to be seen, when any man that reads the trial may perceive it could not be produced; and if it were found since, and so public as he pretends, no doubt our author would have as well recited, as referred to it, for doing so would have been worth all he hath said. of the world absolutely denying the matters they were accused of, any one of them might have secured a pardon by confessing his charge; they have been all of them of approved honest conversation in their several callings during the rest of their lives, and yet we As to their prayers for the judges and accusers, must not believe one tittle of their last words in my judgment they were more likely to pro- spoke so plainly, (if false) to their destruction ceed from charity than malice, let our good both here and hereafter; to their destruction, natured author he of another opinion if he and not the least to their interest: yet on the pleases, but his reason for the contrary is none; contrary we are not so much as allowed to for it is well known St. Stephen at his stoning doubt the fidelity of their accusers, though men did the same, and yet desired neither prayers notorious for scandalous and wicked lives; men nor tears of those that were not of his own pro- who from abject qualities assume to themselves fession; but it is true those prayers may be by this means dignities, and pretend to honours come curses to the witnesses, if the deposition and titles; and who from the extremest poagainst them be as false, as it is evident some verty and necessity are advanced to opulency of what they have deposed to king and council and plenty for accusing persons of consulting hath been, as I could instance in the case of with them about affairs of so high a nature as Don John, and divers other matters, if I were the alteration of kingdoms, and murdering the minded to disparage the king's witnesses, as best of monarchs. Persons of such qualities they call them but this I cannot forbear ob- and fortunes, as would with Job have disdained serving, that it may be justly said of some of to set them with the dogs of their flock, who them, as doctor Dun says of witches, that they if they would have made use of such pitiful inconfess things impossible. But leaving them to struments, would certainly have taken care for the great Judge of all things, I will only remind their support, and not have seconded their imthem of this truth, that if they betray innocent prudent election of such counsellors in matter blood for gain, and make God's name contemp- of so great trust, with a second error of suffertible, by invoking it to a falsehood; no equi-ing them to want when they had trusted them, vocation, nor mental reservation, will shelter them from his dreadful vengeance which he in his due time will visit them with: and it is a thousand to one he will for terror to others and despair to themselves, make them the most miserable and contemptible wretches breathing in this world; but if they have sworn truth, let then give a lustre to it by amending their lives, that they and the nation they have saved by their discoveries may glory in one another, to the confusion and destruction not only of these, but all other its enemies. : but would have provided for them as those we see do sufficiently, who now make use of their service; but though we may not call them perjured persons until convicted, which their protectors will easily prevent, by not permitting them to be indicted, yet noue can deny us the liberty of thinking that men will easily discern the difference between the dying and the living testimonies, let their pretences and lies be never so many; but to the God of truth we refer both causes, not doubting but in his good time all these secrets will be brought to light to his everlasting glory. Bu to conclude, I will desire but any reasonable man to consider the absurdity of their arguing, who pretend that not only these last P. S. Since the former; there is come forth five, but the eight others condemned by the another paper, called An Answer to the Jesame evidence, had dispensations to die with suits Speeches, by Esrael Tongue, D. D.' full lies in their mouths: and that by the doctrine fraught with labour and studied falsehoods, but of equivocation and mental reservation, they so plainly malicious, that nobody who had not and all other papists can say and swear any been a witness of the success of their ill spun thing, when it is plain to all the world, that improbable stories in their first pretended disnothing but their fearing to swear falsely lays coveries, could have had the least hope, these them liable to the laws against popery; can it should have prevailed with one man, so conbe believed that men who forfeit peerage, trary to the sentiments of human nature. No, offices of honour, trust, power and profit, lose we all too well know sophistry vanishes at the two thirds of their estates, and make themselves approach of infallible death, and that Dr. more obnoxious to more severe laws than ever Tongue, and the more hardened impostor his was in force against Christianity during the first companion in title and design, will find at the ten persecutions, and all this because they will approach of that grim usher to their eternal not swear against conscience, can have dispen-abodes, no resolution but a good conscience sations so convenient to their earthly well being, and make no use of them; nothing can be more contradictory to human reason than these calumnies, nor can any indifferent