Canterburys Doom

We shall now proceed in the second place to discover his atempts, and manifest his proceedings in this kind by bringing in Popish Tenants and doctrines by degrees; wherein we shall so fully uncase this Romish Fox, as notwithstanding all his shifts and subterfuges) to evidence him the most Pestilent Jesuitical underminer, subverter of the established doctrines of the Church of England, the Archest advancer of the Erroneous Positions of the Church of Rome, that ever breathed in our English Air. And here we meet not only with a Narrow Episcopal See, but vast boundless Ocean of evidence to sails in.

That there hath been for many years last past, a secret plotted Conspiracy, and serious endeavor between sundry pretended members of the Church of England, and real Sons of the Church of Rome, to extirpate the Protestant Religion, and instead thereof to set up Popish superstition and Idolatry; hath been already abundantly manifested to the World, in A necessary Introduction to the History of the Archbishop of Canterbury his Trial, by sundry foreign and domestic evidences: how far this Archbishop was an Arch-agent in promoting this conspiracy in point of Doctrinal Popery, and by what Jesuitical Policies and degrees he proceeded in it, comes now in Order to be proved; wherein we shall steare the course of our evidence, according to the compass and method of his proceedings.

It is the common Policy of all wise experienced Commanders, when they intend to undermine any strong well-fortified defensible Fortress, not desperately to begin their Mines at the very foundation of the Works at first, for fear of discovery, danger, prevention, but at a competent distance, and then to make their approaches by insensible degrees, till at last they have undermined, or blown up the very Walls and Works themselves; The self-same Policy was used by this Arch-Roman Ingineer to undermine and blow up our established Religion: He had learnt from Abbot Bernard: A minimis incipiunt, qui in maxima proruunt; and from Chrysostom: Id certe moris est apud haereticos, ut adumbrant seipsos & occultent in principijs, quousque majorem fiduciam capeant, & quodam favore multitudinis juventur: & tunc contagiosa sua venena intrepide effundunt. Wherefore he began his mines at some seeming distance, and set blinds before them, to prevent discovery. To this purpose combining with the Jesuits, & prosecuting their very method to ruin our Religion, he first bent all his force & industry to introduce Arminianism (the most plausible less discernible Doctrinal part of Popery, yet a ready Jesuitical Posterne to let in all the rest) and that under a specious pretence of opposing Puritanism and Puritans only, against whom he labored to engage some Prelates, and the Duke of Buckingham first, then next His Majesty. This practice of his he began in Oxford in a Sermon preached by him on Shrove-Sunday, Anno 1614. for which he was then publicly (though not by name) taxed by Learned Dr. Robert Abbot, Dr. of the Chair in Oxford, in his Sermon all Saint Peters, on Easter day, 1615. as appears by a † Letter, and Notes of this Sermon under his own hand, sent by him to the then Bishop of Lincoln his great Patron:

Questiones Arminianae.
• An. 1
  • 1. Paulus ad Rom. cap. 7. loquatur in sua Persona de serenato? Af.
  • 2. Analysis Arminij 9. cap ad Rom. sit probanda? Neg.
• 2.
  • 1. Praevisio fidelitatis & infidelitatis praecedat aeternum decretum praedestinationis? N.
  • 2. Objectum Electionis sit fidelis ad finem perseveraturus? N.
• 3.
  • 1. Justicia originalis Adamo fuerit ante lapsum naturalis? A.
  • 2. Lapsus Adami diverso respectu dici possit, necessarius & contingens? A.
• 4.
  • 1. Peccatum Originale infantes sine actualibus peccatis morientes condemnet? A.
  • 2. Homo post lapsum retinuer it liberum arbitrium ad bonum? N.
• 5.
  • 1. Ponenda sit in Deo scientia media de futuris conditionatis ascientia simplicis intelligentiae & visions distincta? N.
  • 2. Facienti quod in se est ex naturae viribus, dentur infallibiter auxilia ad salutem necessaria? N.
• 6.
  • 1. Gratia sufficiens ad salutem concedatur omnibus? N.
  • 2. Gratia regenerationis sit resistibilis? N.
• 7.
  • 1. To Credere sine meritorum Christi imputatione nos justificet? N.
  • 2. Aliquis possit à fide penitus excidere? N.
• 8.
  • 1. Renatus possit & debeat esse certus de sua salute? A.
  • 2. Fideles possint in hac vita vivere sine peccato? N.
• 9.
  • 1. Deus author peccati statuatur ex sententia Orthodoxorum de praedestinatione?
  • 2. Arminianismus sit mere Semi-Pelagianismus? A

These questione, it seems did much displease him, as crossing his Jesuitical design of propagating Arminianism.

Besides, we find in his own Diary these Passages under his own hand in pursuance of this design,

Immediatly after King James his death (a bitter Eenemy to the Arminians, whom he branded with the titles of Atheistical Sectaries, and pestilent Heretics, who dare take upon them that Licentious Liberty, to fetch again from Hell the ancient Heresies long since condemned, or else to invent new of their own brain, contrary to the belief of the true Catholic Church, Bishop Laud to engage the King and Duke against the Anti-Arminians, under the title of Putitans, and ingratiate the Arminians in their favor under the Title of Orkthodox Divines, presented the Duke with a Catalogne of the names of Clergy men, who were Orthodox, (to wit Arminians,) and who Putitans, which he thus expresseth in his Diary.

April 5. 1625. Die Martis, Schedulam exhibui Duci Buckinghamiae, in qua Nomina er ant omnium Ecclesiasticorum sub literis O. & P. (that is Orthodox and Puritans.) Nomina ut sic digererem, jussit ipse Dux Buckinghamiae, traditurus ea (ut dixit) Regi Carolo.

Within four days after, the Duke of Buckingham sent this Prelate to Bishop Andrew's to consult about the 5. Arminian Articles condemned in the Synod of Dort, to promote, and propagate them in our Church, and to return his Answer to him, as is clear by these Passages in his Diary, written with his own hand.

April 9. 1625. Eodem die in mandatis accepiut Rever. Episc. Winton: adirem, & quid velit in causa Ecclesiae sciscitarem: Responsum referem: PRAECIPVE IN 5. ARTICVLIS, &c. April 10. die Solis, post concionem finitam adij Episcopum, que tum Camera sua in Aulâ Regia erat; protuli qua accipi in mandatis; responsum dedit April 13. die Mercurij. Retuli ad Ducem Buck quid responderit Episcopus Winton.

These Bishops of the Arminian & Popish party, after serious consultation among themselves, concluded, that for the better introducing, advancing of the Arminian and Popish Errors in our Church, Richard Montague then Bachelor of Divinity, having the Repute of a great Scholar (being formerly engaged in this Quarrell by the complaints of Mr. Ward, and Mr. Yates against him for the Arminian & Popish Tenets broached in his Gagge,) should in a new Book of his, entitled Appello Caesarem (compiled by all their consents, as appeared by their subscriptions to it, which they afterwards cunningly with-drew when they had procured, Dr. Francis Whites approbation of it leaving him in the sudds alone) as he oft complained, publicly broach, justify, maintain all the Arminian Tenets condemned in the Synod of Dort, as the received Doctrines of the Church of England, and impair the Reputation of that Synods determinations, as the private opinions only of some few illiterate Puritans. This book of his was disallowed by Dr. Abbot then Archbishop of Canterbury and his Chaplines, who stopped it at the Press: but the now Archbishop by his own and the Dukes power, procured it notwithstanding, to be printed, and dedicated to his Majesty in the very beginning of his Reign, thereby to engage him in the Actual Patronage of the Arminian Points, and party, which Montague impetrated at his hands in his Epistle Dedicatory.

This Book giving great and just offense to most men, Dr. Prideaux soon after upon a fit occasion, spake somewhat against it in the Schools at Oxford; admonishing young Scholars, to be cautelous in reading it: of which there was present notice sent to the Prisoner (then Bishop of St. David's) by way of complaint, as these two letters (found in his Study by Mr. Prynne) most clearly manifest.

This last letter intimates an intention to question Dr. Prideaux for these Passages; but the Parliament following soon after, this Book was publicly complained of in the Commons House, and Montague himself there questioned for it, of which this Archbishop took special notice, and thereupon gave all in couragment & protection he could to Montague, as his own Diary manifests in these following clauses, Iulij. 7. 1625. Die Iovis R. Mount. inductus est in Domu • Parliament inferiorem, &c. Iulij 9. Die Saturni, placuit Serenissimo Regi CAROLO, intimare domui illi, SIBI NON PLACERE que de Montacutio, dicta ibi vel statuta fuêre Se inconsulto, Iulij 13. Iter mihi eo facienti obviam casu factus est R Montacutius; PRIMVS FVI qui cum certiorem fecide REGIS ERGA IPSVM GRATIA, &c. A pregnant evidence under his own hand. First that himself was a principal Patriot of Montague and his Book. 2. That he was the first that acquainted him of the Kings Royal favor towards him, for writing this Book, notwithstanding the complaints against it in the Parliament, if not a procurer of the King to intimate his dislike to the Commons House of their proceedings against him; which being discontinued by the dissolution of that Parliament at Oxford; were again revived in the next Parliament; at which time the Bishop procured the Duke to sound his Majesty's opinion concerning Montague's Cause and Book; which to please the Parliament the King then seemed willing to leave to their censure, whereat the Bishop was very much troubled, as this Passage in his Diary manifests.

January 29. 1625. Dies solis erat, intellexi quid D. Buck: collegit de Causa, Libro & opinionibus, Rich. Montacutij R. C. (King Charles) apud se statuisset. Videor videre nubem surgentem & minantem Ecclesia Anglicana. Dissipet pro Misericordia sua Deus.

Soon after there were two Conferences held at York house, before the Duke, and divers Nobles about Montague's Books and opinions, which were there oposed, by Dr. Preston, and Bishop Morton, but defended by Doctor White, and Bishop Laud, who records this memorial of these Conferences in his Diary, Feb. 11. 1625 Die Sabbati ad instantiam Comitis Warwicensis Colloquium fuit in causa R. Mountacutij in adibus Ducis Buckinghamia, &c. Febr. 17. Die Veueris, Colloquium praedictum secundum habitum est, non paucis e Proceribus Regni praesentibus, loco pradicto.

On the 18. of April 1626. Mr. Pyne made a Report in the Commons House from the Commitee of Religion concerning Montague's Appeale, and his Arminian and Popish Tenants therein comprised: whereupon it was voted in the House.

1. That he had disturbed the Peace of the Church by publishing Doctrine, contrary to the Articles of the Church of England, and the Book of Homilies.

2. That there are divers Passages in his Book (especially against those he termeth Puritans,) apt to move sedition betwixt the King and his Subjects, and between Subject and Subject.

3. That the whole frame and scope of his Book is, to discourage the wellaffected in Religion from the true Religion Established in the Church, and to incline them, and as much as in him lay TO RECONCILE THEM TO POPERY.

This Report was no sooner made, but this Bishop (Montague's great Patron who engaged him in this Popish service) had a Copy thereof, and of all other proceedings therein delivered to him, which he endorsed with his own hand: but the Parliament being soon after disolved, Montague instead of a severe censure for the Arminian Popish Assertions in his book was punished with the Bishopric of Chichester, to which he was advanced by this Prelates means, to affront the Parliament and his Predecessor Bishop Carleton, who answered Montague's Book in print, during the Parl. which book was then likewise answered by Francis Rouse Esquire in a Book called King James his Religion; No sooner was the Parliament ended, but both these Books were suppressed by this Bishops means, though recommended to the Press by the House of Commons order, and Montague's offensive Book publicly sold without restraint. Michael Sparke the Elder deposed, that Bishop Carlton sent for him, sitting the Parliament, and desired him to print his Book against Montague; and to encourage him the more, granted him a protection under his own hand; whereupon he printed it: After which Doctor Goad, Archbishop Abbots Chapline, Doctor Ward, and Dr. Belcankwell licenced it for the Press, with a special recommendation, whereupon he reprinted it: yet notwithstanding immediately after the Parliament ended, by Bishop Lauds means, this Licensed book was called in, seised on, and burned in private, and he questioned in the High Commission for printing it. After which this Book of Montague's, and his Arminian Popish Tenants were severally answered by Dr. Featley and Doctor Goad (Chaplines to Archbishop Abbot) in their Paralells; by Mr. Henry Burton in his Plea, by M. Ward, Mr. Yates and Master Wotton, in several Tracts by Master Prynne in his Perpetuity, and by Doctor Sutclife; But these Books of theirs, though licenced by Archbishop Abbots Chaplines, were called in and suppressed by this Bishops mere Arbitrary Power, & the Authors, Printers, sellers of most of them, brought into the High Commission (as Mr. Prynne, Mr. Burton, Mr. Sparkes, Mr. Jones, Mr. Bowler Mr. Bourn, with others, as was attested by the three first of them upon Oath, and manifested by the Articles in the High Commission;) yet these their authorised orthodox books were all seized on, and some of them burnt in private, and Dr. Sutcliffe's Book against Montague suppressed in the Press, when four sheets thereof were printed, which printed sheets Mr. Prynne found in this Archbishops Study, with this endorsment under his own hand, read at the Lord's Barre, The beginning of Dr. Sutcliffe's Censure upon Mr. Montague's Appeale: It was prohibited in the Press.

