Canterburys Doom, Branch 2 · Floating text 1 – Floating text 3
The Examination of FRANCIS HARRIS of Chriſt-Church London, taken Jan. 9. 1643. before the Lords Committee, appointed to take the Examinations in the Cauſe of the Arch-biſhop of Canterbury.
THis Deponent ſaith, that he being at Paris in France, about 24. yeers ſince, meeting with one Ireland (who had formerly bin one of the chief School-Maſters of Westmin. School, and then a Prieſt) and diſcourſing familiarly with this Deponent, the ſaid Ireland told him, that the now Arch biſhop of Canterbury and he were intimate friends, and that he had diſcovered unto him, when they were in the Univerſity together, that the ſaid Arch-biſhops reſolution was, to leave the Kingdome, and to reconcile himſelfe to the Church of Rome, and that he knew him to be a Papiſt in his NOTE.heart, and wondred why he ſtaid ſo long behind, ſaying, that perchance honores mutant mores. And this Deponent further ſaith, That one Leander a Benedictine Fryar, and Doctor of the Chaire at Doway, by the common report of Papists and Priests, both abroad and in England, was very familiar with the ſaid Arch-biſhop, and came over on purpoſe into England (where this Deponent ſince ſaw him) to negotiate with the ſaid Arch-biſhop about matters of Religion, to make a reconciliation between the Church of Rome and England: And this Deponent was bred up a Roman Catholike, and a ſcholler, and a ſecular Prieſt, and upon better advice reconciling himſelfe to the Church of England did often ſolicite and petition the ſaid Archbi. for ſome mean imployment in the Ministery, as having done very good ſervice in diſcovering Prieſts and Jeſuits to the Meſſengers appointed to apprehend them, but the Archbiſhop never gave hau any encouragement or countenance.
This Examination taken before Us, Kent. Lincolne. Francis Harris.
That he hath been reputed a Papiſt in heart, opinion and practiſe ever ſince he left the Univerſity, is ſo notoriouſly knowne to all, that we ſhall produce no witneſſes, many having been publikely cenſured, and privately queſtioned by his power, for calling and reporting him ſuch a one and many publike papers being paſted up and ſcattered about the City and Court from time to time, proclaiming him ſuch a one, of vvhichwhich we have at leaſt a dozen, found among his owne and Secretary Windebankes writings: and that our Engliſh popiſh prieſts and Roman Catholikes (as well as Proteſtants) beaſted of him to be theirs, vve have many inſtances vvhichwhich vve could produce, did vve need ſuch evidence, and the teſtimony of tvvo Prieſts to boot.
But vve ſhall rather informe and prove to your Lordſhips, vvhat repute the papiſts had of him in foraigne parts, yea even in Rome it ſelfe, ſince himſelfe hath chalked … out the vvay, and furniſhed us vvith this kind of proofe, by procuring Sir Henry Mildmay (a Member of the Houſe of Commons) very unſeaſonably and unhappily to teſtifie for him in this kind, vvhat a hard opinion they had of him, and hovv much he vvas hated in Rome by the Jeſuits and others, more then any man breathing, the manner of enforcing vvhoſe teſtimony is very remarkable.
The Arch-biſhop ſome fevv dayes before his tryall, petitioned the Houſe of Commons, that Sir Henry Mildmay of the Jewell Houſe (one of their Members) might be examined in his behalfe, as a ſpeciall witneſſe for him, how much he was hated and ſpoken againſt above all men at Rome, for oppoſing the Popes and Papiſts deſignes in England. Which being granted, the Arch-biſhop moved tvvo or three times very unſeaſonably, that Sir Henry might be called to give in his teſtimony in this kind; vvho being then out of Tovvn and not appearing the Committee of Commons who managed the Evidence, promiſed to ſend for, and cauſe him to appeare the next day at the Lords Bar; vvhichwhich he did, to wit, on June 11. 1644. Whereupon the Archbiſhop deſired him to acquaint the Lords. Whether he had not been of late yeers at Rome, and what opinion they held of himſelf there? Whether Sir Henry upon his return from thence, dining with him at Lambeth, did not tell him of his own accord, he was the moſt odiousman of any at Rome? and therefore certainely the furtheſt of any from ſetting up popery, and endeavouring to reconcile us to Rome. Whereupon Sir Henry ſaid; My Lords, it is true, J was ſome few yeers ſince at Rome not upon any meſſage or deſigne at all, but being ſomewhat infirme in body, J was adviſed by my phyſicians to travell for a time into forraign parts to recover my health: Wherupon J firſt travailed into France, from thence into Italy, and being there, to ſatiſfie my owne curioſity, and recover my health, J travelled to Rome. During my abode there, J was very inquiſitive to know, what opinion they had of us in England, and of the great men there, especially of the Arch-biſhop of Canterbury: and I obſerved there were ſome there that were againſt the Arch-biſhop, and ſpake ill of him; others that ſpake very well of him, and ſo much I informed him at Lambeth upon my returne from thence; but I deny that ever I told him, he was the moſt odious man at Rome of any, or, of any that had ſate in that Sea: The Arch-biſhop then averred, that he uſed theſe ſpeeches to him at dinner at Lambeth, at a time when Auditor Phillips was there; who demanded of Sir Henry, whether he ſaw the Pope when he was at Rome, and what manner of man he was? Who replied, that he ſaw him in his Garden out of a window, riding a great horſe in a morning, and that he was very like the Auditor; Sir Henry confeſſed this diſcourſe with the Auditor, but abſolutely denied he ever ſaid, he was the moſt odious man at Rome of any, &c. and deſired him to prove it: Wherupon the Archbiſhop asked of his Secretary Dell, whether he did not heare Sir Henry tell him ſo much at dinner? Who anſwered, that he did not heare him ſay ſo, but that his Grace told him after dinner that he ſaid ſo; which Sir Henry peremptorily denied: After which Sir Henry being demanded by Maſter Serjeant Wild, who they were that ſpake againſt the Arch-biſhop, who for him? and what he conceived to be the cauſe why ſome ſpake thus againſt him, others in his behalf? He anſwered, that there were two factions in Rome, one of the Jeſuits; ſome of theſe diſliked the Arch-biſhop and ſpake againſt him, becauſe they conceived he aimed at too great an Eccleſiaſticall power in theſe Kingdomes, for himſelf: The other was of the Secular Prieſts who all ſpake very well of him and commended him, becauſe he carried himſelfe in ſuch ſort in the government of our Church, as to draw it neerer unto the Church of Rome, and ſhewed himſelfe favourable to their party: Whereupon the Arch-biſhop ſaid, that Sir Henry never told him this before: Who anſwered, it was true; and the reaſon was, becauſe he never demanded of him any ſuch Queſtion, but now he was demanded the Question upon his Oath, and therefore he muſt ſpeak the truth. At which paſſage moſt of the Auditory ſmiled, and the Committee of Commons who managed the Evidence, thanked the Arch-biſhop for this good teſtimony on his behalfe, deſiring him to furniſh them with ſome more ſuch witneſſes: Adding, that ſeeing Sir Henry was but a ſingle witneſſe in this caſe, and ſo perhaps the Arch-biſhop would evade his teſtimony, though produced by himſelfe; and ſince he had given them this occaſion, to examine what opinion the Prieſts and Jeſuits had of him at Rome; they therefore humbly deſired, that they might now produce the teſtimonies of ſome other Gentlemen of note, who had been at Rome as well as S. Hen. & could give as good or better an account of his credit there, as he had done. Whereupon they poduced Captain Authony Mildmay (brother to Sir Henry) to teſtifie his knowledge in this particular; who depoſed at the Bar upon oath; That he was at Rome at the time when Con, the Popes Nuncio, was to come over into Eng. as Nuncio; who then enquired of him concerning the infirmities and age of Arch-biſhop Abbot, and thereupon ſaid, Biſhop Laud who is to ſucceed him, will be more favourable to us then he hath been: That there were two great factions in Rome one of the Jeſuits, another of the Secular Prieſts; that the Jeſuits faction did not like the Archb. becauſe he uſurped too much Eccleſiaſticall power to himſelf and endeavoured to make himſelfe a Patriarke over all his Majeſties Kingdomes; but the Secular Prieſts and their faction loved and ſpake very well of him, becauſe they ſaid they knew him to be their friend, and that he had a deſigne to bring the Popiſh Religion into England: NOTE.That Father Fitton and Father John told him, that there was a deſigne to reconcile England to the Church of Rome, that Biſhop Laud was the chiefe inſtrument in it, that other Engliſh Biſhops did joyne with him in the deſigne, and that he ſhould find, that there ſhould be none preferred in the Court, but ſuch as were Papiſts, or affected to popery: That Father Fitton being the generall agent for the Secular Prieſts, had extraordinary good intelligence from England, and that Maſter Walter Mountague when he was at Rome, lay at his houſe; that Father John was the generall agent at Rome for the Benedictines; and that Father Talbot a Jeſuit, had told him as much as theſe two had done concerning Biſhop Laud; who yet ſpake ſomewhat ill of him, becauſe (ſaid he) he intends to make himſelfe a Patriark of all the Kings Dominions out of his pride, which (he ſaid) would eclipſe the Popes authority, and therefore he ſaid he NOTE.was condemned at Rome by their party (the Jeſuits) for this particular, although otherwiſe he was a great favourer of their Religion.
