A Vindication of the Sincerity of the Protestant Religion, Chapter 2

A Vindication of the Sincerity of the Protestant Religion · Chapter 2

p. 18CHAP. II. Whether the Reformation of Religion ought to be charged with Rebellion. Reflections upon the actions of the Proteſtant party.

THe Charge of Rebellion which the Adverſary layeth againſt us, conſiſteth in two things, The Doctrine of our Divines and the actions of our party, eſpecially in the beginnings of the Reformation. I have anſwered the firſt part of the Charge, and ſhewed that either the Charge is falſe, or it is nothing to us, becauſe we have no dependance upon the Authors charged with it. To which I will adde but this; That if as much pains was taken to ſet forth all that thoſe very men have written for obedience, as this Gentleman hath taken to make them ſpeak treaſon, it would be farr more in bulk, and more home, then all that the Roman Catholicks have written or dare write of that ſubject.

**pag. 72. Azor. Moral. Inſtit. parte 1. lib. 8. cap. 13. Eos omnes qui erant haeretico aliqua ratione obſtricti jurisjurandi ſeu fidelitatis feu alterius pactionis & promiſſionis liberari.Our Adverſary chargeth Luther, the firſt Inſtrument in Gods hands for the work of Reformation in Germany, that he was the great Grand-father of the prodigious Doctrines againſt the State, Dignity, and Perſons of Kings and Princes. Why? Did he rebell againſt his Princes? Did he ſtirr rebellion in other Princes States? Did he teach, as the Jeſuit Azorius did ſince, that all that were tyed with any bond of oath or fidelity, or any other paction or promiſe to an Heretick, were freed of it? Then, if ever, it was the right time for him to preach that doctrine, p. 19if he had approved of it, when Commons and Corporations embraced the Reformation, many of them without the Princes conſent. Nay, he did alwaies labour moſt earneſtly and ſucceſsfully to put down rebellions when any aroſe. What was then his rebellion? Marry, he preached againſt the tyranny and ſuperiority of the Biſhop of Rome, ſaith our Adverſary, and perſwaded pag. 73, & 74.the people not to render to him any obedience. This was the rebellion, the moſt horrid of all rebellions in the eyes of Jeſuits. I enter not into the queſtion of the Popes ſuperiority. My Adverſary keeping himſelf to matters of fact, I muſt keep my ſelf to it alſo.

Luther was a man of an invincible ſpirit; one that ſpared neither King nor Pope, when the Truth of God which he announced was oppoſed: And in his expreſſions he was foreign, one that ſpake down right without mincing. Yet as ſtout as he was, I find that he behaved himſelf with great modeſty and patience with the Pope for a great while: And in all his Addreſſes to him for redreſs of the horrible abuſes reigning in the Church, he uſed a Chriſtian humility and ſubmiſſion to the Popes pleaſure, if his Holineſs would have hearkened to conſcience and reaſon, and remembred the duty of his place. But when the Pope and the great Clergy of Germany uſed him with the utmoſt ſcorn and inhumanity, he paid them in the ſame coin. The Pope burnt his Theſes, and he burnt the Popes Decretals in the market place; and writ againſt the higheſt of the Roman Clergy in high terms, a crime much exaggerated by our Adverſary. This is all the rebellion (if they call it ſo) that either Luther or the beginning of the Reformation p. 20can be charged with. For the Reformation was embraced by many Princes and Imperial Cities ſo freely and ſo quietly, that the Adverſary could finde no ground to object any other rebellion unto them but that againſt the Biſhop of Rome, who in effect was neither their Biſhop nor their Prince.

So that which our Adverſary (after others) objects againſt Luther, That he exhorted the Emperour, Kingspag. 74. Luther in Sylveſtriū Pruratem. Si ſures ſurcâ, ſi latrones gladio, ſi haereticos igne plectimus, cur non magis iſtos magiſtros perditionis, hos Cardinales, hos Papas, & totam iſtam Romanae Sodomae colluviem quae Eccleſiam Dei ſine fine corrumpit, omnibus armis impetimus? and Princes to fall upon the Pope and Cardinals, and all the filth of the Roman Sodom, is nothing to the queſtion in hand. For there Luther ſpeaks not of any inſurrection of ſubjects againſt their lawfull Sovereign, but of the juſtice which the Princes of Chriſtian Provinces ought to exerciſe againſt the Tyrants and Corruptors of the Church. He had tryed all means of Piety, Charity, Equity, and Reaſon. When all would not ſerve, and that the Pope and the Cardinals would neither reform the Church nor themſelves, nor admit of an Appeal to the Councel for that great Work, then Luther brake out into theſe words: Mihi verò videtur, ſi ita pergat furor Romaniſtarum, nullum eſſe reliquum remedium quàm ut Imperator, Reges & Principes vi & armis accincti, aggrediantur has peſtes Orbis terrarum, rémque non jam verbis ſed ferro decernant. That is, It is my opinion, if the fury of the Romanists continue, that there is no remedy remaining but that the Emperour, Kings, and Princes who are furniſht with force and arms, ſhould take theſe plagues of the world in hand, and decide the quarrel no more with words but with the ſword. And then follow the words written in our margent which are a continuation of his exhortation to the Higher Powers to make p. 21uſe againſt them of the ſword of Juſtice. This is better then to ſet on private men to ſtab them, or ſtirr the rabble to fall upon them according to the maxims and practiſe of the Jeſuits. But Luther went the right way to work, when he exhorted thoſe to whom God had committed the power of the ſword, to make uſe of it to repreſs the tyranny and oppreſſion both ſpiritual and civil uſed in their Dominions by a foreign uſurped power; and the rather, becauſe the Emperour and the Princes had been very earneſt with the Pope to remove by his Paſtoral care all the cauſes of complaint.

It is objected againſt Luther and his party, that they entred into a Confederacy of defenſive arms at Smalcald; that Luther himſelf made a book contra duo Mandata Caeſaris, againſt two Edicts of the Emperour▪ And that in his book de bello contra Turcas, he denyed the Emperour to be the Head of the Christian Commonwealth: But to judge aright of that Confederacy, and of the opinions of the German Divines and Lawyers about the Emperours Rights, and of the Warrs of that Age between the Emperour and the Princes of the Empire, we muſt conſider the conſtitution of the Empire of Germany. And to that end look to their Magna Charta which is Bulla aurea made under the Emperour CHARLES IV. and Capitulatio Melchior Goladaſt Tom. 3. pag. 424. Quod ſi nos ipſi (inquit Imperator) quod abſit, aut quiſquam Succeſſorum noſtrorum, quod non ſperamus, proceſſu temporis aliquo huic noſtrae ſtatutioni aut ordinationi contravenire voluerit aut eam retractare, aut alio quoris modo violare praeſumpſerit, praeſentium literarum authoritate & poteſtatis regiae plenitudine ex certâ Majeſtatis noſtrae ſcientiâ, nec non cum conſenſu & beneplacito praefatorum ſacri Romani Imperii principum Electorum in robur perpetuae firmitatis ſancivimus, ex tunc tam ipſi Electores quàm caeteri Principes, Eccleſiaſtici & Saeculares, Praelati, Comites, Barones, Nobiles, & Communitates ſacri noſtri Imperii, univerſi ac ſinguli, praeſentes & ſuturi, licitum habeant ſine Rebellionis aut Infidelitatis crimine reſiſtendi ac contradicendi nobis & Succeſſoribus noſtris Romanorum Regibus vel Imperatoribus in perpetuam libertatem.Caeſarea anno 1356. Whereby, if the Emperour or the King of the Romans violate any of the Rights of the Subject eſtabliſhed by that Capitulation, It is declared to be lawfull for the Electors, p. 22Princes, Prelates, Nobles, and Commons, either jointly or ſeverally, to reſiſt them without crime of Rebellion or Infidelity.

Three hundred and fifty years before that, a German Pope Gregory V. had brought in the Inſtitution of the Electors, as the Centuriators of Magdeburg report. But Aventinus and Onuphrius more credibly make it of later date, after the death of Frederick II. whom Pope Innocent IV. had perſecuted to death; and the Empire being much weakned by the loſs of that great Emperour, to weaken him more yet, either Innocent IV. or his Succeſſor Alexander III. procured ſeven perpetual Electors, whoſe Intereſt ſhould be to keep alwaies the Emperours low to keep themſelves high. Since that time the Emperours Authority in many parts of Germany is little more then a title, and a reſpect without power; for the Electors may both elect and depoſe him. They and the other Princes of the Empire govern their Signories, and pay nothing to him but homage. And the Cities called Imperial are they that have the greateſt exemptions from the Imperial Lawes. Wherefore the exclamations of the Adverſaries about the reſiſtance of the Elector of Saxony, with other Princes of the Empire, and ſome Imperial Cities againſt the Emperour, and about the words of German Divines or Juriſts to that purpoſe; are very ignorantly or maliciously urged as p. 23rebellious; for neither the words nor the actions of thoſe Germans ought to be weighed in the balance of the duty of other ſubjects to their abſolute Sovereignes.