Here upon the Arminian party both in Court, our Universities, and else where, grew very great bold, insolent, & their opinions spread themselves like a dangerous Leprosy, over the whole body of our Church, to the grand exultation & advantage of the Jesuits, who first planted this sovereign drugge of Arminianism among us, to reduce us back to Rome, as appears by these Passages in a Jesuits letter sent to the Rector at Brussels, a little before the Parliament w ^ch begun at Westminster the 17. of Mar. 1627. The Copy of which Letter, endorsed with the Archbishops own hand, was seized on in his Study at Lambeth, and attested before the Lord's by M. Prynne.

Father Rector, &c. We have now many strings to our Bow, and have strongly fortified our faction; and have added two Bulworkes more; For when King James lived (we know) he was very violent against Arminianism; and interrupted with his Pestilent wit, & deep learning our strong designs in Holland, &c. NOW WE HAVE PLANTED THE SOVERAIGNE DRVGGE ARMINIANISME, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their Heresy: and it flourisheth and bears fruit in due season, &c. For the better prevention of the Puritans, the Arminians have already locked up the Dukes ears, and we have those of our Religion which stand continually at the Dukes Chamber to see who goes in and out. We cannot be too circumspect and careful in this regard. I cannot choose but laugh to see how some of our own rank have encountered themselves; you would scarce know them if you saw them; and tis admirable, how in speech and gesture they Act the Puritans. The Cambridge Scholars to their woeful experience shall see we can act the Puritan a little better then they have don the Jesuits, I am at this time transported with joy to see how happily all instruments and means as well great a lesser, co-operate unto our purposes, But to return unto the main Fabric, OUR FOVNDATION IS ARMINIANISME: The Arminians affect mutation, this we second and enforce by probable arguments, &c.

From which Letter was observed;

1. That the Jesuits were the Original planters of Arminianism among us:

2. That they reputed it the foundation of their Romish Fabric intended to be here erected among Vs: the chief instrument to effect their Jesuitical purpose, and to purge out the Protestant Religion.

3. That the Arminians were but the Jesuits Agents to promote their ends, & that both of them were very intimate with the Duke of Buckingham, at whose lodgings they usually met.

4. That this Archbishop knew all this, he receiving the Copy of this Letter upon the 27. of Mar. 1628. as appears by his own endorsment of it; yet notwithstanding he promoted Arminians and propagated Arminianism all he could; but in a most cunning Jesuitical way: for perceiving the whole Parliament generally bent against Arminianism and Montague's Book, hereupon this Jesuitical Prelate abusing both the Parliament and His Majesty, to set up Arminianism more securely projected a new way of advancing it, under a specious pretence of silencing both sides: by which policy he inhibited all writing, preaching and disputes against it, and quelled the opposite Anti-Arminian party. To which end he procured His Majesty by a printed Declaration prefixed to the 39. Articles, compiled by himself and other Bishops, of which the most part were Arminians (pretended principally to suppress Arminianism, but intended really for advancing it) to prohibit all unnecessary disputations, altercations, or questions to be raised, which might nourish faction both in Church and Common-wealth. That in these both curious and unhappy differences, which

That this Declaration was made by this Bishops instigation, procurement, and so generally reputed not only at home but abroad, is evident by this passage of Doctor Barons Letter of Aberdean; concerning the pacifying of the 5. Articles, sent to this Arch-Bishop, and found in his Study endorsed with his own hand, dated the 20. of April 1634. Piam hanc Ampl: tuae de Pace Ecclesiae tuenda & conservanda, sollicitudinem, illustri specimine JAMPRIDEM NOTAMOMNIBVSET TESTATAM fecisti, cum Majestas Regia TE AVTHORE ET, SVASORE exitialiisti dissidio de Praedestinatione & annexis Articulis, quo or bis hic Britannicus fere collidebatur, sua authoritate finem imposuit, & impetuosas exulceratorum animorum motus ita compescuit, ut dispersis & dissipatis rixarum indies gliscentium nebulis, nunc optato pacis sudo fruamur. &c.

By color of this Declaration and pretended Amnestie, of silencing both sides the Anti-Arminian truths and received Doctrines of our Church came to be totally silenced, suppressed in Press, Pulpit, Schools, Universities, and the Arminian Errors found free passage in them all without any or very little opposition; this being the highest conquest the Arminian faction could aspire to, yea more then they could hope for in so short a space. Hereupon their prevailing party having greatest power at Court, and in the High Commission, (Archbishop Abbot being then by their power and policy sequestered from both, and from his Archiepiscopall authority, delegated to Bishop Land, and others of the Arminian combination) by color and abuse of this Declaration all Books against the Arminians were suppressed, the Authors prosecuted in the High Commission, those who preached or disputed against them in the Universities, City, Court or Country, silenced, suspended, banished, imprisoned enforced to recant or ruined, at least kept from all preferments: on the contrary those of the Arminian confederacy were advanced, applauded, countenanced, protected, and freely tolerated to vent their Erronious Tenets everywhere in Press, Pulpit, Court, both Universities, without any real convention or suspension, as we shall prove anon.

And to set on this design with greater advantage to the Arminian party, His Majesty being pressed to publish a Proclamation for the calling in of Bishop Montague's Book, (no less than three years after its publication, upon sundry complaints made against it in 3. successive Parliaments, after all the books dispersed, vented and out of all danger of seisure) he so ordered the matter, that there was no execution of it in regard of the Book, this Proclamation was so cunningly and partially penned, that Montague's Popish and Arminians opinions were no ways censured, nor his Books condemned to the fire by it (for fear of hindering the project then in hand) so that all intelligent men might at first view discern the main end of it, was not to suppress and call in the Book, or discredit the Author (who was then advanced to a Bishopric for his pains by Lauds recommendations) but merely to suppress all Books in answer of it, and silence all preaching, writing, disputes against the Arminian Errors, as unnecessary questions, and needless controversies; which appears by the Proclamation it self, thus endorsed with the Archbishops own hand (who had the penning or correcting of it) Janu. 17. 1628. A Proclamation for calling in Bishop Montague's Book.

The Commons then Assembled in Parliament discovering both the sinister end and abuse of this His Majesty's Declaration and Proclamation, in favor of the Arminians, drew up a notable Declaration to His Majesty concerning the increase of Popery and spreading of Arminianism, &c. concerning the latter whereof, they made this following complaint, wherein they charged this Prelate, then Bishop of Bath and Wells with favoring Arminians and their opinions:

As our fear concerning Change or Subversion of RELIGION is grounded upon the daily increase of Papists, the only professed Enemies thereof, for the reasons formerly mentioned; so are the hearts of Your Subjects no less perplexed, when with sorrow they behold a daily growth and spreading of the faction of the Arminians, that being, (as Your Majesty well knows) but a cunning way to bring in Popery and the professors of those opinions, the common disturbers of the Protestant Churches and Incendiaries of those States wherein they have gotten any head, being Protestants in show, but Jesuits in Opinion and practice: which caused Your Royal Father (with so much pious wisdom and ardent zeal) to endeavor the suppressing of them as well at home as in our Neighbouring Countries: and Your Gratious Majesty inimating his most worthy example, have openly and by your Proclamations, declared your mislike of those persons and of their opinions; who notwithstanding are much favored and advanced, not wanting friends even of the Clergy near to Your Majesty, namely Doctor Neal, Bishop of Winchester, and Doctor Laud Bishop of Bath and Wells, who are justly suspected to be unsound in their opinions that way; And it being now generally the way to preferment, and promotion in the Church, many Scholars do bend their Studies to maintain these Errors; their Books and opinions are suffered to be printed and published, and on the other side the impressions of such as are written against them, and in defense of the Orthodox Religion, are hindered, and prohibited, and (which is a boldness most incredible) this restraint of Orthodox Books is made under color of Your Majesty's (formerly mentioned) Proclamation, the intent and meaning whereof we know was quite contrary, &c.

To which Declaration Bishop Laud returned a Peremptory answer in His Majesty's Name, written and endorsed with his own hand, the Original whereof (attested by Master Prynne) was read at the LORD'S Barre in these following words, so far as concerned the charge of Arminianism.

After which the Commons in pursuance of their Opposition against the growing Arminian Faction, On the 28. of January 1628. (but 11. days after the forementioned Proclamation concerning Montague's Book, and prohibiting books against it) passed this notable Vote in Parliament after a large debate; which the Archbishop in his indorsment on it stiles; The Challenge of the lower House in matters of Religion.

To which Challenge of theirs this pragmatical Bishop then returned this bold peremptory answer, written with his own hand, produced, attested by Master Prynne, and read at the Lord's Barre in Evidence against him.

This Parliament also being soon after broken up in discontent by this Bishops power and policy, the Arminian and Popish party grew more bold numerous, potent, and prevalent everywhere, so as the Pulpits at Whice-hall, Paul's Cross, Oxford, Cambridge, and else where, ecchoed again with Arminian Paradoxes, without restraint, and none could or durst oppose them without exemplary punishment, if not all most certain ruin: Books in defense of Arminianism, and Semi-plagianisme were published, printed with public allowance, and all impressions against them most diligently suppressed; the Recantations of Arminian Tenets in former times made in our Universities, were embesled as Barrets Recantation in Cambridge, May 10. 1595.) and new Recantations enjoined to and registered against their opposites, of all which we shall produce some remarkable instances.

The Ministers in and about London, being restrained by Colour of His Majesty's forementioned Declaration and Proclamation, to Preach anything concerning Election, Predestination, Perserverance, or anything opposite to the Arminian Errors thereupon framed this ensuing Petition to his Majesty (about the end of the Parliament, 1628.) for liberty to Preach against the Arminian errors in point of Predestination &c. which this Bishop being informed off, anticipated, and frustrated, two of the Copies, of which Petition were found in his Study by Mr. Prynne, thus endorsed with his own hand. The Copy of the intended Petition about liberty of Preaching Predestination, &c.

About March: 1628. Dr. Hall then Bishop of Exceter published a Book called the Reconciler, in the close whereof, he inserted two Letters, to vindicate himself from the imputation of Arminianism, wherewith some had then aspersed him; to wit, his own letter to Dr. Davenant, then Bishop of Salisbury, and his Answer thereunto; which Letters coming to be licenced, Doctor Thomas Turner the Bishops Chaplain, who authorized it (no doubt by the Bishops directions and command) expunged, these two Passages out of the Letters, against the Arminian Tenets, and in approbation of the Synod of Dort. containing the principle Subject matter of the Letters, and the end for which they were written, the Copy of which Purgations was seized in the Archbishops Study by Mr. Prynne who attested it, thus endorsed with his own hand. That which my Chapline Mr. Turner left out of the letters of the Bishop of Exceter, and Sarum ABOUT ARMINIANISME.

Nathaniel Butter, the Stationer, perceiving these two letters not only extremely mutilated, but made altogether useless, and his Book less vendible by these Purgations of the Licencer, adventured to print these expunged passages in them, whereupon he was apprehended and brought before Bishop Laud by a Pursuivant, committed Prisoner by him to the Fleet, without Baile or maineprize, contrary to the Petition of Right, though he tendered baile, his Books seized, and afterwards Articled against in the High Commission, and there almost ruined, only for printing those deleted Passages in two of our own Bishops Letters; as was proved by the Testimony of Master Henry Burton and Michael Sparkes senior, committed to the Fleet by the Bishop at the same time; by the Warrant of his commitment, under the Bishops own hand, the Articles in the High Commission against Butter, Artic. 4. 5. and his Answer thereunto, produced in Court.

