<h2><SPAN name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></SPAN>CHAPTER I.</h2>
<p class="summary long">A SKETCH OF PAPAL ATTEMPTS IN ENGLAND AND IRELAND
DURING THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH. THE STATE
OF RELIGION AND THE COUNTRY ON JAMES’S ACCESSION.</p>
<p class="newsection"><span class="smcap">As</span> an introduction to the subject, of which this volume
professes more especially to treat, I purpose to give a sketch
of the proceedings of the emissaries of Rome in this country,
during the long reign of Queen Elizabeth. Queen
Mary died <small>A.D.</small> 1558, when her sister Elizabeth succeeded
her on the throne. Paul IV. at this time occupied the
papal chair: but in less than a year after her accession he
was removed by death, and was succeeded by Pius IV.
Both these pontiffs were quiet and moderate men, compared
with several of those who came after them. At
all events, they did not proceed to those extremities to which
their successors resorted. There were, indeed, parties in
the court of Rome, who laboured to induce these pontiffs
to excommunicate the queen, as a heretic and a usurper;
but recollecting the fatal consequences which had issued
from the hasty proceedings of Clement against Henry VIII.,
or, probably imagining that greater benefits would result
from gentle than from violent measures, they pursued a
moderate course, exhorting the queen to return to her allegiance
to the see of Rome, and even making promises of
concessions respecting the reformation. In 1566, Pius V.
was promoted to the papal chair. In a very brief space he
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</SPAN></span>gave indications of a departure from the moderate councils
of his two immediate predecessors. The efforts of Philip II.
of Spain were also, during the early years of this reign,
directed to the same object with those of Paul IV. and
Pius IV. The king was anxious to marry Elizabeth, in
order that he might exercise his influence in England; and
as long as he could entertain a hope that his wishes would
be realized, he seconded the moderate measures of the
Roman pontiff. His expectations on this subject were
destined to disappointment; when perceiving that a marriage
with the queen was out of the question, he directed
his attention towards the accomplishment of his designs on
this country by other means than those of treaty and
diplomacy.</p>
<p>As soon as Pius V. was fixed in the papal chair a different
line of policy, therefore, was pursued towards England.
Some few years, indeed, elapsed before the queen
was actually excommunicated; but conspiracies and treasons
were contrived at Rome, with a view to their execution, as
soon as suitable persons could be found for the purpose.</p>
<p>Pius V. was the pontiff by whom the bull of excommunication
against Elizabeth was issued. The document was
dated March, 1569, or 1570, according to the present mode
of computation. Hitherto the court of Rome had abstained
from any direct attempt against the queen and the country:
but from this time plots were contrived and treasons planned
in rapid succession; for when one scheme was frustrated,
by the vigilance of the government, another was adopted;
so that the whole reign of Elizabeth, with the exception of
the early portion of it, was constantly developing some
machination or other, devised by the emissaries of Rome.
At the head of the confederacy against the queen were the
pope and the king of Spain, who hated her with the most
deadly hatred,—the former, because she was the chief stay
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</SPAN></span>of the reformation, the latter, because she was an obstacle
to the prosecution of his designs on this country<SPAN name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</SPAN>.</p>
<p>The first act of rebellion was the attempt of the earls of
Westmoreland and Northumberland. This was soon after
the bull was issued. In all the treasons and rebellions of
this reign some of the priests of Rome were more or less
concerned; and these two earls were instigated to the
attempt by Morton, an Englishman and a priest, who was
sent into England by the pope himself, for the express purpose
of stirring up rebellion. This design, however, was
strangled in its birth, and its promoters paid the penalty of
their lives.</p>
<p>In 1576 Pius V. paid the debt of nature, and was succeeded
by Gregory XIII., who did not depart from the
practices of his predecessor. Stukely, another subject of
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</SPAN></span>the queen’s, was authorised to go into Ireland by his holiness
and the king of Spain; and the pope had the presumption
to pretend to confer the title of marquis and earl of
several places in that country. He was commissioned to
stir up rebellion, the pope engaging to supply men, and the
king of Spain promising supplies of money. The purpose
was, however, defeated: but the next year several individuals
were actually sent into Ireland, accompanied, as usual,
by Sanders, a priest, who was possessed with legantine
authority from his holiness. To encourage the Irish, a
banner, consecrated by the pope, was sent over, and every
other means was resorted to, which the most inveterate
enmity could devise. The pontiff also sent them his
apostolical benediction, granting to all who should fall in
the attempt against the <i>heretics</i>, a plenary indulgence for all
their sins, and the same privileges as were conferred on
those who fell in battle against the Turks. Sanders, however,
died miserably, and the attempt completely failed.</p>
<p>It was about the year 1580 that the seminary priests,
who were so designated from the circumstance of being
trained in certain seminaries on the Continent, instituted
especially for English priests, began to come over into
England for the express purpose of enforcing the bull of
excommunication against the queen. These men were
natives of England, though educated on the Continent.