This teſtimony, even from Rome it ſelfe, is very full and punctuall to our purpoſe, that there was no difference at all between the Secular Prieſts and the Archbiſhop, nor yet between the Jeſuits and him, but only this, that he out of his ambition would, like his Predeceſſor Anſelme, be aMalmesb. De Geſt. Pontif. Angl. l. 1. Relation of a Conference with Fiſher. pag. 271.Papa alterius orbis, the Pope or Patriark of our other world and of the Kings Dominions (which the titles of Sanctitatis Vestrae & Sanctiſſime Pater, attributed to him by the Univerſity of Oxford and Maſter Croxton, made them jealous of) which the Jeſuits could not well brook at Rome.
But to make this more cleer, we ſhall adde one witneſſe more, who hath been often times at Rome, and ſpent divers yeers among papiſts in foraigne parts, and that is one Maſter Thomas Challoner a Gentleman of quality, who thereupon being ſworn gave in this following teſtimony, viva voce upon oath, which he ſet downe under his owne hand.
MY LORDS,
TOuching the Arch-biſhop of Canterbury, I can ſay little in particular, but in generall thus:
Firſt, that for theſe fourteen or fifteen yeers laſt paſt, it hath been my fortune divers and ſundry times to be in France, Flanders, Holland and Italy, where very often happening into the company of Lawyers prieſts, and men of the long Robe, I found them alwayes very forward in their diſcourſe of England, and of the great hopes they had to ſee it ſuddenly reduced to the catholike faith: that they had many great parſons in England who were ſecretly of their religion, and in particular, the Arch-biſhop, whom they avowed to be wholly theirs, a good Roman Catholike, a politike propagator NOTE.of the Roman faith, by minutes and degrees, wherein he uſed great ſubtilty and craft, which they called wiſdom; and that both he and others would openly declare themſelves ſo to be in time convenient, beſeeching God & the bleſſed Virgin to proſper his deſignes. And this is ſo notorious, as I beleeve no man of any experience in foraigne parts who hath had an eare to hear, or a tongue and heart to ſpeak the truth, but hath heard the ſame often re-iterated and will atteſt it. Yet upon what foundation theſe opinions ſhould be built, I am not preciſely able to determine.
Secondly, that eleven or twelve yeers ſince I being at Bruxels in Brabant, and there diſcourſing with an Engliſh Gentleman, who had been an ancient traveller, touching the then late rooting out of ſundry Engliſh able and orthodox Miniſters, for not complying with the Biſhops in divers new idolatrous ceremonies; this Gentleman aſſured me, that he had often heard of ſtrange reports of matters likely to befall England, both from Engliſh and Iriſh papiſts, which he gave no heed unto, ſuppoſing them to ſpeake rather as they would have it, then as it was in verity: But now that he had heard ſo much from me, he did much ſuſpect that there was ſome plot in hand to change the Religion in Eng. wherof he would diligently enquire, aſſuring me that he had as good means to know it, as any man of our Nation that lived on that ſide of the Seas. At our next meeting, he told me, that he had dived into the plot. That ere long,NOTE: we muſt all of neceſſity be papiſts in Eng. that the beſt wits both in Eng. and on that ſide of the Seas were interested therein: That it was ſo politickly laid, that he did not ſee how in the judgment of man it could poſſibly be prevented: That the Archb. and ſome other Biſhops were of the plot, and that the reſt of the Biſhops and Clergy, partly for feare of loſing what they had, partly for hopes of geting more, would undoubtedly comply: That the refuſers if they could not be corrupted, were to be turned out of their livings, baniſhed, impriſoned, or forced to live in obſcurity: That it was to be done by gradations, to bring in this point of Popery in one quarter of a yeer, and the reſt in another; and if not direct popery, yet ſo neer thereunto, as the common people themſelves would ſlide into it unawares: that nothing but the King of Sweden's prosperity did hinder the ſudden effecting of it. Lastly, that if we reſisted not, we ſhould be cheated and cozened of our Religion; and if we reſisted, we ſhould be compelled thereto perforce.
I replied, that I thought the Papiſts in England were not of any conſiderable number to effect their ends by force, and that they were alſo diſ-armed. He told me the Papiſts were more in number, and better armed then I conceived them to be; many going now to Church, who would then declare themſelves papiſts; beſides a world of Newters, who for hopes of preferment, would be eaſily drawne to their party: that they vvere all united, and beſides armed with authority: He affirming, that for many yeers vve had vvholly been governed by Papiſts; moſt men in higheſt authority being either vvholly ſo, or at leaſt, as ſerviceable unto them for private ends, as if they vvere ſo indeed.
I replied, that if we ſhould be compelled to defend our Religion by force, their authority would not be regarded. He told me, the Iriſh vvould be brought in. I anſwered, NOTE.that I had ſpent ſome yeers in Ireland, and knew them to want both courage and meanes to effect ſo great a buſineſſe, ſo that unleſſe they were backed by the King of Spaine in a better manner then I conceived he was able at that time to doe, they durſt not undertake it. He told me, they ſhould have a better back, and more encouragement then the King of Spaine could give them, and that both France and Spain ſhould aſſiſt therein.
I replied, that I thought France and Spaine were likely to diſagree, and therefore unfit for ſuch a buſineſſe. He told me, that ſince J vvould needs have it, the greateſt introducers of popery ſhould be the Proteſtants themſelves: Whereat vvhen J vvondred, as ſeeming to me a paradox; he told me, that the vvar ſhould be ſo diſguiſed, under NOTE:falſe notions and pretences, as the Proteſtants ſhould ignorantly become the Jeſuits ſervants, and by the effuſion of their ovvne blood, ſet up popery by force.
Thirdly, that being in Rome ſeven or eight yeers ſince, one Father John of the Order of Saint Benet, was very tnquiſitive of me to knovv, vvho beſtovved the livings in England, and vvhether the Arch biſhop did not doe it? I anſwered, that the livings NOTE.were in the donation of ſuch as had the Advouſons of them whether it were the King Arch biſhops, Biſhops, Deanes and Chapters, Colledges, Corporations, Noble men, Gentlemen or others. He asked me, if the Arch-biſhop did not beſtow the Kings livings? I ſaid no but the Lord Keeper, if they were under ſuch a value; if above, the King himſelfe. He ſeemed very much agrieved that the Arch-biſhop did not beſtow them, and NOTE:told me, that he did not deſpaire of ſeeing England to be very ſuddenly Catholike: And though be were, by reaſon of his Order, tyed more ſtrictly to the Pope then others were, yet he was carefull to have both Kings and Kingdomes priviledges preſerved, and more particularly, that the Benefices in England might not be beſtowed upon Italians as formerly, but that the Arch-biſhop ſhould have the ordering thereof. All this I have oft related ſome yeers ſince, to divers perſons of quality, for which I incurred ſome trouble by the Jeſuits and this Arch-biſhops meanes.
This Teſtimony is ſo home and punctuall, that we ſhall adde no more thereto: it informs us of a long ſince plotted and actuated confederacy between this Archbiſhop and other Engliſh Prelats, and the Popes Inſtruments at Rome and in other forraigne parts, to introduce popery, and reduce us back to Rome: It chalks out to us the manner and method of their proceedings in all particulars and the politick contrivances of all ſorts to effect their intended deſigne; all which we have by wofull experience ſeen punctually acted, purſued accordingly to this very moment in which purſuit this Archbiſhop hath been the Archinſtrument; ſince then we viſibly behold theſe reports of theirs verefied to the view of all the world; we muſt no longer look upon them is empty rumours or diſcourſes, but as reall Evidences beyond all exceptions.
The ſecond groundwork we ſhall lay and prove is this: That there hath been for many yeers laſt paſt, a dangerous damnable Plot, and ſerious endeavour of the Pope and his Inſtruments to reduce and reconcile the Church of England to the Church and Sea of Rome, and that this Arch-biſhop was privy to, and had notice of it.
This Plot was firſt laid about the yeer 1617. when the Spaniſh Match was ſet See A neceſſary Introduction to the Arch-biſhops Triall, p. 1. to 50.on foot, and King Charles (then Prince of Wales) fent into Spaine, of purpoſe to reconcile him (and in him our Kingdomes) to the Church of Rome, the prime end the Pope and Catholikes intended in that Match and Treaty; as appeares by the ſeverall Articles paſſages and proceedings in it, well knowne to this Prelate, by the Popes Letter to the Prince, whiles in Spaine, to reconcile him to Rome, and make him a dutifull Sonne of that Church, by the Popes Letter to his Nuncio, the Biſhop of Conchen (when the Prince was in Spaine) to endeavour his converſion to their Church upon this occaſion; by a Jeſuits Oration, to induce his Highneſſe to that Religion, and by the Articles of the Duke of Buckingham againſt the Lord Digby, and the Lord Digbies Articles of impeachment againſt him in Parliament, charging one another reciprocally with high treaſon, for endeavouring to withdraw the Prince (when in Spaine) from his Religion, and make him a Roman Catholike; of all which we find Authentick Copies endorſed with his owne and Windebanke (his creatures) hands, among both their ſeized papers (already publiſhed at large in print, where you may peruſe them at leizure) and therefore he could not poſſibly be ignorant of this Plot: The rather becauſe the ſending of the King (when Prince) into Spaine, was the Duke of Buckingham's project, of purpoſe to ſeduce him in his Religion, for which there were aIbidem p. 31, 32, 33.Articles of high Treaſon exhibited againſt him by the Lord Digby in the Houſe of Peers in Parliament, on the firſt of May, 1626. as appeares by the Lords Journall, and the Biſhops owne Diary; to which Duke this Biſhop was both a Confeſſor, and cabinet boſome Covnſeller, as theſe clauſes in his owne Diary manifeſt. June 9. 1622. My Lord Marqueſſe of Buckingham was pleaſed to enter upon a neerer reſpect to me, the particulars are not for paper: (therefore certainly ſome deep Myſtery of iniquity fit to be concealed) June 15. I became C. (Confeſſor as himſelfe expounded it) to my L. of Buckingham. Jan. 11. My Lord of Buckingham and I in the inner Chamber at York-houſe, &c. and Fed. 17. next following, The Prince and Marqueſſe Buckingham ſet forwards very ſecretly for Spaine.