About the same time Nathaniel Carpenter Chapline to Archbishop Usher, published a Book intitled Achitophel, or the Picture of a wicked Politician. printed at Oxford by Lycence, wherein were divers passages against Arminianism, averring it to be planted among us by Jesuitical Politicians to undermine our Religion by degrees, and covertly to introduce Popery it self: which Book was presently called in, and all the Passages against Arminianism expunged by this Bishops Agents, which done, it was reprinted at London without them, Anno 1629. to the great injury both of the truth and Author: as was attested by Mr. Prynne, & Michael Spark Senior and evident to all who will compare these two Editions. What other passages against the Arminians and their Tenet have been expunged in other Authors; shall be given in evidence elsewhere.

We shall next produce some memorable Instances what countenance was given to Arminian Books and Sermons, notwithstanding his Majesty's Declarations and Proclamations to the contrary, by this Archbishops means. Doctor Thomas Jackson, Chapline in Ordinary to his Majesty, even sitting the Parliament, soon after the Kings Declaration and Proclamation, published, A Treatise of divine Essence, and Attributes: part first, printed at London, 1628. for John Clerke Licensed by this Prelates Chaplain, dedicated to the Right honorable William Earl of Pembroke in the very Epistle Dedicatory, to this Noble Peer, he professeth himself AN ARMINIAN, and Patron of their Tenets: And Chap. 8. to 20. he professedly maintains: A mutability in God's eternal Decrees of Election and Reprobation, depending upon the actions, and wills of men; Universal Grace and Redemption; with other Arminian Errors. This Book though publicly complained of, was never called in by the Bishop; but the second part thereof printed by Licence, An. 1629. and the Author of it advanced to the Presidentship of Corpus Christi College in Oxford, by this Bishop, yea by him designed to be Doctor of the Chair (though he missed that preferment) to poison the University of OXFORD with his Arminian Drugges.

An. 1630. Doctor Brookes of Trinity College in Cambridge Writ an Arminian Treatise of Predestination, with which he acquainted Bishop Laud, who encouraged him in the work, recommending it to the perusal of Doctor Lindsey, and Doctor Beale (two great Arminians,) promising to peruse it himself, as appears by sundry Letters. Whereupon Doctor Brookes returned this answer to him concerning it, in Answer of this Bishops Letter to him, seized in his Study by Mr. Prynne; dated from Cambridge, Dece. 15. 1630. wherein there is this desperate passage worthy Observation.

What gross aspersions he here casts upon the Parliament and Anti-Arminians is so apparent, as needs no explanatory or aggravating Commentary.

On the 27. of Novem. 1630. Doctor Martin this Bishops household Chaplain, a professed Arminian, licensed a Book for the Press, entitled, An Historical Narration of the judgment of some must learned and Godly English Bishops, holy Martyrs and others, concerning God's Election, and the Merits of Christ's death; set forth by I. A. of Ailward (a late Seminary Priest) and printed for Samuel Nealand, 1631. The whole scope of this Book was to prove, the Martyrs and first Reformers of our Church in K. Ed. the 6. and Q. Mary's days, and the beginning of Q. Elizabeth's Rain, to be Arminians, and Arminianism the established Doctrine of our Church: The first 66 pages of this Book, contain, The Copy of an Answer unto a certain Letter; wherein the Answerer purgeth himself and others from Pelagius Errors, and from the Error of Free-will, or Justification of Works, wherewith he seemed to be charged by the said Letter. And further, he showeth wherein he differeth in judgment from certain English Writers and Preachers whom he chargeth with teaching false doctrine, under the name of Predestination. This Treatise, writes he, was published about the second or third year of Queen Elizabeth, by a Protestant Divine, who flourished both in the time of King Edward, and Queen Elizabeth, and in the time of Queen Mary for his Conscience endured voluntary exil; but he names not the Author in particular, nor produceth any warrant for this Encomium of him: The residue of the Book are some mistaken & perverted fragments called out of Bishop Hoopers Preface upon the Commandments; and Father Latymers Sermons; concerning which Book Master Prynne gave in this evidence upon his Oath; That it was the greatest affront and imposture ever offered to, or put upon the Church of England in any age, deserving the highest Censure; of the first discovery whereof God made him the only Instrument: For as soon as this Book was printed, one Copy of it was brought him by a Friend; who informed him, that it was licensed by Master Martin. the Bishops Arminian Chaplain; that the Bishop himself had given order, the Book should not be published, till he had presented one of them to the King, and gained his Royal approbation thereunto: That a day or two after the Book was published by the Bishops direction; One Copy whereof coming to the late learned Sir Humfrey Linds hands, he was very much troubled thereat upon its perusal; whereupon he repaired to Master Prynne at Lincolns-Iaue with the Book; desiring him to take some pains to give a speedy answer to it, being (as he averred) a most dangerous Book, making more for the spreading and justifying of Arminianism, then any Book formerly published. To which Master Prynne replied, that he had no leisure, and less encouragement to answer it, being then & just before vexed in the High Commission for his Perpetuity, and other of his Books written against Arminians; Wherefore Sir Humfrey himself who had more leisure, friends and abilities then himself might do well to return an answer to it. Who thereupon replied to Master Prynne, that none was so fit to answer it as himself, who had perused more ancient English Writers, and was better versed in them then any man he knew; Whereunto Master Prynne rejoined, That he conceived there was no need at all for himself or any man else to answer this book, for that there were two answers to it already in print; To which Sir Humfrey replied, it was impossible, for that this Book came forth but that morning; unto which Mr. Prynne answered, that the greatest part and main substance of this Narration was answered Verbatim in two printed Books, long before either of them was born, and to give him fall satisfaction therein, he shown him two printed answers thereunto, and discovered the whole Imposture to him in that manner as he related it at the Lord's Barre.

First he produced to him, & now to the Lord's, the Original printed Copy of the foresaid answer, made unto a certain Letter, &c. which had all the symptoms of an unlicensed Pamphlet; there being neither Authors, nor Printers name, nor place where, nor year when it was printed to be found in the Title, or any other part of the Book, nor the least mention where, or by whom it was to be sold. Therefore it was doubtless printed by stealth in a Corner, and not by any public allowance, its entry not being extant in the Stationers-Hall. Next he produced two ancient answers in print to this pernicious Pamphlet: The first of them written by John Veron, a very learned man, Chaplain to Queen Elizabeth, and Divinity Lecturer in the Cathedral of Paul's in the beginning of her Rain, to whom he Dedicated his answer to this Pamphlet, Imprinted at London by John Tysdale by public authority. In which answer, (entitled. An Apology or Defense of the Doctrine of Predestination, set fort by the Queens Highness her most humble and obedient servant John Veron, and Dedicated to her Majesty,) we have the name of the nameless Author of this Arminian Pamphlet, the occasion of compiling it, and the quality of the Author, expressed to the full, together with a complete answer thereunto. The Authors name is therein averred to be one Champeneyes, f. 20. 31. 37. 40. 41. 42. His condition and quality is therein thus expressed, f. 16. But in this I comfort myself, that his tongue is known to be no slander, For the like did he most proudly attempt in your most Gratious Brother good King Edward the sixths days, AGAINST ALL THE GODLY PREACHERS OF THAT TIME calling them marked Monsters of Anti-Christ, and men void of the Spirit of God, (for none be they never so Godly, never so earnest and faithful laborers in the Lord's Vineyard, have the Spirit of God, or do know the efficacy of it, but he only) as many godly persons be able to testify to his face: that he did therefore, and for MANT OTHER ABOMINABLE ERRORS which he then stoutly maintained, BEARE AT THAT TIME A FAGGOT AT PAUL'S CROSSE, Father Coverdale making then the Sermon there. Belike fearing now the like punishment, and that he should be compelled to revoke his Pelagian-like opinion, he durst not, for all his proud boast, set his own name to his railing and venomous books, nor yet suffer them to be sold openly or publicly in the Book-binders shops, but cowardously suppressing both his own name and the name of the unwise and foolish Printer, got the whole Impression into his hands, that so he might in hugger-mugger send them unto his privy friends abroad, whom be like he suspected to be of his Affinity and damnable opinion. How be it, this could not be wrought so privily, but that within a while, some of his books came into my hands, whereby shortly after, the Printer was known and brought to his Answer; whom this stout Champion of Pelagius hath left in the briars, and least he himself should be fain to show a reason of his Doctrine, doth keep himself out of the way still, and dares not once show his face. If he be able to maintain his Doctrine against my book to, let him come forth and play the man, I am ready at all times to yield unto the truth, and unto the sincere teachers thereof.

After this, f. 20. he stiles Champenyes; The blind guide of the freewill men: f. 37. Champenyes a very Pelagian and consequently a rank Papist: p. 40. he suffereth the Devil by such Sectaries as Champenyes is, to sow his lies abroad, &c. And f. 41. Champenyes is the Standard-bearer of the freewill men. What an abominable Imposture was it then for this new Pamphleter to style him; A Protestant Divine who flourished in the time of K. Edward and Q. Elizabeth, and in the time of Q. Mary for his conscience endured voluntary exile; And to place him in the front of the most learned and Godly English Bishops, holy Martyrs and others that suffered Martyrdom in the days of Q. Mary, for the truth and Gospel of Christ Jesus, in which number he is Registred in the Title Page, and placed before Bishop Hooper, and Father Latimer in the Book it self,

The occasion of writing this unlicenced obscure Pamphlet, was as followeth, John Veron being Divinity Lecturer in Paul's Cathedral, in the first year of Queen Elizabeth, handled the Doctrine of Predestination, and other incident Points thereto belonging in direct opposition the Popish, Pelagian, and now Arminian Tenets; which Lectures he soon after published in Print, and dedicated to Q. Elizabeth, in a book entitled, A Fruitful Treatise of Predestination, &c. Printed at London for JOHN TYLDALE about the second year of Queen Elizabeth's Rain: against which Lectures, this Champnyes taking some exceptions, published this Anonimous Answer, by way of a Letter: which Veron soon after answered, almost verbatim, in his authorized Apology, dedicated to the Queen, whereto Champeneys never replied. After which, this Letter was largely answered, word for word, from the very Title page to the end thereof, in a Book Intituled, An Apology or Defense of the English Writers and Preachers, with Cerberus the Three-Headed Dog of Hell, chargeth with false Doctrine, under the name of Predestination: written by Robert Crowley Clerke,) a fugitive for Religion in Queen Mary's days and an eminent laborious Preacher in those times) Vicar of Saint Giles without Criplegate in London: Imprinted at London in Pater-Noster-Rowe, at the sign of the Star, by Henry Denham, Anno 1566. Octob. 14. Seene and allowed according to the order appointed. In which book this Pamphlet which the Bishop and his Agents now obtrude upon us, as the received Doctrine of our prime Martyrs and of the Church of England in King Edward the 6th. and Queen Elizabeth's Reignes, was by public Authority, in the name of all the Orthodox Writers, and Preachers of England, refuted, as directly contrary to the received Doctrine of our Martyrs, Writers, Preachers, Church, and censured as Pelagiau and Popish in both these ancient printed Answers. It must needs therefore be an inexpiable, insufferable abuse in this Archbishop and his Instruments, thus to revive, reprint this exploded Erronious Arminian Treatise, in the year, 1631 and obtrude it on us as the received Doctrine of our Martyrs and Church of England in the beginning of Reformation, whereas there was nothing less, on purpose to propagate his Arminian Errors, and strengthen that lesuiticall faction. After this Mr. Prynne produced Bishop Hoopers Confession and Protestation of his faith, made to the whole Parliament, An. 1550. in King Edwards days. His comfortable Exposition upon the Psalms (London, 1580.) his Articles upon the Creed, London, 1584. Artic. 3. to 15. 17. 21. 25. 29. 30. 33. 36. 38. to 56 62. 67. 68. 91. to 99. wherein he expressly in terminis refutes, those Arminian opinions, which this our Author would wrest out of the words of his Preface to the Commandments, contrary to his intention; together with divers Passages in Father Latimers Sermons, expressly against the Arminian Tenets, which explicate his other misapplied Clauses in the Hystoricall Naration, All which Mr. Prynne then shown to Sir Humphrey Lynde to his great satisfaction; & then desired him to repair to Bishop Laud in his name, to acquaint him with the premises, and this desperate Imposture he had obtruded on our Church to his eternal Infamie, and thereupon to advise him, speedily to call in and burn this dangerous seducing book or else he would prosecute him to the uttermost for this abuse. Sir Humphrey accordingly acquainted the Bishop & his Chaplin Martin herewith, but yet they took no course to suppress the Book; whereupon Mr Prynne repaired to Lambeth to Archbishop Abbot acquainted him with the execrablenesse of this imposture, shown him the several old Answers to this new printed Pamphlet with the express positions of Bishop Hooper, and Bishop Latimer, contrary to those imputed to them in this Narration; desiring him to call in this dangerous Historical Narration with all severity, and to cause it to be publicly burnt, to reprint the old Answers to it; and withal to give him leave to prosecute Bishop Laud his Chaplain Martin, with the publisher of this book in the high Commission for this insufferable abuse. To which Archb. Abbot gave this answer that this book did very much trouble him, that he had sent to Bishop Laud about it, who at first denied that his Chaplain licensed it, but afterwards acknowledged it; that he gave order to call it in (but it was in a private manner after most of the books v • nded) that he never saw nor knew of these 2. old Answers to it, & therefore desired Mr. Prynne to leave them with him for a time, promising faithfully to restore them, and to give him an accompt of this business on the Saturday following. In the mean time Mr. Prynne (because this book had done much harm in both the Universities) sent down some of these Answers of Veron, and Crowly, with some of Bishop Hoopers books to Oxf. & Cambridge to some of his acquaintance there; and to the University Lybrary at Oxford whither many resorted to peruse them to their great satisfaction, and the Bishops dishonor, by discovering this imposture to them. On Saturday being Easter Eve. Master Prynne repaired to Archbishop Ahbot for an Answer; who told him that he had called in this offencive book, seized on some of the copies, which were carried into Stationers-hall; that Bishop Laud had since been with him, that he had shown him the books there left, who confessed his Chaplin Martÿn had licenced this Narration in which he had done very ill, but he had given him such a rattling for his pains, that he would warrant His Grace he should never meddle with Arminian Books or Opinions more. To which Mr. Prynne replied; that indeed he had ratled him to very great purpose, for no longer then yesterday in the afternoon his Chapline Martin Preaching the Passion Sermon at Paul's Cross, publicly broached, maintained, Universal grace and Redemption, with all the Arminian Errors contained in this Book, and condemned in the Synol of Dort to the great offense of the Auditors, as his own Chaplains Dr. Buckner, Master Agustine and Dr. Featley could at large inform him; and therefore the Bishop did most grossly abuse his Grace herein, who should do well to proceed against both of them and publicly censure them in the High-Commission, or this gross practice, to the end the whole Kingdom might take notice of it: and the Arminian party, be thereby discouraged: That the Books they had seized were but few, the greatest part of the Impression being vented, & they were called in so slighty and in so private a manner, that few or none took notice thereof: and therefore some public censure ought to pass upon them, & the Books thus seized to be openly burnt, else they would in a few months be sold openly again to corrupt the people, and no satisfaction at all given for this foul offense to the Church of England; which Archbishop Abbot confessed to be true, and said, he would take some Order in it: but by this Bishops power there was nothing more done against the Licenser, Compiler or Book, which soon after was as publicly sold, as if it had neverbeene called in, to the perverting of many in their judgments, who knew not of this grand Imposture; now publicly discovered at the Lord's Barre, by all the forementioned books themselves there produced, and the testimony of Master Prynne upon Oath: seconded by the Stationers book of entries, and the testimonies of Master Sparke, and Master Walley. Doctor Martin for this good service was presently after by this Bishop advanced to a great living, and likewise to the headship of Queens College in Cambridge, instead of other punishment, Master Prynne for his pains, in derecting this fraudulent dealing of the Bishop and his Chaplain, by way of revenge was soon after by this Bishops means imprisoned in the Tower, and most severely censured in the Star-Chamber, for his Book called Histrianastix (though Licensed by Authority) in which he made some mention of this imposture concealed from the most: so fatal was it in those times for any man out of Conscience, or public ends, to oppose the Bishops Arminian designs, such a Stirrop to mount up to preferments to advance them.

After this the Archbishops Chaplain Doctor Haywood on the 26. of August 1634 licensed Book entitled, Collectiones Theologica, writ by Thomas Chune, and Dedicated to the Archbishop of Canterbury himself, in which he justified the Arminian Errors, and the Church of Rome to be a true Church, whereof there were two Impressions in one year, yet neither the Author nor Book once questioned, though publicly complained of by Doctor Bastwicke, at his Censure in the High-Commission, where the Archb. openly justified it. In the years 1636. and 1639. the Arminian Errors were defended by Bishop Montague in print, in his Pars. 1. &. 2. Originum Ecclesiasticarum; God's Love to mankind, and by sundry others without control.

On the contrary; Doctor Twisse his Book in answer of Arminius, though writ in Latin, was refused License by the Bishop and his Arminian Chaplains, Bray, and Baker, and his answers to Doctor Jackson and the Arminian Pamphlet entitled, God's love to Mankind, suppressed; some Lectures of Bish. Davenant, and Sermons of Doctor Clerke against the Arminians were likewise stopped at the Press, and not suffered to be printed with their other Lectures and Sermons. What Books against Montague and the Arminians were called in, suppressed, and the Authors, Printers, Dispersers of them severely prosecuted in the High-Commission, in the Yeares 1628. and 1629 We have already evidenced; Only we shall inform you or one or two Presidents more of later date. Doctor George Downham Bishop of Derry in Ireland publishing a Book in that Kingdom, against the Arminians, and the Total and final Apostasy of the Saints from Grace, about the Yeare 1630. Some of them coming over into England, Bishop Laud caused a strict Letter to be written in his Majesty's name to Abbot Archbishop of Canterbury, for the calling in and suppressing it within the Realm of England, where it was accordingly seized on; and another Letter to Doctor Usher, Archbishop of Armagh, for the suppressing and seizing thereof in the Realm of Ireland; Which was manifested by the Docket Book in the signet Office where entreyes of those Letters are made in Aug. 1631. and by this Letter of Bishop, Usher to Bishop Laud, (found in his study at Lambeth indorsed with his own hand, and arrested by Master Prynne) which fully discovers, that he was the sole or principal occasion of his Majestices Letters for calling in this Book; which he seconded with his own Letter to Bishop Usher for that purpose, who returned this answer to him.

By this Letter it is apparent, that this Prelate, whiles Bishop of London, exercised a kind of Patriarchicall Jurisdiction, for suppressing all Orthodox Books against the Arminians both in England and Ireland; and that his commands in this kind were punctually executed by those Archbishops in both Kingdoms, who should have most stoutly opposed his Arminian Innovations.

About the Palsgraves first coming into Engl. An. 1635. there was a Book printed, entitled the Palsgraves Religion, containing the sum of the Religion professed in the Palatinate Churches, translated out of a printed Latin Copy; which Archbishop Laud caused to be strictly called in and suppressed, only because it glanced at the Arminian Errors: and bowing at the Name of JESUS, as not warranted by Phil. 29. 10. which was proved by the testimonies of Master Prynne, Michael Sparke Senior and others.

What policies (besides the forementioned Royal Declaration and Proclamation) this Arch-Prelate contrived and practiced to suppress all preaching against Armianisme in the Universities and elsewhere, we shall next discover and make good by evidences under his own hand.

In the year 1629. soon after the dissolution of the Parliament Bishop Laud presents to His Majesty a Paper written with his own hand (the original whereof was seized on in his Study at Lambeth by Master Prynne, and produced at the Barre) thus entitled by him. Considerations for the better settling of the Church Government: whereof the third consideration was this.

That His Majesty would be Graciously pleased to command the Lord's the Bishops that they give charge in their Trieniall Visitations and at other times, both by themselves and by the Arch-Deacons, that the Declaration for settling the Questions in difference be strictly observed. And that His Majesty would be Gratiously pleased once in half a year, to call for an account of all or so many of these, as in Wisdom shall think fit. These considerations were immediately after published, & sent to every Archbishop and Bishops to be strictly put in execution as his Majesty's own Instructions; when as in truth they were no other, but the Bishops, contrived by him alone, as the original Coppie, written, and another Coppie corrected afterwards with his own hand together with the Bishop of Bristolls Letter to him, dated Febr. 9. 1629. to resolve some Queries touching these Instructions concerning the Lecturers in Bristol, infallibly manifest. So that His Majesty was here the Bishops mere Instrument to promote his Arminian and popish designs.

These Instructions were published in most Diocese by the Bishops, but more solemnly in London-Diocese by this Bishop, who summoning all the Ministers and Lecturers about the City of London, to London house, made a solemn Oration to them wherein he pressed the necessity of these Instructions of his Majesty for the good of the Church, and their cheerful obedience to them, and withal sent letters to every Archdeacon in his Diocese to publish them to all the Clergy, and to give an exact account to him how they were observed at the end of their several Visitations; especially the third Instruction: For keeping the Kings Declaration, that so differences and questions may cease, inserted into these Letters with his own hand, as appeared by the Original Copy found in his Study.

Soone after this Mr. Mady the Lecturer at Christ-Church in London, delivering this Doctrine in a Sermon there. That Election was not Universal and Common, but special and peculiar, belonging to some: And, That the Principal and efficient cause of Election was the will and Love of God, and not any merit, or foreseen faith or works of man, which he manifested by some Scriptures & Fathers, this Bishop upon information hereof, convented him before him for this Orthodox Doctrine the 10. of March 1630. for that contrary to the Kings Proclamation, he had treated of Predestination and the forementioned points: Whereupon the Bishop by an Act of Court (found among his other Papers by Mr. Prynne) prohibited him to Preach anymore within his Diocese, and admonished him to obey this his Lordships Order. And Doctor Cornelius Burgess, about the same time, for using only this Passage in a Sermon on Col. 2. 7. If your Minister preach Popery or ARMINIANISME you may change your dwellings and not trouble the Peace and Order of the Church, was convented before the Bishop, enforced to deliver in the Copy of his Sermon, and much molested: and Mr. White, with sundry others suspended, for lightly touching upon some points relating to Arminianism, though agreeable to the Scriptures, and 17. Article of our Church.

As he thus proceeded in his Diocese, so he was far more violent in this kind in our Universities, especially in Oxford where he was Chancellor, of which we shall give you these few instances.

One Mr. Thomas Hill of Hart-hall in Oxford on the 24. of May 1631. Preaching at Saint Mary's Church there on James 1. 16. let fall these Passages in his Sermon: And here were my time and learning parallel to my Zeal, what a tempting doth present it self, to show how rashly (that I say not cruelly) our Pelagian Votaries, have handled the Decrees and Statutes of the King of Heaven: But they are to be mischieved into honor (but no matter how) which tempts them to disrelish sound Doctrine on no other ground then did David because the Lord's do not favor it. 1. Sam. 29. 6. Scriptures they use worse then the Turks do Christians at Tunis, enslave it to the vassalage of the foulest error, and according to their most current garb employ it to defend Popery, or as bad, PELAGIANISME &c. Popish Darts whet a freshon a Dutch Grinston, have pierced deep. and without speedy succor will prove mortal. I am persuaded these late transmarine T • nets had not been so jolly and brief among us, nor the opposite truth so Diametrally condemned by many, had they first made proof of these points in their own retired and serious contemplations.

