Memoirs OF THE Right Honourable ARTHUR Earl of ANGLESEY, LATE Lord Privy Seal. Intermixed, With Moral, Political and Historical Observations, by way of Discourse in a Letter. To which is prefixed a Letter Written by his Lordship during his Retirement from Court, in the Year 1683.  
Published by Sir Peter Pett Knight, Advocate General for the Kingdom of Ireland.  
LONDON, Printed for john Dunton, at the Raven in the Poultry, 1693.   

This may be Printed.  
June 30th. 1693. Edward Cook.   

To the Right Honourable the Lord ALTHAM.  
My Lord,  
HAving taken occasion to present the following Papers of your Noble and Learned Father to the World, I held myself obliged to make a particular Dedication of 'em to yourself, in whom so much of the Acuteness of his Wit, and of his incomparable Modesty, and of his Loyalty to his Prince, and Conformity to the Church, Fidelity in Friendship, and Candour of Disposition and Manners, is Conspicuous to the World: And by which latter Qualification your Conversation is perfectly charming to all who have the Honour of it.  
His Lordship's great value of these generous qualities in you, was often signified to me by him in my more than twenty five years frequent Conversation with him in the latter part of his Life; and wherein you gave him so much just Cause to presage, that your Lordship would be both a Prop and an Ornament to his Family.  
And I doubt not but those Great and Manly efforts of his Reason, Religion and Learning that I here lay before your thoughts, will be further Inducements to you to make a Natural use of his great Example, and to spend as much of your Life, as you can spare from the Service of your Country, in the most vigorous pursuits after Knowledge, and in the investigation of Truth; and for your doing which, you have in the Course of Nature so fair a prospect of a long race of Life before you.  
His Lordship used often to quote occasionally that saying of my Lord Bacon's, Actio est Conversatio cum Stultis, lectio autem cum Sapientibus: The thought whereof induced him to spend so much of his time in his Library; and where he usually loc'kd himself up so close, that in stead of fortifying his Interest at Court, as great Men do, by frequent giving of Visits to one another he very much avoided the receiving them.  
And therefore he having so vast a Collection of Choice Books both in the Ancient and Modern Languages, and especially of Divinity, Common-Law, Civil Law, Canon-Law, and History; and laying the Scene of his Life so much among them▪ and living to a good Old Age, the World might well expect that what he should leave behind him of his own Composing, should be worthy of himself, and it: And such your Lordship will find this Volume to be.  
The first Work of your Fathers, that I shall Entertain your Lordship and the World with, is that of his Letter to myself, of july the 18 th'. 1683, Writ on the occasion of my minding him of his yearly Custom of sending Venison to Sir George Ent; and which Letter is variously instructful to the Age. I placed before his large Discourse by way of Letter to me in Answer of Mine to him of that Nature, because the Order of time required it.  
He had my entire Discourse by him in his Study, Printed and bound up long before he died. And his Lordship telling me, that he intended his by way of return to it, and to be Printed in Folio to be bound up with mine; mine thereby happened not to be Published in his Life time.  
It was afterward Published with the Title of the Happy Future State of England, and since by a new Title, viz, A Discourse of the growth of England, in populousness and trade since the Reformation, etc. Printed for William Rogers, at the Sun over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet.  
And as all great Writers (and especially of such Subjects that refer to various kinds of Learning) have Customarily employed several persons in gathering Quotations for them, and abstracting them (and as for this purpose, I have some where Cited the Lord Secretary Falkland, for saying of Cardinal Peron, that Baronius and Bellarmine were but fit to gather Quotations for him) so your Father was pleased to Crave the Aid of Quotations from his Learned Friend Bishop Barlow, in two or three Points relating to Theology and the Canon Law, and which were sent to him in Letters. I scarce know any one Man who is so absolute a Master of all the various kinds of Learning referred to in your Father's large following Discourse, as to have commanded the proper use thereof, without applying to the Labour of some other Friend in this kind. Nor have any of the most Learned of the Jesuits presumed to Publish the most Famous and Elaborate of their Volumes, either Historical or Mathematical, without owing a beholdingness to others for Quotations.  
And as any one here, who entertains a great Prince in a Splendid manner, holds himself obliged not to confine himself to his own Ground for all the Materials of his Treat, so he who invites to his Entertainment no meaner a Guest than the World by his Writings, ought not to Disdain the use of the Heads or Hands of others in finding out the most Curious Provision for it, and especially in so Critical an Age as this.  
But even herein was your Father's great Modesty so Signal, as to show that he designed not the Appropriating wholly to himself the Honour of all the Bishops Learned and Judicious Quotations (and which yet by the Custom of other great Writers, he might have justifiably done) that he is pleased to notify to the World in p. 21. his having applied to the Bishop on that account, and what Communications he had from him by Letters, and his desire of their Publication.  
Another great instance of his Exuberant Modesty, I shall here Entertain your Lordship with, is the great Compliment he was pleased to put on me, when not very long before his last Sickness, he delivered to me his large Discourse as fairly Writ out by his amanuensis, and variously altered by his own Hand (and the which after the Printers have made use of, I intent to offer to your Lordship's Cabinet) and desired me, that I would take the same Freedom in putting out, or Deleting any thing I thought Superfluous or proper to be expunged, as he told me, Mr. boil had desired me to do when I Published his Excellent Book of The Style of the Scriptures. Mr. Boil in a Letter to me Printed before that Book, Addressed it to me with the Initial Letters of Mr. P.P. A.G. F.I. (by which he meant to refer to me as Advocate General for Ireland, and giving a Friendly Reason for not more openly naming me.) And he is there pleased to say, I have been obliged, that I might obey you, not only to Dismember, but to Mangle the Treatise you perused, cutting out here a whole side, and there half, and in another place perhaps a quarter of one.  
And if it had so pleased God, that your Father had lived any considerable time longer, I would have humbly offered it to his Consideration, to have some Passages there omitted, and particularly that wherein he giveth his thoughts of somewhat in p. 70. of my Discourse, and likewise those wherein his Lordship is pleased to signify his over-valuing of my poor Sixth-rate Talents, and my performance in my Work. But since he lived not long enough for my having an opportunity to satisfy him with my Reasons, for the leaving out any passages, as I did the incomparable Mr. boil, I presumed not to delete any thing therein, worth the speaking of. But as I took great Care to watch the Press in my Publication of that Noble Work of Mr. Boyles, to prevent the Printers Errata, so I have in this of your Fathers.  
The Author of the Athenae Oxonienses having among the Lives of the Oxford Writers, Writ that of your Father, is there pleased to mention, that in the beginning of the year 1686. He began to be admitted into the Favour of King James the II. But he was admitted into his Majesty's Favour before; and Mr. Ryley after your Father's Death, showed me this in his Lordship's Diary, viz. On March 8.85. Spent most at home in Business; and Duty (i. e. Prayer) In the Evening was private with the Lord Sunderland, my good Friend; and then was with the King a full hour at Mr. Chiffinches; who was very kind, free, and open in Discourse: Said, he would not be Priestridden; Read a Letter of the Late King, said I should be welcome to him. I refer to this, to show likewise on what Terms he stood in the Royal Favour (and which was so great to him, that his Friends supposed, that had he lived a Month longer, he would have been Lord Chancellor) and that his zeal for his Religion, suffered no Diminution thereby, and which sufficiently appeared by the Picture of his mind drawn by himself in the following Discourse, and to which he was then applying his finishing Touches.  
And hence the Reader may guests, that his private Belief of his Prince not designing the unsettlement of our Religion, Encouraged him in his thoughts of Loyalty, and in his Inculcating the Moral Offices of it so much throughout the following Discourse.  
And indeed his Advices then about it, were but Echoes to the Pulpits of the Divines of the Church of England in general, that rang with it till the time of the setting up the Ecclesiastical High Commisssion, and by virtue of which, they had apprehensions of their being removable out of their Church-Freeholds in two or three days time: And whereupon they had (as I may say, in the School-Divinity Terms) the motus primo primi, to think that the Affirmative precepts of Preaching up Loyalty in their Sermons as before, did not bind Semper & ad Semper. But your Father was in his Grave, before the Birth of that Commission, and it was several Months after in that year 1686. before the Commissioners opened their Commission, and which they did on Tuesday the 3 d. of August that year.  
However it may be said that no Revolutions time can cause, can make persuasives to Loyalty wholly useless, or it cease to be a Virtue, or to want the Support of any Government, and which must be supported by it.  
But your Father's growth in his Habitual Loyalty, when he was so near his End, needs no Apology. And according to the observation I have met with from some of our Practical Divines that God watcheth when his Child is at the best, and his Grace's ripest, and then takes him, thus was it with your Noble Father.  
And as no thought can be more obvious to a prudent Statesman▪ who was for a time Employed by his Prince in a Provincial Kingdom under his Viceroy, and was preparing to return to his King, and to be under his Eye, than that 'tis his great concern to part fairly with the Viceroy, and not to be conscious of having Dishonoured, or of having rendered him uneasy in the discharge of his Office; so neither can it be unthought of by any Pious Minister of Kings (who are Gods Vice-Gerents) that it highly imports him after his splendid Sojourning here, to have the Testimonials of a good Conscience, ready to carry to Heaven with him, that he here Honoured the great King of Heaven and Earth, in the persons of such Vice-gerents, and did not by stirring up any popular ferments, trouble their Administration and frustrate their Counsels.  
Had your Father lived to have come to the Helm of State, as a premier Ministre, I believe his influence would have prevented many inconveniences that happened by the Bigotry, Pedantry, and blind zeal of some particular papists. For though I have owned to the World in print, the excellent Tempers and Justice and prudence of some Great roman-catholics then, yet I have often been diverted by the impotent passion of some certain Popish Bigots, who, because I in my Book which I designed as persuasive against the Exclusion, & the growth of the popular fears of Papists and Popery, and wrote in the turbid interval of the Kingdom, the interval of panic Fears, and when the Air of men's fancies was generally infected, and the Kingdom was in a Chaos-like condition, thought it necessary to Demonstrate, that I was a Non-Papist, and not to dilate in invectives against the Belief of any popish Plot whatsoever, and against all the Witnesses in particular, were pleased in common talk, to shoot the bolts of their Censures against me and my Works. And the truth is, for any writer for the aforesaid purposes, to have then appeared in such a Dress, as they would have had him, would have showed as strangely, as when it once happened, that one being to Act Theseus in Hercules furens coming out of Hell, he could not for a long time be persuaded to wear some old sooty Clothes, but would needs come out of Hell in a white Satin Doublet.  
Your Father's Learned Book may in various places, teach such Censorious bigots common sense. And his Lordship justly coming under the Character of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I may account his single acknowledgement of my performance, to outweigh Myriad of such Ignorant Censurers, and be very well content with my having escaped the Scandal of their praise.  
But here I must needs say, that as I have sufficiently shown in print, the aversion of my Humour from courting the popular praise of any party (as having judged that the medicament of Notions I applied to each, would be necessarily helped in the working by the ungratefulness of the Taste) so by my having so long delayed the publication of this excellent Volume of your Father, I have shown some uneasiness or backwardness in receiving the various Honour he was pleased in his short Letter prefixed, and following large one, to do to that Work of mine, which in obedience to his Commands, and for the doing him Justice I wrote.  
And I believe, had not a Learned and Prudent Friend of mine of the Church of England told me, that my being thus accessary to the publishing of your Father's Laudatory Acknowledgements of my performance, was as much consistent with the Laws of Modesty as is many grave and wise Authors prefixing Commendatory Verses or Prose-testimonials from others before their works (and for which purpose, he told me of Mr. Hobbes having before a philosophical and political Work of his, printed some excellent verses of Dr. Bathurst; and of Dr. Templer having printed some of another before his admirable Confutation of Leviathan) and withal represented it to me, that I was in Conscience bound to the supporting the Honour of our Church, by the publishing the New Matter contained in your Father's Book against popery, and likewise to the supporting the Justice of our Compassion, for the sufferings of our Brethren in France by the Bigotry of the French Clergy, upon the account of their not owning the Faith of the Council of Trent, (your Father's Book beyond all other Writings published, so clearly showing it out of the most Authentic Histories, that that Council was never published and received in France) I should have been inclined to have Transmitted this incomparable Discourse of his Lordship, to have lived only in the Archives of the Oxford-Library. And so chief by the weight of this latter Consideration, I have held myself obliged to make it public: And I doubt not but all protestants, and especially our Divines of the Church of England, will bid it welcome to the World.  
But My Lord, I am to crave your Lordship's Pardon, for thus long detaining your thoughts from the Great and Noble ones of your Fathers in the following Discourse; and will no longer offend therein, than by Subscribing myself,  
My Lord, Your Lordship's most Faithful and most Humble Servant, P. Pett. July 17. 1693.   

From my Tusculanum, Totteridge, july 18. 1683.  
Sir Peter Pett.  
I Obeyed your Commands in giving the great Sr. George Ent a taste of my villa fare. I hope you seasoned it with your wont good discourse; I envy you nothing of your Happiness, but that I had not a part in it; for I delight in nothing more than such Company from whom I ever part the better and the wiser. I acknowledge the favour in the two Sheets you sent me, which were so far from satisfying me, that they served but to whet my appetite to desire, that you would after so long an expectation given, ultimam manum ponere to that work, wherein you do pingere aeternitati; and from which it is pity the public should be withheld longer.  
I remember after Cicero's incomparable parts and learning had advanced him in Rome to the highest Honours & Offices of that famous Common wealth, that by Caesar's Usurpations upon the public, there was no longer place either in the Senate or Hall of justice, for the Romanum Eloquium he had made so much his Study, and wherein he had before Caesar himself shown how much he excelled, he betook himself wholly to the common consolation of wise Men in distress, the use and practice of Philosophy, and therein with an industry and stile answerable to the diviness of the purpose, undertook for the benefit of all Ages, the most Religious and Sacred part of Philosophy, the Nature of the Godhead, wherein amidst a cloud of various and opposite errors, and the thick darkness of a benighted ignorance, he acquitted himself to admiration, insomuch, that I may account him as some great Authors have done, the Divine Philosopher as well as Seneca.  
And if I had reason to doubt what his opinion might be concerning a Deity, or whether his works evince not the true Deity and Religion, yet I am sure they tend strongly to the overthrowing the False: Which the very worshippers of those ignoti Dei were so sensible of, that they conspired the Destruction of this work of his, insomuch that in the Reign of Dioclesian that great Bigott (as I may call him) of the Heathenish Idolatry, and the Enemy of the Christian Religion, these three Books De naturâ Deorum, and his other two of Divination, were publicly burnt in company with the writings of the Christians, Anno Christi 302. as most famous Chronologers and others have recorded. In particular Arnobius sharply (though then no Christian) inveighs against the burners of these Books of Cicero, in these words, viz. But before all others, Tully the most Eloquent of the Romans, not fearing the imputation of Impiety, with great Ingenuity, Freedom and Exactness shows what his thoughts were, and yet (saith he) I hear of some, that are much transported against these Books of his, and give out, that the Senate ought to Decree the abolishing of them, as bringing countenance to the Christian Religion, and impairing the Authority of Antiquity: rather (said he) if you believe you have aught certain to deliver, as to your Deities, convince Cicero of Error, confute and explode his evil Doctrine. For to destroy Writings, or go about to hinder the common Reading of them, is not to defend the Gods; but to be afraid of the Testimony of Truth. Thus far Arnobius. And I could not leave Cicero and his Books in a more illustrious place than amidst those bright flames, wherein the Divine writings were consumed▪ For what greater Honour than for him to be joined with Christ, in the same cause and punishment? I should not have so far advanced the pattern of Cicero in a Christian Kingdom, but that we are so far degenerated from the primitive ones, that Tullyes' Morality if not Divinity, goes beyond us. When the Age is Receptive of better examples (though you need them not) I should willingly insinuate them to others.  
Now if by the beginnings of Persecution in France and other parts, and the dangerous Divisions and Circumstances at home, we seem to be hurrying to the like sad times, you may guests what makes me embrace so much a Country life as Cicero did, and that from the Noise and Contrivances of a crowd in the City, I am retired to the sweet quiet of a Tusculanum, and to converse with the dead qui non mordent: and if I declare I should be glad (among the Tombs) of such company as you and other my good friends that perhaps in kindness to me think me wanting there, you will believe me no ill chooser for myself, and I hope squander away some time upon a friend. You see I give a beginning to our intercourse, wherein you were not wont to flinch; and when you writ to Bugden, pray let the Learned and good Bishop know, I am as much his as ever, though the whole Body of Papists seem now to be confuting his before judged irrefragable Book, and bring in the protestants by Head and Shoulders, to what he evinced were their Maxims and practice; so that now Mutato nomine de nobis fabula narratur. But the God of truth, in the thing wherein they deal proudly and falsely will show himself above them; to him I commit you, and in him I am  
Your Affectionate Friend and Servant. ANGLESEY.   

Memoirs Of the Late Earl of Anglesey, etc.  
SIR,  
I Have not that time I wish; to thank you particularly enough for your Discourse in a Letter to me, and writ to me when I was Lord Privy Seal, on the Occasion mentioned in your Preface.  
I am so much a lover of my Country, that I would be content to have all the Dirt and Shame again thrown on me by any such Infamous Witness as He was, if it might Occasion the Enriching it with the Treasure of such an other Discourse. I did not account it a Solamen, that not only the Earl of Peterburgh; but his Majesty were participants with me in the Calumnious Affidavit Published against me; but was sorry and ashamed for the Effrontery of the Infamous Swearer, extending itself so far; and likewise glad, that after I was sufficiently vindicated by your Pen▪ you took the pains so Learnedly to State the Notion of Infamous Witnesses, for Illuminating the Age therein.  
I know that in the Hot times of the Martyrocracy (as you call it) it would not have been for the Advantage of myself or others, so unworthily then treated by it, for you to have then used Personal Invectives to have rendered any Witness more odious; and when likewise it would have proved more dangerous to you, than Scandalum Magnatum. You having mentioned what Authority of Testimony, or real Weight and Worth there should be to Convict a person of such Authority, and that Diamonds are not to be Cut, but with the dust of Diamonds, and that it is not for nothing, that the Scripture Cautions the not receiving an Accusation against an Elder, but by two or three Witnesses; and how the Canon Law requires 72 Witnesses to Convict a Cardinal Bishop, accused of any Crime but Heresy, and 26 to Convict a Cardinal Deacon, and 7 to Convict any Clerk; did afterward very justly commend our judges, for having at a known Trial, acquainted the jury that they are carefully to weigh the Credibility of Witnesses Pardoned for Perjury, and did learnedly show out of the Canonists and Schoolmen, that the Pope himself with the plenitude of his pretended Monarchical Power, cannot by his Pardon, wash away the infamia facti, and thereby did sufficiently rescue myself and other Honest Men from the foul Hands of Infamous Witnesses. And that one Notion of yours, though softly insinuated, and with the Gentleness of a Philosopher, that a Man Pardoned for Infamy, is to be allowed as a Credible Witness only, after it hath been found that he hath acquired anhabit of Virtue by the Series of many Actions in the following part of his Life, (no Man being supposed able in a desultory way, to leap out of a rooted habit of Vice, into an Heroical Habit of Virtue; and so è contrà) was in effect a Thunderclap against the Testimony of the Infamous Person, who Slandered me by his Affidavit, and which too might serve to Deter all Infamous Persons in that Conjuncture, from daring to try to run Men of probity down with the noise of Shame: And your afterwards rendering such Persons capable of being Accusers in the point of Treason (and even as Heretics are allowable by the Canonists, to accuse a Pope of Heresy) was enough pleasing to me: As were likewise the Curious and Soft strokes of your Rhetoric and Reason in the following Page, when on the grounds of the dark Colours of such Persons in general, who cheated their Countrymen by Retail and who had long acted only Devils parts on the Stage of the World, and been Malefactors, you lay the bright ones of saving their Country by Wholesale, and being Benefactors etc. and whereby (as I may say) you have in effect, gilded the Pillory for them, and have added to the number of the Spectators of their shame; and by those soft strokes provided for the Deletion of that Government of the Witnesses, better than the most bold touches could then have done.  
That Empire of theirs which you then weighed hath been since naturally destroyed: And your having mentioned such, having long acted the Parts of Devils, brings into my mind, what I somewhere met with Cited out of Melchior Adam's Lives of the Germane Divines, (and with which I shall here Divert you, as you have me with some apposite pleasant passages in your Letter) Namely that Bucholeer said by way of Counsel to one of his Friends going to live at Court, Fidem Diabolorum tibi commendo, etc. and take heed how you believe Men's promises there, otherwise than warily and with fear.  
Your weighty Notion of the Incredibility of any things sworn, being to be much regarded in the Depositions of the most Credible Persons, inclined me to a necessary Caution and Fear, as to the Truth of those Oaths assertory, when both Incredible Persons Swearing, and Incredible things Sworn, were in the Case.  
I was therefore without any fear, (as I may say) an Athanasius against the World of our three Estates, when I did (as you mention) publicly give my Vote, that there was no such IRISH PLOT, as was Sworn by the Witnesses: And what my Sense was of any Irish or English Papists PLOT, I shall not here take occasion to express; but yet as to some persons Convicted of the Popish Plot in England, upon the Oaths of Witnesses, who appeared in the Eye of the Law then, probi & legales homines, I was so fearful of the Defects of some Witnesses, and their say, that I being then Lord Privy Seal, interceded as earnestly as I could with the King my Master, to grant his Pardon particularly in the Case of Mr. Langhorne and the Titular Archbishop Plunkett; and was as Active as any in the House of Lords, in Exploding the Infamous Accusation of the most Virtuous than Queen Consort. And though in the unfortunate Lord Staffords Case, I going Secundum allegata & probata, I gave my Judgement as I did, yet his late Majesty did publicly acknowledge that I was an Importunate Solicitor with him for his Lordship's Pardon, as well as for the Pardon of Langhorne and Plunkett above mentioned.  
And you have done me but justice, in mentioning that I interceded with his late Majesty, for the Releasing of all Lay and Clerical Papists whatsoever out of the Prisons, who were not charged with the Popish Plot; And which I moved to his Majesty, in the warmest time of the late Hot Conjuncture. I was always of your Mind in what you mention, that 'tis easier to give our Account to God for Mercy, than justice; and do more thank you for the Representing my Habitual and Natural Inclination, to do all the good I can to all Mankind; and to make every miserable Man I know, and cannot help, yet sure of my Compassion; than for your having ventured by your kind Opinion, to Multiply or Magnify any intellectual Talents in me.  
I easily foresaw at that time, that my then showing the Humanity of a Man, the Frankness of a Gentleman, and Charity and Compassion of a Christian, to the Persons of many Papists and others, and doing as I did in the late Conjuncture, would occasion designing Papists, and some perverse Nominal Protestants (as you call them) to make a Papist of me, and did therefore esteem it in you, (whom I never had opportunity to oblige) a Favour to do me Justice therein, as you have in the former part of your Discourse; and of which (I think) the Sheets were sent me printed within a Month or two's time after the old Date they bear. But a long fit of Sickness afterward seizing you, and you then signifying to me, that you resolved that the same should not be published, till you added the following part; wherein for the Encouragement of so many Protestants, who were so much Dispirited with imaginations of Popery's coming to be the paramount Religion, and of Protestancy's being Extirpated, you endeavoured to show the impossibility of the same (Humanly speaking) and till you had likewise finished your Casuistical Discourse of the Obligatoriness of our Oaths as to the King, his Heirs and Successors: I was easily satisfied, with your taking your own time for the Publishing the whole, as knowing that the Torrent of Shame, and Calumny by which the Reputations of many Loyal Persons were born down, was too violent to be of any long continuance; and considering likewise, that your incorporating the Character of my Life, into a Work so full of various exquisite Learning of all sorts (and particularly of that now so much in request, Namely, the reducing Political Matters by Calculation ad firmam (as you call it) that by the Course of Nature, must be immortal, and probably pass Christendom in some Language more general than the English) would in time Render me a sufficient gainer by the false Affidavit which an angry House of Commons, so unwarily dispersed with their Votes throughout this Kingdom.  
The truth is, you having been the first Person who took the pains to find out by the Records of the Pole Bills, and the Bishop's survey, the Number of the People of England, have highly Merited the thanks of your Country thereby, as having necessarily rendered its Figure and Alliances in the World the more considerable. And it was the more proper to be done, by reason of De Leti having Published it, that that Learned Person, and my Worthy Friend Monsieur Van Beuninghen, had Judged the People here to be but two Millions; and because as you have Cited it out of Dr. Vessius his Book of various Observations, Dedicated by him to his late Majesty, that the Doctor there hath Estimated the People in England, Scotland and Ireland, to be but two Millions.  
I remember not in all the Books I have read, to have found so much, and so various Political Calculation, as in this your Discourse: And because you intent a Review thereof, I think it will be in any who have the Custody of Records that may be of use to you; a kindness to the public, to be communicative of them to you.  
Though I need not observe to any Reader of your Discourse, the height of your Eloquence and great unaffected Wit, and the Nervous way of Argumentation appearing therein, yet I am obliged to acquaint you, that in some particular passages therein, my Observations of Men and Things, have been different from yours: But all of which I hold myself likewise obliged, not to trouble the World or you with at this time; for your having mentioned your intended Review, to be Published in a Volume by itself: I who have received so much kindness from you, am to do you the justice to stay a while in expecting your Second thoughts, and without boding ill of your being any way partial therein; yet shall here at present acquaint you, that as I am a Member of the Church of England, as now by Law Established, I will not Recede a jot from its Doctrine, by Judging the Papacy not to be Antichrist, or by judging the Worshipping the Host, not to be formal Idolatry, as my Honoured Friends, Dr. Hammond and Bishop Taylor (as you say) have done: And shall here observe to you, that tho' Bishop Tailor in his Liberty of Prophesying, pronounced Worshipping the Host, to be not FORMAL Idolatry, yet afterward upon more Mature thoughts, he in his Dissuasive against Popery, did make it FORMAL Idolatry.  
I shall likewise tell you, that Bishop Sanderson, whom you so often quote, and whose Judgement you so deservedly Celebrate, doth amongst his Sermons printed Anno 1657. in the fifth Sermon, Ad Populum p. 287. in plain Terms call the Pope the Man of Sin; the Text of the Sermon is 1 Tim. 4.4. The Bishop there represents the Church of Rome as injurious to our Christian Liberty, whom St. Paul in this passage (saith he) hath branded with an indelible note of Infamy; in as much as those very Doctrines, wherein he gives an instance, as Doctrines of Devils, are the received Tenets and Conclusions of that Church, not to insist on other prejudices done to Christian Liberty by the intolerable Usurpation of the Man of Sin: where he refers in his Margin to 2 Th. 2, 3. who exerciseth a Spiritual Tyranny over men's Consciences, as opposite to Evangelical Liberty, as Antichrist is to Christ. Let us a little see how she hath fulfilled St. Paul's Prediction, in teaching Lying and Devilish Doctrines, and that with seared Consciences and in Hypocrisy, in the two Specialties mentioned in the next verse, viz. Forbidding to Marry; and commanding to abstain from Meats. And then the Bishop saith, Marriage, the Holy Ordinance of God, is yet by this purple Strumpet forbidden, and that Sub Mortali to Bishops, Priests, Deacons, etc. and he there for that Appellation of purple Strumpet, refers in his Margin to, Rev. 17.13.  
And as I have here cited this great B. for this purpose; so I may likewise refer you to the work of our B. of Lincoln called Brutum Fulmen, as proving the Pope to be Antichrist, contrary to the Assertions of Grotius and Dr. Hammond and others: I never think of this Bishop, and of his Incomparable Knowledge, both in Theology and Church-History, and in the Ecclesiastical Law, without applying to him in my Thoughts, the Character that Cicero gave Crassus, viz. Vir non unus é multis, sed unus inter omnes, propè singularis: And I desire here to own my beholdingness to his communicative Disposition, for assisting me with quotations and his Judgement when I have occasion to Crave his Aid therein, as you know I have lately done; and shall be glad that the learning in such Letters as I have received from him, wherein there are many excellent Notions, which I had no occasion to quote, may sometime see the light.  
But I am in the next place with Justice, to acknowledge it to you, that you have in your Reflections on the Usurpations of the late times, acquainted the World with several things useful to be inserted in the History of that Age, and could wish that such a Writer as yourself, would undertake the writing of it.  
Nor can I forbear to observe, that your occasional propping up the great Characters of many of his Majesty's Ministers in your Discourse, in very warm Conjuncture, when a Factious Multitude was so busy in Demolishing their Reputations, was worthy your great thoughts and generosity: And your particular painting the Character of the late Earl of Clarendon in such Noble Colours (and with Somewhat as bold strokes too of your Fancy and Judgement, as Aerodius showed in his pen's Nulling the Laws made above a thousand years ago, against the Heroical Men you have mentioned) was in you an adventurous piece of Justice. The course of Mortality hath carried several persons off th● Stage, whom you mentioned as then living, and particularly the late Duke of Norfolk, of whom in p. 174. of your Discourse you speak as one of the three Earls then Living, who went from the Church of England, to the Roman-Catholick Communion; and whom you since told me, you there introduced only with his Title of Earl (a Title that was due to him as Earl of Norwich, Arundel and Surry) making bold to Levelly him with the Title of the other two, (viz.) the late Earl of Bristol, and the late Earl of Inchiqueen, as intending thereby, that if he had lived to have read your Discourse, (of which you told me, you communicated several parts to him) he might by that little Obscurity, see the Reverence you had paid to that picture of your known great Friend, by your drawing a Curtain before it.  
The Earl of Radnor, and the late Lord Keeper North, whose Characters you have so greatly painted to Eternity, left the World, without seeing the right that you had so generously done them in Defiance of the vulgar Clamour.  
I am moreover here to own my thanks to you, for giving me occasion by your so frequent quoting of D' Ossat, to renew my Conversation in my Library, with that great Author.  
His Excellent Letters were formerly fresh enough in my Memory; and time was heretofore, when not to be well versed in him, was a Reproach to a Man employed in Affairs of the State, as you will see by my Lord Falkeland the Secretary of State's printed Letter, in answer to Mr. Walter Montague's Letter, where speaking of D' Ossat, he adds, viz. An Author which, I know, Mr. Montague hath read; because whosoever hath but considered State Matters, must be as well skilled in him, as any Priest in his breviary.  
You very well in p. 38. observed how one Priest, that in his Book considered State Matters and quoting D' Ossat about the same, was not so well skilled in him, as in his Breviary; I mean, Mr. Browne the Franciscan, who in his ADVOCATE of Conscience Liberty, Cited D' OSSATS' Letter, to show that the Gunpowder-Treason was contrived by CECIL.  
But it was the ill fate of that Cardinal, on the account of his great Fame for the Politics, to be falsely Cited, and even as to the point of the Gunpowder-Treason, by several who never read him, and particularly by Mr. Osborne, in his works bound together, p. 487. among the Memoirs of King James, where he saith; And here I cannot omit, that after this happy Discovery, his Catholic Majesty sent an Agent, on purpose to Congratulate King James his great preservation from the Gunpowder-Treason, a flattery so palpable, as the Pope could not forbear Laughing in the face of Cardinal D' Ossat, when he first told it him: Nor he forbear to imform his King of it, as may be found in his printed Letters.  
You have truly shown it out of the Cardinal's Epitaph, printed in the Edition of his Letters in Folio, that he died in the year 1604.  
I am very glad, that for the Honour of the Reformation, you have with so much Candour, and likewise with Substantial Calculation, Confuted an Unjust insinuation against it, made by the Author of the Compendium, who there in p. 77. saith, can it be said that the Monarchy of England hath gotten by the Reformation (and what desperate Enemies that hath created, us may be easily imagined) that nothing but Popery, or at least its Principles, can make it again emerge or lasting.  
It was fit that the clearing of the truth in that matter, should be undertaken by some one or other of our Church; and it hath been by you very Satisfactorily performed: And your thus Confuting that Author, without naming him or his Book in that part of your Discourse, where you were doing it, was the more Congruous to the measures of Charity and Candour; and the more for the advantage of your undertaking.  
It was likewise fit, that the minds of so many People, whose Humour in the late Fermentation was desperare de Republicâ, should be fortified with Reason: And that the popular Nuisance of FEARS AND JEALOUSIES should be removed, and which you have so much ex professo (I think) beyond any of our late Writers done.  
And while the vulgus of Writers were entailing Fears and jealousies upon us; your predicting, from Natural Causes, the Happy Future STATE of your Country; and that the Fermentation would be perfective to it, (as your words are) was an Attempt of a great Genius.  
And I cannot but in Justice say to you, that your thoughts in p. 194, 195. of the Folly and Madness of any Republican Modellers here, are new and great.  
Moreover, as I always had a Just and High value and Honour for the Endowments of his Present Majesty, that were in him Conspicuous to the World, when Duke of York; and was as much ashamed of the opprobrious Calumnies, that his great Character was then exposed to, as any Man whatsoever; (and was likewise more concerned for the ill usage he had, than for my own, when my poor Name was in the printed Affidavit, enforced to March round the Kingdom with his Great and Illustrious one;) so I was glad that in the late Conjuncture, I found by some printed Sheets of your Discourse then sent me, your papers Representation of his Character made him amends for the Sanbenito of the Affidavit.  
And the Strictures of your great Fancy and judgement, with which you so apparently refer to his Character in p. 122.176.211.271. and others in your Casuistical Discussion, tho' they were but short, and seemingly en passant, yet they were like the slanting of Lightning, and like glances, whose quick Movements, might probably Create much more powerful Passions of Love and Admiration in a Reader; than if you had penned his Character in Set formal Panegyrics, whose Honey soon cloys, and leaves no sting or Impression in the Mind.  
But that which I may parallel, with any Coup de Maitre in your, or perhaps any Discourse, and Writ with such great Advantage for his present Majesty's Service; and wherein the Mixtures of your great Colours is so Admirable, and wherein you have painted according to the height of a pittore, that the Italians say, must paint con diligenza & con amore & con fortuna, is what I find in your page 217, and 218. For 'tis there, that in your great picture of His Late Majesty as an Agonist, and laying the Crown of Righteousness before him, eo nomine, and as Contending for the Succession; You have interweaved the picture of your own Loyalty and Contention for it, with such bold Touches, as I shall not name; but refer the Reader to them, which it was pity but your Index had done, with a hand in the Margin.  
There is no doubt; but the very Curiosity of the Calculations in your Discourse, would have brought it into the late King's Cabinet, and to his perusal, had he lived till its Publication; and your great Majestic Insinuations of persuasive Argument, there brought apparently w●th a Design to fortify his great Mind against any possible further Batteries from Members of any of the three Estates, to occasion his consenting to the Exclusion, must necessarily have been soon perceived by so quick an Apprehension as his Majesties; and could not but have made deep impressions on him, for the continuance in his former purpose. And I will hereupon say, that if any Loyal Roman-Catholick would not on the Account of what you have said in those two pages, absolve you from his severe Censuring of the warmest passages against Popery, in your whole Discourse, he would injure his own Judgement. And the Truth is, Archbishop Hutton's minding Queen Elizabeth so boldly from the Pulpit, though yet with a Salvo to the Rules of Modesty, and Decorum, of what in Justice concerned her as to K. James' Succession; which you have mentioned, and which was by her so well taken, was not a harder Task to be performed, than what you presented to the consideration of his Late Majesty from the Press, in the Affair of his preserving the Lineal Succession of his present Majesty.  
As it is natural to Men, on the sight of any Combatants or Wrestlers, whom they had never before seen, to wish better to the one, than the other; and to have their Fancy's by the Current of Nature constantly carried along, to favour the Fortunes of this or that Contend, whom yet they never saw, so I have during the course of our long acquaintance, observed in you on all occasions, a natural and constant tenderness in your Wishes of Happiness, and good Success to his present Majesty, when Duke of York. And had not you on grounds of Nature, and so like a Philosopher expressed the same, and from the Knowledge of things in particular, founded your Conjectural measures of England's future Happy State, if under his Government, but had only presaged well of his Reign in general; one might have thought that your natural Affection and Honour for his Person, might have biased you that way, as a praedicter, rather than the natural knowledge of things; especially considering what you have well hinted, that the very predication of things, is often a Natural cause, in some degree, of Men's being Animated to bring them to effect.  
And indeed, I receiving many of your printed Sheets, during our late Fermentation, when so many Writers seemed Associated in the predication of the worst of Events, under a Popish Successor, was the more pleased to find one Man that was not like a dead fish carried down with the stream of the Times, as to the point of ill boding to the public; and the strength of whose fancy mixed with his great Reason and Judgement, might be able to help to turn that stream.  
And God be thanked, that by his Majesty's coming to inherit the Throne of his Ancestors, with almost as equal Peace and joy of the People, as his Royal Brother was Restored to the same, (and for your Description of the Figure I made in which latter, or to speak more properly of my Duty I discharged therein, I return you my Just Acknowledgements) and by his so early and voluntary Gracious Declaration, of his defending the C. of E. and the Civil Government, as by Law Established; and so publicly owning the Loyalty of the Principles of that Church, and by his continuance of the prosperity of that Church, and the Peace and Prosperity of the Kingdom, while the whole Creation (as I may say) groans under the pressure of some of our Protestant Brethren abroad, you have hitherto appeared so much a True Praedicter as you have.  
I am likewise glad hereby, that another Learned Person of our Church, I mean Dr. Thomas Sprat, the Lord Bishop of Rochester, taking his view of the Future State of England, in his History of the Royal Society, and there saying, as you have Cited it, that we may safely conclude, that what ever vicissitude shall happen about Religion in our time, it will probably be neither to the advantage of implicit Faith, nor of Enthusiasm, has hitherto appeared so fortunate in that predication.  
God be thanked that such as in the late Conjuncture, troubled us with the being Lachrymists in another, and the imagined nubecula est, etc. as to persecution, have had some cause to be ashamed of their Fears: And that you have hitherto had no more cause to be ashamed of praedicting England's future pacific State, though yet we have had a 
* Monmouths.  Rebellion since. But as to that, it may be properly said, that, that persecution against the Throne, nubecula fuit, & transivit.  
We have had presently after the Kings coming to the Throne, a little Cloud of Calumny cast on the Reputations of four of the most Eminent Divines of our Metropolis, by some of their fellow Subjects, supposed Roman Catholics; but it soon passed off: And God brought forth their Righteousness as the Light, and their judgement as the Noonday: And the thing scarce deserves to be remembered, that after they had thus misrepresented four such Protestant Divines with so much falsehood, some others of those published a Book, called The Papist Misrepresented, and Represented, and which is lately answered with that Candour and Strength of Reason, that aught to be in Theological Writings; and wherein as the Lord Falkeland who was then Secretary, was wont to say, it was as absurd to mingle angry reviling expressions, as to do so in a Love-Letter. There was a despicable Childish Pamphlet (and Writ with too much petulant insolence) called, An Address from the Church of England, to both Houses of Parliament; and which was by many of the Fathers of that Church, held not worth the taking notice of.  
And because it is very Ridiculous for any now to think to Re-Baptize the present Church of England, with the Name of ROMAN Catholic: I have here thought fit, in pursuance of what you mentioned in p. 70. to let you and others have a Copy of the Rescript or judgement of the University of Oxford, to Henry the 8 th'. whereby the Bishop of Rome was pronounced to have no more power here by the Word of God, than any other Foreign Bishop. I Judge that that Old Book of Dr. James' you refer to, is called A Manuduction or Introduction unto Divinity, containing a Confutation of Papists by Papists, etc. by Tho. James, Doctor of Divinity, late fellow of New-Colledge in Oxford, and Sub Dean of the Cathedral Church of Wells, printed at Oxford. 1625.  
The Book is full of great Learning, and Dedicated to the then Lord Keeper, Bishop of Lincoln: And there under his third proposition, (viz.) the King is not Subject to any Foreign jurisdiction, he tells us in p. 40. that K. Henry the 8th. being at Variance with the Pope, a Parliament was called within two years, and a Motion was made therein, that the King should be declared Head of the Church. But his Majesty refused, till he had Advised with his Universities, of that point. And whilst the Parliament Sat, (God, in whose Hand the Hearts of Princes are, so disposing it) the King reflecting belike on Wickliffs' former Articles, directing his Letters to the University of Ox. about Electing the Bp. of Lincoln, into the Chancellorship of the University of Oxford, in the room of Archbishop Warham lately Deceased; After the Accomplishment whereof (saith the King) our Pleasure and Commandment is, that ye, as shall beseem Men of Virtue and profound literature, diligently entreating, examining, and discussing a certain question sent from us to you, concerning the Power and Primacy of the Bishop of Rome, send again to us in writing, under your common Seal, with convenient Speed and Celerity, your mind, Sentence, and assertion of the Question, according to the mere and sincere Truth of the same, willing you to give Credence to our Trusty and Wellbeloved, this bringer, your Commissary; As well touching our further pleasure in the premises, as for other matters, etc. Given under our Signet, at our Manor of Greenwich, the 18 th' Day of May. 'Tis there said in the Margin, Ex Registro Act. in archivis Academiae Oxon. Ad Ann. Dom. 1534. p. 127, etc.  
The Doctor then thus goeth on; Upon the Receipt of these Letters, the University (at that time for aught we know, consisting all of Papists) being assembled in Convocation, Decreed as followeth; That for the Examination, Determination and Decision of this question, sent unto them to be Discussed from the King's Majesty; whether the Bishop of Rome had any greater Jurisdiction Collated upon him from God in the Holy Scripture, than any other Foreign Bishop; that there should be Deputed thirty Divines, Doctors and Bachelors of Divinity to whose Sentence, Assertion or Determination, or the greater part of them, the Common Seal of the University, in the Name thereof should be annexed: And then sent up to his Majesty. And the 27 th'. of June, in the year of our Saviour 1534. this Instrument following, was made and sent up Sealed with the Common Seal of the University. The Instrument itself is in Latin; but is in English thus: To all the Sons of our Mother the Church, to whom these present Letters shall come, john, by the Grace of God, Chancellor of the Famous University of Oxon, and the whole Assembly of Doctors and Masters, Regent's, and not Regent's in the same, greeting. Whereas our most Noble and Mighty Prince and Lord, Hen. the 8 th'. by the Grace of God, of England and France, King, Defender of the Faith, and Lord of Ireland, upon the continual Requests and Complaints of his Subjects, Exhibited unto him in Parliament, against the intolerable exactions of Foreign Jurisdictions, and upon divers Controversies had, and moved about the Jurisdiction and Power of the Bishop of Rome; and for other divers and urgent Causes against the said Bishop then and there expounded and declared; was sent unto, and humbly desired, that he would provide in time some fit Remedy, and satisfy the Complaint of his dear Subjects: He, as a most prudent Solomon, minding the good of his Subjects, over whom God hath placed him; and deeply pondering with himself, how he might make good and wholesome Laws for the Government of his Commonwealth; and above all things, taking care that nothing be there resolved upon against the Holy Scriptures; (which he is, and ever will be ready to Defend with Hazard of his Dearest Blood) out of his deep Wisdom, and after great pains taken hereabouts, hath Transmitted, and sent unto his University of Oxon, a certain question to be Disputed, viz. whether the Bishop of Rome hath any greater Jurisdiction granted to him from God in the Holy Scriptures, to be exercised and used in this Kingdom, than any other Foreign Bishop; and hath commanded us, that disputing the question, after a diligent and mature Deliberation and Examination of the premises, we should certify his Majesty, under the Common Seal of our University, what is the true meaning of the Scriptures in that behalf, according to our Judgements and Apprehensions. We therefore the Chancellor, Doctors and Masters above Recited, daily and often remembering, and altogether weighing with ourselves how good and godly a thing it is, and Congruous to our Profession, befitting our Submissions, Obediences and Charities, to foreshow the way of Truth and Righteousness, to as many as desire to tread in her steps; and with a good, sure and quiet Conscience, to Anchor themselves upon God's Word: We could not but endeavour ourselves, with all the possible care that we could devise, to satisfy so Just and Reasonable a Request of so great a Prince (who next under God, is our most Happy and Supreme Moderator and Governor.) Taking therefore the said question into our Considerations, with all Humble Devotion, and due Reverence (as becometh us) and Assembling our Divines together from all parts, taking time enough, and many days space to Deliberate thereof diligently, religiously, and in the fear of God, with zealous and upright Minds; first searching, and searching again the Book of God, and the best Interpreters thereupon disputing the said questions, Solemnly and Publicly in our Schools, have in the end, unanimously, and with joint consent, resolved upon the Conclusion; that is to say, That the Bishop of Rome hath no greater Jurisdiction given unto him in Scripture, than any other Bishop, in this Kingdom of England: Which our Assertion, Sentence, or Determination, so upon deliberation maturely and throughly discussed; and according to the Tenor of the Statutes and Ordinances of this our University concluded upon publicly, in the Name of the whole University; we do pronounce and testify to be sure, certain and consonant to the Holy Scripture. In witness whereof, we have caused these our Letters to be written, Sealed, and ratified by the Seal of our University. Given in our Assembly House the 27 th'. of the Month of june, in the year of Christ, 1534.  
I took care formerly to satisfy the Curious, by my taking a Copy of this Rescript out of the Records, in the Registry of the University of Oxford; and which I not being able at present to find among my Papers, have sent you this English Translation of it, as Printed in that Book of Dr. James'.  
That Book of his, any one may see in the Catalogue of the Bodleian Library, and of which Library, he was the Head-keeper, And in that Office, very Diligent and Careful, and was a Person of great Learning and Probity.  
The Knowledge of this Rescript of that University, and likewise of the other of Cambridge, is necessary to all who will be Masters of the Knowledge of the History of those times. For the Author of a Book in Quarto, Printed in Oxford, in the year 1645. called, the Parliaments power in Laws for Religion, having there in p. 4. said that the third and Final Act for the Pope's Ejection, was an Act of Parliament, 28. H. 8th. c. 10. entitled, an Act extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome: Saith, it was ushered in by the Determination first; and after by the practice of all the Clergy; for in the Year 1534. which was two years before the passing of this Act, the King had sent this Proposition to be agitated in both Universities, and in the greatest and most famous Monasteries of the Kingdom, That is to say, An aliquid authoritatis in hoc Regno Angliae Pontifici Romano de Jure competat plusquam alii cuicunque Episcopo extero? By whom it was Determined Negatively, that the Bishop of Rome had no more power of Right in the Kingdom of England, than any other Foreign Bishop; which being Testified, and returned under their Hands and Seals respectively, (the Originals whereof, are still remaining in the Library of Sir Robert Cotton) was a good preamble to the Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy Assembled in their Convocation to conclude the like. And so accordingly they did, and made an Instrument thereof Subscribed by the Hands of all the Bishops and others of the Clergy; and who afterward confirmed the same by their Corporal Oaths: The Copies of which Oaths and Instruments, you shall find in Foxes Acts and Monuments, vol. 2. fol. 1203. and 1211. of the Edition of John Day, An. 1570. And this was semblably the ground of a following Statute. 35. H. 8. c. 1. Wherein another Oath was devised and ratified, to be imposed upon the Subject; for the more clear asserting of the King's Supremacy, and the utter exclusion of the Popes for ever: Which Statutes, though they were all Repealed by one Act of Parliament, 1st. and 2d. of Philip and Mary C. 8. Yet they were brought in force again, 1 Eliz▪ c. 1.  
My Lord Herbert, in his History of Henry the 8 th'. under the year 1534. and the 26 th'. year of his Reign, p. 408. telling us, that it was Enacted, that the King by his Heirs and Successors Kings of England, should be Accepted and Reputed the Supreme Head on Earth of the Church of Eng. called Ecclesia Anglicana, etc. saith that, that Act, though much for the manutention of the Regal Authority, seemed not yet to be suddenly approved by our King, nor before he had consulted with his Counsel, etc. and with his Bishops; who having discussed the point in their Convocations, declared, that the Pope had no jurisdiction warranted to him by God's Word in this Kingdom; which also was seconded by the Universities, and by the Subscriptions of the several Colleges, and Religious Houses, etc.  
Most certainly Hen. the ths. gaining this point, that the Bp. of Rome hath no more power here by God's Word, than any other Foreign Bishop, was of great and necessary use, in order to the effectual withstanding the Papal Usurpations; and was re verâ, the gaining of a Pass; and for which end, he made use of intellectual Detachments from his Universities.  
And suitably to the Wisdom of our Ancestors here, in Henry 8 this. time, any Popish Prince abroad, who intends effectually to Combat the Papal Usurpations, must first gain that Pass: For the effect of the common say in Natural Philosophy, that, Natura non conjungit extrema nisi per media, and that Natura non facit Saltum, must likewise obtain in Politics, when the Nature of things is operating there toward a Reformation of Church or State.  
And this weighty Rescript of the University of Oxford, not being Printed in Dr. Burnet's excellent Historical Books of the Reformation, nor yet in Fox his Martyrology; and now Published here, as set down in English, by Dr. james, may perhaps serve usefully to illuminate the World abroad, about the way of its Transitus from Popery.  
But here I shall observe, that though I find, in Mr. Fox his Acts and Monuments Printed in 3 Volumes in London, for the Company of Stationers, An. 1641. the judgement of the University of Cambridge is there set down, in p. 338. and relates to the same year with the Oxford Rescript, namely the year 1534. yet it doth not there appear to be a Rescript to King Henry 8 th'. by way of return to a Letter from his Majesty; and it gins thus: Vniversis sanctae Matris Ecclesiae filijs, ad quos praesentes literae perventurae sunt; Caetus omnis Regentium & non Regentium Academiae Cantabrigiensis, salutem in omnium Salvatore jesus Christo. Cum de Romani Pontificis potestate, etc. And then follows the Translation of the whole in English; and which makes about half of that page 338, and wherein the same Judgement for substance is given, with that of the Oxford Rescripts: That the Bishop of Rome hath no more State Authority and jurisdiction given him of God in the Scriptures over this Realm of England, than any other extern Bishop hath. That Instrument hath not there the Date of any Month to it, as the Oxford Rescript hath: But in the Body of the Instrument 'tis mentioned, that the judgement of that University was therein required, though not by whom; and towards the Conclusion of it, 'tis Styled an Answer, in the Name of that University; and 'tis probable, that the judgement of that University might have been required by some of the Ministers of King Henry 8 th'. and by his Order; whereas the Oxford Rescript, mentioned his Majesty's having himself required the judgement of that University in that point.  
What I have here mentioned of the judgement of our two Universities, gives me occasion to take notice of an Oversight of my Lord Herbert, in this place of his History, by me Cited; For he in this p. 408. makes the Universities Determining, that the Pope had no jurisdiction warranted to him by God's Word in this Kingdom; whereas he should have Represented their Sense of his not having more here, than any other Foreign Bishop. And thus you truly express the Sense of their Judgement in this Case, when you say p. 70 th'. of your Book, that the Pope's Cards were, by the Clergy that played his Game, thrown up, as to all claim of more power here by the Word of God, than every other Foreign Bishop had: And both our Universities sent their judgements about the same thing to the K. which, methinks, might make our Papists approach a little nearer to us, without any fear of Infection. For we allow the Bishop of Rome to have as much power by the Word of God here, as any other Foreign Bishop; and 'tis pity but that the judgement of our Universities, were shown the World in Print, and sent to the French King; and particularly the judgement or Rescript of the University of Oxford, as not being any where in Print as I know of; But in an Old Book of Dr. James', against Popery.  
But as to your thought of having that Rescript of the University of Oxford, sent to the French King; I for my part, am disinclined to it. The printing of it here, may probably bring it to the notice of his Ministers, and so perhaps to his. I have heard how the French Ambassador, not long ago applied to a Learned Friend of ours, of the long Robe, and of the Church of England; and one who is a great Antiquary, and desired him to furnish him with Copies of Records not printed in Dr. Burnet's Works, that related to Henry ths▪ withstanding the Papal Usurpation; and no doubt but the Copy of this Oxford Rescript, would have been as welcome to him, and as necessary to Complete his Collection, as any could have been; and the publication of it, may perhaps be of use in some places of the Roman Catholic World abroad: But I fear, that the present French King, will never without some strange unexpected provocation, received from the Papacy, advance so far towards the confines of Reformation, as Henry 8 th'. did. I know it was but Congruous to Worldly Politics (however contrary to Justice) for French Kings formerly to use very high Severities to their Protestant Subjects, in the Conjunctures of their quarrelling with the Pope; and this you well observe in p. 329. out of the Book called, the Policy of the Clergy of France; Namely, that the French Kings never made any Assaults on the Papal Power; but what cost their Protestant Subjects very dear. And of the like Nature, were the Political Measures of Henry the 8 th'▪ hear, who at the same time, burned his Protestant Subjects, for what he called Heresy, that he hanged some of his Popish ones, for what he called Treason, in abetting the Papal Supremacy.  
I know we should not presume to limit the most Holy God, as to what Instruments he shall, or shall not use in the Melioration of the Affairs of Church or State: But the French King is one, I never think of without Horror. Nor do I entertain any idea, of Gods making any right Lines in the World, by so crooked an Instrument. If David must not be allowed by the Course of Providence, to build the Temple; because his Administration of the Government, had been so much dipped in Blood; what good to Religion can we presage from such a Monarch, as has made all Christendom almost one great Aceldama? The great God will, I believe, take his time to make this Monarch share in the usual fate of Persecutors, how prosperous soever he may be at present, according to what is commonly observed out of the Heathen Moralist: That the Divine Wheels are grinding, and will grind to powder, though they are slow in Motion. Nor did God think fit to use our Henry 8 th'. as an Instrument to contribute towards the building his House here, further than by removing the Rubbish of the Papal Usurpations, and by so Signally Acting therein, by compassing the Pope's power, to be here reduced to the level of that of every other Foreign Bishop. This was a Momentous thing, and worthy the Sagacity and Politics of King Henry, and his Ministers, and it must however be for his Honour acknowledged in our English Story.  
The truth is, that it having been so Customary for the Bishops of Rome, when they met with a weak King here, or one whose Affairs were Embarrassed, to interlope in their Temporal Concerns; and to presume to dispose of their Crowns and Regalities; it was but Natural, for such a Magnanimous Monarch as Henry the 8 th'. was, to Stake down the Pope's Spiritual power, to that short tedder he did out of the Scriptures, and to allow it to go no further there, than any other Foreign Bishop's. And thus I for my part would never prefer any Divine to be my Spiritual Pastor, who claimed my Temporal Estate: And, as I think, no Lords of Manors, who had the right of Advowson, would present any one to a Living in their gift, who without Sense or Reason, did set up a title to the Manor.  
But the very thought of waters not rising higher than their Springs, might well serve to mind Henry 8 th'. and some of our former Roman Catholic Princes, that the Power of the Bishop of Rome in Temporals, however Claimed by Popes, was not allowed to rise higher than St. Peter's, nor St. Peter's higher than his, who said his Kingdom was not of this World, and that St. Peter's Successor, is not like Tamburlaine, to tread on the Heads of Christians, nor like Alexander the Third▪ to Tread on the Neck of an Emperor and Burlesquing one of King David's Psalms; Super aspidem & basiliscum ambulabis, conculcabis l●onem & Draconem; when it may be said, that the Holy jesus did tread so gently in his passage through the World, that if he had trod on a bruised Reed, he would not have broke it, or if on smoking Flax, he would not have quenched it.  
A Man cannot throughly Write of the Old Papal Usurpations here, without being as voluminous as Mr. Prynne; and our Statute-Book doth sufficiently instruct us out of Hen. 8th's Reign, and former ones in the Fact of the Papal Arrogance, and in the Fact and Right of their being withstood. But I need not tell you of the common Observation, that those Statutes in Henry ths time, that were most warm against the Papal Usurpations, were but Declarative of our old Laws and Customs; and as for example, the dernier Resort, that the Cannon Law gives the Pope, of Appeals from our Ecclesiastical Courts, was an Usurpation, long before the Statute of Henry the ths. time for prohibiting all Appeals out of England, to the Court of Rome: And thus the Constitutions at Clarendon, plainly speak out, how our Old Laws and Customs were to be observed in this point, viz. That all Appeals must proceed regularly from the Arch Deacon to the Bishop, from the Bishop, to the Archbishop; and if the Archbishop failed to do Justice, the last Complaint must be to the King, to give Order for Redress (i e.) by proper delegates: and Matthew Paris, A. 1164. thus tells us, that in the Reign of Henry the Second, the Custom then about Appeals was, viz. Si emerserint ab Archidiacono, debet procedi ad Episcopum, ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum & si Archiepiscopus defuerit in justitiâ exhibendâ, ad Dominum Regem perveniendum est postremo, ipsius in Curiâ Archiepiscopi controversia terminetur, ita quod non debet ultrà procedi absque assensu Domini Regis.  
But as to the Ridiculousness of the Papal Usurpations by the Canon Law, giving the Pope a power to receive Appeals from the Dominions of Sovereign Princes and States, Mastertius in his Book de justitiâ Legum Romanarum in the Summaries of his 20 th'. Chapter, sets it down, That, 

1. Ridetur Pontifex ab ipsâ Romanâ Curiâ.  
2. Credentes Constitutioni Pontificis, a Regibus, liberisque populis laesae Majestatis damnantur.  
3. Iterum dissentit a Pontifice Romana Curia.  
4. Mira pontificis caecitas notatur:  
5. Intellectus L. à proconsulibus 19 Cod de appellat.  
6. Ius Canonicum malè damnat in expensas tantum appellantem perperam.    
Under which he saith, Infelix fuit Romanus Praesul in Cap. 7. Cap. de priore. 31. Cap. Ad audientiam, 34. Cap. dilecti. 52.— Ext. de appellat. quibus constituit adversus L. Imper. in princip. D. de appellat. licere pulsatae parti, relictis medijs, pontificalem cognitionem invocare, nam ipsa Romana Curia id juris, tanquam omnem bonum ordinem invertens & ex merâ dissentiendi libidine promanans, explosit; neque procedit Canonistarum glossema, quo videtur id constituisse pontifex, ob specialem suae sedis praerogativam quâ fidelium omnium competens est judex, Cap. si duobus. 7. & ibi D. D. ext. de appellat. Concil. Trident. sess. 24. Cap. 20. de reformat. Nam cum id falsum sit, totius Christiani Orbis Reges liberique populi, laesae Majestatis reos agunt, qui vel immediatè, vel ab ipsorum sententiâ ad pontificem praesumunt appellare.  
Eodem candore defert appellationi rei minimae, iterum reluctante Romanâ Curiâ & requirente ut litis aestimatio sit ut minimum coronatorum decem. Praesec. in praxi Episcop. p. 2. Cap. 4. Art. 15. N. 8. Mechlinensi 50. Flor. D. Zypaeus de jure Pontif. novo. tit. de appellat N. 8. Mihi videtur quod pontifex de industria se voluerit risui propinare, nam hic defert appellationi rei minimae, suprà relictis mediis implorationi Pontificialis auditorij, evocando Belgam aut Anglum in Causâ aliquorum obolorum, ad urbem Romanam experiundi sui juris gratiâ.  
But there is another use we may now well make of the publication of this Rescript of the University of Oxon; and that is to observe how awkwardly and unseasonably the Author of The Papist Misrepresented, and Represented, hath thought fit to Represent the Pope as now deducing a Claim to a Higher Power here by the Word of God, than what our Roman-Catholick Universities allowed him in Henry the 8th's time. For in his 18 th'. Chapter, he tells us, That the Papist believes, that there is a Pastor, Governor, and Head of Christ's Church under Christ, to wit the Pope, or Bishop of Rome, who is the Successor of St. Peter, to whom Christ committed the Care of his Flock, etc. and now believing the Pope to enjoy his Dignity, he looks on himself obliged to show him the Respect, Submission and Obedience which is due to his place. And afterward, in this manner is he ready to behave himself towards his CHIEF PASTOR, with all Reverence and Submission, never scrupling to receive his Decrees and Definitions, such as are issued forth by his Authority, with all their due Circumstances, and according to Law, in the concern of the whole Flock,  
His Answerer doth well reply to him in that point, and with a Candour suitable to the Pacifick State of the Realm you have predicted, under any Prince of the Roman-Catholick Communion; say, viz. How doth it appear that Christ ever made St. Peter Head of the Church, or committed his Flock to him, in contradistinction to the Rest of the Apostles? This is so far from being evident by Scripture, that the Learned Men of their Church, are ashamed of the places commonly produced for it, etc. And afterward saith, ' We need not insist on the Proof of this, since the late mentioned Authors of the Roman Communion, have taken so great pains not only to prove the Pope's Supremacy to be an Encroachment and Usurpation in the Church; but that the laying it aside, is necessary to the Peace and Unity of it. And until the Divine Institution of the Papal Supremacy be proved, it is to no purpose to debate what manner of Assistance is promised to the Pope in his Decrees.  
It was (I think) an undertaking, that none but a very Sanguine Man, could suppose feasible to engage us to believe in this Age, that the Pope was by Divine Right, Head of our Church under Christ. I say in this Age, so generally Learned, and when a Layman furnished but with an ordinary Library, can show that the Churches of the British Islands, England, Scotland and Ireland (as my Lord Primate Bramhal shows in Chap. 5. of his Just Vindication of the Church of England,) by the Constitution of the Apostles, and by the Solemn Sentence of the Catholic Church, are exempted from all Foreign jurisdiction, and that if it be objected, that the Bishop of Rome was ever our Patriarch, that all Patriarchal Jurisdiction is of Human Institution; and by the Statute of 35 C. 1. it was declared, that the Holy Church of England, was founded in the State of PRELACY (not of Papacy) within the Realm of Eng. (not without it) by the Kings and Peers thereof (not by the Popes) and when in the time of our late Civil Wars, the Presbyterian and Independent Divines had by their Claims of Ius Divinum for their Models of Church-Government, so much exercised the understanding of the People in general, that at the time of his late Majesty's Restoration, restoring to our Church the best Constituted Government in the World, many of our Virtuosos and Latitudinarians could not be brought expressly to own its excellence, on an Universal Ius Divinum praeceptivum, and would say, that in any Church Government that by Divine Right would bind all Churches, there must be not only praxis; but institutio apostolica.  
The Pryers into the Rabbinical Learning of the jews, have not been forced more to observe their Criticising on the Divinity of the Fire, which burned the Sacrifices on the Brazen Altar, as coming from Heaven, both when the Tabernacle was erected, and when the Temple was built, and making the fire in the first Temple, to be Divino-Divinus, altogether Holy, and the fire in the second Temple, to be Divino-Humanus, Human Holy, as being kindled as our fire, though still kept in, as the fire of the first Temple was; and the third fire that Nadab and Abihu offered to be Humanus, and likewise called by them alienus, as strange fire; then the Readers of the late Controvertists of the Ius Divinum of several Forms of Church-Government among us, have been forced to take notice of their▪ nicety in distinguishing it▪ And now after the Bishop of Rome had before Henry the 8th's time made the figure of the fire, Divino Humanus, and whose Authority was then Extinguished (for so the Style runs of the Act of Parliament I mentioned of 28 of H. 8 th'. viz. An Act for Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome and as to whose Authority we are told by More, 463. that all the power of the Pope, was not by the 25 of H. 8th. given to the King, but was extinct; in Holy wells Case;) for any Writers without the Heat and Light of much clear Learned Argumentation, to rekindle that extinguished ignis alienus: a strange fire of Foreign power in our Beliefs, will, (I may modestly say) be a strange Attempt, and not to be Effected by any Rhetorical Representer.  
But here I cannot forbear observing, that the Author of the Papist Misrepresented, etc. doth in his Reflections upon the Answer to his Book in p. 13. referring to Dr. Hickes his jovian, call him a Worthy Divine, and Cite him for saying, that in Case a Popish Julian indeed, should Reign over us, he should believe him uncapable of Repentance, and upon that Supposition, should be tempted to pray for his Destruction; and then in seeming Charity to the Church of England deny that, because the Doctor used those Words, it is honest hence to blacken the Church of England, with this Disloyal Principle, as if she allowed her Members, though not to fight against, yet to pray for the Destruction of such a Prince.  
The Doctor, whose great Learning and Pains taken in doing right to the Succession you have so particularly Represented in your Preface, and whereupon if we reflect on the little or nothing, ex professo, writ by any Romanists against the Exclusion, it will be no Compliment to ●ay that, he hath therein laboured more abundantly than THEY all, might if it had pleased this Representer, have been deservedly referred to by him, with a higher Character. And if in any expressions warmer than ordinary against the principles of Popery, he had erred by any little Transports in any of his Books, he sufficiently Merited from any Roman Catholic Critics, their mildest Representation of them: And it had been but Justice in the Representer, to have Cited the former part of the Doctor's Sentence, viz. and if it should please God to plague the Church with such a Spiteful Enemy of Christ, etc. And if he had done so, it would have invited the Reader to look back to what the Doctor had written, from the 140 th' page, to the passage which he Cites, and then his Reflection would have come to nothing.  
By what I have heard of the Doctor's Loyalty, I believe him to be one who with Effectual Fervent Prayers, doth Importune Heaven, for his Majesty's long and prosperous Reign; and doth his Duty of praising God for his Majesty's being so far a Nursing Father to the Church of England; And I have that opinion of the largeness of his Christian Charity and Justice, that he is ready to retaliate with the Representer, in not blackening the whole Church of Rome, with the principles lately held by some jesuits and others Casuists referred to in the Pope's Decree of March 2 d. 1679. in §. 13, 14, 15. by the 1st of which, it is rendered no Mortal Sin, to be troubled for the Life of another, so it be done with due Moderation, and by the second, it is made Lawful to desire the Death of ones Father, by an absolute desire, and by the 3 d. Lawful for a Son to rejoice at the same, and perpetrated by a Son in Drunkenness.  
I suppose you could not but take notice how that Answerer of the Papist misrepresented, etc. reflects on the unlucky instance there in Caiaphas, and saying was not Caiaphas himself the Man, who proposed the taking away the Life of Christ at that time? was he assisted in that Council? Did not he determine afterward Christ to be guilty of Blasphemy, and therefore worthy of Death?  
For you have well observed the ill Luck, that the Famous Hosius (as he is called by you) had in this case of Caiaphas, as to which Dr. Crackanthorp exclaims against Hosius, O Hominem Sacrilegum ac Blasphemum! Illene reus Mortis, qui innocens & innoxius vitam dedit? a & Blasphemus etiam! Ea judicij pars.  
You may in Bishop jewels Apology, find this blot of Hosius hit, where speaking of the Pope, p. 151, 152. of the London Edition, in the ●ear 1581. he saith, Petrus quidem á Soto, & ejus astipulator HOSIUS, nihil dubitant affirmare concilium illud ipsum, in quo Christus Iesus adjudicatus est morti, habuisse spiritum propheticum, spiritum sanctum, spiritum veritatis: Nec falsum aut vanum fuisse, quod Episcopi illi dixerunt: Nos habemus Legem, & secundum legem debet mori, illos judicasse (Sic enim scribit HOSIUS) judicij veritatem: omninóque justum fuisse illud decretum, quo ab illis pronuciatum est, Christum dignum esse qui moreretur. Mirum verò est non posse istos pro se dicere, & propugnare causam suam, nisi uná etiam Annae Cajaphaeque pratrocinentur. Nam qui illud ipsum concilium, in quo filius Dei ad crucem ignominiosissime condemnatus est, legitimum dicent fuisse ac probum; quod tandem illi concilium decernent esse vitiosum? Tamen qualia sunt istorum concilia ferè omnia necesse illis fuit, ut ista de Cajaphae Annaeque concilio pronunciarent, etc. He there had Cited in the Margin Hosius contra Brentium. lib. 2.  
But if so great a Divine as Hosius, who was a Polonian Bishop, and Cardinal of Rome, and one of the Pope's Legates in the Council of Trent, did thus err in this point; the mistake of an other therein, who was of an inferior Character, is not to be much wondered at.  
However, as I am an Honourer of Learned Men, I Derogate not from the Talents of Wit and Learning, shown in his Book; and do suppose that somewhat of the Moderation he shows therein, may be attributed to the Candour of that Church he was first Educated in: And am sorry that he should find any Cause in his Papist Misrepresented, Chapter 31. Of wicked Principles and Practices, to say, take but a view of the Horrid practices, She (i. e. the Church of Rome) hath been engaged in of late years, consider the French and Irish Massacres, the Murder of Hen. the 3 d. and 4 th'. Kings of France, the Holy League, the Gunpowder Treason, the Cruelty of Queen Mary, the Firing of London, the late Plot in the year 1678. to Subvert the Government, and destroy his Majesty, the Death of Sir Edmund Godfrey, etc. And then tell me whether that Church which hath been the Author and Promoter of such Barbarous Designs, aught to be esteemed Holy, etc. and let never so many pretences be made, yet 'tis evident, that all these Execrable practices have been done according to the known Principles of this Holy Church; and that her greatest Patrons, the most Learned of her Divines, her most Eminent Bishops, her Prelates, Cardinals, and even the Popes themselves, have been the chief Managers of these Hellish Contrivances; and what more convincing Argument, that they are well approved, and conform to the Religion taught by their Church? And as to which in his Papist Represented, he fairly saith, Neither let any one pretend to Demonstrate the Faith and Principles of the Papists, by the Works of every Divine in that Communion, or by the Acts of every Bishop, Cardinal or Pope; for they extend not their Faith beyond the Declaration of General Councils, and standing fast to these. He had before said there, against what was mentioned in the Papist Misrepresented, about firing of London, the Late Plot in the year 78, etc. And though he is not bound to believe all to be Truth, that is charged upon them by Adversaries, there being no NARRATIVE of any of these Devilish Contrivances and Practices laid to them, wherein Passion and Fury have not made great additions, wherein things dubious, are not improved into certainty, Suspicious into Realities; Fears and Jealousies, into Substantial Plots; and downright Lies, and Recorded Perjuries, into Pulpit, nay, Gospel Truth; yet he really thinks, there have been Men of his profession of every rank and degree, etc. that have been Scandalous in their lives, etc. But what then, is the whole Church to be Condemned, for the Vicious Lives of some of her professors? etc. And in the Conclusion, he saith, These are the Characters of the Papist, as he is misrepresented, and as he is Represented: And as different, as the one is from the other; So different is the Papist, as reputed by his Maligners, from the Papist, as to what he is in himself. The one is so absurd and monstrous, that 'tis impossible possible for any one to be of that Profession, without first laying by all thoughts of Christianity and Reason. The other is just Contradictory to this, and without any further Apology, may be exposed to the perusal of all prudent and unpassionate considerers to examine, if there be any thing in it that deserveth the Hatred of any Christian, and if it be not in every point, wholly conform to the Doctrine of Christ, and not in the least contrary to Reason.  
I will readily accord with him, that Delictum personae non debet ad ecclesie detrimentum trahi: And do therefore suppose, that he likewise will not charge the Constitution of the Church of England, with any imperfections; because many of its Members have misrepresented or Calumniated any Papist. Nor hath any one a greater Compassion, than myself, for such Innocent and Loyal Papists, as have in the late Fermentation, been aspersed with the Shammes in Narratives.  
Any one may easily Judge me not untaught, as to the Moral Offices of such Compassion, from the Measures of, Non Ignara Mali, etc. I never in the Conjuncture, when we were so much deafened with the Noise of Narratives, thought otherwise of them, than as being partly like the River Euphrates, according to the known Description of it, in that Hymn of Callimachus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Assyrius fluvius volvit magno agmine fluctus,  
Et trahit Illuviem, Multasque hinc indeque sordes.  
The Recorded Infamous Person, who in his Affidavit that made so much noise, and threw so much Dirt on me (and who by being so presumptuous therein, as to Reproach his Majesty, with things that no Man of Sense could believe, thought to eternize his Name like him, who burned the Temple at Ephesus) hath Miss of that Aim, as far as in me lay, and so shall: And I think you have done well, in not naming the Profligate. But it having pleased God to permit him, while he was under the Course of his due punishment, and under the protection of the Law, to fall by the Hand of an Assassinate, (and at whose Hand, his Majesty required his Blood) that Signal instance of the Justice, inherent in his Majesty's Nature, hath sufficiently encouraged all his Liege People, to think themselves safe by his being a Terror to Evil Doers, and not bearing the Sword in vain: According to the Moral Offices you have so well described, of not Condemning whole parties, merely on the account of the immoral Actions of particular Members of them; I however blame not any Religionary Caetus that either the profligate, or assassin referred to for their respective Outrages, did herd with. And as the Author of the Papist misrepresented, etc. is very fairly desirous, that we should take our measures of the Church of Rome, from the Principles approved by it, I shall herein Comply with him. But here must say, that I am sorry to find that the Author is in a Church, where the DEPOSING Power, is so much as DELIBERATED: For as you have well cited it out of two Heathen Authors, Dum deliberant, desciverunt; And, Ea deliberanda omnino non sunt in quibus est turpis ipsa deliberatio. And I am glad, that in his 26 th'. Chap. viz. of Mental Reservation, he was enabled to cite the present Pope's Decree, of the 2 d. of March 1679. for the Damning of the Doctrine of Equivocation of Oaths: And among the many Principles of the jesuits and other Casuists, which may come under your Denomination of irreligionary ones, that Sicarious one, as you properly call it, viz. It is lawful for a Person of Honour to kill a Man, that intends to Calumniate him, if there is no other way to avoid that Reproach; was in that Decree, very justly Condemned: And but for that Principle, having till its Condemnation been approved in the Church of Rome; there could be no more just cause to charge any Papist, except the Actors, with the Blood of Godfrey, than there was to cast the odium of the Execrable Murder of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, on any of the Presbyterians, except the Ruffianly Actors.  
And as to the case of Godfrey, I remember you told me, that since your warm aggravations about it in your DISCOURSE, you were a colder Concurrer with the justice of the Nation therein, and that you, thought there was still somewhat of the Intervallum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, uncertain, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fabulous, in the case of his Death.  
And as to what the Author speaks of Papists, being Misrepresented, with relation to the late Plot, in the year 1678. To Subvert the Government, and destroy his Majesty: I who in the Conjuncture of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made so little about it, shall not now make any at all. What I have read in a Pacificatory Discourse, of a Pious Divine, published in the year 1653. where speaking of a Spirit of jealousy, and of envy, strife, Rail, and Evil Surmising, and having quoted 1. Tim. 6.4. and that Strife and evil surmisings, are near of kin; and that if Contentious Men can get nothing against their Brethren, they will surmise there is something, and if they can find nothing in their Actions to judge, they will judge their Hearts: If there be nothing above-board, they will think there may be something underboard; and from thinking there MAY BE something; they will think it is very LIKELY there is something; and from LIKELY THERE IS, they will conclude THERE IS, surely there is some PLOT working; hath still since inclined me to be cautious, how in my most private thoughts I charged any Men, and especially, any great Bodies of Men, with PLOTS:  
And I think the Author of the Papist misrepresented, etc. will find enough Protestants as ready as you and myself, to avoid troubling them with the Witnesses Plot.  
But since the Author hath in this case, thought fit to invite us to a view of the Principles APPROVED, and Conform to the Religion taught by his Church, I shall, reflecting on the Principles approved by so many in that Church, tell him, I cannot but Judge them short of that unconditional Loyalty, you have so clearly asserted in your Discussion; and shall judge, as the L. Falkland the Secretary did, in the Letter to Mr. Montague I before referred to, where his Lordship on Mr. Mountagues making POPERY the way to Obedience, having had these words, viz. I cannot but say, that though no Tenet of their whole Church (which I know) makes at all against it; yet there are prevailing opinions of that side, which are not fit to make good Subjects, when their Kings and they are of different persuasions; and having quoted D' Ossat, for saying, that it is the Spaniards Maxim, that Faith is not to be kept with Heretics, and more, that the Pope intimated as much in a Discourse, intended to persuade the King of France to forsake the Queen of England; and that they hold at Rome, that the Pope to avoid a probable Danger of the increasing of Heresy, may take away a Territory from the true owner, and dispose of it to another; and many also defend, that he hath power to Depose an Heretical Prince, and of Heresy, he makes himself the Judge: His Lordship with a profound Charity and judgement, thus goeth on, viz. So that though I had rather my Tongue should cleave to the Roof of my Mouth, than that I should deny that a Papist may be a good Subject, even to a King, whom he accounts an Heretic; since I verily believe, that I myself know very many very good: Yet Popery is like to an ill Air, wherein, though many keep their Healths, yet many are Infected, (so that at most, they are good Subjects; but during the Pope's pleasure) and the rest are in more danger, than if they were out of it.  
Moreover, as to the firing of London; which the Author referreth to, in his Papist Misrepresented, as well as the Death of Godfrey, I was always as careful as you were, to charge no more Papists with the Odium of it, than such as the Justice of the Nation Criminated therewith. Moreover, if any one will have it, that Hubert and Peidelow were not Papstis, I shall not account it tanti, to contend with him about it, and as you told me lately, that you would not I remember when we were long since Discoursing of that fire, you shown me a Book of Vigelius a Civilian, who treating, de praesumptionibus quaestionum facti, laid it down as a particular Rule, viz. Si de causâ incendij quaeritur, culpâ inhabitantium praesumitur factum, and saith, quae regula approbatur l. 3. §. 31. ff de officio praefecti vigilum, ubi Paulus plerumque (inquit) incendia fiunt culpâ inhabitantium.  
Moreover you once showed me it represented, as a Rule in Magerus his Advocatia armata, that damnum quod ignoratur à quo provenerit, ab inimico illatum esse praesumitur; which doth partly agree with the presumption of the causer of the damage mentioned in the parable of the tares, an enemy, hath done this: And you have with Candour in the Papists behalf, in p. 180. to show that the Pope was not the inimicus Homo, helped them to the Testimony of an adversary, I mean of Marvil, in his growth of Popery.  
You have likewise done justice to the Papists, in p. 181. Exploding the great popular Argument of London, being designedly fired, by many Popish Persons; because of the flames breaking out at once, in several places▪ distant from one another: An Argument, that the Author of Pyrotechnica-Loyolana, printed in London, in the year 1667. doth in p. 130. lay great stress on, and saith, that as at Cracow in Poland (which he had before accused the jesuits for having fired) the flames did break out there, in several places of the City, at the Tops of Houses, so here the fire did break first out at the Tops of several Houses, which were every way, at a considerable distance, from the contiguous burning in the main Body, etc. And therefore on the Account of the thing you mentioned, and which is obvious enough in Nature, a fire first caused in London, or Cracow, culpâ inhabitantium, might afterward appear, breaking out in several distant places thereof. And I have several times told you, how I was in the behalf of the Roman Catholics, troubled at the Votes of the House of Commons, that threw the Gild of the fire of London, on the Papists in general; and likewise, at what was spoke by an Eminent Son of our Church, and Minister of his late Majesties, that at the Condemnation of the Lord Stafford, in effect did so, for there, as you have truly said in p. 179. the Evidence did not rise High and Clear enough; for the charging any Papist with it. Nor need I now tell you, that I was in the year 79 sorry to find that a Pamphlet against Popery, that charged the Papists in general, with the Fire of London, and with that, particularly of the Temple, caused by a Non-Papist Debauchè, who was burned in it, was then Licenced by a very Loyal and Learned Licenser.  
But since our Roman-Catholick Author, in his Papist Misrepresented, doth partly found the Misrepresentation, on these execrable practices having been done according to the known Principles of the Church of Rome, I shall take this occasion he hath given me, to offer it to him, to consider how far any known principle, founded on the Papal Usurpations, and approved either BY or IN that Church, might have Legitimated a practice of the like Nature: As for Example, the Firing of the Heretical Villages at the Massacre of Merindol, affirmed by Heylin and Maimbourg, and the designed one of the City of Westminster, in the Gunpowder-Treason: And shall leave it to the ingenious Author to Recollect, whether any Divines or Divine of the Church of England he withdrew from, and much more whither any of its Canons, approved any principle of that extravagant Nature.  
Whatever Impressions it may make on his Thoughts, or those of the Gentleman you refer to in p. 173. (and there mention with Honour; and, as one though having forsaken the Communion of the Church of England; yet being a Pious and Learned Roman Catholic, and of a nice tenderness of Conscience, and a lover of Truth as such, and whose Inquisitiveness in Religion, is not at its Journeys end in Rome, and whom you have found inclined to return to the Church of England, if the Tenent I shown you, discussed by Gundissalvus, and asserted in the gloss and Text of the Canon Law, can be charged on the Church of Rome, as approved by it) I know not; but shall here send you a Transcript of the same, and shall first observe, that the sedes materiae for this Tenet, that a whole City may be burned with fire, if the Major part thereof were Heretics, is in the Body of the Canon Law, namely in the Text of the Decrets itself, Can. si audieris 23 Caus. Q. 5.  
And if any one will consult the Body of the Canon Law, with the gloss and Case of the Edition at Turin, in the year 1620, he will find it there as followeth.  
SI AUDIERIS. CASUS.  
Cyprianus fuit interrogatus an mali post adventum Domini in hunc mundum, morte sint puniendi; Et certe respondet quod sic: quia si ante adventum Christi hoc fuit; ut probabitur autoritate Deuteronomij & exemplo Matathiae: Multo fortius post adventum Christi hoc fieri debet: Autoritas durat a principio usque. ibi cujus praecepti. Postea sunt verba Cypriani. SI AUDIERIS. Haec verba sumpta sunt de Deuterono usque ad illum locum hujus praecepti.  
Necabis] Tu quicunque sis: Et sic quandoque ille qui non est judex potest punire malesicos, etc.  
OMNES QUI. si Ergo aliqui haeretici sunt in una civitate tota civitas possit exuri & sic ecclesia vel civitas punitur pro delicto personarum ut 25. q. 2. ita nos, etc.  
NUNC] id est in futurum, etc.  
CVIVS] haec suntverba Cypriani.  
MATATHIAS] ut legitur in libro Machabeorum.  
Item Cyprianus lib. de exhortatione Martyrij cap 5.  
Principes saeculi pessimis parcere non debent. 34.  
§ Si audieris in unâ ex civitatibus quas dominus deus tuus dabit tibi inhabitare illic, dicentes, eamus & serviamus dijs alijs quos non novisti, interficiens necabis omnes qui sunt in civitate caede gladij: Et incendes civitatem igni, & erit sine habitaculo in aeternum; non reaedificabitur etiam nunc, ut avertatur dominus ab indignatione irae suae; & dabit misericordiam tibi & miseribitur tui & multiplicabit te, si exaudieris v●cem dom dei tui & observaveris praecepta ejus. Cujus praecepti & rigoris memor Matathias inte●fecit eum qui ad aram sacrificaturus accesserat. Quod si ante adventum Christi circa deum colendum & idola spernenda haec praecepta servata sunt; quanto magis post adventum Christi servanda sunt, quando ille veniens non tantum verbis nos hortatus est, sed & factis.  
To this place in the Canon Law, Gundissalrus refers in his Discourse against Heretical Pravity; and which I shown you in my Study among the Tractatus Criminals, published by Franciscus Maria Passerus at Venice, in the year 1556. and where in p. 158. he hath discussed the Tenet at large, and ex professo. 'Tis among those Criminal Tractates called Tractatus contra haereticam pravitatem per Gundissalrum de villa diego Sacri Palatij Apostolici Auditorem. char. 158. and where it follows thus, viz.  


Summarium.  
1. Civitas in qua aliqui insunt Haeretici an tota possit igne exuri, aut alias destrui latissimè usque ad questionis finem.  
2. Civitas quando dicatur Haeresim committere ut universe destrui possit.  
3. Vniversitate punitâ de Haeresi, an singuli quoque puniti videantur ita ut amplius puniri non possint.   

Questio 24.  
Vigesimo quartò quae●o, an si aliqui Haeretici sunt in unâ civitate, possit tota civitas exuri sive alias destrui, & glo. in c. Si audieris. 23. q. 5. arguit, quod sic per illum tex. & videntur ibi velle joan. & Laur. quod quilibet possit hoc facere; sed in Contrarium inducitur ea q. si non licet. ver. quasdam. & versi. his igitur & q. 4. ver non ergo & q. ●ult. quodcunque & quod no. 33. q 1. inter haec. in 1. glo. Archi. in. c. praesidentes de haere. l. 6. dicit quod Ecclesia concedit generalem authoritatem exterminandi haereticos 23. q. v. si vos, etc. Si audieris. Quae non tantum diriguntur principibus. Et facit eadem causa q. legi. & de haeretici communicamus. § Catholici. ubi etiam ad eos exterminandos, conceditur cruce signat. indulgentia ultra-marina; tamen occifio & spoliatio talium, tutum est quod fiat ex edicto principis aut Ecclesiae c. cum. secundum leges eo. titu. lib. 6. ne ex cupiditate vel ultione potius quam ex justitia vel obedientia pugnare videantur. 23. q. 1. quid culpatur & q. 11. c. 1. & q. 111. Sex differentiae. quod etiam tenuit in summa. eo. titu. versic: Sed nunquid, & Goffre. in summa. eo. titu. §. sed nunquid Catholici & Hostien. in summa. eo. titu. qualiter evitentur. vers. sed nunquid Catholici. idem sequitur Joan. And in novel. in d. c. praesidentes. & domi. qui subjungit oportere necessario praecedere judicis declarationem super crimine haeresis ad hoc ut ista executio fieret, per d. c. cum secundum leges.  
Sed ista videntur mihi cum supportatione nimis crudè & indigeste dicta, & in tantâ questione ubi de tantorum periculo agitur, & praesertim ubi innocentes pro nocentibus puniiuntur, gravius & profundius scribendum, & calamus magis temperandus fuisset; quapropter ego dicerem quod etiam si aliqui de civitate sint Haeretici, dummodo civitas ipsa haeresim non incurrerit, adeo quod delictum istud universitati civitatis ascribi possit, non propterea civitas possit uxuri aut alias destrui. Nullo enim jure hoc reperitur cautum, omnia jura clamant in contrarium, scilicet quod peccata suos debent tenere Authores. C. de pae. sancimus. de his quae fiunt a Majori parte. c. quaesivit.  
Ad jura quae in contrarium inducuntur stat responsio ad C. si audieris. per quod glo. praefata se fundat, dici potest multipliciter. Primo quod illud erat praeceptum legis veteris, & judiciale, ut patet clare, nam habetur originaliter Deutero. 13. & talia in lege nouâ cessaverunt, nisi de novo fuissent instituta, nec legitur nova institutio. Nam Cyprianus cui inscribitur ille tex. in decretis non habuit facultatem jura generalia concedenai, cum non fuerit Ro. Ponti. eo. Maxime ubi de incendio, & morte inferendis disponitur, ut patet in illo tex. quae paenae ab ecclesiâ non imponantur ne cleri. vel mona. sententiam sanguinis, & eo. ti. eo. lib. & de exces. praelatorum ex literis; vel aliter dicas quod ille tex. non loquitur de haere. sed de idolatris, & ista crimina sunt diversa, ut ex superioribus patet. Aliter etiam potest dici quod loquitur, quando omnes de civitate inficerentur illo crimine & si non omnes; illud tamen tempore illo licite fiebat, stante praecepto Dei qui Dominus est vitae & mortis, pro quo bonus tex. in d. c. si non licet, & in c. gaudemus de divor. ubi de homicidio Sansonis fit mentio.  
Ad alia vero jura quae inducit Archidia. videlicet c. legi, respondetur quod Authoritate dei illa facta fuerunt qui interius Authoritatem occidendi inspirabat, ut in d. c. si non licet. ad c. vos. dicendum est quod loquitur quum Authoritate judicis illa fiunt, ut patet in fine ejusdem tex. ubi dicit diligentissimi rectores, etc. ad c. excommunicamus. § Catholici. dicas quod intelligitur quum in casu licito bellum contra eos moveretur & accedente Authoritate superioris qui hanc concedere posset; alias autem sequeretur absurdum, quod pro actu illicito, & reprobato Papa concederet indulgentias quae tantum pro opere Charitatis sunt indulgendae. juxta no. per Doctores c. qd; autem de paenis, remissionibus, Pro quo est tex. eo. tit. cum ex eodem tenet S. Tho. 4. sententiarum distin. 20. Stabit in hoc conclusio quod si civitas labatur in haeresim, tunc demum possit exuri, & destrui & non aliter. Hanc sententiam firmat Bar. in l. aut facta. § Nonunquam. F. F. de paen. in crimine haeresis, & in crimine laesae Majestatis, & alias ubicunque filius pnnitur propter delictum patris, & sic fuit factum de Carthagine, quae propter Rebellionem passa est aratrum, ut ff. quibus med. usufruct. amit. l. si ususfructus. Dicit etiam se vidisse sententiam definitivam imperatoris Henrici quam dedit contra civitatem Brixiae quae fuit sibi Rebellis in quâ dicebat illam civitatem esse subijciendam aratro, quam paenam postea ex Misericordiâ relaxavit, quae sententia definitiva est lex ut l. ij ff. de lege & in l. fi. C. eo & de re judica. c. in causis, et ita fecit Papa Bonifacius qui propter delicta quorundam Templariorum totam ordinem eorum destruxit, quia erant Heretici.  
Hanc autem sententiam nullus inferior a principe ferre poterit, nec sine principis authoritate hoc fieri potest secundum quod latè prosequitur Bart. in extravagan. quoniam. et idem sensit uno verbo. Sal. in l. 1. c. de sed in fine.  
Sed quum dicemus civitatem committere haeresim, ut modo praemisso puniatur? dicas quod si omnes essent haeretici, vel major pars, ut in l. quod major. ff. admunicipa. et hoc tenet Bar. in d. extravagant. quum in simili materia, et requiritur quod conveniant, ●ut universitas ad hoc faciendum, utpote communicato consilio, alias dicerentur singuli facere, et non universitas juxta nota per glo. l. sed si ex dolo. §. 1. ff. de dolo. et l. aliud. § refertur. ff. de Reg. jur. neque per hoc credas quod paena corporali puniantur innocentes pro nocentibus quod manifeste patet per ea quo Bar. no. in d. § Nonunquam. et Saly. in d. l. 1. C. de sediti.  
Sed juxta praedicta quaero an punita universitate de Haeresi modo praemisso censeantur singulares puniti ad hoc, ut amplius puniri nequeant. Ad hoc respondeo quod singulares non eo minus puniri poterunt si culpabiles in hoc delicto reperiantur, quia qd debet universitas non debent singuli, et é contra. ff. quod cujusque univer. l. sicut. § 1. ff. de Reg. jur. aliud § refert. facit. ff. quod vi aut clam. l. semper § si in Sedulchro. Ad hanc decisionem, faciunt no. per joan. Mo. et Io. And. in c. faelicis. de pen. li. 6. in fi. et per Bart. in d. l. aut facta § nonunquam.    
Without troubling myself to make a formal Translation of this place, of Gundissalvus; I shall for the benefit of Common Readers, set down the Substance of it in English, omitting the References to most of the quotations out of Lawyers, which to the unlearned in the Laws, might seem uncouth, and which the Learned may Consult as they please in the Latin Transcript, viz.  


The Summary or Contents.  
1. Whether a whole City may be Burned with fire, or otherwise destroyed, in which are some Heretics? This is discussed at large, to the end of the question.  
2. When a City may be said to be guilty of Heresy, so that it may be wholly destroyed?  
3. The Community being punished for Heresy, whether every particular Person, may seem to be so punished, as that he may not be liable to any further punishment?   

Question the 24th.  
In the 24 th'. place, I inquire whether a whole City may be burned, or otherwise destroyed, in which are some Heretics? And the gloss on the Canon, Si audieris, argues, that 'tis so by the Text. And johannes & Laurentius, seem to be of opinion that any Person whatsoever, may do it. But other Authorities are brought for the contrary, etc. And Archidiaconus saith, that the Church doth grant the general power of Exterminating Heretics. And by the Authorities Cited, the power for so doing, is not only directed to Princes: And likewise, the Indulgence is granted to the Cruse signati, for the exterminating Heretics: But as to the kill and despoiling of such, it is safe, that it be done by the Edict of the Prince, or the Church: Lest any should seem to fight rather out of Lust or Revenge, than out of Justice or Obedience, the which Raynerius doth also assert, and likewise Goffredus and Hostiensis. johannes Andreas, goes in the same Track, who subjoins, that the Declaration of a Judge on the Crime of Heresy, ought necessarily to precede to the effect, that execution be so done. But those things seem to me (under favour) to be too crudely and indigestly spoken: And in so great a question, where the danger of so many is treated of, and especially, where the innocent are punished for the guilty, the Subject is to be Writ of more gravely, and more profoundly; and ones pen was to have been more tempered. Wherefore I would say, that though some of a City are Heretics, yet while the City itself hath not incurred the guilt of Heresy, and so that that Crime cannot be ascribed to the Body of the City, it may not therefore be burned, or otherwise destroyed; For this is not found ordered by any Law. Nay, the Laws are evident to the contrary; Namely, that Sins ought only to reach to their Authors.  
To the Laws that are brought to the contrary, the Answer is clear, and to the Canon, Si audieris, by which the gloss doth found itself, much may be said: As first, that that was a Precept of the Old Judicial Law, as appears clearly. For 'tis found in the 13 th'. of Deuteronomy And commands of that kind ceased to oblige under the new Law, unless the institution thereof, had been renewed. Nor do we read of any such new Institution: For Cyprian, to whom that Text in the Decrets is ascribed, had not the power of issuing out the General Laws (for as much, as he was not Bishop of Rome) nor especially in a Case, wherein order is given concerning Burning, and Death; as appears in the Text, etc.  
Or otherwise you may say, that, that Text doth not speak of Heretics, but of Idolaters; and those Crimes are different, as appears out of what hath been before said.  
And again, otherwise it may be said, that it speaks so, when all Persons of a City were infected with that Crime. And if they were not all infected, yet that was lawful at that time, while there was a Command of God for it, who is the Lord of Life and Death; and for which, there is a good Text, where mention is made of Sampson's Homicide. But to the other Laws which Archidiaconus urgeth, 'tis answered, that those things were done by God's Authority, who did inwardly inspire the Authority of killing, etc. and it is to be said, that he speaks, when these things were done by the Authority of the Judge, as appears in the end of the Text, etc.  
And as to somewhat else Cited, you may say, that 'tis understood, when in a lawful Case, War was waged against them; and there was added also to that the Authority of a Superior, who could grant it: Otherwise this Absurdity would follow; that for an Act unlawful, and disallowed, the Pope might grant Indulgences; which are only to be granted for a work of Charity: According to what is named by the Doctors, etc. and for which the Text makes, for as much as Saint Thomas holds out of the same 4. Sententiarum. distinc. 20.  
The Result of the whole, will rest here, that if a City doth fall into Heresy, than it may be burned and destroyed, and not otherwise.  
Bartolus Confirms this Resolution in the Case of Heresy, and of Treason, and in all other Cases where the Son is punished for the offence of the Father. And thus it was done in the Case of Carthage, which for its Rebellion, was ploughed up, as appears in the Pandects. He saith likewise, that he saw the Definitive Sentence of Henry the Emperor, which he gave against the City of Brixia, that Rebelled against him, wherein he mentioned, that the City was to be ploughed up: The which punishment he afterward out of his Mercy released, etc. And thus Boniface did, who by reason of the faults of some of the Templars, destroyed their whole order, because they were Heretics.  
But none inferior to a Prince, can give this Sentence, nor can it be done, without the Authority of a Prince, according to what Bartolus doth at large pursue. And Salycet was of the same Opinion.  
But when shall we say, that a City commits Heresy, so that it may be punished in the manner aforesaid?  
I Answer, then, if they were all Heretics, or the Major part: And it is requisite that they should meet together as a Community to commit this Crime; Namely, by joint Counsels. Otherwise single Persons would be said to do it and not the Community, etc. Nor would I have you believe by this, that the Innocent are punished with Corporal Punishment for the guilty, which appears manifestly from what is said by Bartolus, etc.  
But accrding to the premises, the question is, Whether the Community being punished for Heresy, every single Person be deemed to be punished so, as that he may be judged to be severally punished for it; and so ought not to be punished further?  
To this I Answer, that Persons singly, may nevertheless be punished, if they are found guilty of this Crime; because what the Community doth owe, Persons do not singly, and so on the contrary, etc. For this Decision, those things do serve, that are noted by joannes and the Moderns, and by Bartolus.    
If any one would know what figure Gundissalvus makes in the account of the Learned Papal World, you may tell him, that I suppose that Tractate of his against Heretical pravity, was Printed long before it was bound up with the Tractatus Criminals, before mentioned: For that by one whom I Employed to Consult the TRACTATES in 17 Volumes, in the Edition of Lions, in the Year 1544. I am informed, that, that Work of Gundissalvus, is there in the Second Volume, fol. 267. (the which alone, would show him to be a considerable Author) and in the course of my Cursory View of some Civil Law Books writ of matters of State, I have read him respectfully cited by Magerus de Advocatiâ Armatâ, cap. 8. and p. 205. and by Klockius in his Book De Contributionibus. And as an Indication of his not being valued as a singular or Heterodox Author by Passerus, who published the Criminal Tractates aforesaid, you may find somewhat of the Famous Boerius his Tractatus de Seditiosis, published in the same Volume, viz. char. 57 n 18. asserted to the same purpose.  
But none need wonder at Gundissalvus, giving his opinion as he did, when he tells us, that johannes Andreas, and Laurentius, two Famous Canonists, seemed to be of opinion, that an Heretical City, might be destroyed by any one; and without the Judgement of the Church, particularly ordering it.  
Yet here in this place, I have Cited out of Gundissalvus, it is worthy of observation, that some passages may render him appearing no Slave to Implicit Faith, or one as I may say that roweth in the Pope's Galleys. His Judging of the Case, as he did with so much Horror, was very Commendable in him; as was likewise his reproof of the Canonists by him Cited; and his saying that ones pen was to have been more tempered, and his differing from the measures of the Text and Gloss about the Canon Si audieris, and the Interpretation of the 13 th'. of Deuteronomy and answering the objection thence taken, and from the Authority of Cyprian, seems to have in it something of the Noble Berean. But after all he doth in reality show himself an arrant Canonist, and with other Canonists by him cited, he found'st the Papal power of destroying Heretical Cities, on the Pope's being a kind of Prince or fifth Monarch over the World, and on Heresy being a rebellion against him: And that where the Major part of a City are Heretics, the most moderate of the Canonists think the destruction of it is lawful, if there be the Judgement of the Church, that is to say, of the Pope in the case, as any could think the Destroying of a City, where the Majority were Rebels when decreed by a Sovereign Prince.  
No doubt but to all Loyal Roman Catholics who are willing on all occasions to testify their Loyalty by the opposing that Irreligionary part of Popery (as you call it) which refers to the Usurpations of the Papaute, and to its pretended Universal Monarchy, the Publishing of this or any Tenet that showeth the Absurdity of the Pope's claiming such a Power cannot be unwelcome. And as you have well urged it that the Canon Law was never in Gross received in Eng. in the time of our Roman Catholic Ancestors, so it would be a vain expense of time to show that this particular Canon, Si Audieris, never was, and that Malicious and Voluntary Burning of Houses being an Hostile Action, is presumed in our Law to be done for Revenge, and as by an Enemy, to Consume the same by Fire, in time of Peace. Any such Foreign power would by our Roman Catholic ancestors have been Presently Adjudged to come under the Notion of what I before referred to, as Ignis Alienus, and of outraging our Country Modo guerrino; and the very claim thereof in the Canon Law cannot but make all considerate and Loyal Roman Catholics startle at the thought of the Extravagance of the former papal Usurpations in the world abroad.  
But you have from p. 259. to 265. with so much Candour and Fairness, discoursed of this Savage Tenet in the Canon Law, that you have saved any one else much of his Labour in doing it; and I could wish, that all Writers of Religionary Controversy, would proceed by such your Measures of thinking themselves Morally obliged, to say all that the matter will fairly bear on both sides. And I accord with you, in Judging any writer to be a kind of Falsarius, who doth not so: And am glad that you having so Justly branded that poor partial way of Writing, wherein too many Protestant, as well as Popish Authors, have appeared so defective, you have afforded the Age so fair a Specimen of Writing with Morality about a Tenet very unmoral, and in so Cool and Dispassionate a manner of a Tenet so fiery.  
I am not now to tell you, what you have so long known of me, viz. That I never was a Lover of the Canon Law: And that though I always had a great Honour for the Principles of Nature and Reason, appearing in the Civil Law, yet as I never thought better of the Canon Law, than Albericus Gentilis did in his 9 th'. Chapter, and Second Book, De Nuptijs, where he saith, sed hoc jus brutum & barbarum sanè est, natum in tenebris Saeculorum Spississimis, productum a Monacho, Tenebrione, etc. So my finding particularly Cyprian so miserably abused in the Canon of Si audieris, hath made me the more to Nauseate it. For it is evident, that the place in Cyprian, doth not prove what Gratian proposeth, viz. That a whole City now under the Gospel, may be burned for a few Heretics inhabiting in it.  
'Tis plain, that Cyprian's design there is to encourage all good Christians, rather to suffer Martyrdom, than to commit Idolatry, by Worshipping other Gods; that being the Title and Subject of the Epistle, De exhortatione Martyrij; and in order to this, he shows God's great Hatred, and severe punishing of Idolatry, Namely, from Deut. 1●. 6. (the which making nothing for that Monk's purpose, he wisely leaveth it out of his Canon) and from v. 12 th'. and 13 th'. of that Chapter, viz. If thou shalt hear say in one of thy Cities, which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, certain Men, the Children of Belial, are gone from among you, and have withdrawn the Inhabitants of their City, saying, let us go and serve other Gods, etc. 'Tis therefore plain, that this severe Law▪ concerned only the Cities of Israel; the words in that Text being One of THY Cities, which the Lord thy God hath Given THEE. And as the Law under that penalty, was given only to the jews in Canaan, so it obliged them only, and not any other People of any other Country. Moreover as to the Words in the Text, viz. withdraw the Inhabitants of their City, and which Gratian thought fit to leave out, they may be said to be Indefinite, and may mean all the Inhabitants: And then it was evidently Just, to kill them all, according to the words in Cyprian, Etiam si universa Civitas consenserit ad idololatriam. But if the Major part be not indeed meant then, if you will consult Ainsworths excellent Commentary, on Deut. 13. v. 12, 13. you will find, that the Doctors among the jews, say, that if a Major part of the City be drawn to Idolatry, than that Major part shall be slain, and the City be burned. But if the Minor part only be drawn to Idolatry, than they say, that Minor part shall be Slain; but the City shall not be burnt. This the jewish Doctors, who understood that Text, much better than Gratian or john Semeca his Glossator, took to be the meaning of that Text, and so likewise many Learned Christians did.  
Cyprian then having shown how great a Sin Idolatry was; and how hateful it was to God, he adds, Si ante Adventum Christi Circa Deum Colendum & Idola Spernenda haec precepta servata sunt, quanto magis post adventum Christi servanda sunt? But we know, Mosaical precepts▪ are either De officijs, or de poenis. And as to the former, namely, Moral Offices, or Duty to God, and our Neighbour; Of precepts for these Cyprian says, that if they were observed before Christ, then quantò magis post adventum Christi, etc. who had in his Sermon on the Mount, fully explained, and given us the true meaning of them. And the clearer understanding of any Laws, doth certainly induce a stronger Obligation from them: And hence it is, that Cyprian thinks truly that Christians are more strictly obliged to observe the Moral Law, than the jews were. But the Laws de paenis & supplicijs, Cyprian doth not at all mention, nor in that place intent or mean. For Christians are not bound to inflict the same punishments on the Transgressors of the Law, to which the jews by the Mosaical Law were bound. For to the jews Adultery, or breach of the Sabbath, were Capital Crimes: But not so among the Christians. Theft was not Capital by Moses his Law: Yet by the Law of England it is. By the jews Law, it was an Eye for an Eye, and a Tooth for a Tooth; but our Blessed Lord declares against that severity, as not to be used amongst Christians. And yet our Monarchus Tenebrio, would have Cyprian understood de poenis; and against Truth and the Sense of Cyprian concludes, that because Idolatry was by the jews Law punished with Death, therefore it should be so punished, since Christ, under the Gospel.  
Gratian ends his Quotation out of Cyprian, with these words, viz. Si ante adventum Christi haec praecepta servata sunt quanto magis post adventum servanda sunt, quando ille veniens non verbis tantum nos hortatus est, sed & factis? By which words he would prove, that our Lord did both by Words and Deeds, exhort us to Kill Heretics: Whereas there is not one word in Cyprian, or the Texts of Scripture he Cites, which any way concerns Heretics or Heresy; but only Idolaters and Idolatry, which are things of a far different Nature. And had Gratian considered what immediately follows there in Cyprian (and which he there unluckily leaves out) he might have clearly seen that Cyprian neither said nor meant, that the Meek and the Holy jesus, did, by Deeds or Words, Exhort Men to kill Heretics. But that which Cyprian truly saith, our Blessed Saviour did by Deeds and Words Exhort us to, was that Christians should patiently suffer, and by no means renounce the Gospel by serving Idols, and by Idolatry. For as to those words with which Gratian ends his Canon, viz▪ Christus veniens non verbis tantum nos hortatus est, sed factis, there should have been only a Comma after factis, though Gratian makes a full point, as if it concluded the Sentence. It immediately follows in Cyprian thus, viz. Non verbis tantum nos hortatus sit, sed & factis, post omnes Injurias & contumelias passus & Crucifixus, ut nos pati & mori exemplo suo doceret, ut nulla sit homini excusatio pro se (pro Christo) non patienti, Cum ille passus sit pro nobis, etc. In short, that which Cyprian saith, Christ taught us with Words and Deeds was not, that we should Kill Heretics, as Gratian would have it; but that we should willingly suffer Death for the Gospel, rather than be Idolaters.  
We know that in the case of the Samaritans (who were both Heretics and Idolaters) when james and john would have had fire from Heaven, to Consume them, our Blessed Saviour Rebuked them, and said, that the Son of Man was not come to destroy men's Lives; but to save them.  
Because I love to make no breach among Christians wider, and because in p. 260. you have, in general, mentioned Gratian's Misciting of Cyprian, and in p. 261. shown that Gratian's founding a Tenet on Cyprian, or any places out of other Authors, giveth it only the weight that Cyprian and they had in their proper Works, etc. I have here thought it worth while, to show that Papists are under no Moral Obligation by this Canon, Si audieris, and do believe, that the more Sagacious Persons of the Church of Rome, do (as is said in Pere verons Book, you in the page last cited refer to) make Gratian's Decrees, and the gloss claim nothing of Faith, and so even in the country's of the Pope, where the Canon Law is in force, this part of the Decrees, so wilfully mistaken by Gratian out of Cyprian, can bind none in Conscience.  
And therefore as to what you mention of the Roman Catholic Gentlemen observing, that the Council of Trent had gone far in the Confirmation of the Canon Law, etc. I account you have said enough to Answer that Objection: For though the Council of Trent hath it in the 25 th'. Session C. 20. De Reformatione p 623, 624. of the Edition at Antwerp, in the year 1033 that Praecipit sancta synodus sacros canon's, & concilia generalia omnia, necnon alias Apostolicas sanctiones in favorem Ecclesiasticarum personarum, libertatis Ecclesiasticae, & contra ejus violatores editas quae omnia praesenti decreto innovat, exactè ab omnibus observari debere; tho' other expressions in that Council, may seem to confirm some parts of the Canon Law, they cannot (I think) Rationally be extended to confirm any thing therein that was void, ab initio, and so not obligatory, and as this Canon, Si audieris, appears not to be, by Gratians falsification as to Cyprian.  
But how far a Tenet or Principle of this Nature, branded by no Index expurgatorius, is yet chargeable on the Papacy as approved by it, I leave to consideration, and do think it great pity, that when a Pope could find leisure by a Bull, that I find King james the I. mentions in his Works, as beginning with, Exurge Deus, to Damn among other say, that of Luther, Nova vita est optima paenitentia; he did not find time to censure this thing in his Canon Law.  
I thank God that I am Embarked in a Church, whose Articles and Canons contain nothing inserted in them by any Falsarius; and by which nothing is approved, or imposed on me to own, contrary to the Liberty purchased for me by my Redeemer. You have in p. 71. cited a late Author of the Communion of this Church, for saying that Image-Worship, invocation of Saints, Transubstantiation, Purgatory are, and will be Learnedly and Voluminously defended on each side, to the World's End; and perhaps in the World abroad, it will be so. But I agree with you, in believing that the Present State of England doth, and probable future one of it will here render Voluminous Writings of all Theological Controversies out of Fashion.  
Your p. 170. contains in it one Theological consideration, of more value in my Opinion, than many Tomes of Controversy, viz. that Papists as well as others of Mankind, have a right and title to the free and undisturbed Worshipping of God, and the confession of the Principles of Religion, purchased for them, by the Blood of Christ: And the very consideration of the Duty incumbent on all Christians, to stand fast in this Liberty, so dearly purchased for them, would, if I were in the External Communion of the Roman Catholic Church, prevail with me to leave it, though there were perhaps, no other Argument in the case.  
I have here our great Dr. jackson on my side, in thus Judging in his Treatise of the Church, 14th. Chapter, where having given two Reasons as just and necessary for which Men may, and aught to separate themselves from any visible Church, and named this as the first▪ Namely, when they are urged and constrained to profess or believe some points of Doctrine, or to adventure upon some practices, which are contrary to the Rule of Faith, or Love of God, he mentions this as the Second, viz. In case they are utterly deprived of Freedom of Conscience, in professing what they inwardly believe, etc. for which he quotes, 1 Cor. 7.23. ye are bought with a price, be not ye Servants of Men.  
Although (saith he) we were persuaded that we could communicate with such a Church, without evident danger of Damnation, yet in as much as we cannot Communicate with it, upon any better Terms than Legal Servants or Bondslaves do with their Masters, we are bound in Conscience and Religious Discretion, when lawful occasions and opportunities are offered, to use our liberty, and to seek our Freedom, rather than to live in Bondage▪  
I am far from desiring to entrench on this liberty for Papists, in matters or Tenets properly denominable by the Term of Religionary ones (according to the expression by you frequently used) and do suppose, though there were no such thing in the World, as a Pope or Patriarch, that the Religionary Tenets of Transubstantiation and Purgatory, etc. may continue to be believed by many; and if any one shall contrary to the Sense of the Government, and of Acts of Parliament in Henry 8 this time, believe, as the Representer doth, that the Bishop of Rome hath here in Spirituals▪ more power by the Word of God, than other Foreign Bishops; I shall not endeavour by any severity, to impose on him the contrary Belief: But yet shall still by virtue of that Sacred Word, think myself bound, and that particular passage in it cited by Dr. jackson, not to be a Servant of Men, as to any Doctrinal Impositions; and to forbear external Communion with any Church, that would impose upon my Belief.  
I know of none of the Church of England, who hath avowed the practice of more Indulgence to Papists in the Confession of their Religionary Principles, than I have done: And I thank God, that my practice in this kind, hath not been by Fits or Starts, or Turns of Times or Humours; but that my Life hath in this Point of doing Just and Charitable Offices, to all Conscientious and Loyal Papists been as (I may say) a Thread even spun upon every Wheel of Providence. Yourself can tell of the Signal good Offices I did to many Papists, and to others, that a Clamorous Common Fame would have run down as Popishly Affected, when you applied to me then in their behalf, during the Season of some of the late Narratives; and I am able further to do you the Justice, as to remember what you have long ago told me (and what I had reason to believe) that when the figure you made in another of his Majesty's Realms, allowed you Virtute officij, to have made many thousands of them groan under the Burden of the Penal Laws, you held yourself, in Conscience obliged not to do it, but on the contrary, to rescue them from the least Hardship thereby.  
But I shall here take occasion to tell you, that I have scarce in any thing more showed my Friendliness to the Persons of some of my Roman Catholic Friends, than by my Advice to them that they would apply to the Writers of their Church, to forbear troubling our English World with new Models of Reconciliation of Churches.  
And indeed, Nature doth now Loudly enough tell us, that the Real Peace of Kingdoms ought not to be troubled by projects of a Chimerical one between Churches. The best Men are Reconciled to one another, and the Reconciling of all the worst Men in the World together, would make their Association more troublesome to Mankind: And when we know that the Bigots of the Church of Rome can stir no further from the Council of Trent, than our Soldiers in Africa, could from their Garrison of Tangier before the Peace, there is no thinking of their Travelling far to meet us. And if any one suppose that they would meet us half way, yet notwithstanding he might likewise according to the Principles of Nature suppose that the other Moiety of the Theological Controversies not agreed in, would occasionally render men's Spirits more Tempestuous toward each other, and the public; as we usually see Storms to be most violent about the Season of the Equinoctial. Moreover, they who give themselves the Office of Reconcilers general, or intrude into the Station of the Public Mediators, appearing thereby hot and unquiet in their own tempers, & rendering themselves always liable to disquiet from abroad, by attacks from all parties, are of all Men the most unlikely to be universal Peacemakers', or to gain any Blessing by being such And as you have in your Discourse Studiously declined the use of the little Names of Distinctions of three differing Parties in the State, so shall I likewise do; but can easily give you occasion to guests which of them refers to Men most Hated, and most Impolitic, by Minding you how the Systematical Writers of Politics do often call neuters Middle Region Men, and such as being Lodged in the Middle Rooms▪ are annoyed with the droppings from above, and smoke from below.  
You have expressed yourself in your Preface and Discourse as so much agreeing with me in this Subject, that I shall be but Just to you, in owning my Belief, that your varying from some of the Measures of the Church of England in some Points tended not to encourage others to undertake the Thankless Office of being Matchmakers' of Churches.  
I know very well, what my Lord Primate Bramhall, in order to showing that the Sons of the Church of England are not Slaves to its Articles, saith, In his Just Vindication of the Church of England; and how Mr. Chillingworth in his Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation, tells us, that by the Religion of Protestants, he understands not the Doctrine of Luther or Calvin, or Melanchton, nor the Articles of the Church of England, etc. But that wherein they all agree, and which they all Subscribed, etc. as a perfect Rule of their Faith and Actions, that is, the Bible, the Bible I say, the Bible only is the True Religion of Protestants, etc.  
And therefore what ever freedom you justly claim, by the Charter of the Bible, to confess any Religionary Tenets however different from those I own, I am not to envy you: But do know, that I am bound to pity you, or any else of Mankind, that I shall think to err therein, though it should be in any Religionary Tenet of Popery itself, or in the Power of the Bishop of Rome in Imposing Creeds or Rules of Divine Worship on Men by Divine Right, as part of your Description of Popery runs; and as to which I think, there may be occasion in your Review of it, to avoid giving more Offence both to the Church of England, and that of Rome thereby, than you perhaps intended  
I have observed a late French Writer to avoid the Censure of describing the Communion of the Church of Rome, or the Faith of that Church by a doubtful Name, having used the Term la Catholicitè. But as to your Description of Popery, I may mind you, that according to your Quotation in p. 318. out of Ames, of the Seven Venetian Divines, who, in that most judicious Tractate of theirs (as Ames calls it) of the Papal Interdict, affirmed, that a Christian ought not to obey any Command of the Popes, unless he had first examined the Command, as far as the Subject Matter required, whether it were convenient, lawful and Obligatory, and that he Sins, who Implicitly obeys it; those Divines though adhering to la Catholicitè firmly enough, did thereby throw off the Power of the Bishop of Rome, in imposing Creeds and Doctrines, and Rules of Divine Worship on Men, as much as your Description doth: And the Venetians particularly opposing the Pope's Interloping in their Jurisdiction, that other thing referred to in your Description, is sufficiently known. But if by your Description of Popery, you intent only to give us a Dictionary of your Sense of the word generally, as used by you; and that you intent by the Extermination of Popery, the Banishing only of those Principles of it, that are Irreligionary, out of men's Minds; namely, the Principles that tend to the Pope's Spiritual and Temporal Usurpations: I am not to quarrel with your expressing your own meaning, But as I Judge several Roman-Catholick Writers using the Term Popery, to intent thereby, the Religion of the Church of Rome, as for example, the Author of the Compendium, saying what I before referred to, that nothing but Popery or at least its Principles, can make the Monarchy of England again emerge or lasting (yet as to which a Divine Sentence was in the Mouth of the King, when in his Gracious Expressions in Council concerning the Church of England, he Judged otherwise, and said, I know the Principles of that Church, are for Monarchy, etc.) and meaning by Popery, what was called la Catholicitè, I shall say, that according to the common acception of the Word Popery, were I to explain what I usually mean by it, I would declare, that I mean not only the Power of the Bishop of Rome; but of any General Councils in Imposing Creeds and Doctrines, etc. on me: And I desiring to have all Religionary Errors banished out of my understanding, and Loving my Neighbour, as myself, will desire they may be so out of his, and particularly, if after he knoweth he is bought with a price, he shall think it lawful for him to be a Servant of Men: And will not only weigh the Commands and Decrees of any Bishop, But of any General Council whatsoever: And if in Matters that Import my Salvation, I find them contrary to the Bible, with a Salvo to the Reverence I own to all Lawful General Councils, I will desire them to excuse me from obeying them. Were it not for what you have so well in p. 48. said, that the Protestant Religion not making the intention of the Priest essential to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, is more strongly assertive of the Real presence there, than the Popish Hypothesis, and for that great and excellent Notion of yours, in your Discourse, viz. That Papists and others being bought with a Price; that therefore they ought not to be the Servants of Men, and my Judging that according to what I have mentioned out of Dr, jackson, that you would separate yourself from any Church, that imposed any thing Magisterially on men's Faiths, I might think that perhaps, had you lived in the Reign of Henry the 8 th', you would not have separated from the Ecclesia Anglicana, as then by Law Established.  
And therefore, when by your warm Expressions in p. 47. after you have said, that the Protestation that the Protestant Religion requires, is such a continual one, as is Reiterated upon every fresh Act and Attempt of the Papal Religion, upon ours; (and whereby it would impose Creeds and Doctrines on us, contrary to the Liberty of the Church of England, as now by Law Established) You tell us, that We are to show no Mercy to these Principles of Popery, that disquiet the World, and on the several occasions offered, protest against the Damages, that both our King and Country, may have from the Rage of Popery, I may tell you; that this PROTESTANCY amounts to no more than what we read of in the Review of the Council of Trent, where in Book 1. and 12 th'. Chapter, the Author refers to the French King by his Ambassadors, causing a PROTESTATION to be made against the Council of Trent, and as appeared by the Oration there made by Mr. Arnold de Ferriers, the 22 d. of September, 1563. where among other things▪ having mentioned many grievances, he saith, that according to the Commands of the most Christian King, they were constrained CONCILIO INTERCEDERE VT NUNC INTERCEDEBANT, by the same Token, that that Book relates, how thereupon a certain Prelate of the Council of Trent, not well understanding the Propriety of the Word Intercedere, which the Tribunes were wont of Old to use, when they made their Oppositions and Hindrances, asked his Neighbour, PRO QVO ORAT REX CHRISTIANISSIMUS?  
But of the French Kings Ambassadors protesting not only against Grievances in the Council of Trent; but against itself, as a Grievance, and of some occasions thereof, it will come in my way to speak hereafter.  
Nor was there ever any Instrument or Paper Writ with more sharpness of Anger and Scorn in the way of Defiance against Papismus or Popery, than H. the 8 this Protestation against the Council of Trent; and yet inclusive too of another Protestation, I mean, of his Adherence to the Faith then called Catholic. That long Protestation calls the Pope by the Name of Bishop of Rome, and saith, surely except God take away our right Wits, not only his Authority shall be driven out for ever; but his NAME also shall be forgotten in England.  
Nor did ever any Protestant Writer in Queen Elizabeth's, or King james the First's time, or in our late Fermentation, so zealously press the Exterminating of the Papal Power, as Henry the 8ths. Proclamation, about the Abolishing the same, Triumph at its being here done: And where he saith: We have by Good and Wholesome Laws and Statutes made for this purpose, EXTIRPED, ABOLISHED▪ Separated and Secluded out of this our Realm, the Abuses of the Bishop of Rome, his Authority and jurisdiction, of long time Usurped, etc. And the King there Orders, all manner of Prayers, Orisons, Rubrics, Canons of Mass-Books, and all other Books in the Churches, wherein the Bishop of Rome is NAMED, or his Presumptuous and proud Pomp and Authority preferred, utterly to be Abolished, Eradicate, and Razed out, and his NAME and Memory, to be never more (except to his Contumely and Reproach) remembered; but perpetually suppressed and obscured.  
The Act of 28 of Henry the 8 th'. before spoken of, called an Act for Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome, was here referred to, and which Act, and other Acts of Parliament Establishing the King's Supremacy, and Excluding the Pope for ever, I mentioned as revived in Queen Elizabeth's time▪ after their being repealed in Queen Mary's.  
I need not observe to you, how this present French King hath likewise lately shown a very Commendable Zeal for the Exterminating the Usurpations of the Papal Power in the Business of the Regalia, and that the Case of that King's Power is much altered for the better, since D' Ossat Writ to Villeroy from Rome with so much Joy, for his having found out an expedient, as to the difference between Henry the 4 th'. and the Pope, about the granting to one a Church- Dignity in France, Namely, to have the Words put into the Pope's Bull thus, viz. pro quo Christianissimus Rex scripsit, instead of quem Rex Christianissimus nominavit.  
I doubt not, but your Curiosity hath led you to see a Copy of the Letter, writ to the French King, on the 10 th'. of july, 1680. by the Arch Bishops and Bishops, and other ecclesiastics of France appointed by the Clergy there, about the last Breve of this Pope, upon the Subject of the Regale, in which Letter they take notice, how THIS POPE required him not to subject any of their Churches to the right of the Regale, and threatened him, that he would make use of his Authority, if his Majesty did not Submit to the Paternal Remonstrances he had often made, and repeated to him about that point; and they there pass, as YOUR Protestants, so far, as to make a PROTESTATION, (as their word is) against the Papal Usurpation designed by THIS POPE.  
And moreover, YOUR sober party of the JESVITS, have in France adhered to the King against the Pope in this Contest about the Regale.  
But how severe the same Arch-Bishops and Bishops in France, who made that PROTESTATION, have since been in their ADDRESS against the True Protestants there, who have been averse from the Religionary part of Popery (as you call it) I suppose you cannot be ignorant. For undoubtedly, the Acts of the general Assembly of the French Clergy, in the year 1685. Concerning Religion, together with their Complaint against the Calumnies and Injuries, which the pretended reform have, and do every day publish in their Books and Sermons against the Doctrine of the Church, presented to the King by the Clergy in a Body, July the 14 th'. 1685. Cannot have escaped your view, the same having been since printed in London, Translated into English, and, as I suppose, by some of the Roman Catholic Religion, and will not trouble myself to guests for what intent of the Publisher. I have looked it over, and leave it to our Divines, to consider whether it deserves any Answer. I observed in it one Reference to Peter du Moulins Nouveaute de Papism, of the Edition of Sedan, about Protestants rendering the Papists Idolatrous, as invocating Saints, which was an Instance of the freedom allowed Protestants in that Realm, in Writing and Publishing Books against the Religion of Popery, as by Law Established in France, a liberty that the Publisher of that Translation hath likewise sufficiently taken, in publishing it here without Licence; and whereby he hath brought our Famous Whitaker and Downham, Rainolds and Ames▪ into the Range of Calumniators and Publishers of Calumny's against the Church of Rome.  
Though the Course of my Studies, hath lain much more among Law-Books than in those of Polemical Divinity, yet the time I have spent on the latter, hath enabled me to observe one very Inauspicious passage under the first Article, and the Column of the Calumny of the pretended Reformed about it; and where the French Clergy accuse them of Calumny, for saying, That with the Heretics mentioned by St. Irenaeus, Roman Catholics reject the Holy Scriptures, that with the Montanists, they accuse it of Imperfection, that they Contemn it; and afterward that the Roman Catholics call the Scripture a Dumb Rule, a Stumbling Stone, a Nose of Wax, a Two edged Sword: And for that purpose, having begun with accusing our Whitaker and Downham as Calumniators, and referred to their works to prove it, they afterward quote the Thesaurus Disputationum Theologicarum in Academiâ Sedanensi, etc. de summo controvers. judice. Tom. 1. p. 26. Onerant (pontificij) Scripturam plaustro convitiorum, vocando eam Regulam Mutam, lapidem scandali, nasum cereum, gladium ancipitem.  
But without any undue Reflections on that Clergy, I think it might have been more worthy of their great Learning and Hatred of CALUMNY, and their Tenderness for the Honour of the Scripture, and their Obligation to handle Theological Controversy with the fairest and softest hands they could, and in short, more worthy of the Honour of the Church of Rome, if they had quoted Turrian. count. saddle. p. 99 Canus. lib. 3. Loc. Theol. Cap. 2. Sect. ●ec vero. Ecchius in ench. tit. de ecclesiâ. Hosius lib. 3. de Auth. Sac. Script. Sect. fingamus. p. 148. as I find them Cited by our Dr. Crackanthorp, under his De loc. arguendi ab Authoritate, that you have referred to, and whom you have Celebrated for being just in his quotations, and who there speaking of Papists slighting the Scripture, thus quotes these Authors, viz. HI Scripturam vocant gladium Delphicum, Nasum cereum ad sensum quemvis flexibilem, quae non nisi ecclesiae (suae) authoritate authentica sit, de quâ posse pio sensu dici volunt eam, si destituatur ecclesiae authoritate, non plus valere quam Aesopi fabulas: And had further Cited some index expurgatorius, for censuring the profaneness of those expressions in Roman Catholic Authors, and one of whom was a Legate in the Council of Trent, and another a Divine sent to that Council by the Pope.  
There is another Eminent Father of our Church, whose Writings the French Clergy might if they pleased, have quoted, for the same purpose they did those of Whitaker and Downham, and that is jewel in his Apology, who in p. 106, 107, 108. saith, Itaque Sacrosanctas Scripturas quas Servator noster▪ jesus Christus non tantúm in omni sermon usurpavit, sed etiam ad extremum sanguine suo consignavit, quo populum ab illis, tanquam à re periculosâ & noxiâ, minore negotio abigant, solent literam frigidam, incertam, inutilem, mutam, occidentem, mortuam appellare: Quod nobis quidem perinde videtur esse, ac si eas omnino nullas esse dicerent. Sed addunt etiam simile quoddam non aptissimum: Eas esse quodammodo nasum cereum, posse fingi flectique in omnes modos, & omnium instituto inservire. An PONTIFEX ista à SUIS dici nescit? Aut tales se habere patronos non intelligit? Audiat ergo quàm sanctè, quamque piè, de hac re scribat Hosius, quidam polonus, (ut ipse de se testatur) Episcopus, certe homo disertus, & non indoctus, & acerrimus ac fortissimus propugnator ejus causae. Mirabit●● opinor hominem pium de illis vocibus, quas sciret pro●ectas ab ore Dei, vel tam impiè sentire potuisse, vel tam contumeliosè scribere, ita praesertim, ut eam sententiam non fuam unius propriam videri vellet, sed istorum communem omnium. Nos, inquit, ipsas scripturas, quarum tot jam non diversas modo, sed etiam contrarias interpretationes afferri videmus, facessere jubebimus, & Deum loquen●em potius audiemus, quàm ut ad EGENA ista ELEMENTA nos convertamus, & in illis Salutem nostram constituamus. Non oportet legis & Scripturae peritum esse, sed à Deo doctum; vanus est labour qui scriptures impenditur. Scriptura enum creatura est, & egonum quoddam Elementum. Haec Hosius. Eodem prorsus spiritu atquè animo, quo olim Montanus, aut Marcio, quos diunt solitos esse dicere, cum sacras scripturas contemptive repudiarent, se multo & plura, & Meliora scire, quàm aut Christus unquam scivisset, aut Apostoli. Quid ergo hic dicam? O columina religionis, O praesides Ecclesiae Christianae! An haec ea reverentia vestra est quam adhibetis verbo Dei? And afterward saith, aut illud verbum, quo uno, ut Paulus ait, reconciliamur Deo, quodque propheta David ait sanctum & castum esse, & in omne tempus esse duraturum, egenum tantum, & mortuum elementum appellabitis?  
I have not time to Consult the Works of Whitaker and Downham as Cited by the French Clergy: But do find that by jewels Citing Pighius, and likewise Hosius to make good his Charge, the French Clergy knew why, and wherefore, to spare Iewell's Name in their Class of Calumniators▪ jewel in his Margin Cites, Pighius in Hierarchia, and in his Margin referring to Hosius, saith very candidly, Haec Hosius in lib. de expresso verbo dei sed astutè, & sub alterius personâ: Quamvis & ipse aliàs eadem, in eodem etiam libro, disertis verbis affirmet.  
They afterward referred to our Learned Rainolds, as a Calumniator under their 6 th'. Article, and Cite him for saying, that Roman Catholics do call the Virgin Mary Queen of Heaven: And they might if they had pleased, have called to mind, that in the proper Mass of her seven Sorrows, she is called Caeli Regina & Mater Mundi, and that in an Office where the Te Deum is Travestyed to her (and which Office the Present Pope hath worthily Suppressed) she is called the Queen of Glory  
But as to their charging our Aims under their Seventh Article with Calumny for saying in his Bellarminus enervatus the Pope was the ILLE Antichristus, I shall make no remark on their Charge; but let it pass.  
There was however, another thing that I could not but take notice of in that Book of the French Clergy▪ that made their accusing the Writers of the Reformed Religion, as Calumniators and Falsifiers of the Doctrine of the Church, seem to me very severe: Namely, that Clergy's joining the Decisions of the Council of Trent, with the Profession of their Faith, and noting in one Column, that profession and the Articles of the Council of Trent, and there making the Doctrine of their Church a result from both, and opposing thereunto in another Column the Calumny's in the Writings of the Reformed; and yet by the Date of the Impressions of many of those Writings as mentioned at the end of that Book, it appears, they were Printed long before the year 1615. and some before the year 1579. in which latter year, Cressy in his Epistle Apologetical to the Late Earl of Clarendon voucheth (but to no effect, as I shall by and by show) that De Marca in his Volume De Concordiâ Sacerdotij & Imperij, tells us the Definitions of Faith of the Council of Trent were admitted by a public Edict concerning the same in France; and as to which former year, Cabassutius an Oratorian in his Notitia council. declares out of the Records of the French Clergy, that in their General Assembly at Paris, in the year 1615. the Canons of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent, were unanimously received by the whole Clergy. And in p. 6. of the Translated Book of the French Clergy, a Book of Beza's is cited, as printed in the year 1576, and one of Luther's, printed in the year 1558. and one of Melanchton's in the year 1552, to show them Calumniators of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent, as the Received Doctrine in the Gallican Church. And whether the many other Authors there cited as printed before the year 1615, and yet too Cited as Calumniating for injuring the Trent Doctrines, as being those of the Gallican Church, were not likewise severely dealt with, is left to the impartial to Judge, and to whose view of that Book of the French Clergy, it will be obvious that the profession of Faith inserted at the end of the Council of Trent, is brought in, in the beginning of that Clergies Representing the Doctrine of the Church.  
I love not to be Curious in alienâ Republicâ, and much more, not to be so in alienâ Ecclesiâ: But since the Acts of that Clergy have been made to speak English here; and so without Licence to Travel about our Country, I cannot but occasionally make a further Remark on the Severity of that Clergy, in taking it ill of the Protestants there supposing that the Catholic Church Disguiseth or Condemneth the most Essential verities of Religion, and Representing her under the Hideous idea of a Society professing an impious Doctrine, and denying the chiefest Articles of Faith; since as I said, that it was but in the year 1615. that the Canons of the Council of Trent, were pretended to be unanimously received by the whole French Clergy at Paris, and that it was but a year before▪ that the SAME Clergy (as I find it observed by the Author of The Difference between the Church and Court of Rome, p. 31.) referred to the Account of what was done upon the meeting of the three Estates, and when Cardinal Perron, being the Clergy's Spokes Man, told the King, that The Matter contested, was a point of Doctrine, etc. and that the Power of the Pope was full, nay, most full and direct in Spirituals, and indirect in temporals, etc. and that they would Excommunicate all those who were of a contrary Opinion to the Proposition, which affirmed, the Pope could depose the King, etc. and for which 'tis there Cited, how the Pope by a Breve in that year 1615. returned his Solemn thanks to the Clergy of France, for what they had done against the Articles of the 3d. Estate, wherein his Power was concerned. The use I make of this, is only to show that the present French Clergy, who no doubt are Conscious of the Error of their Predecessors in such a DOCTRINE, wherein Religion and Loyalty are concerned, were obliged to show all the Tenderness and Compassion to their Frail and Fallible Brethren, not Erring in a Point of that Nature; but only in such as were Subject to Controversy.  
I shall here observe that Cressy in the Book aforesaid reflects on the late Earl of Clarendon, for saying in p. ●48. of his Vindication of Dr. Stilling-fleet, that the Council of Trent is not yet received in France, and in many other Catholic Country's; and saith to the Earl, under favour Honoured Sir, you will, I suppose, grant that the late Famous and Learned Archbishop of Paris, Peter de Marca, was better informed in the Ecclesiastical State of France, than yourself a Stranger, and quotes the Volume of De Marca before mentioned, lib. 2. cap. 17. S. 6. for Writing expressly, that the Definitions of Faith of the Council of Trent, were admitted by a public Edict made concerning the same matter, in the year 1579; but that the Decrees which regard discipline, are not received in France, because they are not ratified by the Law of the Prince; although the Chief Heads which do not infringe the received Customs▪ and Ancient Rights of the Gallican Church, are Comprehended in Regal Constitutions several times published concerning that matter: Which thing how grateful and acceptable it was to Pope Clement the 8 th', is testified by the late King Henry the Great in his Rescript of the year 1606. And then he Quotes Cabassutius his Notitia Concil. in fine, for the purpose I have mentioned before, and declaring out of the Records of the French Clergy, viz. that in their General Assembly at Paris, in the year 1615. the Canons of the Doctrine of the Council of Trent were unanimously received by the whole Clergy:  
Father Cressy than farther addeth by way of Triumph over the supposed mistake in the said Earl, in p. 131. of that Epistle: And long before that, even from the rising of the said Council, each particular Bishop had received it in their Respective Diocesan Synods. Thus Sir you see a sufficient Reception of the Faith delivered by the Council of Trent in France both by Authority Episcopal and Regal.  
I must not here forbear to take notice, that if it were true what Cressy allegeth, namely, that from the ri●ing of the said Council, the French Bishops did receive it in their Respective Diocesan Synods, before any PUBLISHING of it by the French King, and not staying for the same, they made such a kind of Invasion of the Regal power in France, Namely, by introducing Religionary Establishments without ITS Authority, as was never practised by our English Clergy, since the Reformation, nor perhaps before it; and such as the French Clergy, cannot charge the pretended Reformed with.  
For their Petition to the King doth in p. 3. mention their (i. e. the pretended Reformed) having been by Edicts, permitted the Exercise of their Religion, and the Freedom of Acting in their Synods, as they have done. But this by the way.  
If we consider the time of the very Professio fidei (that the Acts of the French Clergy speak of) being first owned, and that in the year 1564, the time likewise of the Confirmation of the Trent Council, and which was not made nor Composed by the French Clergy, but by the Direction of the Trent-fathers', and Published by Pope Pius the 4 th'. in the year last mentioned, must it not seem hard, that Luther's Book printed, as was mentioned, in the year 1558, and that of Melanchton's printed in the year 1562, and before the Date of their very Profession of Faith, should be brought in as Calumniating it?  
When any had a Triumph Decreed them in the Old Common Wealth of Rome, the Writers of such Solemnities tell us, the Custom was, Vt à militibus & abjectissimis quibuscunque triumphalem currum sequentibus, diversis triumphantes Convicijs incesserentur, nè prosperâ illâ fortunâ plus justo insolescerent. But the new Church of Rome, I mean the Tridentine one in France, will bear no Raillery, nor Calumny of Words, nor yet any to ask them when▪ and by whom their Triumph was Decreed them, and if their Doctrine was Crowned Lawfully. And methinks, as if Nature and its God meant that all should ludibrium debere, that would Triumph over Fallibility in what Church soever, Our Honest Monk whom I lately mentioned, as Decreeing himself a Triumph over that great observer of all things he referred to, I mean the late Earl of Clarendon, had in his Triumphant Chariot the usual Compliment of that Solemnity, viz. Hominem te esse cogita, there put on him by Nature.  
And one might to him Cite D' Ossats Letters, and with some Allusion to his Words to the Earl of Clarendon say, that he supposed that that Cardinal understood the State of the Council of Trent, relating to France, as well as any one, and much better than De Marca, or any one else who would make its definitions of Faith admitted in France by an Edict in the year 1579.  
Let any one for this purpose, who pleases, look on D' Ossats Letter from Rome, the 19 th' of November 1596 to Villeroy, where he adviseth, that the Council of Trent might be Published in France, and mentions that the Clergy of France had often desired a Publication of it, and saith, that the Huguenots by reason of the Edict of 77. would not be prejudiced by such publication; and on another Letter to Villeroy from Rome, on the 19 th'. of February 1597, where he again presseth for the publication of that Council, and saith of it, La publication sans l' observation, pourroit plus que l' observation sans la publication: and that the Courts of Parliament and others, would have no cause of complaint thereupon, and that a Salvo of two or three Lines, would be a remedy against any complaints, and on his long Letter from Rome, the 28 th' of March 1599 to Henry the Fourth, where he minds him from the Pope, that the Council of Trent might be Published, and saith, Que la pluspart des Catholics, & ceux qui plus peuvent Comme les Parlemens, & les Chapitres, & les principaux Signior, ne veulent point du dit Concile, pour n' avoir point à laisser les benefices incompatibles, les confidences & autres abus quae la Reformation portee par le dit Concile osteroit; and on his Letter from Rome the last of March, 1599 to Villeroy, Animating him to promote the Publication of that Council, and where he saith, I never knew that that Council prejudiced any Regal Right, as some say it hath done; but though it might prejudice it in some point, it might however be published, with adding thereto such a Salvo as we could have, Namely, as to the Prerogative and Preeminences of the Crown, the Authority of the King, the Liberties and Franchises of the Gallican Church, the Indults of the Court of Parliament, and the Edicts of Pacification, and all other things that we would have excepted, and on his long Letter to Henry the Fourth from Rome, of june the 11 th'. 1601. where mentioning his excusatory replies to the Pope, about the not publishing that Council, he saith, that not only the Heretics, but a great part of the Catholics were against it; and that his Holiness might remember how Henry the Fourth's Predecessors, could never be brought to publish that Council.  
I might here mention how Father Paul in his History of the Venetian Interdict, p. 4. and 48. tells us, that the Trent Council was not received in France, in the year 1616, and that Thuanus assures us, that the Trent Council was not received in France in the year 1588., and therefore not in the year 1579. according to De Marca. For that excellent and most Faithful Historian, Tom the 4 th'. lib. 93. p. 361. of his History, tells us, that at that time (i. e. An. 1588.) Magno Caloris aestu contentio de Tridentinâ Synodo toties agitata denuô renovata est, and how stoutly the promulgation of it was opposed.  
And there is the Work of another French Historian, that may be here referred to, viz. Historiarum Galliae ab excessu Hen. 4. Libri 18. Authore G. B. Gramondo in Sacro Regis Consistorio Senatore & in Parliamento Tolosano Praeside. Tolosae 1643. and where in p 57 the Author tells us, that in the year 1615. (the year in which Cressy out of Cabassutius says, the Clergy received the Trent Council) Proposita à Clero Concilij Tridentini promulgatio, & molliendae invidiae adjecta est haec clausula sine praejudicio Coronae Regiae, & Libertatum Gallicanae Ecclesiae, etc. and that Cardinal Peron spoke Elegantly and Learnedly for it; but that after long debate about the Reception of that Council (especially between the clergy and the 3 d. Estate) the issue was, that the third Estate carried it against the Clergy; and the Reception and Promulgation of the Trent Council, was absolutely rejected, and (p. 69.) PRAEVALVITQVE CLERO POPULUS.  
Where it is evident. 1. That what Cabassutius in his Notitia Conciliorum, p. 720. names only a Convention of the Clergy in that year 1615. (as if that had been all) was in Truth, Conventus trium Regni Ordinum, a Convention of the three Estates, the greatest and Supreme Convention of France, and as Gramondus saith, p. 58. 2dly. That whereas Cabassutius says, the Trent Council was received in that General Convention of the Gallican Clergy; De Marca saith, and evidently proves, that no such Convention of the Gallican Clergy had any Authority to Receive or Promulgate the Trent Council▪ or any other. Approve it they might; but receive it they could not. But it was so far from being received by the Convention of the French clergy, that it was absolutely rejected by the Supreme Convention of the three Estates, and that after a long and free Debate.  
It is true and most Notorious, that not only in France, but in England heretofore, many of the Papal Clergy were generally more addicted to advance the Papal Power, than the Just Prerogatives of their own Kings, or the Rights of the Laity: Because as by the Clergy's help and assistance the Papacy grew greater, their Jurisdiction and Revenues were thereby increased. And thus Anselme and Becket being zealous for the Pope, and Disobedient to their King, found their account in the Pope's Assisting and Favouring them with his Power while they lived, and Canonising them, and making them (what their Loyalty could not while they lived) Saints after their Death. But as our Magnanimous Roman Catholic Princes did then bridle the Papal Power, so likewise those of France have done; and even where Cabassutius saith, that the Trent Council was received in the year 1615. à Clero Gallicano sub Ludovico 13. he doth not say that the King received it, and thus De Marca tells us in his De Concordiâ Sacerd. & Imperij. Lib. 2. Cap. 17. S. 7. p. 33. Decreta Conciliorum legis vim in Gallià non habent, nisi recepta à Clero, & Regiâ Authoritate munita. But De Marca had in that Book informed us, that in the time the Trent Council Sat, when it evidently appeared by the Decrees of that Council, the Liberty of the Gallican Church was in quamplurimis apitibus destroyed, the Ambassadors of Henry the 2 d. and Charles the 9 th'. left the Synod, being called home by their Kings: And had complained in that Council, that the Liberty of the Gallican Church, & Regia dignitas erant imminutae; and their recess from and leaving the Council was a good reason, as De Marca there proves, non admittendae Synodi (i. e.) of their not receiving that Council.  
Father Paul likewise in his History of that Council saith, that the French Bishops left it on the same account.  
But moreover De Marca in the same place tells us, that the whole Clergy of France did most frequently in their Synods Petition their Kings, that they would Publish and Receive the Trent Council (excepting those things which were repugnant to the Liberty of the Gallican Church) and that they would never grant their Petition, nor Publish or Receive the Trent Council, though with that Exception. His words are, Totius Cleri Gallicani Conventus Concilij Tridentini promulgationem à Regibus nostris supplicibus libellis postulaverit, eâ lege ut ea Capita exciperent, quae libertatibus Ecclesiae adversarentur: Quorum desiderijs Principes, toto hoc negotio saepe in Consilium prudentissimorum relato, se accommodare non potuerunt. From whence it is evident, if that great Archbishop says true, that the Kings of France would never receive any of the Trent Council, no not that part of it, which was not against the Liberty of their Church, or their King's Regalities.  
But after all this, I must not forbear to observe how here it appears, that the Learned De Marca doth contradict himself. For in the same page and Column, viz. p. 133. Col. 1. he saith, that the Definitions of the Council of Trent concerning Faith were admitted in France by a public Edict, Anno 1579. (which must be in the 6th. year of Henry the 3 d. of France) and yet he tells us in this same page and Column, that although the whole Clergy of France did most frequently Petition their Kings to Promulgate and admit only that part of the Trent Council, which was not against the Liberties of the Gallican Church, yet their Kings would never admit it. If these words of his mean any thing, I think they must mean the Definitions of Faith, which De Marca saith were received by the Edict 1579. But if their Kings would never admit any of it, though the whole Clergy did Petition them to do it, than was it not admitted by any Public Edict in the year 1579.  
I remember the Learned Author of the Nouvelles de la Republique des letteres, for the Month of March 1685. there mentioning the Histoire critic du Vieux Testament par le P. Richard Simon Prêtre de la Congregation de l' Oratoire of the New Edition at Rotterdam that year, saith that that New Edition contains a Letter of a Protestant Doctor, who procured the 5 th'. Edition of that Critical History; and further quotes that Protestant Minister for giving an Answer to the ordinary Distinction, viz. that the Council of Trent hath been received in France, in what concerns Faith, but not in matters of Discipline; and he speaks of an Assembly of the Clergy held, which he saith, Deliberated how to present a Petition to the King, that that Council might be received as to what concerns Faith only, and that whatever deliberation the Prelates made there upon, the Court would not grant their Request. And if that Council (saith he) hath been received, let them produce us the publication of it, or any Act that shows us that it hath been truly received and published; for according to the Rules of Right, a Council cannot Fair Loy, if it hath not been published.  
But if any one were minded to speak Argumentatively, and show that the French do not now receive the Trent Council, no not in rebus fidei, he might urge. 1. That the whole Clergy of France in their Assembly, March 19 1682. declared that a Council is above the Pope. 2. That he hath no Power in Temporals in any Prince's Dominions. 3. That he hath no Power to Depose Princes. 4. Nor to Absolve Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance. 5. That he is not infallible. And though the Pope declared by his Bull Dated at Rome Apr. 11 th'. 1682. that those Acts of theirs were Null (the words of Improbamus, Rescindimus, Cassamus, etc. being in the Bull) yet the French King had before in his Edict of March 23. 1682. Registered in Parliament, Ratified and Confirmed them all. Nor is it deniable, that these 5 Propositions, contradict many things in the Trent Council, which are settled in it as Doctrinal Points.  
And moreover 'tis obvious to any one to observe, that in the Acts of the General Assembly of the French Clergy in the year 1685. they Cite their new Trent Creed (i. e.) some PART of it: For the last of it they cite, is p. 38. of that Book, and leave out the LAST part of that Creed, which is contained in these words, Caetera item omnia Sacris Canonibus & aecumenicis Concilijs, ac praecipuè à Sacro-Sanctà Tridentinà Synodo tradita, definita & declarata, indubitanter recipio ac profiteor, simulque Contraria omnia atque haereses quascunque ab Ecclesiâ damnatas & rejectas & Anathematizatas, ego pariter rejicio, damno, & Anathematizo. Hanc veram Catholicam fidem, extrà quam nemo salvus esse potest, quam in praesente sponte profiteor & veraciter teneo, eandem integram usque ad extremum vitae Spiritum Constantissimè retinere & confiteri, atque ab illis quorum cura ad me in munere hoc spectabit, teneri, doceri & praedicari quantum in me est curaturum. Ego idem N. spondeo, voveo, juro, etc. These are the words which the French Clergy leave out in their Book above mentioned, and they knew the Preservation of the Liberties of the Gallican Church, obliged them to such omission.  
For by this part of the Trent Creed, they are bound to believe and profess, Omnia à Concilio Tridentino tradita, definita, declarata, and so not matters of Doctrine and Definitions of Faith only: And 'tis most plain, that the Council intended both matters of Discipline and Doctrine. And in the aforesaid words of the Trent Creed, a firm Belief is required to be given, omnibus in Concilijs oecumenicis traditis; and then a long farewell to all their Liberties of the Gallican Church would ensue, and their Sanctio Pragmatica, which is the Authentic Comprehension of them is Damned by Leo the 10th. approbante Concilio, in the General Lateran Council.  
It may be moreover said, that the words above mentioned that the French Clergy left out of their Book are a part Fidei Catholicae extrà quam non est salus: and therefore if the French do not receive (as it seems they do not) this part of the Trent Creed, than it may very well be doubted, whether they received the Definitions of Faith of the Tridentine Council, as De Marca would have us believe.  
The Trent Creed I have referred to, is at the end of that Council in most of the Editions of it; but in the Edition at Antwerp, which is the best, viz. Anno 1633, it is in the Body of the Council. Ses. 24. p. 450, 451.  
It here occurs to my thoughts, to entertain yours out of Hoornbeck's Examen bullae Papalis: Printed An. 1652. where in p. 42. speaking of the French Ambassadors claiming the Honour of sitting before those of Spain, he saith, uti apparuit in Oratorum Galliae Regis Carol. 9 protestatione in Concilio Tridentino factâ An. 1563, quando secus fieret, & Oratores Hispan. Regis post Imperatoris, locum Caperent primum: Cujus omnem Culpam in solum rejiciebant Papam Pium 4 tum, Cujus, aiebant, imperium detrectamus, quaecunque sint ejus judicia & sententiae, reijcimus, respuimus & contemnimus. Et quanquam, Patres Sanctissimi, vestra omnium Religio, vita & eruditio, magnae semper fuit & erit apud nos auctoritatis; cum tamen nihil a vobis, Sed omnia magis Romae quam Tridenti agantur, & quae hic publicantur magis Pij 4 ti placita quam Concilij Tridentim decreta jure existimentur, denunciamus & protestamur, quaecunque in hoc conventu, hoc est, toto Pij nutu & voluntate decernuntur & publicantur, ea neque Regem Christianissimum probaturum, neque Ecclesiam Gallicanam pro decreto oecumenici Concilij habituram. Interea quot quot estis Galliae Archiepiscopi, Episcopi, Abbates, Doctores, Theologi, vos omnes hinc abire Rex Christianissimus jubet, redituros ut primum Deus oped. max. Ecclesiae Catholicae in generalibus Concilijs anttquam formam & libertatem restituerit; Regi autem Christianissimo suam dignitatem & Majestatem.  
And he afterward in p. 192. desires that after those words dignitatem & Majestatem, may be added, what followeth among the addenda, there to his foregoing work, viz. In Concilio Tridentino vehementer illa inter Gallos' & Hispanos agitabatur Contentio de praecedentiâ: Non solum illis primum à legato Imperatoris locum petentibus, sed & nolentibus ut Orator Hispani Regis alio quo singulari loco ab illis sederet, sed ordine post eos: aliter se protestari, non adversum legatos, aut Philippum Regem, aut Concilium, aut Ecclesiam Romanam, sed adversus ipsum Papam Pium, 4 tum, non pro legitimo illum habentes Papâ, & provocare se ad Concilium aliud liberum in Galliâ Cogendum.  
Ubi illud facetum accidit, quod quando adversus Oratoris Gallici expostulationem, diceretur cum Scommate, Gallus Cantat, hic Concinne protinus respondit, utinam illo Gallicinio Petrus ad resipiscentiam & fletum excitaretur. Illàque causa postmodum Gallis fuit inter alias quo minus Concilium Tridentinum in Regno & Ecclesiis Gallicanis, vel ejus publicatio admissa fuerit.  
This Book of Hoornbeck, was Printed at Vtrecht, and the Papal Bull on which it very Learnedly Animadverts, is that by which the Pope endeavoured to Abrogate the Peace of Munster.  
But to go on with my Assertion of the Non-reception of the Council of Trent in France, I shall acquaint you that another considerable Author, Namely, My Lord Primate Bramhal, who was an Exile in France, in the time of the Usurpation, and whose observation penetrated as far into the Constitution of the Gallican Church, as either F. Cressy's or any Mans else, having in p. 284. of his Just Vindication of the Church of England, spoke of the Trent Council, saith, We have seen heretofore how, the French Ambassador in the Name of the King and Church of France, protested against it, and until this day, though they do not oppose it, but acquiesce, to avoid such disadvantages as must ensue thereupon, yet they never did admit it. Let no Man say that they rejected the Determinations thereof only in point of Discipline, not of Doctrine: For the same Canonical Obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Council in point of Discipline, as in point of Doctrine.  
Monsieur jurieu in his Historical Reflections on Councils, and particularly on that of Trent, which were Translated into English, and Printed in the year 1684. Saith that the French Kings their Parliaments and Bishops dislike several things in the Decrees of the Council of Trent; and mentions as the Reasons why the Council of Trent is not received in France, these following. 1. That the Council hath done and suffered many things that suppose and confirm a Superiority of the Pope over Councils. 2. It hath confirmed the Papal encroachments upon ordinaries by exemption of Chapters, and privileges of Regulars, who are both withdrawn from Episcopal Jurisdiction. 3. That it hath not restored to the Bishops, certain Functions appertaining to their Office and taken from them, otherwise than to execute them as delegates of the See of Rome. 4. That it hath infringed the privileges of Bishops, of being Judged by their Metrapolitan and Bishops of Provinces, by permitting a removal of great Causes to Rome, and giving Power to the Pope, to Name Commissioners to Judge the Accused Bishop. 5. That it hath declared, that neither Princes, Magistrates nor People, are to be consulted in Settling and placing of Bishops. 6. That it hath Empowered Bishops, to proceed in their Jurisdictions by Civil pains, by Imprisonment, and by Seizures of the Temporalties. 7. That it hath made Bishops the Executors of all Donations, for Pious uses. 8. That it hath given them a Superintendency over Hospitals, Colleges, and Fraternities, with power of disposing their Goods, notwithstanding that these matters had been always managed by Lay Men. 9 That it hath ordained, that Bps. shall have the examining of all Notary's Royal and Imperial, with power to Deprive or Suspend, notwithstanding any Opposition or Appeal. 10. That it hath given power to Bishops, with consent of two Members of their Chapter, and of two of their Clergy, to take and retrench part of the Revenue of the Hospitals, and to take away feudal Tithes belonging to Lay-Men. 11. That it hath made Bishops the Masters of Foundations of Piety, as Churches, Chapels and Hospitals, so as that those who have the Care and Government of them, are obliged to be accountable to the Bishops. 12. That in confirming Ecclesiastical Exemptions, it hath wholly ascribed to the Pope and Spiritual Judges, all power of Judging the Causes of Accused Bishops, as if Sovereign Princes had lost the right they had over their Subjects, as soon as they became ecclesiastics. 13. That it hath empowered the Ordinaries and Judges Ecclesiastic, in Quality of Delegates of the Holy See, to inquire of the Right and Possession of Lay-Patronages; and to quash and annul them, if they were not of great necessity and well founded. 14. That in Prohibiting Duels, it had declared, that such Emperor or Prince, as should show favour to Duels, should therefore be Excommunicated and Deprived of the signory of the place holding of the Church, where the Duel was fought. 15. that it hath permitted the Mendicant Friars to possess Immovables. 16. That it hath ordained an Establishment of Judges it calls Apostles in all Dioceses, with Power to Judge of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Matters, in prejudice of the Ordinary. 17. That it hath declared, that Matrimonial Causes, are of the Church's Jurisdiction. 18. That it hath enjoined Kings and Princes to leave ecclesiastics, the free and entire possession of the jurisdiction granted them by the Holy Canons, and General Councils, that is to say, usurped by the Clergy over the Civil Power. These are the Principal Points Disputed in France: These that tend to the Diminution of the Authority and Privileges of Bishops, to enlarge the Roman power, are Rejected by the Bishops: And those that would extend the power of Bishops to the Prejudice of the Civil Authority are Rejected by the Parliaments. Between both, this Council, as enacting contrary to the Rights and Liberties of the Gallican Church▪ was never at all received in France, so as to obtain the force of a Law. He than shows, that the Pope's Superiority over Councils, is a point of Doctrine, and was decided in the Council of Trent: And yet that the Gallican Church believes the contrary. I know it will be said (saith he) that the Council of Trent hath not decided, that the Pope is Superior to Councils. Men may talk as they please; but things for all that, will continue as they are. It is true, that among the Decrees and Canons of the Council, there is none that saith in express Terms, that the Pope is Superior to Councils, and can be judged by none: But the effect of such Decision is apparent in all the Acts, and through the whole Conduct of this Council. And he afterward saith, that the Clause of proponentibus legatis, was a plain Decision of the Pope's Superiority over the Council.  
But to these 18 Reasons of Mr. jurieu, about the Reception of the Trent Council in France; being neither practicable nor practised; I might add, that, according to what my Lord Primate Bramhal observes in another place of that Book of his, I Cited before, the Obedience promised to the Bishop of Rome, as Successor to St. Peter and Vicar of jesus Christ, pursuant to the Trent Council, may seem to quadrate but ill with the liberty of the Gallican Church, to set up a Patriarch. For in p. 194. of that Book, he mentions that in Cardinal Richelieu's Days it was well known, what Books were freely Printed in France, and publicly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulness of Erecting a new, or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France, as one of the liberties of the Gallican Church: And thereupon saith, It was well for the Roman Court, that they became more propitious to the French Affairs.  
And if we consider how in the 22 d. Session of the Council of Trent▪ Chapter the 11 th'. all Kings and Emperors are Anathematised, who hinder any ecclesiastics from the Enjoyment of any of their feudal Rights, or other profits; and that it might well be supposed, that the Course and Vicissitudes of time would put Roman Catholic Princes on somewhat of that Nature, and which so eminently influenced the French King in the Munster Treaty; none need wonder at the Trent Councils not being received in France.  
There was a Book called a Review of the Council of Trent, written by a Learned Roman-Catholick, and Printed A. 1600. and Translated by Dr Langbain and Printed at Oxon 1638. The Author is believed by Rivet in his Answer to Coeffeteau, and by Langbain, to be William Ranclin Dr. of Laws, fiscal Advocate in the Court of Aids at Oua in Henry the 4 this. time, and after-terward Attorney General in the Sovereign Court of Aids at Montpellier, In ch. 1. p. 11. of the Translated Book he tells us, that being at Court, he saw many earnest Suits Exhibited to the French King, in behalf of the Pope, for the receiving that Council; and such as had been made to the preceding Kings; but which they would never grant, nor allow the publication of what they conceived so dangerous to Church and State.  
And in ch. 2. he gives us several Instances, which were made to the late Kings, for receiving the Council of Trent. Charles the 9th. was moved by the Ambassadors of Pope Pius the 4th, the Emperor and King of the Romans, the King of Spain, the Prince of Piedmont, soon after the year 1563. to Publish that Council. The King said, he would have the Advice of his Lords: But it was Determined by them, that he should not hearken to their Requests. That in the year 1572. when Cardinal Alexandrino knew the Pope's Nephew came out of Spain into France, with Commission to reinforce the Suit to Henry the 3d. both the Pope and the Clergy urged him to publish it; but nothing was done. The Request was renewed by the Clergy at Blois, and especially by Peter Espinoc Archbishop of Lions, in the year 1576; but without any effect.  
The Request was renewed by the Assembly of France, Assembled at Melun in july 1579. The Speaker was Arnalt Bishop of Bazas. Nicholas Angelier Bishop of Brien, made the like Instance to the same King, Oct. 3. 1579. and again July 17. 1582. Renald of Beaune, Archbishop of Bourges, and Primate of Aquitaine, Delegate for the Clergy, made the same Request at Fountain-Bleau; but all in vain.  
In the beginning of A. 1583. A Nuntio came from the Pope into France to Henry the 3d. but could not stir him from his purpose: and in a Letter to the King of Navarre Henry 4. who afterward Succeeded him, he protests, that it was never in his thoughts to admit of it.  
November the 19th. 1585. the aforesaid Bishop Nicholas Angelier renews this Request very earnestly to the King; and another Assault is made on him October 14. 1585. by the Bishop and Earl of Nayan, who in his Speech is very Confident, that the Council of Trent was guided by the Holy Ghost.  
He adds, though it was not received, yet several things in that Council, especially what concerned the Clergy, were inserted in the Canons of some of their Provincial Councils held in France, at Rohan. 1581., at Bourges 1584. at Tours 1585. and at Aix in Provence the same year.  
One of the King's Lieutenants General for the Administration of justice, in an Assembly of the States particularly, An. 1588. makes a Suit to the King to publish the Council; but to no purpose; Nay more, The King did not receive so much as those very Decrees of the Council, which were no way Repugnant to the Gallican Liberties. However, Suppressing the Name of the Council, they Decreed the very same things at Blois, An. 1579.  
But after all that this Author hath mentioned of the Parliament at Blois, Decreeing the same things in the year 1579. that were agreeable to the Canons of the Council of Trent, and of the fruitless Request of the Archbishop of Bourges in 1582. and of others afterwards for the Reception of that Council, I cannot but call to mind that Thuanus Hist. Tom. 4. lib. 94. p. 388. Edit. An. 1620. tells us, that in the year 1589. the same Archbishop of Bourges in a Convention of the ● Estates, did among other things propose, ut Concilio Tridentino tradita disciplina ab omnibus recipiatur: But nothing was done; and the Speech of the Archbishop and some others made in that Convention, are by Thuanus called, Orationes intempestivae.  
And I might add, that the Author of the Inventoire General des affaires de France, from the Death of Henry the 4 th'. to the year 1620. tells us, that in the year 1615, on the 19 th'. of February, the Clergy Deputed the Bishop of Beauvais, to pray the third Estate to agree to the publishing the Council of Trent: And that Monsieur le Precedent Miron in the Name of the 3d. Estate, Replied, that they could not at present receive that Council: The which agrees with what I have before alleged contrary to the Measures of Cressy; and as doth likewise the Pope's issuing out a Breve to the Cardinal of joyeux, An 1605. and mentioned in the Memoirs p. 391. after the Histoire du Cardinal Duc de Ioyeux par le Sieur Aubery Advocate en Parliament & aux Conseils du Roy, Printed at Paris An. 1654. and in which Breve, the Pope desires that Cardinal's earnest endeavours for the introducing the Constitutions of the Council of Trent into France; and acknowledgeth the Difficulty of that Work; but withal addeth that he confideth in the Cardinal's Industry, as to the Labouring that point, and saith, that he had Writ to Hen. the 4 th'. about it. And p. 931. there is another Breve of the Pope to that Cardinal, A. 1615. which beginneth thus, Venerab. Frater noster. Salut. & apostol. benedict. Planè dicere possumus, expectavimus pacem & ecce turbatio: Superioribus namque diebus spem non levem conceperamus, fore ut SSti Concilij Tridentini decreta in Galliâ reciperentur, & dum animum nostrum varietate & multitudine pastoralium▪ Sollicitudinum penè oppressum Sublevare hoc Solatio curabamus, repentè ad nos allatum est quod 4 to Nonas ●ebr. in publico conventu isthic attentatum fuerit in detrimentum supremae Authoritatis hujus SStae Apostolicae sedis, etc. And where he afterward complains to this effect, that the King (i. e. H. 4.) had several times abused him with promises and pretensions that he would publish the Council of Trent; but that nothing came of it.  
If then any one will yet say, that the French Clergy not being able in the year 1615, to engage the 3 d. Estate, to agree to the Publishing the Trent Council, did then Publish it themselves, I shall leave him to consider both the Nature and the Event of such an Invasion of the Regal Rights, and shall further acquaint him, that according to the saying of, De facto factum potest de facto tolli, he may if he pleaseth, consult the Publication of the Peace Relating to the French King, and the Prince of Conde first Prince of the Blood, Published in the Town of Loudun, the 14 th'. of May A. 1616. and where he will find the 5 th'. and th' 6. Articles to be as followeth, viz. 5th. That the Authority of the French church be observed, and no allowance or Permission be granted for any Encroachment upon the Rights, Franchises and Liberties of the same. AGREED UNTO. 6th. That, that which was made by the Clergy for the Publication of the Council of Trent, without the Authority of the King, be Repaired and Amended, and all such things formerly done in the Estate, be Reform. AGREED UNTO.  
Yet if any one wants further Confirmation, from Authorities about the Trent Council not having been received in France, I may send him to the Synopsis of councils, Writ by Dr. Prideaux, sometime Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford, and afterward Bishop of Worcester, where the Bishop Writing Chap. 5. and p. 29. of the Trent Council, saith, This Council cried up by so many Acclamations, and so Solemnly Confirmed by the Seal of of the Fisher, the French admitted not.  
But after all this said of the Council of Trent's not having been Published and Received in France, if either by the Government or Clergy or Laity there, any of the Religionary or Doctrinal points of Faith contained in that Council, are inwardly believed, and openly professed, I leave them and all Mankind to the Exercise of the Liberty wherewith christ hath made them free; and will suppose, that if after all the Old Protestations of the Government against that Council, roman-catholics in France having found the Doctrinal Points of their Faith, that were Stated and Determined by former General Councils, to be more fully and clearly made out in the Tridentine one, did profess the belief of the same, and did refer to that Council, when they would give an exterior Account or Reason of their Faith; and did think themselves obliged for the supporting the Unity of the Roman-Catholick Church, to profess the same Doctrinal Points with these Countries, where that Council had been received and published: I will make this Charitable Construction, that they did and do intent no more Diminution of the Regal Rights and Liberties of the Gallican Church thereby, than the Nations of Europe did intent a Diminution of their Freedom, by receiving any part of the Civil Law of Rome, and still continuing the Use and Authority of the same in their Commerce, and in the Interpretation of their public pactions, and of the Ius gentium: Nor than the Romans did intent to lessen the Rights of their Government, by taking their Law of the twelve Tables from Athens, nor their Maritime Law from Rhodes; and no more than our Roman-Catholick Ancestors did intent a Subjugating of our Laws to the Pope's Canon Law (against several parts of which, they openly protested) by the receiving of some other parts of it, they thought agreeable to the good of Church and State; or than the Government at present intends any Recognition of Foreign Power, by any parts of the Civil or Canon Law, being still incorporated in our Laws, and continuing here to be a part of the Lex terrae QVOAD certain causes Ecclesiastical or Maritime.  
And indeed it must be acknowledged, to be for the Honour of the Trent Council, that in France and some other Countries where it hath not been received and published, its Doctrinal Definitions have yet got ground in the Belief of many roman-catholics, on the supposed Merits of the things themselves therein contained; and as it hath been for the Reputation of some things in the Civil or Canon Law, that on their being thought reasonable, our Laws have Adopted them as their own.  
But as with all due Tenderness to all my fellow Christians in France or elsewhere, whether Lay or Clerical, I forbear to Censure or Reproach them in my most Secret Thoughts, for Embracing the Belief of any such Tenets as may be called Religionary, though taken up from Trent by them, after they have used all the due means for the finding out Truth in the same (and do most earnestly pray, that God who hath been pleased in Scripture to express his Divine Philanthrophy by the Discreet Love of a Father, and the Tender Love of a Mother, would bestow the same Blessings on them, that I wish for myself, and my most near and dear Relations) so I should have been glad to have found the like Spirit of Charity Breathing in the Acts of the French clergy with Relation to their Christian Brethren differing from them in points Religionary, instead of pronouncing their breach made with them, to be founded only on Calumnies, after the Pastoral Advertisement of that Clergy to them in the year 1682, and instead of affording them their Compassion for not being able in the three following Years, to receive that Faith of that Trent Council, which I account from the year 1564. the time of its Confirmation to this Day, not to have been Published or Received in that Kingdom, and whose Publication may be said to be there yet, but (as it were) in abbeyance, and instead of further charging them as Calumniators, because of the things Writ against the Romanists by our Whitaker and Downham, a hardship I have observed complained of in some late Writings of the French Protestants.  
But the great Royal goodness of our Gracious King, and the fervent Zeal and Charity of the present Divines of England, have made them an amends for what they suffered on the account of those our former great Clergymen.  
Yet must it be acknowledged, that in one point that Clergy in their Petition to the King, doth the Huguenots this Justice as to say the pretended Reform, how great soever their Blindness is, are not arrived to that height of Folly, as to maintain their lawful practice of the Crimes of Imputations and Calumny.  
And I am glad that since the 2 d. of March. 1679. so much occasion hath been given by the Pope's Condemning the Tenets of the jesuits, about the Doctrine of CALUMNY, and their Sicarious Principles, for the not charging them on the Church of Rome, as approved by it as formerly. But on the account of the Horrid Calumnies against Fathers and Councils, still continued in the Decrets of the Canon Law, and forged with as much Falsehood as any could have been by the French Clergy observed in the Case of the pretended Reformed, as I have particularly enough shown in the Case of Cyprian I may well urge it as an Argumentumad hominem, that neither the Pope nor French Clergy, should have been Authors of too much Severity to those Reformed, on the pretence of their Calumniating the Doctrine of their Church: And have been careful not to charge on the Catholicitè (as the Term is) the Falsehood of Gratian, and the lachesse of the Popes, that so long suffered so much trumpery in him to pass for Law: And were I at Rome now, while the Pope is so worthily busied in strengthening the preparations against the Turk in this Conjuncture, would not divert him from the same, by importuning him to make a better Canon Law for his Flock. Nor do I charge on the Gallican Church or State, what I have mentioned out of Boerius, a Precedent of Parliament there: If they hoped by the publication of their Book in France, to effect a Reconciliation of Churches there, or the Translators of it any such thing by their Printing it here, much good may their Design do them: But it seems an untoward way of beginning a Reconciliation by giving the lie, or accusing the pretended Reformed of Calumnies and Falsities. But the Author of the Papist Represented and Misrepresented, hath outdone the French Clergy in Civility of Expression to Protestants, and by rendering them only Misrepresenters of the Church of Rome.  
Yet since both these Books do agree in Representing roman-catholics as owning the Doctrine of the council of Trent, I standing fast in the Liberty I have, not to be imposed on by those Doctrines, intermeddle not here with others liberty, to own any Religionary Tenets of the same.  
And our Excellent and Learned Clergymen will no doubt, both by Preaching and Writing occasionally, secure the Souls of their Congregations, from any danger that they shall apprehend from any of the Papal Clergy, propagating such Tenets among them.  
But here I shall occasionally say, that I think that few of the Religionary or Doctrinal Tenets of the Council of Trent either do, or in the time of our Fears and jealousies, have so much Animated the Aversion of many of the Populaae here against that Council, as their apprehension of the exterminium of Heretics designed long ago by the calling of that Council. The benefit of the peace, and rest the Protestants had obtained by the Interim, A. 1548. and it's formula inter●religionis, was but to last to the end of the Council of Trent: And I have some where met with john Paul Windec, cited for boasting in his Book, de Heretic extirpand. that nothing was accorded for the Protestants by that Edict or Formula; but a Dilatory Reprieve and Toleration, till the end of that Council. And moreover we know, that in that Council there is an express Confirmation of former General Councils, and of the Terrible Lateran one in particular. For though you mention some Popish and Protestant Writers as denying the Lateran Council to have been a General one, and that Protestant Authors are somewhat put to it, who would prove it so to have been, yet if you had considered what the Bishop of Lincoln in his first Book about Popery saith in p 51. that the Council of Trent in Sess. 24. cap. 5. calls that Lateran one a General Council, and confirms one of its Canons; you would have thought it a very easy task, to have satisfied any Reverers of the Council of Trent, with the others having been a general one. And the Trent Council having, as that Learned Bishop shows there in p. 43. Commanded Emperors, Kings and Princes to observe the Sacred Canon, and all General Councils and Apostolical Sanctions in favour of Ecclesiastical Persons, and the Liberties of the Church; and where the Title to the Chapter is said to be, Cogantur omnes Principes Catholici conservare omnia sancita, etc. and those words which in p. 57 the Bishop refers to the Council of Lateran for, viz. Catholici qui Crucis assumpto charactere ad haereticorum exterminium se accinxerint, illâ gaudeant indulgentiâ quae accedentibus ad terrae sanctae subsidium Conceditur, and that Councils having so threatened Princes with Deposition, and the absolving of their Subjects from their Allegiance, in Case they do not Exterminate Heretics, hath really been the most Considerable and operative Objection that any Protestant Writers have brought to show the dread of that part of the Principles of Popery, that you term Irreligionary: And few of the Writers against the same, in our late Fermentation, but instanced in that Objection: And to which none of the Roman Catholic Writers then, that I read, did Attempt to apply the least Answer.  
The Author of the Compendium (whom you mention with the Title of Ingenious) doth there in p. 79. tell us, That there is not one single Paragraph in that Book of the Bishops; but what was either fully Answered, or what doth not at least wound the whole Protestant Party by its Consequence more than us: But was so Ingenuous, as to answer not a word that I can find there, to the Objection of the Lateran Council, and which omission in him proceeded not from inadventence; for in that one leaf where he insinuates, that he hath fully Answered the Bishop's whole Book, he tells us twice, that no Council ever imposed the Deposing Power on our Belief. And I observed, that my Good and Learned Friend Father Walsh, where in the Preface to his Causa Valesiana, printed in the year 1682. he endeavours to answer that Book of the Bishop, did not think fit to take notice of the Objection of the Lateran Council.  
But after your common way in all your Writings I have seen, namely to fortify Objections, before you answer them, thus (as I may say) to Deck and Crown the Victim you intent to offer to the World, as I find you have done right to the considerableness of this of the Lateran Council, and have in your discourse Termed that Learned Bishop's Book both unanswered and unanswerable, it is by all Ingenious and Loyal Protestants and Papists, to be acknowledged to you, that you are the only Person, who hath appeared in Print, to give the Objection the Answer that it will bear; and for which none I believe will thank you more than that excellent Prelate. For after you had taken the freedom in your Introduction or Preface, to Reflect as you have done on Archbishop Ushers Prophecy, and the Predictions of Bishop Morly, you with great Curiosity set forth the factum of the Munster Peace, whereby the Age may learn, that as with God, all things are possible, so by his having influenced the understandings of Roman-Catholick Princes, and by their having showed much better than by Words I mean, by their pacta Convenia really observed, that they think not themselves obliged by the Lateran Council, and the Deposition there threatened to exterminate their Heretical Subjects, and you Candidly show the Artifice of the Objection in a great Measure answered by the God of Nature, and by Natural Causes inclining the great Roman-Catholick Crowned Heads of Christendom to permit the dire passages in that Council, to be in a manner Abrogated by Desuetude.  
You have fairly related it, how the Roman Catholic Princes agreed in their Treaty, that no CANONS or DECREES of COUNCILS or ABSOLUTIONS whatsoever, should in future times be allowed against any Article of it, and consequently that the Canons or Decrees of that Council, Threatening Princes with DEPOSITION, and the Absolving of their Subjects from their Allegiance, for the not Exterminating their Heretical Subjects from their Allegiance, were by all those Roman-Catholick Crowned Heads, Contemned and defied; and you have shown how the Papacy hath since Acquiesced therein, and since lex currit cum praxi, and that Peace hath been so long observed, your account of it hath been of much more Importance to the Papists, as to the helping to bring them off in some Measure from the Odium of the Disloyal Doctrine of the DEPOSING Power, than any thing said by their Writers hath been, and no doubt but when any more such close Attacks shall be made upon them by our Writers, as have been since his Majesty's Reign, to charge the Allowance of the Deposing Power on their Church, they will not neglect to Crave Aid from what you have said in that your Historical Account of that Peace.  
I assure you it was no easy Task to give so Critical and so Impartial an account of the factum of that Peace, as you have done, and so much for the Advantage of the Papists, and whereby you have Merited much more from them, than their Favourite of our Church, Dr. Heylin did by Writing of the Outrages that accompanied the Reformation. And your occasional rectifying the Mistake of a considerable Writer of the Church of Rome, and of such another of the Church of England here in the Negotiation of that peace, hath showed the Niceness and Difficulty of stating it exactly as you have done.  
The Author of the Novelles de la Republique des Lettres, for the Month of November last passed, giving an account of Dr. Burnet's 2d. Part of the Hist. of the Reformation, being Beyond-Sea lately Printed in French, doth there in p. 1250 give the World a fresh view of the Horror of the Lateran Council▪ by rendering our Queen Mary as prompted by that Council, to the Persecution of her Protestant Subjects.  
But you having in your Discourse with the Exquisite Artifice of Oratory, mentioned some Passages in her Reign, not commonly known, and that on the Foundation you laid so low in the Rubbish of her Reign, you might with more Advantage support the whole Super structure of your Judging that any Roman Catholic Prince that should inherit the Throne here, would perfectly Decline her politics, and likewise in your Preface particularly fortified the Minds of People against the Fears and Jealousies of such a Prince, that might be Occasioned by the Lateran Council, did very seasonably thereby advance the measures of Loyalty and men's more cheerful adherence to the Lineal Succession.  
And the Truth is, that among the many Pamphlets Writ, with most Artifice and ill applied Learning ad faciendum populum, and to pervert them to the Exclusion, I observing the Lateran Council so much insisted on, cannot but Judge your undeceiving them in that point, to have been the more necessary. The Pamphlet you showed me in 4 to, Pr for janeway in the year 1681. and called A Moderate Decision of the Point of Succession, humbly proposed to the consideration of the Parliament, doth harp much on that Council: And another Pamphlet Printed in the same year for the same Person, and called The Case of Protestants in England, under a Popish Prince, etc. did there among the many Quotations out of the Canon Law and Canonists, councils, and Popish Divines and Schoolmen making for its purpose in p. 5. and 27. trouble us with the Lateran Council, and mentions Bellarmine's calling it the Papists great and most Famous Council. Your having in your Discussion, so successfully combated the obligatoriness of that Council upon Papists, was of great use for the unblundering many nominal Protestants (as your term is) in their fancying it so necessary for the quiet of Christendom, that Princes and their Subjects should agree in the Belief of the Speculative points of Religion, as your expressions are, and whereupon you promise the Age your publication of the fact of the Munster Peace and its Consequences, and which promise you have in your Preface, so well and fully performed.  
The Author of the Answer to the Book called, A Papist Misrepresented, doth refer to Lessius his Discussio decreti magni Concil. Lateran. and saying that the Church's Authority would not be maintained without the Deposing Power, and in p. 104. making the Councils of Lateran under Alex. 3. and Innocent 3. to be general ones. And in the Reflections on the Answer, nothing is mentioned to deny it. But your having in your Discussion cited Cardinal Peron, for having so strenuously asserted that Councils being a general one, and yet not thinking it Obligatory for the Exterminating the Persons of Heretics from France, where their number was so great, and your having cited Cardinal D' Ossat partly to the same effect, and further showing this their Doctrine Incarnate in the Lives of so many Roman-Catholick Crowned Heads, and their Empires after all the dismal effects that the contrary practices produced, and that the Voice of Nature did, in the Storm their Country's were in, and when it was so necessary to have many Hands, speak it as plainly concerning Heretical Subjects continuing with them, as St. Paul's words were to the Centurion, and to the Soldiers, viz. except these abide in the Ship, ye cannot be saved, and your showing that pursuant to the Munster Peace they did abide in the Ship, and thereby saved themselves and it, was time by you very nobly spent, in your helping Men to See, how far Nature had by its powerful Hands, effectually delivered People from their Fears of the Lateran Council, and which time was to much better purpose spent, than that of some Roman-Catholick Apologists, for any harsh thing Decreed by General Councils, and saying that they are not declared as Doctrinal points, and that the Decrees relating only to Discipline and Government, come short of being Articles of Faith, as the Author of the Reply to the Reflections upon the answer to a Papist Misrepresented and Represented, observes, and as to which he there further in p. 54. quotes the Vindication of Dr. sherlock's Sermon, for saying, that to Decree what shall be done, includes a Virtual Definition of that Doctrine, on which that Decree is founded.  
But such little Arts the great Cardinal you mentioned, forbore to use in the point of the Lateran Council: And 'tis not Art but Nature, that can satisfy the Curious in this inquisitive Age, and by the great prospect of Nature you have showed Men appearing in the Munster-Peace, they will be naturally untaught their Fears of that Council, now they know its Sting is plucked out, what ever humming about their Ears it may still make by the help of any Writers.  
The Learned Author of the Seasonable Discourse in his other Book of the difference between the Church and Court of Rome considered in p. 21. speaking of the Lateran Council, and how his Roman-Catholick Antagonist had Cited one john Bishop, who in a Book Written in the time of Queen Elizabeth, affirmed, that the Constitution of the Lateran Council, on which the whole Authority of Absolving Subjects from their Allegiance, and Deposing Princes is founded, is no other than a Decree of Pope Innocent the 3 d, and was never admitted in England: Yea, that the said Council was no Council at all, nor any thing at all there Decreed by the Fathers, doth in the following Pages, substantially Confute his Adversary, and sets up the Authority of Cardinal Peron, and of the Council of Trent against that john Bishop, and refers to Dr. Vane's Vindication of the Council of Lateran, and shows how and when the Canons of that Council were allowed and confirmed in the National Synod held at Oxford, 1222.  
When therefore I consider how one said, that Custom having once through Continuance, Naturalised itself into any sublunary things, it is then (to speak properly) no more Custom, but Nature; and that Custom according to Galen, is a kind of adscititious Nature, and that Origen tells us, that of all Customs, none stick so fast in the mind, when once settled there, and none so hard to be wiped and washed off as those, which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Customs of Opinion and Doctrine, be they right or wrong, and have found Gregory the Pope Cited for ascribing to Custom a power to make things that are bad in themselves, to become Just and Legal, viz. Si pravae rei aditus antequam diu patescat, non clauditur, usu fit latior & erit consuetudine licitum, quod ratione Constat esse prohibitum. Greg. Reg. Epist. P. 7. Ind. 2. Ep. 120. and do consider how far, and how long your instances were extended of the Lateran Council, having lost its Nature by the Customs of Opinion and Doctrine contrary thereto, obtaining much in the Papal World, any Philosopher or indifferent Man must say, that you have said something of Substance, and indeed, the best thing that can fairly be said to show Men the vanity and illogicalness of their former fears of Roman Catholic Princes▪ being bound by their Religion to Exterminate their Heterodox Subjects, by your showing the Treaty when, and place where and named the Year and Month, in which that Irreligionary Principle of Popery, was itself Exterminated by them; and a custom contrary to the Lateran Laws, been there firmly Naturalised, 'Tis said in jeremiah 2.24. concerning the Wild Ass: all they that seek her, will not weary themselves; in her Month they shall find her; alluding to the Hunters being able to take her in her Month, when she was burdened, and so near Foaling: And the endeavours of the Wise to Hunt down that Foolish and Cruel thing called Bigotry, were not ineffectual when its Month was come and when it grew so Burdensome to itself; and you have led us to the Month in which the Monarch of Spain was put to it to Relinquish his Right and Sovereignty in those Provinces, from whence so many Nominal Heretics had been formerly exterminated.  
You have in your Discussion, been very kind to the Character of a very Pious and Loyal Gentleman, on the account of what you had been informed of as to his Signalising the Weight of his Political Remarks and Learning, as well as of his Loyalty (as your words are) by his Speech he made against the Exclusion, and his instancing in some Princes and their Subjects of different Religions, living very happily together. But whether you have not overacted your part of praising that performance of his, I am to leave you to consider; for if that Speech of his was truly related in the Printed Collection of the Debates of the House of Commons, at the Parliament held at Westminster, on October 1680. there was nothing to justify the Learning of his Political Remarks to the purpose you spoke of, but his saving, that it was no such strange thing, to have the Prince, of one Religion and People of another; and his instancing, that the late Duke of Hannover was a Papist, and yet lived in Peace with his People, though Lutherans.  
It was pity but on that occasion, he had opened the prospect of a larger Scene, than what the Case of the quiet living of that Duke, and his Subjects could import; and that both he and all the Speakers and Writers against the Exclusion, that I took notice of, omitted the referring to the happy effects of the Treaty of Munster, that provided for so many great Popish Princes, and the vast Numbers of their Protestant Subjects living well together, though yet it happened, that there was an occasion fair enough in all Conscience, for all men's taking notice of it, who mind the Affairs of Christendom; and that was, that in the first project or platform of Conditions of Peace made by the French King in order to the Peace at Nimeghen, and in which project (as Dated at St. Germane the 9 th' of April 1678.) 'tis said expressly, that as to what concerns the Empire, that he will insist only on the restoring of the Munster Treaties in all their points, and to have them once more to be the means of restoring Peace to Germany; and in the Peace between the Emperor and the French King Signed at Nimeghen (and which mentions the Settlement of that Peace, as Resulting from the Successful Mediation of his Majesty of England) there are these words in the Second Article, viz. and for as much as the Peace concluded at Munster in West Phalia, is to be the Foundation and basis of this present Treaty, and public Tranquillity, the said Peace shall from henceforth be restored in all and every its points, and remain in full force and vigour, as if the same were word for word inserted herein, except in such points as are Derogated from it by this present Treaty.  
And as to that we know, that exceptio firmat regulam, and thus too in the Articles between the Emperor and the King of Sweden, Signed at Nimeghen on the same Day with the former Articles▪ viz. February 5. 1679. The third Article runs thus, According to this Foundation of an Universal and Unlimited Anmesty, and to the end a more certain Rule of Friendship and Peace, may be settled between the Parties, it hath been by mutual consent agreed on between them, that the Peace Concluded in West-Phalia, shall remain the Basis, and Rule of the pre●ent pacification in such manner, that it shall be restored to its first Force and Vigour, and inviolably kept hereafter, and continue as it was before the present War, a Pragmatic Sanction, and Fundamental Law of the Empire, etc. And in the Articles between the Emperor and the French King, as likewise in those between the Emperor and the King of Sweden, there are some to include the King of Great Britain in the Treaty after the best and most effectual manner that may be, and to admit his Guaranty for the Execution and Performance of the Pacta Conventa herein: And his present Majesty hath in the past time of his Reign, appeared as tender of the Performance and Stabiliment of them, as of the Apple of his Eye, and on an Emergent occasion, was (as I am informed) heard to say to a great Foreign Minister; but I WILL have the Nimeghen Peace OBSERVED, and with a parallel bravery to that in those words of Henry the Fourth, you have mentioned; but I WILL have my own.  
Thus is the Munster Treaty, and the Liberty thereby given to Protestants and Calvinists, both as to the Enjoyment of their Religion and their Estates (and many of which Estates were Church-Lands) notwithstanding the Pope's Declaration of the Nullity of that Peace supported by his Present Majejesty, and as I doubt not, but it always will be, as well as by other Roman-Catholick Crowned Heads. And the figure the present French King made in the Munster Treaty, in the year Forty Eight, and in the Restauration of its effects, and Vigour in Christendom in the year Seventy Nine, is a sufficient Demonstration of his thinking it lawful for the Lateran Council, to be Disobey'd by Popish Princes, as to the point of Exterminating their Heretical Subjects.  
I do therefore account this your Manly way of Confuting the Fears and jealousies founded on that Council, to have been at this time the more opportune, and the more worthy of your Loyalty; because (as you have mentioned it after the End of your Discussion) It may seem the Design of some People in the World abroad, to increase our Divisions, and the popular hatred against Papists and Popery here, by the usage that Protestants meet with there, as if the Religion of Popery did necessarily 'Cause the same. You have therefore well reputed it the opus diei here in England, to show the contrary, and have done it more effectually, than any late Writer of the Church of Rome, I know, here hath done, or perhaps was able to do: And your quoting for this purpose in p. 208. D' Ossats Speech to the Pope, and wherein he so Argumentatively both like a Divine and a Statesman, asserted the Lawfulness of Henry the 4th's of France observing the EDICTS in favour of his Protestant Subjects, and wherein he mentioned how other Roman Catholic Princes had done what was tantamount to it, and how that the Pope made no Reply to him thereupon, may much help to show our Timid and jealous People, that the Religionary part of Popery or Doctrine of the Church of Rome, doth not oblige Roman-Catholick Princes to make the Lives of their Protestant Subjects uneasy to them.  
It here falls in my way, to acknowledge to you, that the great Instances you have given in your Discourse concerning the Consummate Loyalty of great numbers of Henry the 4ths. Popish Subjects to him while a Protestant, and under the Pope's Excommunication, have been very useful for the enlarging People's Charitable Thoughts, as to the Persons of some Papists, and the tendency of their Principles to Loyalty, and to the showing, that though in the Great Lateran Council (wherein were 1215 Fathers) it was Synodically and Categorically concluded, that the Pope might absolve Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance, that yet great Numbers of Henry the 4ths. Roman-Catholick Subjects knew, and Practised better things, and that their great Absolute and Unconditional Loyalty to him, lives in the Records of the Impartial Thuanus: And that notwithstanding any principles Chargeable on the Church of Rome, the Faith of many particular persons in it hath by its Works shown itself very perfect for Loyalty.  
But here I am likewise obliged to gratify you by my Complaisance with your Temper in differing somewhat in Opinion from you (for you say, you are better pleased in Conversation with those who in many points differ from you, than with those who in all agree with you) and am frankly to tell you, that tho' I am sufficiently satisfied with your discharging of the Moral Offices of Honouring all Men, and giving Honour particularly to some Roman Catholics to whom it was due, and particularly where in p. 360. You have with so great a Height of Expression Celebrated the Virtue of the Queen Dowager (and from whom I had the Honour to receive Thanks, by the late Earl of Ossory for the Justice I did her Majesty in a late Conjuncture.) Yet there is one thing at the end of your Discourse, and another after the end of your Discussion, wherein you are pleased to give your Judgement concerning the Papists here in general, as I would not have given mine in the Case. You say in p. 285. That after the Various Intervals in which the Discourse was Written, it having happened that the Papists are to the General Satisfaction of Impartial Judges of Men and things, become as sound a part of this Nation, as they were and are of the Dutch States, and as throughout the Discourse you always supposed them Capable of being, and in p. 361. You say, that it is with Justice to be by all Men to our Popish Fellow Subjects acknowledged, that what ever petulance some of them were formerly guilty of, or of any Ambitious Design of making too great a Figure in the Internal Government of the Nation, yet that the Deportment of the Generality of them, hath lately appeared with such a Face, not only of Loyalty, but of Complaisance with his Majesty's Measures, in employing the Hands and Heads of Protestants of the Church of England, in the Management of great Matters of State, as is necessarily Attractive of our Christian Love and Compassion, etc.  
But tho' I account myself Morally obliged to Judge several Papists of my Acquaintance to abound in Loyalty, and to be such whose Moderation is known to all Men, and to be no Exorbitant Affecters of making too great a Figure in the Internal Government of the Kingdom; and do hope that many others are so with whom I am not acquainted, and will Judge no particular Papist to believe or practise Principles of Disloyalty, without particular grounds, and tho' on the account of the Trite Rule that Interest never lies, I will hope that the generality of them will in his Majesty's Reign and afterward be neither Disloyal, nor Heady nor highminded, nor affecters of Pre-eminence: Yet if I were required to give my present Judgement in short of the present Temper of the generality of them, as to the Qualifications about which you have given your Judgement in the Case, and that too relating to future times, I considering the Formulary of the Letters denoting Judgement, given in the Mode of the Old Roman Laws, viz. A. and C. and N. L. would not presume either to Absolve or Condemn the gross of their Numbers as to those Qualifications; but would interpose the Non Liquet in their Case; and much less will I Condemn your Judgement of Charity to them, and say, that some of your Sharp Reflections on Popery, and some Papists, have favoured of the Common way of some Partial Judges Biased with an intent to bring off some Criminals, Namely, to make some disobliging rough Language previous to the obliging them with their Sentence at last: But taking every thing in the best Sense it will bear, shall suppose that your Information of the Temper of the Generality of them, might be what arrived not at my Knowledge, and that therefore you pronounced thereof as you have done. And moreover, your Discourse being Writ before the Late King's Death, I shall account it was for several Reasons, a strengthening of Loyalty, and weakening of the Fears of Timid Protestants, for you both in the Close of your Discourse, as well as your Discussion, to do the Persons as well as Tenets of Papists all the Justice you could.  
From your having in that Discussion occasionally so much dilated on the Moral Offices of Loyalty to our Princes, without respect to their Religion, and what ever Religion they may profess different from that by Law Established, I shall be glad if the thoughts of all his Majesty's Protestant Subjects, will Receive deep Impressions of the peculiar Duties we own to him our Great and Gracious Sovereign, particularly eo nomine. When ever we pray for him at the Prayers of our Church, or our private Devotions, let us think of him, with the Honour due to a King, and God's Vicegerent; Let us not Slander the Footsteps of Gods Anointed, in what ever way to Heaven he hath placed the same, nor yet by Reproaches make the few of this great populous Nation uneasy, who as Viatores attend him in the same way; but be the more Civil to them, for being part of his retinue therein. Since it is Rudeness for any Man to be Curiously Inquisitive into the Speculative points of Religion held by Subjects, it may be thought both that and Profanation of Gods more than ordinary Care over the Hearts of Kings, to be prying and intruding into the Sentiments of our Sovereign As there are peculiar Moral Offices that concern Subjects, when the Prince is not in the External Communion of the same Church with them, so there are such likewise incumbent on those Subjects, that are in the External Communion of the same Church with their Prince, and which oblige them particularly to promote the Ease and Tranquillity of his Reign.  
It having pleased God by the Course of the Executive power of the Law in his Majesty's Hands, to free them from many Hardships to which they were before liable, and to put a great price into their Hands (if they have Hearts to make use of it, and to give them an opportunity by their Moderation, and by their Complaisance with his Majesty's Measures in the Defence and Supporting of the Church of England, and by their knowing in this their Day, the things that belong to their Peace, to compass an Universal and lasting Tenderness in the great Body of the English People toward their Persons, and making the Laws and the whole Hive of the English People to guard them, and the very Anger and Zeal of the Protestants to be a Defensive Wall of Fire round about them, (as your words are) it becomes them to contribute to the ease of his Majesty's Royal Cares, by their being what you say they generally are, and by their not Misrepresenting or Calumniating those who are of the Religion different from theirs, which yet you have showed Father Parsons predicted they must necessarily do, and by their not affecting such an excessive internal Power in the Government, as you say in the distant Reigns of some of our Protestant Princes they did.  
It concerns them by their Reverently using their present Temporary Indulgence, to effect for his Majesty, that in the Case of his easing their Consciences and their Estates from some Penal Laws▪ it may be as was in the Reign of David, viz. that whatsoever the King did, pleased all the People.  
There is none desires more than myself, that among the various Opinions in Religion, all exasperations against each others Persons, and Misrepresentations of each others Doctrines, may for ever cease.  
And therefore according to the expressions used in the Acts of the General Assembly of the French Clergy, complaining of Calumny published against the Doctrine of the Church, and the Faith of the Catholic Church, and their seeming there to restrain that Doctrine and that Faith, to the Decisions of the Council of Trent, and such as are of the Nature with those printed in one Column apart, I in what I have Written in my private Papers concerning the Religion of the Church of Rome, have observed the Measures that our great Writer Mr. Chillingworth hath done in his Book forecited, and where he saith, Chap. 6. N. 56. I do not understand by your Religion, the Doctrine of Bellarmine or Baronius, or any other private Man among you, nor the Doctrine of the Sorbon, or of the Jesuits or Dominicans, or of any other particular company among you; but that wherein you all agree, or profess to agree, the Doctrine of the Council of Trent.  
And though in your Explication of what you mean by Popery, you seem to restrain your aversion to it, as comprising only the Papal Usurpations, or what is Congruous to the known Distinction of the Court of Rome and the Church of Rome, and profess to follow the Measures of the late Earl of Clarendon, of whom Cressy in p. 101. of his Epistle Apologetical, saith that he makes the Pope's Temporal power to be the Hinge, upon which all other Controversies between Protestants and English Catholics do hang and depend so entirely, that if that only were taken off, all the rest would quickly fall to the ground; I am pleased with his Lordship or yours, having gone so far with me in my way against Popery (for if any Friend bears me Company good part of my way in any Journey, I shall be pleased therewith, though he accompany me not to my Journeys end) I am yet to tell you, that in my way to Heaven, I have further to go, than merely so far as the leaving that Temporal Power of the Pope behind me: And must freely pass the bounds of Trent, but yet strictly observing the Moral Offices of not injuring or troubling, or Misrepresenting or Miscalling any Man for not going my way; and if I find the professed observers of the Doctrines of the Council of Trent seeming but tacitly to reject the Disloyal Principles propped up formerly by the Council of Lateran, and owning expressly only the Doctrines of the Council of Trent, I shall not trouble myself or them to charge them with the Odious Matter of the former Council, or to Recant by Words what you say so many and so great Papists have done by Actions.  
And if the Roman Catholics who were supposed to have published that Translated Book of the Acts of the French Clergy, intended only thereby to caution us against the Misrepresenting them and the Doctrine of their Church, I shall be glad if the Caution may be justly pursued by all Men.  
But some Critics on that Translation have presumed to Judge their publishing the French Kings Edict of the 14 th'. of july last, for Restraining the French Protestants former Liberty of Writing and Speaking against the Doctrines of the Council of Trent, or as the words there are, from speaking directly or indirectly after what manner soever of the Catholic Religion, was perhaps done with an ill intent by some who with an Evil Eye looked on the King's goodness to the Church of England.  
I am far from Attributing the Heat or Indiscretion of particular Persons, to the Body of any Religionary Party: And do Judge, that when our Excellent Divines of the Church of England shall be of Opinion that the Emissaries of Rome are not more than ordinarily busy in endeavouring to pervert any of their Flocks from their Religion, they will naturally throw off Debates of Speculative Controversial Divinity. For granted it must be, that both Protestants and Papists do stand more in need to be taught what were the Moral Practices of the Primitive Christians than what were their Speculative Assertions: And as a late Divine hath well remarked, Sixteen Hundred Years are run out, since the Son of God came down to Sanctify and Save the World, which are so many Degrees, whereby we are Descended from the first Perfection. We are more distant from them in Holiness than in time; so universal and great is the Corruption, that 'tis almost as difficult to revive the dying Faith of Christians, and to Reform their Lives according to the Purity of their Profession, as the Conversion of the World was from Heathenism to Christianity.  
And when I consider how much the Christian Religion hath been Debased to a Religion-Trade, as your Term is, and and a project to advance men's Ambition or profit, and by ways and Artifices contrary to the Law of Nature, and below that generous Contempt of Sordid Actions and below the fides, verecundia, honestas, and the Simplicity of Manners that Adorned the Minds and the Conversations of the Ancient Heathens, and how much the Old pietas in patriam, you have referred to in Cicero, is evaporated among Christians, and the very ideas of Heroical Actions lost, that is, such Actions as were termed so as respecting the good of our Prince and Country, and when I consider how by that Cruel Revengeful implacable Spirit, rendering Christians worse Enemies to one another, than even ever julian was (for he in one of his Epistles to jamblichus professed that he thought then was not fit for him to persecute the Christians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. I think it fit to teach, but not to punish Fools) & seeing some Christians to apostatise from that which was commendable in the temper of julian the Apostate, I cannot forbear thinking of those severe words of my Friend Dr. Hammond, in the Epistle to his practical Catechism, viz. As Machiavelli, thought Religion would emasculate and enfeeble Common wealths, we have more reason to complain, that it hath Debauched and Corrupted Lives: And were it not that God hath been pleased to preserve a scattered Remnant, a few in every Nation to be the Records (as it were) from whom it may be seen what Christianity is able to do, if it may be harkened to: Were it not that there are a few Ancient primitive Spirits, by whom as by a Standard others may, and aught to be reform, we have reason to think, and say that Christian Men are the impurest part of the World: That Satan's aftergame hath proved more prosperous and lucky to him, than his first designment did; that his Night-walk hath brought him more proselytes, than his unlimited range of going up and down, to and fro over the face of the Earth: that as Sin by the Law, so Satan by the Faith of Christ, hath taken occasion, and so deceived and ruined us more desperately, more universally, than by all the National Idolatrous Customs of Heathenism he hath been able to do.  
There is one noble Virtue of the Primitive Christians, that hath indeed by the Successful labours of the Divines of the Church of England been lately much Propagated in this Land; and that is, Loyalty to our Princes, and God be thanked that we have many thousands of the Laity of that Church who have been better instructed in that Primitive virtue▪ than ever Bellarmine was▪ as appears by his Quia deerant vires.  
And I wish that for the ease of his Majesty's Cares and Safety of his Government, all men's Ideas and Practices of Loyalty, may grow both more refined and firm. And that according to your excellent quotation out of Seneca, Quanto latius officiorum patet quam juris Regula, all his Majesty's Subjects may practise the Primitive Obedience to the Height of all Moral Offices, & not to think that their being barely legales homines, in doing what the Law compels them to for his Service, is all the Loyalty or Obedience requisite.  
The obvious thought of Children, as well as Parents being Morally bound to be helpful to each other beyond what they are constrained to by the Law, may show us the reasonableness of the extending our Obedience to our Political Father, to all the Noble heights of Virtue.  
Jam very well pleased with the passages in your Discourse, that brand Mercenary Loyalty in p. 274. and the I opeans you sing to the Crowns victories obtained over Mercenary loyalty. And here I cannot omit being so just to yourself, as to acknowledge that you have as good a warrant, as any Subject of the Crown I know, to reprehend Mercenary Loyalty; since on your modest Application to the late King upon the importunity of your friends, for a Compensation of your varicus Services done him almost ever since his Restoration, and the Reinbursment of your expenses in his Service, and on his Ministers by reference consulting my Judgement about your Case, I found several thousands of pounds due to you on that account, and do Judge that you never since applied to his late Majesty, nor any of his Ministers about the same. But one instance more of your unmercenary Loyalty I shall not conceal, that I was assured of from a Lord in High Favour with his late Majesty, Namely, that when in his late Majesty's Reign, he knowing your Abilities to serve the King, did of his own accord offer to you his readiness to move his Majesty to afford you a fair Pension, you Overmodestly requested his Lordship to move no such thing in your behalf, professing to his Lordship that it should be the business of your life, to promote all his Majesty's Just Measures in what you could, without any expectation of other reward than what the pleasure of all Actions of Loyalty necessarily included in the doing of them. And to this too I might add, that in the time when the late Western Rebellion was most considerable, your having with other Gentlemen appeared to his Majesty, as ready at your own expense, to be then in Arms to serve the Crown at an Hours warning, was a further fair example of your unmercenary Loyalty.  
And the truth is, that in the Present State of England, when it so much imports us to restore England to its Old Office of balancing the World, Mercenary Loyalty would be now a kind of Monster In morality.  
It here falls in my way to observe that you have in p. 156. and 157. very usefully shown Mercenary Religion to be a thing both senseless and odious. And therefore though you may seem the only person of the Church of Eng. who hath in print varied from its Homilies or Articles since his Majesty's Reign in any Religionary point: Yet as to yourself, I have had reason to guests that you long ago in the late King's Reign had some Theological Sentiments some what differing from what I took for our Church's Articles, and that I speaking to you thereof, you replied out of Bishop bramhall's Just Vindication of our Church, that our Articles are not penned with Anathemas, or Curses against all those even of our own, who do not receive them; but used only as an help or rule of unity among ourselves.  
Nor have I forgot how you once discoursed to me your opinion of the Tenet, that the Souls of good Men, do not immediately after Death go up into Heaven, nor the Souls of bad Men then immediately down into Hell: But that the former than go into a good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the latter into a bad one, and that such place was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. inconspicuus as being so not in regard of itself, but of us, and that our Saviour's Soul went 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that this Tenet was more particularly Tertullias, and that he describing the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said 'twas a place ubi bonis benè erat & malis malè, and that good Men did there in Candidâ expectare diem Judicij, and that the Expression of aeternitatis Candidati, was first taken occasionally from those words of Tertullian, and that it seemed suitable to the Measures of Divine justice, not to give the great Sentence concerning eternal rewards, and punishments, before the Trial of the Day of judgement, and that as a Thousand years with God, are said to be but one Day, the time of that Trial might possibly last so long, and that it might else seem a diminutio capitis, for Saints to be brought from the Caelum beatorum, to the Bar, and that somewhat like this notion of the State of Souls after Death the jews had, and likewise all the Fathers for the first four Centuries, and when some of them encouraging Men to be Martyrs, said that such did uno saltu get up into Heaven, and that our Saviour saying in my Father's House are many Mansions, etc. and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself, though therefore the good will not be received by Christ into those Mansions, till he comes again, yet their condition will be much better in the good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then in the most prosperous State here below, where they are continually exposed to the Contagion of Sin: And as you have in p. 317. mentioned that some of our Protestant Divines owning this Tenet, have not been therefore Censured as Popishly affected or maintainers of Purgatory, so neither shall I therefore thence infer your owning the Notion of a Purgatory or Limbus, nor the usefulness of Praying for any Souls in the Hades, and much less, that your favouring this notion of Hades by publishing it now, as what some of our Protestant Divines favoured, was in the least designed by you as any humouring of a Project to reconcile Churches, a project that you have expressed to be so ineffectual, when some well meaning Men had it in their Heads in a Conjuncture long ago, and when Withers a dull Poet of the Age, yet a favourite of the vulgus, did in his Emblems p. 3 of his ep. dedicat. (as you once told me) amuse them with his fancies of the Union of Religion.  
And as you have in your preface observed it that the few florid Sheets lately published on the Subject of Toleration, have made no other figure than that of the poor resemblances of flowers extracted by Chemical Art out of their ashes, and that a little shaking them together in the glass of time, must make them presently fall in pieces, I have observed likewise, that the perhaps well meant Velleities or Wishes or little Essays of some few private Persons that since his Majesty's Reign, amused any by propounding a Reconciliation of Churches, have appeared but like extracted resemblances of the flowers of private men's proposals of that kind in the Conjuncture before the year 1640; and since his Majesty's happy Reign, they have been easily shaken in pieces.  
Mr. Prynne in his History of the Trial of Arch Bishop Laud, in p. 191. tells us what a ferment Mr. Adam's his Case made in the University of Cambridge, in the year 1637. who Preaching in St. Mary's, and there asserting the necessity of Auricular Confession, was by Dr. Brownrig the Vicechancellor enjoined to Recant that Doctrine, and about which great Heats arose among the Heads of Houses there.  
But the Sharpness of the canons of 40 against Popery, showing the zeal the Archbishop expressed in the making of those Canons, and of that Clause in the Oath there for the abjuring Popery, viz. and that I will not Subject the Church of England, to the Church of Rome which Oath the Archbishop in his Defence saith, was a more strict Oath, than ever was made against Popery in any Age or Church, may easily Convince the Sagacious, of the Church of England's Sense then, about any Project of Reconciling the Church of England to that of Rome, being altogether vain.  
The Archbishop had it seems by long and deep observation found the project of the reconciling of our Church and Rome's, a thing utterly unpracticable; however, as to his having been formerly a Visionaire about the possibility of the same I remember I have seen some angry reflections of Dr▪ Williams Bishop of Lincoln against him, and Writ with that Bishops own Hand in the Margin of the Arch-Bishops Printed Star-Chamber Speech, where over against those passages that seemed to be somewhat trimming in favour of the Church of Rome, Bishop Williams wrote the nearer you come to the Church of Rome, the further she will fly from your Courtship and Caresses, and will tell you that Rusticus es Corydon, nec munera curate Alexis.  
But what thing the Reconcilers would be of Churches mean, to themselves is sufficiently plain. As to the natural meaning of any thing of that nature, I call to mind, that a Presbyterian Minister speaking to you once of Comprehension, and of the Divines of his persuasion, and that of the Church of England being that way Reconciled, you told him you wished a Coalition of such with the Church of England as were formerly of his Persuasion: But that you supposed by his comprehension, he desired to be a Comprehensor of some of the Live of the Divines of the Church of England, and that therefore when you found any Divine speak of the Essaying to Reconcile Churches, you naturally thought of those Words in the Acts of the Apostles. C. 17. v. 18. What will this Babbler say? and Rendering the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there by Church Robber, Altar Robber, and Sacrilegious Person as our Broughton did, and justifying that your Critical Acception of the word out of the Greek Classic Authors, viz. Demosthenes and Aristophanes, whom you had said, you had found Cited for that Sense of the word, at the end of Cloppenburg de Sacrificiis, and who Citing Aristophanes his Comedy of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aves where the Birds threaten jupiter with a Holy War, shows that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was meant, Avis Seminilega, and that the Athenians thought St. Paul would despoil the Altars of the Gods of the Provisions of their Offerings: And in Fine you said, that such various readings of that word, would certainly meet in any one's being thought a Babbler by those of the Religion Established, if he would interlope in their Maintenance.  
I doubt not but you have heard of the late Candidate Beyond-Sea, for the Office of the Reconciler of Churches, I mean the Author of TUBA PACIS, ad universas Dissidentes in Occidente Ecclesias, seu Discursus Theologicus, de union Ecclesiarum Romanae & Protestantium, nec non amicâ Compositione Controversiarum sidei inter hosce Caetus, per Matheum Praetorium Memela Prussum. Printed at Collen, An. 1684. and which that Author Dedicates to the Emperor, and to the Kings of Poland, France, England, Denmark, Sweden, severally, and to the Electors and other Princes of the Empire: And just before he blows his Trumpet, he warn thus of the two Old Pronouns, that have so long troubled the World, viz. Meum and Tuum, and which will always continue so to do, till all Men shall be of St. Francis his mind, whom when a Friar told that he came à cellâ tuâ, St. Francis when he heard the word tuâ, said he would Lodge no more there. The Author tells us in his 10. Chapter, Tentavit quidem Compositionem Vir ob studium pacis a plurimis & principibus viris Longè Laudatus Georgius Cassander, sed non fausto Successu, Contradicentibus partim Romanis, partim & protestantibus, and tells us there of the like Event, that Marcus Antonius de Dominis, and his Work for that purpose had. But our Author had the Fortune to Catch a Tartar of an Objection in the last Paragraph of his Book save one, viz. At dicet aliquis si unio nostrarum Ecclesiarum Cum Romanâ Ecclesiâ sieret, Romanus Pontifex jus suum repeteret▪ tot▪ bona olim Eccliastica quae jam per pacta & transacta in manus serenissimorum principum Cessere quae nunquam principes in aerarij sui damnum adimi sibi patientur. And to this Objection, he returneth this Answer, viz. Respondetur, Omninò aequum est Ius suum Cuique tribuere, nec Romano Pontifici illud derogandum quod ipsi legitimè Competit. Bona Ecclesiastica quae olim fuerunt, nunc autem aerario principum adscripta, jure gladij & pactorum acquisita NON PUTAMUS Romanum Ponti ficem pro suâ quâ pollet prudentiâ repetiturum. Frui Concedet ijs ad qua● admissi sunt possessionibus. Nihil ijs vel decedere vel adimi cupiet. This the good Man in his Embassy Speech to the World, as its Reconciler tells us of this Pope; but without showing his Credentials either from the Pope, or any one else: And I believe on the account of what you have shown of the Munster-Treaty, the Princes and Electors of the Empire, to whom he hath Dedicated his Book, will not fear this Pope's being either able or willing to give them any disturbance in their Church-Lands. Nor need any of us in England more fear the Pope's being able or willing to hurt our possessions of the Church-Lands. We are sufficiently shown it out of Moor's Reports, f. 1.282. that the Pope's Bulls giving Monasteries to Wolsy, with the consent of the King, and the Surrender of the Priors to Wolsy, would not serve the turn: and that nothing but an Act of Parliament would alter the Property.  
You have here an instance of our present Foreign Reconcilers of Churches, being very poor Middle Region Men, in Comparison of Cassander and Antonius de Dominis, and others; as our late little Reconcilers likewise have been, Compared with the unfortunate ones of the Old Conjuncture. The question of what will this Babbler say, is properly applicable to them from all Parties.  
But one thing I cannot but here observe to you, that as I was very well pleased with your Design, that you Communicated to me after you had begun this long VOYAGE of your THOUGHTS (as I may call it) and writ the former part of your Discourse, namely, that because in your occasional Conversation with People of all sorts, you have found that men's Fancies were (as you said) Nailed to POPERY, and their Tongues Tied up as to any thing but POPERY, and that they could not go beyond the Tedder of that in their Discourse; and that POPERY's Monopolising so much of their Discourse, had been one of its USURPATIONS, you intended to try to divert them from it, and make them pass ad autres, by laying before them such various Matters of Calculation, relating to their own Country and many places of Christendom, as might give them somewhat beside POPERY and PLOTS to think and speak of in Company; So I am much better pleased with your Performance of that your Curious Enterprise, and do think that your Book by containing in it so many MISCELLANEA, must eo nomine, prove highly useful to our English World in this Conjuncture.  
It here occurs to me to observe to you, that after an Erratum of the Press in Page 38. of your Discourse, Namely, where you referred to P. 325 in the Advocate of Conscience Liberty, instead of Page 225, you make the last Letter of D'Ossats to be from Rome An. 1596, and I suppose you happened to do so, by casting your Eye on the Old Date of the last Letter but one Printed in the Volume of his Letters in Folio of the Paris Edition, An. 1625. and finding it to be An. 1596. But it came not into your Mind then, to observe that the last of his Letters as they are Ranged in Order, was the 199 th'. and in the End of Book 9 th'. and which was to Villeroy from Rome, March the 6 th'. An. 1604, and in which Year he died, as you rightly refer to his Epitaph to show. But it seems after that last Letter in Book 9 th'. of the Paris Edition, the Publisher saying that he had recovered some others of his Letters, Prints them without respect to the Order of time; and there makes the Date of the last Letter save one in the Volume, to be in the Year 1596. as you have there done. But however this Derogates not from the justice of your Animadversion in page 38. on the Roman-Catholick English Priest, for making D' Ossat to have known the Gunpowder Treason Plot to be a Shame one, Eight Years before it was to be Executed. For the Letter of D' Ossat that that Priest alleged to prove what I now mentioned, was Dated as you justly say from Rome, March 29 th'. An. 1596, and he never read the Letter that can find any thing of the Gunpowder Treason in it.  
I shall here take occasion to make my Excuse to the Reverend Divines of our Church assuring them, that by adding Observations on the Writings of the Author of the Papist Misrepresented and Represented; I intended not to Derogate from the Sufficiency of the Learning and Reason they have showed in their Answers thereunto. But the ●ruth is, though as in our Parliaments, frequently when ●ny have moved for some Additional Branch to be settled on the Revenue here af●er the Example of somewhat of the like Nature in France, the Naming of France ●n the Case then for a Pre●ident, hath been observed ●o make many speak against the Unseasonableness of the Motion, who otherwise would not have done it; so the writing of any thing that was contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England, and after the Mode of the Bishop of Condom and the Acts of the French Clergy, just at this time of Day, was a thing that I could not but show my Resentment against, as very much unseasonable. And moreover according to the saying that one ought not t● be Patient under charge of Heresy, I may justify the warmth of my Resentments, against the Acts of the French Clergy charging some of ours both with Heresy and Calumny and bringing up our Whitaker and Downham there in the Van of the Calumniators under the first Article, and our Raynolds under the Sixth.  
I Remain SIR, Your Affectionate Friend and Servant. ANGLESEY.   
FINIS.