They assumed various disguises on their arrival, travelling
from place to place to promote the grand design, which had
been projected at Rome. They endeavoured to execute the
bull by making various attempts upon the queen’s life, from
which, however, she was mercifully delivered. Two points
were constantly kept in view: the one to stir up dissensions
at home, among the queen’s subjects; the other to induce
the papal sovereigns to promise men and arms, whenever it
should be deemed desirable to make a descent on the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</SPAN></span>country. Many of these men were executed as traitors,
though the Romanists pretend that they were martyrs for
their religion<SPAN name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</SPAN>. It is true that their religious views led
them into treason and rebellion; yet they were no more
martyrs for their faith than the murderer who was executed
at Tyburn. Parsons and Campion were the leaders of this
body: the former escaped to the Continent, the latter was
taken and executed for his treasonable practices.</p>
<p>It is constantly asserted by Roman Catholic writers,
that the priests who suffered during this reign were martyrs
to the faith: and the inference is attempted to be drawn,
that the church of England is as much exposed to the
charge of persecution as the church of Rome. One thing
is certain, however, that, whether the advisers of Elizabeth
were justified in their course or otherwise, they did not consider
that they were putting men to death for religion: but,
on the other hand, the martyrs under Queen Mary were committed
to the flames as heretics, not as traitors or offenders
against the laws of the land. When, therefore, Romanist
writers attempt to draw a parallel between the martyrs of
the Anglican church under Queen Mary, and the priests
who suffered in the reign of Elizabeth, it is a sufficient
answer to their cavils to allege the fact, that the former
were put to death according to the mode prescribed in cases
of heresy, which was an offence against religion; the latter
were tried and executed for treason, which is an offence
against the state. It is the remark of Archbishop Tillotson
that, “We have found by experience that ever since the
reformation they have continually been pecking at the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</SPAN></span>foundations of our peace and religion; when God knows we
have been so far from thirsting after their blood, that we
did not so much as desire their disquiet, but in order to
our own necessary safety, and indeed to theirs.”</p>
<p>In 1583 Somerville attempted to kill the queen. The
plot was discovered, and its author only escaped a public
execution by strangling himself in prison.</p>
<p>In 1585 another plot was revealed. Parry, who had
been employed on the Continent, came into England with a
fixed determination to take the life of the queen. To this
act he was instigated by the pope, who sent him his benediction,
with a plenary indulgence for his sins. He was
discovered and condemned. On his trial he produced the
pope’s letter, which had been penned by one of the
cardinals.</p>
<p>At this time, when it was found that all the plots were
secretly contrived or supported by the seminary priests, certain
severe statutes were enacted. The priests, whose only
occupation in England was to stir up rebellion, were commanded
to quit the country, or be subjected to the charge
of treason. These enactments were absolutely necessary,
for every priest was a traitor: nor was it possible that it
should have been otherwise, where the pope himself encouraged
them in their designs.</p>
<p>During this year Sixtus V. was elected pope in the room
of Gregory XIII. This pontiff walked in the steps of his
immediate predecessors. It should be stated, that at that
time the doctrine was inculcated, that it was meritorious to
kill heretics, and those who were excommunicated. To die,
therefore, in any such attempts, as those to which I have
alluded, was deemed the readiest way to the crown of martyrdom,
which was coveted by many members of the church
of Rome. When such doctrines were believed, we cannot
be surprised that so many treasons and rebellions were
contrived.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</SPAN></span>In 1586 the life of the queen was attempted by Babington.