person chuse but see through such absurd contradictions. In fine there has thirteen men, of which one a Protestant, have died already by the accusation of these four witnesses, all have gone out can make them follow him smiling, this truth writ with an indelible character in every breast will save us a labour to answer his frivolous anatomizing those mens last words, delivered so cheerfully and heartily at their execution; only we may safely make reflection on the last paragraph of his impious and uncharitable paper, where he says, It is no more than they expected, a truth undeniable as to him and his companions, who cannot but be conscious to themselves whether the evidence given against them be true or false, and from that might well expect their denial, which no man else that believed them guilty did or could: But it is in vain to warn thinking people from making natural reflections on these mens dying words, until it be proved that they made it their practice to violate all laws human and divine, by better evidence than such as have been noto riously guilty of doing so, by a continued series of cheating, stealing, robberies, perjury and buggery, and all other unnatural crimes and uncleannesses sufficiently known, and above denial public to the whole world; but what truth can be expected from a low spirited wretch, who for a little money (of which he complains he has been cousened too) can be contented to debase his character of divine to be the zany or deputy devil to such mountebanks. Anmimadversions on the last Speeches of the five Jesuits, viz. THOMAS WHITE alias WHITEBREAD, Provincial of the Jesuits in England; WILLIAM HARCOURT, Pretended Rector of London; JOHN FENWICK, Procurator for the Jesuits in England; JOHN GAVAN alias GAWEN, and ANTHONY TURNER; who were all executed at Tyburn for High Treason in conspiring the Death of the King, &c. June 20, 1679. by this art. And therefore it is no wonder if they decline it not at trials in courts of judicature, no nor when they are dying and approaching the dreadful tribunal of the Judge of Heaven and Earth, though truth and sincerity he then, if ever, necessary. They have the confidence to plead the examples of God, of Christ, of the ancient saints recorded in scripture, in justification of it. But our Jesuits have more pertinent instances, those of the same principles, and in the like circumstances, to encourage them with oaths and asseverations to assert what could not be true, or deny what is not false, but by this device. PROTESTANTS, who make conscience of their words, and count it a horrid crime to speak otherwise than they think when they are dying, may be ready to take the measures of others by themselves, and to judge those guiltless, who, when they are dying, assert their innocency with the highest asseverations. But they will see reason to judge otherwise, if they take notice how full and clear the evidence is by which these Jesuits were cast, and withal understand the principles of the persons executed, and their associates, which they were greatly concerned to put in practice, are such as destroy all confidence in their words living | and dying. For by the common doctrine F. Garnet, predecessor of F. Whitebread taught and received amongst them, they are both in his office and practices, being principal furnished with expedients whereby they may of the Jesuits, and chief promoter of the Powdeny what is most true, and affirm what is most der plot,(a) when after secret conference befalse; and that with most solemn oaths or tween him and Hall, another Jesuit in the dreadful imprecations, and yet neither lie,`nor Tower, he was asked before the Lords Combe forsworn, nor any way sin in the least de- missioners, whether Hall and he had any congree; and so may without any scruple endea- ference together, and was desired not to equi vour to deceive others by the use of such false-vocate; he swearing upon his salvation, reitness, as at other times, so even when they are dying. Their principal artifice, to wave others, is that which they call mental equivocation, not on account of the ambiguousness in the words, though they may make their advantage of this also; but because of a double sense in some proportion, partly expressed, and partly reserved in their minds; so that it is true in their own sense, but false in the sense of all that hear it. The use of it is allowed by all sorts of Papists, and particularly the Jesuits; it is much endeared to them, and more familiarly used by them than any other fraudulent arts, because the fraud herein is both more easy, and undiscernable, and innocent in their account, and the advantage of it admirable; there being nothing so false but it may be made true, nothing so true but it may be made false erating it with so many horrid imprecations as wounded their bearts to hear, he denied again and again that he had any discourse; yet afterwards when he knew that the thing was known, and that Hall had confessed it, he cried the Lords' mercy, and said he had offended if equivocation did not help him.(b) Another time being asked whether he did not swear upon the holy evangelists, that he bad neither writ nor sent to the Jesuit Tesmond, which he knew to be false? He answered, That he swore so lawfully enough, not knowing then that his letters were intercepted, and thinking they could not have disproved him. (a) Gunpowder-Treason, p. 176. a Casaub. Ep. ad Front. Duc. (b) Ibid. p. 200. Gunpowder-Treason, p. 194. Tresham,(c) one of the chief undertakers in the Powder Plot, upon the examination did confess that F. Garnet was privy to the treasou; but afterwards by the importunities of his wife, three or four hours before his death, he protested and took it upon his salvation, setting it down under his hand, That his former confession was false, and that he had not seen Garnet in sixteen years before, at the least; and so he died. His protestation and oath were not long after proved to be untrue; yea, and Garnet himself confessed that within that space he had seen him many times. Whereupon being demanded what he thought of Tresham's dying oath and protestation? He answered, It might be he meant to equivocate. Hereupon Garnet thus resolves the case about the lawfulness of equivocating at point of death, as it was found in his papers communicated to Casaubon by king James: "If any one," says he, "shall enquire whether it be lawful to imitate Tresham's equivocating in the very article of death, upon some necessity, as to free a friend from danger? It is truly lawful," says he, "and we may prove it by an argument drawn from confessions; and since it is lawful for any one to use this in the course of his life, why may it not be used also by a dying man?" Casaubon, ibid. p. 202. not do something which indeed he did do, understanding within himself some other thing else which he did not do, some other days than that wherein he did it, or any other addition that is true, this man does not indeed either lie or forswear (f);" producing many authors for it, and referring to divers others (g). It seems mysterious, that the same thing should be both true and false; that he should speak what is false in itself, and in his own judgment, and that which tends to deceive others, and yet not lie. But they would clear it thus; A proposition formed in this case has two parts, one expressed and the other concealed; that which is expressed is false, but the part concealed being added to it, the entire proposition is true, e. g. F. W. did not design to kill the king, this is false; but adding some secret reserve, viz. king Harry, or king Charles before he was born, or in Scotland, and the whole is true. And by this device our Jesuits, though they as fully designed to kill Charles the 2nd, as ever Ravillac did Harry the 4th; yet they may deny it with all asseverations, and yet not lie at all (as they believe by virtue of this device): they may assert their innocency in terms which are false in the sense of all the world, yet by such a reserve all will be true in their own sense; and so in averring that which is most false, they persuade themselves they do no more lie, they do no more sin, than the child unborn. Hereby we see that these were their practices of old, and justified by their teachers as lawful even at the hour of death; therefore we should not be surprised, if we find our Jesuits use these arts in their last speeches; this is not new to them, nor unwarrantable either at pub-words of dying men, whose doctrine assures the lic trials or executions. But their principles are further considerable, of which take an account in some severals. First, by their doctrine they may lawfully say what is false, making use of a inental reservation, by virtue of which that which is false in itself, will be true in their reserved sense; and therefore though it be gross untruth, as expressed, and they know it to be so, and use it with an intent to deceive others, yet they count it no lie, and therefore no sin, and so they need not fear to use it when they are passing out of the world. That it is no lie, they generally maintain. "If a man," saith Prsons, "use mental reservation, he doth not offend against the negative precept which forbiddeth to lie. It is freed from the nature of a lie, by the due and just reservation in the speaker's mind (d)," says he. By understanding something in our minds," saith Navarr, "we may make that true which we affirm, though it be false; and that false which we deny, though it be true (e)" And Sanchez the Jesuit more fully: "If a man do swear that he did 66 And here let the world judge what regard is due to the words of those, though they be the most guilty persons in the world, that if they persist in a false defence of their innocency, even unto death, yet by this method they teach them, it will be no lie, it will be no sin at all. This may be enough to satisfy us concerning the common expressions wherein they all agree to disclaim all guilt. But there is something singular in F. Gavan's speech, which requires a particular consideration, and yet it may be grounded on the common principle. I cannot imagine how that which he protests with the last words of a dying man to vindicate ́his Society (for which I wish he were not more solicitous than for his soul) can be true without some fraudulent reserve, since it is very false in itself, that the Jesuits allow not the doctrine of king-killing, but detest and abhor it, or that none of them hold it lawful for a private person to kill a king, but only Mariana. I suppose the principles of the Jesuit Sanctarellus are little more favourable to kings than those of Mariana, his book on that account being condemned and burnt by the parliament at Paris; yet it was printed at Rome, and approved by Mutius Vitellescus, the general of the Jesuits. And when the chief of that order in France were examined, whether they did believe as their general did at Rome? or would do so if they were at Rome? It was answered by F. Cotten in the name of the rest, That they would change their judgments with the country, and would believe as they did at Rome, when there, though he ridiculously denied that they did believe so while they were in France. However Mariana had many of the Jesuits who expressly owned his doctrine; Ribadeneira, Scribanius, under the name of Bonarscius, Becanus, Gretserus, do partly praise him, and partly defend his opinion. Another patron of the Jesuits says plainly in an English trearise, That they are enemies of that holy name of Jesus, that condemned Mariana for any such doctrine. And his book having been before printed at Toledo with the approbation of the superiors of the Society, there was a new edition of it at Mentz by the procurement of the Jesuits there. It is much if J. G. could make | all these to be but one Mariana. And wherein does Emanuel Sa (g) come short of Mariana in that particular wherein the Jesuit would clear the Society? Or Becanus in his English controversies? Or Suarez? a Jesuit of such reputation, that his judgment alone is valued more than a thousand other authors, who expresses himself thus: "When a king is deposed, then he is neither lawful king nor prince; and if therefore he endeavour to keep the kingdom under him by strength, then he is an usurper, no lawful king, having no true title to the crown; for that (h) after the decree of deposition, he is altogether deprived of his kingdom, so that he cannot with a just title possess, and so may be used as a tyrant or usurper, and by consequence may be slain by any private man." Here we have multitudes of Jesuits in one, allowing the killing of kings by any private man: for not only divers bishops, but the provincial Jesuits of Portugal and Germany, testify their approbation of his judgment; and a whole university declares, "That there is nothing in it but ought to be approved, every thing being according to their own opinion and judgment (i)." Add but one F. Campian, (g) Vid. Aphor. v. tyr. num. 2, p. 115. (h) At vero post sententiam latam omnino privatur regno, ita ut non possit justo titulo illud possidere: ergo ex tunc poterit tanquam omnino tyrannus tractari, et consequenter a quocunque privato poterit interfici.' Defens. fid. lib. 6, cap. 4, num. 14 and 17. (i) Nihil est in. toto hoc opere a nostro ' omnium sensu discordans, cum de hac re sit omnium nostrum eadem vox idem animus eademque sententia.' Cens. academiæ Complutensis. who may be instead of all. He declares, "That all the Jesuits spread far and wide through the whole world, have entered into a league to make away all heretical kings in any manner whatsoever: nor will they despair of effecting it, so long as any one Jesuit remains in the world (k)." There is no room to alledge particular doctors, which might easily be multiplied. That which we charge the Jesuits with, in reference to the murdering of kings, may be reduced to two heads: 1. That the pope has power to depose kings for heresy especially. 2. That being deposed, any one may kill them, at least by the pope's order. : The former is the doctrine of their church, and not of particular doctors only; being esta blished not only by the opinion of all sorts of their authors, but by the determination of popes, and the decrees of general councils; so that hence the famous Jesuit Lessius declares, that if the pope had not this power of deposing kings, the church which has taught it must of necessity err and to hold that is heretical, and a more intolerable error, than any about the sacrament can be. And a greater than he, Cardinal Perron, (in his Diverses Oeures, and Recueil General des Affaires du Clerge de France) declares it as the sense of the whole clergy of France (who of all the Romanists are accounted least favourable to the papal power), that all who maintain the contrary, are heretics and schismatics. (!) For the latter, we have the declared sense of the whole body of the Jesuits in France (than whom, none of the society in any part of the world, were more favourable to kings) in an Apology for their doctrine on this subject, to Harry the 4th; yet there they declare in the words of Valentia, consonant to the doctrine of Aquinas, Cajetan, Sotus, Coveruvius, Salonius, and others, That a Tyrant who has no just title, but usurps authority, may be killed by any one. (m) Now there is none of them who (k) In Epist. ad Concil. Reg. Anglii, p. 22. (1) Defens. decret. concil. Lateran. p. 46. Ergo tam est certum posse Pontificem coercere vel punire principes temporales, his pænarum generibus, quam est certum non posse ecclesiam in fide et moribus errare. Here Suarez maintains it to be as certain, as that this church is infallible, Defens. fid. 1. 3. c. 23. n. 16. (m) Si est tyrannus secundo modo (viz. per arrogatam sibi in justam potestatem) quilibet possit illum occidere, Apol. Societ. Jes. in Gall. 1599. append. p. 115, &c. Suarez Defens. fid, lib. 6. c. 4. n. 14. Si rex talis post depositionem legitimam, in sua pertioacia perseverans regnum per vim retineat, incipit esse tyrannus in titulo, quia non est legitimus Rex, nec justo titulo regnum possidet. Assertitur hunc tyrannum quoad titulum, interfeci posse, a quacunq. privata persona, idem, ibid. num. 7. have the use of reason, will deny, but a king deposed by the pope, is such a tyrant, a mere usurper, without any just title; and therefore the Jesuits cannot deny, but it is their doctrine, that a king deposed by the pope, may be killed by any one. Or if all the Jesuits in France will make no more than one Mariana, let us see if the Jesuits of other nations may possibly do it. Bomencina tells us, that Valentia, Suarez, Lessius, Molina, Filliucius, concur with him and many others, in this assertion: Licitum est homini privato, occidere tyrannum qui absque ullo titulo usurpat, &c. It is lawful for a private man to kill such a tyrant as has no title, tom. 2. de Fastit. Disp. 2. q. 8, punct. 3. n. 2, et 3. The premises considered, if F. G. understood them, either he intended to deceive the people with a downright lye, or with a gross untruth under the covert of a secret reservation; both are alike heinous to us, and this latter worse, because there is less fence against it: but in charity I incline to think he used the latter, because in such cases they count it sinless and innocent, and not to be declined at the point of death. ments that the society ever used. But my design is to shew the fraud, not the weakness of his discourse. Let the reader judge how true that is which he swears concerning his innocency, by the truth of what he protests concerning the Jesuits doctrine. Both require equal regard, both being the asseverations of a dying man; yet both might be true in his account by this artifice, how false soever in themselves, and so might innocently be asserted by a dying man. As for their prayers for the king, I do not well understand them; they would have it thought, that they had no design to kill the king who can pray for his prosperous reign. But do they think that his majesty can truly prosper till he turn Roman Catholic? This they heartily wish, no doubt; whether they can pray, or no, I know not. However, it need not seem strange if they should equivocate in their way of praying, since they allow of plain lyes in their public liturgies, which divers of their own authors express themselves sensible of. F. Garnet having composed some prayers for the good success of the Pow der-Plot, and using them amongst his party, when he was charged with it, made use of such a plea as became such a Jesuit; he said that he made not those prayers with that meaning that the thing might fall out according to the mind of the conspirators, but rather cross to their desires, that so the safety of king and kingdom might be provided for: So that when he prayed for the ruin of king and kingdom, yet his meaning was, that they might be preserved and prosper: And so when our Jesuits pray for the king's prosperous reign, why may not their together as likely as the other. But there is no penetrating a Jesuit's meaning any where, no not in his prayers; for whatever the words thereof seem to be, the meaning may be quite contrary. So it was in F. Garnet's time, and the world is not much mended with the society since. And two reserves he might make use of, one in reference to the word king; Jesuits are not for king-killing doctrine: for they will have kings first deposed by the pope, or by heresy, and then they are no kings, and so they may be killed by any men, and yet no king may be killed by any private person. All the kings of England, Sweden, Denmark, &c. may be killed one after another, by the Jesuits doctrine, and yet by that doctrine no king at all will be killed. Or he might use another reserve with respect to the words 'private persons,' under-meaning be his utter destruction? for this is alstanding reservedly, persons that have no authority from the pope, or any under him. And this fraudulent reserve, F. Parsons might help him to who to avoid the charge, that they held a king condemned or deposed, may be killed by a private person; he denies that a private man as a private man, i. e. by private authority, can kill any prince. (n) And in this sense neither Grove, nor Patrick, nor any other who undertook this horrid murder can be counted private persons: for they did not undertake it by their own authority. And the meanest and most private persons in these three kingdoms, or any other nations, may assasinate the king, by the Jesuits doctrine, if they have the pope's, authority for it, immedi ately or mediately and yet by no means must the doctrine of the Jesuits be charged as allow ing that private persons may kill kings; and the reason is, because the pope's executioners are no more private persons than the common hang-man (as the Jesuit gravely explains it) though he use but his ax once. What he adds concerning Harry the fourth was sufficiently confuted by Chastell, first, and after by Ravillac, by the inost effectual argu (n) Sober reckoning cap. 5. num. 44. p. $22. vid. Suarez ubi supra, 12. The forces of Charles the 5th having taken the Pope prisoner, the Emperor orders that public prayers should be made for his holiness release. The world thought that he might have saved his prayers, and given him liberty, instead of begging it. To be sure, his majesty might well enough spare the Jesuits prayers, if they would forbear their plotting against him. But to proceed, Secondly, They maintain, that when they may lawfully speak what is false, they may lawfully swear it; it is the common doctrine of the "That all Romanists. F. Parsons assures us, divines hold, that what may lawfully be said, may also be lawfully sworn." (0) And again says he, It being a most certain principle, as well in reason as in divinity, that what a man may (by virtue of mental reservation) truly say, he may truly also swear."(p) So Les (o) Mitig. c. 11. sec. 9. num. 42. p. 468. (P) Mitig. c. 11, sec. 4. num. 17. p. 449. |