A DEFENCE of the Innocency of the LIVES, PRACTICE, AND DOCTRINE of the ENGLISH PRIESTS, JESUITS, and PAPISTS. relating to the Crimes of MURDER and TREASON, unjustly charged on them by E. C. in his NARRATIVE Wherein are discovered His Grosse Mistakes, His wilful Falsifications, His shameful Falshoodes, and His groundless unjust Accusations OF THE ENGLISH PAPISTS. In malâ Causâ non possunt alìter: sed quis coegit eos malam causam habere? Agust. A bad cause, (such is the charging Innocent Persons with grievous crimes) cannot be better managed: But what forced them to undertake such a bad cause? ANSWER: Odio habuerunt me gratis. Joan. 15.25. They hate the Mystical Body of CHRIST, without any cause at all. Permissu Superiorum. 1680. THE PREFACE. THE Narrative, which I here examine in its design is like the rest of the Libels, which have of late appeared with that title, but is far different in the means it makes use of, to compass it. All conspire to persuade the world, that Catholics are not fit to be permitted in any Government, by reason of the Designs contrary to them, which we drive on. But the first Narratives differre from this, that those alleged several pretended Treasons of Papists them alive, either committed, or designed in our days, in the presence of those Informers, and which might have ruined Church, and state had they not been prevented by the seasonable discovery of those villainies: so they were made up of personal Acts either done, or designed, as was pretended, by Papists, then alive: and which therefore were justly charged on them, if the Informations were true. But that plea being evidently baffled by the many contradictions, and improbabilities it contained, this Narrative arraigns' the English Catholics in another way, charging them with what its Author thought blame-worthy in any Professor of the same Religion, how distant soever he was from English Catholics, both in place where, and time when he lived. To this intent he takes the Liberty to range over all ages, and Countries, where Catholic Religion hath been professed; and if in this, or any former age, in Spain, or Italy, France, Portugal, or Germany he finds an indiscreet Schooleman, a Choleric Pope, or a Passionate Prince, Writ, Speak, or Act reprehensibly, all that is charged upon the English catholics in this Libel. So what the D. de Alva did in the Low-countries, what Lewis VIII. in Languedoc, and what S. Gregory the great writ above a thousand years ago to Phocas the Emperor, all these, I say, and many more serve to increase the indightment drawn up against us in this wise Narrative. Here we see this our Friend hath opened a way to find matter enough to charge us with. But with what colour of justice can any of th●se illegal actions (suppose them such) be charged on us, who have no more hand in them, then in the Actions of the Cham of Tartary, or the Great Mogul, or those of Marius, and Sylla, seeing these were dead we were borne, so was Lewis VIII. and S. Gregory; and with the D. de Alva we had no more communication, then with the great Mogul, or the Cham With what Topicke then can we be made answerable for those faults, of which we knew nothing, unless this worthy person thinks, we could know, before we had any Being What Innocency can be proof, when it comes to be tried as ours is? We were first charged with personal Actions, as actually and personnally plotting against his sacred Majesty's life and government. The falsity of this charge being made evident, whereas we should be acquitted, a new endightment is drawn up against us by E. C. containing all the faults, he had read, or feigned of the Catholics of what soever country, or age: all which he hath deposed in this Narative. Why so? he considers all Catholics that are, or have been, as one Mass of perdition, one Reprobate Person, whereof each part is made answeareable for the bad Actions of the whole, and of each other part of it. How hard soever it be for any Innocency to stand such afiery Ordeale, yet ours hath stood this, and either the virtue of past and foreign Papists hath been so wonderful, or his Blindness so great, that all which Histories of past times, or remote parts afforded him, could not satisfy his hatred of us, nor complete his charge against us, without helping it out, with new crimes of his own feighning. Witness what he citys page 6. out of Suarez, that it is lawful for any man to kill an excommunicated King. Which he relates as Suarez his Doctrine: whereas in Suarez after those words, immediately follows this censure upon them: This position is most false. Haec Propositio falsissima est. You see Suarez doth absolutely condemn that very Doctrine, which he is accused to have taught. Again page 9 he assures, that none but moneyed men can get absolution from their fins in the Roman Church. Peccatorum venia non nisi nummatis impenditur. A thing so false, that I defy any man living to produce one single instance of a man, who upon score of Poverty was refused absolution. And in all our Churches our Confession seats are as free and open to ●●us●, as to Croesus. More examples of the sincerity of this tale teller will occur in the following Treatise. These two will suffice for a show of his Art. Recrimination is a familiar, ordinary, and obvious Apology: yet I think it the least satisfactory, & worst of all as being fit to multiply the number of guilty Persons, then prove the Innocency of any one. For it doth not follow, that M. Whitebreade was Innocent, if it should be proved, that Oates hath always had an aversion to the Royal family. Or that the Papists are loyal subjects, because the Wicleffists held seditious Doctrines. Yet I have been persuaded not to omit that way of answering too, to oblige the Protestants, if possible, to combat wicked maxims in their own, as well as in Papists, & to move them to some compassion of humane frailties, to which they are much more subject than we. For two very material differences are observable betwixt the things they charge Papists with, & what the Protestants are accused off. The first: that those charged on us are consistant with Authority. For what bad effect could those words of a Pope Spoken in passion have: Either I will have Philip's Crown, or he shall have my Mitre? They forewarned the King of the danger, by discovering such a bad talon in the Pope against him. And moreover probably the Pope himself having slept upon it, was ashamed of such a passionate expression so unbeseeming his Dignity. Whereas the Doctrines we charge on Protestants, are settled seditious maxims, which lay the Axe at the root of all Authority Civil, and Ecclesiastical. For example that of the Wicleffists; no man in state of mortal sin retains any Authority. What King can be sure of his crown, what Bishop of his mitre where this Doctrine prevails. Another difference is, that we have long since rejected these Doctrines (if there were ever any such amongst us) and I challenge Protestants to show any Papist alive, who doth teach them. Whereas the Protestants retain the same unretracted, uncondemned to this moment, & upon occasions spread them a new As that seditious maxim of the Wicleffists, (of which I have spoken.) which Oats hath printed in the Dedicatory of his Narrative to the King himself. Whence follows a Third difference: that what is found blame worthy in our Predecessors cannot be laid to our charge, seeing we neither practice, nor teach it; nay our Prelates have condemned it, as we shall see at the end of this Preface; whereas Protestants are answerable for the doctrines of their Fore fathers, and all the pernicious consequences flowing from them, because they never condemned, or disowned them; but do still approve of them. Wherefore seeing nothing can be with justice charged on English Catholics, for whom alone I plead: seeing their life is so clear from sin, & their Doctrine from error, that neither can be blamed without a calumny, nor our reputation wounded but through the side of Truth: Let Oats & Prance, Euerard & Dugdale, Smith, & jenison, Bolron, dangerfield, & E. C. (one for any thing I know like the rest) multiply their Narratives as often as they please, & stuff them with calumnies to as great a bulk, as their little wit, & great malice will permit, the only effect of those Libels will be to cloud our Reputation from the eyes of the people for a time, & give them some bad impressions of us: yet our Innocency will disperse those mists, & shine so brightly, as to be conspicuous to the whole world. And the People itself whom their Ministers seduce with these Fables, & disingenuous Arts, will give to us, & to the Libelers their due; to us, in acquitting us of the crimes charged unjustly upon us; & to them, by finding them guilty of uncharitable lies, at the private tribunal of each one's Judgement. It is uncertain when we may expect to see an end of these disputes betwixt our Innocency, and their malice. Nothing put a stop to the false accusations of the Author of the first & greatest Narrative, but his loss of credit, by the open discovery of his lies. A like loss of credit may happily put astop to the pens of these Libelers. And I doubt not, but the better part of our nation will be glad to see Truth asserted against Falshood, & Innocency triumphing over Malicious slanders. Of the Author of this Narrative I will only lay, that if he had not Honesty to speak only the truth, he had wit enough to conceal his name, that he might preserve his credit, notwithstanding all his lies. Now because I shall have occasion to cite in our Defence hereafter some Decrees of Popes (to which all Catholics submit) in our vindication, I will here give an extract of such Propositions condemned in them which relate to MURDER, & equivocation. Out of the Decree of Allexandre VII. Anno 1665. 24. Septembris. On that day, 28. propositions were condemned under pain of Excommunication reserved to his Holiness, upon any that should practise, teach, or hold lawful any of them, or speak of them otherwise, then condemning, or impugning them. Amongst these the seventeenth is as follows: 17. Est licitum Religioso, vel Clerico Calumniatorem gravia crimina de se, vel de suâ Religione spargere minantem occidere, quando alius modus defendendi non suppetit: uti suppetere non videtur, si calumniator sit paratus vel ipsi Religioso, vel ejus Religioni publicè, & coram gravistimis viris praedicta impingere nisi occidatur. 18. Licet interficere falsum Accusatorem, falsos testes, ac etiam judicem, à quo iniqua ●ertò imminet sententia, si alia viâ non potest Innocens damnum evitare. In English thus: 17. It is lawful for a Religious man, or Clergy man, to to kill a Calumniator, who threatens to accuse him, or his order of some grievous crimes, in case there be no other means to defend himself; & there seems to be no other means, when the Sycophant is ready to accuse him before Persons of quality, if he be not killed out of hand. 18. It is lawful to kill a false Accuser, false witnesses, & even the Judge, by whom certainly the Accused shall shortly be condemned, if the Jnnocent can by no other means avoid the damage. Out of the Decree of JNNOCENT XI. published 2. March 1679. stilo no. On that day Sixty five Propositions were condemned, & in alike manner forbidden under pain of Excommunication. Here I give those, which I shall cite hereafter. 26. Si quis vel solus vel coram alijs, sive interrogatus, sive propriâ sponte, sive recreationis causâ, sive quocunque alio fine juret, se non fecisse aliquid, quod reverâ fecit, intelligendo intra se aliquid aliud, quod non fecit, vel aliam diem ab eâ, in quâ fecit, vel quodvis aliud additum verum, reverâ non mentitur, nec est periurus. 27. Causa justa utendi his amphibologijs est, quoties id necessarium, aut utile est ad salutem corporis, honorem, res familitares tuendas, vel ad quemlibet alium virtutis actum, ita ut veritatis occultatio censeatur tunc expediens, & studiosa, 30. Fas est viro honorato occidere invasorem, qui nititur calumniam infer, si aliter haec ignominia vitari nequit: jd m quoque direndum, si quis impingat alapam, vel fuste percutiat, & post impactam alapam vel ictum fustis fugiat. 31. Regulariter occidere possum furem pro conservatione unius aurei. In English thus. 26. If any man either alone, or in presence of others, either upon examination, or of this own accord, or for divertissement, or for any other intent, swears he did not do, what he really did, imagining he did some other thing, or some other day than he did it on, or any other truth, that man doth neither lie, nor is perjured. 27. A just cause to use Equivocation, is when it is necessary, or useful to preserve our Health, our Honour, or our goods, or for any other Act of virtue; so that when these occur, it may be thought expedient, & laudable to conceal the Truth 30. It is lawful for a man of Honour, to kill an aggressor, who endeavours to slander him, if he cannot some other way avoid the disgrace. The same is to be said, if the aggressor give him a box oth'eart, or cudgel him, & having done so, runs away. 31. I may ordinarily kill a man, to presence the value of a crown. These propositions concerning Equivocation, & Murder, are in alike manner, condemned, & the greatest Ecclesiastical Censure annexed to those who teach, practice, or defend any one of them, as probable. And there is no English Catholic, Jesuit, or other, who doth not submit to this Decree. As all English Catholics, particularly jesuits are ready to declare publicly when it shall be legally or by Public Authority required of them. CHAPTER I. Reflections on the Preface. Where of the pretended danger hanging over libelers against Catholics. E C: Being very sensible how much this small treatise will expose me to the industrious malice, & hatred of all stiff, & positive Papists _____ My chief business was to find out one, that would boldly stand up with me in the same defence, and be ready to justify the truth & honest sincerity of these following sheets. Answer: It is a common Topick for all who accuse Catholecks, to increase the Odium against them, & recommend their own zeal for the common good to the Public benevolence by representing the dangers, they expose themselves to, by discovering the faults, the conspiracies, the murders, the Treasons of the Papists: As if the Protection of the Law, the security of the public Peace, the vigilancy of Magistrates, & the number of Libelling Ministers, & factious & malicious scribblers, were not a sufficient Protection against a few disarmed men, & for the most part Prisoners; but either by Authority a guard must be appointed for every libeler, or else by their whining complaints of imaginary dangers, they would engage others without Authority in any illegal Association for mutual defence. I leave to our venerable judges to declare whither this stand with the law: and his Majesty's most honourable privy Council to consider whither it do not endanger the Public Peace. Whence this Panic Fear, of an inconsiderable number of men, all disarmed, & most of them either imprisoned, or banished? From a bad conscience, which in the midst of Peace, & the greatest security always thinks of dangers. Cum Pax sit, ipse semper insidias suspicatur. Job. 15.21. And the wicked fly, when no body pursues them. Prou. 28.1. This is the miserable condition of sinners, says S. Chrisost. Hom. 8. ad Pop. Antioch. They suspect all things, they fear shadows, they tremble at the least noise; no body whispers, but they think it is against them: no body moves, but they surmise it is to attack them. Such is the nature of sin: it discovers itsself, althô none else dream of it, arraings the guilty person without any other witnesses, & condemns him at the Tribunal of his own conscience from which sentence there is no appeal. Hence he flies, though no body pursues him, thinking that every man he sees or fancies, is his Executioner. Is not this a Picture of these Champions of the Protestant Church & Accusers of Papists? Is not this danger alleged framed by their own guilty conscience, which accuses, arraings, judges, & condemns them, & then represents all men as designed to execute the sentence, as Cain said, all who find me, will kill me? Gen. 4.14. Yet you offer at a reason, & here it is. E. C. The Doctrines of the Church of Rome are bloody ones, & such as are directly contrary to the word of God, & the constant sense of the Church of all ages, & if blindly followed, what can we ever expect, but Rebellion, Murder Bloodshed, & all manner of confusion? Answ. It is easy to say Our Doctrines are contrary to those of the ancient Church but impossible to prove it, because it is evidently false. They are bloody ones, say you. I know no doctrines defended by the Church of Rome against Protestants, but those contained in the Profession of Faith of Pius FOUR show one bloody doctrine contained in it, & I will yield the cause. If you can show none there, this Assertion of yours is a great slander. You produce indeed some pieces out of private Authors, with what sincerity, we will hereafter examine. Now suppose what you say be true, and they really held those Doctrines, why should their singular sentiments be the Doctrine of the Church, when others as learned, & pious as they, say the contrary, & the chief Prelates of the Church condemn those opinions? Is there any law which makes each English Catholic answerable for every Action, or writing, or word of every Sicilian & Spaniard? If not, we may be Innocent, hate Murder, & abhor Treason, althô some of those said the contrary, if they did say so. Of which hereafter. E. C. As uncontrollable Dominion, & Rule is the ground, & bottom of all their Designs, if ever they come to attain it, KING, Lords, & Commons, should be the meanest of their Subjects, & the whole Kingdom be as one general Flame. Answ. were this spoken in a Nation, where Catholic Religion were utterly unknown, you might hope to frighten People from it: but to say it in England, where during its prevailing there appeared no symptom of such dismal effects, & to English, who, know it still prevails in their neighbouring countries, without those mischiefs, is impudent. What Kings more absolute in their Dominions, than the Most Christian, & Catholic Monarches? what subjection are they, and their Nobles, & Commons brought under? And as for our own Kings, when were they more honoured and obeyed, and their subjects at home by loved by their Friends, & Allies, & feared by their ennemies abroad, then when Papists? Popery instructs all to give to God, what is Gods, & to Caesar, what is his: It trains up her children in due obedience to spiritual, & temporal Magistrates. Whereas your Reformation first quite cast off the yoke of the Ecclesiastical Superior, & by degrees so weakened that of the Civil Authority, by perpetual en croachments upon its Prerogative, that it broke it too. And then you sent your King to the grave with the formalities of justice, and pulled the Lords out of their seats into the lowest ranks of the People, annulling all the Privileges of Peers, & equalling them with the meanest of the Commons. This done how mercifully you dealt with Lords, Gentlemen, & Commons, appears by the history of those times, & many still alive can witness. Show such an example of exorbitant Tyranny in any Catholic nation. E. C. We must not say it is only the Duty of Kings, Princes, & Governors, but of every particular man in his way & measure, to lend his helping hand to the furthering of so good a work, & to do what he can for the mantaining of that Religion & worship of God in its Primitive Purity, which Christ & his Apostles taught. Answer: your words here seem as smooth as oil; yet they are Darts, Darts shot at the very hart of Government: for they encouraged and authorise each private man to meddle with the Church Discipline, & order, even the Altar, according as he fancies the ancient worship of God, in its Primitive Purity: to which People are prone enough of themselves. Every one is willing to defer to the Physician, to the Lawyer, & even to the smith, or Cobbler in their own Art: yet in matter of Church, or state, every one thinks himself wiser, than those who sit at the Helm, & sufficiently qualifyed to correct them: & being once imbued with this opinion, that it is the Duty of each Private man to lend a hand, to further the work of the Lord, & maintain the Church in its Purity, as established by Christ, it necessarily follows, that each one presume to direct his Superior, to what he likes, take upon him to govern, whose rank is to be governed, & by that means he will break the order established, disorder the Counsils of the Magistrate, hinder his Actings, & disturb, or dissolve the Government. No way more Innocent for subjects to represent their minds to superiors, then by Petitions: yet these are declared seditious by the Judges, & found such by Practice, because the People are taught (as the late King of Glorious memory said) first to Petition, then to Protest, then to dictate, at last to command, & over aye the Parliament, & all lawful Authority. To prevent which mischiefs to the Public, with great reason Petitious have been of late forbidden by Proclamation. How much more Peaceable are the ways of Catholics, who are taught to leave the care of providing for public security in Church, & state to the lawful superiors of both, & to obey them in all things, where there appears no sin? E. C. My Lord of Shaftesbury, your Pious & Constant Zeal for the Protestant Religion, hath ever been very remarkable; & it is so much the more improved now, as your Lordship sees it in a most desperate, & languishing condition. Ans: what you mean by Protestant Religion, I know not: (it is as hard to frame a Definition of it, as to make a gown for the moon, in the Fable) & I believe you know as little what has been, or is that noble man's Faith, or if he hath any. By what I hear of his past life, I dare say, that if the English Protestant Bishops take strict informations of it, they will scarce canonize him. And why you should represent the Protestant Religion, in such a gasping condition, I know not. Papists cannot have reduced it so low, who are by it reduced almost to nothing: their Priests executed, imprisoned, or fled: if any remain, to conceal themselves from your Argos eyes, they are forced to lie hidden, as the Primitive Christians, in dens, caves, & woods: their nobility imprisoned, their gently banished, their houses ransacked, their estates confiscated, & you poor remainder of them scarce secure of one day's, nay one hours liberty. And what hurt can such a shattered, defeated, despicable body of men do to the Triumphant Protestant Church? This representation of its dismal condition, is but your old stratagem, to stir up the rabble to sedition, to prevent its utter ruin, which by such tragical bewailings you effected in 42. & now endeavour it again. For before you told your Reader, that each private man is bound to lend a hand to hold up the Ark, when it is in danger of falling: now you say, it is in most imminent danger. What follows, but that at this time each private man is bound to fall to work to protect Protestant Religion, & do what he can to maintain it? Which if it be not seditious, I know not what is. I observe generally in all your Libels against Catholics, that in your Prefaces, (which are writ with most Art, & red with most Attention) you always have some desperate fling at the Present Government: as if your prime design were to ruin that, which breares the first brunt in all you attacks. I think without casting a figure, we may guess at your intentions. E. C. I can no better acquit myself of my Duty (to preserve the life of gasping Protentantisme) then by pulling of the mask, & rectifying the judgements of those that are not too much to the Roman communion, in convincing them of the cruelty, & Bloodiness of their Doctrines, & Principles. Ans: It seems if others neglect theirs, you will comply with your Duty, & here you give us a summary of your whole book: which contains a great charge against us, if true; & if false, as great a charge against yourself, who publish such a calumny, & against your Church, which approves, & applauds it. I hope to make it evident that you pull no mask off of Papists, but which you put on them, & which they detest as much, as you or any Protestant. E. C. I could wish, that care might be taken, that Papists children should not suck in this so dangerous a Religion to the Peace of the state; with their Milk, but that they should be baptised after our way, & educated in the Principles of Protestantisme. Ans: here we see your own meekness, whilst you reproach Cruelty to us: for althô the laws enacted against us, & of late executed with such severity, be said by strangers to be written, like those of Draco, with Blood, yet they do not satisfy you, who require a further law, to take away all our children to be bred up in Protestantism. A thing so contrary to the law of nature, & so barbarous, that it never was practised; not even in Rome itself, upon the jews. Thus you enhance the Honour & credit of your Religion, which is made up of Love, & charity, & a sweet condescension, & peaceableness of mind to all Men. Which are your words. You affect the voice of jacob; but we seel the hands of Esau. CHAPTER 2. English Catholics do not hold Murder Lawful. E. C. I cannot but wonder, they (the Papists) should be to far lost so all Humanity, & sense of Pity, as to hold that most damnable Tenet of Murder, & Treason, not only to be lawful; but in many, if not most cases, to be necessary, commendable, & meritorious. Now that they hold these four Points in Murder & Treason I shall prove it palpably upon them, from the Testimony of their own writings. Answer: you may with reason wonder at the Inhumamanity of English Papists, if this charge be true: & we may wonder you should have lost all shame of men, if it be false. The charge is general, & involues all Catholics: so it must be false & , if any be innocent: for two contradictions cannot be true: viz: All Papists hold Murder, & Treason lawful, necessary, etc. And: some Papists have no such opinions of Murder, and Treason. Yet both Propositions are your own: the first, in the words above cited: the second, page 5. where you have these words: I will not be so adventurous, as to say or think, there are none amongst them of a less, savage Temper, & disposition. Which are contradictory to the general charge, as owning some Papists to be free from those opinions of Murder, & Treason. We seldom find any of the Protestant Ministers speak without contradictions, when Papists, or Popery is the subject of their discourse: because there are two contrary inclinations in their wills, the one of love to Truth, the other of hatred to Popery & Papists. The first is so natural to all men, that they cannot totally free themselves from it: Quid amplius desiderat anima, quam veritatem? Aug. tract. 26. in joan. The second is so tenaciously retained, for what motive I know not, but leave to them to declare) that it works commonly more violently, & controls the love of Truth, althô it cannot quite banish it out of their Hearts: for this finds some occasions to make them give Glory to God, & acknowledge the innocency of Catholics, which the other represents as the worst of men. I will prove this out of this very pamphlet. Page 9 & 10. I find these, words: Are they, the Papists, not men like the rest of Mankind? Have they not the same Passion, & Tempers, the same Impulses of Tendernesses, & pity in their Nature with others of different judgements, & persuasions?— Take them out of that Character (their Religion) & they are in all things like unto the rest of their Fellow-Creatures, & Brethren; their minds are Peaceable, their Deportment affable & Generous & the Gros of their Tempers full of a sweet, & endearing Complacency. Yet Page 17. you say— Their Tempers are Fire & Toe. And in the very same place, where you commend our natures & Tempers so much, you say: Their Religion forces them to put off their Humanity, & makes them so bloody minded as therein to be far worse than beasts that perish. And a little after: No Tigers are more fell, & savage than they in their Natures: they could cut off the whole race of the ●an kind:— they could call down fire from Heaven, nay the very stames of Hell on all such, as would not bend the knee to their BAAL, & adjust their Faith & Consciences to the wild Caprichio of their Idolatrous Enthusiasms. How with Truth to reconcile these different chatacters of us, I cannot tell. That our Minds should be Peaceable; & yet we be bloody minded: we like the rest of Mankind & yet have put off our Humanity our Deportments affable & generous; & yet we more fell, & savage, than the Tigers. Our Tempers full of a sweet & endearing Complacency; & yet our Tempers should be fire & toe. In reality as these contradictions cannot stand together, so they discover clearly those two contrary Passions in your breast of love to Truth, & hatred to Papists. The first speaks advantageously of us, the second blames us: this condemns, that absolues us. The first is evidently true, & visible to all, who converse with us; the second surmised