The plot was discovered, and he and several of his
accomplices were executed.</p>
<p>Thus it became necessary to frame new laws to prevent
the plots of the seminary priests, who flocked into England
for the sole purpose of exciting rebellion. A statute was,
therefore, passed, by which it was made treason for any
one, who had been ordained a priest by authority of the
see of Rome, since Elizabeth’s accession, to come into her
dominions. This act was charged with cruelty at the time,
and the charge is still repeated, not only by Romanist, but
by many other writers: yet the act was absolutely necessary
in self-defence. It was intended to keep the priests
out of the country, since their coming always issued in
treason and the consequent loss of their lives. Let it be
remembered that the laws against recusants were not
enacted until the treasons of Campion, Parry, and others,
had rendered such a step on the part of the government
unavoidable. The course adopted to prevent the coming
of the priests was a merciful one, for it was supposed
that they would not venture into England at the peril
of their lives: it was also a reasonable one, since no
sovereign was ever known to permit men to reside in his
dominions, who denied that he was the lawful prince, and
who endeavoured to withdraw his subjects from their allegiance,
or stir them up to rebellion. As early even as the
reign of Edward I., to bring in a bull from Rome was
adjudged to be treason<SPAN name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</SPAN>.</p>
<p><span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</SPAN></span>The next year a similar plot, which was devised by an
Englishman of the name of Moody, was brought to light.
All these attempts were directed against Elizabeth herself;
and though Englishmen were the traitors, who engaged to
carry the plots into execution, yet they were encouraged in
their work, and supported both by the pope and the king of
Spain. The intention of the papal party was to dethrone
Elizabeth, and seat Mary, queen of Scots, on the throne.
No one will justify Elizabeth in taking the life of Mary:
but it may be observed that if no attempts had been made
against the queen’s life, and if the court of Rome had
acted justly and honourably, the ministers of Elizabeth
would never have recommended the execution of that unfortunate
queen. Her death must be attributed to Romish
principles, and to the papal attacks on the Protestant
religion<SPAN name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</SPAN>.</p>
<p>The year 1588 is memorable in English history for
the defeat of the <i>Spanish Armada</i>, impiously called the
<i>Invincible Armada</i>. Several years were occupied in its
preparation; and the enemies of England expected to overwhelm
the country by one stroke. At this time the pope
issued another bull against the queen, in which it was pretended
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</SPAN></span>that she was deprived of her royal dignity and
kingdom, while her subjects were absolved from their
allegiance. The same document commands all Englishmen
to unite with the Spaniards on their landing, and to submit
themselves to the Spanish general. Ample rewards also
are promised to any who shall deliver the <i>proscribed
woman</i>, as she is termed, into the hands of the papal party;
while a full pardon was granted to all who should engage in
the enterprise. It was determined that King Philip should
hold the kingdom <i>in fee</i> from the pope. To accomplish
their purpose, the Armada was fitted out.</p>
<p>Though King Philip was the individual, by whom the
Armada was fitted out, yet he was encouraged in the
designed invasion by the pope as well as by the English
fugitives on the Continent, headed by Sir William Stanley.
The war with Portugal had, for some years, prevented
Philip from bending all his energies towards the conquest
of England. Being successful in his attempts on his
neighbours, and also in the East Indies, it was argued by
his flatterers that equal success would attend his efforts
against England. Nor was another argument forgotten as a
spur to his diligence, namely, that the conquest of England,
with the consequent re-establishment of popery, would be
an acceptable service to God, who had given him his great
success against his enemies, and that no action could be
more meritorious. It is stated that a hundred <i>Monks</i> and
<i>Jesuits</i> accompanied the expedition; while Cardinal Allen,
an Englishman, was appointed superintendent of ecclesiastical
affairs throughout England. After having suffered
much from the fire of the English fleet, as well as from
the violence of the tempests, many of their ships being
disabled, it was determined to attempt to return home
through the Northern Ocean. At this time the powder of
the English fleet was almost exhausted; so that the departure
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</SPAN></span>of the Spanish vessels, at this juncture, must be
regarded as an interposition of divine providence in favour
of our country. Many of the vessels which thus escaped
from the English fleet, never reached the coast of Spain,
being wrecked in different places. Elizabeth displayed a
most magnanimous spirit during the time that the Armada
was hovering around our coasts. She addressed the army
in terms calculated to inspire them with confidence, and to
endear them to her person. A solemn fast had been
observed when the danger threatened; and when the deliverance
of the country was manifest, a solemn thanksgiving
was offered up in St. Paul’s Cathedral on the 8th of
September, when some of the Spanish ensigns lately taken
were hung about the church. On Sunday, September
24th, the queen herself proceeded to St. Paul’s, and on
arriving at the west door, she knelt down within the
church, and in an audible voice praised God as her only
defender against her enemies. It was further ordered that
the 19th of November should be observed as a day of
thanksgiving throughout the country; which day was
annually commemorated during the reign of Elizabeth<SPAN name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</SPAN>.</p>
<p>In 1590, Urban VII. became pope. He was succeeded
in a very brief space by Gregory XIV., who also was
speedily succeeded by Innocent IX. Nor did Innocent
occupy the papal chair for any lengthened period. In consequence
of the defeat of the <i>Armada</i>, and also of the
rapid changes in the holy see, three popes having died
within the space of eighteen months, there was a slight
cessation from the attempts against Elizabeth. In 1592,
Clement VIII. was elevated to the popedom: and under
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</SPAN></span>his auspices there was a revival of the previous practices,
which had not been given up, but merely relinquished for a
season. During the years 1592, 1593, and 1594, several
persons were commissioned by the court of Rome to raise
rebellions in England, and to poison or assassinate the
queen. The watchful eye of providence, however, was
extended over the country and the queen. Every plot was
discovered; every hostile design failed; and the only sufferers
were the traitors themselves.</p>
<p>Patrick Cullen received absolution and the sacrament,
<small>A.D.</small> 1592, from the Jesuit Holt, by whom it was determined
to be a meritorious deed to kill the queen; and in 1594,
Williams and York came over to England for the same
purpose, having first received the sacrament in the Jesuits’
college. In the year 1597, Squire came over from Spain
with the same object in view, namely, the assassination of
the queen; he also was instigated by Walpole, a <i>Jesuit</i>,
from whom he received the sacrament under a promise to
put the project in execution, and then conceal the deed. It
was observed by Sir Edward Coke, that since the Jesuits
set foot in England, there never passed four years without
a pernicious treason.</p>
<p>About this time the English fleet obtained a most
decisive victory over the Spanish. In 1598, Philip of
Spain, the great enemy of England, was removed by death
from that scene, in which he had, for so many years, acted
so conspicuous, yet inglorious a part.</p>
<p>In 1599 and 1600, a rebellion was headed in Ireland
by Tir Owen. This rebel chief was, as usual, encouraged
by the pope, who sent him a plume of feathers as a token of
his favour.</p>
<p>In 1603, the queen died in peace. From the preceding
abstract it will appear, that from the year 1570 to 1600,
Queen Elizabeth and the Protestant religion were constantly
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</SPAN></span>exposed to the machinations of the active partisans of the
Roman see, who were encouraged by the pope himself.
Every pontiff pursued the same course. There was a settled
purpose at Rome, and, indeed, throughout the whole Romish
confederacy, to dethrone Elizabeth and overturn the Anglican
church; nor is it a libel on the church of Rome to
say, that in all these proceedings, she acted on recognised
principles—principles which had received the solemn sanction
of her councils. To root out heresy, by any means
within their reach, was deemed, or at all events was
asserted to be a sacred duty incumbent on all the members
of the church of Rome. The doctrine may be denied in the
present day, when times and circumstances do not permit
of its being carried into practice; but, unquestionably, it
was not merely believed as an article of faith in the days of
Elizabeth, for we have seen that the attempt was made to
enforce the bull which was issued against the queen.</p>
<p>James I. succeeded to the throne at a period when the
eyes of Romanists were fastened on England as their prey.
During the latter years of Elizabeth, the emissaries of
Rome were comparatively quiet, in the hope that James,
from a feeling of filial reverence towards the memory of
his unfortunate mother, would not be unfavourably disposed
towards their church. It is certain, however, that a plot
was in agitation before the death of Elizabeth, being managed
by some of those individuals who were impatient of
waiting the course of events on the queen’s death. The
confessions and examinations of the conspirators show that
the powder plot was partly contrived before James’s accession.
Several of their number went into Spain to stir up the
Spanish court against the queen, and to request a foreign
army for the subjugation of England. The death of Elizabeth
took place while those proceedings were going forward
on the Continent, and was the means of suspending the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</SPAN></span>operations of the conspirators for a season. As soon as
James’s accession was known, the king of Spain endeavoured
to enter into a negociation for peace, so that the
conspirators were not at this time openly favoured by that
monarch. It was supposed that some concessions might be
obtained from James in favour of his Roman Catholic subjects:
but in a very short space the leaders of the conspiracy
discovered, that they were not likely to gain much by
negociation. Unquestionably the Romanist party in England
endeavoured to induce the King of Spain to attempt
an invasion of the country: and it is equally certain, that
their solicitations would have been taken into serious consideration
if Queen Elizabeth had not died. Had the project
of invasion been realised, the conspirators would not
have proceeded to execute the Gunpowder Plot.</p>
<p>On the accession of James, therefore, there was a calm:
but it was deceptive: it was only the calm before the
storm; and to the eye of the careful observer, it indicated
any thing but prosperity and tranquillity. It was evident
to most men of reflection, that the storm was gathering:
nay, there were indications of its approach, though no one
knew how or where it would burst forth. The rolling of
the thunder was, as it were, heard in the distance, though
whether it would approach nearer or pass away altogether,
was a question which no one could determine.</p>
<p>I have glanced at the various treasons with which the
whole reign of Elizabeth was so pregnant: and the principles
from which they flowed have also been slightly alluded
to, namely, the principles of the church of Rome respecting
the punishment of heresy, and the keeping faith with heretics.