For these slight glances against the Arminians (the Copy whereof was sent up to Bishop Laud, seised among his Papers, and endorsed with his hand;) by his procurement Mr. Hill was convented before the Vice-Chancellor & heads of Houses, and enforced to make a public submissive Recantation upon his knees, in a full Convocation held the 16. of July 1631. recorded in the University Register. f. 35. to this effect I Thomas Hill do freely and sincerely acknowledge before this Venerable Assembly of Convocation, that in a Sermon lately by me Preached in Saint Mary's, I did let fall divers scandalous speeches, partly in opposition to his Majesty's Jnjunctions, by odious justling together of certain factions in the Church, and imputing Pelagianism and Popery to the one side, Partly in disparagement of the present Government of State and Church, by making foul and erroneous Opinions, the rediest way nowadays, to preferment &c. All which passages in my Sermon I confess to have given just offense to the University, and to deserve the sharpest of Censures. Wherefore with all humble submission, I beseech the whole University represented in this Venerable House, to pass by this my woeful error, undiscreet and misguided zeal, And do faithfully promise hence forward to abstain from all such scandalous aspersions and intimations, as tending only to the disparagement of our Church, and the distraction and detrement of the University. And this my submission I humbly crave may be accepted, which I do here make willingly, and from my heart with true sorrow for what is past.

Thomas Hill.

Upon this submission and Recantation, the Arminian faction in Oxford grew very bold, and having the both Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor of their party, vented their errors publicly both in the Pulpit & Schools without any public check; whereupon one Mr. Thomas Forde of Magdalene Hall, Mr. Giles Thorn of Bailioll College, and Mr. Giles Hodges of Exeter College, moved with a pious zeal and indignation against their insolences, in June and July, 1631. in their Sermons at S ^r . Mary's used some bold expressions against the Arminians and their errors, under the Titles of Pelagians and Demi-Pelagians; for which being convented before the Vice-Chancellor, Doctor Smith, and others of the Arminian party, as Offendors against the Kings Instructions; and being ordered to bring in the Copies of their Sermons to him, when those who preached Arminianism, were neither questioned nor reproved, but applauded, advanced for it, they thereupon perceiving the Vice-Chancellors partiality and Injustice, appealed from him to the Proctors (as they might do by the University Statutes) who received their appeals. Hereupon Bishop Laud complains of their Appeales to the King, who on the 23. day of August following, heard the whole business at Woodstock, where, (by the Bishops procurement there present) these three young hopeful Divines were ordered to be expelled the University, and the two Proctors for receiving their Appeal, deprived of their places (a President without parallel in any former Age) whereupon they were all three in full Convocation on the 26. of August, accordingly banished & expelled the University as was evidenced by the sentence of their Banishment and deprivation, recorded in the University Register. fol. 32. to 39.

That this sentence of theirs was the Bishops own Act, was manifested by the Copies of their Accusations, by transcripts of their Sermons found in his Study, endorsed with his own hand, by their several Petitions to him for restitution to the University & likewise by these Passages in his Diary: Days of observation to me, The great hearing of the Oxford disorders at Woodstock by King Charles August 23. 1631. (A sentence so grateful to him, so advantageous to the Arminian faction, that both in his Diary, and Book of private Devotions, he make; the day on which it was given, a kind of Anniversary holy day, of special observation to him) After which it thus follows in his Diary.

August 23. 1631. In this June and July, were the great disorders by appealing from Doctor Smith, then Vice-Chancellor, the chief ring-leaders were Mr. Ford of Magdalene Hall, and Mr. Thorn of Baylioll College: The Proctors Mr. Atherton Burch and Mr. John Doughty received their Appeales, as if it had not been Parturbatio pacis, &c. The Vice-Chancellor was forced in a Statutable way to appeal to the King. The King with all the Lord's of his Council then present, heard the Cause at Woodstock, Aug. 23. 1631. being Tuesday in the afternoon, The sentence upon the hearing was, That Ford, Thorn, and Hodges of Exeter Coll: should be banished the University: And both the Proctors were commanded to come into the Convocation House and there resign their Office, that two others might be named out of the same Colleges, Doctor Prideaux Rector of Exeter College, and Doctor Wiskinson Principal of Magdelen-Hall, received a sharp Admonition for their misbehaviours in this business, (viz. for opposing the Arminian party, and favoring these Orthodox Scholars, being of their own Houses.)

True it is, that after this sentence of Banishment pronounced and executed against these parties, one of them, to wit, Master Hodges, upon his most humble Petition to His Majesty, and submission to the Archbishop, with promise to be his faithful obsequious Votary for the future, was restored to the University for one years space, only as a Probationer, to bewail his offense and learn obedience, yet upon these two harsh conditions.

First, That he should make a public Recantation Sermon in Saint Mary's Church in Oxford before the University, confessing his great offense in preaching contrary to His Majesty's Declaration; which he did accordingly on the first of January following, the Copy of which Sermon he sent up to the Bishop, in whose Study it was seized:

Secondly, That he should make this ensuing submission and Recantation in the Convocation House before the whole Assembly of the Doctors, Procters, Regent, and non-regent Masters, on his bended Knees, and with a mind officiously devoted; which he did accordingly; 15. Decem. 1631. as is manifest by the University Register, where his submission is recorded in these words, Fol. 42.

This done, after a full years probation and bewailing of his disobedience, he was upon his Petition to His Majesty fully restored, and his censure at Woodstock discharged, as the University Register manifests, which records both his Petition, and Restitution. pag. 50. 51.

Master Thorn likewise made a most submissive Petition to the Archbishop, desiring his favor pardon, and readmission to the University, but yet he found no fruits thereof. As for Mr. Ford; he refused to make any addresses to him and returning into Devonshire, some friends of his intended to elect him for their Lecturer, or Vicar it, the Town of Plymouth; of which the Bishop being informed presently procured a Letter from His Majesty, to the Major and Corporation of Plymouth not to choose Mr. Ford for their Lecturer or Vicar upon any terms, under pain of his Royal displeasure; and another Letter to the Bishop of Exeter, not to admit him to be their Lecturer or Vicar, in case they should elect him, notwithstanding His Majesty's Letter; as appears by the Docquet Book in the Privy signet Office, September 1631. Wherein we find these two Entries.

A Letter to the Major and Aldermen of Plymouth, requiring them to forbear, either to make any election of one Thomas Foard unto the Lectureship of that Town, or any ways to assist him in procuring the Advowson of the Vicarage there; be being lately expelled the University of Oxford, for a notable disobedience by him shown, procured by (the Bishop of London) dated 12. Sep. 1631.

A like to the Lord Bishop of Exeter, signifying His Majesty's pleasure, that in case the said Thomas Foard should be elected to the said Lectureship, or procure the said Advowson, he do not give any approbation thereof; procured, ut supra, dated 12. Septem. 1631.

These Letters were drawn by the Bishops own direction, not by the Secretary of State, or Clerks of the Signet, being not entered at large in the Letter Signet Book, but only this note of them entered in the Docquet Book, by which his implacable transcendent malice appeared against the opposites to Arminianism, that not satisfied with their unjust banishment out of Oxford, he endeavored by indirect means to hinder them from Ecclesiastical preferments in the Church, whereas he advanced those of the Arminian faction to places of highest eminency in the Church, as we shall manifest in due season.

After these severe proceedings against these Anti-Arminians in the University, the Arminians there grew very numerous, insolent, few or none dating to oppose them but Doctor Prideaux, with two or three more in some passages in their Sermons, for which they were presently questioned by the Arminian Faction, and enjoined public Recantations; witness the Recantation of William Hobbes Fellow of Trinitio College, the 25. of January 1632. for preaching against falling from Grace, contrary to the intent and purpose of His Majesty's Declaration, in a Sermon on a Tuesday at St. Mary's; Recorded in the Oxford Register f. 54 The Recantation of Master Thomas Cook of Brase-Nose the 19th of July 1634. for using some passages in a Latin Sermon in Saint Mary's, which by consequence might imply connivency and partiality in the Vice-Chancellor (Doctor Duppa) towards some of the Arminian party, that had violated the Kings Edicts, concerning such points of controversy as are forbidden; Registred in the University Register, pag. 90. with the convention and submission of Master Kichard Kilby, of Lincoln College, before Doctor Bayley, Vice-Chancellor and others, March 13. 1637. for reviving some controversies concerning Arminianism, contrary to His Majesty's Declaration; entered in the University Register, fol. 152.

About September 1632. there were some Satirical Verses scattered abroad in Oxford against the Arminians, thus entitled. The Academical Army of Epidemical Arminians: To the tune of the Souldieur; wherein Doctor Corbet Doctor Duppa, Doctor Iackeson, Doctor Marsh, Doctor Turner with others, of the Arminian faction were mentioned, and Bishop Laud as their General, who receiving a Coppie of them, December 19. 1632. writ this endorsment on it. Oxford Libell against such as they will needs call Arminians; Who were all backed by Bishop Laud their grand Patron, and preferred to the highest Ecclesiastical preferments.

How the Arminian party prevailed in the University of Cambridge, by this Arch-Prelates abetment, so far as to procure Barrets Recantation of the Arminian Tenets (solemnly made in that University, in 37. of Q. Elizabeth's Rain, and then printed) to be rased out of the University Register, where it was Recorded, and to prosecute Mr. Bernard whom he caused to be censured & ruined in the High-Commission for preaching against the increase of Popery and Arminianism (of which hereafter) is so well known to most, that we shall not insist upon it, most of the heads of Houses there (as Doctor Brookes, Doctor Beale, Doctor Martin, Doctor Paske, Doctor Cozens, Doctor Lany, &c) being professed Arminians, and this Archbishops Creatures to prosecute his designs.

How diligent the Bishops were, by color of His Majesty's Declarations, and Instructions, to suppress all preaching against all Arminianism in their Diocese by this Arch-Prelates instigation, will appear by their printed Visitation Articles, for this purpose; particularly, by the Articles of enquiry, and direction for the Diocese of Norwich, in the first Visitation of Rich. Montague, Bishop of that Diocese, An. Dom. 1638 Tit. 5. Artic. 22. in Church-Wardens.

Besides this Arch-prelate not satisfied with propagating these dangerous Arminian Novelties throughout the Realm of England, endeavored to infect by degrees the whole Church of Irel, therewith. To which end he not only caused Bishop Downehams book, of perseverance; there printed against the Arminians to be suppressed (as you heard before) but the very Articles of the Church of Ireland made in a full National Synod and Convocation held at Dubline, 1615. and ratified by King James (wherein all the Arminian Errors are terminis terminantibus condemned as Erronious,) to be repealed; the L. Deputy Wentworth, by high hand (being but the Archbishops instrument herein) enforcing the Convocation at Dublin. An, 1634. by sundry threatening Messages full fore against their wills, to condescend to the repealing of them under pretext of establishing the 39. Articles of the Church of England, (comprised in the former) for the only Articles of that Church for Unity and Uniformity sake; as was attested by Dr. Hoyle, a Member of that Irish Convocation at the Lord's Ear, & long since published in print with the Archbishops privity, if not command, by Dr. Heylin, in his History of the Sabbath, Part. 2. chap. 8. sect. 9. pag. 259. in these very terms.

Uniformity with the Church of England was the pretence for revoking these Articles, but the real cause was, because they defined in terminis, The Pope to be Antichrist; the Church of Rome to be no true Church, the Lord's day to be totally sanctfied, and all the Arminian Tenets to be erroneous, contrary to the established Doctrine both of the Church of England and Ireland. Grand obstacles to this Arch-Preltats Popish designs, and therefore necessary to be set aside. These Articles being thus repealed, the Archbishop soon after sent over Master Chapel (the most notorious seducing Arminian in the whole University of Cambridge) into Jreland, to be President of the College of Dublin there, to poison that University with his Arminian Drugs, which he there publicly vented, as Dr. Hoyle (Divinity Reader in that University) attested upon Oath, who had frequent contestations with him concerning the same: This Chapel joining with Dr. Bramhall Chaplain to the Lord Deputy Wentworth (a professed Arminian who managed all the Ecclesiastical affairs of that Church under the Archbishop and Lord Deputy) raised a great party there to oppose and suppress the truth.

What influence this Arch-Prelate likewise had upon the Prelates and Clergy of Scotland, and how far he proceeded in introducing Arminianism & by it Popery into the Church of Scotland, is so largely demonstrated by M. Bailey, in his Canterburians self-conviction, the last Edition, that we shall not here insist upon it.

And thus we have given you a true and Copious Evidence of this Arch-Prelates endeavors to undermine our established Religion by introducing fomenting dangerous Arminian Errors in all our three Kingdoms, of purpose to Usher Popery into them by insensible degrees through this Jesuitical devise.

