A REASONABLE DEFENCE OF THE Seasonable Discourse: showing The Necessity of Maintaining the ESTABLISHED RELIGION In Opposition to POPERY.  
OR, A Reply to a Treatise, called, A Full Answer and Confutation of a Scandalous Pamphlet, &c.  
 cannon topped with a crown 
H B   
LONDON, Printed for H. broom, at the Gun at the West-end of St. Pauls. 1674.   

A REASONABLE DEFENCE OF THE Seasonable Discourse: OR, A Reply to a Treatise called, A full Answer and Confutation of a scandalous Pamphlet, &c.  
THe Seasonable Discourse showing the necessity of maintaining the Established Religion in opposition to Popery, having not long after its coming abroad into the World, been replied unto, under the title of a full Answer, it was to be hoped that there would be seen at once put together, all that could be said in defence of the Roman Cause: and possibly so it is. However upon perusal it appears, that the Book made good its Title, by being full only of emptiness and railing; and besides, hath the disadvantage to be encumbered by a particular quarrel, which it seems the Author before had managed in the defence of the Loyalty of his Party. Therefore at his first setting forth upon his controversy, he falls into passion, that any thing should be wrote in a matter wherein he happens to have dealt, without a particular regard to him: as if all mankind were bound to red whatever he wrote, or that impertinencies were to be adverted to in a Discourse which pretended to be seasonable. What the Authors triumphs are in his catholic Apology, and his Reply to the Answer of it, I am not here concerned to account for; he will find that done else where: my business shall be to vindicate that Discourse in defence of the established Religion and Laws, which our Author, according to his great civility and duty, is pleased to compliment under the name of a Scandalous Pamphlet.  
The first exception he takes, is at its pretence to be seasonable; and his reason is, because his Majesty put out his gracious Indulgence of Popery, and other Sectaries, which also confounded the designs of foreign Achitophels, and united England as one man, without the least murmur in our streets. Had this been wrote before the last Session of Parliament, we might have taken it for one of our Authors natural strains of rhetoric, which of course pass with him for demonstrations; but after that his Majesty had recalled it, boldly to tell us that none were aggrieved but Pulpit-Rabshekahs, is Language becoming them, who not long since attempted to blow up the Parliament and King together, and stand in defiance of Majesty and Law. But after all, it so happens, that ever since that this indulgence is withdrawn; we have as vigorously as before pursued the War against the force as well as machinations and designs of foreign Achitophels, without any murmur but what proceeded from a few scribbling Rabshekahs: and therefore I may reasonably hope, that notwithstanding our Authors charge, who will needs make me a Dutchman, I may, without the help of an Act for naturalisation, be an Englishman again. I have( not long since) red in a desperate Book wrote against Henry IV. of France, in the time of the Civil War, entitled, De Justâ Reipub. Christianae in reges impios& haereticos authoritate; an odd Paradox attempted to be proved at large in a Chapter of above 40 Pages, 
P. 19 ●4. &c.  that the Hugonots of France were no longer Frenchmen. By parity of reason it may be our case here, and no Protestant deserves the name of an Englishman: If upon this score it be that I am outlawed, I must bear the calam●ty as well as I can; being to suffer as in a very good cause, so also in exceedingly good company.  
Our Author having thus unfortunately combated the Title of my Book, the next attack is against my manner of expressing the excellency of the Faith of the English Reformed Church, with the erroneousness of the Roman. And this he overthrows by saying, he will be bound to describe the Faith of any Christian Congregation in the World, in the very same Words. We will admit that any Christian Church may be so described; but how well such a Picture will represent its Pattern, any sober man will easily judge. I am sure the being bound, and offering to lay Wagers, is a very incompetent decision of Controversies: and indeed no body besides one of our Authors Kidney, would disparaged the credit of the 39. Articles, the Catechism and Liturgy of the Church of England, in the affair for which they are brought; the description of its Faith. For be they whatever our Author, or any other perverse man would have them, they are certainly the most authentic evidence that can be given of what our Church professes.  
And as to the tricking out of Popery, which he so much dislikes, opposing his crude sentiments concerning real Presence, Infallibility, Purgatory, &c. 'tis sure more reasonable to take the measures of Popery from the dictates of the Council of Trent, and other public determinations referred to by me, then what one or two private men will, to serve a present turn, declare to be their judgement or Opinion. 'tis true, Cardinal Bellarmine is quoted sometimes by me; and so soon as his authority, and those who go along with him, shall be allowed to have no greater force, then the angry single assertion of the Bishop of Ossory, we will show him how far we will be parties to the injury of bringing in a rival pretention to that of his holiness, in being Antichrist. But our Adversary tells us, and we see it plainly in every period he writes, that Religion is not his Calling; and adds, that his pains is saved in writing about Religion, because I magisterially tell what mine own is, without defending it; and no otherwise disprove his, then by wrong stating it: that is, give an account of both the one and the other, from the authentic writings of each; therefore he entreats the good Reader never to believe such a detractor, &c. How far his Petitions may be prevalent in lieu of Arguments, I shall not determine, but offer a more just request unto the Reader, that he believe neither of us; but look to matter of Fact, and the reasons alleged by both, and only believe himself: for under our Authors favour, notwithstanding his peremptory asseveration; I neither assume to myself, nor desire to have given me, the privilege of being an Interpreter or a Judge. And so for the present, the Idolatry of the Mass, the sacrilege of robbing the Laity of half the Sacrament, and all the holy Scriptures; the addition of new Articles to the Creed, the praying to Saints, and adoration of Images, with the other abominations of that Church, are upon our Authors Passport, to march off in peace.  
He advances next to the fourth Paragraph of my Discourse, and by his dextrous method of dispatch, confutes the whole Section; which from unquestionable History, and downright matter of Fact, the writings of the most celebrated Authors of the Roman Profession, the Bulls of Popes, and Canons of Councils admitted by the Church of Rome for universal, demonstrated how destructive Popery is to the interest of Kings and their Governments, by gravely calling in for Umpires Solon and Lycurgus; who, he says, would expect that Protestant Princes should after this fair story, abound in all affluence and power, and live longer then Nestor, whilst those of the catholic Model, are but Tenants at will to the Pope, &c. Here our Author, if there be any sense in what he says, supposes that Protestant Princes cannot suffer any harm from Papists by the one privilege of their having thrown off the Papal yoke, and that no sickness or accident is to have liberty to kill where his Holiness spares. But by our Authors good leave, Solon and Lycurgus would make no such inferences, should they by a poetic Fiction, or if you please( for 'tis the same thing) by a Popish miracle, be revived, and enjoined a Pilgrimage to these Western parts of Europe, they would have seen a Protestant Prince in France, amid the solemnities of his marriage, entertained with the massacre of 30000 of his Friends and Servants, his own Bedchamber not being an Asylum, 
Meser. in An. 1572.  the Butchery committed in could blood in a time of Peace, and begun in the dead of night; against not only the expectation, but also the solemnest promises of security; so that at once were violated all Laws of Nations, Nature, and Religion, all those genial and hospitable Rites which were held sacred by the most barbarous of Heathens, by a new prodigy of cruelty sent forth into the World for the propagation and glory of the Roman catholic Faith; which Act, notwithstanding all its guilt and horror, became the public exultation, not only of the Court of the catholic King: but the sacred Conclave of his Holiness, and above all, his Holiness himself. They would have seen the self same Prince not only assaulted in the Field by open violence, but attempted in his person, and that more then once by his loyal Roman catholic Subjects; and when he had quitted his Religion, and hoped for more security; at last destroyed by the desperate hand of one of that Churches Votaries. Or if the before mentioned Solon and Lycurgus had gone forward to the British Islands, they would have there beholded a Protestant Queen pursued with greater fury by her Popish Subjects; scarce a year of her long reign past without some new attempt upon her life by War, 
Cambd. Eliz. Speed, Baker, &c.  by Dagger, or by poison. And had they stayed for some time with us; they would have seen her successor designed to death with his Royal Family, his Nobility and Senate, the representative Power, and real strength of his whole Realm, by a strange compendium of ruin, all of them in one short moment to be destroyed by the perpetually loyal Roman catholic Saints and Subjects of his Kingdom. After all, though the case be plainly thus, our good man appeals to experience the truest informer of mankind, and to make out an incontrolable proof of the greatness and security of Popish Princes, he points out to one nameless King of Spain, and one as nameless King of France, and so proportionably( that is some one of) the Papal Princes ranting like the Grand signior, if they please in their own Dominions, &c. When, or how it pleases these Monarchs to rant, we are not  told; nor what comes of ranting( if his Holiness chance to be concerned in it) at the long run. We will suppose the ranting King of Spain, whom he means, may be Charles the V. for he we know made bold to imprison the old Gentleman; but in the mean time there was very little ranting in the case. 
Hist. Courc. Trent, p. 44. Spondan. in Anno 1529.  The Emperour sadly complains of the misfortune to his neighbour Princes, and in his own Dominions orders solemn Prayers and Masses to be said every where, for his rescue and delivery; and when all was done in good sober earnest was content to knock under the Table, and mary his daughter to his Holinesses Nephew, 
Spond. ibid. Meser. Anno. 1529.  Alexander Medices. But there is one more circumstance which should not be concealed from our Author; that if Charles the V. was able to master the Pope, it was by the strength of an honest German Army, 
Spond. ibid:  consisting almost wholly of Protestants. And therefore thus far we see no great exploit done by the Spanish ranting against the Pope. Let us see next whether the French be more lucky Hectors. The sturdiest that I know, was Philip the IV. who when Boniface the VIII. had wrote an insolent Letter to him, directs an answer as follows: Philip by the Grace of God King of the French, to Boniface bearing himself as Pope, little health, or none at all;  
Let your great Foolship understand that in Temporal affairs we are subject to no man, &c. But praise at parting, he that was so hot at hand, was not long after could in the mouth: For though he had the luck to escape the thunder of Pope Boniface's Bulls, 
M●se●. An. 1303 &c. ( who excommunicated him, released his Subjects from their allegiance, and gave his Kingdom to the first occupant) and what is more, took him Prisoner at Anagnia; yet after four days durance, the burghers beat the French out of their Town, and gave the Old Gentleman an opportunity to go in peace to Rome; where though soon after he died, and thereby released the King from that personal quarrel, yet was the survivor fain to make fair weather with his Successors in St. Peters Chair, Benedict II, and Clement V. to the latter of whom he did the honour to led his Mule by the Bridle; for which compliment he had like to have paid very dear, being hurt by the ruin of the Wall at Lions, near which they passed, as was his Brother Charles: yet they escaped better then the Duke of Britanny and the Popes brother, who were killed in the service. But after many troubles, he himself was rid by the Popes Legates, who drew him to make a most dishonourable Peace with the revolted Flemmings, and perished by an untimely death; having before he left the World, the grief of being the last of his Family, and of seeing his three daughters, by Judicial Process, openly convicted of Adultery; and lastly, to find himself the most hated and abominated person in his whole Kingdom. It were very eafie to instance in some other Kings of France, who have taken the liberty to speak big, upon the confidence of the liberties of the Gallican Church; particularly Henry III. excommunicated first, and after murdered by James Clement a Monk. Which Fact Sixtus Quintus then Pope, commended in the Consistory, as a rare, noble, and memorable dead; a Fact done not without the providence and appointment of God, &c. But we shall ever find that the Pope hath still met an opportunity to cut their recurrent nerves, and spoil their ranting: leaving a more durable triumphal Pillar in memory of his Victories over France, then that which was lately raised in Rome to its dishonour.  
After this very long and equally insignificant discourse, our Author makes a conscience of troubling Solon or Lycurgus, or his Reader, to travail beyond the Seas for examples of the splendour and greatness of Popish Princes, and refers us to Henry the VIII. who was esteemed over all the World ten times more considerable before, then after his revolt from Rome, &c. All the World is a large Word, and soon said by our Author: that comprehensive Theatre for men, will I fear scarce ever be of the same mind with this most improbable Doctor.  
In the mean time if there was any decay in that Princes Reputation or Interest toward the end of his Reign, an accident which happens to almost every Monarch in his declining Age, Persons as wise every whit as our Author, have assigned very different causes of it, from what is by him produced, As 1. 
Herbert Baker, &c.  The removal of Wolsey,; 2. The encumbrances which his frequent Marriages and Divorces brought him; And 3.( what it would have become our Author to have thought of,) the Thunderbolt of the Capitoline Jupiter, the Bull of Paul III. followed by a dangerous Rebellion in Lincolnshire, where 20000 men were in Arms against him. This seconded by another of double the number in the North; followed by a third, fourth, and fifth: and if he that had so much work cut him out at home, was not at leisure to appear much abroad, we know who is to be thanked for it.  
But our Author closes this Section, by saying, that nothing can be so ridiculous, as the foolish pretence of his Adversary, that the persons of our Princes are safer then under Popery; when every body knows that since the Reformation there have been but three Protestant Kings, and that all of them are reputed to have come to violent and extraordinary deaths. To gratify our Author, I will show him something more ridiculous by far; even his own dearly beloved Argument. For, not to insist on what is intimated before, that his Holiness has not the Keys of Death, though he pretend to those of Heaven, and his own kitchen, Purgatory; and men may go out of the World, though not sent upon his errand, I will offer him a parallel Story. A person of his Church, very wise, and of great devotion, designs a Visit to our Lady of Loretto, his Friend tells him that the Passages are beset with Troops of Bandetties, who lately murdered a great Prince in his way thither, soon after killed another, then a third and a fourth, and so on, and attempted besides very many more, who hardly escaped their hands. No, says our Votary, this cannot be, for I knew three men that purposed to go thither, and two of them were poisoned in their Inn, and a third was murdered by his Servants, before his own doors. The Parallel is so evident, that I am sure, though our Author does not, every body else will comprehend it. I will not question our Author why only the three Protestant Kings are mentioned, and we hear nothing of his Adversary Queen Elizabeth in this account of our late Princes. He takes her it seems for a she Nestor, whom none of the attempts of his Party could rid out of the way. But then as to his observation of the poisoning of Edward VI. and King James, as it is plain, that were it true, 'tis nothing to the purpose; so, as luck would have it, 'tis utterly false; 
Godwin in Edw. p. 253. ●aker, &c. ●. R. cont. of Martin, p. 363.  our Historians either not mentioning the suggestion, or at the same time they do so, confuting it. The Fable of the Nosegay and Black plaster being fitted for such weak persons that have used their understandings to submit to Tales and Legends, or such malicious ones, who tell a lye first, and then make it an Argument why they should be Rebels: and we cannot but remember of what particular use the story of the Black plaster was in the last War. The best on't is, notwithstanding all Romish Designs both in Scotland and in this Nation, taking in the Gunpowder Treason into the bargain, King James lived to a fair Age, and sober men will not wonder if an Ague at that critical season, without the help of a plaster, could kill him. Surely in this Argument it would have been expected from our Author, to have controlled my allegations, and shewed that none of those persons, who I say were destroyed or ill handled by Popes, were so dealt with; and that all the Bulls that I produced are forgeries. But this meek Reasoner hath a fairer expedient, and tells us, That he for his part lays not such abominations to the charge of any Religion, but to the pravity of human nature; which is also the cause that his Party is so abused by the Unprincipled Incendiary, meaning myself, for were I not wicked in the highest degree, I would never have grounded any argument upon the vices and scandals of Popes, when I know their Infallibility is no Article of Faith amongst Papists.  
welfare a man that writes controversy without a grain of logic. He is very kind however in the first place, to let me know, whether I will or not, what the learnedest Doctors of the Church of Rome are far from understanding, that the Popes infallibility is not matter of Faith among them. But to wave this, and behold the quintessence of Demonstration, my Author for his part lays no such abominations to the charge of any Religion, therefore no body else must. Therefore the Papists are abused by the Unprincipled Incendiary, who sets down plain matter of Fact. And again, the Popes of Rome are not infallible; therefore it is safe and eligible to submit unto their yoke, though they are never so tyrannous and debauched. We are no more bound to believe the Pope unerrable, then is the Chancellor of France, or any Lieutenant Criminal of Paris that the King can do no wrong; therefore it is still safe to submit to the Papacy, &c.  
Once more our Author, and somebody else that would be nameless, Abominate the Popes ill actions, as they admire their good ones; and cannot but think that all Christians ought to be subject to these Prelates in spirituals: Therefore every one besides, must be as good natured as they, and be enslaved to him in his spiritual and temporal tyrannies. Whoever hath use of a Rope of Sand, let him apply himself to this Artist; for certainly the World cannot show his fellow in tacking incoherent things together.  
Accordingly he goes on and takes me to task for quoting Bellarmine, Suarez, Turrecremata, Perron, &c. who say, that the Pope may depose Kings, and for inferring thence the danger of that Religion which teacheth these Doctrines. Here a solemn appeal is made, Is not this, Reader, urged like the man of Parts I ever took him for? Well, It seems all Readers knew what opinion the worthy Answerer always had of the Author of the Seasonable Discourse: but I hope before we part, they will not be to seek what opinion they are to have of him, and the Religion he defends. In the next words he says, I will cut my own throat, do what one can to hinder it. This is proved by another appeal, For did not all the Bishops of England that were consulted with, except one, declare to his Majesty, that he might lawfully comply and assent to my Lord of Straffords death, &c. This shall not yet make me say, that our Protestant Doctrine teaches Murder; or that acting against conscience for human advantage is warrantable, though the opinion of so many Prelates is, comparatively more considerable to the English Church, than a thousand to the catholic. It is truly very much he should not make the inference he talks of, for it would be in all points as good as any he hath hitherto produced: but we must follow him in his own way. Where, first, upon hearing this Story as he tells it, one would think that a Synod of all the Bishops of the three Kingdoms had been convened, when alas the total sum amounted but to five persons in all; and the question was not what our Author falsely sets it: But to use Mr. H. L' Estrange his words( which generally the Writers of K. Charles I. life, exactly accord with. 
Ham. L' Estrange, p. 265. &c. Perench. p. 25. ) The Bishops were only to resolve, whether the King might, his Conscience entire, pass the Bill against the Earl. The Bishops determine thus, That the matters of Fact and Law, were to stand apart; for the first, his Majesties presence at all the proceedings might enable him to pass his judgement: and if his judgement informed him that the Earl was guiltless, he might not in conscience condemn him. For the last being matter of Law, what was Treason, what not, the Judges they said were obliged by their Oaths to direct him. This was the total result of their joint opinions. There was indeed a Writing put into his Majesties hand by the Bishop of Lincoln, but what the contents thereof were, he never imparted to his other associates.  
And now let the World judge, if all the Bishops of England, except one, &c. teach Murder to be lawful, or that acting against Conscience for human advantage was warrantable: when of the whole Order there was but one single person who can reasonably be imagined to have promoted the Earl of Straffords death. What is suggested by the Author concerning the Archbishop of Armagh, is a great and manifest calumny; as appears from the very particular account of that transaction inserted into the History of Sir Will. Sanderson; and might be farther evidenced by uncontrollable proofs, if there were need of them.  
After this unsuccessful attack upon the Bishops, our good man hath somewhat as little to the purpose to say to the Lawyers: Do we not find that several of our learned Lawyers have affirmed that this or that was a Prerogative of the Crown, when other as learned have  told us the quiter contrary? Yet the Law of the Land is not to be called false, &c. Now from the Premises it is to be concluded, that I will cut my own throat, do what one can to hinder it. It seems a little difference in Opinion concerning some branch of the Prerogative; is to be put in balance with dethroning and murdering of Kings: and the judgement of a Lawyer or two, hath the same influence on the consciences of men, as the resolution of so many probable Doctors in concurrence with his Holiness, who have in every Age filled Europe with confusion and blood.  
Not to trouble us more in this matter, our Author at last comes to an issue, and according to his confident manner, says, In short, Reader, were these Schoolmen, which our Adversary mentions now alive, they would tell us, that every body that pleased, might reject their fancies. Good God, What kind of men were Cardinal Bellarmine, Perron, and the rest! who handle points that concern the lives of Kings, the interest and duty of whole Kingdoms; where if there be an error, it engages to Rebellion, Treason, Parricide, and other the most enormous crimes that can be acted; and yet these are such trifling fancies, that the Authors are not concerned whether they be admitted or rejected; though they have declared them also to be de fide. Whereas 'tis added that Mariana's Book was burnt, we can tell also where 'twas not; nay where it and all of that stamp, even Sanctorellus himself, 
St. Amour, p. 129.  who to prove the Popes power in deposing Kings, urges the Text of the Apostle in the very contradictory to what he said, that it was to edification and also to destruction. If this be news to our Author, he may have it more at large in St. Amours Journal, and also see the opinion not of a few Doctors, 
Pag. 448.  but the whole Senate of Inquisitors, that the denial of the execution of the Popes Jurisdiction in the temporal Territories of Princes, without they give leave, is heresy.  
As to his shrinking these high flown Writers to 10 or 12, when all the World knows that Bellarmine reckons up 72. and others rise to much higher numbers; if the issue be put to number, so that what side most Writers are of, shall pass for the Doctrine of the Roman Church, we will not decline the issue, notwithstanding the Musters of Father Carron, and the Author of the Controversial Letters.  
After all these misadventures, our Author hath the confidence to make another appeal to his Reader, and tell him, that he sees how little my allegations either from the practices of Popes, or writings of a few Doctors made against the Papists, make against them; since the Author and some other disown those opinions, &c. The Reader does abundantly see what hath been said on both sides, and will be sure never to take inferences from his hands, who hath so ill luck at them. But I pray if the claim and prescription of 600 years, I mean, ever since the days of Hildebrand, and the Writings of the most celebrated Doctors in all that time signify nothing, to evidence the danger of Popery; because forsooth this does not speak the Doctrine of the Church; what is replied to the determinations of ecumenical Councils where his Holiness presided? I hope if the Infallibility be not vested in the Doctors, nor the Pope, nor Councils apart; yet if any thing be declared in a General Council with the concurrence of the Pope, this will pass for the Doctrine of the Church; unless perchance the new Scheme in behalf of the Nurses and Mothers have utterly supplanted the Authority of the Fathers of the Church. In proof hereof the Seasonable Discourse produces the Council of Lateran, of lions, and of Constance, all which are allowed for General. But to this our prudent Answerer says not one single word, and betakes himself to his old topic of the loyalty of his Party; concerning which since he will have it so, let him expect his answer from the rejoinder of the Antiapology.  
Our Author having run himself out of breath in his zeal to his loyal Party, comes next to tell me, that I need not have troubled myself with the ungrateful topic of the Popes Excommunicating and Deposing Kings, seeing Popish Princes fear as little the loss of their Dominions as the Protestants; and that I( senseless as I am) know that ever since the Reformation, the Pope hath given away but two Kingdoms, England and France, which thanks be to God belong still to the owners, whilst those that call themselves Protestants have deposed the absolute Princes of Scotland, Denmark, Sweden, &c. In the first place I do not think our Author hath been admitted to the Cabinet Council of either Popish or Protestant Princes, to know what they do, or do not fear. And, Secondly, 'tis an inference very worthy our Author to conclude, such a mischief is not feared, therefore there is no danger, when every body, besides our Author, knows that no ruin is so fatal as that which is contemned and overlooked. But the following inference is more remarkable, the Pope hath done all that in him lies, to divest the Kings of France and England of their Dominions, yet by Gods blessing they hold them still; therefore there is no danger from the Pope. Further yet, Some that call themselves Protestants have been guilty of Rebellions; therefore the Church of England, who both in her Principles and Practices is confessedly free from any such disorders, is equally guilty of them. And lastly, what suits exactly with the rest, Matthew Paris and other catholics, complain of the intolerable tyrannies of the Pope; therefore 'tis a fault in us to complain of them: or, which follows as well, those tyrannies are very fit for us to call upon ourselves, when by Gods blessing we are freed from them.  
Now at last we have attended our Author to the end of his second head. After some scorn of my politics, he addresses to them, forgetting to say one syllable in defence of putting whole Nations under interdict; that they who happen to displease his Holiness, should have no public Offices of Religion for several years together; this our Full Answerer slides by in silence, and arrives, as he says, to his politics. And first he destroys my profound Observation( Pag. 18.) that says Popery will be destructive to the Laws of the Land. This he laughs out of countenance, by saying that the Lawyers are very good Catholiks already, for they declare that the King, and by parity of reason, the Pope, &c. can do no wrong; that their Common Law is oral Tradition, that an unknown tongue is fit and laudable; that Clients must pay blind obedience. But since a Rowland for an Oliver is the word; I must beg leave to add one maxim of Law more, The King never dies, and therefore never any Papist murdered any King, or ought to be punished for attempting what was in itself an impossibility. But our merriment is upon the sudden turned into fury; Who can have patience, says our meek Reasoner, with this piece of formality, that durst urge such a foolish insignificant argument, that Popery will prejudice our Law and Lawyers, when as not only they, but all that can red, know what learned rich and eminent persons, both for power and dignity, we have had formerly of this Profession: the like at present being seen in France, Spain, Italy, and other places, &c. It is a hard matter to deal with a man who will bear one down, and persuade him against the most evident truths in the World. There is scarce an ordinary School-boy, who does not know that most of the Judicatories of England were, till the Reformation, commonly in the hands of Priests and Canonists; and that when ever Popery comes in, it will probably be so again. However it is most manifest that the greatest part of the Grist will be carried to another Mill; first the Ecclesiastical Courts at home, and then by appeals to Rome abroad. I can with very little recollection at any time reckon up about twenty Earls, Viscounts, and Barons, which since the time of King Henry VIII. threw off the Pope,( excluding the interval of Q. Maries reign) were raised to the Peerage of England from the Law; and I can reckon up hundreds, who have gained estates thereby, which might qualify them for the like dignity. But I have not in all History met with one instance of that strange secret which our Author tells us is known to every one that can red, of rich and eminent persons to be set in balance with the other. But he proves his Paradox by the greatness of the French, Spanish, and Italian Lawyers; a point which I have no reason at all to grant him, but only because if it were true, it proves nothing at all to the purpose: for quietness sake it shall be, for once, as he pleases. But the Argument runs thus; The Civil and Canon Lawyers are great men abroad under Popery, therefore the Common Lawyers of England will be so too. The Gentlemen of the Long rob, who upon the double obligation of their Country and Profession, are the asserters of the Laws of England, are not so foolish as to desert their interest and duty upon those lamentable pretences that are here offered. And therefore I shall no longer insist upon this head, but proceed to the following.  
Where my Adversary undertakes to confute, that is, derides and rails against my second wise Observation,( p. 20.) that Popery will resume all the Lands alienated since the Reformation from the Church. Whether my observations be to be called wise or foolish, is, I hope, to be determined by somewhat besides our Authors pleasure; who appears, and no body can help it, secure and unconcerned at the mention of resumption of Church Lands. We will not suppose him thus unconcerned because he hath not much to lose, and therefore impute it to his confidence of obtaining such advantages, in case of a change, as may abundantly recompense him. We know very well that such considerations prevailed with some men about the time of his Majesties restauration, and may as well in any other revolution. The Pope, he tells us, is not such a child, as to give a thing and take a thing; whether the old Gentleman may not, at least in this particular, be twice a child, we are not secure by our Authors assertion; especially since another sort of persons besides idiots and Infants, meddle with things which belong to them. And were not our Author furnished with a convenient talent of incogitancy, he could not but know how in all Ages Popes have done so: usurped not only on the Estates of private men, and Dominions of Princes,( and, not to go for instances beyond those which were before his eyes in the Seasonable Discourse, where he finds his Majesties Dominions disposed of several times over) but on the acts of preceding Popes; the doing which is justified by as good Canon Law as is to be found in the Decretals. I instance in that which occurs next, where his Holiness breaking through the Decree of a Council, and his Predecessors to boot, 
Cap. innotuit nobis, de ele●… tione,& cle●… ti potestate.  declares peremptorily, That though the Lateran Council and Pope Alexander had decreed a nullity to be in the Acts there specified, yet the power of dispensing is not taken from the succeeding Pope, since that could not be intended by them, who could not prejudice the right of the Successor, who was to have the same power that the other had: and it is a known rule that par in parem imperium non habet. If the Act of a preceding Pope could bind the Successors, I fear me, 'twould go but ill with our Lay-Abbots; for Pope Symmachus is very positive, that it shall not be lawful for the Pope to alienate the Lands of the Church in any manner, 
Canons non li●… cat, 11. q. 2.  or for any necessity: but the Gloss sets all streight again, and says, that the Successor is not bound, it being certain that no mortal can judge the Pope. So that I doubt our Author has not divined aright, what the Popes opinion of his obligation would be, in case of a revolution: yet however, without intending it, he hath  told us his own, by his Story of Mrs. Ven: viz. that the possessors of Church Lands have no better right, then Mrs. Ven had to a Cavaliers Estate; and how well Mrs. Ven kept hers, 'tis not hard to be informed.  
But our Author tells us, such a resumption must be either by Act of Parliament, or by the Pope: an Act of Parliament cannot be had, and the Pope will not do it: the latter, the Popes good will, we have seen how far it is to be depended on; the former part our Author fortifies with this reason, that it will be against the interest of all the members, to pass such an Act. It falls out unfortunately for our Author to writ in an Age where revolutions have furnished matter of Fact, which is a pestilent Argument of the possibility of an event; only those that are armed with infallibility having confidence enough to deny, that what hath been, may be. Having therefore an eye to what hath passed heretofore, let us examine this grand security our Author gives the Lay Abbots from the interest of the members of Parliament not to consent to a restitution to Holy Church.  
First of all, what certainty have we that the Members of Parliament, upon such a revolution, shall be all or most chosen out of Lay Abbots? did we find the late Purchasers, or that sort of men, carry so many elections in the choice of this present Parliament, which was as free and uncontrolled as any ever was, or will be? or did we rather find that the humour of the People went quiter against that sort of men? Yet farther, What if upon such a revolution as must be supposed if Popery should once prevail in this Kingdom, none should be eligible but under certain qualifications? The late Times furnished us with one of fearing God, and hating covetousness; which interpnted by a Roman Casuist, might easily be brought to signify such as had not, or would not retain Church Lands. If those terms be not expressive enough, new ones would not be long in finding, to take the place of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy at the Parliament door, which upon such a change must avoid.  
What if one should desire the Author to consider, that many ways may be found out to prevail with the most eminent and leading men? Besides that, the zeal in delivering up Church Lands will so recommend them to those that shall be then in power( and who those may be, God knows) that it will be like the merit of an old Cavalier at the Kings restauration, qualifying them for all the good things of the Land.  
What if one should farther desire the Author to call to mind, that the long Parliament itself, at the last when they saw the humour of the Nation run toward it, were plainly desirous, and contriving to bring in the King?( I mean when the secluded Members were amongst them) though there was not one man there who had not forfeited his neck by the Law of the Land,( and that is as sensible an interest as Abbey Lands) and yet the Kings good words, the humour of the Nation leading toward it, and the hope of meriting by being of the forwardest, made many men not only suffer it, but by opposing the Faction then in possession, run some hazards to promote the Kings restauration. He that shall peruse our Records and Acts of Parliament, will find that every Faction, when prevailing, hath had no great difficulty to get Laws made for their purpose.  
Those Lay Abbots, who will prevent Acts for resuming Church Lands, must in their several capacities use their endeavour to prevent the growth of Popery in the Nation. If once that over-spread this Kingdom, it is beyond folly to rely on the Acts of Parliaments under which they now claim.  
Our Author, for our farther security, tells us the Pope gave consent to alienate Lands at Venice for the War against the Turk, and for an end he supposes not unlike it the settling a distracted Kingdom, dispensed with it here also. The Lay Abbots are obliged to him for putting the alienation of Church Lands here upon an equal foot with those at Venice. It is the first time I have ever heard any of that Religion give so great an approbation of it: and yet even in this kindness of his, there is a latent sting; he doth not mean that the first alienation had the Popes allowance, he speaks only of what the Pope consented to in Q. Maries days, as he calls it, ( i.e.) reclaiming a distracted, i.e. in their sense, an heretical Kingdom. When the Seasonable Discourse doubts whether, that not having the effect, for which it was designed, it will not be interpnted a condition not accepted of, and therefore no longer obligatory. Our Author answers only by his censure, which he is pleased to bestow on it, as a transcendent confidence to allege as an instance that there remains no obligation from the Kings offer at the Isle of Wight, to lease Church Lands for 99 years, since not accepted, as certainly no offer obliges unless accepted. He is pleased to say with some derision, that none but the Author of the Seasonable Discourse fancies the Pope cannot be tied to an agreement as well as other Governours. The Seasonable Discourse had  told him, that the Pope acting for the Church, would in a favourable conjuncture, find himself obliged to rescind whatever had passed prejudicial to it; the impossibility whereof, I do not find him demonstrate: and I have shewed him as good Canon Law as is in the Decretals, that the Pope can be loose from this Act of his Predecessors, had it been more formal then it was, whenever he pleased. But my good man brings up his reserve of the Treaty of Munster, upon which so many Papist and Protestant Princes, Noblemen, and Gentlemen, have either bishoprics, Abbeys, or the like, confirmed to them by the Pope. But if after all this there be no such matter, 
Instrum. Pacis. Notitia rerum Imperii Romano Germanici per Phil. And. Burgoldensem. p. 91. 6 Innocentii X. Declaratio nullitatis articulorum nuperae pacis Germaniae, &c. ex Typogr. reverendae Camerae. apostle. Anno, 1651.  if the Pope have been so far from confirming these grants, as to protest against them by his Legate Cardinal Cheigi in the Treaty; and afterwards in a particular Bull damned them to the Pit of Hell: what shall we say to the honesty and credit of our Author, with his impertinent Broadside from the Maltese Gallies? But( not to insist on our Authors customary frailty of being mistaken) as to our present business, suppose the Popes equally obliged with other Governors, I do not find the Author hath answered any thing to those words, in Pag. 21. of Season. Disc. Acts of Resumption are not things unheard of in ours, or in foreign Stories. Nor to the instance of the present French Kings method of resuming the Demesnes of his Crown, p. 22. no contemptible Argument of fear to the Lay Abbots, since our Author does not pretend the Pope more easily or more strongly to be tied then other Governors. The Glance he is pleased to give at the Fee-farm Rents, however intended by him, furnisheth a pregnant argument how doubtful men are of the title to alienations of that nature( though purely lay without any scruple or pretence of sacrilege by any body) since it is evident that whilst they were exposed to sale for ready money, scarce any would deal for them, and they remained unsold, till the method of doubling orders, did a little help; but that which made men earnest indeed to buy them, was the stop upon some of his Majesties other payments, which made men to resort to this as the most eligible in this conjuncture; which I suppose may have been the greatest inducement to those Princes he is pleased to speak of in Germany, to accept of a settlement of their Church Revenues, as the best terms they could at that time obtain; though they were to undergo all the Curses of Pope Innocent X. Bull, particularly against them, and all the studied execrations of the Bulla Coenae, that most solemn and devout preparative among the Romanists for the charities of Easter; and the Decree and command of the Council of Trent, Sess. 25. c. 20. establishing all the sacred Canons, all General Councils, together with other Apostolical Ordinances,( that is, Bulls of Popes,) made in favour of Ecclesiastical persons, and Ecclesiastical liberty, and against the violators thereof, &c. The easiest effect whereof to those of the Roman Communion, must be the paying a round fine at every absolution; and at the time of death being awed with the terrors of Purgatory, till a liberal sacrifice to the Popes Coffers, promise a release from his Holinesses kitchen. I desire this Decree of the holy and ecumenical Council of Trent last mentioned, may be well weighed and considered; for if all Bulls in favour of Ecclesiastical persons and liberty be here established; and none of these Orders were founded, but by privileges and Bulls from the Pope; one need not make much scruple what will become of these Parliament Acts which vacated them, so soon as a fair opportunity of declaring in the case shall present itself.  
But farther yet, Supposing the Pope equally tied with other Governours, may he not pled that the Law doth relieve the King against his own Act, when he hath been deceived in his grant, obtained by undue suggestions. 'tis not to be doubted, but if Popery should prevail, his Holiness would expect the same equity of our Law; and I believe the Lay Abbots do not desire to put their Estates to that issue before a Jesuited Jury, whether the Pope were deceived in his Concessions in Q. Maries days. The points in Law which may rise from the penning the Acts of Suppression of Religious Houses, intimated in the Seasonable Disc. our Author, according to his way of full answering, fairly passes over.  
My next misdemeanour, for which I am to have due correction, is my quotation of a passage in the Traitte politic, which after a great deal of insipid contumely that was intended for wit, and fills up the room of sense, is not at all pretended to be misrecited by me; only I am first very ridiculous to think the Interest of the Regulars so considerable a thing. Well, since it must be so, and I am never to be believed, let us take the opinion of Campanella in the case, as good a politician I dare say as our Author is likely to be in hast. If( says he) all Princes with their People should join their forces to destroy the Popedom, 
〈…〉 ●… e Monarch. ●… isp. c. 18. ●●.  they would never be able to compass it. Let him but set out a Crusade, all the Religious, of which there are many millions, would all run to arms, able to resist and terrify the whole World with their Tongues and Swords. But should we take them for mere Abbylubbers, that had much rather eat then fight, 'tis plain to every man of sense, what interest they have in setting on others that have better Metal: not to tell of their dexterities in poisoning and stabbing, by that compendium superseding the use of War and Armies.  
But secondly, As to the absurd Parallels of the Hugonots and the Mogul, out of which our chemist in reasoning draws a plain Conclusion, that I have ruined the Church, and am a Traitor, 'tis such a piece of childish folly, that in mere respect to the Reader, I will not expose him for it. Let any honest man that hath not traveled himself out of his Religion and Wits, and love of his Country, seriously red the Section referred to by me; and freely judge whether it be that unconcerning piece of Nonsense 'tis represented.  
Our Author after this calls me to account for my third Observation which stirs up my zeal against Popery, The preservation of Trade, with the value of Lands and Rents. It cannot be denied but the Author hath given good evidence of his skill, when he comes to examine the arguments of inconvenience to Trade, Rents, and Riches of the Nation, supposed to follow the admission of Popery: but the dexterity lies in knowing what he could not answer, and so diverting the Discourse to another subject: For example, It was objected that the encouragement Popery gave to idle persons by Monasteries, &c. would withdraw many hands from Work and Trade. The Author to prove this false( as if he were playing at across purposes) tells us, some have affirmed deaneries, Prebendaries, &c. did so also. Doth that make the objection any thing less true? none can deny, but if all the hands in England were employed in working, more work might be done: And if for other good reasons it is found fit to set apart some for other uses, Judges, States-men, Divines, &c. doth it therefore follow it is good to have a refuge for all the lazy People in a Nation to be idle in, without being any way useful, much less necessary to the public? But if the Reader find not that argument convincing, he hath plenty of others as good, so the number shall supply for the weight; for to prove that Monasteries do not withdraw hands from Work and Trade, he tells you, many Protestants have and do lament the want of them: Ergo. That Mr. Stow saith it was a pitiful thing to hear the lamentation in the Country for them, when they were put down: Ergo. But who do you think lamented them? Probably, those who by their suppression were forced to work and take pains for their living, which before they did not.  
The Author of the Seasonable Discourse had unfortunately overshot himself, and said, That he thought the Celibate of Priests, and the admitting Nuns and Religious Orders would be an hindrance to the increase in People: the Answerer convinceth him of his mistake by a Proverb,( I think of his own making) viz. That nothing furnishes the Gallows and the Bawdy-houses like Parsons children: Ergo, the Celibate, &c. doth not hinder the increase in People. His inferences are so lovely, that I can by no means pass them by. Certainly no body but our Author in an Age when several of the Nobility and prime Ministers of State, are and have been Sons of Clergy men: when the Sons of so many Earls and Barons, not to mention the Gentry, are actually in Holy Orders, and more in the Universities are Candidates of them: and on the other side, when persons of the vilest extraction, in the Church of Rome are notoriously known to have risen to be Cardinals and Popes: I say, no body besides our Author, would have objected the mean birth of our Clergy as a reproach unto us. I am sure no Christian, who is the Votary and Disciple of the blessed Jesus, who for our sakes made himself of no reputation, and put on the form of a Servant, and choose Fishermen and Tent-makers for his Apostles, would with despite and scorn( had the thing been true, as it is in the general very false) objected an humble Fortune or mean Birth to those who serve at his Altar, and succeed to his Apostles in their ministration in holy things. Had I my Authors eloquence in Exclamations, I might here cry out on the Unprincipled man. But to pass this, however here is an excellent effect of the marriage of the Clergy, which I did not before think of; they provide matter for the Exercise of Justice( which would else be quiter out of use) and give sufficient supply to the Bawdy houses, without laying a necessity on those of any other extraction to be debauched. How should one do to convince this Author that there were Whores and Thieves when Priests did not mary? or that there may be now of other extraction then Ministry. I shall not pretend to the privilege of making Proverbs: but I am sure it is become the vulgar observation, that the Whores and the Thieves almost of course seek an Asylum at Rome, whose first beginnings were owed to that sort of Inhabitants. If we should search Records of old time, to see what Thieves had been condemned or executed in those days, our Author has an answer for that too; for neither the Judges nor the Juries supposed to condemn them, were infallible; as he is pleased to say even of the Pope himself, when he finds an argument cannot be otherwise avoided; and the Reader will easily believe our Author thinks the Pope as infallible as a Free-holder at the least. Despairing therefore of convincing him by any arguments of mine, in this difficult point, I leave him to his own meditation resolving to comply with what he is pleased to say to his Reader upon this very subject, viz. that there is no need of staying longer upon it. And yet lest he should think himself neglected, I am willing to offer a word or two to his observation of Popish Countries being as populous as the Reformed; in which, if circumstances be rightly considered, the Reader will find cause to differ from him. For he will scarce find a Popish Country of that extent so populous as Holland is, or lately was. If the Author think our want of People may be alleged on his side, it is to be considered that we have been for a long time wonderfully drained of our People by our Plantations, besides the Wars of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the re-planting of Ireland, which the Author ought the less to forget, because we are obliged to those of his Church for the occasion of it.  
As to his argument of taking away all days of rest, it will not follow, that because I allow it reasonable to pay Tithes, or Easter Offerings to the Clergy, therefore I should give them half or all my Estate; nor the other way, that because I will not give them all my Estate, therefore I should not pay Tithes. The moderation of many things makes them eligible, which the excess would render perfectly intolerable.  
The next of our Authors dexterities is his eluding the argument used in the Seasonable Discourse, that Fasting days would be more numerous, and therefore less flesh eaten; and thence it was inferred, Cattle abounding would be cheaper, and therefore Farmers would not pay the same rent for Land, as if there were not so many Fasting days. Now our Authors full answer is, Bishop Andrews in his Lenten Sermons commends Fasting, and so do many other Protestant Divines. Therefore though there should be more Fasting days, there would be as much Flesh eaten, &c.  
It is unfortunate our Author did not light upon a right way of arguing at first; for if he had, it is probable he would have kept it up, as well as he hath done his across purposes; in which being once engaged, he would not be so wavering as to depart from it. I dare not undertake for a Gentleman who thinks he follows an Infallible guide; otherwise I should have been tempted to give the Reader hopes, that when any body should writ against the lawfulness of Monasteries, or of Priests continuing unmarried, of holidays, or of Fasting, our Author would then give us his arguments of their convenience or inconvenience as to Trade, Rent, or increase of People: which he hath been pleased wholly to omit now, when that part only was in question. If Spain, which hath Plantations, be compared with us, we are much more populous, as we are also then Italy which hath none at all; 'tis true France exceeds us, not having had that drain of Plantations, till of late; and that sparing in respect of us; and possibly somewhat of the populousness of France may be owing to the Reformation, those of that Religion, furnishing no Nuns, Friers, or Orders of either Sex obliged to celibate. I have heard the French King hath had some consideration of suppressing some of the Religious Houses, and restraining the admission of persons into them upon this very account; whether it is become any thing more then a project, I cannot say.  
The next thing is, the objection from holidays, as an hindrance to Trade and Work; but because I have the ill luck never to be believed by our Author, I will set down the very words of a devout catholic, 
Caramuel Fund. Theol. 52. §. 11.  J. Caramuel, and let the World judge whether I am that impudent affirmer I am represented. In the Countries( saith he) subject to the King of Spain, besides Sundays, and Festivals to our Lady, the Apostles and other Saints, there are the peculiar holidays of Cities and Thanksgivings for Victories, which are so frequent as to take up a great part of the year. Under the States there are no holidays besides the Sundays. Now the catholic and heretic Cities being close together, this I see and experiment every day, that poor men who have a charge of Wife and Children, cannot in four days gain enough to maintain their Wife and Families for seven; therefore they run over to the Rebels, that getting more there, they may live more advantageously and plentifully. This removal occasions four necessary mischiefs: 1. The catholic King loses his Subjects. 2. The number of our Enemies is increased. 3. Our Enemies are enriched, the Manufactures of our Runaways are sold to us, for which our money is sent into Holland, who fight against us with it. 4. They turn Calvinists. Thus he. And I think his words are a sufficient justification of mine. But our Author I expect should say that Pope Urban VIII. in his Bull bearing date Decemb. 22. 1642. retrenches the number of holidays. He does so indeed, but under the soft terms of holidays of obligation universally to be observed; but even then, under our Authors correction, he retains Holy-rood day, the Assumption of the blessed Virgin, her Birth, St. Laurence, St. Sylvester, St. Joseph, St. Anne, the Guardian Saint of the Kingdom, as also the Patron of the City, Town, Parish, which fall not within the number our Author pretends. But however, since notwithstanding Pope Urbans Bull, the old Troop of Saints, both real and imaginary, those I mean which are in Heaven, or Hell, or never were at all,( which notoriously is the case of some of them) remains in the Roman Breviary, after it has been reformed over and over by several Popes since the Council of Trent; our Author must not blame the Seasonable Discourse( having been taught by him, that Popes Bulls are not to be urged in proof of the Doctrine of the Church; and therefore will hardly counterbalance Liturgies) though he had laid his charge to the most comprehensive extent: but surely 'tis most plain that my argumentation is firm and conclusive, That the increase of holidays, or the rigour of their observance, which is all one, is so far prejudicial to Trade, as there is an increase, whatever the proportion be. His story of the Reverend man, who would mortify in Capon, because he loved Fish better, may when 'tis equally true, stand besides the parallel of one of his own Tribe; who in great devotion to the Laws of the Church, dipped his forbidden flesh into the water, and by his fiat( which we know of course works greater miracles) commanded it to go down big, and come up Pike, and then with a good conscience fell to his Fish. Our Authors argument for the employing Seamen, will have no force in this matter, so long as it is known how many Hollanders fish upon our Coasts, and make a vast Revenue by it, yet are under no other outward tie then that of frugality, to keep at any time a Fast, or feed on Fish.  
Our Author goes on to my fourth Observation, that Popery will bring to private persons a vast expense in Masses, Dirges, &c. I expected that after the charge of so large a sum, our Author should have made use of his Talent of Confidence, and stoutly denied the allegation; or at least, as he uses to do in a case of exigence, put on the Buffoon and fairly laughed it out. But he very honestly confesses the whole matter, and goes about to justify it, because Magna Charta gives every body leave to do what he will with his own. Our Author hath the luck to surprise his Reader in every thing he says. There is not a Grand Jury man in England but knows that there are several scores of Statutes that restrain men from doing what they will with their own, and yet they were never till now charged with being a breach of Magna Charta; I would fain know( to wave other instances) if the Statute of Mortmain, which he presently mentions, do not induce such a restraint; and if that be a breach of Magna Charta. 'tis a known rule in Law, that the public is concerned to take care that private men should well employ their Estates; and all wise Nations have been concerned to appoint Guardians and Tutors to those whose weakness or prodigality made them ill managers for the public and themselves. And sure 'tis but an ill account of Popery, that it will put us under a perpetual nonage; and unless our Authors new maxim help, expose us to be begged for Fools and Idiots. His next argument to prove that Popery does not drain the purses of its Votaries, is that he believes the Papists of England and elsewhere, have as much money in their purses at the years end, as their Protestant neighbours of the same rank and estate. I desire this may be remembered at the next complaint of persecution. They are indeed shrewdly hurt by the tyrannous heretics, who crack in this manner, and offer to drop Ginneys with their Neighbours. But Sir, if Popery prevail, the burdensome offices, from which you are now exempted, will fall upon you as well as others; nor must you think to make your Priest your Caterer or Bailiff any longer, or put him off with a pitiful salary, raised out of simony, which in this case his Holiness hath made lawful for you. The World, believe it, will be changed; his Holiness is now to stroke you, and shake his Provender; but if he gets up again upon his old patient Beast, which carried him and all the load he could heap on, for so many Ages; we must not doubt, and you with us, of having the same, if not worse usage then formerly we met.  
When I had made out from unquestionable Records the intolerable oppressions and incredible sums of money, which in times of Popery were drained, and even screwed from us, I closed the Paragraph by desiring to be informed what was, or may be expected to come back in exchange to us, besides Parchments full of Benedictions and Indulgences; store of Leaden Seals, Beads, and Tickets, Medals, Agnus dei's, Rosaries, hallowed grains, and Wax Candles: These it seems our Author takes for very sufficient Barter; for he attempts not to name any one thing which is to be added to the Account.  
He proceeds to my fifth Observation, p. 29. which nettles me when I think on't, 'tis Auricular Confession. And here he again wonders at the unprincipled man, and tells us, that Scripture commands it by these words, confess your sins one to another. There be some who would reply, that these words enjoin as much the Priest to confess his sins to the People, as the People to the Priest: But I will not discourage a young beginner from quoting the Scriptures, and therefore will by no means take the advantage of that exception: but will flatly tell him, that neither this Text, nor any other in the Bible, nor Canon of any ancient Council, Writing of Fathers, or practise of the Primitive Church gives the least countenance to Auricular Confession. For proof of this, because my credit is low with him, I shall desire my Author at his best leisure to look upon what is said in the known Jansenist Tract, De la frequent Communion, proving through the first Ages, that performance of the Penance did precede the Absolution: which Pecavius ●●plying to, can only answer, that those instances were all in public penitences: but is able to produce himself not one instance, whether of Confession or Penance where 'twas otherwise; which sufficiently shows that this present Engine of the Romanists, which gives Absolution before the performance of Penance, is a mere abuse and novelty in the Church. His excuse for the sacred seal of Confession in behalf of Princes, that by this means Priests will dissuade and dehort all Subjects from traitorous machinations, which otherwise would be concealed from them, is such a piece of confidence, as we could hardly meet elsewhere, but from our Author. For was it not as clear as noon-day light, that the whole design of the Gunpowder Treason was made known in Confession, and that Absolution was given upon it, and the Sacrament also in pursuance thereof: and for the keeping secret the whole matter, in respect of the Priest as well as the Conspirators? 
Proceedings against the late Traitors.  and was not this almost the only Plea which Father Garnet made at his arraignment, to justify himself for not disclosing the Conspiracy? when 'twas withal notorious that his resolution of the case did not dehort or dissuade, but animate that hellish enterprise? The close of our Authors Apology is, that Auricular Confession may be abused and profaned, as is the reading of the Scriptures. To which I answer, that the Parallel is not very mannerly or apposite; but yet it yields a very good argument ad hominem, The Papists, because the Scriptures may be abused, forbid the reading of them; therefore since, as 'tis notorious, Auricular Confession is more abused, let that be forbid likewise.  
Our Author proceeds to my short and dull glances against Indulgences and Pardons; I never intended to convince by strains of wit or railing, that is our Authors privilege, the weapon which I use is plain and down-right truth, which he above all mankind that ever I yet met, hath reason to be angry with. His first charge is my quoting Corn. Agrippa; He may himself it seems, with a good grace quote Plays, and the Transproser, and Dr. Wild the Poet, and Mr. Pen the Quaker, and transcribe whole Pages at a time; but the very naming Cornelius Agrippa is a mortal sin in me. Let him however red what Naudaeus hath said in his behalf; and then see whether he be to be put in the same form with rabelais. But I am farther accused of being pleasantly, if not maliciously ignorant concerning the ancient rates mentioned by me of Fornication: which imposition the Reader must know, was only a pecuniary Mulct upon some transgressions, as we have here about swearing, &c. God be thanked there is a Law against Swearing, 'twere much to be wished that there were some against Lying: since you will out-face me in every thing that I say, be it never so evident. I pray what think you of Claud. Espencaeus? 
come. i● Epist. ad Tit cap. 1, Digr. ●. p. 67.  did he know what these your ancient godly impositions were? or will you have some deference to his opinion in the case? his words are these. There is a Book publicly set to every mans view, which goes off as well now as ever, entitled, Taxa Cancellariae Apostolicae, which is exposed and prostituted as a common Whore for gain: whence more villainy is learned then from all the Institutions and Summaries of wickedness: there is licence granted for many of the most abominable crimes, and absolution for all, excepting such who will not buy them. I forbear their names, they being( as one expresses it) horrid in their very sound. It is strange that in these Times, in this Schism, that Catalogue and Inventory of so many foul and abominable villainies, so infamous, that I verily believe there is not a more scandalous Book in all Germany, Switzerland, or any other place which hath separated from the Church of Rome, is unsupprest. Yea, it is so far from being suppressed by the Treasurers of the Church of Rome, that the Licences and impunities for those so many and horrible crimes, are renewed, and for the most part confirmed by the faculties of the Legates, &c. And now the Author may be pleased to rub his forehead a little, and with good confidence go on to tell his Stories, whether he made them himself, or received them in Confession, or heard them at the Coffee-house, 'twill make no great odds. The reason, he says, why I am so piquant against Popes, Cardinals, &c. is out of madness to see that none of my Flock will trust me with the news of a Gazette, and 'tis a common saying, that if one would have a thing bruited abroad, 'tis but telling it to the person as a secret, who will not fail of acquainting his wife, and she presently, the whole Parish with it. And now if I should chance to have no Parish, nor no Wife, what a goodly argument would be here spoiled? Well Sir, the Friers and Popish Priests Concubine is as near his bosom, as the Protestant Priests Wife: and you know 'tis a more celebrated saying than that which you just now alleged, that the Priests have a Law forbidding them to mary, and a custom for not living chased. But in reserve comes in the story of Simon More, the Preacher to the Rebels at Worcester, who betrayed Hind the famous Robber: and he is set out as a Ghostly Father of the Church of England, and a sufficient reason why no body will sithen his Conscience to any Priest of our Church: which suggestion, whether it have more malice or folly in it, I cannot easily resolve, but I am sure deserves no farther answer.  
He goes on to the last Observation, which makes me his mortal enemy, p. 32. Self-preservation, to avoid Fire and Faggot, Massacres, Racks and Gibbets, the known methods by which the Romanists support their Cause, and propagate their Faith, &c. all which, he says, are at large answered in the Reply, where 'tis proved that either the allegations are false, or are no more to the catholic Religion, than Judas his Treason is to Christianity. I have given him my word, that I will not meddle with his Reply, else I should tell him that 'tis something strange that Rebellions acted in pursuance of the most probable Doctors resolution of his Holiness his Bulls, and decisions of Councils, should be so wide from having to do with the catholic Religion, unless happily what passes under that name be not Christianity. But he goes on and rails at the poor Albingenses and Piemonteses for being open Rebels. Good Sir remember a little, Were the Crusades employed against them for their Rebellion, or their heresy, that is, dissenting from the Roman Doctrines? But if this do not do, I am to be confuted with the Quakers complaints against our persecuting of them. We are fallen into a good World when Papists writ for Toleration, and make Apologies for Quakers. In fine, Our Author makes a grave remark, that there is great difference between the Popish and Protestant Party, who as soon as we were in power, persecuted them their elder brother. I would very fain keep my word, and since I have promised it, say nothing to the topic of our Authors Reply, the loyalty of his Party. But since he forces me to it, I must beg leave to remind him, that there was no great Persecution in Edw. VI. time, nor for the first 11. years of Q. Eliz. nay to the 23. of her Reign, and for that time I hope the Protestants were in power; 
Watsons Quod- lib. p. 265.  yet the Papists had no cause to say that they were persecuted: and 'tis confessed by their own Party, that their multiplied Treasons did extort all the severe Laws that were made against them. And whereas our Author wishes that the Papists in England had half so much favour as the Piedmonteses have; 'tis such an extremity of stupid ingratitude, as will certainly by no means recommend to the favour and indulgence which is begged for in the next period. If the English Papists, who live on their Estates in all freedom, affluence, and plenty, and as our Author acknowledges it, have as much money in their purses as their neighbors, do yet complain of persecution, and wish to be in the state of the Piedmonteses, who live in that desolate poverty, that nothing but the luxury of cruelty could tempt men to take the pains to destroy them; we must not hope they will be ever satisfied with all the kindness we can show them. But to satisfy all doubts, my Adversary, as if he came Legate à later to reconcile the Nation to the Church of Rome, gives us unquestionable security, even his own fair word, which we have seen to be frail enough; telling us that he declares upon the faith of a Christian, that he abominates for his own part, the very thought of blood and persecution; and that he verily believes the catholics of England would not touch the least hair of any Protestants head( were they in power) for their Conscience. I will be so charitable as to admit our Author may abominate or believe what he protests he does; but we cannot but know that he has a faculty of changing his belief; and he cannot tell what an alteration a new face of things might make in his mind. In the mean time I am sure we have no reason to hope that all the catholics of England, however transformed of late from what they always were before, as our Author would persuade us they are, are a distinct species of Christians from those elsewhere; particularly of Ireland, for whom our Undertaker is so cautious as not to engage. So that we must resolve that St. Patricks benediction is transferred to us, and the most poisonous Jesuited Viper of Ireland, that eats his way through his Mothers bowels,( for I say our Author has nothing to pled for them) so soon as set upon the English Shore, loses all his venoms, and is as harmless as Innocence itself.  
We might have ended here, but that our Author is to show one piece more of my matchless impudence, which is, that deal Rio informs us that the Powder Plot was with the privity and direction of the Pope; when as this Author published his Book in Feb. 1598. ( for then the licence for printing it, bears date) which is seven years before that treasonable machination; nor hath he a word there of England in the place: and whereas I say that Clement VIII. gave order that no Priest should discover any thing that came to his knowledge by Confession, for the benefit of the secular Government, 'tis absolutely false; for his Holiness his Precept was only to the Superiors of the Regulars( as the said Author expressly tells us) that they should diligently beware of making any thing known, discovered by Confession, to advantage their own exterior Government; that is, if by Confession a superior came to know the natural imperfections of a Subject, as his lying, idleness, or prodigality, &c. he should not therefore put him out of his Office, &c. The Gentleman has now done, but let us see where is this matchless impudence that I am charged with? Is it because I say the Gunpowder Treason was with the Privity and direction of the Pope; surely that cannot be it, for that hath been asserted by others long before me; 
Cap. 5. p. 113.  particularly by Bishop Andrews in his Book against Bellarm. who says that his Holiness had ordered three Bulls to be in readiness on the other side the Water, which were to be sent over and published in several parts of the Nation so soon as the blow was given. Or possibly the fault is, 
Disquis. Mag. l. 6. c. 1.§ 2.  that I say deal Rio informs me of it. If I can prove that an ordinary jesuit knew of it, and that some years before, I hope 'twill be a little more than probable, it was not a secret which the Pope might not be trusted with, till it was done. Now whether deal Rio knew of it or no, let his own words determine. The case he puts is this, Whether if a Confederate discover in Confession, that he or some else have placed Gunpowder, or such like matter, under such or such a house, and unless it be removed the house will be blown up, the Prince destroyed, and as many as are in, or are going out of the City, will sustain great mischief, or run an extreme hazard, the Priest ought to reveal it, which is determined in the negative. 'tis true here is no mention of England, but our Author, I dare say, can give a very good reason why that particular is omitted: and I am sure there are all other circumstances exactly enough to ground somewhat more than a loose possibility. Now if the matter stick here, I can produce subsidiary proofs that other Priests in foreign parts did know of the design some time before it was to be executed. But thirdly, It may be my impudence lies in quoting deal Rio for this matter of the Gunpowder Treason, who wrote his Book seven years before that treasonable machination was to be put in execution; And this our Author has been very curious to peruse. To this I might answer, that 'tis no news for Romanists to lay their Plots as deep as this; and a design, whose motions were to have violent fears as well as hopes, and which waited for the convening and Session of a Parliament, could not morally speaking, have a ready execution. But what if our Authors suggestion concerning the time of the publishing deal Rio's Books, notwithstanding his very curious perusals, be absolutely false, will he hereafter have the face to take himself to be a man of honour; or expect to be believed in any thing he writes or speaks? The truth of the Story in plain terms is this, The first edition of the two first Books of deal Rio, and only of them, came out in the end of the year 1599. the 7. of the Ides of March, for so deal Rio's Epistle to the Bishop of Colen assures us; who tells him That he puts forth a Specimen of his labour, and a kind of taste of the succeeding Feast, two of the six Books which he had written: and this he did because the approaching time of the Mart, and other delays hindered the publishing of more. Let my Author inquire for the louvain Edition printed by Gerard Rivius, in the year 1599. and see if I falsify. And this a man of any tolerable sagacity might have discerned in that very page. which the Author cites; for there the louvain Censors approbation of the first two Books stands and bears date, Feb. 8. Ann. 1599. Now does any body use to print the four last Books of any Work before the two first? So much then be said to the first part of our Authors diligence. I am now to show when the four last Books of deal Rio came forth, and particularly the last Tome, in which our present concern is placed. And for this let the louvain Edition by the same Gerard Rivius in the year 1600. and the Dedicatory Epistle to the foresaid Elector of Colen, dated the fifth of the Calends of March, in the 16. secular year, be my evidence. This being laid down, let us now cast up our account, and reckon from the very end of the year, 
See Proceedings against the late Traitors.  1600. to the first year of K. James his Reign, March 1603. at which time the Gunpowder Traitors had actually confederated, and I would fain know if that interval make seven years. Our Author had much better have insisted on the Discourses of Father Garnet to the Conspirators; that he( good man) persuaded them to acquaint his Holiness before they proceeded; who accordingly dispatched Sir edmond Baynam on that service. But they are strangers to the artifice of that Father, who would take this for an argument that the Pope was kept in ignorance till then. And besides, we are not concerned whether the Pope knew or approved of such a Plot 3 years, or 3 months before it was put in execution, so as it be certain that at the later term he did know of it. And therefore if these probabilities I offer from deal Rio should not be convincing to one that will be obstinate; there will be nothing gained to our Authors cause, so long as there is other evidence of his being privy to it.  
But after all, my matchless impudence may perchance lye in the application of his Holiness's Bull to the secular Government, which the Author says is absolutely false. Be my error or my Impudence what it can be, I am sure it is not matchless, for I say nothing but upon the credit of deal Rio, who quotes this Bull of Clement V●II. and answers this very Objection, which as if it were fire new▪ our Author is here pleased to urge with so much confidence and assuming. This Sanction says deal Rio, though it obliges only those to whom it was directed, yet it sufficiently shows that his Holiness approves that opinion, which will have Confessors behave themselves altogether so, as if they had heard nothing at all in Confession.  
The Author having thus happily demonstrated my matchless impudence in this quotation of deal Rio, he comes next to show my want of integrity, in the mention of the accusation of the Bishop of Angelopolis against the Jesuits: which I know has been answered to the full in the late Letters against Mr. Stillingfleets Idolatry. My Author is wonderful kind in making me know ever and anon things that I am a most perfect stranger to. I know indeed, that a confident asseverer has the face to say that the Bishop of Angelopolis Letter was forged at Port Royal by the Jansenists; but he should have  told us farther, that the Bulls of Pope Innocent X. and the long decisions in the cause, which we have at large in Cherubin's Bullarium, 
Cherubin. Tom. 3. p. 286. ad 301.  were forged also. A man a little better versed in Books and things than our Author, would have understood that this groundless cavil was many years since suggested by F. Annat in France, and soon after, beyond reply or contradiction, refuted by the Curez of Paris. 
Neufieme Escrit de Curez. de Paris, p. 878  But every thing is new and demonstrative to one, who knows no better than our Author. His quarrel with Dr. Du Moulin for quoting Mr. Whites Book of Government, when not only that, but all the other works of that catholic Leviathan, are condemned by the Pope, is owed to the same original, the not understanding what is talked of; for every body knows that Mr. White might have wrote what Treason he had pleased against Princes, and have fared no worse than his neighbours, if his Tabulae Suffragiales, 
Tabu. Suffr. à p. 102. ad 273.  and some other of his Writings, had not been so unfortunate as to touch his Holiness his Copy-hold in the point of Infallibility, of his being Judge of Cantroversies of Faith and Purgatory, the very best part of the Papal Revenue: and thereby rendered heretical all that he had wrote or could writ hereafter.  
I am come now to the Postscript, which being nothing but a heavy repetition of what has been said before, requires very little answer. Therefore I shall only say, that if the members of the Church of England must not refute or oppose treasonable principles and practices, without falling under the imputation of Incendiaries, Persecutors, having ill natured seditious designs and the Churches being conscious of its weakness; 'tis to be doubted there are really such designs on foot, as cannot well consist with having those doctrines and practices exposed to open view.  
I have now done, and endeavoured to answer every thing but the contumely of my Author. Had I a mind to have requited his favour, and been his Godfather, as he was pleased to be mine, he must needs know I could easily enough, out of some of our English Plays, have found a name which would have fitted him as well, and stuck as close as that he has bestowed on me; but when all is done, what is a Nick-name, the crying Sir Pol, the urining at St. Mark, or the Tortoise; to the merit of the cause between the Protestant and the Papist? I cannot think our Religion and Laws, our Liberties and Lives, are so trivial a prise, as to be carried by a Mastery in fooling. When our Author shall think fit to writ with the sobriety of one who treats of Religion, the civility of a Gentleman, and the veracity of a man of honour; he may look for a respectful and modest reply; otherwise from me he shall have no more trouble, for I am not at leisure to throw dirt, nor will I be a Buffoon for Company.  
FINIS.