The doctrine of the church of Rome on this subject,
as expounded by the Jesuits, and especially by Parsons, who
at this period was one of the prime movers of every conspiracy
against the English sovereign, was this, namely, that
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</SPAN></span>if any prince should turn aside from the church of Rome,
he would forfeit his royal power; and that this result would
follow from the law itself, both human and divine, even before
any sentence was passed upon him by the supreme
pastor or judge. This doctrine was a consequence of the
papal supremacy. The doctrine of the supremacy is
this—that the bishops of Rome, as successors of St. Peter,
have authority, derived to them from Christ himself, over
all churches, and kingdoms, and princes; that, in consequence
of this power, they may depose kings and absolve
their subjects from their allegiance, bestowing the kingdom
of the offender on another; that excommunicated princes
are not to be obeyed; and that, to rise in arms against
them, or to put them to death, is not only lawful, but meritorious.
Acting on these principles, Clement VIII. issued
certain bulls, in which he called upon all members of the
church of Rome to use their exertions for the purpose of
preventing the accession of James, whenever Queen Elizabeth
should depart this life.</p>
<p>Under such circumstances was James I. called to the
throne. The papal party were resolved on the execution
of their designs: and the pope and the king of Spain were
so far implicated, that they were fully aware, if not of the
particular nature of the intended plot, yet that certain
schemes would be resorted to for the accomplishment of
the grand object, which was the subjugation of England to
the papal yoke. Had the conspirators been successful, they
would have been furnished with all necessary supplies for
their purpose by the court of Rome, and those states which
were in alliance with the holy see. Such a combination
could not have been defeated by human means, especially
as the plot was carried on with the utmost secresy: but the
watchful eye of divine providence was fixed on the country,
and the designs of its enemies, as will be shown in this
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</SPAN></span>narrative, were mercifully frustrated. The bulls above
alluded to were to be kept secret as long as the queen survived.
They were addressed to the clergy, the nobility,
and the commons, who were exhorted not to receive any
sovereign whose accession would not be agreeable to the
pope. The reasons assigned by his holiness for recommending
such a course, were the honour of God, the restoration
of the true religion, and the salvation of immortal
souls. The Cardinal D’Ossat, to whom they were at first
entrusted, wrote to King James on the subject, expressing a
hope that he would openly profess the religion of his
mother. It will be seen, in a subsequent chapter, that
these bulls were committed to Garnet, who confessed that
they had been in his possession, and by whom they were
destroyed when it was found to be impossible to prevent
James from succeeding to the English throne.</p>
<p>Never, perhaps, in the history of the world was a sovereign
delivered from more conspiracies than Queen Elizabeth.
The efforts of her enemies were unceasingly directed
to one object, and that object was the queen’s death. Not
only were private individuals instigated to attempt her destruction,
but the most extensive confederacies were entered
into by almost all the papal sovereigns of Europe.</p>
<p>A remarkable circumstance is related of the hopes and
intentions of the Spaniards, in the event of success in the
<i>Armada</i>. A Spanish officer, who was taken prisoner, was
examined before the privy council. He confessed that their
object in coming was to subjugate the nation to the yoke of
Spain, and the church to that of the pope. He was asked
by some of the lords what they intended to do with the <i>Catholics</i>,
as some must necessarily have fallen: to which
question he promptly replied, that they meant to send them
directly to <i>heaven</i>, even as they should have sent the <i>heretics</i>
to <i>hell</i>. This statement rests on the authority of the
<span class="pagenum"><SPAN name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</SPAN></span>chaplain to the army. It was revealed to him in order that
he might publish it the next day, in his sermon, to the
troops. He states, that by commandment of the council
he did publish it to the army. In those days, there were
no <i>newspapers</i>: nor was it then so easy to communicate
intelligence by <i>placards</i> or <i>bills</i>. We find, therefore, that
the pulpit was often made a vehicle for publishing the common
news of the day. At a subsequent period, during the
commotions between Charles I. and his Parliament, when
the latter obtained possession of most of the pulpits, they
were the only channels through which many of the people
were made acquainted with the progress of the war. Whatever
had occurred during the week was published to the
people, from the pulpit, on the Sunday<SPAN name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></SPAN><SPAN href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</SPAN>.</p>
<p>King James, therefore, succeeded to the English crown
at a period when the pope and the papal sovereigns entertained
the most sanguine hopes of re-establishing popery in
this country, and when numbers of Jesuits and their disciples
were ready to execute any treason which might be
concocted.</p>
<div class="footnotes"><p class="footnotetitle">Footnotes:</p>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></SPAN> I subjoin a few extracts from the bull issued against Elizabeth.