Luther who was always very rigid for the ſubjection of every ſoul to the higher powers, and had written a book expresly of that ſubject, had much ado to be perſwaded to conſent to a confederacy of defenſive arms againſt the Emperour; who being ſet on by the Court of Rome, oppreſſed the liberties of Germany; and to ſuppreſs the growing Reformation took more cognizance of caſes belonging to the jurisdiction of the Princes, and cities of the Empire, then he was allowed by the authentical capitulations, till▪ the learned in the Law ſatisfied him about the Statutes of his Countrey, and his reaſon and conſcience ſhewed him, that the Apoſtle commanding Chriſtians to ſubmit themſelves to every ordinance of man for the Lords ſake, requireth of them an obedience proportioned to the conſtitutions of the States, of which they are members. Of that conſultation Sleidan giveth this account.

Before they made the confederacy,Sleidan. Hiſt. lib. 8. ad an. 1531. Priusquam ſoedus iniretur, in conſilium adhibiti ſunt, non Iurisconſulti modo, ſed Theologi quoque. Lutherus enim ſemper docuerat Magiſtratui non eſſe reſiſtendum; & exſtabat ejus ea de re libellus. Cum autem in hac deliberatione periti juris docerent legibus eſſe permiſſum reſiſtere nonnunquam, & nunc in eum caſum de quo leges inter alia mentionem faciunt rem eſſe deductam oſtenderent, Lutherus ingenue profitetur ſe neſciviſſe hoc licere: Et quia leges Politicas Evangelium non impugnat aut aboleat, uti ſemper docuerit. Deinde quoniam hoc tempore tam dubio tamque formidoloſo multa poſſint accidere, ſic ut non modo jus ipſum ſed conſcientiae quoque vis atque neceſſitas arma nobis porrigat, defenſionis cauſa foedus iniri poſſe dicit, five Caeſar ipſe, ſive quis alius forte bellum ejus nomine ſaciat. they called to counſel, not onelyonly Juriſts, but Divines alſo. For Luther had taught alwayes that the Magistrate muſt not be reſisted, and a book of his concerning that ſubject was extant. But when in that conſultation the learned in law ſhewed that it was permitted p. 24by the laws to reſist ſometimes, and demonſtrated that at that time their buſineſs was come to that very caſe, of which the laws make mention among other things; Luther did ingeniouſly profeſs that he knew not that it was lawfull: And becauſe the Goſpel doth not impugne or aboliſh the Politick laws, as he had alwayes taught. Alſo becauſe, the time being ſo perillous and full of terrour, many things might happen which would put the armes in our hands, not onelyonly by the preſcript of the law, but by the force of conſcience and neceſſity, he declared his opinion, that a defenſive League might juſtly be made whether the Emperour himſelf, or any other in his name ſhould make war against us.

While they were thus met at Smalcald, the Emperour ſent letters to them, not to condemn or diſſolve their meeting, as a King of England or France would have done, for he knew that by the laws they might meet to look to their common intereſt without him, yea and againſt him. But to charge the Proteſtants to ſend help againſt the Turk, who was advancing with a great army towards Germany. The Proteſtants anſwered, that becauſe the Emperour would grant them no peace at home, nor ſuſpenſion of the decree of confiſcation againſt their eſtates for their Religion, and that they were in daily expectation of proſcription and hoſtile dealing from him, they could not cut off their own ſinews, and lay themſelves open to his hoſtility to help him againſt a foreign enemy. But if he would make all fiſcal proceedings for the matter of Religion to ſurceaſe till the time p. 25of the promiſed Councel, and grant them peace and ſafety at home, they would not onelyonly aſſiſt him againſt the Turk with all their power, but ſerve him in all the publick intereſts to which their duty bound them. And this is that confeder… … which the Adverſary cryeth down as the …p… … …rn of Rebellion from that time to our days, how … the equitable Reader judge.

If it be objected, that this abridging of the Emperours power was wrongfully got from him, I will grant it: It was jus quod coepit ab injuria; a right that began by wrong; yet confirmed by the Emperours with authentical Charters, and ſtrengthened by long preſcription. The Emperour may thank the Popefor it, who having an ancient jealouſie of the Imperial rights in Italy, and not able to ſuffer any King of the Romans, but themſelves, have powerfully laboured for many ages to break the Emperours power every where. And it was by their practiſes, that the conſtitution of the Electors and the Golden Bull was made, and thoſe great immunities given to the Princes of the Empire and Imperial Cities, whereby the Emperour is remained a manacled Prince; ſo unable in moſt parts of the Empire to ſtretch his hands upon the meaneſt perſons that trouble him, that he could never ſo much as ſecure Luther a poor Monk, though urged to it by the moſt powerfull and irreſiſtible ſollicitations of the Court of Rome; but Luther continued till death (about thirty years) deſtroying the Popes intereſts in Germany, and all parts of Europe, and neither Pope nor Caeſar could touch him. Wonderfull are the ways of Gods juſtice, that the Pope by fomenting p. 26factions in the Empire, and breaking the Emperours power, did prepare ſafety and facility for his enemies in the following ages, to make that great breach in his Kingdome, and give that mortal wound to his power, of which it ſhall bleed till it dye of it.

Againſt the Helvetian Reformation the Adverſary ſaith nothing, onelyonly he arrayeth Zuinglius in a ſwaggering Pag. 3.ſwaſh buckler habit, as if he had wrought Reformation with ſword and buckler; yet it was made quietly the preaching of the Goſpel, and began at Zurick in the year 1522. When Zuinglius was cenſured by the BiſhopSleidan. of Conſtance his Ordinary for oppreſſing the Romiſh errours, he ſet ſorth Theſes containing his doctrine, and the Senate of Zurick called together all the Clergy of the Canton to confer about Religion, and requeſted the Biſhop to be preſent, or ſend ſome authorized by him. The Biſhop ſent Johannes Faber his Vicar General, in whoſe preſence the Conſul invited all the aſſiſtants, if they had any thing to oppoſe unto the Theſes of Zuinglius that they would ſpeak. And Zuinglius having addreſt the ſame invitation to the Vicar in particular, the Vicar anſwered, that treating of Controverſies was not fit for that place, and that it belonged to the Councel which ſhould aſſemble ſhortly. After that many words had paſt between them, when none appeared that had any thing to oppoſe, the Senate made an Edict, that in all their dominions the Goſpel ſhould be purely taught out of the Books of the Old and New Teſtament, and that humane traditions ſhould be baniſht. This was obeyed, and Reformation was eſtabliſhed without either ſword or buckler. Neither do I read that Zuinglius was in armes p. 27till eleven years after that five Gantons of contrary Religion ſuddenly invaded that of Zurick, and put Zurick▪ men to a neceſſary but diſorderly defenſe, in which Zuinglius was ſlain. The Switzers had cantoned themſelves in the year 1315. which was 200▪ years before the Reformation. Were I as unſincere as my Adverſary, I ſhould charge the Roman Religion which then reigned with that change of State.

From Zuinglius the Adverſary paſſeth to Calvin as the head of the French Reformation, wherein he ſheweth his great ignorance; for the Reformed Religion was ſpread in France twenty years before Calvin was ſettled in Geneva, and well nigh aſſoon as in Germany. The beginning of which muſt not be aſcribed to one Hugo, whom our Adverſary knowsnot, nor any body elſe. But the truth is, that it was in France long before it was in Germany, ever ſince the errours and tyranny of the Court of Rome began to be oppoſed by the Valdenſes, whoſe relicks after long perſecutions by fire and ſword, remained in the Vale of Cabrieres and Marindol in Provence. It was from thence that Reformation was propagated, incouraged by the happy progreſſes of Luther and Zuinglius. Wherefore the Popes creatures perceiving whence that blow came upon the Roman Court, never left ſolliciting Francis the I. of France, till they got an Edict for the extirpating of them, which was executed with the utmoſt rigour.

And it was not for Religion that they were thus butchered, but meerly to make a ſacrifice to the pride and cruelty of Rome. For as for their doctrine that excellent King Lewis the XII. liked it ſo well, that to ſome p. 28that repreſented it to him, and would incenſe him againſt them. He anſwered, that they were better Chriſtians then he and his Kingdome.

This was then the true Origine of the Reformation of France, the doctrine of the Valdenſes preſerved in the relicks of their deſcent: a doctrine perfectioned ſince into a more Orthodox Confeſſion conformable to the Confeſſions of other Proteſtant Churches. So Calvin had no hand in that Reformation, and no more had he with that of Geneva, or in turning that State into an Ariſtocracy, as this Adverſary upbraids him.

My buſineſs being to vindicate Reformation from the charge of rebellion, I muſt take from the Reformers of Geneva that aſperſion, that they expelled their Biſhop, and that they altered the conſtitution of that State, and both theſe aſcribed unto Calvin. It is a tradition received in England for a currant and undoubted truth. And upon that ground many fine and judicious inferences are built. But it is like the ſtories of the Phenix, and the ſinging of Swans before their death, never the truer for the curious ſimilies and ingenious moralities that haveEpiſtola Benedicti. Turretini ad Scultetum in Annal. reformationis An. 1529. been ſpun out of that ſtuffe. What credit can we give to Hiſtories of things happened in the Indies two thouſand years ago, if in things done to lately, and ſo near us, groſs miſtakes go for uncontrollable truths? I ſay it is utterly falſe thar Calvin was one of the planters of Reformed Religion at Geneva. Falſe alſo that he or the Reformers of Geneva turned their Biſhop out of doors. And falſe alſo that the Biſhop went away upon the quarrel of Religion. Farel, Froment, and Viret were they that wrought under God the converſion of the City by p. 29their Sermons, and by a publick conference with the Friars and Clergy of Geneva, there being then no Biſhop in that Town, who was fled eight moneths before, ſeeing his conſpiracy diſcovered, to oppreſſe the liberties of the City, by the help of the Duke of Savoy, for which his Secretary was hanged, after he was gone; the ſaid Biſhop being hated before, for the rape of a Virgin, and many adulteries with Citizens Wives. And it is moſt to be noted, that they who after his flightSee the book entituled, A view of the Government, &c. by Iohn Durel. reformed the Civil Government, were ſtrong Papiſts, and mainly oppoſed the Reformation of Religion. To which ſomething like was ſeen in England, not far from that time: For the ſame Engliſh Biſhops that moſt earneſtly ſerved Henry the VIII. to make him acknowledged the Supreme Head of the Church of England, Tonſtal. Gardiner. Bonner &c.were afterwards the greateſt oppoſers of the Work of Reformation, and the fierceſt perſecutors of the Proteſtants.