That this Prelat was privy to the plot of ſending the Prince thither, before he was ſent, and to the Inſtructions given him here how to demean himſelf even toward the Pope and his inſtruments when he came thither, is moſt apparent by his owne Letter under his owne hand, ſent to Biſhop Hall, Jan. 14. 1639. wherein there is this notable paſſage, bHere p. 264.formerly urged upon another occaſion.
The laſt (with which I durſt not but acquaint the King) is about Antichriſt, which Title in three or four places of your Book, you beſtow upon the Pope poſitively and determinately; whereas King James of bleſſed memory, having brought ſtrong proofe in a work of his, as you well know, to prove the Pope to be Antichriſt, and being aftewards CHALLENGED ABOUT IT, he made this Anſwer; WHEN THE KING THAT NOW IS WENT INTO SPAINE, AND ACQUAINTED NOTE.HIM WITH IT, that he wrote that, not concludingly, but by way of Argument onelyonly, that the Pope and his adherents might ſee, there was as good and better Arguments to prove him Antichriſt, then for the Pope to challenge temporall juriſdiction over Kings: THIS WHOLE PASSAGE BEING KNOWNE TOME, I could not but ſpeake with the King about it, who commanded me to write unto you, that you might qualifie NOTE.your expreſsion in theſe particulars, and ſo not differ from the knowne judgement of his pious and learned Father, &c.
By this relation under his owne hand and Seale, it is as cleere as the noon-day Sunne, this Prelat was not onelyonly privy to the Kings voyage into Spaine before he departed hence, but likewiſe to the private inſtructions for his carriage towards the Pope & his agents when he came there; and his zeal to have this title of Antichriſt given to the Pope by Biſhop Hall ſo lately, thus qualified, obliterated, and his complaint of it to the King at this time, plainly ſhewes that he bare a good affection to the Pope and his deſignes both then and now, and politickly furniſhes King James with this equivocating Anſwer, to pleaſe his Holineſſe: and to put all out of queſtion, that he was privy to this journey before it was undertaken, we ſhall prove it by his owne Diary; wherein thus he writes: Feb. 17. 1622: The Prince and the Marqueſſe Buckingham ſet forwards very ſecretly for Spaine: Feb. 21. I writ to my Lord of Buckingham into Spaine: March 31. 1623. I received Letters from my Lord of Buckingham out of Spaine: April 19. I received Letters from my Lord of Buckingham out of Spaine: June 13. I received Letters from the Duke of Buckingham out of Spaine: Aug. 17. I received Letters from the Duke of Buckingham out of Spaine. By which it is apparent, Firſt, that he knew of the time of their ſecret departure to Spaine the very day they went: Secondly, that he knew whether they went, and writ Letters to the Duke into Spaine within foure dayes after their departure hence, before they were neere there, or knowne to be arrived there: Thirdly, that he held conſtant intelligence with the Duke all the time he was in Spaine, writing frequently to him, and received no leſſe then four Letters from him from thence; therefore queſtionleſſe he was privy to this perilous journey of the Prince into Spaine (one of the horrideſt treaſons that ever was acted) thereby to pervert him in his Religion, and reconcile both him and our Kingdomes to the Sea of Rome; for this very act alone (which his profeſſion, as a Biſhop, ought to have engaged him againſt with all his might) he deſerved to be impeached of high treaſon as well as the Duke of Buckingham and the Lord Digby, who impeached one one another of *See A Neceſſary Introduction to the Arch-biſhop of Canterburies Tryall, p. 31, 32, 33, 34.high treaſon for it in Parliament, anno 1626. In one word, this Biſhop at the time of the Princes being in Spaine, was ſo farre in love with the Maſſe-book, and ſo ſtudious of it, that he noted his Miſſale Romanum (neatly bound up & gilt, in folio) almoſt in every leaf with his own hand, by way of approbation, and every monethmonth in the Callender of it, by inſerting into it with his own pen, the Feaſts and Stories of divers Popiſh Saints, with the tranſlations of their Reliques; and in the MonethMonth of Sepetmber, the 13. day he writes this Memoriall of the Princes returne out of Spaine; Prince Charles this night took ſhip at Saint Andrews to come out of Spaine, but had no prayers in his ſhip that night, becauſe ſo many Spaniards were aboard. To prove which, the Miſſal it ſelfe was produced: This his noting and ſtudying of the Maſſe-book at that very time, doth as we conceive, ſtrongly intimate his approbation of it, his good hopes and aſſiſtance to introduce it by that Spaniſh Match, had it ſucceeded.
But that breaking off (to his griefe) ſoone after the Princes returne from Spaine, the next deſigne of the Duke and his popiſh confederates, to reconcile, See A Neceſſary Introduction, &c. p. 69… to 150.reduce us to Rome, was the tranſlation of their Scene from Spaine into France, and making up a popiſh Match there, between the King and our preſent Queen Mary (a zealous Roman Catholike & grand patriot of that party) whoſe powerfull mediation and ſolicitations, might (as theythen writ) in time effect and accompliſh this plot, as we have elſwhere cleerly demonſtrated: And in this project likewiſe this Arch-biſhop had a finger, if not a hand: For the Duke of Buckingham (with whom he was a Cabinet Counſellour) being ſent into France to conſummate that Match, and bring over the Queene from thence, we find this Arch-biſhop poſted Letters thither to him, immediatly after his departure hence, by theſe ſeverall paſſages in his Diary. May 11. 1625. Die Mercurij primo mane Dux Buck. Verſus mare ſe tranſtulit obviam iturus Reginae Mariae in Galliam: Dedi ad Ducem eo die Literas, ſed quae properantem ſequerentur: Maij 19. Die Jovis Literas ſecundas miſi ad Ducem Buck, tunc pauliſper morantem Pariſijs: Maij 29. Die Solis Literas tertias dedi in manus Epiſcopi Dunelmenſis, qui cum Rege iturus, traderet eas Duci Buck. ad litus applicanti: Junij 5. Die Pentecoſtes mane inſtanter iturus ad ſacra, Literas è Gallia à Duce Clariſ. Buckinghamiae in manus meas ſe dedere. Reſponſum dedi Aurora proxima: Junij 12. Die Solis Regina Maria, maria pertranſciens, ad Litus Noſtrum appulit, circiter boram ſeptimam Veſpertinam: Det Deus ut Haſpera ſit *The very expreſſion uſed by Nich. le Maistre, a French Prieſt, in his Inſtauratio Antiqui Epiſcoporum Principatus Pariſiis 1633. p. 279. Quid vetat id ipſum in Anglià perfici, maxime ubi deſaeviit ćador ille perſecutionum per magnanimi Regis, & Invictiſſimi Prinpis benignitatem, per imminent iſtis Regionibus in Chariſſima Coniuge Sydus Borbonium Quibus Aſtristanquam Dioſcuris, deferveſcat forſan aliquando tempeſtas, & agnoſcet Generſus Princeps Chriſtum eundem, ſub quo Maiores ſui tam glorioſe triumpha…unt.& foelix Stella orbi noſtro. Theſe ſeverall Letters of his to and from the Duke upon this occaſion (the Originals and Copies whereof could we have met with them, would doubtleſſe have diſcovered many notable ſecrets) intimate, both his privity to, and concurrence in this popiſh French Match, as well as in the Spaniſh.
This we ſhall further cleere by other paſſages in his owne Diary, diſcovering what a great favourite and inſtrument of the Qveens he hath been, even ſince the Marriage. Aug. 30. 1634. Saturday at Oatlands, the Queen ſent for me, and gave me NOTE.thanks for a buſineſſe with which ſhee truſted me; her promiſe then that ſhe would be my friend, and that I ſhould have immediate addreſſe to her when I had occaſion. Here we have the Queen truſting the Arch-biſhop with a private buſineſſe; her thanks for his diſcharge of this truſt, with a promiſe of future favour, and immediate addreſſe to her upon all occaſions: May 18. & 24. 1635. Whitſon Munday at Greenwich, my account to the Queen put off till Trinity Sunday, then given her by my ſelfe, and aſſurance of all that was deſired by me, &c. A very ſuſpitious paſſage: after which, five whole NOTE.lines are ſo raſed that they are not legible: April 3. 1639. Wedneſday, before the Kings going, I ſetled with him a great buſineſſe for the Queen, which I under ſtood ſhee would never move for her ſelfe: the Queen gave me great thanks, and this, day I waited purpoſely on her, to give her thanks for her gracious acceptance; ſhee was pleaſed to be very free with me, and to promiſe me freedome.
This intimacy of the Arch-biſhop with the Queene, theſe private ſervices he did for her, and theſe ſpeciall mementoes of her favours to, and freeneſſe with him, could not be to convert her to the Proteſtant Religion (which he never attempted in any meaſure, for ought we ever heard) it being contrary to the tenth Article of her Marriage, which runs thus; Alſo the King of Great Britaine is by Oath bound NOT TO ENDEAVOUR BY ANY MEANS AT ALL NOTE.to have his ſaid Queen to renounce the Catholike, Apoſtolike and Romiſh Religion, nor compell her to do any thing whatſoever that is contrary to the ſame Religion. Now this Archbi. was ſo farre from endeavouring her converſion to our Religion himſelfe, that in his owne Metropoliticall viſitation, he prohibited Miniſters publikely to pray for the Queens converſion in their Pulpits, and queſtioned, cenſured ſome Miniſters in the High Commiſſion, for praying for her converſion from Popery to our Religion, as a grand unpardonable offence. To prove this, we ſhall firſt produce his owne Informations and Inſtructions to Sir Nathaniel Brent (endorſed, ſubſcribed with his own hand) touching his Metropoliticall viſitation in the Dioceſſe of London, in March 1636. Among which we find a paper thus endorſed; Informations of divers abuſes in the City of London: The ſecond particular whereof is this; That ſome Preachers take great liberty to pray before and after their Sermons looſly NOTE.and factiouſly, as FOR THE CONVERSION OF THE QUEEN: over againſt which, theſe two names are written in the margin; Maſter Walker of Saint Johns Evangeliſt, Maſter Burtons Curate, &c. Saint Matthew Friday-ſtreet: To which himſelfe adds this ſubſcription, directed to his Vicar generall that viſited:
I require you, that beſides my other Instructions, you give me an account of all particulars within named
W. CANT.
Hereupon Sir Nathaniel Brent in purſuance of this Order, in his open viſitation prohibited the Miniſters to pray for the Queenes converſion: for proofe whereof, Maſter Hugh Ratcliffe of Martins Ludgate, teſtified upon oath, That at a viſitation held at Bow Church in London by Sir Nathaniel Brent, Vicar generall to this Arch-biſhop of Canterbury, in whoſe right he then viſited, about Mar. 1636. the ſaid Sir Nath. then and there in his publike charge to the Miniſters, in his bearing uſed theſe words; Whereas divers of you in your Prayers before your Sermons, Uſe TO PRAY FOR THE NOTE.QUEENS CONVERSION, YOU ARE TO DOE SO NO MORE. Adding, that the Queen did not doubt of her converſion; meaning, that ſhee doubted not but that ſhee was already in the right way: We could produce other witneſſes of this, but the thing is ſo notorious, we ſhall need no more.
From this inhibition of his, we may certainly inferre theſe concluſions: Firſt, that he who thus publikely inhibited other Miniſters to pray for the Queens converſion, would never queſteonleſſe himſelfe endeavour by prayer, conference, or intimacy with her, to convert her to our Religion: Secondly, that he muſt verily beleeve her popiſh Religion to be the true Religion, and ours the falſe; elſe both himſelfe and all other our Miniſters were bound, in duty, conſcience, moſt realouſly and conſtantly to pray in ſpeciall manner to God, for her Highneſſe converſion from it, becauſe Gods Word and chriſtian charity required it; the imminent danger that might and doth acrew thereby to her owne ſoule in particular, to his Majeſty, his royall Iſſue, and this whole Church, State in generall, exacts it; and the publike Liturgy of our Church (which this Prelate ſo much ſtickled for) both warrants and preſcribes it; not onelyonly in the ſpeciall Collects for the King and Queen, the Letany, the Prayer for the eſtate of the whole Church militant, but likewiſe in the Collect for Good-friday, which runs thus:
Mercifull God, who haſt made all men, and hateſt nothing that thou haſt made, nor wouldeſt the death of a ſinner, but rather that he ſhould be converted & live, have mercy upon all Jewes, Turkes, Inſidels and Heretycks, and take from them all ignorance, hardneſſe of heart and contempt of thy Word, and ſo fetch them home (bleſſed Lord) to thy ſtocke, that they may be ſaved among the remnant of the true Iſraelites, and be made one fold under one Shepheard, Jeſus Chriſt our Lord, &c. May, yea muſt we then pray for all Jewes, Turkes, Hereticks in generall, that God would really convert and bring them to his fold, though we have no ſpeciall relation to them; and muſt our Miniſters yet be expreſly prohibited to pray for the Queens converſion in particular, to whom we have ſo neere relation; the want of whoſe converſion hath brought ſo many miſchiefs, wars on our Church and Kingdomes? Certainly this was an Act of the greateſt impiety that ever was committed by any chriſtian Prelat, if he really beleeved the Queen to live in a falſe Religion; and may juſtly brand him for an Atheiſt, being diametrally contrary to Gods precept, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2. I exhort therefore, that firſt of all ſupplications, prayers, interceſſions and giving of thanks be made FOR ALL MEN, for Kings and ALL THAT ARE IN AƲTHORITY, that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godlineſſe and honeſty: Therefore he muſt needs beleeve her popiſh Religion to be the true, ours the falſe; elſe he would have encouraged rather then prohibited Miniſters to pray for her converſion unto us and our Religion, whom it ſeems by this inhibition, he would have converted to her and hers. Thirdly, this inhibition manifeſts, at the leaſt, that the Archbiſhop was a very cordiall friend, ſervant, not onelyonly to her Majeſties perſon but her popiſh Religion too, that he deſired her un-interrupted continuance in it, without the leaſt oppoſition, not onelyonly by way of diſpute, but prayers too: Fourthly, this publike prohibition in his own Metropoliticall viſitation, was of it ſelf a great encouragement to, a ſtrong confirmation of her Majeſty and all the popiſh party in their falſe Religion, giving them great advantages to ſeduce others to it, as the true, becauſe this Injunction intimated it to be the true Religion, wherein they might ſafely perſevere.
But did this Prelate ſtop here only, openly to inhibit men thus to pray for her Majeſties converſion? No verily; for both before and after this, he impriſoned, queſtioned and cenſured ſome in the High Commiſſion, for ſuch prayers. Maſter Bernard (as we proved formerly) was queſtioned, cenſured in the High Commiſſion as a grand offender for ſuch a Prayer; Maſter Hugh Peter was apprehended by a Purſevant, impriſoned for a time in the New-priſon, ſilenced here from his Miniſtry, and forced into Holland by the Arch-biſhop, onelyonly for praying at Sepulchers Church for the Queen, in theſe words, That as ſhee came into a Goſhen of ſafety, ſo the light of Goſhen might ſhine into her ſoule, that ſhee might not periſh in the day of Chriſt; as himſelfe and ſundry others will depoſe: But we ſhall inſiſt onelyonly on two other inſtances in the High Commiſsion: The firſt is one Maſter William Jones, a Glouceſterſhire Miniſter, who (as Maſter Prynne atteſted upon oath) Master Jones Caſe:was brought into the High Commiſsion, Anno 1636. and there proſecuted by the Arch-biſhops meanes, for not reading the Booke of Sports, and for praying thus for the Queen in his Pulpit to God; To ſhew unto the Queene the light of Goſhen, and to bring her to his true worſhip: What worſhip? ſaid the Arch-biſhop to him; as if her popiſh worſhip were Gods true worſhip.
Nor did he onelyonly perſecute and trouble Miniſters thus for praying for the Queens illumination and converſion to Gods true worſhip; but likewiſe for praying to God to keep the Prince from the infection of popery; witneſſe the caſe of one Maſter John How, Miniſter of Loughborough in the County of Leiceſter, who on the Master John Howes Caſe.ſixth day of November 1634. (as was proved by the Regiſter book of the High Commiſsion Court, there produced and read) was cenſured in that Court (where the Archbiſhop was chiefe Judge and Dominus fac totum) attached, committed during his Majeſties pleaſure, ſuſpended from the execution of his Miniſtry, and every part thereof, fined five hundred pounds to the Kings uſe, ordered to make a ſubmiſsion to the Court, and condemned in expences and coſts of ſuit, onelyonly for praying but once in the Pulpit, That the young Prince might not be brought up in Popery, whereof there was great cauſe to feare; for that (as was alleaged) theſe words did much derogate from his Majeſties known, approved, Religious care in maintaining, propagating the true Religion here eſtabliſhed, profeſſed within this Realme, and cauſed a cauſeleſſe jealouſie of the education of the young Prince his Sonne in the popiſh Religion. When as he onelyonly intended it of the danger of his education in reſpect of the Queen his Mother, and thoſe many ſeducing Prieſts, Papiſts then about her, who by many policies, devices, endeavoured, as much in them lay, to draw him to, and educate him in the popiſh Religion: it being provided by the ſixteenth Article of the Kings marriage with France; That the children which ſhall by reaſon of the ſaid marriage be borne and live, ſhall be nurſt and brought up NEER THE SAID LADY AND QUEEN, from the time of their birth, untill they come to the age OF FOURTEEN YEERS. In reſpect whereof there was great cauſe to feare the Princes infection by, and ſeducement unto Popery, without Gods extraordinary mercy; and therefore great need of our frequent prayers to prevent it.
His rigorous proceedings therefore againſt theſe Miniſters on the one hand, for praying for the Queens illumination with, and converſion to our Religion; and his ſevere cenſuring them on the other hand, for praying, That the young Prince might not be brought up in Popery, compared with his intimacy, favour with the Queen, his redineſſe to ſerve her Majeſty upon all ſpeciall ſervices and commands, are a moſt pregnant evidence, not onelyonly of his conuſance of, but powerfull concurring aſſiſtance in promoting this grand dangerous deſigne, of introducing Popery, and reconciling us to the Church of Rome.
And that which may further ſatisfie your Lordſhips and the world herein, is, his extraordinary dignifying of Queen Maries, his depreſſing King Edward the ſixth his Reigne, in his very Preface to the new Statutes, compiled by him for the Ʋniverſity of Oxford; the Originall whereof was produced, and this clauſe read out of it: Edwardo ſexto ad clavem ſedente, novo ſundatum eſt molimine, &c. Praſcribente Rege, & lenocinante NOVITATE, primo viſum opus admitti, &c. Paulo poſt potiente rerum Maria, ſub Cardinalis Poli auſpicijs idem recruduit labor. Novae exindè data leges, ſed pari cum prioribus anguſtiâ: Interim tamen, inter incerta vacillans Statuta, viguit Academia, colebantur ſtudia, enituit Diſciplina, & OPTANDA TEMPORUM FAELICITATE Tabularum defectum reſarcivit innatus Candor, & quicquid legibus deerat, Moribus ſuppletum eſt. Decurrente temporum ſerie, & vitijs & legibus pariter laboratum eſt.
In which paſſage he brands King Edwards dayes of Reformation, with Flattering Novelty; applauds Queen Maries, under the government of Cardinall Pool, as thoſe wherein the Univerſity of Oxford did moſt eminently flouriſh in learning, Diſcicipline, manners; and magnifies the deſirable felicity of thoſe times (under another Qu. Mary of the ſame Religion) depreſſing Queen Elizabeths reign, and her ſucceſſors, as more abounding with vice, and more defective of good laws and government (in our Oxford Univerſity at leaſt) then Queene Maries. This paſſage is not only ſeconded by Doctor Pocklingtons forecited clauſe, who brands our Martyrs Here, ….ſuffering in Queen Maries dayes, for Rebels, Traytors, Hereticks; but by Doctor Heylyn, in his Moderate Anſwer to Maſter Burton (penned and publiſhed by the Archbiſhops command,) who thus diſparageth King Edwards, applauds Queene Maries lawes and actions: pag. 100. 101. 102. Now for King Edward the ſixth, the caſe ſtands thus: King Edward being a Minor, about nine yeers old, at his firſt comming to the Crowne, there was much heaving at the Church by ſome great men that were about him, who purpoſed to enrich themſelves with the ſpoyles thereof: For the effecting of which purpoſe, it was thought expedient to leſſen the number of thoſe Biſhops which were then in place, and to make all thoſe that were to come the more obedient to the Crowne: Ʋpon this ground, there paſſed a Statute, 1. of this King, conſiſting of four principall Branches; whereof the firſt cut off all Elections and Writs of Conge diſlier, formerly in uſe; the other did, if not take off, yet very much abate the edge of Eccleſiaſticall cenſures: Then he recites the words of the Statute, and concludes; which Act with every branch and clauſe thereof was afterwards repealed, 1. of Queen Mary, c. 2. and hath ſtood ſo repealed to this very day, &c.
This magnifying then of Queen Maries dayes, and depreſſing King Edwards, implyes a grand deſigne in this Arch-prelate, to rvevie thoſe Marian times, as happy and deſirable.
From theſe few generall, we ſhall next deſcend to ſome more particular inſtances, to prove, that there was a ſerious deſigne and endeavour of the Pope and his Inſtruments in forraigne parts, to reduce us back to Rome, that the Archbiſhop had exact notice of it, and yet was ſo far from reſiſting, oppoſing this their deſigne, according to his place, truſt, duty, that he complied with them to the utmoſt of his wit and power therein. It cannot be expected, that in a Plot of this nature, being a hidden work of darkneſſe, and abſtruce myſtery of iniquity carried on with all the artifice and cunning that Rome or Hell could ſuggeſt; diſguiſed, concealed under divers charactariſticall Letters, which we cannot as yet unriddle, though we have ſome of them in our cuſtody; ſealed up under oaths, promiſes of ſecreſie, and acted by ſuch Jeſuiticall ſpirits, as will rather obſtinately die, then diſcloſe the ſecrets of their helliſh conſpiracies; which we cannot poſſibly manifeſt to the full, unleſſe we had been ſo happy as to have ſeized the Arch-biſhops moſt ſecret papers (which he conveyed away or burned before his cloſet, dores were ſealed up) and the Popes Nuncioes Cabinet, or might have liberty to ſearch the Popes own Cloſet, or Cardi. Barbarino his ſecret papers and the private intelligences of the Roman Conclave; yet we preſume we ſhall produce ſo many cleer demonſtrations, and circumſtantial proofs, as ſhall abundantly ſatisfie your Lordſhips judgements, conſciences, and the world, both of the reality of this plot, and the Arch-biſhops guiltineſle in concurring in it: We know it is uſuall for Juries to convict, for Judges to condemne and execute Traitors, felons as well upon violent preſumptions & circumſtances, as upon eye witneſſes and punctuall teſtimonies of the facts for which they are indicted: and we doubt not but our evidence in this kind will be ſo cleer, as it will ſurmount a violent preſumption, yea amount to an infallible demonſtration, conviction of his guiltineſſe, if not ſeverally conſidered, yet at leaſt conjoyned.
The firſt particular Evidence to prove a deſigne at Rome, to reduce us to our ancient vaſſalage under it, is a very notable paper printed at Rome, Superiorum permiſſu (in two large folio ſheets paſted together) An. 1636. In the firſt & uppermoſt ſheet, there is a coper Peece, cut with Anticks, wherein there are two Scutchions; the one hanging juſt in the middeſt neere the upper end of the ſheet, wherein the Popes and Cardinall Barbarino (his Nephewe's) Armes are engraven; the other hanging a little lower then the former, on the right ſide of the ſheet, containing the King of Englands Armes: The Author of this paper was an Engliſh Fryar, who ſtiles himſelfe, Frater Franciſcus a Sauctâ Mariâ, Sacra Theologiae Lector Generalis, Primario Jubilato; ac Provinciae Sanctae Elizabethae Cuſtos: The ſubſtance of it he ſtiles, Concluſiones Theologiae; which are thirteen in number; but that which is moſt obſervable therein, is this dedication of it to Cardinall Barbarino.
Eminentiſsimo & Reverendiſsimo Principi Franciſco Cardinali Barbarino, Sanctae Romanae Eccleſiae Vice-Cancellari… R. R. ANGLIAE, SCOTIAE, necuon Seraphicae NOTE.Religionis PROTECTORI VIGILANTISSIMO; Frater Ludovicus à Sancta Maria, Anglus, D. D. D. MAGNAE BRITANIAE. PATRONO MAXIMO, ET BRITANICAE NATIONIS, & Minorum Familiae minimus, Theologiam devovet ſu…m.
By this paper it is evident, that this Cardinall was publikly deputed and ſtiled, even in print at Rome, The moſt vigilant Protector of England, Scotland, and of the Seraphicall Religion there; the greateſt Patron of great Brittaine, deſigned to this charge, for this very purpoſe, to *See Romes Maſter-piecereduce it againe to the boſome of the Roman Church, the onelyonly uſe, end of this his office and Title. Of this deſigne this Arch-biſhop had moſt certaine intelligence from Maſter Middleton, Chaplaine to the Engliſh Agent at Venice, to whom this paper was ſent from Rome, and by him conveyed to the Arch-biſhop, who thus indorſed it with his owne handwriting. 1636. Fra. Ludovici â Sa. Maria Angli Theſes, &c. and reſerved it in his Study at Lambeth, where Maſter Prynne atteſted it was ſeized. This Fryar's right name (as appears by a paper under *See A Neceſſary Introduction, p. 145.Secretary Windcbanks owne hand) was Kerton, alias Morton, who ſoon after repaired into England, to help reduce it; Where he lived ſo wickedly, in drawing Maids, Women and others to ſinne carnally, and committed ſuch horrible acts in proſecuting his luſts, that be was enforced to returne to Paris in France: Secretary Windebank giving his ſon Tom, ſpeciall inſtructions (when he went over thither to negotiate the Palſgraves releaſe) To adviſe thoſe of his Order there, to prevent his returne bither, becauſe he would be aſſuredly publikely puniſhed according to the laws, to the great ſeandall of his Religion: which manifeſts a correſpondency in Windebank and his ſonne (this Arch-biſhops creatures) even with the Franciſcan Fryars, beyond the ſeas, and a care in them to prevent this Fryars, with his Religious publike diſgrace and ſcandall.