It was entitled <i>The Damnation and Excommunication of Queen Elizabeth.</i>
It commenced thus: “He that reigneth on high committed
one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (out of which there is no
salvation) to one alone upon earth, namely, to Peter, and to Peter’s
successor, the bishop of Rome. <i>Him alone he made prince over all
people, and all kingdoms, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant,
and build, that he may contain the faithful that are knit together with
the band of charity, in the unity of the Spirit.</i>” Then, after an enumeration
of Elizabeth’s alleged crimes against the holy see, his holiness
proceeds: “We do, out of the fulness of our apostolic power,
declare the aforesaid Elizabeth, being a heretic, and a favourer of
heretics, to have incurred the sentence of <i>anathema</i>, and to be cut off
from the unity of the body of Christ. And, moreover, <i>we do declare
her to be deprived of her pretended title to the kingdom aforesaid, and
of all dominion, dignity, and privilege</i>. And also the nobility, subjects,
and people of the said kingdom, and all others, who have in any
sort sworn unto her, <i>to be for ever absolved from any such oath</i>. And
we do command and interdict all and every the noblemen, subjects,
and people, <i>that they presume not to obey her, or her monitions, mandates,
and laws</i>.”</p>
<p>It is necessary to give these extracts in the outset, in order that it
may be seen that the gunpowder treason, and almost all other treasons
in the reigns of Elizabeth and James, flowed from the doctrines
thus promulgated by the papal see.</p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></SPAN> For a full discussion of the question, whether the priests and
others who suffered death at this period and subsequently, were
punished for religion or for treason, the author’s work, <i>The State of
Popery and Jesuitism in England</i>, may be consulted. In that work
I have entered fully into the subject, and have proved that all the
parties who suffered were executed for treason.</p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></SPAN> By the 27th Elizabeth, c. 2, it was enacted, “Because Jesuits,
seminary priests, or other priests came over into this realm of England,
of purpose, as it hath appeared by sundry of their own examinations
and confessions,—not only to withdraw her highness’s
subjects from their due obedience, but also to stir up and move
sedition, rebellion and open hostility—to the utter ruin, desolation,
and overthrow of the whole realm, if the same be not the sooner by
some good means foreseen and prevented, that it shall not be lawful
for any Jesuit, seminary priest, or other such priest—being born
within this realm—ordained by any authority derived from the see
of Rome, to come into, be, or remain in, any part of this realm: and
if he do, that then every such offence shall be taken and adjudged
to be high treason, and every person so offending shall for his
offence be adjudged a traitor.” This statute was rendered necessary
by the treasonable practices of the priests. Had they not been engaged
in such practices, the statute never would have been devised.
The only way, in which it can be said, that such priests suffered for
religion is this, namely, <i>that their religion led them into treason</i>; but
this would be to charge all their sufferings upon the church of Rome
herself, which is indeed the fact, though Romanists will not admit it.</p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></SPAN> At this time Cardinal Allen, an Englishman, published a
defence of Stanley’s treason, maintaining that in consequence of the
queen’s excommunication and heresy, it was not only lawful, but a
duty to deprive her of the kingdom.</p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></SPAN> Several medals were stamped in commemoration of the defeat.
One bore this inscription, under a fleet flying with full sails, <i>Venit,
vidit, fugit</i>: another the following, <i>Dux Fœmina facti</i>. Several
medal were also stamped in the Low Countries.</p>
</div>
<div class="footnote"><p><SPAN name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></SPAN><SPAN href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></SPAN> For a description of the proceedings of the Parliamentary
divines in publishing the <i>news</i> of the day from the pulpits during the
civil war, the reader is referred to my former work, <i>A History of
the English Episcopacy from 1640 to 1660</i>.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />