richard the first. Afterward the Archbishop of Rouen was made Regent of England, then being made Archbishop of Canterbury. Then you see there was no jealousy of the Pope or his Clergy, but on the contrary for many hundred years our Princes and Nation reposed (as with just reason they might) the greatest trust, and confidence in their loyalty, faith and honesty. It would fill a volume itself to recount all the benefits, privileges, honours and advantages this Nation hath received from the Popes and See of Rome. See Bishop Smith in his Epist. Histor. ad regem Jacobum of the Pope's favours to England.  
Hence our first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, Parker in Eliz. lib. antiq. Britan. ait, hanc insulae nobilitatem atque gloriam Dei providentiae atque beneficentiae, etc. The nobleness of this Island for being the first of all Provinces of the World that received the Christian Faith, and the glory thereof is to be acknowledged to have proceeded from the providence and goodness of God: yet the way itself and means by which this nobility and glory was won unto it, it was first and always laid open unto us from the See of Rome; we have always from that time persevered in the unity of the Roman Faith, and our subjection to the Roman Church is most ancient. Haec ille.  
Abbot Fecknam in his Oration to the Parliament of the first of Eliz. saith thus, Damianus and Fugatianus, as Ambassadors from the See of Rome, did bring into this Realm a thousand four hundred years past, the very same Apostolical Religion we are now in possession of. (For then the Roman Religion was not voted down) he would not have dared to have uttered in that time and place, but that he could produce good witness and antiquity to his warrant.  
Let not now their Adversaries be so unreasonable as to quote Mariana, Suarez or Bellar. or any other private Author that may have enlarged the jurisdiction of Popes, to the prejudice of Kings, and then lay their particular Opinions to the charge of all. For were this a just and fair way of dealing, they could, with as much ease, requite them with Text for Text out of Luther, Calvin, Knox, Buchanan and many more, whose Opinions are at least as dangerous to the safety of Monarchy. The difference betwixt them being only this, whereas the former lodge the deposing power in the Pope only (whose person is at a safe and sufficient distance, at least, from us:) the latter bring the danger home to the doors of Princes, and place it in the people whom they make both judges and parties in the case.  
Secondly, Mariana's personal fault and his opinion were condemned by a Provincial Council of the same Society held at Paris 15 16. and that confirmation ratified by Claudius Aquaviva, the General of the Order: and the Doctors of Sorbon in the same year declared it an ungodly position. Thirdly, Mariana was not resolute in that opinion neither, but handled it problematically. Fourthly, It was not for deposing of Kings but Tyrants which altars the case.  
In France 1614 a Book written by Suarez against the Oaths, in which the deposing power was asserted, was by Decree of the Parliament of Paris condemned to be burnt by the public Executioner, as containing scandalous, seditious positions, etc. and Armandus, Cotton, Front and Symond four chief Jesuits, were to take order their General should renew a prohibition to teach like Doctrines, and the whole Order after disavowed them.  
Eight Universities, viz. Paris, Valentia, Tholouse, Poicteirs, Bordeaux, Burges, Reims and Caen, did of their own accord (not expecting a command from the Court) 1626. brand this Doctrine of Pope's deposing power with titles of impious, seditious, infamous, etc. And Fossart of the Society in a public Act advancing the proposition, although it was interpreted to extend only to Tyrants; by decree of the whole University of Caen, the Proposition and Expositions were censured impious and condemned, Fossart imprisoned and sentenced, bareheaded to acknowledge the said positions false and contrary to the decrees of Councils, etc.  
But to silence all impertinent objections in this nature, or in any other matter, they declare to the whole world, that no private authors (but only the Decisions of lawful general Councils) have any influence upon their Faith or Doctrine in any point whatsoever. Therefore if their adversaries will conclude any thing against them from their own Principles; they must do it from their own proper uncontradicted confession, or from the Decrees of General Councils, from which they only take the Rule of their Faith.  
The Project of the Gunpowder Treason, undertaken only by a few malcontents; in justice might rather be burned in oblivion with the offenders, than objected perpetually to innocent men, who abhor the fact; and were publicly acquitted thereof, by the King himself in the Parliament following. See the King's Speeches.  
That the Catholic Body had no hand in this Treason, appears by the quality of the actors, and number of them, being but four Gentlemen. The Catholic Noblemen then were the most considerable of the Nation; their first Marquis viz. Winchester: The first Earl, viz. Arundel: Their first Viscount, viz. Montague: Their first Baron, viz. Abergaveny, etc. Now none of these or any chief of the party had any intrigue in the design, though all imaginable industry was used by the Commons, Lords, and Privy Council, and by Cecil their plotting enemy to bring them in.  
Therefore to call this an universal Popish plot is in itself a contradiction, because no plot can be looked on as geneneral when no number of the chiefest part are intrigued in the design. If then some four necessitous or lose persons have been of the Gunpowder Treason, to infer thence all other of the same profession are of the same stamp: Do not all rational men see this inference is irrational? That it may be retorted against any other profession in England in other things? Is it not unreasonable and uncharitable to infer from thence an imputation upon all others? Can any one in his right senses accuse the whole Church of England, for incestuous, or drunkards, because some of them have been guilty of those crimes?  
Stow Chron. p. 882. noteth by many factious people, it was given out, this Treason was attempted by consent of the King of Spain, French King and Archduke. Catesby, at his Death, said, the plot and practice of this Treason was only his, and that others were but his assistants, saith Stow. And the Council perceived it was practised by some discontented Papist, Staw 879.— many untruths were divulged— hoping to have drawn into their rebellion those of their Religion, and other malcontents.  
In all their examinations none else were discovered though they revealed several secret particulars, as is seen in their printed confessions— they would not have spared others, seeing they accused their Confessor.  
Garnet, saith Stow, Provincial of the Jesuits, for concealing it in confession only, was executed.— Acknowledged to God his offence, was hearty sorry, asked God and the King forgiveness, and beseeched God to bless the King and his issue: exhorted all Catholics not to attempt any Rebellion or Treason, etc. for all such courses, said he, are utterly against Catholic Faith and Religion. Vide Stow.  
To find out the depth of the plot they left no stone unrolled, to show how nice they were. Sturton and Mordent, two Catholic Lords, were fined because they were absent from Parliament that day: their circumspection was so great, that the Lord of Northumberland, a Protestant, was imprisoned for many years, because, being Captain, he admitted Piercy into the Bond of Pensioners. Thus any indifferent Reader may see how improbable or rather impossible it was the Catholic party to be involved therein.  
Concerning Plots we know it was counted a piece of wit in Queen Elizabeth's time to draw men into such devices; and none more excellent than Burleigh and Walsingham: the first of which Cecil was son to, and successor to the others secretariship, and fomenting of plots then in fashion. Who hath forgot the plots of Cromwell framed in his Closet, not only to destroy many faithful Cavaliers, but also to put a lustre upon his intelligence.  
This Gunpowder Treason was a mere device (though acted by the hand of some desperate persons) as King James saith in his second Proclamation. (whereas Thomas Piercy & some other confederates being of l●wd life, insolent dispositions, and for the most part of desperate Estates, etc.) Yet contrived & invented by a crafty Statesman; who every one knew hated their profession (to make them odious & suspected in that Nation, and to disoblige his Majesty of his promises in favour of them) and this his jealousy increased, seeing the King received in his Council Henry Earl 
Wil Hist. in King James, p. 3. p. 190.  of Northampton, an eminent Papist, and no friend to the Statesmen. And his Majesty's speech then to the two Houses against persecution of Catholics, as Wilson noteth, as it may be justly thought, considering what Politician sat at the helm then. Nor was it hard for a Secretary to know turbulent and malicious Spirits, as Stow calleth Catesby a malcontent in Queen Elizabeth's days; and when King James came to the Crown, no favourable Article concerning Indulgency to English Catholics. And that the King of Spain and Archduke minded only their own interest, etc. Vide Stow 880.  
'Tis argument enough to assert this, that if a Statesman professed in tricks, hating and envying Roman Catholics, contrived the material part, contrived also the rest: and certainly the miraculous letter which discovered the Gunpowder Treason, will discover our Statesmen to be the author of it. The Letter is this to the Lord Mounteagle a Roman Catholic.  
MY LORD,  
Out of the Love I bear some of your Friends, I have care of your preservation; therefore I would wish you (as you tender your life) to forbear the attendance at this Parliament; for God and man have concurred to punish the wickedness of the time. Think not slightly of the advertisement; for though there be no appearance of any stir, yet, I say, they shall receive a terrible blow this Parliament, and yet they shall not see who hurt them. This Counsel is not to be contemned, because it may do you good, and can do you no harm; for the danger is past as soon as you have burnt the Letter, and, I hope, you will make good use of it.  
Now this Letter could not be written by Piercy, as reputed; because first, there was little intimacy between the Lord Mounteagle and Piercy, as Wilson saith. Secondly, the Earl of Northumberland, Percy's Patron and only support; he was to be sacrificed, and all Catholic Lords of his Religion: therefore no Plotter writ this; for here a hundred suspicious things, in the opinion of any fool, would endanger the discovery. Thirdly, Notice also given so long before the execution; for the Letter was sent to Mounteagle ten days before the 5. of November, as Saunderson p. 383. Hist. saith, the long warning being opposite to the design of a Conspirator. Fourthly, in their examinations they never confessed it, as they did things of higher secrecy.  
Now the interval was beneficial to a Machivilian, it would be more grateful to the Council, to have time to consider the difficulties, to ruin his enemies and make his vigilance appear. And Cecil did not miss of his aim; for, as Saunderson says, he was made Earl for his Service. For the Letter came by his contrivance, being, as Osborn. Prot. Hist. confesseth, a neat device of the Treasurers. Nor was he ignorant from time to time of their actions, Osborne Mem. K. Jam. p. 360. For Tresham and another, who were Cecil's instruments, had access to him at midnight, and last he should discover it he was never brought to a public trial, were sent to the Tower, and never seen afterward, lest they should tell tales. And Piercy and Catesby might have been taken alive, but Cecil feared these two would have related the Story less to his advantage. Whence they were not made Prisoners, though they had no weapons but their Swords.  
Besides many knowing men, Strangers abroad have writ; And Protestants themselves at home have discovered since, this to be a purposed contrivance: So Ossate Letters Liur. 2. Epist. 43. Prins Antip. of Prelate. p. 151. His Majesty also well knew some had learned this art in their old Mistress' time. Whence he oft said, the fifth of November was Cecils holiday; as the Lord Cobham and others have protested to have heard from his own mouth. Therefore the Roman party had no hand in the Treason, being but thirteen Laymen, and all those drawn in by their mortal enemy.  
This desperate attempt seemed rather of a private Kindred, or Acquaintance, than of any Religion. Catesby and Tresham were Sister's Children, the two Grants two Brethren; and the elder intermarried with Winter's Sister; Faux and Keys were but Servingmen; the two wright's long time dependers on Catesby, and their Sister married to Piercy.  
If any of these were Papists, or so died, they were not so long before; for the true Priests and Catholics in England knew them not to be such; they being never frequenters of Catholic Sacraments; and none of them convicted and known recusants before; as our Courts witness. Papists and Priests know Catholics, by using Sacraments. These they renounced by public Writings, and condemned their Enterprise for impious malefactors of this hellish Conspiracy. The Lord Mounteagle with his Lady and Children who disclosed it, indeed were known Catholics.  
No Priest or known Catholic, after many strict examinations, searches and scrutinies, was either proved or probably suspected of it: but so far freed that the Lords of the Council requested, that a Priest should be appointed to persuade and assure Faux (an agent in it) that he was bound in conscience to utter what he could of that Conspiracy. And Master Thomas Wright, a learned Priest did hereupon come to the Council and offer his best Service therein, and had a Warrant to that purpose subsigned with twelve Privy Counsellors hands: but Faux had confessed all they could wish, before he could come to him.  
So that no man of Conscience can think but Recusants rather deserved favour for their loyalty. Seeing the Archpriest condemned it, all Catholics detested and abhorred it, as appears by their Petitions to the King, Parliament, and chief Secretary, printed at that time; and neither could any noted or known Catholic, by any device, be drawn into this matter.  
Those that were up in tumult with Catesby were, by our Prot. Hist. Howes, never full fourscore; and those made up with servants, horse-boys and houshouldattendance, as Saunders and Speed confirm. For if Priests and Recusants, so many thousands then in England, would have entertained it; no man can be so malicious and simple, to think that there would not have been a greater assembly to take such an action in hand; and the Council could not have been so ill-sighted, but that they would have found some other culpable; as some by all imaginable craft and industry endeavoured and desired.  
But to confirm their innocency, King James in his own Declaration saith, that the generality of Catholics did abhor such a detestable Conspiracy no less than himself. And he was so kind to Catholics, the last half of his Reign, of which Wilson complains in several places, 
Wills. K. of 193.  which was impossible he should have been so favourable, had he not been convinced they never had had any design of destroying him or his.  
Secondly, the King in his second Proclamation 1605. and in his third Proclamation 1605. when they were all discovered; in which Proclamation we plainly see the King and Council knew the Complices and partakers of that villainy, yet never taxed any Priest or Papist therewith.  
Thirdly, the King in public Parliament did free catholics as much as Protestants, when he plainly saith (as truth is) if it had taken effect, Protestants and Papists should have all gone away and perished together. The King in his second Proclamation against the Conspiracy calleth the Confederates Men of lewd life, insolent dispositions and of desperate estates.  
And to demonstrate from the public Act their innocency as well Protestants, he declares by Proclamation, Proclamatione die 7. Novemb. 1605. We are by good experience so well persuaded of the loyalty of divers Subjects of the Romish Religion, that they do as much abhor this detestable conspiracy as ourselves, and will be ready to do their best endeavours, though with expense of their blood to suppress all attempters against our safety and the quiet of our State; and discover whomsoever they shall suspect to be rebellious. This by good experience he pronounceth.  
Priests and Catholics notwithstanding were upon this pretence persecuted; though besides all these reasons aforesaid, by public consent both of their Clergy and Laity, Catholics presented and offered to maintain their cause and innocency in many humble Petitions, whereof two were printed to the King. The first gins  
To the most excellent and mighty Prince, our gracious and dread Sovereign James, King of England, etc. justifying of Catholics, and the Truth of their Religion against their Adversaries.  
Most Gracious Sovereign,  
THe late intended Conspiracy against the Life of your Royal Majesty, the Life, Union, Rule and Direction to these united Kingdoms, was so heinous an impiety that nothing which is holy can make it legitimate, no pretence of Religion can be alleged to excuse it: God in heaven condemns it, men on earth detest it, innocents' bewail it, and your dutiful Subjects, Catholics, Priests and others, which have endured most for their Profession hold it in greatest detestation and horror, etc.  
Yet this is the miserable distressed state of many thousands of your most loyal and loving Subjects (dread Liege) for their faithful duty to God and Religion, taught in this Kingdom, and embraced by all your progenitors and our Ancestors, so many hundred years, that every adversary may preach and print against us, and make their challenge, as though either for ignorance we could not, or for distrust of our cause, we were not willing to make them answer, or come to trial: when quite contrary, we have often earnestly, and by all means we could, desired to have it granted, etc.  
And at this time when your chief Protestant Clergy, Bishops and others is assembled, we most humbly entreat this so reasonable a placet, that although they will not (as we fear) ever consent to an indifferent choice, opposition and defence in questions: yet at least to avoid the wonder of the world, they will be content, we may have public audience of those Articles, Opinions and Practices, for which we are so much condemned and persecuted. If we shall not be able to defend or prove any position generally maintained in our Doctrine, to be conformable to those rules in Divinity, which your Majesty and the Protestant Laws of England (we can offer no more) have confirmed for holy Canonical Scripture; the first four General Councils, the days of Constantine and the primitive Church: let the penalties be imposed and executed against us, etc. & in fine—  
Your Royal person and that honourable Consistory now assembled are holden in your Doctrine to be Supreme Sentencers even in Spiritual businesses in this Kingdom: we therefore hope you will not in a Court from whence no appeal is allowed, and in matters of such consequence, proceed to Judgement or determine of execution, before the arraigned is summoned to answer, hath received or refused trial, is or can be proved guilty, etc.  
Deny not that to us (your true and obedient Subjects) in a Religion so ancient, which your colleagued Princes the King of Spain and Archduke do offer to thee so many years disobedient Netherlands, upon their temporal submittance in so late an embraced doctrine; That which the Arrian Emperors of the East permitted to the Catholic Bishops, Priests, Churches, toleration: What the Barbarian Vandals often offered and sometimes truly perforformed in afric; what the Turkish Emperor in Greece, and Protestant Princes in Germany, and other places conformable to the example of Protestant Rulers, not unanswerable to your own Princely piety, pity and promise— no disgust to any equally minded Protestant or Puritan at home, a Jubilee to us distressed, a warrant of security to your Majesty in all opinions from all terrors and dangers— from which of what kind soever we most humbly beseech the infinite mercy of almighty God to preserve your Highness, and send you, your children and Posterity, all happiness and felicity both in Heaven and Earth.  
Amen.  
Another Petition to the King and Parliament from the Cath. in Eng. allowed by the Priests, was presented by Sir Franc. Hastins and Sir Richard Knightly, which urged likewise for a Disputation.  
Another to the same tenure was then, with the same assent, subscribed with three and twenty hands of the greatest Catholic Gentry of England; and presented to the chief Secretary of State, potent in those times, in Court and Council, and (as Recusants feared) not equally affected towards them, though never so innocent. And the same Recusants were more than jealous, that this practice of Conspiracy was no great secret to that Secretary, long before divers of them, that were actors in it (by him named Catholics) were acquainted with it: an invention to entrap those he did not affect. Whence Master Howes in his Hist. makes relation,— A great Protestant had more, or not much inferior knowledge of it, than some that were put to death for concealing it.  
Thus the crimes of a few miserable wretches, necessitous and lose persons, are perpetually objected to the innocent, and made their guilt (though by none more detested than themselves;) but how unreasonable and how great a solecism it is in Christianity, to conclude all guilty of every horrid crime, which some few are known to have perpetrated? none but injudicious furies, and such as, in some measure, may deserve to be ranged in the categories of fools or madmen, but must needs acknowledge. And unless we will renounce all charity, justice and humanity, we must not impute particular men's actions (either of this or other matters) to Catholic Religion, and for their faults expose them to common hatred and violence. For in common sense, if Catholics refuse to go to Church in respect of Conscience, they will far more refuse Treason, to attempt or consent to any desperate act against our Country or State, or commit such sins as hazard both body and soul.  
O but bloody Queen Mary! O what cries against the days of Queen Mary! as if her cruelty were unparallelled? when it plainly appears, to any impartial inquirer, that more Catholics have died by Protestants, than of them by Papists; and that since the exclusion of the Pope, there hath been a greater quantity of blood judicially spilt among us, on the score of Religion, than from the Conversion of England to Hen. 8. Why do we then cry out, like men in the fit of fury, of the bloody Papists? It's suspicion some radicated hatred obfuscates our intellect; as the Poet saith,  Impedit ira animum, nec potest cernere verm. 
Queen Mary put none to death, but by the known Laws established many hundred years before the malefactors were born, and which are still used to this day by Protestants against Heretics. None were then put to death, but by virtue of ancient Laws of Christian Emperors, and Kings of England: therefore not the Queen, nor Bishops, but the Law was cruel: yet the said Laws are still in force, still continue, and were made use of since the Reformation, by Elizabeth and King James, to burn Heretics in their time; as Stow and Baker note. Why did King James put Legat and Wightman to death, but because he religiously thought it unfit they should live any longer to blaspheme? why did Queen Elizabeth 1587. hang Coppinger and Thacker at Saint Edmundsbury, for publishing Brown's Book, saith Cambden, which, saith Stow p. 1174. was written against the Common Prayer.  
I will not apologise for any extravagancies done by our predecessors in the beginning of Reformation. He that will judge, let him lay his hand on his own breast, and examine what he would do in this condition. Suppose he were of a Religion he thought the whole visible Church from age to age delivered to his ancestors, and saw Professed in all Kingdoms; Suppose then the preaching of two or three men, base in rank, and taxed in moralities, broaching forth new and dangerous opinions to Church and State obstinately, and would not be silenced by any satisfactory means, would he think it then cruelty to put Laws in execution against such novelties? the consequences whereof proved seditious and rebellious, as is seen in History.  
There died of the Reformists in the the whole but two hundred seventy seven; as Baker in Queen Mary p. 467. and Speed in Queen Mary p. 833. and other Protestant Writers record: And were there two hundred of those now living, they would suffer for extravagancies and perpetrated villainies; as most of those did in the voluminous Legend of Fox, stuffed with Wicliffians and Waldenses (whom Philip Melancton and other Protestants disown,) with Tinkers, Cobblers, Butchers, Tailors and prating Wives, very few of them put to death on the score of Religion, as the Records testify.  
Cranmer and Ridley so much spoken of were attainted of Treason defending the Title to the Lady Jane. Cranmer being a Counsellor in the business, and Ridley Bishop of London preaching a Sermon for it at St. Paul's Cross the Sunday after King Edward died. So Cranmer was condemned of Treason and arraigned with the Lady Jane. He was also an Instrument of divorce to bring Anna Bullein to the King's appetite; and afterward, he and Cromwell the chief actors for her death, as p. 3. Statut. 28. Hen. 8. c. 1. where Cranmers Sentence is recorded judicially, as of his own knowledge, convincing her of the foul fact. Or if there were some at that time put to death (for their conscience only, which can hardly be proved, and that there was no faction, exterior disobedience or innovation in the case,) yet they could not be properly Protestant Martyrs; because they suffered before the thirty nine Articles or Church of England was established.  
Reformed Historians, viz. Bishop Goodman, Baker, Speed, etc. do agree Queen Mary was a marvellous good Woman, had many troubles; Cranmer and Ridley, with a thousand more, set up as busy as Bees against her: when she was to be invested in her Rights, Reformists would not receive her as their Queen, but upon condition (as Suffolk people) nor assist her without Indentures, Stow annal. p. 1064. nor acknowledge her but upon such and such terms, yet her Right was indubitable. How Wars were waged against her by the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk, Bills spread abroad, and several treacherous practices contrived against her and her Dignity, by Archbishop Cranmer, see Stow Annal. printed 1592. p. 1039, 1042, etc. What great commotions and insurrections were made against her by Wyatt, on the score of Religion? How Towns and Castles were taken and held out against her by Stafford? p. 1047. ibid. How Daggers were thrown and Guns shot off at Priests of her Religion, whiles they were preaching at Paul's Cross, viz. Doctor Pendleton and Master Bourne. How many treasonable Books writ against her after she came to the Crown by Goodman; insomuch, that more open rebellion and insurrection was in five years of her short Government, from such as were not affected to her Religion, than Queen Elizabeth had from Catholics in forty years. vide Stow 1039, 1058.  
How plain and sincere her Government was, how free from tricks, and such strains of Policy as were afterward used; is manifest to all the world; How just was she? if severe for a time, that severity was necessary, not only by the judgement of Parliament, which a little before had enacted the Laws on which she proceeded, and before which she acted nothing in that kind, but also in respect of her own safety and of the State. And to vindicate their Clergy, let all the Canons of the Church be examined and searched, if there be one to be found that justifies the shedding of blood simply on the account of Religion.  
That She was withal a merciful Princess, is evidenced by the compassion showed to such as deserved not well of her, as the Duchess of Somerset, to Sir John Cheek, to Sir Edward Montague, Lord chief Justice, who had subscribed and counselled her disinheriting, to Sir Roger Cholmey, to the Marqness of Northampton, to the Lord Robert Dudley, to Sir Henry Dudley, to Sir Henry Gates, etc. who stood attainted, and the Duke of Suffolk, all obnoxious to her Justice, she knew very well, neither affected her Religion nor Title: they being her prisoners in the Tower, she released them all.  
But for all this the Zealots of her time would not be quieted; they libel against the Government of Women; they pick quarrels and murmur at her Marriage: they publish invectives and scurrilous Pamphlets against Religion: yet forbear not to plot and conspire her deprivation. Goodman writ a pernicious Book to have her put to death: William Thomas, a gospeler, conspires to 
Out of Fox his Martyrs.  kill the Queen, and when hanged said, he died for his Country. Stow in Queen Mary p. 1056.  
On the contrary, in Queen Elizabeth's time, although Catholics then were the chief Ministers in Church and State, and might have used indirect means against her, she being of a contrary Religion, and not of so clear a Title: yet Catholic Bishop's who set the Crown upon her head are commended by Holinshed, a Prot. Hist. ann. Eliz. 26. pag. 1358, & 1360. for peaceable quiet Bishops, and the Catholic temporal Lords there by him recorded to be far from opposing themselves against her interest, as they are said there to offer her Majesty in her defence to impugn and resist any foreign force, though it should come from the Pope himself. Insomuch, that they are commended by Holinshed for loyalty and obedience. And,  
Stow testifies how diligent Catholics were to offer their service in that great action 88 neither were they altogether refused by her Majesty. How the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor of England, Doctor Heath, a Catholic Bishop, instead of inveighing against her, or casting forth of Libels, (as Cranmer did against Q. Mary her entrance and Government) made a public oration in her behalf, to persuade the people to obedience, and to acknowledge her power and authority, Holin. ib. 1170. whence the said Archbishop's faithfulness was left to commendation also by Protestant Bishop Goodman in his Catalogue of Bishops. How all Catholic Lords and Bishops repaired to London to proclaim her Queen, who not long after turned them out of several Offices and Bishoprics; Holinshed p. 1171.  
To use Cambdens own words and phrase, the world stood 
Cambdens Britann. p. 163.  amazed and England groaned at it; what would flesh and blood move him to? was it not strange in the beginning to behold Abbeys destroyed, Bishoprics gelded, Chaunteries, Hospitals, Colleges turned to profaneness? change of Liturgies, Rites, & c.? to see people renounce their pious vows?— such unexpected alterations— it being a pitiful thing, as Stow saith, to hear the Lamentations in the Country for religious Houses, St●w p. 964.  
Notwithstanding the loyalty and obedience of Catholics towards her appeared undeniable in all things, not only in their humble petitions, but by their constant and general conformity unto her temporal Government in 88 and by their Protestations made at Ely 1588. as by other offers made to the Lord North, the Queen's Lieutenant there, and by their just actions afterwards, by their submission as to the Lords of the Privy Council, and profession of all due acknowledgement to her Majesty, notwithstanding the Sentence of Excommunication. Whence the Author of Execution of English Justice acknowledges their obedience and loyalty to Elizabeth, in a time when they wanted no matter of complaint.  
Any man of candour and integrity may easily convince the vulgar error, the unevenness of Queen Elizabeth's nature and severity to that of Queen mary. Queen Elizabeth made new Laws against Catholics, and put them to death for not embracing a new heresy, which has been condemned to the fire here, and in all other Christian Countries. She embrued her hands in the blood royal of Mary Stewart, lawful Heir to the Crown, put to death many noble persons by their blood, to colour her Supremacy, raised up upstarts, Heretics from nothing, annihilated the ancient Nobility and Gentry, etc. to use a Protest. Historiographers words, the bloody practices of Queen Eliz. if not so barbarous in appearance (though more wicked in substance) as being exhibited under the colour and pretext of Law, in the starving and racking so many innocent, worthy, learned persons, tearing out their hearts and bowels in public view, upon suborned witnesses, base vagabond and perjured Catchpoles hired to swear.  
Neither was there any reason then for persecution on the account of the Catholics misdemeanours. For as Cambden, her own Historiographer, noteth: The reason of the penal Statutes in Eliz. was 1. the opinion of the Queen's Illegitimation abroad: 2. Jealousies had of the Queen of Scots her nearness to the Crown: 3. the Bull of Pius 5. 4. the doubt of the house of Guise in behalf of their Niece. 5. the offence given to the King of Spain in assisting Orange. These causes induced the Queen with her Pauculi intimi, saith Cambden.  
We cannot excuse the persecution therefore under Queen Elizabeth against Catholics, for any cause given by them, or just fear of their fidelity, nor from the example of Christian Emperors and Kings, that both for zeal of Religion and human policy (to avoid danger of Rebellion) made Laws and Statutes against Heretics and innovators of the ancient faith and sense of Scripture, which descended to them by Tradition from the Apostles. Queen Elizabeth, taking a contrary way, made Laws and Statutes against the ancient Religion, and known sense of God's word delivered from age t● age: which practice destroys the order of Justice, to persecute Christians for professing a Religion confirmed by the public testimony and practice of the Christian world, from the first propagation of Christianity to this present t●●e. No part of their doctrine being ●●er judged an heresy or novelty by antiquity: otherwise they had not escaped the rigour of penal Laws made against Heretics and Novelists in former ages. But no History did or can ever mention any person that suffered as an Heretic, for broaching or maintaining any one point which they now believe and profess.  
Whereas Q. Marry her predecessors, Emperors and Kings punished Novelists only, that made Religons of their own heads, condemne● as Heretics by the Church in ancient times. The disparity therefore was great: Catholic Prince's standing as defenders of their ancient Faith, others as invaders and introducers of a new Belief. They seek to keep what de jure they had, Calvinists what they had not: they possessors of the traditum and depositum left by Christ and his Apostles; others descissors and injurious infringers of those Apostolic ties and regulations so carefully delivered to all posterity.  
Laws indeed have been made in Catholic Countries, very severe against those the Church calleth Heretics, but they were none of the Church's Laws, (nor made by the principles of Catholic Doctrine.) The Arrians were the first introducers of persecution; they were not, I say, enacted by ecclesiastics, but by civil Governors only. We know, that by the Canons of the Church ever in force, their Clergy, under the penalty of irregularity, are forbidden to have any hand in blood. And whatsoever civil Laws have been made, by Catholic civil Governors, were but as prudent means to prevent Sedition or Rebellions justly apprehended. And though for some later ages civil Magistrates, in some Countries, exercise greater severities than anciently were used; must England imitate the rigidest of other Countries?  
Neither can our hatred or persecution against Catholics be any more excused, by the proceed of the Spanish or Italian Inquisitions, than our penal Statutes have been by the Laws of ancient Kings and Emperors against Heretics.  
First, Because the Inquisition proceeds according to the rules and forms of justice; none is declared an Heretic or guilty by any new Law or Oath, made only to the end, that by them men may be entrapped both in Soul, in Body and Estate. It was no crime in England to be a Roman Catholic before the penal Laws were enacted: but it was a crime to be an Heretic or an Apostate, or broacher of new Doctrines, before the ancient Emperors and Kings made penal Laws against Heresy. The Law supposed and did not make the crime. As penal Statutes do in England, making a crime of Christian Religion.  
Secondly, Heretics are never condemned by the Inquisition, without the testimony of many lawful witnesses, both living and dead: All the ancient Fathers, Councils, and the Christian Church of former ages testify their errors are new and contrary to the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles. No Rebel was ever more evidently convicted of Rebellion against his Prince, than Heretics are by the Inquisition of Heresy against God and the old Apostolical Church. Catholics cannot obtain so fair a Plea, they are condemned by a new Law, because they are not Heretics, and separate from the ancient Faith.  
Thirdly, The Inquisition practiceth all imaginary means towards the accused to reduce his judgement.  
Fourthly, The Inquisition itself is permitted in no Kingdom where Heresy is numerous: nor can it be in justice: they strive to keep out Sects and new Opinions in Countries totally of one Belief. We do not morally blame the very Moors in Africa being of one profession for keeping out the Gospel itself. In England where all fell not from the Papacy, there is not the same just motive for severity, as if it brought an upstart Religion, never heard of or spread over the Nation.  
Fifthly, The Inquisition meddleth not with those who never were Catholics: but the penal Statutes comprehend them who never were of their Church or Communion.  
Sixthly, The Inquisition condemns no Heretics to death, but only declares their heresy to the end the faithful may avoid their conversation: its true the Secular power executes the sentence of death against them, notwithstanding the Inquisition doth protest against the rigour, and desireth that Heretics may not be punished with death.  
Seventhly, Though the Inquisition were rigorous and unjust (as adversaries pretend) it is not a blemish to Catholic Religion, because, it is not an universal practice but limited to Spain and Italy at the instance of secular Princes, looked upon as a necessary means to keep their Subjects in awe of their 〈◊〉.  
Eighthly, The Inquisition ●oth seriously wish and endeavour the conversion and amendment of Heretics, imploring learned Divines to convince them, and by fair ways and reason to win them.  
Neither can the Muthers or Massacres in Ireland so much and so often exaggerated in Protestant Pamphlets and Pulpits be any pretext of rigour or austerity to English Catholics. What hath an English Catholic to do with an Irish Massacre? Can we ourselves excuse all the extravagancies by some of our natives and party? Doth Catholic Religion either incline him to or teach murder or rebellion? Have they not a settled sense of Scripture for loyalty and obedience? Which none can alter without breach of his Catholic Faith? And they are not their own interpreters and and judges in points controverted; that's the privilege of others. I only say and wish from my soul that some indiscreet Zealots had not a greater hand in them than Catholic Religion, whose tenets are contrary to cruelty and murder on any pretence whatsoever.  
Is it not notorious that the Reformed Zealots in Ireland signed a bloody Petition offered to the Parliament in England, that all Irish that would not go to Church might be extirpated or banished? This was done before the Irish Catholics did stir.  
Suppose that in Ulster some of the rascality or Kerns (being exasperated by so many and continual injuries, had murdered some persons, must that reflect upon the English Catholics and all the Irish Nation? or what is the Irish Rebellion to English Catholics who detest it) more than the Amboyna to Reformists? it is too much ascertained, that the Murders and Massacres done in Ireland by Reformists furious zeal against Catholics, exceeded those committed by Catholics, witness their murders about Dublin: the County of Wicko and Fingcole, by the transplantation of them into Canaught, and by the transporting them into the Plantations of America, forcing them to the Oath of Abjuration, and almost starving them in those places, contrary to the Public Faith given them by printed Declarations in the Name of the English Parliament to Irish Catholics, Anno 1649.— 1652. that the Oath of Abjuration shall not be administered to any in Ireland.  
Baxter in his Cure of Church-Division; confesseth and saith, they put the Irish to death that went to defend themselves and stand for the King and Country— yet they who seemed so godly themselves Massacred millions of their own Country that were for the Country and King, and gave God many humiliation days, and thanks for their success— killing after so many Scots in cold blood after they were taken at Worcester Fight. See Baxter.  
But whosoever desires to be better satisfied in this of Ireland, let him read the printed Remonstrance of the Irish Confederate Catholics delivered by their Commissioners the Lord Viscount Preston and Sir Robert Talbot the seventeenth of March 1642. to his Majesty's Commissioners at Trim. There he will see how the Irish desired the murders on both sides might be punished: and how they were forced to take up arms by the wicked practices of Sir William Persons, Sir Charles Coot, and other fiery Protestants who governed the Kingdom. Therefore whatsoever may be said in passion of the Irish war, its evident that the Calvinistical Zealot had great influence upon their injurious provocations, murdering seven or eight hundred women, children, Ploughman, and labourers in a day in the King's Land; whensoever the Army went abroad, the poor Countrypeople did betake themselves to the Sirs where the Parliament Officers did besiege them, and set the F●rrs on fire, and such as escaped that element were killed by the Army. These cruelties were ordinary not only near Dublin but in all other parts of the Kingdom, where the Parliamentarians were. As may be read in divers Remonstrances and Relations published in the beginning of the late troubles.  
Massacre in France so much objected also against Catholics in general; The world knows was a Cabinet Plot condemned by Catholic Writers, there and in other Countries. Although it was evident in matter of fact, their powerful Rebellion drew them into that Machinated destruction; and the King was moved to it by Interest of State, and security to himself, not for Religion.  
They fought many Battles with their Prince, fortified Towns against him. And Coligni their great Commander known to be a grand Rebel. They brought foreign Forces into France as Rutyers from Germany, and English from us. They delivered Haura de grace to Queen Elizabeth. Nay they began first to murder Catholics in Paris: and also Coligni and Beza got Poltrot to murder the Duke of Guise, as Davila l. 3. Hist. who is thought by Protestants, an authentical and impartial Author. And Poltrot confessed so at his death for the Fact, so Davila. Moreover there were other motives that caused the King and Councils dipleasure against these rebellious People. For  
Baxter in his Cure of Church-Divisions, p. 365. who is known to be no friend to Catholics, confesseth in these words.  
Historians tells us, saith he, that when King Francis of France had forbid the reproaching of Papists way of worship, and silenced the Ministers for not obeying him: Many of of hot-brained people took up the way of provoking them by scornful Pictures and Libels, hanging up and down in Streets such ridiculous and reproachful Rhimes and Images: (but this which was none of the way of God) began that persecution, (by provoking the King) which cost many thousand lives before it ended (and the Protestant Synod at Rochel refused the Council of du Plessis, du Moulin and many others) was stirred up by the People's zeal, and ended in the blood of a thousand, and ruin, and power of the Protestants in France, See Baxter.  
How false therefore and malicious it was to affirm that a Jubilee was kept for this Massacre, let the world be witness. When even Thuanus a malicious and partial Writer as ever undertook History, as Doctor Heylin confesseth) writ in spleen and Faction against Popes, first belched out this notorious Fable— yet he himself confesseth, p. 1069. The Jubilee was to thank God for the victory at Lepanto, for the Election of a Catholic King of Poland, etc.  
Another Calumny and not long since spread abroad by many ignorant and illiterate people, and imprudently reassumed by Doctor Stilling. Tillot. etc. that many Quakers, and Tub-Preachers among the Sectaries were disguised Jesuits, Friars, etc. or had their Fanatic principles from them.  
This weak, childish (if not malignant slander) is refuted, and known to be a manifest untruth by all understanding men. Since such wicked dissimulation is clearly against the principles of their Religion, damnable in itself, and by no power on earth (upon whatsoever pretence) dispensable.  
Secondly, It is known false by the Sectaries themselves, who are always well acquainted with their Preachers, Education, former Profession, Trade, Family, etc.  
Thirdly, Those disguised Preachers, after so many years could never be detected by themselves, or any others, or brought to trial. 'Tis yet uncertain whether this charge doth proceed from impotent malice or desperate impudence. This Imposture is now so transparent that the meanest capacity now gins to see through it, and discover the Legerdemain therein.  
I ask was there ever any such thing duly proved? was there ever any such Priest or Jesuit taken under such disguise? let any man of honour or conscience, mark the proceed of these men; I mean the Authors and spreaders of such reports and stories. They are challenged to make discovery; to prosecute the business. The Papists disclaim the imputation as a most injurious slander suggested against them merely by the malice of their enemies. Insomuch that I dare confidently assure myself; that if an Oath were tendered to all the Papists in the Nation; they would willingly swear; that neither they themselves, nor ever any they knew, did ever use any such practices; or ever thought them lawful.  
What man in his right senses, can believe such gross calumnies? so groundless, so full of contradictions? insipid accusations which seem to cheak reason. If these and the like can be thought to deserve credit; ere it be long no man's innocence will be able to protect him against suspicion and slander. But who is acquainted with antiquity will find their accusers in such points to imitate the old Heathens; who imputed the unlucky mischievous accidents that happened amongst themselves, to the primitive Christians.  
We have seen of late (to the regret of all moderate and judicious men) how some unquiet and uncharitable Spirits by false insinuations, have abused the Nation into most antichristian thoughts, suspicions and jealousies, of the greatest, most prudent and peaceable Society of Christianity.  
Never did Jacob Behmen, Stifeler or any of their Fraternity, writ more malicious self-contradictions, or that had more inference of confusion and disorder then a late calumniating Polyprag●us.  
What candour, morality, or justice, or charity can there be in a person, for accusing the whole Catholic Church Western and Eastern for practice of idolatry? which must unchurch this great Body and divorce this Adultress from Christ, it being a fundamental error. Can any think it agreeable to the gracious nature, design and office of Christ to cast of and condemn, for so many ages the visible Body of Christianity? have not the Egyptians, Aethiopians, Syrians, Armenians, Abyssines and Greeks almost all the same manner of worship in those things we so much censure the Roman?  
Is it not a gross injustice that most men's Christianity and Church-Rites should be judged null, upon the censures and rumours of suspicious men, without any just proof or trial? to traduce and defame almost all the whole world; to judge the generality of Christians visible members of the Devil? doth not this ●acerate and defame all Religion; and make all Christian Churches lubricous and uncertain shadows? that any such man that is unconscionable enough to say they are profane, idolatrous, etc. may unchurch at his pleasure? and what you say of others, another may say of you, and as justly expect to be believed.  
You have great errors yourselves ex concessis, should you be made odious for them to hearers: you must all put up your pipes, and find your artifice would first silence yourselves. What if any should say of you, that you are, antichristian, seditious, bloody-minded, superstitious, etc. would you not think they should every one personally appear before the accused; and proof brought against them: and that they should speak for themselves before they are condemned? Seeing in this age men censure and persecute most, where they are acquainted least.  
Can such Champions hope for success that go down into Egypt for help? cutting and lancing with lies and falsities as with sharp Razors? can such weapons prosper as are sharpened at the forges of Philistines? is there no way to undermine Romanists, but by digging as low as Hell in slandering the footsteps, and traducing the persons of our Progenitors? can that wisdom come from above which representeth the highest devotions practised from antiquity as Fanaticism? that makes all supernatural favours, revelations, ecstasies, etc. matter of drollery? to term S. Francis, S. Dominick▪ etc. Enthusiasts? whom Tindal, Act. Mon. 1338, Pa●teleon, Luther and the Centurists their very Adversaries call holy and good men: and our very Almanacs these two hundred years have included in the Category of Saints?  
The Doctor hath founded all the weight of his arguments upon false suppositions, grossly imagining any inferior relative honour given to Saints, Angels, etc. it is derogatory to the honour of God and perfect idolatry, imitating therein the craft of the Devil, who always covereth his malice with pretext of good: impugneth the same under colour and pretence to defend God's honour, so the Serpent seduced Eve. So he boldly chargeth them with giving divine honour to Images, accidents of bread and wine; and unto Saints, using the word adoration, or honour, for divine worship: this we must suppose otherwise his whole book and arguments doth not ●ouch them, or any thing to the purpose, but phalerae a● populum.  
Who ever that prete●ds to the name of a Christian, but confesses all religious divine worship is proper and due to God alone, and no created thing whatsoever is capable of it?  
He should have first proved his grounds solidly before he made his inferences upon them: And so his large chapter of Idolatry, might have seemed at least to have been somewhat ad rem: whereas now it serveth to no other end but to discovery his f●lly and humour against Catholics. Why doth he cavil so about words? all the ground of his disputation is upon the equivocation of words. Can he be ignorant that the vulgar use have not words enough properly to signify all our notions and conceptions?  
The terms, worship, prayer, invocation, bowing down, adoration, etc. for want of words are or may be equivocal. For worship or prayer directed to God imports a total dependence in him; and so our prayers, etc. are offered to God alone. As applied to just and holy men it implies only a communion in the members of the Church militant; or assistance of their prayers, to him who only can give what we ask. They pray not to Saints in the manner as they pray to God, but desire their prayers, as we do the just men on earth to pray for us. How comes then the one to be idolatry, and the other a recommendable action?  
The word Adoration, signifieth not only divine honour and worship, but also religious and civil. As may be proved out of the Scripture and Fathers. The Protestants themselves grant the different kinds of worship and honour signified thereby.  
These three Adoratious have many examples and testimonies in holy Writ, as the word adoration is to be understood diversely: either to God alone, called Latria: or to Angels and Saints, holy men, as servants of God, and for love of him called Dulia. The third a civil worship to men of dignity for some civil or temporal excellency.  
These three kinds of adoration, etc. according to the different applications thereof, cannot be distinguished in reading, but by circumstances: And because the corporeal exhibition of the same exterior acts of submission and reverence is common to all kinds of worship; thence they are distinguished and diversified only by the intention and will of him that doth perform them. Whence it is not to be wondered that, as the ancient Fathers; so Catholics now following the custom and phrase of holy Scripture, do use also the word adoration in different manner and sense.  
The Doctor grants the civil adoration, though absurdly he denies the Religious; Calling that civil worship which is testified in Scripture to have been done to Angels and holy men. Whence the adoration Abraham, Lot, and Joshua did to Angels could be only civil. Which would be absurd, because there was not therein any civil or temporal respect, the motive of their adoration being a supernatural excellency, including also a sanctity, or holiness; as appears by the example of Joshua's adoration of the Angel; who, besides his falling prostrate on the ground, was commanded to do more reverence; viz. to put off his shoes, because the place was holy, viz. in respect of the Angel's presence.  
The like is to be said of the examples exhibited by Abdias to Elias, of the children of the Prophets to Elizaeus; for although Abdias was in temporal dignity a greater man and more worthy than Elias the Prophet; yet he fell upon his face before Elias 3 Kings 18. acknowledging thereby the spiritual excellency of God's Prophet, and did therein an act religious. So the children of the Prophets did the like to Elizaeus, adoraverunt ●um proni in terram 4 Reg. 2. specifying a supernatural respect of his miraculous passage over the River, the motive of this adoration. Therefore it cannot be only civil.  
This I thought good to note by the way, to show by this occasion the piece of Legerdemain i● the Doctor, who denies that Angels might be adored in any sense: yet it appears that Abraham, Lot, Joshua adored Angels prostrate on the ground Genes. 18. 19 Joshua 3. therefore there is some inferior adoration, or we must charge the holy men with Idolatry. It cannot be called civil only, for the spiritual excellency of Angels, and sanctity of the Prophets being supernatural, doth not import any temporal or civil consideration, but a religious respect, because it is exhibited to Angels and Saints as Servants of God, for the honour and love of him: so as the worship resteth not in them, but hath a spicial relation to Almighty God, being yielded to them for his sake; because they are his Servants; and to the end to honour him in them, which must be a religious act. This honour being finally and principally to God, for whose sake they are honoured in respect of the participation of the divine excellency and abundance of Grace given them; which is so far from dishonouring, that we do him a special honour and service therein; for seeing he said to his Disciples, qui vos recipit me recipit, qui vos spernit me spernit, he that receiveth you receiveth me, etc. so that the honour done to them redounds to the honour of God.  
This being so and most manifest in our Doctrine and Practice: How impudent and unheard of a thing is it to make them idolaters? whereas their Books written of Worship and Add ration etc. and their Doctrine in Schools and Pulpits do proclaim unto the world, and their Consciences do witness it betwixt God and them, although they honour Saints and Angels; yet they hold and believe them to be creatures of God, and the honour they yield to them is not a divine honour, but such as may be given to a gloriefid creature, whom God will have to be honoured, according to the testimony of our Saviour, John 22. quis mihi ministraverit, etc. for God is honoured and glorified thereby.  
Did Saint Hierome, when he wrote to Marcelia, and invited her to adore the ashes of Saint John Baptist, Elizaeus and Abdias commit flat idolatry? did not Saint Ambrose, Saint Augustine and other Fathers, yea the very Penners of Scripture apply adorare very often to the worship of creatures? Saint Ambrose, saith Helen, did wisely to cause the nail of Christ's Cross to be set in the Diadem of the Emperor Constantine, ut 〈◊〉 Christi adoretur in regibus: and Saint Augustine (as Collins, an eminent Protestant, confesseth) applied the word adorare to the Sacrament of Baptism and Circumcision, saying to Faustus the Manichean, Adoratur in gestante. Did not St. Ambrose reverence and worship holy Relics, the Bodies of Saint Gervasius and Protasius, Nazarius and Celsus, Vit●lis and Agricola, found out b● a revelation he had from God? and were by him translated and honoured with pomp and solemnity, and approved by many Miracles, as St. Aug. witnesseth in his Confess. or Book De civet. Dei?  
But this Doctor imitateth Vigilanti●s the Heretic, who charged Christians of those days with flat Idolatry, for worshipping Relics of Saints, calling them Cinerarios, kissing and adoring a little dust carried in a little vessel, taking adoration for worship due to God alone. Whence Saint Hierome answering him in the same sense saith, non adoramus martyrum, etc. viz. with divine honour committing idolatry, as Vigilantius chargeth us: sed honoramus reliquias martyrum, ut eum cujus sunt martyres adoremus & honoremus s●r●os, etc. we honour the Servants, to the end that their honour may redound to the honour of their Lord; who saith, He that receiveth you receiveth me. Vigilantius did not herein reprove the custom of particular men, but the practice of the whole Church. So Saint Hierome impugned him with public examples, as of the public translation of the relics of Saint Andrew, St. Luke, Saint Timothy to Constantinople by Constantine, apud quas, saith he, demones rugiunt, etc. and then produceth another example of the most solemn translation of the Relics of Samuel the Prophet, from Judaea to Chalcedon in Thracia, sumptuously carried by Bishops in a golden vessel; met, received and accompanied by people of all Churches by the way. Whereupon he asketh Vigilantius whether he took Arcadius the Emperor (who caused this to be done) and all the Bishops and multitude for sacrilegious persons and fools? as we may ask the Doctor in the same manner.  
Saint Hierome said of himself praefepe domini & incunabula adoremus: and expounding the verse of the Psalm adorate scabellum pedum ejus, he taketh the footstool to be the Cross. See Saint Gregor. Naz. Theod. who maketh a plain distinction betwixt Latria and Dulia. They came not, saith he, to the Martyrs as to God, therefore did not give divine honour due alone to God, but an inferior honour due to God's Servants. So there is some intermediate worship between a divine and mere civil worship: let the Doctor find out a suitabe name for it, we will not stand upon terms;— but nothing will serve him, but a religious and divine worship must be all one.  
I wish the Doctor had studied Metaphysics better, and not to confound and jumble together the Notions of those things, which ought to be distinguished, abstracted or severed one from another. Is it not an errand fallacy to infer and conclude an absolute divine worship; when the premises only understood in some inferior relative respect?  
The very light of nature and common sense may decide this Controversy: touching the honour and dishonour done to a picture or image of them we hate or affect, reflects upon the person represented. Yet this man, who prattles much of reason and sense, denieth the honour or respect given to the image of Christ or his Saints doth at all redound to them: nay that it is flat idolatry? What Logic is this? is it the same thing to worship an image instead of God; and to worship God himself before an image? The Jews, we know, did worship God by bowing down before the Ark and Cherubims, and yet they did not worship them instead of God. Do all of the English Church commit idolatry entering the Churches uncovered, in revererence to the walls, bowing at the Altar or Name of Jesus, kneeling at their Communion, to their Parents for Blessing? all which may be as truly called, and are, as much a religious worship, or inferior honour, as any practised by the Papists.  
Doth not he interpret the word of God and the second precept falsely? in charging others with idolatry, for doing the self same things which God himself commanded the Jews to do, to whom he gave this Precept? Did not God command Moses to make two Cherubims of Gold in the two ends of the Mercy Seat? Exod. 25. 18. Were there not graven Images on the walls of the Temple? 2 Chron. c. 3. were not the two Cherubims in the most holy place of image work? 
Psal. 99 5.  were not the people to pray in the Temple, and commanded to worship at the footstool of our Lord, that is, the Ark of the Covenant, 
1 Chron. 28. 2.  over which were Cherubims of image work?  
Behold now what a deep Divine and terrible Logician the Doctor is, the Papists were never so much put to their trumps, he argueth so substantially (against Scripture and against charity) his inference you must mark well.  
God commanded the making of Images after he had given the second Precept: therefore Papists can make no Images, but they are Idolaters. Images were placed in God's Temple: therefore Papists are Idolaters, in placing Images in their Churches. God commanded to bow down and be prostrate before the Ark: Therefore Papists who kneel in the sight of an Image are Idolaters. Are not these good consequences? and yet this is the weighty and wildy club whereby this great Hercules hopeth to beat down Popery.  
I leave it to all wise men to judge whether he be not selfconceited and presumptuous; who would make so many Christians Idolaters whether they will or no? and those who so much detest it, that it is incompatible to all the Articles of their Belief. To go about to paganize and make Antichristian all Christian Predecessors of this Nation, and all the Churches of Christ for a thousand years, and so by a necessary consequence to be members of perdition.  
Can any commit Idolatry against their will and intention? can you think it credible, that prudent men should be so dull; as, in the midst of a people that cry out against Idolatry, they should deny God, and make Gods of Stocks and Stones? they who labonred these thousand years, by the conversion of Nations, to persuade people from Idolatry, to be charged themselves with the same guilt? Good Sir, you may as truly say they worship an Ass' head (as the old Heathens accused the primitive Christians:) a wise man will as soon believe if you should affirm, those that approve all things in the Koran are Christians; or that England reaches as far as Greece. This Web which you wove with so much earnestness will only catch dotterils and fools, such as have shaked their hands with their reason; or else enthralled or captivated it under tyranny and partiality; and locked it down to the galleys of their own passions.  
It is not my business to dispute this polemical Article at large, which is better done by Doctor T. G. and V C. I find his whole Book like that paralytic Discourse, written rather Rhetorically add captandum populum, to insinuate into vulgar capacities, then logically to evince the Hypothesis contended for: strip it out of its multifarious fallacies, ungrounded surmises and erroneous suppositions; and it will not only be a massy body without bones and nerves to support it and join it together: but sine succo & sanguine, a very Skelleton.  
Pardon me, good Reader, if thou think me oversharp with this man, who hath kindled my zeal and whetted my stile against him: in that his procedure is unchristian, that it tends to destroy all, but settle no Religion. The greatest heathen could never reproach Christians with more injurious slanders. And shall it be lawful for a private person to condemn and deride, on false grounds and surmises, those duties which the most learned and major part of Christians ever admitted of? and shall such a one be entreated to preach and print, and others abler and honester forbidden the Press and Pulpit? are we not then partial to ourselves, and become judges of evil thoughts. James 2. 1, 4.  
When the Doctor proveth that they worship Idols, together with God, as the Kings of Israel did. Or alone without him, as the Pagans did: or that they adored with Sacrifice the Sun, the Moon, etc. and other inferior Deities, as he calls them, we will grant him flat idolatry. In the mean while, all sober men must think,  
These are devices to seduce the vulgar into strange opinions and unchristian thoughts of others; to traduce honest men and their principles: let them be fairly heard in a public conference, how far they can justify themselves from being deservedly suspected of such abominations: if our passion will not our charity ought to think better.  
I intended here to have a lash or two at the late uncharitable Pamphlet, called (A seasonable Discourse:) but hearing it is already fully examined and corrected by a better Quill, I will only give these Animadversions; viz. that all or most of his material Arguments, are sufficiently answered in this Treatise, viz. concerning the Pope's Power of Excommunication, Deposing, Suprem●●y, the Inquisition, Massacres, disguised Jesuits, opinions of Mariana, etc. as you may find in the Objections and Answers before; as also that faith is not to be kept with Heretics; that dissimulation of Equivocations in Religion is permitted: all these are confuted to be most manifest untruths and falsehoods: he citys also very insincerely many Authors: and brings in for his best proofs for witness, our enemies or partial Authors not to be credited; as Thuanus, Platina, Myster. Jesui●. Cornel. Agrippa, Sleiden, ●ll●ry de Foulis, etc.  
The Pamphlet indeed rather indeed deserves a rebuke for his slanders (and therefore the name is wisely concealed) than for any man to take the pains to read or answer it. It is but a cheating Drollery to delude the people; whence he makes merry with the life of Saint Francis, as fabulous, though written by the hand of Saint Bonaventure, a seraphical and holy learned man, reputed amongst wiser Protestant's: he takes pleasure to rail at the Popes; to whom all western Churches did ever bear a respect, and aught to do, as being the chief Patriarch of the West acknowledged by the adversaries themselves.  
All men should speak honourably and reverently of Princes and Bishops, the one being Gods Vicegerents in temporals, the other in spirituals, and Successors to the Apostles. Suppose some Popes have behaved themselves too severe, or haughty, (being Princes as well as Bishops) it is not so strange, all great mean should be Saints. But the very name of a Pope is a scarecrow to this man; as if he were one of the ignorant Herd, credulous to believe any fabulous stories picked out of Legends (like his own Pamphlet) that have neither charity, truth or civility. Why cannot he (if he were just and honest) rehearse as well the pious acts and memories of good Popes, where there be twenty to one; famous in approved Authors, and undeniable History? but that, like some venomous serpent he loves to suck only in poisoned places: To speak of our own days, (as he doth at random, without jugment or sincerity) what can he say against the lives and the actions of the last three Popes? have not they incessantly laboured for the peace and support of all Christian Princes, among themselves and against the common enemy? and now in particular uniting the Polanders, and assisting them with money against the Adversary of Christianity.  
Is it not then a weakness in this man, (worthy to be derided by all the moderate and wiser sort) who would make the world believe Popes are so dangerous to Monarchy? What Kings or States complain against them? Are his neighbouring Princes jealous or fearful of his power or encroachments? and cannot more potent Princes and Commonwealths, at a distance, better secure themselves by their own power? Are not Catholics in all places obliged to stand to their Sovereign, in defence of their Country, against the Pope as effectually as against any other? Have not the English catholics long ago in open Parliament declared, that the Imperial Crown of England is, and hath been at all times, free from all sabjection to the Pope? and provided a Statute of praemunire, against any abuses as they thought might happen?  
Look on the English Catholics in 88 when the Pope was excited and backed by the power of a great Prince, (Her Title being disputable) and urged by some abuses, and continued severities, to excommunication, etc. Do not our own and foreign Writers notwithstanding testify, the Catholics stood firmly to their Allegiance? and the most learned Priests, by an authentic Writing, acknowledged the Q. (though excommunicated) to have still the same authority as her Predecessors, and cheerfully offered to hazard their lives in defence of her Dignity and Country?  
Suppose eight or ten men talk at random in Schools of the deposing power, etc. must that be the Doctrine of the Church? Did the Church ever approve or teach any such maxims, or were they ever tolerated? (as he most falsely would have it.) Have not all other, numerous, learned men contradicted them? did not all the Universities of a great Kingdom condemn such opinions, and their Books to be burnt, by a Decree in the face of the world, by public Justice? did not a General Council of Constance sentence the Deposing Power as erroneous and scandalous, although he were a Tyrant? Have any other reform Churches proceeded so far? The Doctor doth well to cry Whore first, and take no notice of the many standing objections in this and other things, against his own Calvinistical party.  
But what need I trouble Ink and Paper to examine this man's absurdities, when I had taken but three hours to run them over, they are increased to so many, I am come into a Labyrinth: you may judge by his first ten lines, wherein he committeth three: first he saith, His Majesty found it necessary, for good of his affairs to grant freedom to all Dissentors. If His Majesty found it necessary, is not he presumptuous, being a private man and a subject, to make this invective (he calls seasonable) Discourse to impeach it? to offer weak and lying motives to obstruct it? Secondly, what confidence hath he to utter so notorious an untruth, as to say, Now Priests openly act in all parts their functions? In what City or Country Town, hath he found them publckly preaching or praying? Thirdly, is it not absurd, that being an ecclesiastic, he (should so mind us of Capital punishment) who, by the Canons, should have no hand in blood?  
He is much troubled at the Co●●iers Crred, viz. to believe as the Church believes. Which gives a suspicion he doth not believe or would not have his Parishioners believe one article of the Creed. He calls charity and love, but tempting charms: as if he did not know or believe the Gospel; where there be innumerable commands for it. But then he comes a canting (being suspicious his Book tends to Sedition and to breed feuds amongst us) saith, no price can be to great for peace, but truth. But what truth doth he mean? the many imputed slanders in his Book? or would he have truth separated from love, peace, and charity? He citys Authors falsely; as Thomas Aquinus Peron, etc. he hath false supposals, viz. that Catholics take away the Scripture, give a half Communion, make new Articles of Religion, etc. that indulgencies remit the guilt of sin, and that the gifts of God are bought with money, etc. who ever writ more against such Simony than Catholic Authors? or hold more plainly that sin is never forgiven without sorrow and repentance from God by the Merits and Passion of Jesus Christ? So much for the Unseasonable Discourse.  
Now to overthrow from the foundation all other aspersions in this kind. Let all impartial men consider, first those criminations proceed originally from enemies, and grand animosities of parties adverse. Secondly, Papists universally disown them. Thirdly, unrepentant traitors and implacable enemies are amongst their accusers, and which most encourages them is their constant fidelity: they might easily vindicate themselves from all such imputations by the putting their adversaries to the proof, had they but liberty to question them, and bring them to a trial: For they never durst appear or show their faces in an open and impartial audience. We might admire where such deep malice could be found, but much more how any prudence could believe them; and that no reason or experience will restrain them.  
How strange a wickedness is then the groundless censuring, so highly and publicly, so many noble and honourable personages, so many eminently deserving subjects of his Majesty? so many grave, most venerable and most sacred personages in the world? What account shall such give at the last day? what is this less than persecution? what mischiefs flow and are apt from such libelling by sad experience, we have tasted the bitterness of the fruit.  
The dreadful ruin of Jerusalem was brought about by such furious ones, Josephus calleth the Zealots. And should they still be countenanced, it unavoidably bringeth incurable divisions; for there is no certain rule of Justice with such persons. Secondly, It breeds an ill correspondence between our fellow subjects, and makes them ill looked upon, which violates civil unity, so necessary for the peace and strength of a Kingdom. Thirdly, It disincourages Loyalty, to see that after such testimonies it may be lawful for any, at pleasure, to brand them as Traitors publicly in Print. Fourthly, It tends to excite our Governors, that they are not fit to be endured in any State. Fifthly, It must breed fouds between private persons all over England, Scotland and Ireland. 6. It is a reproach to Christian Religion, when the world must see, we have not so much justice and equity as Heathens have in their worldly Societies. Seventhly, It is a great cause of the persecution of Christians, and the damnation of Persecutors: being foolisher than the Devil, who would build Christ's house or Kingdom by dividing it. Mat. 12.  
And that which must sanctify all this sin, is, the seeming interest of God and Religion, to hinder the growth and increase of Popery. If it was an untruth they spoke, it was for Religion; if they did backbite and revile, it was to preserve the hearers from errors and infection. If they used their reputation to murder love, and make others odious, and rejoiced in their sufferings and afflictions. all this is but for defence of truth. They think all this is a part of Christian zeal.  
And this is a mark of Satan's way of Reformation he doth it by dividing, and teaching Christians to form odious thoughts of one another: And when his meaning is to save you from heaven and truth; he takes upon him, he is only saving you from sin, or errors or corruptions of the Church.  
By these notes and signs (saith an English Divine) you may easily perceive how the dividing zeal of such differs from the true, genuine Christian Catholic Zeal. If your zeal be raised for some singular opinion, not for the common salvation; moved by some personal interest, honour, or dishonour, for strengthening a party, etc. And not to promote godliness the common cause of Christianity, or general cause of pedce and piety.  
A hurting burning zeal, for execution of penal Statutes. When it causeth you to revile, backbite, despise, censure, and zealously to make dissenters odious, that hearers may abate their love. When your zeal tendeth to hurt and cruelty, and is greater for the adversaries destruction, than your desire and prayer for his conversion.  
It's a false zeal, more inclined to their sufferings, reproach or hurt with some secret desire of fire from heaven, etc. when it tendeth to separations, divisions, distances from our ancient Brethren.  
This is the complexion of the proud, false, conceited and surly sort of professors, which flieth outward against the sins of other men, and can live with pride, selfishness, and sensuality at home— a contemptuous persecuting zeal, kinled by inflaming censures of rash passionate Preachers.  
First it is an ill sign when their censures are beyond the proportion of their understandings; and their experience and prudence much less than others whom they censure. Secondly, When it is hardly restrained; it showeth the World and the Flesh are too much it friends. Thirdly, When it burneth where lust, pride and malice burn. Fourthly, When it carrieth you from those holy rules prescribed: and pretendeth to come from a spirit which will not be tried, but by Scripture. It's a suspicious sign when it is contrary to the judgement, experience, and zeal of the generality of most well experienced, sober godly Christians. And so contrary to the ordinary working of God's Spirit in others, who are as good as you: for this zeal cometh not from heaven. For God's Spirit is not contrary to itself.  
But the true Catholic genuine Christian zeal appeareth in its own likeness, in wisdom, love, humility, meekness and and sobriety: Provoketh hearers to love; and good works. Is not contentious, reproachful, injurious: loveth virtue in a heathen. Is kindled by humble meditations of Christ's example, to study and imitate him and his Saints in forbearance, patience, forgiving others and doing good.  
Promoting Christian Religion with sincere and plain dealing; winning men by Morality, justice and charity, and offending them by no unnecessary thing; by no imputed calumnies; sticking closer to justice and peace than to any party: Owneth virtue and goodness that is in all parties and opinions. Which will be a means to remove the animosities we are so apt to receive against dissenters, and lessen our differences and disagreements.  
The true means of gaining souls to God, is the Gospellary way of meekness, persuasion, etc. Christ and his Apostles appeared without words of man's wisdom, assistance of Kings or Princes; without fines, imprisonments, oaths, etc. By his admirable mildness he condemned all these politic Religions, by using cruelty to support them. If it had been otherwise I would have told you, John 14 if the way of planting or preserving my faith had been by imposing penalties, by cruel Oaths, or watering it with the blood of Refusers, I would have told you. The son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them.  
To wind up all in few words of what is said in this Book, I desire no prudent man to give any credit further than his experience shall find true after diligent search made as concerns every one; before he pass sentence. If this be not enough to disabuse your credulity, (of criminations imputed without proof or probability) let all impartial men judge whether you have not shaked hands with all morality. For who can pretend any charity that will harbour detected calumnies? or who can love truth that will not acknowledge it when represented? The reasons above given I doubt not, which would serve to clear the Catholics from such aspersions, before any just or reasonable Judge, Pagan or Mahometan. How much more ought they to serve among Christians; who profess not only truth, but charity, which is the life of Religion and bond of perfection. Hence, saith the great Siracides, blame no man before thou hast enquired the matter; understand first and then reform righteously.   

CONCLUSION.  
IN Conclusion now of this Apologetic Discourse; it will not be improper, once again to mind you of the necessity we have to Christian love. Seeing the neglect of it, and a persecuting hurtful spirit (mistaken for zeal) hath been and is the issue and consequence of all the immoderation, feuds and antipathies we have one against another.  
It is then the duty of every serious Christian to lay aside all vain jealousies, idle suspicions, rude severities; (and much more forged calumnies) against any persuasion whatsoever. The Authors and Meditators of such aspersions, though they may pretend much Conscience and Religion, can have none. For S. James assures us, that whosoever would seem religious and tempers not his tongue, that man's religion is vain: And in Leviticus 19 15. It's commanded, thou shalt not calumniate thy neighbour nor oppress him by violence. It's against a divine precept to bear false witness or detect our brother; it's against the lustre of Christian Religion, it gives scandal abroad to the very Heathens, it's against the peace and settlement of the Nation at home, which must be conserved by mutual concord and unity of affection.  
No moderate man that hath left any room in his breast for truth; or charity in his heart; can abet such fierce, censorious unchristian tempers, (which have appeared of late) which have made and still keep open, our divisions and distances: if the same sins are continued without repentance, and if after such warning (as the whole world ever scarce had the like) we remain still selfconceited, and arrogantly ignorant. How heinous is our crime, and how dreadful is the prognostic of our greater ruin? and how guilty are those Ministers of the blood of Souls, who tell not men of this sin and danger?  
When I consider Christ's precept of mutual love, and the Apostle abridging it, the whole duty of a Christian: I cannot sufficiently wonder to see Christians in this present age; so furiously to persecute and hate one another only on the account of Religion. If we reflect upon the difficulties that encounter us in the way of truth, and withal consider the shortness of our sight, for here we see but in part, and understand but in part, There will appear more reason to endeavour the mutual assistance and support, than malicious destruction and ruin of one another. To hate and vilify others for their opinions, is repugnant to Scripture which commands us to love our brother and not persecute him. To despise our brother for his innocent mistakes, or to constrain him to profess more than he is convinced of; proceeds from a great tyranny and presumption.  
I searched Evangelical records; and there was nothing but mildness, and soft doctrine: I enquired into the breathe of the Spirit, and they were all pacificatory. I wondered from what Scripture-encouragement these men deducted their practices. At last I was forced to conclude, they were only pretended Chaplains to the Prince of peace: And those Teachers that should have been saving lights, were degenerated into firebrands.  
Different Opinions in Religion, might consist well enough, with peace and public safety, would men be persuaded to be modest, to keep them to themselves, and not to fancy their conceits necessary to the rest of mankind; to vex their neighbours, provoke their rulers, dissettle the government and disturb the peace for the propagation of them.  
Unity and affection might be preserved amidst diversity of opinions; if we do but consider that errors are infirmities of the understanding, and no man is willing to be deceived. So are not objects of our hatred, but our pity. We hate no man for being blind, poor, lame, etc. ignorance and infirmity require our compassion and our charity: but nothing can justify our rage and malice. If we were infallible and all our opinions were certainties and demonstrations; we might then have more pretence for our stifness, rigidness, and severities. But to confess the infirmities of our own faith and understanding; and to give no candid allowance to others in many failings, this is utterly inexcusable.  
The way indeed may not be broad in respect of practice, or sensual indulgence: yet it hath a latitude, in respect of judgement and circumstantial opinion. A middle; moderate, pacific way. He that stands in the middle path, may extend the arms of his charity on both sides. Extremes are dangerous. Our affections ought to meet, though our judgements cannot; Christian love is necessary, but agreement in opinion is neither necessary, nor possible. Love and goodness prevail. Where nothing else will; these win and captivate the Soul. And such conquests are more noble and better than either those of arts or arms.  
Now to attain this excellent Catholic temper, we are to love virtue in a Heathen, and S. Paul 1 Cor. 7. saith If any brother hath a wife an Infidel and she consent to dwell with him, let him not put her away, what can be said more to oblige Christians to charity and meekness, to forbear one another, than an injunction of an Apostle to live peaceably even with an Infidel?  
The excellency of christian love is preferred before all gifts and natural perfections: Cor. 13. it is the image of God, it is his vital Spirit infused into us, and renders us most like to our Maker. It is the Spirit of Angels and glorified Souls. The Celestial Inhabitants live and abide in love, sweetness and benignity. Nor is that love confined to the blessed and glorified company, but it sheds itself abroad upon the nether world. And they are ministering Spirits for our good, Heb. 1. 14. They so far love us, that they can stoop from heaven to serve us: for there is joy at the conversion of a sinner, and consequently love to converted Saints, & care and pity for the rest of men.  
Love and charity is the vital grace of Christian Religion; and though men's understandings, are convinced already, that charity is their duty: yet there is too much need to represent some of the vast heap of Injunctions that make it so, to incline their wills. I shall therefore briefly lay together a few of the chief instances of this kind.  
Our Saviour urgeth it in his command John 13. 34. he maketh it a distinguishing note of his Disciples, 13. 35. and enjoins them to love their enemies, Mat. 3. 24. And the want of it the reason of the curse pronounced on those on the left hand at the solemn judgement, Mat. 41. 42.  
This love and union was so recommended to all Christians by the Apostles, that they inculcated nothing more than the necessity thereof. Saint Paul attributed thereto all the persecution of Christian Religion, saying, qui diligit proximum legem implevit, Rom. ●3. 3. and Galat. 3. 22. reckons it five times over, under the names of peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness and meekness, Gal. 22. 23. He advanceth it above all gifts and graces, 1 Cor. 13. above prophecy and mysteries, and knowledge of faith. And the beloved Disciple Saint John attributes unto it our being born of God: And the want of this an evidence of not knowing God, and a sign of one that abideth in death, 1 John 3. 14. he calls him a murderer that hates another, 11. 15. a liar if he pretend to love God and loveth not his brother, 1 John 4. 20. we are commanded to be kindly affected one towards another, and to be pitiful and courteous, 11. 10. S. Peter exhorteth to mutual charity above all things, mutuam charitatem ante omnia, etc. Pet. 1. 8. and 4. 14.  
This our charity, gentleness, goodness, meekness, etc. aught to extend to all men universally without limitation; but especially to all Christians as Christians: because such are the more special objects. It must not be consigned by names and the interest of parties or sects; but aught to reach as far as Christianity itself. To love those that are of our way, humour, and opinion, is not charity but self-love: and it is not for Christ's sake but our own.  
It is rare to meet with serious Christians who are not so deeply engaged in some party or other, as to darken their judgements, and pervert their affections as to all the rest. What company can you come into but all their discourse is to stigmatise dissenters? what bitter lies, what invectives have been raised against most grave, solid and ancient Christians? how blindly do they look on all that is good in those that differ from them? how partially do they aggravate the faults of all that are against their way? and how small a thing will serve their turn to excuse the faults of their own party? and they think all this is a part of Christian zeal, as if Christians engaged in a war against themselves. And when all men should know them to be Christ's Disciples by loving one another; most men may perceive (that contrary to the essence of Christianity) they endeavour to make each other odious.  
So that though I see never so much eagerness for an opinion, I shall never call that zeal or▪ religion without the conscience of christian love. Yea though such men should sacrifice their lives, I should not think them martyrs: and in this I have the warrant of the great Apostle, 1 Cor. 13. 3. though I give my body to be burned and have not charity it profiteth nothing.  
Even those that killed Christ and his Apostles, did it as a duty, and a part of service of God, John 16. but believe it, it is Apostasy, to fall from love; your Souls die, when charity dyeth: that which killeth love and charity; killeth all grace and holiness. The opinions, principles, sidings, practices, which destroy love, destroys your Souls. O what a loathsome sacrifice is it to the God of love, if we must leave our gift at the altar till we are reconciled to our offended brother: what a gift is theirs who are unreconciled to almost all Churches of Christianity?  
Young unexperienced Christians are ignorant of Satan's wiles, thinking when a wrathful enemy's heat is kindled in them, (even against men of ancient principles) that it is a zeal of God's exciting spirit, and that it is your duty, or that you should be lukewarm in the cause of God and truth, if you did it not: when alas! it hath more of wrath than love. The white Devil is a killer of Souls as well as the black.  
And now considering the express recommends and injunctions of all the aforesaid and many other places of holy writ, to this grand duty of Religion: if any can quiet their Consciences, and yet continue in the contrary persecuting spirit and practice: they have found a way to escape all Laws of God; and may conceit themselves religious, though they live in the works of the flesh, hatred, variance, sedition, etc. Gal. 3. 22.  
There was never a more seasonable time to tell men of this great sin, than when the temptation to it is greatest; when God hath been so frequently dishonoured by it; when the world doth ring of it. All Sides and Nations reproach us for it: when the sensual and partial are so hardened in their their selfishness, that no warning can take off the Bias of their Judgements. There is a kind of spirit in some, which is so different from that charity which thinketh no evil: that it thinketh nothing 
1 Cor. 13.  else concerning those that differ from them: this is contrary to that charity, which is not puffed up, and doth not behave itself unseemly.  
In that almighty God hath put enmity between the Seed of the Woman and the Seed of the Serpent; we may gather, that as the Seed of the Woman should be at enmity with the Seed of the Serpent; so should it be at unity with itself. If even with Infidels and Heathens the Servant of God must not strive, but be gentle to all men, apt to teach, etc. 2 Tim. 2. 24. How much more is God's family and inheritance to be used with love and tenderness?  
There is in many Christians a strange inequality of partiality. Alas! how often have I heard wise, and otherwise prudent persons, cry out against pride and partiality in others; who in their next discourse have shamefully shown it themselves? making much of their own inconsiderable reasonings, and vilifying urgent evidence. And being so intent on their own cause, that they could scarce have patience to hear another speak, and when they have heard them, their first words show, that they never well weighed the strength of his arguments, but were all the while thinking what to say against him, or how to go on as they had begun.  
Many an error is taken up by going too far from others. Some giddy and heady Professors (saith Doctor Gauden) have been so eager to come out of Babylon, that they are almost run out of their wits; so jealous of superstition, that they are panders for confusion; so scared with the name of Rome, that they are afraid of all right reason and sober Religion; so fearful of being over-righteous, by following traditions of men, that they fear not to be over-wicked, by overthrowing the good foundations of honour, order, peace and charity: fierce enemies indeed against the Idolatry of Antichrist, but fast friends to Belial and Mammon, to Schism and Sacrilege.  
And thus men's judgements and practices are depraved by flying indiscreetly from others; while they think more from whence they go than whether: More favouring the separate zeal of Pharisees than the winning zeal of Christ: calling themselves a godly people, and are but a company of superstitious Pharisees, or a sort of melancholy humorists, who must sit because their neighbour stands, or must go out of the way because their neighbour goeth in it.  
They that will find out the bottom of any Religion must prepare themselves to carry a spirit thoroughly discharged of all animosities, passions and false apprehensions, which corrupt the judgement, and raise a mist upon the most resplendent lights of truth. If we were impartially willing to know the truth, and did pray God in meekness of spirit: we would avoid, and not choose deceits, and resist the light, and provoke God to forsake our understandings.  
Many Christians are as children tossed too and sro, fluctuating 'twixt wind and water: there is no other remedy for such, or satisfaction or pe●ce to their Consciences, but Christ's precept and prescript: to hear the Church; to be of the number and in the community of the generality of agreeing Christians; seeing the generality of those that have a long and constant delivered Series of their Doctrines, is more unlikely to be in error, or forsaken of Christ, than a few odd-conceited new opinions. And this may be one rational means left us to find out the truth; as Baxter confesseth in cure of Church, etc. to submit to that, the most religious, the most learned, the major part of Christians ever taught or submitted to. Whence Bishop Gauden noteth; The primitive Churches were as careful to act in their outward Order and Government of the Church, according to Apostolical pattern, and traditional constitutions (which were first the rule of the Church's practice) as they were faithful to preserve the Canon of Scriptures, which were after written and delivered without corruption to posterity.  
Every one will confess that the true spirit of Christianity is meek, peaceable, gentle; and yet how contrary is the practice? the people of God are realous, but of what? not to consume and destroy one another, not to hate and vilify one another: but they are zealous to love one another, to forbear what is contrary to love: zealous of good works, patiented, temperate, gentle, etc. the way of heavenly wisdom is meek, peaceable and easy to be entreated, by all offices of 
Rom. 12. 18.  love, inclined to good to all. The spirit of false zeal is censorious, hurtful, dividing, following the works of the flesh, which are hatred, malice, 
Galat. 5. 12.  variance, leading the way to cruelty and persecution.  
Where is persecution, but from thinking ill of others? abhorring, and not loving them? robbing men of the privileges of Christians, not leaving them common liberty of men and subjects, nor to plead for themselves. This destroying cruelty leaveth them neither, and will not suffer them to enjoy so much liberty as Heathens and Infidels may enjoy; or as S. Paul did under such: condemning them to the loss of the greatest 
Act. 28.  privileges on earth, and to be left out with the dogs, publicans and heathens.  
Is persecution worthy all the calamitous divisions in Christendom, and the blood of so many thousands shed for conscience sake? and enduring the outcries of the imprisoned and banished, and their prayers to Heaven from men's hands, and the leaving such a name upon record to posterity, as is usually left in History on the authors of such sufferings? besides the present regret of mind in the calamities of others, and sad divisions and destructions of charity which cometh hereupon?  
Will force cure disagreements and errors better than evidence of truth and love will do? will they be so cured without a greater mischief? Is not the work to be done for saving men's Souls, and shall any be saved against his will? will penalties change the judgement in matters of religion? is he any better than a knave or hypocrite who will say or swear to do that through fear which he thinketh God forbiddeth him, and feareth may damn his Soul? is it the honour of Church or Kingdom to be composed of such? and are the lives of Kings, peace of Kingdoms, Estates, etc. competently secured where God is not feared more than fines or corporal punishments?  
Is this to teach in love, to instruct in meekness? it is certain, whosoever swerves from the dictate of his Conscience commits a sin, Rom. 14. So they that endeavour to force or draw any man to profess or act contrary to what his Soul believes are as deeply guilty of the same crime. We are all infirm, and of imperfect understandings, therefore we ought not to be too imperious or too censorious toward other dissenters, lest you 
James 3. 12.  receive a greater condemnation: take heed you fall not into the hands of the living God. They shall be judged without mercy, who have showed no mercy.  
The rod of discipline must be used, but it must be done only to the scandalous: and so done, that it may appear to be Christ's own work, and upon his interest, and his command; and not either arbitrarily or for ourselves. Christ teacheth us not to use violence, when we speak for him, but to beseech men in his name to be reconciled to God, 2 Cor. 5. And men would more easily be persuaded to believe that Religion to be from God, whose Professors they saw to be godlike. The whole Gospel is a revelation of the love of God, and a Messiah of peace, and very opposite to envy and animosity: all principles which are against universal love, are against God and holiness: it is Love which is predominant, Fear is subservient, and that fear which is contrary to love is vice.  
I dare proclaim true piety, love, humility and prudence may happily heal a great many dissensions, and the wounds which rash injudicious zeal hath made, that to the proud, carnal and uncharitable seem incurable; and the cessation of unnecessary impositions might cease the saddest distractions of the Nation. Oppression maketh a wise man mad, saith the Preacher, Eccles. 7. 7. Conscience Persecution then among Christians is clearly repugnant to the Law of God, the Light of Nature, and evidence of our own principles.  
For the sake then of Christ, who purchased the weakest with his blood: for the sake of those who are in danger of turning to Atheism: for the sake of the poor distracted Nation: for the sake of the King, that he may have comfort in his Subjects, of governing a quiet, peaceable people: and for your own sakes, that you may give up account to God of your principal and most Christian duty; and not make Apocryphal all those Texts of Scripture, and plain injunctions to charity and love above cited, and Rom. 14. 2, 3, 4. and 15. 34. Matt. 25. 40. 1 Phil. 15, 16, 17.  
Let then the Scripture, Reason and Experience, the Petitions and Tears of the distressed entreat you to moderation, Rom. 3. 16. let the deformity and unreasonableness of the cruel maxims of persecution, bringing nothing but destruction and misery, be a determent to all tempestuous spirits; let the conscientious and godly-minded people out of the bowels of mercy and compassion solicit the Governors of the earth, and pray unto heaven for an impartial freedom.  
That eternal Majesty who raised so brave a fabric of such indisposed materials, that controls the waves, and checks the tumults of the people; let his mercy be implored for speedy succour to the distressed, for unity and charity to the divided: That the rod of Aaron may blossom, that the Tabernacle of David may be raised, that the subtle and envious may be caught in their own snare, that the result of all afflictions may be the greatening of his Glory and the exalting of his Sceptre.  
Amen.   
FINIS.