That the Church Diſcipline of Geneva was conſtituted without a biſhop, is a matter of another nature: Their Succeſſors that continue it ſo to this day, are of age, let them ſpeak for themſelves. It is enough for my preſent purpoſe, that I have vindicated the Introduction of Reformation into that State, from the crime of rebellion.

As long as their Biſhop lived, they could not have another, and durſt not receive him, being manifeſtly convicted of ſelling the Cities liberty to the Duke of Savoy: And when the Biſhop died, they had uſed themſelves to live without a Biſhop.

p. 30The firſt proof of our Adverſary to indite the French Reformation of rebellion, is the enterpriſe of Amboiſe An. 1560. But the Proteſtant Religion had ſubſiſted already forty years in France under the croſſe: And the Profeſſors of the ſame, though numerous, had never fought for their Religion, but by their conſtancy in aſſerting the truth and ſuffering for it.

The enterpriſe of Amboiſe was a … quarrel of State, not of Religion; and …and… the Leader was a man moſt averſe from the Proteſtant Religion: The quarrel was this, King Francis the II. being about ſixteen years of age, and younger in underſtanding then years, was altogether governed by ſome Lords of the Houſe of Guiſe, then lookt upon as ſtrangers, and the Princes of the blood were excluded from the buſineſſes of State. Theſe excluded Princes plotted to ſurpriſe the Court at Amboiſe, and remove ſtrangers from about the Kings perſon, thinking themſelves ſufficiently warranted by their quality and intereſt; that plot was criedThuan. Hiſt lib. 24. Nullos ex conjuratis convictos fuiſſe alicujus molitionis in Regemaut Reginam, ſed tantū in exteros ſui in Aulâ tyrannicé omnia adminiſtrabant nempe Guiſianos. down as rebellious, becauſe it did not take effect; and being diſcovered, the Houſe of Guiſe did not fail to make it a matter of High Treaſon: although the great Thuanus depoſe for the conſpirators, that, None of them was convicted of any attempt againſt the King and Queen, but onelyonly againſt strangers, who governed all things about the Court in a tyrannical way. Who ſo knoweth the intereſts of the Princes of the blood in France, will never call that attempt treaſon. And if they could do ſo much by the right of their birth, their right was never the worſe for their being Proteſtants.

Francis II. being dead ſoon after, and his Succeſſor p. 31Charls the IX. being under age, the Princes of the blood had more right then before, to claim the management of the publick affairs, being intruſted with them by the Laws of the Kingdome in the Kings minority, at leaſt in conjunction with the Queen Mother. And being excluded from it again they raiſed an Army to recover their right. That right is not conſidered at all by Jeſuites, that take upon them now a hundred years after to cenſure their actions, but theſe Princes and their followers are repreſented onelyonly as Hereticks and Rebels that made Warre againſt their Sovereigne.

After the King was out of minority, the Princes and their party, ſeeing that the King was much incenſed againſt them, and was of a dangerous and implacable nature, durſt not come neer him; and the frequent Maſſacres, made them keep themſelves in a poſture of defence, and repel force by force.

To be rid of them at once, the King uſed that famous and unparallelled treachery of a feigned peace with the Proteſtants, ſealed with the Marriage of his Siſter with the Head of their party, the firſt Prince of the blood next to his Brothers, Henry King of Navarre; and having invited them to the Wedding, he slew them in their beds. The number of the slain in cold blood on St. Bartholomew's Day and ſince, within the ſpace of three moneths, amounted to about a hundred thouſand. An action publickly commended by the Pope, and the Murtherers rewarded with many ſpiritual graces by his Holineſſe.

That the relicks of the party after that general execution, took defenſive arms, as it is not to be commended, p. 32it is not to be wondred at neither: Men are not Angels, and there is nothing more natural, then to ſtrive for life.

The Houſe of Guiſe having formed the League pretended for the deſtruction of Hereſie, but intended … them for the pulling down of the Royal Houſe; King Henry the III. perceiving this too late, made …e of Henry King of Navarre, then the apparent Heir of the Crown, and of his Proteſtants Army, to oppoſe the League.

That King being ſtabbed by a Monk ſoon after, the Head of the Proteſtant party became lawful King, and his Proteſtant Army the Royal Army: yet their arms then though never ſo juſt, were as much condemned by the Pope as before, and as much taxed of rebellion. But that praiſe cannot be denied to their arms, that by them, as Gods chief inſtruments, the rebellion of the League was defeated, and the lawful King preſerved, raiſed, and ſetled upon his Throne, whileſt the Jeſuited Zealots expreſt their zeal of religion, by attempting to ſtab him, and were too good Catholicks, to be good Subjects.

Since our Adverſary alledgeth the words of King James of bleſſed and glorious memory, and ſets himſelf forth under the name of Philanax, a Lover of the King, he muſt in duty ſtand to the judgement of that great and judicious King. This Sentence his Majeſty pronounceth of that cauſe which this enemy calleth a Defence of the Right of Kings.moſt unanſwerable rebellion, pag. 14. I never knew yet (ſaith the King) that the French Protestants took arms againſt their King. In the first troubles they ſtood onelyonly upon their defence. Before they took arms they were burnt p. 33and maſſacred every where; and the quarrel did not begin for Religion, but becauſe when King Francis the II. was under age, they had been the refuge of the Princes of the blood expelled from the Court, even of the Grandfather of the King now reigning, and of that of the Prince of Conde, who knew not where to take ſanctuary: For which the preſent King hath reaſon to wiſh them well. It ſhall not be found that they made any other warre, nay, is it not true that King Henry the III. ſent armies againſt them, to destroy them; and yet they ran to his help, as ſoon as they ſaw him in danger? Is it not true that they ſaved his life at Tours, and delivered him from an extreme peril? Is it not true that they never forſook neither him nor his Succeſſour, in the midſt of the revolt and rebellion of moſt part of the Kingdome, raiſed by the Pope and the greateſt part of his Clergy? Is it not true that they have aſſisted him in all his battails, and helped much to raiſe the Crown again, which was ready to fall? Is it not true that they which perſecuted the late King (Henry the II.) enjoy this day the fruits of the ſervices done by the Proteſtants? who are now maligned not for controverſies of Religion, but becauſe that if their advice was followed, the Crowne of the French Kings ſhould no more depend on the Pope, there would be no Frenchman in France, that is not the Kings Subject; there would be no appeal to Rome of beneficial and matrimonial cauſes, and the Kingdome ſhould be no more tributary, under colour of Annats, and the like impoſitions. Even Cardinal Perron cleareth them from that imputation (of rebellion) when he ſaith that the doctrine of the depoſition of Kings by the Pope was received in France till Calvin: He doth then ſilently acknowledge that p. 34Kings were ill ſerved before, and that thoſe whom he calls hereticks, having brought forth the Holy Scripture to the publick ſight, have made the Right of Kings known, which was oppreſt before. Such a judgement is of great weight, coming from a wiſe King, who was truly informed of the buſineſſes of his neighbours: Certainly, ſi perito in arte ſua credendum est: If a skilful Artiſt muſt be believed, when he ſpeaketh within the compaſſe of his Art, none can decide better what rebellion is, and what is not, then a great Monarch, jealous of the Royal Authority, skilled in the duty of Subjects, and one that had a long ſtruggling with rebellious ſpirits.

This Sentence was pronounced by his Majeſty in the year 1615, when France had peace at home and abroad.

Two years after they had the like teſtimony of their fidelity from their own King, by a Letter of his Majeſty written to their Deputies aſſembled in a Synod at Vitre, in theſe terms: Nous avons receu bien volontiers les nouuelles aſſurances & proteſtations que vous nous auez faites de voſtre fidelite & obeiſſance▪ En laquelle perſiſtans comme vous devez & que vous auez ſait par le paſsè, vous pouuez auſſi eſtre aſſurez que nous aurons touſſours ſoin de vous maintenir & conſerver en tous les avantages qui vous ont eſté accordez. Theſe Letters were printed and publiſhed with other Declarations.We have received with good ſatisfaction, the new aſſurances and proteſtations which you have made unto us of your fidelity and obedience: In the which if you perſist as you ought and as you have done before, you may alſo be aſſured, that we ſhall alwayes have a care to maintain and preſerve you in all the advantages which have been granted unto you. Theſe Letrers bear the Date of May 29. 1617. from Paris.

p. 35Cardinal d'Oſſat ſpeaking to Cardinal Aldobrandin, Nephew to Clement the VIII. about the execrable murther attempted by Iohn Chastel againſt Henry the IV. of France, told him, that if Sil y avoit lieu a de tels aſſaſſinats ce ſeroit aux Heretiques a les purchaſſer & executer, qu'il a quittez & abandonnez & qui avoyent a ſe craindre de luy & touteſois ils n'ont rien attenté contre luy ni contre aucun de cinq de nos Roys ſes predeceſſeurs quelque boucherie que leurs Majeſtez ayent fait deſdits Huguenots. Card. d'Oſſat. Epiſt. 8. a Mr. de Velleroy, ▪Ian. 25. 1595. pag. 77.ſuch attempts were allowable, they were more proper to execute for the Hereticks (ſo he is pleaſed to call the Proteſtants) whom the King hath left and forſaken, and who have reaſon to ſtand in fear of him: and yet they never attempted any ſuch thing, neither against him, nor againſt any of the Kings, his predeceſſors, what ſlaughter ſoever they have made of the ſaid Hugenots.

But the greateſt teſtimony of their fidelity, is that famous Edict of Nantes, which was expreſſely made to reward them with priviledges, for their conſtant adhering to their King, in the long calamities of France.

Seeing then that the French Proteſtants were acknowledged good Subjects by their Sovereigne, and have deſerved by their ſignal loyalty and long ſervices to the Crowne, thoſe few priviledges which they hardly enjoy; it is evident how unjuſt the extraordinary expoſtulation is, That the Roman Catholicks have not the publick allowed exerciſe of Religion in England, as the Proteſtants have in France. There is great reaſon for that differing dealing. The French Proteſtants have deſerved that liberty and more, by their conſtant fidelity and valour, having maintained their King with their purſes, and defended him with their ſwords, ſo many years, againſt the Jeſuitical p. 36party, who had made a League with ſtrangers to keep him from the Crown, and take away his life. It is known that the Grandfather of the King now reigning, was ſet upon the Throne by the ſwords of his Proteſtant Subjects: Let the Jeſuitical party of England ſhew the like ſervice to their Sovereigne, whereby they deſerve the like recompence. What care did they take of the preſervation of their Sovereigns lives, Queen Elizabeth and King Iames? How did they defend their Crowns againſt the claim and invaſion of ſtrangers? Did they further or hinder the return of our gracious King now reigning? If ſome few Roman Catholicks have fought for our glorious King and Martyr Charles the I. their whole party fares the better by it now, and finds the King a grateful Prince, remembring good deeds, and forgetting injuries: Then the difference of their doctrine in point of Government, ought to make a great difference in the allowance of the publick exerciſe of their Religion. The Jeſuited Catholicks acknowledge another Sovereigne over their King, both for the Spiritual and the Temporal, a forreigne power, which can diſpenſe them of their Allegiance to him. The Proteſtants acknowledge no Sovereigne above their King, and give no jealouſie by their doctrine to the Roman Catholick Princes and States under which they live, as the Jeſuites have done, even to Roman Catholicks, by whom they have been expelled out of their Dominions, as Teachers of a doctrine tending to rebellion.

Of the troubles that followed, who ſo will give an impartial judgement, muſt look upon the condition of the French Proteſtants ſince King Henry IV. bought p. 37his peace with the party of the League by the change of his Religion. That King ſeeing himſelf obliged to provide for the ſafety of his Proteſtant ſubjects, by whoſe armes and long ſervice he had been preſerved in his adverſities, and finally placed upon the Royal Seat, gave them ſome places of ſtrength in ſeveral Provinces of the Kingdome for certain years; and by an Edict (called the Edict of Nantes) the free enjoying of their eſtates, and the open exerciſe of their Religion, with ſome limitation of places.

Of the priviledges granted them by that Edict, there were many infractions, eſpecially ſince the death of Henry the IV. who both by his authority, and together by his ancient intereſt in the Proteſtant party, kept all quiet, and preſerved them from thoſe wrongs to which the weakeſt are alwaies obnoxious.

The term being expired of the grant of thoſe places, King Lewis the XIII. renewed it for four or five years, after which he would have them out of their hands. That they were to be reſtored upon the Kings demand, was the opinion of grave Proteſtants, the ſevereſt exactors of the obedience of ſubjects to the Sovereign; of my Reverend Father eſpecially, who being eminent and reſpected in the party, was a principal means to keep the Proteſtant Churches on this ſide Loire in peace and in duty to their King, for which his Majeſty ſent him a conſiderable ſumme of money, which he refuſed to take, ſaying, that he could be loyal to his King without being bought.

But the neceſſity of their keeping thoſe places, ſeemed to be juſtified by the reaſon of the firſt grant, which p. 38was to preſerve them from the violence of their bitter enemies; for (ſaid they) if ſo many places of ſafety could not keep us ſafe from their inſolence, what will become of us when we ſhall lye naked of all defenſe, and expoſed to the will of that party which uſed us before like ſheep appointed to the slaughter?

Upon thoſe terms they were when the Aſſembly ofThe Aſſembly of Rochel was not an Eccleſiaſtick but▪ a Politick Aſſembly, for thoſe two ſorts of Aſſemblies they were allowed to keep, but now the Eccleſiaſtick only is allowed. Rochel being once licenced by their King, and ſince forbidden, ſate againſt his will, and took order for a defenſive war. Whereupon, my Reverend Father returning from the National Synod of Alais, of which he had been Preſident, writ a Letter to them, which I inſert here as very pertinent to my purpoſe.

Gentlemen,

I do not write to you to powr my ſorrows into your boſome, or to entertain you with my private croſſes: upon that I need no comforter, accounting it a great honour, that in the publick affliction of the Church, God would have me to march in the front. And I would account it a great happineſs if all the ſtorm ſhould light on my head, ſo that I were the onelyonly ſufferer, and the Church of God ſhould enjoy peace and proſperity. A more ſmarting care hath moved me to write to you, and forced me to go beyond my nature, which was alwayes averſe from medling with publick buſineſſes, and from moving out of the ſphere of my proper calling. For ſeeing the general body of the Church in eminent danger, and upon the brink of a diſmal precipice, it was not poſſible for me to keep ſilence. Nay, I cannot be p. 39ſilent in this urgent neceſſity, without drawing upon me the guilt of inſenſibility and Cruelty towards the Church of God. And I am full of hope that while I deliver my mind to you about publick buſineſſes, my domeſtick affliction will free me from jealouſies in your opinion. And if I be not believed, at least I ſhall be excuſed. Indeed it doth not become me to take upon me to give counſel to an aſſembly of perſons choſen out of the whole Kingdome to bear the burden of the publick affairs in a time ſo full of difficulties; yet I think it uſefull for you to be truly informed what the ſenſe is, and what the diſpoſition of our ChurchesNone could have a more particular knowledge of it, then he who was lately come from the National Synod in the South of France, where he made it his buſineſſe to obſerve the poſture of the affairs of the Proteſtants. by perſons that have a particular knowledge of it.

The question being then, whether you ought to ſeparate your Aſſembly to obey his Majeſty, or keep together to give order to the affairs of the Churches, I am obliged to tell you, that the general deſire of our Churches is, that it may pleaſe God to continue our peace in our obedience to his Majeſty. And that ſeeing the King reſolved to make himſelf obeyed by the force of his armes, they truſt, that you will do your beſt to avoid that ſtorm, and rather yield unto neceſſity, then to ingage them in a war which moſt certainly will ruine most part of our Churches, and will bring us into a trouble, of which we ſee the beginning, but can ſee no end. By obeying the King you ſhall take away the pretence uſed by thoſe that ſet his Majesty on to perſecute us: and if we muſt be perſecuted, all that fear God deſire that it may be for the profeſſion of the Goſpel, and that our perſecution may truly be the croſs of Chriſt. In one word, I can aſſure you, Gentlemen, that the greateſt and beſt part of our Churches wiſheth for your ſeparation, if it may be with the ſafety of your perſons: yea, that many of the Romane p. 40Church deſiring the publick peace, are continually about us, beſeeching and exhorting us that we do not by caſting our ſelves headlong, involve them in the ſame ruine.

Hereupon I need not repreſent unto you how terribly and generally our poor flocks are frighted and diſmayed, caſting their eyes upon you, as perſons that may procure their reſt, and by yielding to the preſent neceſſity, blow away the storm hanging over their heads. Many already have forſaken the land, many have forſaken their Religion; whence you may judge what diſſipation is like to follow, if this exaſperation go on further.

No more do I need to recommend unto you to have a tender care of the preſervation of our poor Churches, knowing that you would chuſe death, rather then to draw that reproach upon you, that you have haſtened the perſecution of the Church, and deſtroyed that which the zeal of our Fathers have planted, and that you have put this State in confuſion.

I am not ignorant, that many reaſons are alledged to perſwade you to continue your Aſſembly, they tell you that the King hath granted it; but for that grant of his Majesty you can ſhow no Warrant, nor any written Declaration, without which all promiſes are but words in the air: for Kings believe they have power to forbid that which they have permitted, and to revoke that which they have granted, when they judge it expedient for the good of their affairs. Neither is there any of you, after he hath ſent his ſervant, or given him leave to goe to ſome place, that thinks not that he hath power to call him back. Sovereign Princes eſpecially, are very unwilling to keep their promiſes, when they have been extorted.

p. 41Alſo great number of grievances and contraventions to the Kings Edicts are repreſented unto you, which complaints, to our great grief, are too true. But that I may not urge that we have given occaſion to many of thoſe evils our own ſelves, the difficulty lyeth not in repreſenting our griefs, but in finding the remedies. Conſider then whether the ſubſistence of your Aſſembly can heal all theſe ſores; whether your ſitting can give a ſhelter to our Churches, provide all things neceſſary for a war where the parties are ſo unequal, raiſe forces, and make a ſtock to pay them; Whether all the good that your ſitting can produce can countervail the diſſipation of ſo many Churches which lye open to the wrath of their enemies: Whether when they are fallen you can raiſe them again: Whether in the evident diviſion that is amongus, you are able to rally the ſcattered parts of that divided body, which if it were well united, yet would be too weak to stand upon the defenſive.

Pardon me, Gentlemen, if I tell you that you ſhall not find all our Proteſtants inclined to obey your reſolutions; and that the fire being kindled all about you, ſhall remain helpleſs beholders of the ruine which you have drawn on our heads. Neither can it be unknown to you, that many of the beſt quality among us, and best able to defend us, openly blame your actions, holding and profeſſing, that ſuffering for this cauſe is not ſuffering for the cauſe of God. Theſe making no reſiſtance, and opening the gates of their places, or joining their armes with the Kings, you may eaſily judge what loſs and what weakning of the party that will be. How many of our Nobility will forſake y…u, ſome out of treachery, ſome out of weakneſs? Even they who p. 42in an Aſſembly are moſt vehement in their votes, and toAnd ſo it proved. ſhew themſelves zealous, are altogether for violent waies, are very often they that will revolt and betray their brethren. They bring our diſtreſſed Churches to the hottest danger, and there leave them, going away after they have ſet the houſe on fire.

If there be once fighting or beſieging of our towns, whatſoever the iſſue may be of the combat or the ſiege, all that while it will be hard to keep the people animated against us, from falling upon our Churches, which have neither retreat nor defenſe. And what order ſoever the Magiſtrates of contrary Religion take about it, they ſhall never be able to compaſs it.

I might alſo repreſent unto you many reaſons out of the ſtate of our Churches, both within and without the Kingdome, to ſhew you that this ſtirring of yours is altogether unſeaſonable, and that you ſet ſail against wind and tyde. But you are clear-ſighted enough to ſee it, and to conſider in what poſture your neighbours are, and from whence you may look for help; whether among you the vertue and the concord, and the quality of the heads is grown or diminiſht. Certainly this is not the time when the troubling of this pool can heal our diſeaſes. And certain it is, that if any thing can help ſo much weakneſs, it muſt be the zeal of Religion, which in the time of our fathers hath upholden us, when we had leſs strength, and more vertue. But in this cauſe you ſhall find that zeal languiſhing, becauſe moſt of our people believe that this evil might have been avoided without breach of conſcience. Be ye ſure that there will be alwaies diſunion among us, every time that we ſhall ſtir for civil cauſes, and not directly for the cauſe of the Goſpel.

p. 43Againſt that it is objected, that our enemies have determined our ruine; that they undermine us by little and little; that it is better to begin now, then to ſtay longer. Truly that man ſhould be void of common ſenſe, that doubted of their ill will. And yet when I call to mind our ſeveral loſſes, as that of Lectoure, Privas, and Bearn, I finde that we ourſelves have contributed to them, and it is no wonder that our enemies take no care to remedy our faults, and that they joyn with us to do us harm. But hence it follows, not that we throw the helve after the hatchet, and ſet our houſe on fire our ſelves, becauſe others are reſolved to burn it, or take in hand to remedy particular loſſes by means weak to redreſs them, but strong and certain to ruine the general. God, who hath ſo many times diverted the counſels taken for our ruine, hath neither lost his power, nor altered his will. We ſhall find him the ſame still, if we have the grace to wait for his aſſistance, not caſting our ſelves headlong by our impatience, or ſetting our mind obſtinately upon impoſſibilities. Take this for certain, that although our enemies ſeek our ruine, they will never undertake it openly, without ſome pretence, other and better then that of Religion, which we muſt not give them. For if we keep our ſelves in the obedience which ſubjects owe to their Sovereign, you ſhall ſee, that while our enemies hope in vain that we ſhall make our ſelves guilty by ſome diſobedience. God will give them ſome other work, and afford us occaſions to ſhew to his Majeſty that we are a body uſefull to this State, and put him in mind of the ſignal ſervices that our Churches have done to the late King of glorious memory. But if we are ſo unfortunate, that while we keep our ſelves in our duty, the calumnies of our enemies p. 44prevail, at least we ſhall get this ſatisfaction, that we have kept all the right on our ſide, and made it appear, that we love the peace of the State.

Notwithſtanding all this, Gentlemen, you may and ought to take order for the ſafety of your perſons. For whereas his Majeſty and his Counſel have ſaid often, that if you ſeparate your ſelves, he will let our Churches enjoy peace, and the benefit of his Edicts, it is not reaſonable that your ſeparation be done with the peril of your perſons. And whenever you petition for your ſafe diſſolution, I truſt it will be eaſily obtained, if you make poſſible requests, and ſuch, as the miſery of the time, and the preſent neceſſity can bear. In the mean while you may adviſe before you part, what ſhould be done, if notwithſtanding your ſeparation, we ſhould be oppreſt, that order your prudence may finde, and it is not my part to ſuggeſt it unto you.

If by propounding theſe things unto you, I have exceeded the limits of diſcretion, you will be pleaſed to impute it to my zeal for the good and preſervation of the Church. And if this advice of mine is rejected, as unworthy of your conſideration, this comfort I ſhall have, that I have diſcharged my conſcience, and retiring my ſelf into ſome foreign Countrey, there I will end thoſe few daies which I have yet to live, lamenting the loſs of the Church, and the deſtruction of the Temple, for the building whereof I have laboured with much more courage and fidelity then ſucceſs. The Lord turn away his wrath from us, direct your Aſſembly, and preſerve your perſons. I reſt, &c.

From Sedan, Feb. 12. 1621.

p. 45When this Letter was read in the Aſſembly, ſome aroſe immediately and left it: others continued to ſit, and by their ſitting turned theſe warnings into prophecies. This Epiſtle will give to the judicious Reader an inſight into the affairs of that time and State; and together into the preſent queſtion, which is altogether of fact, whether and how far the French Proteſtants may be taxed of diſobedience againſt their Sovereign. For it is juſtified by this relation, that when ſome of them reſiſted, they had the greateſt temptation to it that a juſt fear can preſent unto fleſh and bloud; and yet that even then they were diſavowed by the best and the moſt of their Church, and exhorted to their duty by their Divines, which in points of conſcience are the repreſentative perſons of a party when they are ſolemnly met; and this was the ſenſe of the National Synod, of which this eminent Divine was Preſident but two moneths before.

Here every wiſe and charitable Chriſtian ſhould lay David's doctrine to heart, Pſal. 41. 1. foreign Bleſſed is he that conſiders with intelligence and judgement him that is in a low condition. It is eaſie for us that enjoy proſperity under a gracious King, to determine the point of paſſive obedience: not ſo for them that groan under the ſad burden of the Croſs. Chriſtian equity ought to pity thoſe that are expoſed to the ſad counſels of terrour and deſpair.

I am not without ſuſpition, that when thoſe places of ſafety were granted to them by Henry the IV. their enemies in the Kings Counſel ſuggeſted or furthered that grant for their undoing in the time to come; for they p. 46might well foreſee, that on the one ſide a wiſe King would not ſuffer long ſuch a diſeaſe in his own bowels as a party of his ſubjects armed with places of ſecurity againſt him: and that on the other ſide, the party ſo ſecured, would not part with that ſecurity for their Religion, Liberties, and Lives, without committing ſuch actions as would make them obnoxious to their Sovereigns anger, and their ruine.

Three or four years after the rendition of all thoſe places to the King, the Duke of Montmorancy raiſed a party againſt him in Languedock, of which he was Governour, hoping to find the Proteſtants which are numerous there, prepared ſubjects for an inſurrection; yet neither his ſolicitations, nor the reſentment of their ſufferings could move them to aſſiſt him. But they joyned univerſally with the King, and did rare ſervice in a battel where that Duke was defeated and taken, and with him a Jeſuited Biſhop. And it is to be noted, that old Marſhal de la Force a Proteſtant, that hardly eſcaped the Maſſacre of St. Bartholomew, was one of the chief Commanders of the Kings Army.

The Adverſary gives a touch of the wars, begun in Germany, Bohemia, and Hungary in the year 1619. of which he imputes the whole cauſe to the Proteſtants. I undertake not to juſtifie their errours; I ſay onelyonly, that whoſo had looked with an ordinary judgement upon the face of thoſe Countreys, as they were then divided and ballanced between the Papiſt and the Proteſtant party, might have foretold without a ſpirit of prophecy, that they ſhould not enjoy a long peace, there being ſo many free ſpirits animated to liberty and revenge by the ſeverity p. 47of the ſuperſtitious houſe of Auſtria towards their Proteſtant ſubjects.

If Bethlem Gabor was a prodigious man, and a demi-Turk, as this man makes him, it is nothing to us: as Religion juſtifieth no mans faults, no mans faults can condemn Religion. The notion under which I fancy that man, is, that of a cannon-ſhot without bullet, which makes a great and ſhort crack, and no effect. All that the Adverſary ſaith of his dealing with the Turk, ſheweth, that the Proteſtants of Hungary were ſo oppreſt by the Emperour, that they wiſht themſelves the Turks ſubjects. I pray God they do not ſo ſtill, and with them the other Proteſtants belonging to the Emperours hereditary Countreys, ſeeing their brethren that live under the Turk enjoy the freedome of their Religion. The ſame reaſon might make the Proteſtants of the Empire slow to contribute towards the war againſt the Turk; yet I hear they are as forward as any. It is not declaiming againſt them (as the Adverſary doth) but uſing them like Chriſtians that will make them joyn heartily with the Emperour in that war. The Spaniſh branch of the houſe of Austria hath loſt great part of Netherlands by the inflexibleneſs of Philip the II. of Spain, to grant liberty of Religion to his Proteſtant ſubjects. Let the German branch of Austria which uſeth the like hardneſs, take heed of the like loſs.

The Reformation of Religion in the United Provinces, is that upon which the Adverſary triumpheth moſt, it being very apparent, to his thinking, that they brought it in by ſhaking the Yoke of the King of Spain. But there is great difference between reforming p. 48and eſtabliſhing the Reformation. The firſt was done by the Word, the ſecond by the Sword, and the firſt forty years before the ſecond. The Reformed Religion was ſpred over the Seventeen Provinces many years, before there was any thought of making an Union againſt the Spaniard; neither was that Union made upon the ſcore of Religion, but of State, for maintaining their Franchiſes againſt the oppreſſion of Spain; as it was ſufficiently juſtified, by their chooſing of Francis Duke of Alenſon, a Roman Catholick, for their Prince;An. 1583. which they would never have done, if the Union had ever marched under the notion of Religion, as our Adverſarypag. 32. affirmeth, or if the Proteſtants had been the greater number. And that Religion was not that which knit the party, and that there was no ſuch thing in the Articles, it appeared again when ſome Provinces forſook the Union, becauſe the Prince of Orange had put Religion among the cauſes of their defenſive Warre. If then the Union was unjuſt, the injuſtice muſt not be caſt upon Religion, ſince it was not made upon that intereſt; and if it was juſt, it could not become unjuſt, by the acceſſion of the intereſt of Religion, to the other intereſts. So that which way ſoever the Adverſary takes it, the Roman Catholicks bear an equal ſhare with the Proteſtants, in the right and wrong of the cauſe; Flanders and Brabant were as guilty as Holland and Zealand: The difference is, that Flanders and Brabant were beaten to obedience by the Duke of Parma, but Holland and Zealand proved too ſtrong for him. The World beholds with amazement the ſucceſſe of that Union, that theſe little Provinces ſhould bring p. 49their Prince to be their ſuppliant, that he might be allowed to quit his right over them, and acknowledge them Free States, yea and to juſtifie their armes. It is that ſucceſſe, not their guilt, that makes our Adverſary ſo vehement againſt them; for ill Gameſters will be angry, when they are looſers.

Whether it be out of wilfulneſſe or ignorance, this Gentleman miſ-repreſents that buſineſſe, ſpeaking of the King of Spain, as of an abſolute Sovereigne of the Low Countries, and of the people, as of meer Subjects. Philip the II. was not their King, but their Count. ButI have ſaid ſomething of that in my Clamor Regii Sanguinis ad Caelum. it is beſides my buſineſſe, to inquire how the rights of Sovereignty were divided between the Prince and the People, which ought to be known before the caſe be ſtated.

If the cauſe of Religion made the quarrel irreconcileable, Philip the II. may thank himſelf for it. Strada the great friend of the Spaniard, tells us that the Great Council of Spain repreſented to the King, that unleſſe he granted liberty of conſcience to his Subjects of the Netherlands, the Countrey would be loſt, and the Warre perpetual; whereupon the King fell on his knees before a Crucifix, and vowed that he would chooſe to loſe his Dominions, rather then to permit hereſie, ſo he called the Proteſtant Religion. If many years after they were offered to be ſecured for their Religion, as our Adverſary ſaith (which I never heard before) it waspag. 39. too late. It is an unequitable motion, and more advantageous for the Roman party than ours, that exceſſes happening by the ordinary courſe of humane buſineſſes be not imputed to Religion. Oppreſſion will p. 50make ſubjects to ſhake off the yoke: And the proſperity of their defection keeps them from returning to their former ſubjection.

From Holland the Adverſary ſaileth into Scotland, and objects to us the Maxims of Knox and Buchanan, and the diſorders of that time. Of which I have ſaid enough in the Chapter before.

Of the Work of Reformation in England, and the publick actions of that age upon that intereſt, he ſpeaks very ſcornfully; ſaying, that the Sect of Wicleff lay pag. 71.ſtrangled in the cradle till King Edward the VI. his dayes, when ſome ends of it were taken up again, and ſet out with more oſtentation then ever, in that Princes minority: and what rare effects of obedience were by that means produced in Queen Maries time, who brought them up again to the test, may be eaſily read in our Chronicles. Wherein it is plain, that in the poor five years of her Reign there was de facto more open and violent oppoſition and rebellion, made by her own ſubjects, then Queen Elizabeth had in forty five years; or any Prince before or ſince the Wicleffian doctrine, till the ſame ſmothered fire broke out at laſt in good King Charles his time, to his utter ruin, and the ſhaking of the very foundation of his Monarchy. Is this ſpoken like a most obſervant Son, and in every honeſt mans eſteem a pious, reverend, and learned Prieſt of the Church of England, as this Author is tearmed in the Publiſhers Epiſtle to the Reader? Certainly a Son and a Prieſt of the Church of England would never have derived from Wickleff, but from the Holy Scripture, the Religion of the Church his Mother; nor aſcribed to her Religion the cauſe of the late horrid rebellion. We ſee p. 51what a Son and Prieſt of the Church he is, the tree is known by his fruit. What better figs can be gathered from ſuch a thorn? What better grapes from ſuch a bramble? And what is that doctrine of Wickliffe which he imputes to the Proteſtants, to the Engliſh eſpecially? Impios nullum dominium habere, That the ungodly pag. 70.can have no right of dominion: Was that the doctrine ſet out with oſtentation in Edward the VI. his dayes? Or was any of the Proteſtants found tainted with that doctrine, when Queen Mary burnt them, which this man calls bringing them to the teſt? Sure it was not upon that ground that ſome oppoſitions were made againſt that Queen. It is a wonder that ſhe met with no more, conſidering how her Father had declared by Act of Parliament her Mothers Marriage unlawful, and her ſelf incapable of the Crown, and had miſerably incumbred the Title and Succeſſion of his Children.

That there was more open and violent oppoſition againſt her in her five years reigne from her own Subjects, then Queen Elizabeth had in forty five years, it is, becauſe they that went to queſtion her Title, went to work plainly above boord; but no ſecret Jeſuitical conſpiracies to ſtabbe or poyſon her, as againſt Queen Elizabeth.

The means ſhe made to reduce her diſſenting ſubjects in Religion, when they made no oppoſition againſt her, was to make bon-fires of them. Three hundred of thoſe burnt-offerings ſhe ſacrificed unto God: A farre greater number in her poor five years, then that of the Popiſh Martyrs of diſobedience, ſince the death of that p. 52Queen, now above a hundred years. For no Papiſt was executed for his Religion, all for diſobeying the Laws of the Land, and many of them for High Treaſon.

It is known that Queen Mary got the Crowne by the aſſiſtance of the Proteſtants of Suffolk, and what recompence ſhe gave them for it. And, whereas no fewer then eight rebellions did riſe in Henry the VIII. his dayes, I find not that the Proteſtants had a hand in any of them. All were raiſed by Papiſts; and upon the ſcore of Popery.

The principal colour of our Adverſaries malice is his deteſtation of the late rebellion of England, and the execrable Murther committed in the ſacred Perſon of our gracious Sovereigne. Upon this he makes ſeveral Panegyricks, which are very ill ſorted with his Apology for Mariana, and juſtifying of the Ieſuites doctrine: Eſpecially ſeeing that thoſe actions were copied out upon their principles. Felicia tempora quae te Moribus admorunt. Belike the curious pens of the wiſe States-men and learned Scholars of England, had need to be ſupplied by the boyiſh theames of a petty Novice of Doway, to learn the duty of Subjects, and to abhorre the guiltineſſe of rebellion.

The venome that lieth under that oratory of invectives, is that all the miſchief is imputed to the Proteſtants of Integrity, a term which he uſeth like a ſtirrupleather, longer or ſhorter, according to his occaſions, yet alwayes treacherouſly to caſt the faults of ſome particular perſon, or ſome heretical Sect upon the generality of the Proteſtants. But let him know, that the p. 53King, the Church, and the State, are Proteſtants of Integrity: and that the parricides and troublers of our Iſrael will never give him thanks for calling them Proteſtants: Alſo that we acknowledge them not for ſuch, unleſſe it be upon a new ſcore, becauſe they proteſt againſt the Kings power and the duty of their obedience.

When Jeſuits or their Scholars, (as this Gentleman is) charge our Fanaticks with High Treaſon, they do but act that which they had prepared to do, if the Powder-Plot had taken. For they had a Declaration ready to indite the Proteſtants of that Treaſon. For theſe men would ſtory the juſt clamor againſt them for their doctrine of rebellion and parricide, by laying the ſame charge with loud words upon others.

We have great reaſon to call upon the Juſtice of God and Men to condemne the unſincerity of this clamour. With what face or conſcience can the Jeſuits paſſe a hard Sentence upon the late Rebels and Kingkillers, ſeeing that theſe furious Zealots have neither taught nor done any thing in that horrible defection, but what they had learned of the Jeſuits? For what do they blame them for?

Is it for teaching that the Sovereigne Power lieth in the Commons, and that they may alter the Government of a State? Did they not learnBellarm. de Laicis, lib. 3. cap. 6. Poteſtas immediate eſt tanquam in ſubjecto in tota multitudine, & ſi cauſa legitima adſit poteſt multitudo mutare regnum in Ariſtocratiam, aut Democratiam, & è contrarie. that of Bellarmine? The Power (ſaith he) is in the whole multitude, as in its ſubject, and if there be a lawful cauſe for it, the multitude may alter the Royal State into an Ariſtocracy, or Democracy, and ſo on the contrary.

p. 54Is it for ſaying that the people makes the King, and may unmake him, and retains ſtill the habit of power? Did they not learn of the ſame Bellarmine, that, In the Kingdomes of Bellarm. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 19. In regnis hominum poteſtas Regis eſt à populo, quia populus facit Regem. Ibid. cap. 19. ſect ad alteram. In Rebusp. temporalibus ſi Rex degeneret in tyrannum, licet caput ſit Regni, tamen à populo poteſt deponi & eligi alius. Et Recogn. lib. de Laicis ſect. Addo experientiam laudat Navarrum qui non dubitat affirmare nunquam populum ita poteſtatem ſuam in Regem transferre quin illam ſibi in habitu retineat; ut in certis quibuſdam caſibus etiam actu recipere poſſit.men, the Kings power is from the people, becauſe the people makes the King. And in temporal Common-wealths, if the King degenerate into a Tyrant, though he be the Head of the Kingdome, he may be depoſed by the people, and another elected. And doth he not praiſe Navarrus for ſaying, that the people never ſo transferre their power to the King, but they retain it in the habit; ſo that in ſome caſes they may reſume it.

Is it for ſaying that the Common-wealth may take defenſive armes againſt the King, and expel him? The Jeſuite Suarez taught them that doctrine.Suarez Defenſ Fid lib. 6. c. 19. ſect. 17. Reſp. ex ſola rei natura ſpectatam prout fuit apud Gentiles & nunc eſt inter Ethnicos habet poteſtatem ſe deſendendi à Tyranno Rege. & ſect. 15. Si Rex legitimus tyrannice gubernat & regno nullum aliud ſit remedium niſi Regem expellere & deponere, poterit Reſp. tota publico & communi conſenſu civitatem & procerum Regem deponere. The Common-wealth (ſaith he) conſidered in her meer nature, and as it was among the Gentiles, and as it is now among the Pagans, hath the power to defend her ſelf againſt a Tyrant. If a lawful King governe tyrannically, and that there be no other remedy for the Kingdome but to expel and depoſe the King, the whole Common-wealth by the publick and common conſent of the Cities and the Peers, may depoſe the King.

p. 55Or do the Jeſuites inveigh againſt them for making a formal and aggreſſive Warre againſt the King? They have no reaſon for it, ſeeing that the Jeſuite Mariana hath ſet them down the whole courſe which they have followed. The readiest Mariana lib. 6. de Rege, cap. 6. pag. 59. & 60. Expedita maximé & tuta via eſt ſi publici conventus facultas detur communi conſenſu quid ſtatuendum ſit deliberare, fixum ratumque habere quod communi ſententia ſteterit. Monendus in primis Princeps erit atque ad ſanitatem revocandus, &c. Qui ſi medicinam reſpuat, neque ſpes ulla ſanitatis relinquatur, ſententia pronuntiata licebit Reip, ejus imperium detrectare primum, & quoniam bellum neceſſario concitabitur, ejus defendendi conſilia explicare, expedire arma, pecunias in belli ſumptus imperare populis: & ſi res feret neque aliter ſe Reſp. tueri poſſit, eodem defenſionis jure, ac vero potiori authoritate & propria Principem publice hoſtem declaratum ferro perimere.and the ſafest way (ſaith he) if the people may meet in a publick Aſſembly, is to deliberate by common conſent what is to be done, and then to keep inviolably that which is agreed on by common conſent. The Prince muſt firſt be admoniſh't and exhorted to mend: But if he refuſe the remedy, and there be no hope of his mending, the ſentence being once pronounced (againſt him) it will be lawful for the Common-wealth to refuſe to obey him. And becauſe a Warre muſt neceſſarily follow, the counſels how to maintain it must be ſet down, armes must be quickly provided, and taxes laid upon the people, to bear the expences of the Warre. And if it be requiſite, and the Common-wealth cannot otherwiſe maintain it ſelf, it ſhall be lawful, both by the right of defence, and more by the Authority proper (to the people) to declare publikely the King to be the common enemy, and then kill him with the ſword.

Do the Jeſuites look with horrour upon that Court of Juſtice erected to try the King? Let them remember that they had Mariana's warrant for it. That the Common-wealth from which the Royal Power hath its p. 56original, may when the caſe requires Mariana Ibid. Certe à Rep. unde ortum habet regia poteſtas rebus exigentibus Regem in jus vocari poſſe, & ſi ſanitatem reſpuat Principatu ſpoliari. Neque ita in Principem jura poteſtatis tranſtulit ut non ſibi majorem reſervarit poteſtatem.it, bring the King to judgement; and if he refuſe to mend, deprive him of his Sovereignty: For the Commonwealth hath not ſo transferred the right of power unto the Prince, but it hath reſerved a greater power to it ſelf.

And why doth our Adverſary, an earneſt defender of the Jeſuites, exclaim ſo much againſt the abominable parricide acted upon our Sacred Sovereigne, ſeeing that the people which made Warre againſt him, held him to be a Tyrant, andLeſsius lib. 2. de Iuſtitia & Iure cap. 9. dubio 4. ſcribit. Verum Principem qui tyrannus eſt ratione adminiſtrationis non poſſe à privatis interimi quamdiu manet Princeps,—primum à Repub. vel comitiis Regni vel alio habente authoritatem eſſe deponendum, & hoſtem declarandum, ut in ipſius perſonam liceat quicquam attentare. it is the currant opinion of the Jeſuites, that a tyrant may be killed by any private man. A true Prince (ſaith Leſſius) who is a tyrant by reaſon of his administration, cannot be killed by a private perſon as long as he remaineth a Prince,—but he must firſt be depoſed and declared enemy by the Common-wealth, or the Parliament of the Kingdome, or ſome other, having Authority, that it may be lawful to attempt any Suarez contra Regem Mag. Brit. lib. 6. cap. 4. ſect. 14. Poſt ſententiam lutam domnino privatur regno ita ut non poſſit juſto titulo illud poſſidere; ergo ex tunc poterit tanquam tyrannus tractari & conſequenter à quocunquè privato poterit interſici.thing against his perſon. And Suarez ſaith to the ſame purpoſe, that after the Sentence given (againſt a King) he is altogether deprived of his Kingdome, ſo that he can no more poſſeſſe it with a just title. Wherefore from thenceforth he may be uſed like a tyrant, and killed by any private perſon.

p. 57Neither ought the Jeſuites to find fault with the publick thanksgiving for murthering the King, and making of the thirtieth of Ianuary a Thanksgiving Day, ſeeing that the Jeſuites of Paris ſhewed the way for that to the Rebels in England, for in the time of the French League, they made Solemne Thanksgivings for the murthering of their King, as Pope Sixtus the V. did ſince at Rome, with a vehement oration, in which he applieth a Propheſie of the Incarnation of the Sonne of God unto that Kings Murther.

So much the late Rebels of England have learned of you, Fathers Jeſuites, and no reaſon have you to chide your Scholars for following your doctrine and example; how far you are yet before them, I will ſhew before I have done with you. For they do not make the crown of their Kings obnoxious to be kickt down by the Pope, and have learned no further of your maximes, then will ſerve them to kill the King, and keep rhe crown for themſelves. And by their groſs dealing with their King, beheading him upon a Scaffold, whereby they have ſpun a halter for their own necks, they have ſhewed themſelves not skilled in the myſteries of King-killing, ſet forth by your Mariana, who to put a King to death with leſs danger to the Actours,Mariana lib. 1. cap. 7. Hoc temperamento uti in hac quidem diſputatione licebit, ſi non ipſe qui perimitur venenum haurire cogitur quo intimis medullis concepto pereat: ſed exterius ab alio adhibeatur, nihil adjuvante co qui perin▪ endus eſt. Nimirum cum tanta vis eſt veneni in ſella eo, autveſte delibuta, ut vim interficiendi habeat. Qua artè à Mauris Regibus invenio ſaepe alios Principes miſlis donis, veſte pretioſa, linteis, armis, ephippiis, ſuiſſe oppreſſos. then to ſtab him, will have him taken away by poiſon. Yet ſo mercifull he is to ſuch a King, that leaſt he ſhould be acceſſary to his own death, by taking the poiſon himſelf in his meat or p. 58drink, he will have a ſtrong and ſubtile poiſon put in a garment or ſaddle, which may ſpread its mortiferous quality into his body. And for that he propounds the example of Moore Kings, who have killed their enemies with poiſoned preſents. Theſe Jeſuitical curioſities about a murther are too fine for our Northern Fanaticks; but for going ſo far with you as they have done, you have reaſon to cheriſh them.

When the buſineſſes of the late bad times are once ripe for an hiſtory, and time the bringer of truth hath diſcovered the myſteries of iniquity, and the depths of Satan which have wrought ſo much crime and miſchief, it will be found, that the late rebellion was raiſed and foſtered by the arts of the Court of Rome. That Jeſuites profeſſed themſelves Independent, as not depending on the Church of England; and Fifth-Monarchy-men, that they might pull down the Engliſh Monarchy, and that in the Committees, for the deſtruction of the King and the Church, they had their ſpies and their agents. The Roman Prieſt and Confeſſour is known, who when he ſaw the fatal ſtroke given to our Holy King and Martyr, flouriſhed with his ſword, and ſaid, Now the greateſt enemy that we had in the world is gone.

When the newes of that horrible execution came to Roan, a Proteſtant Gentleman of good credit was preſent in a great company of Jeſuited perſons: where after great expreſſions of joy, the graveſt of the company, to whom all gave ear, ſpake much after this ſort: The King of England at his Marriage had promis'd Which is moſt falſe.us the re-eſtabliſhing of the Catholick Religion in England; and when he delayed to fulfill his promiſe, we p. 59ſummoned him from time to time to performe it: We came ſo far as to tell him, that if he would not do it, we ſhould be forced to take thoſe courſes which would bring him to his deſtruction. We have given him lawful warning, and when no warning would ſerve, we have kept our word to him, ſince he would not keep his word to us.

That grave Rabbies ſentence agreeth with this certain intelligence which ſhall be juſtified whenſoever Authority will require it: That the year before the Kings death, a ſelect number of Engliſh Jeſuits were ſent from their whole party in England; firſt to Paris, to conſult with the Faculty of Sorbon, then altogether Jeſuited; to whom they put this queſtion in writing: That ſeeing the State of England was in a likely poſture to change Government, whether it was lawful for the Catholicks to work that change, for the advancing and ſecuring of the Catholick Cauſe in England, by making away the King, whom there was no hope to turn from his hereſie? Which was anſwered affirmatively. After which the ſame perſons went to Rome, where the ſame queſtion being propounded and debated, it was concluded by the Pope and his Council, that it was both lawful and expedient for the Catholicks to promote that alteration of State. What followed that Conſultation and Sentence, all the World knoweth, and how the Jeſuites went to work, God knoweth; and Time the bringer forth of truth, will let us know. But when the horrible parricide committed in the Kings Sacred Perſon, was ſo univerſally cried down as the greateſt villany that had been p. 60committed in many ages, the Pope commanded all the papers about that queſtion to be gathered and burnt: In obedience to which order, a Roman Catholick in Paris was demanded a Copy which he had of thoſe papers; but the Gentleman who had had time to conſider and deteſt the wickedneſſe of that project, refuſed to give it, and ſhewed it to a Proteſtant friend of his; and related to him the whole carriage of this negotiation, with great abhorrency of the practices of the Jeſuites.

In purſuance of that Order from Rome, for the pulling down both the Monarch and the Monarchy of England, many Jeſuites came over, who took ſeveral ſhapes, to go about their worke, but moſt of them took party in the Army. About thirty of them were met by a Proteſtant Gentleman, between Roan and Diepe, to whom they ſaid (taking him for one of their party) that they were going into England, and would take Armes in the Independant Army, and endeavour to be Agitators.

A Proteſtant Lady living in Paris in the time of our late calamities, was perſwaded by a Jeſuit going in ſcarlet, to turn Roman Catholick: When the diſmal newes of the Kings Murther came to Paris, this Lady, as all other good Engliſh Subjects, was moſt deeply afflicted with it. And when this Scarlet Divine came to ſee her, and found her melting in tears, about that heavy and common diſaſter; he told her with a ſmiling countenance, that ſhe had no reaſon to lament, but rather to rejoyce, ſeeing that the Catholicks were rid of their greateſt enemy, and that the Catholick Cauſe p. 61was much furthered by his death. Upon which the Lady in great anger put the man down the ſtairs: ſaying, If that be your Religion, I have done with you for ever. And God hath given her the grace to make her word good hitherto.

Many intelligent Travellers can tell of the great joy among the Engliſh Convents and Seminaries, about the Kings death, as having overcome their enemy, and done their main work for their ſettlement in England; of which they made themſelves ſo ſure, that the Benedictins were in great care that the Jeſuites ſhould not get their land: and the Engliſh Nunnes were contending who ſhould be Abbeſſes in England.

An underſtanding Gentleman viſiting the Engliſh Friars of Dunkirke, put them upon the diſcourſe of the Kings death, and to pump out their ſenſe about it, ſaid that the Jeſuites had laboured very much, to compaſſe that great work: To which they anſwered, that the Jeſuites would engroſſe to themſelves the glory of all great and good works, and of this among others workes; whereas they had laboured as diligently and effectually for it as they. So there was ſtriving for the glory of that atchievement, and the Friars ſhewed themſelves as much Jeſuited as the Jeſuites.

In the height of Olivers Tyranny, Thomas White Gentleman, a Prieſt, and a right Jeſuite in all his principles about obedience, ſet out a Book entituled, the Grounds of Obedience and Government: Wherein hepag. 122. maintains that, If the people by any circumſtance be devolved to the State of Anarchy, their promiſe made (to their expelled Governour) binds no more. That the people p. 62is remitted by the evil managing or inſufficiency of their Governour, to the force of Nature to provide for themſelves, and not bound by any promiſe made to their Governour. pag. 123, & 124.That the Magiſtrate by his miſcarriages abdicateth himſelf from being a Magiſtrate, and proveth a Brigand or Robber inſtead of a Defender. That word Defender he writes with a great D. that the Reader may take notice whom he means.

If the Magistrate (ſaith he) have truly deſerved to be pag. 133.diſpoſſeſſed, or if he be rationally doubted, that he hath deſerved it, and he be actually out of poſſeſſion. In the former caſe, it is certain the ſubject hath no Obligation to hazard for his reſtitution, but rather to hinder it: For ſince it is the common good that both the Magiſtrate and the Subject are to aim at, and clearly out of what is exprest, it is the common harm to admit again of ſuch a Magiſtrate, every one to his power is bound to reſist him. The next caſe is, pag. 135.if he be innocent, and wrongfully depoſed, nay let us add, One who had governed well, and deſerved much of the Commonwealth, yet is he totally diſpoſſeſſed: And ſo that it is plain in theſe circumſtances, It were better for the Common good to ſtay as they are, then to venture the reſtoring him, becauſe of the publick hazard.

And not to ſet down all his words, and follow his ſtyle, which is affectedly intricate and obſcure, he maintaineth that a diſpoſſeſſed Prince, whether by right or wrong, is obliged abſolutely to renounce all Right and pag. 136.Claim to Government; and if he does not, he is worſe then an Infidel.

He tells us, That Pope Ʋrban the VIII. publiſhed a pag. 151.Deciſion, That after five yeers quiet poſſeſſion of an Eſtate, p. 63the Church was not bound to take notice whether the Title were lawful or no, but acknowledge the Poſſeſſor in Eccleſiaſtical buſineſſe.

That when the peoples good ſtands on the Poſſeſſors ſide, pag. 154.then clearly he begins to gain right and power. That when the people think themſelves well, they manifeſtly conſent to the preſent Government. Beſides (ſaith he) who can anſwer they ſhall be better by the return of the diſpoſſeſſed party? Surely by common preſumption the gainer is like to defend them better then he who lost it. He comes ſo far as to conclude, That if the old Magiſtrate offer to return, he muſt be repulſed by force of Arms. His reaſoning is this: What if an open enemy ſhould come; could pag 1…7.or ought the ſubjects joyn against him with their new Magiſtrate? If not, the whole Publick must periſh: If they may, then their caſe is the ſame againſt their old Magiſtrate, ſince his right ſtood upon the common Peace; and that transferred from him to his Rival by the Title of quiet poſſeſſion.

This was the Philoſophy of that contemplative Gentleman, when the King lived in exile, and Oliver ſate on the Throne. Having ſo well deſerved of the King, he was not long ſince highly recommended to His Majeſty, by a man of great Note: But the King who hath a Royal Inſight into perſons and buſineſſes, ſtopt him with this ſhort anſwer, No more of that, I know what man he is.

Father Bret was of M. Whites opinion, for the Caſtle of Jerſey being ſurrendred after that reſiſtance which for the length of ſtanding out, and the height of Valour, ſhall be memorable in all ages: When the Gentlemen who had defended it were preſt to take the Engagement, p. 64contrary to the Articles of their Rendition: That goodly Divine was very earneſt with them at S^t Malo to take it; maintaining, That they were not to acknowledge any Supreme but the prevailing power.

When his Majeſty caſt himſelf upon the Spaniard, the Jeſuitical party thought they had him ſure enough from ever returning: But God diſappointed their hopes, and deceived our fears by his miraculous mercy: For it was the Lords doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes, that he ſcaped out of thoſe hands.

I cannot leave un-obſerved, That in rhe height of the late Tyrannie, two heads of the Gun-powder Traytors that were ſet up upon the Houſe of Lords, were taken down; not by the high winds, but by the ſame zeal which had plotted that Treaſon, and with the leave of Traytors of another feather. We may hear in time that thoſe holy Reliques are ſhrined up in gold, and are working miracles.