We shall now proceed to his varius attemps and endeavors to undermine the established Protestant and advance the Romish Religion in our Churches, by introducing, broaching maintaining printing, publishing all kind of Doctrinal points of Popery, by suppressing Books and purging out Passages against them in old and new writers; by promoting protecting the Propugners, discouraging, persecuting the oppugners of Popish Assertions, Sermons, Pamphlets, and sundry other practices.

The Authorizing Printing dispersing Popish Books Doctrines and prohibiting contrary Impressions to refute them, being the most pernicious destructive prevalent project of all others to undermine Religion seduce corrupt both the present and future Generations with Popish Errors and set up Popery in its full vigor, we shall begin with this Archbishops various practices, concerning the Authorising, printing, dispersing of Popish, prohibiting, suppressing purging corrupting Orthodox Books, against Popery; wherein he directly traced the Popish Prelates & Jesuits footsteps.

The Pope with Popish Prelates and Jesuits being Masters of the printing Presses in most parts, had four principal ways to advance Popery, and suppress the Protestant Religion, in relation only to printing.

The first was to License and print sundry Books and Discourses from time to time upon all occasions in defense of their Erronious Popish Tenets against the Protestants.

The second, to prohibit sundry special Treatises against Popery to be printed, reprinted, dispersed, or read; and to seize on and suppress them in all places with greatest diligence when printed.

The third, to purge out the principal Passages, Motives, Invectives against Popery and its abuses in all old printed Books, ere they should be reprinted; and out of all new Books tendered to the Press, before they could gain License to pass it.

The fourth, to punish the Authors, Printers, dispersers of any prohibited or unlicensed Books against Popery, with the severest censures: all which is abundantly evident, by their several Indices Librorum Prohibitorum, and Librorum Expurgandorum by the Provincial Council of Sennes, Anno 1528. Apud Surium Council: Tom. 4. p. 718. to 723. Laurentius Bochellius, Decreta Ecclesia Gall, lib. 1. Tit. 10. De Libris vetitis, cap. 1. to 29. The Statute of 34, and 35. H. 8. c. 1. Master Fox his Acts and Monuments, the old Edition, pag. 536. 573. 680. 450. 1335. &c. Dr. James his Index Generalis Librorum prohibitorum a Pontifieijs, &c. Oxford 1627. Antonij Posse • ini Bibliothesa selecta, with sundry others;

The Arch-bishop in imitation of this their policy, first of all engrossed the sole power of licensing all new Books of Divinity into his own, his Chaplains and Creatures hands, so as nothing could pass the Press with public approbation but by his or their precedent approbation, without danger of ruin to the Authors, Printers, Stationers, Venders, Dispersers. And because he feared and experimentally discerned that when Stationers or Printers were restrained to print new Books against Popery, they would presently fall to reprint old ones formerly licenced by Authority; to prevent this inconvenience to the Popish party, he procured this ensuing Decree of his own contriving, to be ratified by the Lord's in the Star-Chamber, then sent it to the Stationers to print, and commanded them punctually to observe it, whereby he Monopolized the sole power of authorizing Divinity Books for the Press to himself and his Agents; and restrained the reprinting of all Books, though formerly printed by Authority, without a special review, and relicencing of them, by him and his Chaplains.

This Decree was entitled.

A Decree of Star-Chamber concerning Printing, made the first day of July, 1637. Imprinted at LONDON by Robert Barker, &c. 1637.

This Decree in the Printed Order of Star-chamber prefixed thereunto, is Expresly alleged, to be drawn, and Penned by the advice of the most Reverend Father in God the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury his Grace, the Right Honorable and Right Reverend Father in God the Lord Bishop of London, Lord High Treasurer of ENGLAND, and of the Lord Keeper, the Lord chief Justices, and Lord chief Barron, when it was the Archbishops project only, who sent it to the Press, the others names being used only for conformity, as M. Walley & others attested upon Oath: We shall rehearse only such clauses thereof as are most observable & pertinent to our purpose.

The Archbishop and his Confederates having accroached by color of this Decree the sole power of the Press into their hands, which they usurped, without any such pretext of Authority, long before the passing thereof, began after the Popish guife, in imitation of the Pope and Popish Inquisitors.

First, to prohibit the re-printing and sale of sundry Orthodox Books formerly printed and sold by Authority, of which we shall give you sundry notable instances. One of the first Books we find prohibited by the Popish Prelates in England, in King Henry the 8. his Reign; was the Bible and New Testament in English of Tyndale • translation, and all other English Bibles and Testaments having any Annotations or Preambles, which were ordered to be out and blotted out of the said Bibles and Testaments in such sort, as they could not be perceived or read, under pain of forfeiting 40s. for every such Bible with Annotations, or preambles, as you may read in the Statute of 34. and 35. H. 8. cap. 1. and in Master Fox his Acts and Monuments, pag: 635. 621. Whereupon those Annotations and Preambles were cut and blotted out accordingly in sundry old Bibles yet extant. Yea the first Book in the Roman Indices, Librorum prohibitorum, in Forraigne parts, is the Bible of some Translations (especially Bibles in the Vulgar Tongue with Notes, and Prologues, the Bibles of Rob. Stephanus, Vatablas, • agnine, & others, (though Papists) with the Arguments of Raynerius upon the Psalms expressly ordered to be expunged, as you may read in the Index Librorum Expurgatorum, set forth by Gaspar Quiroga Archbish. of Toledo, General Inquisitor of Spain, Salmuri 1601. p. 7. to 18. 151. to 152. in Bochellus Decreta Ecclesia Gal. l. 1. Tit. 10. Delibris vetitis, c. 1. 11. Dr. James his Index Generalis Librorum prohibitorum, with others. So one of the first Books most strictly prohibited to be printed, imported or sold, by this Archb: was the English Geneva Bible with Marginal Notes and Prefaces, though printed here in Engl. not only without the least restraint, but Cum Privilegio Regia Majestatis, during all Q. Elizabeth's and K. James their Reigns, by the Queens and Kings Printers, and since our Printers have neglected to reprint them for fear of hundering the sale of Bibles of the last Translation without Notes, they have been sold without any contradiction till this Archbishop began to domineer; yet no sooner was he advanced to his Papal See, but the printing, importing and sale of all these Bibles with Notes was most strictly inhibited, the Bibles searched for, seized, confiscated, the importers and Sellers of them imprisoned, vexed, and some of them ruined in the High-Commission Court. Michael Sparke Senior, deposed, that himself, and sundry other Stationers had divers of their English Bibles with Notes seized and taken from them by the Archbishops means, which were commonly sold before his time, without restraint, but contradicted and suppressed by him; and that himself with diverse others had been prosecuted in the High-Commission for selling of Bibles with Notes, and some imprisoned and fined for this cause. Mr. Prynne, produced an Abstract of a Letter dated Septem. 30. 1633. from Sir William Boswell, (His Majesty's Agent in the Low-Countries,) endorsed with Mr. Dells hand, and found in the Archbishops Study, wherein among other accounts of his good services for the Archbishop, he certified His Grace, that there had been two Impressions of English Bibles at Delfe, and Amsterdam, with the Geneva Notes, &c. Whereof he might be pleased to make such use as seemeth best for suppressing the abuse at home, whether they are likewise transported under pretence of White-paper, And April 14. 1638. he received another Information out of Holland from I. S. endorsed with Master Dells hand, concerning the Printing of English Bibles there in Quarto and Folio, with Notes in the Margent, intended to be transported thence into England. A clear Evidence, that his Grace was the Original cause of suppressing these Bibles, not only at home but in fortaigne parts, and all for fear the Notes in them should over-much instruct the people in the knowledge of the Scriptures; which Notes though highly esteemed of in all reformed Churches, and printed not only with their Latin Bibles, but with the English, French, Dutch, German, and Italian Bibles in vulgar use among them, and in the Folio Bible printed in Scot. 1610; yet now they must be totally prohibited, suppressed only in England, by this Popish Prelate, though here formerly printed Cum Privilegio, and freely vended, read, approved, used in our Church for above 60. years space together. How much Impiety, and Popery lies coucked in this notorious fact of his (not to be paralleled by any Protestant Prelates, but Popes and Popish Prelates only whom he imitated herein) we must humbly submit to Your Lordships and all Protestants considerations.

In the Yeare 1631. William Beale, Servant to Master Henry Gellibrand, Professor of the Mathematickes at Gresham College London, set forth an Almanac for that Yeare, by His Masters Approbation, printed for the Company of Stationers, agreeing with the Kalendar before Master Fox his Acts and Monuments printed oft times by public Authority, without the least exceptions both in Queen Elizabeth's. King James, and King Charles Reignes, in which Almanac the names of the Popish Saints Canonized by Popes and thrust into our Kalendars were omitted, and the names of real Saints and Martyrs mentioned in the Book of Martyrs, inserted, just as they are in Master Foxes his Kalendar: This Prelate being then Bishop of London taking great exceptions against this Almanac, brought both Mr. Gellibrand and his man into the High Commission for compiling and publishing it, where he prosecuted them with great violence. At the hearing of the cause, it appearing to the Court, that it was Verbatim the same with Mr. Fox his authorized Calendar, and that some Almanackes of this kind had formerly been printed, as tending only to the honor of our own real Martyrs, and the disparagement only of false Popish Saints, Master Gellibrand was acquitted by Archbishop Abbot, and the General Vote of the High-Commission Court, none censuring him but this Bishop: who perceiving Master Gellibrand to be acquitted, He thereupon stood up in a great passion, and publicly informed the Court, That the Queen her self sent for him, and specially complained to him against this Almanac, which gave great offense to those of her Religion; and desired him to prosecute the Author of it, and suppress the Book; and therefore he hoped he should not pass unpunished in this Court; yet notwithstanding the Court acquitted him: Hereupon the Bishop stood up again in a fury, and said to Mr. Gellibrand, Sir, Remember you have made a Faction in this Court, for which you ought to be punished; and know that you are not yet discharged hence, I will sit in your Skirts, for I hear you keep Conventicles at G • esham-College after your Lectures there. Whereupon he gave Order for a second prosecution against him in the High-Commission, which so afflicted this good man, that it put him into a Feaver fit, whereof he died. And because the Bishop could not procure Master Gellibrand to be censured, and this Almanac burned as he desired, the Papists thereupon bought up most of them and made them Martyrs, by burning them in the fire. All which was deposed at the Lord's Bar by Mr. Gellibrand of Bread-street London, and ready to be attested by sundry others, had not the Bishop himself acknowledged the truth thereof.

In this Evidence there are four things very remarkable.

FIrst, That this Bishop was so shameless as to profess in open Court, that in this, Prosecution of Master Gellibrand, he was but the Queens and Papists Agent proceeding thus against him at their special request.

Secondly, That he was extraordinary violent, if not extremely irregular and unjust in this prosecution, making no Conscience to ruin a Learned Pious Protestant, without any just Cause, to pleasure the Papists, notwithstanding he was generally acquitted by the Court.

3ly. That when he could not have his will of this innocent Gentleman one way, he meditared present revenge another way & proclaimed it in open Court, charging him with raising a Faction in the High-Commission Court, when as his fellow Commissioners would not concur with him in his Factious prosecution to gratify the Papists.