The ſecond Evidence (which backs the former) is, a diſcovery of a moſt deſperate *See Romes Master-piece.Plot of this Cardinall Barbarim, and his four ſorts of Engliſh and Scottiſh Jeſuits, II.reſiding in and about Drury-lane and Long-acre, where they had built a Colledge; and had their conſtant meeting; of which ſociety, this Cardinall was the immadiate head next under the Pope, to whom they bad their immediate addreſſes, and directed their weekly intelligence: The plot was, to ſubvert the Proteſtant Religion, ſet up Popery, and reconcile us unto Rome, by engaging the King in a bloody warre againſt the Scots, and working him to their party; and in caſe they could not doe it, then to give him a poyſoned ſigge (as his Father was poyſoned) and ſeize upon the Prince, whom they would educate in the Romiſh Religion. This Plot was diſcovered, meerly out of remorſe of conſcionce, by one who was a chiefe actor in it, ſent from Rome to aſſiſt Con, the Popes Lagat in his Negotiations in England, to one Andreas ab Habernfield (Phyſitian to the Queen of Bohemia) who diſcloſed it to Sir William Boſwell, the Kings leager at the Hague, who from thence by ſundry Letters, revealed it to this Arch-biſhop, in whoſe chamber at the Tower, the whole plot and originall Letters concerning it, were ſeized on by Maſter Prynne (who atteſted and produced them at the Barre) and publiſhed them at large to the world by order of Parliament, in Romes Maſter-piece, where the principall Agents in this plot, and their proceedings therein are particularly related many of them (as Secr Windebank, the Earle and Counteſſe of Arundell, Mr. Porter of the Bed-chamber, and Sir Toby Matthew) being the Arch-biſhops intimate friends and familiars. Of this Plot the Arch-biſhop took ſuch ſpeciall notice, that he acquainted the King himſelfe with it, as appeares by his owne Letter to the King, and his Majeſties Anſwer to it, with his owne royall hand to it in the margin, ſent from York to Lambeth: Yet for all this, he was ſo far from croſſing this their Jeſuiticall deſigne, that he confederated and joyned with the Jeſuits and popiſh party in fomenting, maintaining the war See A Neceſſary Introduction to the Arch-biſhops Tryall, p. 170. to 200.againſt the Scots, and revived it when it was ceaſed, by perſwading the King to break the firſt pacification, and denounce a ſecond war againſt them.
The third particular we ſhall produce, to prove an endeavour of the Pope and Cardinall Barbarino at Rome, to reconcile, reduce us back to them, and that this Arch-biſhop had notice of it, is a Letter (found in his Study, atteſted by Maſter Prynne) written to him by one Maſter John Greaves, from Ligonne, March 3. 1639. indorſed with his owne hand thus, Rece. Mar. 27. 1640. Faſtidius printed at Rome: Wherein Maſter Greaves hath this clauſe: I humbly beſeech your Grace to pardon my preſumptions, and this other Information which I ſhall give your Grace: They have printed at Rome a Book of Faſtidius, a Britaine Biſhop, De Vitâ Chriſtianâ, WHICH THE CARDINALL FRANCISCO BARBARINO INTENDS NOTE.TO DEDICATE TO HIS SACRED MAJESTY; a Book of ſingulan devotion and piety, and of great Antiquity; the Author being a Biſhop in England, about three hundred yeers after our Saviour. Lucas Holſtenius, a very learned man, hath the care oft the Edition, but hath not I thinke, as yet finiſhed the Annotations upon it: For the Text, he and I compared the Manuſcript (which was alſo very ancient) with the printed Copy, and I find it exactly to agree.
Now what other meaning could there be for this Cardinall to print this book at Rome, to dedicate it publikely to our King, and to uſe Maſter Greaves himſelfe in comparing the printed Copy with the Manuſcript, but to inſinuate himſelf into the Kings affections, thereby to reduce both him and his Dominions unto the boſome of the Church of Rome, which the forementioned diſcovery of this and the Jeſuits Plot, by Andreas ab Habernfield, more largely demonſtrates? this Cardinall ſending over ſundry Statues, Pictures, Antiquities, and other vanities from Rome to his Majeſty, to incline him to the Roman party, as we have *See Romes Maſter-Piece, p. 16. and A neceſſary Introduction, &c. p. 146.elſewhere manifeſted,
The fourth particular Evidence we ſhall inſiſt on, which addes luſter and vigor to all the former, is the Book intituled Deus, Natura & Gratia: Ʋbi ad trutinam Fidei Catholicae examinatur Confeſſio Anglicana, & ad ſingula puncta, quid teneat, qualiter differat execuitur: Acceſsit Paraphraſtica Expoſit to reliquorum Articulorum Confeſſionis Anglicae, per Fr. Franciſcum â Sancta Clara, olim apud Duacenſes in Collegio B. Bon aventurae, Provinciae ANGLIAE F. F, Minorum, S. Theolog. Lectorem primarium: Printed Lugduni, 1634. Cum Privilegio Regis, & approbatione Doctorum.
This Book was dedicated to our King Charles, with a Dedicatory Epiſtle, to ſeduce his Majeſty in his Religion, and induce him to eſtabliſh the Romiſh Religion amongſt us by his Royall authority; as this cloſe of the Epiſtle manifeſts: Periculoſum nobis admodum, atquè etiam miſerabile eſt, tot nunc fides exiſtere quot voluntates, &c. Contremiſcunt oſſa mea dum hoc recogito: Morbus, ubi ſpiritus vitales opprimuntur, nempè ut fides radix vitae corrumpitur, difficilime ſanatur: Hic morbus noſter: Remedium tamen, & illud efficax, à Samaritano noſtro deſignatum reperimus, nec aliud niſi illud, DIC ECCLESIAE. Dico: Eccleſiae definitiones Majeſtati Veſtrae propono; Sanctorum Patrum & Venerabilium Doctorum expoſitiones, Novorum ineptijs praepono; quas dum modeſtè retego, in Chriſto …ego; ſaniem, non-ſcalpendo, ſed ſuavitèr lambendo; lavo ut abluam: SACRO VESTRO IMPERIO OPUS, QUIPPE UT EXECUTIONI MANDETUR, quod ab Eccleſia & Sanctis Patribus ſancitum eſt, ſecundum illud Juſtiniani. Conſtit. 42. Haec decrevimus Sanctorum Patrum canones ſecuti: HOC TUA MAJESTATE DIGNUM; hoc dignitati cauſae conſonum, HOC SALUTI ANIMARUM PRORSUS NECESSARIUM; ET OMNIS POPULUS, DICET AMEN.
Sacrae ſuae Majeſtatis
Devotiſſimus Subditus
Fr. Fran. â S. Clara.
The ſcope of the whole Book in the compoſing and publiſhing, was to reconcile, reduce both our King, Church, and the Articles of our Religion, which i… coments upon, to the Church of Rome. This we ſhall evidence,
Firſt by the Authors owne expreſſe confeſſion, pag. 338. Inſtudui (ut vides) NOTE.pie Lector RECONCILIARE Articulos Confeſſionis Anglicae, DETERMINATION IBUS ECCLESIAE CATHOLICAE: NON ECCLESIAM IPSIS, ex quâ collapſi ſunt; SED IPSOS ECCLESIAE, in qua (Dei opitulante Gratia) ſalvandi ſunt, DUCENDOS CENSUI. Corticem verborum ſubinde cenſurâ graviori dignum cenſebis; ſenſum ocrò latitantem, quem elicui, non adeò veritati diſſonum, niſi alio detorquere malint, recte judicabis: his tamen verborum Novitatibus, Chriſtum lacerum inſpexi, tunicam inconſu…ilem diſſutam, diſſectam reperi: quis non condoleret? quis non REDINTEGRATIONEM SUADERET? omnibus modis, ſi poſſet, PERSUADERET? HIC UNICUS SCOPUS MEUS, &c. Omnia Eccleſiae & ejus ſub Chriſto capiti [the Pope] quâ del eo reverentiâ ſubmitto: Ʋltro obteſtor Deum & Sanctos ejus, me in hoc qualicunque Opello noſtro animarum ſalutem, PER FIDEI REDINTIGRATIONEM intendere: Quod Deus per viſcera Domini Noſtri Jeſu Chriſti, ad interceſſionem omnium beatorum opportunè efficiat; ET SERENISSIMUM REGEM NOSTRUM, PRO OMNIUM CATHOLICORUM NOTE:VOTIS, AD UTRAMQUE FAELICITATEM PERDVCAT.
Secondly, by the cenſures and judgements of the Doctors and Divines (who are twelve in number) prefixed, by way of approbation thereunto: James Dre… a Sorbon Doctor, Londini pridie Calend. Auguſti. gives this teſtimony of this Book▪ Fateor me, &c. ſed & laudaſſe conſilium & propoſitum tuum, quod in Eccleſiae utilitatem ceſſarum auguror, ad CONCILIANDOS ERRANTIUM ANIMOS, ſi Deus Opt. Max. caeptis tuis annuat, QUOD SPERO PRECORQUE. Thomas Blaclo, Profeſſor of Divinity, 5. Julij 1633. gives this verdict of it: Libellum qui ſic inſcribitur, Articuli confeſſionis Anglicanae paraphraſticè exponuntur, &c. ex zelo Fidei & animarum ſcriptus omnibus CONCORDIAE ET PACIS CHRISTIANAE AMICIS, non poteſt non eſſe acceptus, cum Catholico & animo & calamo ſcriptus ſit, & errantibus, UT AD CHRISTI CAULAM NOTE.REDITUM INVENIANT, facem Catholicae veritatis, quaſi ex propinquo ad alliciendos puſillanimos oſtentet: William Tomſon, Doctor of Divinity, writes of it, 20. Aprilis, Dignum praelo, cenſuit ſperans INTER PROTESTANTES, ſaltem moderatiores, fructuri futurum. T. P. a Papiſt, profeſſor of Divinity, 16. April 1633. gives this approbation of it, Tractatum hunc perlegi, &c. & verè ſecundum calculum meum, publicatio operis PROTESTANTIBUS MODERATIORIBUS ARRIDEBIT (omnibus pla, ere difficilimum) ET AD NOTE.READVNATIONEM CUM ECCLESIA ROMANA, DUM OPPORTUNUM FUERIT DISPONET: & interim reverentiorem ejus eſtimationem inuret; praeſertim reliquos Confeſsionis Anglicae Articulos (quod optarem) eadem moderatione exponere vellet, & ad calcem hujus operis (ſi pro voto ſucceſſerit) Lectorem ſpe caterorum foveres: All which are atteſted to agree with the Originals, by D. David, Monachus & Decanus Congregationis Caſinenſis, olim Romae Sereniſ. D. N. Urbani Papae Octavi Panetentiarius, NOTORIUS APOSTOLICUS. The deſigne therefore of this Booke, by the teſtimony of all theſe popiſh Doctors, and of the Popes owne Notary, was, to reconcile, reunite us and our Articles to the Church and Doctrine of Rome.
Thirdly, this we ſhall make evident by notable paſſages in the Booke it ſelfe, wherein the Athor proclaimrs our reconciliation in ſundry points of doctrine, as Biſhop Mountague, Bi. Andrewes, with ſome other of our popiſh Doctors expounded both our Articles, Homilies and poſitions: In his 22. Problem. concerning the great controverſie about Juſtification, he thus publiſheth our agreement and conſent, page 157, 158, 159. Haec Doctrina eorum & noſtra; nec plus dant fidei quam Concilium Trid. quoad juſtificationem, ſi cautè exponantur, &c. Hîc ergo facilima pax ineunda; ſic enim D. Montacutius Articulum de Fide rectè explicat, &c. Nulla igitur differentia quoad hoc punctum. Ecce igitur PLANE ET PLENE NOTE.CONVENIMUS: Et hinc ut patebit quaeſtione ſequenti doctiores, Proteſtantes tribuunt juſtificationem noſtram intrinſecam habitui Juſtitiae: non ergo fidei. Imo haec noſtra poſitio ſolenniter Cantabrigiae in Comitijs anniverſarijs pro actu Doctorali haec anno currente menſe Julio, agitata & probata eſt. Which he thus ſeconds, page 181. Quibus omnibus benè penſatis, ſanè nulla hodiè reperietur differentia in Confeſſione Anglica, & Sanctiſſima diffinitione Trid. nihil enim in Articulis Hamptonienfibus in oppoſitum ordinatur: Ʋt patet Artic. 9. De Juſtificatione: Ʋnde Montacutius in ſuo Appello Caeſarem, ca. 6. expreſſe probat, doctrinam noſtram, ſaltem ſecundum gradum hujus latitudinis, ab ipſis teneri, & ibidem rectè adducit Doctorem White, aſſerentem, in Juſtificatione peccatoris, duas eſſe actiones Dei; unam, quâ remittit peccatum; alteram, qua poteſtatem dat homini reſiſtendi peccatis; quae poteſtas eſt ipſa charitas infuſa in cordibus noſtris, per illam ſecundam actionem Dei, quae eſt ipſiſſima doctrina noſtra. HIC IGITUR PAX.
So in the point of falling from grace, in his 30. Problem, An Juſtus poteſt finaliter NOTE.peccare? page 209, 210, 211. he brings in our 16. Article, and the Booke of Homilies, juſt as they are cited by Mountague in his Appeale, to prove, that a juſtified perſon may fall from grace, and ſinne finally; concluding thus, Et certè omnes confeſsiones aliarum Nationum ferè conſpirant, cum Ovarello in Collatione Hamptonienſi; Montacutio in ſuâ Appellatione, Cauſabono, in Epiſtola ad Bertium, cum reliquis omnibus melioris Notae.
In his 36. Problem, concerning Supererogation, miſconſtruing the fourteenth Article of our Church, point blank againſt the words and ſenſe, he concludes thus, page 253. Interim â nobis ſtant Confeſſio Anglicana, & ejus Genuini ſequaces, HIC ERGO PAX, & utinam Pax illa, non quam mundus dat, quae ſingulis horis novitate opinionum violatur, ſed quam Chriſtus ſuis Apoſtolis legavit, &c.
In the 37. Problem concerning the Invocation of Saints, and its lawfulneſſe, he writes thus, page 260. Montacutius de hoc ſubjecto agens, momentis rationum, & monamentis authoritatum oppreſſus, â veritate ſtat, & alij frequentèr: De re agitur non ſolum inter nos concordia, ſed ni fallor inter celebriores ex adverſarijs, ut poſted melius patebit: Which he proſecutes, page 273, 274, 275, 276. where he records, Quoad Reliquiarum & Crucis Chriſti Venerationem, profitetur D. Andreros, in Reſponſ. ad cap. 18. Peronij. Cauſabonus in Exercitationibus Baronij, ad An. 34. Cultus etiam ſeu venerationem quandam honoratiorem Sacrarum imaginum, cum Chryſoſtomo in ſua Liturgia, id eſt, inclinationem religioſam ad Imaginem, aſtruit poſt alios D. Montacutius, in Reſponſoria ad Heighamum, & in Appello Caeſarem cap. 22. Then he concludes, page 277. Hîc igitur cum Confeſſione Anglica erit PAX OMNIMODE, modò non ex affectu partium, ſed veritatis, omnia pro dignitate perpendent. Cloſing up his Deus Natura & Gratia thus; In quibus ſi omnia rectè perpenderit Lector eruditus, MAGNUM FUTURAE READUNATIONIS SPECIMEN NOTE.PERSPICIET.
After this, pag. 278. he paraphraſeth all our 39. Articles, endeavouring to reconcile them, and us in them, to the Tenets of the Church of Rome: pag. 316, 317. on the 31. Article (againſt the ſacrifice of the Maſſe) he gloſſeth thus; Nulla prorſus hîc erit difficultas cum doctioribus Proteſtantibus, qui planè hoc totum fatentur: Ʋt videre eſt apud D. Andreros, contrâ Perronium, & D. Montacutium, contra Heigham & alios frequenter: Denique nec hic Articulus, ullatenus adverſatur: Cum enim ipſi fateantur, in Eccleſiá eſſe Sacerdotes, eſſe etiam Sacrificia propitiantia, fateantur neceſſe eſt. Nam in Heb. 5. Omnis Sacerdos conſtituitur, ut offer at dona, & ſacrificia pro peccatis; HIC IGITUR NECESSARIO PAX: Ad pacem verò hanc altius ſtabiliandam, examinemus naturam ſacrificij, &c. Eſt igitur ſacrificium, ſed cum termino illo NOTE.reſtrictivo â Patribus uſurpato, incruentum, quod non negant. And pag. 334. Et eo plus quo video celebriores Proteſtantium Doctores Sacerdotes & ſacrificia agnoſcere. In the 25. Article concerning Homilies, pag. 321. he thus ſhakes off our Homilies, in our Biſhops owne tearmes: Nec tenentur Proteſtantes, ob haec verba in Articulo ſtatim in ſingula verba vel ſententias Homiliarum jurare, &c. Prudenter igitur quae ſanam Doctrinam ſapiunt, populo legenda; alia, neglectui habenda.
Pape 332. in the 37. Article, concerning the power of the civill Magiſtrates, againſt the Popes Juriſdiction, he writes thus; D. Montacutius, contr. Heighum & alij eorum doctiſsimi, quibuſcum de hoc egi, nullam utique Juriſdictionem ſpiritualem Regibus noſiris concedunt, ſed gubernium civile & temporale, indirectè & per accidens, ob pacem Reipubl. in perſonas & cauſas Eccleſiaſticas extenſum. Gaviſus ſum etiam valdà NOTE.de illo quod etiam his diebus factum eſt Cantabrigiae, in Comitijs pro actu Doctoroli, ubi SUMMO PONTIFICI UT MAXIMO PATRI (ſic enim eum appellabant) deſignata eſt cura ſpiritualium, Regi temporalium, licet ſub fine ſubjiciebatur, Regum eſſe omnes regere; quod intelligi debet civiliter, non ſpiritualiter, modò â nobis explicato. After which, pag. 334, 335, 336. he handles theſe three Queſtions: Firſt, Whether any have power to withdraw themſelves from ſubjection and obedience to the Sea and Church of Rome upon any occaſion? Secondly, Whether we of this Realme had ſufficient cauſes to doe it? Thirdly, Whether we did well in it, and did not exceed meaſure therein? And he reſolves the two latter thus.
Ʋtraque quaeſtio ſi…e dubio, graviſsima eſt, & maximum meretur diſcuſsionem. Quod ſi cauſa ſufficiens non fuerit; vel terminus juſtae ſubſtractionis exceſſerint, quanta pericula in tàm diuturno ſciſmate? Hinc utique omnia quantacunque mala ſunt, originaliter ebullierunt. Catholici veriori & tutiori parti adhaerere volentes, cum inſufficientiasm cauſae, quam moderaminis exceſsum agnoverunt ponderant utique graviſsimum illud Auguſtini; praecidendae unitatis nulla eſt juſta neceſſitas, Lib. 2. cont. Epiſt. Parm. Utinam DENVO AUTHORITATE PUBLICA pro dignitane (PURITANIS NON INTERMIXTIS NOTE.) EX AFFECTU READUNITIONIS PERPENDERETUR & ad hoc ſinguli evoluant Auguſtinum contra Donatum. Scio illos hoc abhorrere de quibus dicit Caſſander, (licet haud ſatis affectus Romanae Ecclesiae;) Plerique ex eis qui ſibi ab Evangelio nomen ſumpſerunt, cum partem qua vetus Catholicorum, & Ecclesiae Romanae nomen retinet, prorſus aſpernantur, omnem que ejus communionem defugiunt, nec ut membra ejuſdem corporis, amore & miſericordia proſequuntur (quod nos a Puritanis hic experimur) ſed ut Satanae & Antichriſti corpus abominatur. Scio id equidem & doles, & qui ejuſmodi ſunt, quomodo â ſchiſmatis (rectius dixiſſet Haereſeos) nota eximi poſſunt, non video.
From all theſe remarkable paſſages of this book, it is moſt evident, that it was purpoſely penned, publiſhed, dedicated and preſented to the King, to reconcile him, and reunite our Church and Articles to the Church of Rome; that this union and accommodation was already accompliſhed by Biſhop Andrewes, Biſhop Muntague, and others of our moſt eminent moderate Divines, in many points of greateſt moment, and would ſoon be effected in the reſidue, by a publike Aſſembly or Synod of our Prelates and divines, if no Puritans were intermixed among them.
But you will object; What is all this, or this Book to the Archbiſhop? Did he know any thing of this Plot, Book, or had any hand therein? Yes verily: Firſt, he know of this book before it was publiſhed, Doctor Lindſey his great favourite (whom he advanced to a Deanary and two Biſhopricks, as we have formerly proved) acquainting him therewith, and bringing the Author of it to his Grace, who had recourſe to him ſeverall times after: This we ſhall prove by a paper writen with his own hand, by way of extenuation of this charge even ſince his commitment to the Tower, and there ſei…ed on by Maſter Pryme, which was read as followeth.
MY Intelligence with the Pope by S. Clara. I never ſaw that Franciſcan Fryar in my life, to the utmoſt of my memory, above four times, or five at moſt.
He was firſt brought to me by Doctor Linſey, it was when he was ſetting out his booke about the Articles of the Church of England; and I then told Doctor Linſey, I did feare he NOTE.would never expound them, ſo as the Church of England might have cauſe to thanke him for it.
He never came to me after, till he was almoſt ready to print another booke, to prove, that Epiſcopacy was authorized in the Church by divine right; and theſe was after this vnhappy ſtirres began: His deſire was, to have this book printed here; but at his ſeverall addreſſes to me for this, I ſtill gave him this anſwer: That I did not like the way which the Church of Rome went concerning Epiſcopacy: And howſoever, I would never give way that any ſuch book from the pen of any Romaniſt, ſhould be printed here: And the Biſhops of England are very well able to defend their owne cauſe and calling, without calling in any ayd from Rome, and would ſo doe when they ſaw cauſe; And this is all the conference that ever I had with him.
This excuſe of his (though partiall) acknowledgeth, that he was acquainted with the book and Author before its printing, and that Doctor Linſey his favourite, was a great promoter of it, privy to the plot of Reconciliation, and very intimate with the Fryar that compiled it.
Secondly, when the book was printed, this Author preſented not onelyonly the King, but Archbiſhop himſelf with one of them, bound up in Vellam, with the Kings Armes on the cover, and blew ſilk ſtrings, which he thus endorſed with his owne hand, Fron. â Sanctâ Clara, Problemata 37. Expoſitio paraphraſtica Confeſsionis Anglicanae: Which book he reſerved in his Study at Lambeth, where Maſter Prynne ſeized, and produced it at the Barre.
Thirdly, he not onelyonly received, but permitted it to be publikely ſold and diſperſed amongſt us, without any ſeizure or reſtaint, and to be twice or thrice reprinted in London, notwithſtanding many exceptions and complaints againſt it, when as he moſt ſtrictly ſuppreſſed orthodox books.
Fourthly, if Fryar Saint Giles were the true Author of this book (as he was reputed by the Fryars in forraigne parts) the Archbiſhop not onelyonly knew, but maintained him in the Univerſity of Oxford (to ſeduce, poyſon the Schollers there, and reconcile them to Rome) and gave him an annuall penſion of one hundred Markes; the blame of which action for his owne excuſe, he would tranſferre upon the King (without any proofe at all, but onelyonly this ſurreptitious warrant, without any date at all, writ with his owne hand, not by any Secretary of State) which will no wayes extenuate, but aggravate his crime, the warrant being no doubt fraudulently procured, to ſerve a turne at a dead lift, ſince his troubles.
Charles R.
CAnterbury, Maſter Saint Giles by ſerving Ʋs and this State, hath loſt all his hopes in France, and deſires to spend his time here at his private ſtudies; I would have you think upon ſome way for his maintainance, and to place him in Oxford, that he may have uſe of that Library, which he much deſires: And he may ſo order it, that his profeſſion in Religion may doe no harme.
What the ſervice was that this Fryar had done for the King and State, for which he loſt his hopes in France, we could never learne, unleſſe it were the penning and publiſhing of this book, which ſome Jeſuits and their faction onelyonly, diſliked. What it was that this Archbiſhop did for him (upon this warrant, as he pretends) is thus expreſſed, in a paper written with his own hand, by way of excuſe, ſeized by Maſter Prynne in the Tower, and by him produced at the Lords Barre, where it was read as followeth.
MAſter Saint Giles was a man well reputed of in France, and placed about the Queens Majeſty, at her Majeſties firſt comming hither: After upon ſome ſervices (and thoſe in a very faire way) done to this State, he loſt ground in France, and when ſome other French men were ſent away from the Queens ſervice, he durſt not goe thither, but choſe to live here in a very low condition for ſafeties ſake, rather then adventure thither. All this while the man was unknowne to me, but comming one day to wait upon his Majeſty at Saint Jamſes, his Majeſty was pleaſed to ask me, Whether I knew Maſter Saint Giles? I anſwered, I did not: Hereupon his Majeſty tooke occaſion to tell me the condition of the man, and his wants, and withall, told me which way he conceived ſome reliefe might be given to his neceſsities; and preſcribed me a way how to order it, that he might receive for his maintainance NOTE:a hundred Marks a yeere. This in obedience to his Majeſty, I did: (and I have his Majeſties Warrant for it) But I never allowed or gave him one penny of my owne.
Not long after this, partly that the poore man, being a ſtranger, might live the cheaper, and partly that he might have the uſe of the publike Library, reſolving (as he pretended) to follow metaphisicall learning, and not engage himſelfe in the controversies of the times; His Majeſty moved me againe, that he might live in Oxford, and in ſome Colledge or Hall there. In this I humbly beſought his Majeſty to pardon me, becauſe it would be dangerous to the youth NOTE.bred in that Colledge, and ſcandalous to his Majeſty, this Church, and the Ʋniversity, and bring danger upon my ſelfe, being Chancellour there: After much importunity uſed by me, his Majeſty was gnaciously pleaſed to be ſatisfied, that he ſhould not be admitted to live in any Colledge or Hall among the Students, but required me not to hinder his going to Oxford, and the making uſe of the Library, provided, that he kept no company with any young Schollers; that he lived privately in ſome Towne-houſe; and that he did not preſume to exerciſe his Prieſtly function, or doe any thing againſt the lawes: This he undertook to performe, and I could never find (by any the ſpies which I put upon him) that he brake this in any particular, but lived there without offence given to any.
In all times of his recourſe to me for his pension, I never ſpent one houre with him, nor had I ever any diſcourſe with him at all, but once onelyonly, and that was about a dangerous opinion of Pompanatius,: At that time he told me, he had a desire to labour in that Argument, and to confute him: I told him, I could not approve any medling with that queſtion in theſe times, for that I thought few would be able to underſtand the ſubtilty of that diſpute, and that the ſtirring of it in theſe times would doe a great deale of miſchiefe; and this is all that ever paſt between him and me all my life.
This Saint Giles by this Prelats meanes, continued in the Univerſity of Oxford ſundry yeers, and had the uſe of the Libraries there, where he did much miſchiefe; Maſter Broad of Oxford depoſed, that Saint Giles continued in Oxford foure yeers or more, that he was a very dangerous insinuating perſon, that Doctor Turner, Doctor Johnſon, and others of the Ʋniversity, uſually reſorted to him, and familiarly converſed with him, though he were there knowne to be a popiſh Prieſt; that when Maſter Prynne, Maſter Burton, and Doctor Baſtwick ſuffered at Weſtminſter on the Pillory, this Saint Giles ſpeaking of their ſufferings, told this Deponent (in whoſe Kinſwomans houſe he lay) that though the Archbiſhop and other Biſhops WERE CORDIALL FOR THE NOTE.ROMISH RELIGION, yet he doubted their cruelty would rather hurt then further their cauſe, becauſe it loſt them much in the affections of the people. Now what a capitall offence it was for this Archprelat to harbour ſuch a dangerous ſeducing Prieſt, (reputed one of the greateſt Schollers among the Papiſts) in this famous Univerſity to ſeduce the Students there (and as the Queens Apothecary, a great Papiſt, reported, of purpoſe to inſtruct the Doctors there, as Maſter Godfrey, a quondam converted popiſh Prieſt averred) and to lay the blame of it thus wholly on his Majeſty to excuſe himſelfe, we humbly ſubmit to your Lordſhips conſideration.
To prove this Saint Giles (now Prieſt to the Venetian Ambaſſadour, reſident in London, where he doth much miſchiefe) the Author of Deus, Natura & Gratia, &c. what repute it had among Papiſts abroad, how the Archbiſhops Agents applauded, made uſe of it, and certified him from time to time, how it was entertained by Papiſts in forraigne parts, what they thought of him and other great perſons in England, & how they ſtood affected to popery, we ſhall produce two Originall Letters from Maſter William Middleton (then Chaplaine to the Lord Fielding, Ambaſſadour at Venice) ſent thence to the Archbiſhop, in whoſe Study they were found by Maſter Prynne, endorſed by Maſter Dell and the Archbiſhop: the firſt of them beares date in Septemb. 1635. and was received by the Archbiſhop Octob. 9. wherein he thus writes: