ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE LAST SPEECH OF William Viscount Stafford WHO WAS BEHEADED ON TOWER-HILL FOR HIGH TREASON In Conspiring the Death of the King, etc. on Wednesday, December 29th. 1680.  
DYing men's words are generally much regarded: and Protestants who make Conscience of their own words, and count it a Horrid Crime to speak otherwise than think when they are dying, may be ready to take the measures of others by themselves, and to Judge those guiltless, who when they are dying, assert their Innocency with the highest asseverations: But they will find very great reason to alter their opinion, if they take but due notice how very clear the Evidence was by which this miserable Lord was cast, and if withal they do but fully understand the Popish Principles, which destroy all confidence in their words living and dying.  
Fully to convince Protestants, my design shall be to prove that by the common Doctrine received amongst them, they are furnished with expedients, whereby they may deny what is most true, and affirm what is most notoriously, false, and that with the most solmn Oaths or dreadfullest Imprecations, and yet neither lie nor be forsworn, nor any way sin in the least degree, and this they may do even when dying, Their main artifice is that which they call Mental Equivocation, because of a double sense in some proposition partly expressed and partly reserved in their minds, so that a thing may be true in their own sense by virtue of this Mental Reservation, but false in the sense of all that hear it. The use of this is allowed by all sorts of Papists, and particularly the Jesuits, it is an Art more dear to them, and oftener used by them then any other fraudulent art whatever, because this fraud is more easy, less discernible, and the advantage of it admirable, and therefore no wonder that they do not decline it at Trials in Courts of Judicature. No nor when they are dying and approaching the Tribunial of the Great Judge, though truth and sincerity is then, if ever, necessary. But this our Poor deceased Lord hath more pertinent instances of those of his Principles and Circumstances to encourage him with Oaths and Asseverations to assert a falsehood and deny the Truth.  
To instance in their Practices, Father Garnet, Whitebreads Predecessor in Office and Practices, and one concerned in the Gunpowder Plot was notoriously guilty herein, for he denied that, By solemn Oat●s and Imprecations before the Lords Commissioners, which was afterwards proved upon him, and his only Plea for himself was this Doctrine of Equivocation.  
So likewise Tresham another of the Powder Plotters said, that Garnet was privy to the Treason, but afterwards just before his death took it upon his Salvation that he had accused Garnet wrongfully, and that he had not seen him of sixteen years before, and so died but this his Protestation and Oath was soon after proved notoriously false, yea Garnet himself confessed that within sixteen years he had seen him many times, whereupon being asked what be thought of Treshams' dying Oath and Protestation, he answered Possibly Tresham meant to Equivocate.  
And this very Doctrine of Equivocation was justified by Garnet in a Manuscript left by him, which was communicated by King James, to the famous Causabon.  
Both the stories before named may be found at large in the History of the Gunpowder Treason, and in the Proceed against those Traitors.  
By this we see, that these things have been practised of old, and justified by their Teachers as lawful even at the hour of death, therefore we need not be surprised to find any Papist using this art in his Last Speech.  
But their Principles are further considerable, of which take some Account.  
First by their Doctrine, they may lawfuly say what is false making use of a mental Reservation, and though it be a gross untruth in itself as expressed, and they know it to be so, and use it with an intent to deceive others, yet they do not reckon it to be a lie, and consequently no sin, and so need not fear using it when going out of the world. This is affirmed in distinct Treatises of this subject by Father Persons, Naver, Sanche and others.  
And here let the World be Judge what regard is due to the words of those, though they be the words of dying men, whose Doctrine assures the most guilty persons in the world, that if they persist in a false destince of their innocency, even unto death, yet by this method they teach them it will be no lie at all, nor any sin.  
This may be enough to satisfy as concerning the expressions whereby this Lord disclaims his guilt which are not a few, as in the first Paragraph of his Speech, I do most truly in the presence of the Eternal, Omnipotent, and All-knowing God, Protest upon my Salvation, that I am as Innocent as it is possible for any Man to be, so much as in a thought of the Crimes laid to my charge. [The old canting expression, as Innocent as the Child unborn, is here varied.] In the third Paragraph, Since my long imprisonment I have considered often what could be the Original cause of my being thus accused, since I knew myself not culpable, so much as in a thought; and I cannot believe it to be upon any other. Account then my being of the Church of Rome, In the forth Paragraph. To my great and unspeakable grief I have offended God in many things by many great Offences; but, I give him most humble thanks, not in any of those Crimes of which I was accused. In the sixth Paragraph. And if I had known of any Treason, and should thus deny it, as I do now upon my Salvation at this time, I should have no hope of Salvation. In the eleventh Paragraph. I do now upon my Death and Salvation aver that I never spoke one word either unto Oats or Turbervil, or, to my knowledge, ever saw them until my Trial, and for Dugdale I never spoke to him of any thing but about a Footboy, or Footman, or Foot-race, and never was then alone with him. In the twelfth and thirteenth Paragraphs. I hope I have made it appear that I have some Conscience, for if I had none certainly I would have saved my life by acknowledging myself guilty; which I could have done, though I know I am not in the least guilty, and I having some Conscience make very ill use of it; for I throw myself into Eternal pain by thus plainly and constantly denying thus at my Death, the knowledge of what I am accused of, in the least I have said thus much in discharge of my Conscience, and do aver upon my Salvation what I have said to be really true. And in the very last Paragraph. I do with my last Breath truly assert my Innocency, and hope the Omnipotent Allseeing, Just God will deal with me accordingly. Let the Reader judge how true these Protestations of his Innocency are like to be, after he hath considered the fairness of his Trial, the clearness and fullness of the Evidence against him, and their Doctrines, which thus allow them to go out of the world with Lies in their mouths.  
Secondly, They maintain that when they may lawfully speak what is false they may lawfully swear it; thus Father Parsons, Lessins' Sanchez, and Jo. Sanctius.  
This is their Doctrine, whereby it is evident, that if a Person be Accused and Condemned for a Design to murder his Prince, though he design it as much as any Assassinate ever did, yet he may not only deny it, and yet not Lie, by virtue of a Mental Equivocation, but though he be as guilty as any Person that ever was condemned in the World, yet he may assert his Innocency with Oaths; and notwithstanding, by this Art he may free himself from all Gild of Perjury, and all other Sin. And this quite destroys their Credit as to all their Asseverations and Oaths, how many and horrid soever they be, when they think themselves concerned to Equivocate.  
He that would be believed against such Evidence as convicted this Lord had need be a Man of more than ordinary Credit. But Men of his Lordship's Principles are quite broke as to this, for their Credit is blasted by their Doctrine.  
Thirdly, They may use such Mental Reserves or Equivocations, when they are urged by others not to use any, or when themselves profess and swear they use none; So De Secund. Bonacina Sanchez, and Fa. Parsons in his Treatise of Equivocations, approved by Garnet and Blackwell: One passage whereof I will here give you. If (saith he) the Incompetent Judge shall further ask, whether you do not Equivocate, you may answer no, but with another Equivocation: if again suspecting you he urges, whether this third time you do not Equivocate, than the third time also say no, but with another secret Equivocation; and so as often as he shall ask the like, likewise by Equivocating say you do not Equivocate.  
Fourthly, By their Doctrine they may Lawfully use such Mental Reserve or Equivocation, which in their Account makes their Speaking or Swearing falsely to be innocent. Thus Fillincius saith, That Equivocation in Rigour is no Lie nor Perjury. So Toleno, Equivocation may be used, especially when it is expedient to conceal a thing. So Bonacina, It is not (saith he) unlawful to Equivocate as often as any Inconvenience or Injury is like to befall us by speaking Plainly.  
Can therefore any Persons be more highly concerned to keep any thing secret, than these Men are to conceal the Plot; both for the dangerous Consequences of the Discovery, and the Advantage of concealing it? They cannot more effectually promote the Piot, than by persuading us there is none: and so making us the more secure, they think hereby to stagger weak minded Protestants, who cannot think that any Christian dares go out of the World with a Lie in his Mouth. They think also hereby to weaken the Credit of the Witnesses, and to disparage the Justice of the Nation. And Lastly, his Lordship, and the rest of the Plorters, executed before him, may think to die as Martyrs in the Account of the Papists, and as Innocent in the Judgement of many others. But on the other hand, if his Lordship, or those executed before him, had been so ingenuous to have confessed what they knew of this Hellish Plot, they had broke the Neck of their own Design, which seems dearer to them than their Lives, or any other Concerns; they had encouraged others of the Conspirators to have followed their Leaders herein, and so the Plot had been wholly dissected, and Popery itself in danger to be rendered odious to the whole Christian World, and for ever hereafter to be abhorred and renounced by all that own the Christian Name, as utterly repugnant to Christianity, and to be abhorred by Mankind as that which bids Defiance to Humanity itself.  
Having thus sufficiently answered those Passages in his Speech that assert his Innocency, come we next to his false Commendation, and Character of their Church. In the third Paragraph (saith he) I have no reason to be ashamed of my Religion, for it teacheth nothing but the right Worship of God, Obedience to the King, and due Subordination to the Temporal Laws of the Kingdom. And I do submit to all Articles of Faith believed and taught in the Catholic Church, believing them to be most consonant with the Word of God. And whereas it hath so much and often been objected, that the Church holds that Sovereign Princes Excommunicated by the Pope, may by their Subjects be Deposed and Murdered; as to the Murder of Princes. I have been taught as a matter of Faith, in the Catholic Faith that such Doctrine is Diabolical Horrid and Detestable, and contrary to the Law of God Nature and Nations: and as such from my heart I renounce and abominate it. As for the Doctrine of Deposing of Princes. I know some Divines of the Catholic Church hold it, but as Able and Learned as they have writ against it: but it was not pretended to be the Doctrine of the Church; that is any Point of Catholic Faith. Wherefore I do here in my Conscience declare that it is my True and Real judgement that the same Doctrine of Deposing Kings is contrary to the Fundamental Laws of this Kingdom, Injurious to Sovereign Power; and consequently would be in me, or any other of His Majesty's Subjects Impious and Damnable. That their Church teacheth the contrary to the right Worship of God, and Obedience to Kings is very easy to prove: But it is a Work that hath been so often done already, that here we shall wave it. To come then to the nice Point, viz. the King-killing Doctrine. This is a Charge upon them of so horrid a nature, that I do not wonder that they all use their utmost endeavours to persuade the World that they hold no such Doctrine. That Mariana held it, Gavan himself owned: Sanctarellus his Book was a little more favourable to Kings than Mariana's, and yet this was printed at Rome, and approved by Mutius Vitellescus the General of the Jesuits. Ribadinera, Scribanius under the name of Bonarscius, Becanus, Oresterus, do partly praise and partly defend Mariana. And wherein doth Emanuel Sa come short of Mariana in that particular, or Becarus in his English Controversies; which are approved of, not only by divers Bishops, but by the Provincial Jesuits of Portugal and Germany: Yea, a whole University approves of it. To which add Fa. Campian, who may be in stead of all: he declares, That all the Jesuits spread far and wide through the whole World have entered into a League to make away all Heretical Kings in any manner whatsoever; nor will they despair of effecting it so long as one Jesuit remains in the World. In Epist. ad Concil. Reg. Angl. p. 22.  
The Church of Rome doth declare, that the Pope hath power to depose Kings, especially for Heresy. This is not only the Opinion of all sorts of their Authors, but is especially determined by their Popes, and the Decrees of General Councils. They do also declare, that Kings being Deposed, any one may kill them, at least by the Pope's Order. For this we have the declared Sense of the whole Body of the Jesuits in France, [than whom none of the Society in any part of the World were more favourable to Kings.] in an Apology for their Doctrine on this Subject to Henry the Fourth; yet there they declare in the words of Valentia, consonant to the Doctrine of Aquinas, Caletan, Sotus, Coveruvius, Salonius, and others; That a Tyrant, who has no Just Title, but usurps Authority, may be killed by any one. Now there is none of them who have the use of Reason will deny, but a King deposed by the Pope is such a Tyrant, a mere Usurper, without such a just Title; and therefore they cannot deny but it is their Doctrine; That a King Deposed by the Pope may be killed by any one.  
In the Seventh and Sixteenth Paragraphs he prays for the King, acknowledging him. His Lawful King and Sovereign, and denying that any Power on Earth can Legally allow him or any Body else to lift up a Hand against his Legal Authority and then Pra●ing for him that he may enjoy all Happiness in this World, and the World to come, ●●e would undoubtedly have it thought, that he had no design to kill the King, who can pray for his prosperous Reign. But it need not seem strange that any of them should Equivocate in their way of Praying, since their Church allows of plain Lies in their public Liturgies, which divers of their own Authors express themselves sensible of.  
To give one instance of this in Fa. Garnet, he composed some Prayers for the good Success of the Powder Plot, which he used amongst his Party; and being charged with it, answered like such a Jesuit: He said, He made not those Prayers with that meaning that the thing might fall out according to the mind of the Conspirators, but rather cross to their desires; that so the Safety of King and Kingdom might be provided for. So that when he prayed for the Ruin of the King and Kingdom, his meaning was that they might be preserved and prosper. So when any of this sort of Men, I mean Romish Zealots, pray for the King's prosperous Reign, why may not their meaning be his utter Destruction? For this is altogether as likely as the other.  
One thing is observable, that in his Prayer for the King he twice comes in with the word Legal. So in the sixth Paragraph. He would discover if he knew of an Illegal Dangerous Plot. But the Question will here be, what he means by Legal and Illegal. By their Principles, if the King be Excommunicated, his Authority is not Legal, and therefore the Plot against him not Illegal. This Artifice, though the thing be false in itself, yet it may be innocently asserted by him.  
His Temper at Death was none of the most Christianlike, for he could not forbear [though he pretendedly forgave them] vilifying the Witnesses against him, by calling them Perjured Fellows: But what better can be expected from such Men. And he seems designedly to intimate that his Trial was Illegal by this subtle Insinuation: I shall say little to my Trial; and whether it were all according to the known Law, I am too much a Party to say much of it: If it were not so, God forgive him or them that were the Cause or it. Certainly never Man had a more Honourable, Just and Legal Trial, and consequently less Cause for such a Malicious Insinuation.  
To conclude, We have great reason to believe that this Speech was contrived for the promoting of their grand Plot, upon which, as a true Be-Jesuited Zealot, his Heart was so much set [the Catholic Interest being so deeply concerned in it,] that the thoughts of Death could not divert him. Now, if we are found so Weak and Facile as to believe these fraudulent Expressions of this Lord, and others that were Executed before him, against so much Rational Evidence, than their Work is in a manner done; and they will do more at their Deaths by putting out our Eyes, than they could in all their Lives. We cannot in Justice, Reason or Charity believe them against Such Evidence, who think they may Lawfully deceive us when dying, and apprehend it to be the great Interest of their Cause so to do.  
FINIS.