4ly. That he bare an extraordinary affection to Popish, but an extreme inveterate malice to true Protestant Saints and Martyers, because he was so far incensed against Mr. Gillibrand and his Almanac only for omitting the names of false Popish Saints and Martyrs, and placing the names of our real Protestant Martyrs in their stead: the truth whereof was then further manifested at the Bar by a memorable Passage in Doctor John Pocklingtons Altare Christianum, licenced by Doctor Bray, the Archbishops own household Chaplain (as appears by the printed Approbation prefixed to it, and perused by the Archbishop himself, who ordered it to be printed) of which book there being two editions, Mr Prynne found both of them curiously guilded, and bound up in the Archbishops Study at Lambeth, in both of which this Passage remained uncorrected, unexpunged, wherein the Calender before the Book of Martyrs (which Mr. Gellibrand imitated) with our Godly Martyrs are most grossly railed against, censured, traduced as Traitors, Murderers, Rebells, Heretics, and the Popish Saints, in whose places they were inserted, proclaimed to be, the holy Martyrs and Confessors of Jesus Christ, whose names are written in heaven, in these very terms, which you may find in the first Edition, Pag. 92. and Edit. 2. Pag. 114. This was the holy and profitable use of these Diptickes, much like the List of persons CENSVRED BY HOLY CHURCH, called WITH SOME REPROACH OF TRUTH AND CHRISTIAN RELIGION, Catalogus testium Veritatis (collected into one volume by Flacius, Illericus, and enlarged since by others:) And as unlike a KALENDER that I have seen, (to wit, that before Mr. Fox his Acts and Monuments) wherein THE HOLY MARTYRS, AND CONFESSORS OF JESUS CHRIST (who had not only place sometimes in these Dipticks, but WHOSE NAMES ARE WRITTEN IN HEAVEN) ARE RASED OUT, AND TRAITORS, MVRDERERS, REBELS, AND HERETICKS SET IN THEIR ROOMES; so as if Penry, Hacket, or Legat had come in time, they might have challenged as orient and scarlet a die as some of them; Certainly more venom and malice could never have been couched or Vented in fewer words against Mr. Fox his authorized Calendar to his Acts & Monuments, against our own English Martyrs, the Professors of the Protestant Religion in all ages & so by consequence against our Religion it self, then is comprised & vented in these lines, twice published in print in these Editions by this Arch-Prelates, & his Chaplains special approbation without the least retractation, of purpose to please the Popish party, offended with Mr. Gellebrands Almanac, which this Bishop would have Martyred and burned for an Heretic (as our Martyrs were) to gratify the Popish party much offended at it: by which the whole World may clearly discern his strong inclination, his cordial affection to them and their, his palpable disaffection to us, and our Religion.

We shall now proceed to other evidence. About the latter end of the year 1636. Master Prynne being certainly informed of the Archbishops intention to procure a Decree in Starchamber prohibiting the reprinting of all old Books of Divinity unless they were first reviewed, purged, new Licenced by his Chaplains, or Agents, before this Decree was ratified, sent for Michael Spark Senior and persuaded him to reprint some three or four old Books, of special use, against Popery, ere this Decree should pass; by name, Thomas Beacons Display of the Popish Mass, and his Relics of Rome (as being then most seasonable & opposite to the Archbishops Romish designs) formerly printed cum privilegio, in Queen Elizabeth's Reign, An. 1560. yea dedicated to all the Bishops of England, and highly approved by them, Hereupon he caused Mistress Anne Griffin to beg leave of the Company of Stationers (who were owners of those Copies) to reprint these Books, which being granted; she printed off his Display of the Popish Mass, and began to Print his Relics of Rome. No sooner was the first of them published abroad, but a Papist seeing one of them newly printed, lying to be sold in a Book-sellers shop in Paul's Churchyeard, reading the Title thereof, grew very angry at the Book (being a very solid learned Treatise against the Popish Mass, with the Ceremonies accompanying it) and said; he wondered much that the Archbishop would suffer such Books to be Printed in this Age: adding, that perchance he knew not of it, and therefore he would go over to Lambeth and inform him thereof, to the end it might be suddenly called in, ere it were dispersed: which it seems he performed accordingly, for the very next morning the Archbishop called in this Book very strictly, sending his Pursevants and Officers to seize on all of them they could meet with, and understanding that Mistress Griffin printed it, he sent for her to Lambeth, where he in a very angry manner demanded of her, why she did reprint this book against the Mass NOW, above all other times, & whether she could find no other time but this to print it? To which she answered, she did it for want of other work to employ her servants, who else must sit still, seeing they could get no good New books Licenced. Then he demanded of her, how she durst reprint it without a new License? she answered, She did it by leave of the Company of Stationers, and knew of no order to the contrary. After which he threatened her with the high Commission, and told her, that if she printed anymore old Books though formerly licensed, without a review and new licensing of them by his Chaplains, he would put down her printing House, and she should never print again, though there was then no Order to the contrary; whereupon she durst not proceed to print his Relics of Rome, but gave it over. All which was fully proved by the several Oaths of Mr. Prynne, Michael Spark senior, & Anne Griffin: such an Arch-favourer of Popery was this Prelate then grown, that he would not permit this Treatise against the verry Popish Mass it self to be reprinted, though formerly oft printed cum Privilegio, grows angry at the printing of it, causeth it presently to be suppressed upon a Papist Information, and thus checks the Printer. Was not Popery grown to a strong head among us, when not so much as one small old Book against the Mass and Idolatry of it, might pass the Press, but it must presently be suppressed by this Arch bishops special command, and the Printer thus threatened for it? Yet he forsooth (if we dare believe his Protestations) was then as averse from, as great an Enemy to Popery, as any mortal breathing.

About the same time, a Book entitled, The Palsegraves Religion, containing the Faith and Confession of the Churches of the Palatinate, (formerly printed, in Latin, and then reprinted in English,) was called in and suppressed by this Archbishops order, because it over-boldly refuted some points of Popery and Arminianism as was Attested by the Oaths of Master Pryune and Michael Sparke Senior.

Master Walley, Clerke of Stationers Hall and Master Downes deposed, that after the Decree for printing was made, there were divers old Books against Popery formerly Licenced, (as the Book of Martyrs, Bishop Jewels Works, some parts of Doctor Willets Works and others) which the Archbishops and Bishop of London's Chaplains refused to new License; where upon they repaired to Sir John Bramston then Lord chief Justice, and desired leave from him, that good Books formerly licenced and printed, might be reprinted without new Licence, else they should be undone for want of Books, seeing they could not procure these Chaplains to License any good Books whether old or new. Who answered them, that he could do nothing in it but they must go and attend the Archbishop, who had the chief hand in making this Decree.

Mr. John Vicars School-Master of Christ-Church soon after this Decree, repaired to Doctor Baker (the Archbishops great Creature, House-hold Chaplain to the Bishop of London,) for a New license of his History of the Gunpouder Treason, formerly printed by License, which he had since enlarged with some pertinent Additions: But Doctor Baker absolutely refused to Licence it: Master Vicars admiring at it; demanded of him the reason why he would not license a Book of such a subject as this against the Gun-powder Treason, an act so odious and detestable? who answered him, that we were not so angry with the Papists now, as we were about 20. years since, and that there was no need of any such Books as these to exasperate them, there being now an endeavor to win them to us by fairness and mildness.

By these (with sundry other instances of this kind which we pretermit) we conceive it is most apparent; that one principal end of the Archbishops usurping the power of Licensing Books and publishing this Decree concerning the restraint of reprinting any Old Licensed books against Popery, and the grossest errors in it, was, that Popery might again creep in among us by degrees without the least opposition or impeachment.

Secondly, As he and his instruments prohibited the reprinting of old Orthodox Books, so they refused to Licence sundry new ones, especially against Popery and Arminianism, suppressing them when printed by Licence of others: This was evidenced, by the forecited Remonstrance of the Commons in Parliament, Anno 1628 by the forementioned Books against the Arminians, suppressed and called in by this Archbishops means; and by these ensuing Depositions. Master Prynne deposed, that in the Yeare 1627. Doctor Cozens published a Book entitled, A Collection of private Devotions, Or, the hours of Prayer, fraught with Popery, and Popish Superstitions, which gave great offense; whereupon, at the importunity of diverse well'-affected persons, he Writ a Refutation thereof, entitled; A Brief Survey and Censure of Master Cozens his Cosening Devotions; which by this Bishops means and his Confederates was refused License, at London House; but afterwards licenced at Lambeth House by Doctor Featly, and printed sitting the Parliament, in the Yeare 1628. for writing which Book only against Doctor Cozens his Popery, he was immediately after the Parliament ended, questioned in the High-Commission by this Bishops procurement, and thence delivered by a Prohibition, to the Bishops great grief.

Master Henry Burton deposed; That he writ a Book against Cozens his Devotions, which was called in by the Bishops means: after which he compiled and published another Book entitled, The Bayting of the Popes Bull, licensed by Doctor Goad, for which he was called before the Council Table by this Archbishops instigation who was then present spake much against the Book, and called it a Libell, although penned and written only against the Pope and his seditious dangerous Bull. That he printed by lycence, a Book called A Plea to an Appeale, in refutation of diverse Popish and Arminian Errors broached by Montague in his Appello Casarem, which Book though licensed was yet called in and suppressed by this Bishops procurement: After which he writ another Book against Popery, Intituled, The pouring out of the 7. Vials, for which he was called into the High Commission Court by the Bishop, and the Book suppressed, That he likewise writ another Book called, Babel no Bethel wherein he proved the Church of Rome no true visible Church; for which book this Prelate, being then Bishop of London, sent for him by a Pursuivant; committed him immediately to prison in the Fleet, contrary to the Petition of Right then newly passed, refusing to accept any bail, which he tendered, suspended him from his living, prosecuted him in the High Commission, and suppressed the Book.

Michael Sparke Senior, deposed; That himself, together with William Jones, Nathantell Butter, Mr. Bowler and others were committed to prison and vexed several times in the High Commission by this Archbishops means, only for printing Books against the Papists and Arminians, that the Bishop and his Chaplains refused to License diverse Books against Popery tendered to them, and purged sundry others of the chief Passages against Popery, (as we shall prove anon) in so much that the Stationers, and Printers generally complained, that they could get no good Orthodox Books, but only Popish and Superstitious ones licensed, so as they were like to be undone for want of trading, and that this was the general complaint of the whole Company; which other Stationers likewise affirmed. Particularly, the Bishop though he pretended much friendship to Sir Humfrey Linde, that learned Knight, the Author of Via Tuta, and Via Deuia, which were answered by a Jesuit in a scurrilous railing manner; yet he absolutely refused to license his elaborate Reply thereunto, Intituled, A Case for the Spectacles, upon no other pretence, but that Sir Humfrey was a Lay-man; but in verity, because he was unwilling to have him vindicate himself and the truth against a railing Jesuit; of which Injustice, Sir Humfrey oft complained to Mr. Prynne, Dr. Featly, and others of his friends: Yet his Chaplain could license Chunaeus his Collectiones Theologicae, Dedicated to the Archbishop himself, though compiled by a Layman of much instriot parts and learning to Sir Humfrey, in justification of Popery, A minianisme and the Church of Rome.

Thirdly, He with his Chaplains Agents, by his instigation or command, compiled Authorized, imprinted, published diverse Books, Treatises, Sermons in defense of Popish Errors, Superstitious, Ceremonies, practices, almost to the total corruption and subversion of our Religion; Of which we shall give you a brief Catalogue and then proceed to the Popish Passages, errors broached, justified, authorized in, and propagated by them.

The BOOKES are these;

The Archbishops own SPEECH in Star-Chamber: Printed at Lond. An 1637.

The Book of Common Prayer, for the use of the Church of Scotland, printed at Edinburgh 1637.

Richard Montague, his New Gagge for an old Goose, London 1624. His Appello Caesarem: London 1625. His Originum Ecclesiasticarum, Pars prior, Londini, 1636. and Pars Posterior, Londini, 1640. His Anti-Diatribae, Londini 1625 and Visitation Articles, Printed at Cambridge, and London 1638.

Master John Cozens his Houres of Prayer, London 1627.

Edmund Reeves Communion Catechism expounded, London 1635.

Henry Cholmly, His State of the Now Roman Church, London, 1629.

Master Butterfield, His Maschil, London 1629.

Doctor John Pocklington, his Sunday No Sabbath, licensed by Doctor Bray the Arch-Bishops Chaplain, 24. Febru. 1635. and his Altare Christianum, licensed by the same Doctor Bray 7. March, 1636. both printed at London, Ann: 1636. and 1637.

Doctor Peter Heylyns History of Saint George, London, 1630. His Coale from the Altar, London 1636. His Antidotum Lincolniense, with His Moderate Reply to Henry Burton, London, 1637. and History of the Sabbath, London 1636.

Francis Sales, (A Popish Prelate) his Introduction to a devout life: licensed by the Archbishops Chaplain Doctor Haywood, 3. Febr. 1636.

An Epistle, or Exhortatory Letter from Jesus Christ, for every faithful Soul devoutly affected, written by a Friar, and licensed by Doctor Weekes, both his and the Bishop of London's Chaplain, 3. Febr. 1636.

The Female Glory, by Anthony Stafford, London 1635.

Master Yates his Tract of the Honor of God's House, London 1637.

Sparrowes Sermon of Confession, London 1637.

The Churches Authority asserted by Samuel Hoard, Lond. 1637.

Mortification Apostolical, by William Watts, London 1637.

Doctor Thomas Laurence his Sermon preached before the King at White-Hall, London 1637.

John Elborow his Evodias and Syntyche, London 1637.

Robert Shelford his five Treatises, Cantabrigiae, 1635.

Richard Tedder, his Sermon preached at Wimondham, Anno 1637.

Collectiones Theologicae, by Chunaus London 1634.

Christopher Dow, against Master Henry Burton, London 1637.

John Browning concerning public Prayer and the Fasts of the Church, London 1636.

Sir Thomas Ridleys, his Review of the Civil Law, Oxford, 1634.

John Swan, his Redde debitum London. 1640.

Bishop Halls Reconciler, his Episcopy by Divine Right, with infinite other Books, Sermons and Treatises of this kind, which we pretermit.

Before we proceed any further in this subject, we must acquaint Your Lordships with one memorable Passage concerning the Licencing and printing of Francis Sales his Introduction to a devout life; and Christ's Epistle to a devout Soul.

The first of these Books being written by a Popish Prelate, having many Doctrinal and Practical points of Popery interlarded with good meditations and Devotions comprised in it was translated into English by J. Y. (a Priest, and Jesuit) dedicated by him to Mistress Anne Roper a Popish Recusant: and twice printed by Papists in foreign parts, in the years 1617. and 1622. with all the Popery in it: about which time it was likewise translated into English by a Protestant, who lest out all the Popery and superstition couched therein, retaining only what was Orthodox and Pious; which was licenced for the Press, and printed by Nicholas Oaks. On the 3. of February 1636. Doctor Hayward the Archbishops Chaplain, at the instigation of some Popish persons, licensed the very Popish Translation of this Book by (I Y) the Jesuit, for the Press, (most likely by the Archbishops approbation, who had one of these Books formerly printed in his Study produced by Master Prynne, endorsed with his own hand:) which was forthwith entered in Stationers Hall for one W. Brookes a Popish Stationer, and presently sent to the Press to be printed: One part of it coming to Nicholas Oaks his House to be printed, he perceiving divers dangerous Popish Passages in it, and among others, one touching the Popes supremacy, repaired to Doctor Hayward who licensed it, and acquainted him therewith, desiring him to purg out these Popish Passages, else he durst not proceed to print it. Whereupon the Doctor checking him for making such a scruple, bid him go on and say nothing, and he would bear him out, and save him harmless from any danger that might befall him for printing it; adding that he himself would preach as much [as that he complained off] before the King, and therefore he needed not fear to proceed: Whereupon Oaks went on, and the Book (with the Epistle Dedicatory to Mrs. Anne Roper a Papist) was printed & published about Easter. 1637. near the time the Archbishop caused an Information to be Exhibited in Star-chamber by Sir John Banks his Majesty's Attorney General, against D. Bastwick, Mr. Burton and Mr. Prynne, one of the Copies whereof coming to Mr. Pryns hands he finding it full of Popery, superstition, and the very same with the old English Popish Edition, and being informed by Oaks & others, of Dr. Haywards words to Oaks when he complained to him of it, he inserted the Licensing and printing of this Popish Book among others, into his Cross Bill in Star Chamber, against the Archbishop, his Chaplains and others his Popish Confederates; which Bill he tendering to the Lord KEEPER Coventry to admit, the Archbishop getting possession of it, upon view thereof and some complaints at Court against this Popish Book, by the Right honorable Earl of Pembrook, and other well-affected Courteours; thereupon to color his own and his Chaplains practical knavery, in Licensing and promoting this Book, by laying all the blame and punishment upon others, and the poor Printer Ooaks, (who complained against it, and would have stopped it at the Press) & to give some show of satisfaction to the people much offended at the printing of this Popish Book, especially in that nick of time, when he had brought Dr. Bastwick Mr. Burton, & Mr. Prynne into the Star-chamber for charging him with introducing Popish Doctrines and Innovations into our Church; caused his Majesty to publish this following Proclamation, for calling in and burning the said book; wherein he falsely suggested to his Majesty, and his Subjects; that his Chaplain purged out diverse Passages therein tending to Popery, which the Stationer and Translater afterwards inserted again, when as there was no such thing: but his Chaplain licensed all of them at first, and would not purge them out at last; when Oaks complained of them; The Proclamation was this.

Upon this Proclamation, some few of these Books were seised, and publicly burnt in Smithfield; the poor Printer Oaks imprisoned divers Monthes almost to his utter undoing, though he proved, he complained of it to Doctor Haywood who commanded him to proceed: but the Stationer was brought Ore tenus to the Star-Chamber, and charged with the insertion of the Popish Passages after the Doctor had expunged them, which he denied; where the Archbishop made a Speech to clear himself and his Chaplain, in which there was not one word of truth; after which the Stationer was ordered to be committed to Prison, and to find out the Translator, which he affirming he could not do if he were imprisoned, thereupon his imprisonment was respited, and no further examination had of this foul business, then to clear the Archbishop and his Chaplain by this devise: in the mean time Mr. Prynne's Cross Bill, which truly related all the carriage of the business, was suppressed, that so the truth of it (which he thou could & would have manifested by sundry punctual witnesses had he been permitted) might never come to public knowledge to the Archbishops and his Chaplains shame, who abused his Majesty and the People with false representations of this business: which was now charged, proved and testified against him at the Barre by Mr. Prynne, Mistress Oaks, Michael Sparke Senior, and others to his shame.

The Epistle to a devout Soul, written by a Friar & then newly translated into English, was licenced, the self same day for the same Stationer, that Sales book was, being as full of Popery as it; which Mr. Prynne likewise charging in his Cross Bill; thereupon some of the Books were seized by the Stationers and the rest vented in private. But Sales, to make the Papists ammends, was soon after reprinted here withal the Popery in it, and sold publicly without restraint, notwithstanding his Majesty's Proclamation, which was but a mere Page ••• , and devise of the Archbishops, to clear himself and his Chaplain.

Having thus given you a summary Catalogue of the Popish Books, Sermons licenced and published by him, his Chaplains and Agents, we shall next present you with a List or Extract of the several Popish Errors, Doctrines, Positions, Paradoxes authorized and maintained in them, most of them so gross, so execrable, that they never durst appear in any of our Impressions from the infancy of Reformation, till this Arch-Prelate became their Patriot. We shall begin with Auricular Confession, and the power of Priests to remit sins, the sum whereof is this.

1. That Priests have not only a Ministerial, but an Authoritative and Juditiall Power to r • mit sine confessed; And that we ought frequently, to confess our sins to our Priests and Confessors, at least once every Month, especially in Lent.

We read in the Popes Nuntio, compiled by the Venetian Ambassador (concerning the Negotiation of Signior Panzanioes p. 12.) That an English Doctor told Panzanioes friend, that the King did approve of Auricular Confession, was willing to introduce it: and would use force to make it received, were it not for fear of Sedition amongst the people. Certainly all who shall read these ensuing authorized passages touching Auricular confession of Sins to Priests, Confessors, & of Priests not only Ministerial, but Iuditiall Power to remit sins; will undoubtedly believe, that at least our Popish Priests, Prelates, and this Archbishop in particular, had a plotted resolution, to introduce Auricular confession, and set up an Authoritative Iuditiall power in Priests to receive confessions and remit sins confessed in all his Majesty's Dominions. The Passages to this purpose are these.

Montague's Gagge, p. 78. 83. 84. It is confessed, that all Priests, and none but Priests have power to forgive sins. It is confessed, that private confession unto a Priest is of very ancient practice in the Church, we urge it and persuade it in extremis ut supra: we require it in case of perplexity, and likewise before the receiving of the Lord's Supper, according to which Doctrine and Injunction our Bishops do, or should inquire of it in their Visitations, touching the use and neglect of this so good an order.

Which he thus seconds in his Appeale: p. 299. My words are, It is confessed that private confession unto a Priest is of very Ancient practice in the Church, of excellent use and benefit being discrectly handled. We refuse it to none if men require it, if need be to have it, we urge and persuade it in extremis. We require it in case of perplexity, for the quieting of men disturbed in their consciences; This is my Popery per partes, for wariant whereof I bring my witness and authority, the Injunction, direction and practice of the Church, and of the Bishops accordingly in the Church, that which their Mother holy Church, hath commanded in that sort, and case to be observed, pag. 312. Priests have power not only to pronounce, but to give remission of sins, which seemeth to be the Doctrine of the Communion Book in the Visitation of the sick where the Priest saith, And by his Authority committed unto me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, It is Justifiable, it is the Doctrine and practice of the Church of England.

Pag. 315. 316. (Informers) it is confessed that all Priests and none but Priests, have power to forgive sins. And is it not so confessed, when by public warrant in ordination that power is given unto all Priests to do soe in those solemn words of Ordination, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, &c. But with you Puritans, this Doctrine and practice of the Church is held to be Popery. And here you infer, that Priests have no more power to do this than Laymen, here you cast confession upon both one and other; and Laymen may hear it as well as a Priest, and therefore it is probable, you will not be very precise for Absolution to confer it on a Layman as well as on a Priest, But such absolution is a part of that Priestly power which could not be given by men or Angels, but only and immediately by Almighty God himself; a part of that Paramount power which the God of Glory hath invested mortal men withal, in which respect it hath been said and not otherwise, the head of the Emperor hath been subjected to the Priests hands. Priests only have this Commission from Christ unto whom he said, As my father sent me, so send I you, and receive you the Holy-Ghost; whose sins you remit, they are remitted. And in his Originum Ecclesiasticarum, Tomi prioris, Pars posterior, p. 464. to 470. Printed at London. 640. he largely asserts, Sacerdotes remittunt peccata: quomodo? Non annunciative tantum, aut optative, SED AVTHORITATIVE, as he briefly expresseth himself in his Index thereunto.

This Popish Doctrine of his, with some additions, touching confession of sins to Priests & their power to remit them, was publicly justified by M. Sparow, in a Sermon preached by him in St. Mary's church in Cambridge, for which he being questioned by the Vice-Chanceller, Posted up to London, to the Archbishop & his Chaplains for sanctuary, and procuring his Sermon to be there forthwith Licensed and printed, he hereupon turned in triumph to Cambridge, to the great grief and discouragement of the Protestant, but extraordinary encouragement of the Popish party there: In which Sermon of his touching Confession, we find these Popish passages.

Page. 10. Our Confession must be integra & perfecta, not by half, All our sins must be confessed, omnia venialia, omnia mortalia, pag. 14. 15.

Doctor Pocklington (who among other Popish Errors which he maintained long since in Cambridge, justified, Auricular Confession to Priests) hath divers short passages tending to the same effect in his late published Popish scandalous book entitled, Altare Christianum, (set forth by the Archbishops Command and licenced by Dr. Bray his househould Chaplain) pag. 24. To the Chancel belonged the Vestry, Lavatory, Repository; and Relcinatories for hearing of Confessions. How prone those who confessed their sins to Priests were to receive absolution from them, he thus expresseth in the same Book pag. 143. Their Penitents used adgeniculari, to fall down upon their knees; taking absolution before the Altars.

Old doting Shelford, who in the Title of his Treatises (which he presented to the Archbishop) stiles himself a Priest, to make himself more fit to say Mass and hear Confession, writes thus pag. 71. 119. Then they confessed their sins to God and their Minister; for spiritual comfort and Council. &c. Confession and absolution is flat Popery with such, and all is superstition save a Sermon from the spirit, &c.

Christopher Dow a great favorite of the Archbishops; in his late Authorized book against Mr. Burton, entitled. Innovations unjustly charged, determines thus: Page 55.

To advise and urge the use and profit of private Confession to the Priest, is no Popish Innovation, but agreeable to the Constant, and resolved Doctrine of this Church. And if any shall call it Auricular, because it is done in private, and in the ear of the Priest, I know not why he should therefore be condemned of Popery.