only by the Ministers. Just so the Pagans persecuted the Christians of their times. Caius is a good man; but his Religion spoils all: Titius is a Peaceable man; but he is a Christian: such & such are civil, & honest good natured men; but they devour Children, commit incest with their Mothers, & sisters, etc. Laudant, quae sciunt, said T●rtul. Apol. c. 3. vituperant quae ignorant: & id quod sciunt, eo quod ignorant corrumpunt. Cum sit iustius occulta de manifestis praeiudicare quam manifesta de occultis praedamnare. They commend what they know certainly & find by experience; they blame what they surmise, & feign of us: and they bereave us of the good name due to our known virtues, by reproaching unto us such unknown vices. Whereas in justice they should, rather judge favourably of our known hidden actions by reason of our public virtuous lives, then condemn our virtues, for faults only surmised. Thus Tertullian. Whence it appears that in your calumnies you imitate the Pagans; & we follow the example of the Primitive Christians in our Apologies. You say we allow of Murder & Treason: we declare that we detest them: & we prove this detestation of them from our Divine & Humane, Civil, & Ecclesiastical laws. The command not to kill, is extant in our Bibles, our Canons, & our Codes, we teach it to children in our Catechisms, to Scholars in our lessons, & to all men in our Sermons. The Catholic Church punish Murder, with Irregularity, Catholic States with Death, & Catholic Faith, with Hell fire, if it not be repent Nay voluntarily exposing a man's self to a probable danger of Murder, in a Duel, is Death without remission in France, where Catholic Religion still prevails, & jesuits are to be found. Lastly our English laws against Murder were made by our Catholic ancestors. What greater evidence can you give of a Detestation of Murder, & horror of Blood, than we have given, & do stillgive? You ground your accusation chiefly on the say of some writers, whose sentiments shall be examined in the next Chapter: where I doubt not to make it evident that you impose on them things, which they never held. Till then (to show how unsufficient your proofs are) I will gratis admit, that they truly taught, what you falsely say they did. What is that to the English Catholics, (whom you accuse, & I defend, who never read their works, know nothing of their Doctrine, & (probably) never heard their names? will you condemn all the Apostles, for one judas: all the Corinthians for one Incestuous man, all the Deacons, for one Nicolas: all the neophits, for one Simon: all in the Ark for one Cham: all men for one Cain, & all Angels for one Lucifer? you can hear (says S. Austin Epist. 137.) your Neighbour's wife hath broken her Faith to him, without comdemning your Mothers or sisters married, or turning your own wives out of doors, & though your friend's son take bad courses, yet you do not brain your own, nor present them as Felons at the Assizes. Why should then the English catholics be arraigned as holding Murder lawful, because Lessius at Loven, or Amieus at Gretz, taught it, althô they never heard any thing of the Doctrine, nor men, nor towns where they resided. You will say, it may be they know, & approve it (that is the most your can draw out of this argument) & I answer it may be, & certainly is most commonly so, that they neither approved, nor knew of it. What ground here for arraignment? In Treason the will is reputed for the Fact, & both punished alike: not so in Felony. Would you have Catholics condemned on much less ground than a will to Murder, for a thought of it? nay for the possibility of a thought? For all you can infer out of the sentiments of those Authors, is that it is possible, English Catholics may have the like sentiments. Again: if there be such a communication of bad works amongst all Catholics, that each one must be answerable for all the faults of any other, althô unknown to him (for this you must say if you say any thing) why is there not a like communication of good? Lessius say you allows Murder, to save a man's honour: another condemns this. Why shall not this man's writing against it be as efficacious to absolve me, as the others writing for it, to condemn me: when I never gave you any cause to suspect I frame my conscience either in speculation, or practice, rather according to the allower, than the condemner of Murder. And which is yet more convincing, not only private Persons have declared their dislike of these Doctrines; but several universities, & Bishops have censured them, & the Pope hath condemned them. I say those very Propositions which you cite out of Molina, Lessius, & Amicus. That of Amicus, that it is Lawful for an Ecclesiastic to kill a Detractor, was condemned by Alexander VII. 24. Sept. 1665. Those of Molina, & Lessius, that it is lawful to kill to save our honour, by Innocent XI. 2. March 1679. which decrees are enforced with an Excommunication for all such as dare disobey. Now I suppose you know, that all true Catholics obey the Pope's decrees in Doctrinal matters; & how ever they take the freedom to judge of things, before any Declaration of the Church, or her head under Christ on Earth, yet when any decree is published, we all lay down our private sentiments, & frame both Actions, & conscience according to that venerable rule. With what justice then can you charge any with those Doctrines which we all do renounce, and are bound to do so, under pain of Excommunication? Lastly I appeal to the Experience of English Protestants, who have traveled: let them say, whither in Flanders, France, or even Rome itself they found the Papists such Blood thirsty Ruffians, as you describe them. A Minister, who had preached in England, that the Pope was the Beast of the Apocalypse, had seven heads, & ten horns, coming afterwards to Rome, & being admitted to the presence of the Pope, who had heard of it, the Pope said to him: Come hither son, view me well, see that I have but one head, & never a horn at all: look upon my head, (which he then uncovered) & feel it, & believe your own eyes, that I am no such a monster, as you in England describe me. This was Vrbaen VIII. Another of the same tribe, took the liberty in Rome amongst the Natives to declaim against the Pope: who hearing of it, sent one to advice him to be more wary in his words: for althô, said he, there shall be no public procedure against you, yet I cannot assure, but that you may receive some displeasure from some of my subjects. As for jesuits, whom you represent as most addicted to Murdering Protestants, I never heard any complaint of Incivilities received from them, and I have heard several travellers & Merchants acknowledge favours received by their means even in Spain, Italy, & the Indies. Mr. Oats, your Oracle, hath done nothing in England, which he did not design at S. Omers: & with his usual discretion discovered there that black hellish design. Mr. Whitebread then Provincial knew this very well, & spoke of it with much anguish to some alive, who can witness it, foreseeing what mischief might be feared, when that man's malicious lying humour should join with the Popular Odium of Catholics, & particularly jesuits'. Then, or never there was occasion to practice upon him that case of Amicus, had the jesuites approved it. Yet no such thing was thought on: the Provincial ordered him a decent suit of , and four pounds sterling to bear his charges to London, & sent him away with all possible charity, to see whither he could by that sweeten his malignity, & overcome Evil with good. Rom 12.21. This, this is the way, which jesuits', use towards their enemies: thi● they learn our of the Gospel, & their Rules: this their Superiors recommend, this they practice, to heap hot Coals upon their Enemies, not to burn the least hair of their heads; but to warm their hearts with the fire of the love of God, which will introduce that of their Neighbour. And that the English Catholics are bred up with the same peaceable sentiments, appears by their Patiented suffering whatsoever Oats, & his Associates have acted in pursuance of his Majesty's order, but beyond his commission, & contrary to his merciful intentions: althô their cruel Actions have been accompanied with insulting barbarous words, which are much more grievous to a generous mind, than the Actions themselves. All which have met with no other return, but prayers for his Sacred Majesty, & even for those instruments of God's wrath upon the Nation. I say the Nation, which in reality suffers more, than Catholics, (who seem the greatest, & only sufferers in this Tragedy) for, Non qui patitur: sed qui facit iniuriam miser est. I now appeal to yourself, sir, what hath appeared in all this sharp & tedious trial of the Catholics, which doth confirm the Character, you give of them; viz: that their Tempers are Fire, & Toe that they have cast off their Humanity are more fell & savage than Tigers, worse than the Beast which perish, etc. To confute these Impudent calumnies, nothing is necessary, but to look on our lives. Apologias non scribimus, sed vivimus. CHAPTER 3. The jesuits cited by E. C. do not teach Murder to be lawful. I have hitherto admitted your assertion to be true that those jesuites, you cite, did teach Murder to be Lawful, yet that the English Catholics were unconcerned in it: & that there is not the least colour of Reason, or justice, to charge it on them. I now come to examine that assertion, & if your proofs fail you there too, than I hope you will own, that your Bill ought not to be found. E. C. pag. 2. Lessius de Just. l. 2. c. 9 d. 12. n. 79 says that h● who hath received a box o'th' Ear, may be permitted to strike again, for the avoiding of infamy & to that end may immediately put buck the Injury, & that with his sword, etiam cum gladio. Answer 1. those are not the words of Lessius; but taken by him out of Victoria de jure Belli n. 8. Ans. 2. Lessius condemns that opinion: for he says n. 80. Haec sententia non videtur in praxi facile permittenda. This opinion is not easily to be followed: & gives two very good reasons why it is not to be practised. Answ. 3. It doth not appear out of those words, that the Author of them speaks of killing, neither doth the use of the sword signify that: seeing a sword may be used 1. for our defence. 2. to fright an adversary. 3. to beat him, Au plat d'Espée say the french, 4. to give some slight wound not mortal, either with point, or edge. Answ. 4. Whosoever taught that opinion, & what ever his meaning was, all Catholikcs, & particularly jesuits' renounce it: for Innocent XI. expressly condemned it. And all the jesuites in the world submit to that decree. E. C. Page 3. Lessius l. 2. c. 9 d. 12. n. 77. says: If you endeavour to ruin my reputation by opprobrious speeches, spoken before persons of Honour, & that I cannot avoid them other ways then by killing you, I may: nay though the crime you lay to my charge be such as I am really guilty of, it being supposed to be so secretly committed that you cannot discover it according to the ways of justice. Answ. 1. Lessius hath not those words, nor any bearing the same sense in that place, nor any where else in his whole works. And I challenge you, & all your brethren to disprove this, by showing them. Answ. 2. Lessius in that place speaks of an opinion allowing a man of honour to kill a rascal, who cudgels, or buffets him, if there be no other means to avoid the disgrace. And afterwards, n. 78. he condemns that opinion: Haec sententia non est sequenda, says he: this opinion ought not to be followed. For it ought to suffice, that verbal injuries be put by with words, & that injurious Actions may be punished by course of justice. Thus Lessius. Answ. 3. All Catholics condemn that opinion, it having been condemned by Innocent XI. Thus much for Lessius. The next jesuit you produce is Molina. E. C. page 2. by Molina the life of a man is reckoned at six or seven ducats: & he assures us, that it is lawful to kill him for it, nay though he, who hath taken them, fly for it: adding further in the same place, that he durst not charge that man with any sin, that kills another, who had taken from him a thing of the value of a crown, or less, unius aurei, vel minoris adhuc valoris. Ans. 1. If he reckons a Man's life at 6. or 7. Dukats, he rates it much higher than our English Laws, who reckon it at 13. pence-half penny. Answ. 2. you confound two cases in Molina, one of a thief who comes to rob you. The other of one who hath rob you, & runs away with your purse, or goods. As to the first, he says, that if a thief sets upon you, & threatens to kill you, if you do not deliver your money (be it but a Crown or less) that you may defend your life, & money; & if in the fight, you chance to kill him, he dares not condemn you. I do not think our laws in England would hang one, who should in that manner kill a Hygh-way man on the road. If they would, they are very favourable to theives. To the second case he answears, that if the thief run away with a considerable sum (five ducats he esteems as nothing) & there be little hopes to recover it, having called in vain to him, to restore the goods, it is lawful to shoot at him, yet so as to avoid giving him a mortal wound. Semper consulendum est, ne proximus occidatur, are his words. Then he says, if by chance the thief die of that wound, non auderem condemnare. I dare not condemn the Man as a Murderer, to the pains appointed by law to such. This I speak not approving the opinion; but only to explicate his meaning, & to show how you have wronged him 1. in confounding two different cases, & 2 in misrepresenting his meaning in both. But as to the thing, or opinion itself. Answ. 3. both I, & all Papists detest the opinion, & condemn the practice of it, in obedience to the Decree often cited of Innocent XI. E. C. Pag. 3. Amicus tom. 5. Disp. 36. n. 118. It is Lawful for an Ecclesiastic, or a Religious Man, to kill a Detractor, that but threatens to diuulge th' scandalous crimes of his Community, when there is no other means left to himder him from doing of it, as if he be ready to scatter his Calumnies, if not suddenly dispatched out of the way. Answer 1. Amicus his fault in advancing that Proposition was great: althô he corrected the malignity of it, by adding that he did affirm nothing; but left his Discourse to the judgement of the discreet Reader. Answ. 2. in the Antwerp Edition of Amicus an. 1650. made by jesuites, that whole discourse was left out: & by order of the General of the jesuites, it was blotted out of all copies of the first edition in the Libraries of the jesuites. By both which actions the jesuites have sufficiently declared their disowning of that Doctrine. Answ. 3. that same Proposition was condemned by Alexander VII. on the 24. Septemb. 1665. from which time, all Catholics, have been obliged under pain of Excommunication to disown that Doctrine. Thus much in vindication of the three jesuites, you cite: out of which three things are evident. The 1. that not one of them taught the Doctrine you charge them with. Two positively teach the contrary: & the third leaves the judgement to the Reader. The 2. that if they had erred, no English Catholic would be concerned in it, 1. because they knew nothing of the Doctrine. & 2. because they believe, & practise the quite contrary. The 3. no Catholic in the world can be charged with those doctrines, they being condemned by the Church, & all Catholics owning obedience to those Decrees. E. C. Soto says in defence of his person, a man assaulted may kill another: & says, that to hold it not Lawful in such a case, (though to the ruin of the man's soul to boot) is both to pervert the law of nature, & to render the sweet, & easy yoke of Christ intolerable. Answ. Soto l. 5. de Justi: q 1. ar. 8. proposes this question: Wither it be lawful to kill another in my own defence. And he answers 1. When I can sane my own life without killing the aggressor, I must not kill him. 2 When I cannot escape without killing the Aggressor, I may kill him. 3. It is never lawful for any private man to intent the Death of another. That being permitted only to absolute Princes, & Soweraign states, & by their order to their officers, soldiers in time of war, & Executioners. What displeases you in this. Doth not our English Laws permit a man to kill an aggressor, who h●th driven him to a wall, so as he can not save his life by flight? & what is that, but Soto's 2. conclusion? Then he proposes this objection against his 2. Conclusion. The aggressor is in state of mortal sin, because he seeks my life. Wherefore if I kill him, he will be damned, as dying in mortal sin. Now I am bound to lose my life rather than his soul: ergo, I must let myself be killed. And he says, if this reason were good, it were never lawful for any man to defend his life from any Aggressor, who presseth beyond all possibility of escape. Which duty, to let myself be killed, being contrary to the law of nature, so favourable to Ruffians, & so hard for Innocent ●ersons, it would make the sweet yoke of Christ uneasy, & intolerable. To clear his meaning, I propose another case: suppose a Captain of one of his Majesty's ships, should scruple to shoot bullets at the Algerins, as thinking it more conformable to the law of Christ, to let his ship be taken then to save it by the Death, & Damnation of those Infidels. What answer would you E. C. give? that he ought to yield his ship to avoid the loss of those souls: & that the law of Christ obliges to it? If so, I believe his Majesty will never appoint you to instruct his seamen. If you say, he may use such means as God, & his Prince have furnished him with for the defence of his ship, althô by that means some Algerins be killed, & their souls lost: for Christ's law would be intolerable to Absolute Powers, if it enjoined the contrary; if I say you answer so, you say as much as Soto says. Not to tyre my Reader with unecessary matter. & repetitions, I omit what you cite out of Navarre, Grassü, & Bonacina. One word suffices for all: either they truly approve of Murder, or they do not. If they do, we disown them: & so you have no right to charge their sentiments on us. CHAPTER 4. Protestants both teach, & practice sedition & Rebellion. IT is with the greatest reluctance imaginable that I rake in this kennel, whereof the fumes & stench is able to infect a People so susceptible of the infection as English are. It were to be wished these seditious maxims had never appeared in the world, or that upon their first appearance, that severity had been used on them, which the Roman Senate practised on Monsters, that they had been transported out of the fight of men, & butyed in perpetual oblivion. The G●nerals of the jesuites have often forbidden their subjects to treat of any of these seditious points, lest by writing of them, their memory might be preserved; which is always dangerous, when People are disposed to practise them. And I doubt not but experience will sh●w, that is the most prudent way, to prevent all mischief. Yet to comply with your importunity, I will follow & encounter you in this. I own that there have been excesses on both sides in their writers, whose zeal for the cause they embraced was greater, than their Discretion. Yet the fault is less in those who stand only for what was of old believed, and practised, then in those, who would have all things changed according to their fancy: & therefore the excesses on the Catholics side are more excusable: yet we shall find the Protestants more pragmatical, more refractory to Superiors, more violent, more seditious, & Rebellious, than Catholics without comparison. I will begin with your Doctrine, then pass to your practice. The root of all our seditious maxims is that detestable Proposition of your Patriarch Witlef, no Prince, nor Prelate, nor Bishop continues such in state of mortal sin. Council Constant. f. 8. of which Melanction said (Comment. in Polit.) Wicles caused much mischief, by teaching that those lose all Authority, who have not the holy Ghost. What Oats hath the impudence to say even to his Majesty is much worse, for he requires not only that Princes Live vertucusly, (that is have the Holy Ghost) but also punish all who do not, under pain of Deposition. Goodman in his Apology is of the same mind. Bad Princes according to the Law of God ought to be deposed, said he: & in case the Magistrates neglect to do their Duty, the People have as free liberty to do it, as if there were no Magistrates at all, & in those circumstances of time, God enlargeth them with liberty to use the sword. Caluin in 6. Dan. v. 22. & 25. The Kings of the Earth do deprive themselves of Power, when they make head against the King of Heaven. Yea they are unworthy to be numbered amongst men: & therefore we are rather to spit in their faces, then to obey them. Knox: If Princes govern tyrannically against God, & his Truth, their subjects are absolved from their Oath of Fidelity. But is this freeing from their oath all? No: For Buccanan says: The common People have right to dispose of the sceptres of Kingdoms at their pleasure. Again: the People have Power to judge of the life of their Kings. Yet more: It were to be wished, that rewards were appointed for such as kill Tyrants, as there are for such as kill wolves. Goodman: Kings have right to reign from the People who upon occasion can also revoke it. In fine Osiander says it is the common opinion of Wiclef's followers, that the People, may, as they shall pleafe, punish their Princes, who offend. These & many other seditious Doctrines may be found in the Protestants Apology. And if any desire to see their number increased by modern Factious Spirits, he shall see enough in the ordinary Gazettes viz: that the King is one of the three states, that the house of commons made him what he is: that it is not treason to bear arms against the King, provided it be not against the three states. That the Parliament CAN DISPOSE of the SUCCESSION of the CROWN: & many such maxims, which you daily advance, of as malignant a Nature as any before cited. Here I must observe a remarkable difference betwixt Catholics & you: Catholics do not follow these Principles (I defy you to name any one Catholic alive, who hath taught any of them) & you retain them still: or rather grow worse & worse. Which is of no small consequence to discover what party is dangerous to the state, which guilty of treasonable maxims. I come now to your practice: which gives reason to say, you came into the world like the Cadmean brood, all armed: & that many, or rather all your Princes felt your arms, assoon as they saw your faces. In Geneva you cast off the Authority of your Bishop, Prince of the town. In higher Germany you shaked the authority of Charles V Emperor. In lower Germany you withdrew many Provinces from the obedience of their King. You usurped upon Rudolphus the Emperor in Transiluania; upon Christiernus, in Denmarck; & upon Sigimund, in Swedeland. You fought for the Crown of France against Francis II. Charles IX. & Henry III. & in the time of Charles IX. you coined money in the name of one you held for King, says Cardinal Richelieu. Let us come to our dear Country. In England you set up jane Grey, against the lawful heir queen Mary. You bore arms against another Mary lawful queen of Scotland, brought her into restraint, forced her to depose herself, & to fly her country: & not content with keeping her Prisoner nineteen years, at last you put her barbarously to a violent death. Your perpetual insolences against her son & Grandson, & your encroachments upon the Royul Prerogative, are written with a Beam of the sun. Your whole proceed against Charles 1. of Glorious memory, are so known, that I need not to mind you of them: & so detestable, that I need no Art to make them appear odious. I defy you to show, that ever any Catholic designed upon his Sovereign, what you have lately acted on yours. Now with what face can you reproach unto us any seditious Doctrine, whilst you teach much worse, & have executed things more execrable, then ever any Catholic dreamt of? Remove this beam out of your eye, before you take notice of a moth in ours, which yet we have long since removed, as I said. CHAPTER 5. English Catholics teach no seditious Doctrines. E. C. pag. 4. describes us to be men, who sweep away whole towns, Cities & Nations, subvert sundamental Laws, change Governments, cut off Princes, & rightful Monarches, absolve subjects from their Natural allegiance, &c & pag 7. he adds: we are full out such constitutioned Persons as he hath described us, & not a jot better: nay if we prove not worse, before he hath done with us, we shall be obliged to him for his Civility, & Moderation. A formidable charge: but if we do not tell him it is as great a lie, & himself as false an Informer, as Oats, he ought to thank us for our Moderation: for he brings not one word to prove his accusation out of any English Catholic, nor of any other countries, alive: nor any of the dead, who speak home, let us see your proofs. E. C. pag. 4. Peruse the canon (c. Excommunicatorum 23. q. 5.) we do not account them Murderers, who burning with the zeal of our Mother the Catholic Church, shall happen to kill any of them. And are not men of such wicked & bloody designs, like the fatal Sirius, or Dogstar, Answ. read the Canon out, & you will find no subject for this Tragical Exclamation: for that very Canon declares that action, killing an excommunicated Person, to be a sin, & commands the Bishop of Lucia, to impose upon the homicide a severe public Penance. Ne eiusdem Ecclesiae Matres disciplina deseratur, Poenitentiam eis indicito congruentem. Lest the Discipline of our Mother the Church be abandoned, oblige the sinners to a Penance proportioned to their offence. And is this to approve of those attempts? I would willingly see your Bishops impose a Penance on the Rebels, who killed several of their fellow subjects, loyal to their King: & whither they call it Murder, or no, I shall not trouble them about the word. E. C. pag. 5. Bellarmin l. 3. de Laicis c. 22. says: If it were possible, to root out the Heretics (not any in the world excepted, whether KINGS, or EMPERORS, etc.) without doubt they are to be cut off every mother's child of them. Is not here enough, (surely too much) to evidence how lawful they hold MURDER to be? But if it cannot be done because they are too hard, they must lie still. Answer. It is hard to heap together more malicious falsications in so few words. Bellarmin in that place inquires whither those words of our Saviour Mat. 13.30. Let the good seed & the tares grow until the Harvest, do not forbid the Execution of malefactors in general: for he says, that by the good seed are understood all good men, & by tares all wicked men: according to those words: the good seed are the children of the Kingdom: tares are the children of the wicked one. versu 38. And he says that malefactors of what kind soever, are to be punished, when it may be done without danger to the public: but when they are so numerous, as to cope with the bulk of loyal subjects, they ought to be spared, to avoid greater evil. Which is so conformable to common sense, that none, but such a momus, as E. C. could reprehend it: & it is practised in all states. 1. If they can all crush a Rebellion in the egg, by the Death of one, or a few Traitors. 2. Is it spread over a great part of the Nation, some few heads are punished, the rest are pardoned: & 3. some times propter bonum pacts, the heads themselves are pardonned too. Charles 1. designed the first, when he sought the five members: & offered the third, when he was a Prisoner. And Charles 11. at his happy Restauration practised the second: for he punished his Father's judges, & pardonned the rest. Now I come to score up some of your Falsifications. 1. That Bellarmin speaks only of Heretics. He speaks of all kinds of Malefacters. Quaestio est vel de Haereticis, vel de furibus, vel de alijs malis, an extirpandi sint The doubt is either of Heretics, or Thiefs, or other Malefactors: whither they be to be cut off. 2. That he doth not except Kings, or Emperors & to make your Impertinence more observable, you put these names in Capital letters. Sir, I never thought it necessary to except Kings, when we speak of punishing Rogues, & theives: because no man in his wits will think them meant by those words. I believe on the same score all our English laws may be arraigned for I do not think, when they order a thief to be hanged, a Knight of the Post to loose his ears: etc. that they add except he be a King or Emperor. 3 That Bellarmin teaches by those words MURDER to be lawful. Is the Execution of Felons, by due course of law, Murder? of that Bellarmin speaks. Gentle Reader: I earnestly desire thee, to have some Christian compassion of the condition of Catholics, thy countrymen, & neighbours who upon such malicious misrepresentations of most innocent say, are exposed to public Hatred, & cruel Persecutions, by a senseless, , disingenuous sort of men, whose minds are blacker, than their coats: & who make as little bones of a lie, & swearing to it, as drinking a glass of small be when they are thirsty. E. C. pag. 5. Their Religion tempts them to all Actions that are horrible against Protestants, by giving them their Lands, & Estates, which assoon as they have exterminated Heretics, they shall possess without control. Council, Later. sub Innoc. III. c. 3. Now Council's decrees are by Papists honoured as Oracles of the Holy Ghost. Says Stapleton. Answer. No body is ignorant how variously that Canon is spoken of. Platina says that Council made no decrees. Others say Absolute Princes are not comprehended, because not named as they ought to be by reason of their particular dignity, in odiosis, C. sedes Apostolica, de Rescriptis: indeed the words seruato iure Domini principalis, preserving entire the right of the supreme Lord, shows that the Canon speaks only of Vassals, or subordinate Princes; not of the Absolute, as Kings. It is also, said that the Kings consented to the Law, by their Ambassadors, & they may enact what pleased. Lastly it is only a positive law: which may be repealed, & doth not oblige until it be received in the several Catholic states. As appears by those of the Council of Trent: which are universally received no where. As to Stapleton his words are nothing to the purpose, seeing he speaks only of conciliar Definitions in matter of Faith. E. C. pag. 6. Whatsoever the Holy Father the Pope doth, if it be Theft, or any other thing, which of itself is evil (as for example MURDER, etc.) we must like wise impute that to the jnspiration of GOD'S spirit. And you cite C. non nos D. 40. in Glossa. Answer: no great wonder you Protestant Ministers, should falsify glosses of Canons, who build your Faith on falsifications of the scriptures. Neither canon, nor Gloss say, what you produce them for, both lay the quite contrary. The title of the Canon is: The Papal office doth not give; but takes a way the liberty to sin. In the canon: we do not think, that God hath given us any leave to sin. In the Gloss: when the Action is dubious whether it be good, or bad, w● must judge favourably of the Pope If it be of its own nature bad▪ as Adultery, or MURDER: we must own that he sins in it: althô there be no man to whom he ought to be accused, by reason of the dignity of the first Chair. You see, sir, that the gloss says just the contrary to what you cite out of it: for it says the Pope sins by murder; & you make it say, murder is no sin in a Pope. E. C. pag. 6. As yet we have not proved upon them their KING KILLING doctrine pray let one quotation supply for all, & I think it is such an one, as is full home to the Point. Suarez l. 6. ad M. B. Regem 1.24 says. A King if he be once excommunicated, may be deposed, or slain by any person whomsoever: & that with impunity. it is passed all manner of doubt, but that they h●ld it exreamely Lawful. Answer: It is past all manner of doubt, that you hold it extremely Lawful to tell any kind of lies, & falsify any Authors you please, provided it may concontribute to charge some odious opinion on Papists, how contrary soever it be to the Authors you cite. Suarez having written that Proposition immediately adds: Haec Propositio simpliciter sumpta est falsissima. This Proposition absolutely taken, is most false. What say you, Christian Reader, is this fair play? what cannot these men prove at this rate out of any Author; by making him say what he condemns, & condemn what he says? What credit do they deserve, who discover so little sense of Truth, honesty, shame of men, or fear of God? These are his proofs of our holding Murder to be Lawful, which he doth not 1. because there is not one word cited out of any English Catholic. 2. Nor out of any other alive. 3. He falsities impudently all he citys. CHAPTER 6. Catholics practise no Treason. E. C. pag. 7. What was the offence of the Citizens of Toulouse & Auignon, when P. Gregory IX. Set Lewis the French King to war against them, & their Earl Raymundus, without cause, but only that of their Religion, & where the said King died at the siege? Answ. Here are two great untruths. The first, that there was no cause of that war, besides Religion. There were two wars made upon the Albigenses The first by Simon Monfort, with the forces of the King of France, Lewis VIII. Sovereign Lord of the Earl of Toulouse, for having killed an Ambassador, or Legate, against the law of nations. The second by Lewis himself for their heresy, & Rebellion. So neither war was on the score of Religion purely. The second untruth is, that the King of France died at the siege. He finished the war, united those Countries to the crown, & on his way home he died at Monpensier in Auvergn. See De Serres a Huguenot. E. C. p. 7. You give many instances of cruelties showed towards Heretics in Cabrieras Merindol, Provenc, Vassy, Germany, the Lowcountryes, etc. To all I answer they were rebels, stood in open defiance of the Ancient Laws established, & of their Prince's commands. E. C. p. 7. Pray for the fuller satisfaction in this thing, beside D. Fowlis his History of their Rebellions & Treasons, read the ungrateful be behaviour of the Papists & Priests, towards the Imperial Indulgent crown of England. Answ: I will not undertake to vindicate the actions of all Papists, that have been; I speak for those alive. If any here to fore were really guilty of Treason, I excuse them not yet the late proceed against Catholics, althô certainly Innocent, yet charged with the most heavy Accusations imaginable, ground a suspicion that their Ancestors may have had hard measure in that kind. However if our fore fathers left any blot on their Religion by some illegal attempts, Catholics since have washed it out with their Blood. And I pray God with all my hart, that all Protestants were as faith full to the Royal interest, as Papists are. In your pages 8. & 9 I find nothing worth mentioning, but a saying of Aeneas Silvius, that nothing is given at Rome but for money, not even jmposition of hands, & what you cite out of Caramuel: that a Priest may kill a Detractor. As to Aeneas Silvius he recalled all those writings being made Pope Pius II. This is so falls that Absolution, which is one imposition of hands, was never refused any man upon score of Poverty. And as for Caramuel, that proposition is condemned by Alexander VIII. Caramuel hath no credit even in his own order (he is a Bernardin) his writings being forbidden amongst them under great Penaltys. E. C. p. 10. The Pope is called by Papists: our Lord God the Pope. Answer: those words are found but once, & that in a Glossa: which sort of writings are little regarded by our Divines. However you have no reason to reproach us with that expression, who say the same of all Kings pag. 16. & of all men, pag. 21. E. C. p. 11. Bellarmin says, God hath given to the Pope the Power to make sin to be no sin; & no sin to be sin. Answer, this imports no more, then that God gave the Pope to oblige by his laws the conscience of the Faithful in things indifferent: viz, eating flesh on a wednesday which of itself is no sin, but is a sin when forbidden. But Bellarmin expressly says, that the Pope cannot make Lawful a thing of itself cuil, as Theft, or Murder: nor unlawful a thing of itself good, as the love of God. E. C. p. 11. What could stir the Roman Catholics up to that dreadful Rebellion & massacre in Ireland, where in cold Blood were murdered above 100000. Protestants, without the least provocation, but only the Indispensable necessity to kill Heretics. Answer. The late King knew other reasons: These are his words: The preposterous vigour, & unreasonable severity, which some men carried before them in England was not the least incenture that kinaled, & blew up into those horrid flames the despair of discontent which wanted not predisposed fuel for Rebellion in Ireland: where Despair being added to their former discontens, & the Fears of utter extirpation to their wont oppressions, it was easy to provoke to an open Rebellion, a People prone enough to break out to all exorbitant violence, both by some Principles of their Religion, & the natural desire of Liberty: both to exempt themselves from their present restraints, & to prevent those after rigours where with they saw themselves apparently threatened by the Covetous zeal, & uncharitable fury of some men, who think it a great argument of the Truth of their Religion, to endure no other, but their own. The Rebels were exasperated to the most desperate Resolutions, & Actions, by being threatened with all extremities, not only, to the known heads, & cheise Incendiaries; but even to the whole community of the Nation; resolving to destroy Root & Branch, men, women, & children: without any regard to those usual pleas for mercy, which Conquerors not wholly barbarous, are wont to hear from their own breasts, in behalf of those, whose opprestive faces, rather than their malice engaged them, or whose imbecility for sex, or age was such, as they could neither lift up a band against them. Thus his late Majesty. Here you see, Sir, not a little; but a great, & manifold cause & Provocation to that Rebellion, (which I do not intent to justify) viz. 1. Desire of Liberty in a nation subject to a foreigner. 2. Wont oppressions, 3. Discontents grounded on them. 4. Despair being threatened with utter extirpation, Root & Branch, man, woman, & Child. When you have considered this you will conclude that very little of that Rebellion can be charged on Religion. So your saying it was without the least cause, or Pronocation, is Rash, false, & un charitable. Moreover the readiness with which the Irish accepted a Cessation of Arms, when offered by his Majesty, (as you may see in that place) althô without that cessation the Protestant Party had perished, shows the Irish sought self Preservation, as the King says; not destruction of Heretics, as you falsely surmise. All which I say, not to excuse all the Irish Actions; but to discover your want of truth and charity in charging all on Religion, which is Innocent, even when those, who profess it, offend, because she teaches not, nor approves those offences. Pag. 11. & 12. You relate some words & actions of some Popes; which I think Religion not concerned in, seeing it doth not oblige us to think them impeccable in words, or Actions. What if a testy Pope said either he would have Philip's Crown, or Philip should have his Mitre: it was a Passionate expression. And if S. Gregory congratulated Phocas his being Emperor, & commended his Merciful Acts, it may as well betaken for an exhortation to mercy; as relation of what he was. Pag. 13. You charge Religion with the massacre of Paris; althô done without the Pope's knowledge, & resolved on by the King, to rid his kingdom of those who had lately endangered his Crown. It was a pain of Rebellion, not of Heresy. Pag. 14. You cite strange things out of Frasuis du veron. Bonarcius, white & Mariana. Who having all been condemned by Catholics none alive reading them, as far as I know, Catholics cannot with any colour of justice be charged with their writings. If you please to look bacl to 42. you will hear all Pulpits ringing with, and Prints speaking of as desperate things, as in any of of those writers, as far as I know of them. Pag. 15. You serve up again your cold cabbadge the Council of Lateran, & the war on the Albigenses. To which I have already answered. E. C. p. 15. With what pompous ceremonies do they hollow those Instruments, which are to do the blessed work? By what charming names do they call that Bloody wretch, who is to be employed in the Horrible Business? No less than Elected son of God, Blessed vessel, the Arm of the almighty to execute his justice. How they blasphemously come before their Altars, & with a seeming fervent zeal, pray to the God of Heaven, That all the Saints may arise, & give place unto him: & that the Lod may appear to be his strength, & to in fuse, into him the Beams of his Consolation! How do they Divilishly when edle him into a belief, that there is a celestial splendour shining round his head, & like the skin of Moses his face, appearing with so great abryghtness, that they are not capable of looking on him without Trembling, & Confu●ion. How do they throw themselves prostrate at his Feet, & pretend that he is no more a mortal; but changed into a Deity? And how they tell the credulous Cully, that he will by so glorious an Action be certainly freed from the pains of Purgatory, & immediately translated into Paradise, & there be swallowed up of Eternal Delights, & satisfactions? I have given this place at large, that you may see the Malice, & Impertinency of it. In what place did this happen? what man eversaw it? what Author ever mentioned it? The Bishop of Lincoln, in his Annotations on the speeches of the five jesuites was the first, that ever mentioned it, as far I could ever discover: till he name another, I shall take him to be the Author of this Fable. Yet it hath lost nothing in your hands. The splendour of his face like that of Moses, & Papists falling at his Feet, are of your invention. And who can tell what further Additions may be made by others: For in these jmaginary spaces of Fictions, who can six any bounds to Ministers, who without scruple tell any lie, as a Truth? But the success is quite other than you pretend: for thus labouring in vain to prove us guilty; you effectually prove us Innocent. I assure you, that when any of our Church shall write against you, he will find Truth enough to say, without having recourse to such lies. E. C. p 17. They hold it to be no sin Not to keep Faith, nor Peace, not to obserne either Truth or Honesty towards Heretics: it is no deceit to Equivocate with them in private Deal, or Public Transactions; 'tis no Dishonesty to cheat them of what they have, no Perjury to break Oaths with them, no Toes to rob or spoil them, 'tis no inhumanity to burn their Houses over their heads, no Murder to kill them, although KINGS, and PRINCES: in a word, 'tis no sin for all Relations, to deny them what God hath made their Respective Duties. Answ. We disown this Doctrine in all its parts: & our lives confute it sufficiently, but yours is so conformable to it, that we may think it a description of your own practice. Add only th● hiring men of desperate fortunes & flagitious lives, to bear fals● witness against Innocent Papists, with vast rewards, applauding their Depo●●tions, ●ho●gh evidently false, & accompanied with that infallible sign of a lie, contradictions, condemning honest & loyal subjects upon such mock evidence to the greatest Penalties which the law appoints for real Traitors etc. and we have a perfect picture of your proceed with Papists. Stupor & mirabilia facta sunt in terrà, Prophetae prophetabant mendacium: & Sacerdotes applaudebant manibus suis: & populus meus dilexit talia: quid ergo fiet in novissimis eius? Hierem 5.30.31. A wonderful & horrible thing is committed in the Land, England: the Prophets (Oats & Dugdale) Prophecy falsely, & the Priests (Ministers) applaud this with their hands, & my People, upon whom I have showered so many Blessings, Love all this: what will become of them in the end? E. C. pag. If Murdering of Heretics should really be a sin (as none of them will acknowledge) yet so long as the Priests & jesuites shall tell them to the contrary, nay shall cry it up for a signal Act of Piety, they are bound to believe them, & so many MURDERS as People shall commit on such a belief, & from the pure Principle of blind obedience, so many worthy, & Holy Actions do they perform, & by a necessity of consequence do merit accordingly. Therefore how great must needs be their Reward in Heaven, who shall not only have their hands imbrued in a few trifling, petty Murders, but shall make whole nations swim in Blood, & shall not spare their Magistrates Princes, or Kings. Answ. Here is not one true word: & the whole discourse relies on two abominable lies, equal to those of Oats, your Brother Minister. The first that none of us will acknowledge MURDER of Heretics to be a sin. We unanimously profess it is a sin: we are ready to sign it with our Blood, if need be. We declare, we believe that it is a mortal sin for any private man to kill another, unless it be for his own necessary defence. This we say, & are ready to confirm with Oath. The second Lie, is, that Papists are bound to believe what their Priests teach, contrary to the law of God, & that MURDER committed in consequence of that belief becomes meritorious. This is most false, all Papists know they must obey God rather than men & the credit they give to their Priests, is merely because they teach what God commands. And did they find their Priests guilty of such lies, as you of the Ministry fill your Sermons, & Libellous writing with, (contrary to the law of God: thou shalt not bear false witness) they would never vouchsafe to hear them, but cast them off, as a pack of knaves. E. C. pag. 21. I think this will suffice, to make clear the Truth of my whole Assertion, how the jesuites account MURDER & TREASONS to be Lawful, necessary, commendable, & meritorious. Answer. You have proved no one of all those points: we declare against them all: we protest, we hold MURDER & TREASON unlawful on all occasions: & that neither the one nor the other can be m●ritorious. When soever his sacred Majesty shall be pleased to order it, all the jesuites, & other Priests in his Dominions are ready to declare in such form as he shall prescribe them, that they detest MURDER & TREASON, & all Doctrine teaching either of them: & all this in the obvious plain sense of the words, without Aequivocation, or mental Reservation, which two ways of c●●aking a man's mind they renounce, & acknowledge to have been deservedly condemned by Innocent XI. 2. Mar. 1679. And they do further declare, that they shall think themselves sensibly obliged to any Person, who shall procure his Majesty's consent to the making of such a public Declaration. E. C. p. 21. I shall now come to give the Papists some serious CONSIDERATIONS upon what I have said, & so conclude. Answ. Those who design mischief to a town give falls alarms, that defendants being drawn to a place where there is no danger, may neglect those where there is some. Whether you intent such a stratagem, I cannot tell; but I am sure your considerations are needless to Peaceable Catholics, and necessary to your seditious Brethren. So you misapply your Plaster, where there is no sore. I will not gratify so much the Factious party, as to examine your Considerations.: & show their defects. Whereof some are childish: some others substantial in themselves, & taken out of Popish Authors, yet handled so awkwardly, that I once thought you Prevaricated & would divert your Readers from their Duty to their Prince, by commending it weakly. Yet I hope this proceeds from an inability to compose stronger discourse. Indeed those strong Reasons taken out of Papists in your understanding, are not unlike to Herculeses club in the hand of a Pigmy. E. C. p. 30. For our King, let all true loyal hearts pray with me. Answer. I I pray God, that both you, & all the Ministry did heartily pray for his Majesty. I do assure you, that Papists, & particularly jesuits' do pray heartily for him: & I will confirm it out of a Pamplet printed in french by a jesuit, in which speaking to the five executed, he says: Pray also for his Majesty: that God be pleased to give him a wise Council, faithful officers, courageous arms, a Peaceable People, a happy reign, a long life, & an eternal Glory. This I assure you that jesuit said from his hart: & is ready to seal it with his blood.