IF the Author of the Apologie could make good the beginning of his Discourse, I could very heartily turn Apologist for him and his Friends. He say's right, (and the Divel spoke true when he cryed aloud that Jesus was the Son of God) that the Arms which Christians may use against lawful Powers in their severities, are only prayers and tears; Thus far he speakes like a Pro­testant, that is to say, a primitive Christian; and it might have stood as a faire Character of his pretended innocen­cy, had he not foully bespatter'd it in the sequel with the dirt he casts upon the face of Authority. But first it would be considered what it is that the Apologist would be at upon his frequent Compellation of his Lords and Gentlemen; is it to draw them to a firm combination with those of his Roman party against all such that shall question the innocency of his Carriage and Intentions? [Page 4]Nothing less it seems can satisfie or secure him; unless my Lords and Gentlemen, that is, the old constant Roya­list stand up for his advocate, he must fall under the heavy censure of his greatest adversaries, who, (to compleat the mischief and misery of it) are not only become his accu­sers, but his insulting judges, as he complains.

And now it is high time for my Lords and Gentlemen to remember their often vows to that party, and renounce all further conjunction with them, that have been the cause of so great calamity to the Nation, as he there tells them.

But is not this Divide & Impera? and though they did not nip the plant in the bud, yet now being grown up & not likely to answer them in the expected fruits, they will endeavor so to dismember the party as may manifestly indanger the whole.

For what els mean those words, let it never be be recorded in story that you forgott your often vows to us in joyning to them (those insulting judges as he terms them before) that have been the cause of so great calamity to the Nation.

Is not a disunion here manifestly endeavoured? and that in direct contradiction to what was before protested? [far be it from Catholicks to perplex Parliaments.] To recon­cile this difference in the expressions will well become the Apologist before he answer the following objections which he makes his next task.

And here first he presents his Catholick Party astonished even to admiration, at that calumny above the rest that their principles are said to be inconsistent with Govern­ment, and they themselves thought ever prone to Rebel­lion; As if because they account themselves the only Or­thodox Christians they must necessarily be very Loyal sub­jects at the least.

Indeed if they could make good the former we had rea­son to expect some complyance as to the latter; seeing Re­ligion hath its name,Religio a religan­ [...]o. from that connexion and strict con­junction it works in its Professors, as with each other, so in [Page 5]all, with that Government and Governour under which they have their common protection.

But how Orthodox and united Roman Catholicks are in the grounds of their belief, (the maine ingredient in the essence of Religion) hath sufficiently appeared in the writeings of many, who have unanswerably evinced the nullity of the Romanists Faith: whether ultimately resolved into their vertual Church, the Pope with his Conclave, as the Jesuites will have it; Or into the representative Church, a General Councel, as others will have it; Or into both the former conjoynd, as others contend; Or (er­ranti nullus terminus) into the new mode of Orall tradition, as it is lately and clamorously urged by others who abo­minate the former. Yet though our Catholicks do thus stagger in the grounds of their faith, are they not more firm in their fealties, and Loyalties? surely their prin­ciples are every way consisting which the Government un­der which they live.

Nothing less, and it will plainly appeare if we consider the Doctrine of their Church and their frequent practice.

To the former much need not be said. That the Pope, the acknowledged head of their Church, hath a plenary power to excommunicate all Christian Kings that will not close with the Papal perswasion; and when they are excommuni­cated that they cease to be Kings, that their subjects are ab­solved from all fealty and allegiance to them, yea may take up Arms against them and so murther them; All this is so notoriously known, that as no reall Roman Catholick will deny, so it were needless to urge further proof of it:Becanus, Bellarm. Bozius, Molina, Campian. Stapleto. &c. He that hath leisure may find enough of this in Alvarez, Mariana, and divers others that speake expresly enough at this rate; and hath it not been sufficiently verified in the Roman Catholicks practice? Tis well known who encou­raged one Parry to murther Queen Elizabeth, what Pope it was that issued out his dreadfull excommunication ani­mateing the Subjects of England against her; And if you [Page 6]will allow of Cardinal Perron's positive sentence, he will tell you that that doctrine which renders Kings indeposeable opens a gap to no lesse then schisme and heresie, as if it were not only lawfull, but necessary to suppress what­ever they be, that will not conforme to the Popish Hie­rarchy.

He that should see a Soveraigne Prince holding the bason whilst the Pope washeth his hands; and another no less soveraigne holding the stirrup (though unfortunately mis­taken in the side) whilst he mounts up on horsebacke; Yea he that should see that Bishop of Rome treading on a great Prince his neck and abuseing that of the Psalmist for the Justi­fication of his usurped Power — Super Leonem & Aspi­dem, &c. Cannot but conclude that Dominus Deus noster Papa (as the Canonists stile him) will be the supreame Prince of the Christian World and that all other Potentates must limit their Authority and Jurisdiction according to the measure of his placet.

And now the premises considered (that upon the Po­pes excommunication Kings cease to be such, and stand lawfully exposed to all Insolences from their Subjects, (as hath already appeared;) I can not but very much wonder, that the Romanists should be so angry with Cromwel, Brad­shaw, and the rest that of hellish crue, for murthering our late Soveraigne of blessed memory. Were they not taught by those Romish Fathers above cited to murther CHARLES STUART, and yet not kill the King? I dare boldly say that our late Republicarians have not one tenet that is destructive to Civil Government and the Soveraignity of Kings, that was not first broached by the Romanists, to whom we owe our late confusions; Which hath answered the Predictions of Gondamore the Spanish Ambassador, who upon his return into Spaine gave out that he had kindled a fire in England which would burst out into a flame forty years afterwards.

Not to insist upon those severall disguises, presented by the Romanists in the late troubles under the habit of all sorts of Mechanicks, Artists, Soldiers, and others, so to preach up & foment the rebellion with our homebred Sectarians; this may suffice to demonstrate how ill consistent their prin­ciples are with our English Government, and consequently how weakly they acquit themselves of that Calumny they complain of even to admiration; But the Apologist hath his other pretences and will clear all objections that may encounter him in his way; it will be necessary to take a brief view of them.

And here first our Author amuseth us with a pretended submission to lawful powers; begins then to boast how pa­tiently their party did beare with the proceedings of the present Parliament; how they used no tricks and subterfu­ges to nip their proceedings in the bud: (this in his expres­sion.) And I would be glad to know what they could have done more then they did; what means he by this nipping in the bud? Would he have had another Gunpowder treason? To what purpose all this enumeration of our severall Kings? Richard I. Edw. Long-shanks, Edw. III. and Henry the fift. their opinions of their Popish Subjects; In the first place it may be said they were not so cleer-sighted as Princes are in these days; that the Roman writers were not altogether so insolent, plaine, and positive against the soveraignity of Kings as now.

As for the French Kings, they did very roundly maintaine their rights and soveraignties, haveing been sufficiently tormented by their Popish subjects in the time of the Ligue; that what the Jesuites were venting to the prejudice of Kings, was by cunning and insinuation writeing one thing and makeing their French Kings believe another, as is usual with that kind of People.

As for the House of Austria, they have the greatest de­pendances upon the Pope imaginable, & the Pope has a very great tye upon that House for by their incestious marriages [Page 8]authorised by the Popes they make it impossible for them to throw off the Authority of the Pope, for should they do so, all of that House would prove Bastards; And now even in these our dayes the present King of Poland (in the life time of his Brother known by the name of Cardinal Casimir) did marry his said own Brothers Wife, and this was the policy of the Pope with our Henry the VIII in his dispenseing with his marrying his own Brothers Wife, that he might have as great a dominion over the Kings of England, as of Spaine.

As for the Authors branding this last Century that what was perpetrated now, was never done before, (as to Mary Queen of Scots, and our late Souveraigne.) I very much wonder at the impudence of the man, to mix these two actions. The first was done by lawful authority, for her being Queen of Scotland did not bereave Queen Elizabeth of her Sove­raignity, and I have heard it averred by learned and know­ing men, that the King of Scotland hath sate in an English Parliament in former ages as a Peer of England; and then no wonder, nor injustice neither, that the Queen of Scot­land suffered death for her treason against the Queen.

As for the latter (the murther of our late Souveraigne of blessed and glorious Memory,) the action is without ex­ample, such and so hainous a thing was never acted upon the Theatre of the World: And as I said before, so I will againe, that the murther of that good King may properly enough be said to be the abominable product of that accur­sed doctrine of the Popes Infallibility, and his Soveraigni­ty over Kings; For those accursed Regicides, and mur­therers of that glorious King, did but a little alter the argu­ment; For that power which the Romanists lodged in the Pope, these wicked miscreants placed in the People; They had heard there was a power above Kings, and instead of giveing it to the Pope, they gave it to the Peoples Repre­sentative: And so fell this great King to the consternation of the whole World, and for a memento to all Kings to [Page 9]awake them out of their Lethargy and be an exhortation to them to vindicate their Supream Authority; We do all of us much commend the fidelity of Carlos, Whitegrave, and the Penderels, and Huddlestone, and this Author is much mis­taken if he think any of us do wish them ill; Wee have said enough already to evidence that they effected that glorious and happy action, (happy I say to all these Nations) through some other Instigations then the principles of the Romish Religion; They were led thereto certainly by a hand Divine as well as assisted by it; They carried English hearts about them at that time; But if they will Apostatize, tis none of my fault, for my part I am well content they be dispensed with as a marke put upon them for their miraculous preser­ving our good King.

As for the stigmatized person; I must needs say for him that he laboured in the vineyard before the last houre of the day, and was very ready both with hand and pen, to pro­mote the Interests of the King for his restauration, and ther­fore that word of reproach might will have been left out.

That wee differ in religion is but too true; and we dare as boldly as yourselves appeale to the day of Judgment. Some­thing yow say we differ; I say very much, els why does your Church damn ours? But this is not a place either to dispute about Religion or express wherein we vary. We are assured our Religion is the best; free from Superstition, free from too much homeliness; God and the King are best served in our way; Our Church is Monarchicall as well as yours; but still with a subordination to our Soveraign Temporal Prince. What our great Ancestors were, wee shall not be ashamed to remember, nor the Conversion of England from Paga­nisme, which possibly (as all the World besides converted from the like errors) did retaine some few Pagan Ceremo­nies, from which the Church of England was purified in the reformation of Edw. VI. and Queen Elizabeth; He does well to put us in mind of Romish perfecutions, are not we justi­fied therby if we do the same to you?

France forsooth is instanc'd, where the reformed Reli­gion is permitted, which I shall leave indifferent whether to attribute that tolleration to their vast numbers, or to the innocency of their tenets, not at all prejudiciall to Kings; this I am sure, they own no Soveraigne above their Natural King, they have no forraigne jurisdictions in their spirituals, and as little in their Temporals; Let this be remembred they assisted their Henry the III. against his Popish Rebels, even after the Massacre at Paris; and Henry the IIII. in his siege of Paris, when the Duke of Parma relieved it.

But as for the French King, he is no competent in­stance in this case; Had you singled out some Trent-Catholicks (such our English Catholicks would be ac­knowledged) there had been a fairer colour for your Argument. When yow have found some Roman Catho­lick Princes of the Trent perswasion, allowing the same favours to known Protestants, you may more plausibly plead for the like allowance; till when, by their Inqui­sitions and such like entertainments of protestants, they have prescribed the Law for other Princes, towards those that no less differ from them in matters of Religion.

Wee will wave the Massacre at Paris to come nearer home, what thinke you of the Massacre in Ireland, as a fore­runner of the English troubles? was not the Massacre and Rebellion in Ireland Countenanced, and owned by a Popes Nuntio? Let us draw nearer to these times and speake of what passed within this twelvemonth; Was not the Popes Bull, an occasion of Cornett Nangles Rebel­lion? Which had been as universal as the first, but that the Romish party there wanted strength? The Author by mentioning the French Kings kindness to the French Pro­testants, puts me in mind to affirm he is much mistaken; for that King has of late begun very much to persecute them; He has taken from them most of their Churches, will not suffer them to educate their owne Children, and many other grievous punishments he does now inflict upon them, and it [Page 11]may well be suspected he intends yet more against them having already purged his guards of all of their belief.

The Author growes yet more impudent & extravagant, for first he goes about to illegitimate Queen Elizabeth, & then bespatters the fame of our King Henry the VIII. and by that one may see where he has his breeding, and where he learn­ed to speake contumeliously of Kings.

Your urge the Allegiance sworn to Queen Mary; and tis no such wonder considering the Artifices and Power of the Roman Catholicks at that time; But all Roman Catholicks will grant that Queen Maries Mother was King Henries Bro­thers Wife; Yes and it will be replyed that the Pope dis­penced with the marriage; He did so, but S^t John the Baptist (whom our blessed Saviour honours with so high a testimony in the Gospel) would not have done it, he condemned the like marriage in King Herod, & had be lived in those times would have done no less in Kings Henrys. Though perhaps the Pope like another Herod would have cut of his head too for that bold affront; yet the Popes power, though never so much revered in those times could not then silence the suffrages of our Universities here, nor those in forraign parts, who joyntly affirmed and confirmed, both the lawfulness, and necessity of King Henries Divorce from his Brothers Wife: which doth sufficiently wipe off that filth, the Auth or from his impure mouth breathes out against that Queen of glorious memory; But King Henry the VIII. it seems is a great eye-sore to you, and you will leave no place unsearched for some stones of re­proach to throw at him: yet if you would be pleased to cast a serious eye upon divers of your Popes, the chief heads of your Church (you may find a full choice in the ninth & tenth Centuries (besides several others) and vvhen you have throughly perused the exact symmetry of their Carriage and practises (as described in some of your ovvne Authors, then turn your eye upon King Henry the VIII. & you vvil readily I doubt not conclude the saynt to be on his side.

And making so bold with Princes, it would be a wonder [Page 12]if Ministers of State did scape his pen; and it may well be affirmed, that King James is wounded through Cecyls side, of rather that wise King himself is deeply pierced, for may not one thus understand the Apologist? Cecyl is compared to Vlysses & King James to Cromwell. The whole Parliament, is likewise aspersed by him, and according to the opinion of the Apologist, God is mocked every fift of November; so that God himself cannot scape him neither.

He insists much upon the merit of those of his Religion, that ventured their lives in the quarrel of the late King of glorious memory; Where this great merit lies I cannot well understand for these reasons; First they were his Subjects, and so they were in duty bound to fight for him; Secondly they were persecuted by the Long Parliament, and that good King (upon pretence that he so much countenanced them) was persecuted likewise for their sakes, and so they were constrained to stand by him, and for him, for their own preservation; And there is one of his Subjects of that Re­ligion that stipulated, and did drive a bargaine with the last King, before he would engage for him. The Author would have us beleive Dinner-bells are mistaken for Mass-bells: Doe the Papists dine at 6, 7, or 8 of the clock in the morning? All their Insolencies the Author would persuade us to attri­bute to the height of their zeale against Constables, or other persons in authority formerly against the King; When it is very well known that dureing the Rebellion, when the late Rebels Cromwell and Bradshaw, and the rest, were in humane appearance, confirmed in their Thrones; None were better used that went under the name of Cavaleers then Papists: & now since the happy restauration of our gratious Soveraigne many of them indeavour to strike in with the Fanaticks, de­siring them to join with them, and they will take an order with the Episcopal party; These are the men that so much boast themselves of their Loyalty.

As to the burning of London, God reward them according to their demerit, that were the authors of that dismal and [Page 13]execrable fire; This is most certaine, that the Papists re­joice much in those sad flames, and it is a common discourse amongst them, that the burning of that City is a happiness to the Kingdome, and has cured it of the Rickets.

It is now time to draw to a conclusion, though perhaps some things in the Pamplet (being stuffed with many ridi­culous passages, and little pertinent to the purpose,) I have for brevities sake omitted to speake to.

For a farewell I will only add this to the Author; that if the Protestant assertors of his Majesties Right, had been as few as those he has set down in red letters of his party, He should here have been imitated by me; but our numbers are so vast, that many large folio's would not containe them.

But instead of the Apologist his bloody or red list, take here an extract of some things out of the History of Henry the IV. of France, written by Hardouin de Perefix Bishop of Rodez, for­merly Tutor to this French King Lewis, concerning the Ligue in France, called by its abettours the Sacred Vnios, supported by Popes, & more especially by Sextus Quintus, & Gregory the XIV; & entered into (by persuasion of the Roman Divines) by the Rebellious Roman Catholick Subjects of the two Henry's the III, & IV; to oppose which they were most chiefly assisted by their Protestant Subjects, who were always most ready to help them in time of extremity & still proved their best and most Loyal Subjects.