peril of their souls, that I could not but point at these dangerous rocks, at which, I doubt not, but the loyalty of many hath suffered shipwreck, and of thousands more might, if a higher star had not guided them better than their own pilots. I could not, therefore, but think it very likely, that this treason might spring from the same fountain; and I had concluded so in my first meditations, but that I was willing to consider, whether or no it might not be, that these men were rather exasperated than persuaded, and whether it were not that the severity of our laws against them might rather provoke their intemperate zeal, than religion thus move their settled conscience. It was a material consideration, because they ever did, and still do, fill the world with outcries against our laws, for making a rape upon their consciences; have printed catalogues of their English martyrs; drawn schemes of most strange tortures imposed on their priests, such as were unimaginable by Nero, or Dioclesian, or any of the worst and cruelest enemies of christianity, endeavouring thus to make us partly guilty of our own ruin, and so washing their hands, in token of their own innocence, even then when they were dipping them in the blood royal, and would have emptied the best veins in the whole kingdom to fill their lavatory. But I found all these to be but calumnies, strong accusations, upon weak presumptions, and that the cause did rest where I had begun, I mean upon the pretence of the Catholic cause, and that the imagined iniquity of the laws of England could not be made a veil to cover the deformity of their intentions, for our laws were just, honourable, and religious. Concerning these and some other appendices to the business of the day, I expressed some part of my thoughts, which because happily they were but a just truth, and this truth not unseasonable for these last times, in which (as St. Paul prophesied) "Men would be fierce, traitors, heady and high-minded, creeping into houses, leading silly women captive;" it pleased some who had power to command me, to wish me to a publication of these my short and sudden meditations, that, if it were possible, even this way, I might express my duty to God and the king. Being thus far encouraged, I resolved to go something further, even to the boldness of a dedication to your Grace, that since I had no merit of my own, to move me to the confidence of a public view, yet I might dare to venture under the protection of your Grace's favour. But since my boldness doth as much need a defence, as my sermon a patronage, I humbly crave leave to say, that though it be boldness, even to presumption, yet my address to your Grace is not altogether unreasonable. For since all know that your Grace thinks not your life your own, but when it spends itself in the service of your king, opposing your great endeavours against the zealots of both sides, who labour the disturbance of the church and state, I could not think it ȧrpordióvvoov to present to your Grace this short discovery of the king's enemies, wç iπɩкovρíav ßaσidikýv piλobaσide, and proper to your Grace, who is so true, so zealous a lover of your prince and country. It was likewise appointed to be the public voice of thanksgiving for your University, (though she never spake weaker than by so mean an instrument,) and, therefore, is accountable to your Grace, to whom, under God and the king, we owe the blessing and prosperity of all our studies. Nor yet can I choose but hope, that my great obligations to your Grace's favour may plead my pardon (since it is better that my gratitude should be bold, than my diffidence ungrateful); but that this is so far from expressing the least part of them, that it lays a greater bond upon me, either for a debt of delinquency in presenting it, or of thankfulness, if your Grace may please to pardon it. I humbly crave your Grace's benediction, pardon, and acceptance of the humblest duty and observance of JER. TAYLOR. SERMON. disciples at least, and some of them entitled to our great Master by the compellation of his holy name of Jesus. I would say the parallel holds thus far, but that the persons of my text, however " Boanerges," But when James and John saw this, they said, Lord, I SHALL not need to strain much to bring my text and the day together. Here is " fire," in the text, "consuming fire," like that whose "Antevorta" we do this day commemorate. This fire called for by the disciples of Christ; so was ours too, by Christ's are no way considerable in the proportion of malice with the persons of the day. For if I consider the cause that moved James and John to so inconsiderate a wrath, it bears a fair excuse: a the men of Samaria turned their Lord and Master out of doors, denying to give a night's lodging to the Lord of heaven and earth. It would have disturbed an exa Ver. 53. It had been the greater wonder if they had not been angry. But now if we should level our progress by the same line, and guess that in the present affair | there was an equal cause, because a greater fire was intended, we shall too much betray the ingenuity of apparent truth, and the blessing of this anniversary. They had not half such a cause for an excuse to a far greater malice, it will prove they had none at all; and, therefore, their malice was so much the more malicious, because causeless and totally inexcusable. However, I shall endeavour to join their consideration in as near a parallel as I can; which if it be not exact, as certainly it cannot, where we have already discovered so much difference in degrees of malice, yet, by laying them together, we may better take their estimate, though it be only by seeing their disproportion. place whence they would fetch their fire. The apostles would have had it from heaven, but these men's conversation was not there. Ta kárwder, "things from beneath," from an artificial hell, but breathed from the natural and proper, were in all their thoughts. 5. The example, which is the last particular, I fear I must leave quite out; and when you have considered all, perhaps you will look for no example. First of the persons; they were disciples of Christ and apostles : "But when James and John saw this." When first I considered they were apostles, I wondered they should be so intemperately angry; but when I perceived they were so angry, I wondered not that they sinned. Not the privilege of an apostolical spirit, not the nature of angels, not the condition of immortality, can guard from the danger of sin; but if we be overruled by passion, we almost subject ourselves to its necessity. It was not, there fore, without reason altogether, that the Stoics affirmed wise men to be void of passions; for sure I am, the inordination of any passion is the first step to folly. And although of them, as of waters of a muddy residence, we may make good use, and quench our thirst, if we do not trouble them; yet upon any ungentle disturbance we drink down mud instead of a clear stream, and the issues of sin and sorrow, certain consequents of temerarious or inordinate anger. And, therefore, when the apostle had given us leave to "be angry," as knowing the condition of human nature, he quickly enters a caveat that "we sin not;" he knew sin was very likely to be hand-maid where anger did domineer, and this was the reason why St. James and St. John are the men here pointed at; for the Scripture notes them for "Boanerges," sons of thunder," men of an angry temper, "et quid mirum est filios tonitru fulgurâsse voluisse ?" said St. Ambrose. But there was more in it than thus. Their spirits, of themselves hot enough, yet met with their education under the law, whose first tradition was in fire and thunder, whose precepts were just, but not so merciful; and this inflamed their distemper to the height of a revenge. It is the doctrine of St. Jerome and Titus Bostrensis,c 99 66 The words, as they lay in their own order, point out, 1. The persons that asked the question. 2. The cause that moved them. 3. The person to whom they propounded it. 4. The question itself. 5. And the precedent they urged to move a grant, drawn from a very fallible topic, a singular example, in a special and different case. The persons here were Christ's disciples, and so they are in our case, designed to us by that glorious surname of christianity they will be called catholics; but if our discovery perhaps rise higher, and that the see apostolic prove sometimes guilty of so reprovable a spirit, then we are very near to a parallel of the persons, for they were disciples of Christ and apostles. 2. The cause was the denying of toleration of abode upon the grudge of an old schism; religion was made the instrument. That which should have taught the apostles to be charitable, and the Sama--the law had been their schoolmaster, and taught ritans hospitable, was made a pretence to justify the unhospitableness of the one, and the uncharitableness of the other. Thus far we are right; for the malice of this present treason stood upon the same base. 3. Although neither side much doubted of the lawfulness of their proceedings, yet St. James and St. John were so discreet as not to think themselves infallible, therefore they asked their Lord: so did the persons of the day ask the question too, but not of Christ, for he was not in all their thoughts; but yet they asked of Christ's delegates, who, there-integrity, as were to be reserved for the best and fore, should have given their answer ex eodem tripode," from the same spirit. They were the fathers confessors who were asked. 4. The question is of both sides concerning a consumptive sacrifice, the destruction of a town there, of a whole kingdom here, but differing in the circumstance of b Epist. ad Algas. them the rules of justice, both punitive and vindictive; but Christ was the first that taught it to be a sin to retaliate evil with evil; it was a doctrine they could not read in the killing letter of the law. There they might meet with precedents of revenge and anger of a high severity," an eye for an eye," and "a tooth for a tooth," and "let him be cut off from his people:" but forgiving injuries, praying for our persecutors, loving our enemies, and relieving them, were doctrines of such high and absolute most perfect lawgiver, the bringer of the best promises, to which the most perfect actions have the best proportion, and this was to be when Shiloh Now then the spirit of Elias is out of date, came. Jam ferrea primum In Lucam. And, therefore, our blessed Master reproved | effusion of blood, for a christian cause; but this them of ignorance, not of the law, but of his Spirit, were not altogether so unchristian-like, if the sheep, which had they but known or could but have though with blood, yet were not to be fed with the guessed at the end of his coming, they had not been blood of their shepherd Cyrus, I mean their princes. such abecedarii in the school of mercy. But I find many such "nutritii" in the nurseries of Rome, driving their lambs from their folds, unless they will be taught to worry the lion. And now we shall not need to look far for persons, disciples professing at least in Christ's school, yet as great strangers to the merciful spirit of our Saviour, as if they had been sons of the law, or foster-brothers to Romulus, and sucked a wolf; and they are Romanists too: this day's solemnity presents them to us, τŋλòç aïμarı oνμπεдνρμévоs; and yet were that washed off, underneath they write Christian and Jesuit. One would have expected that such men, set forth to the world's acceptance with so merciful a "cognomentum," should have put a hand to support the ruinous fabric of the world's charity, and not have pulled the frame of heaven and earth about our ears. But yet," Ne credite, Teucri!" Give me leave first to make an inquisition after this antichristian pravity, and try who is of our side, and who loves the king, by pointing at those whose sermons do blast loyalty, breathing forth treason, slaughters, and cruelty, the greatest imaginable contrariety to the spirit and doctrine of our dear Master. So we shall quickly find out more than a pareil for St. James and St. John, the Boanerges of my text. "It is an act of faith, by faith to conquer the enemies of God and holy church," saith Sanders, our countryman. Hitherto nothing but well; if James and John had offered to do no more than what they could have done with "the sword of the Spirit, and the shield of faith," they might have been inculpable, and so had he if he had said no more; but the blood boils higher, the manner spoils all. "For it is not well done, unless a warlike captain be appointed by Christ's vicar to bear a crusade in a field of blood." And if the other apostles did not proceed such an angry way as James and John, it was only discretion that detained them, not religion. "For so they might, and it were no way unlawful for them to bear arms to propagate religion, had they not wanted an opportunity;' "if you believe the same author: "for fighting is proper for St. Peter and his successors, therefore, because Christ gave him commission to feed his lambs." A strange reason! I had thought Christ would have his lambs fed with the sincere milk of his word, not like to cannibals, Emanuel Sà, in his Aphorisms, affirms it lawful to kill a king; indeed not every king, but such a one as rules with tyranny; and not then, unless the pope hath sentenced him to death, but then he may, though he be his lawful prince. Not the necessitude which the law of nations hath put between prince and people, not the obligation of the oath of allegiance, not the sanctions of God Almighty himself, must reverse the sentence against the king when once passed; but any one of his subjects, of his own sworn subjects, may kill him. This perfidious treasonable position of Sà is not a single testimony. For 1. it slipped not from his pen by inadvertency; it was not made public until after forty years' deliberation, as himself testifies in his preface. 2. After such an avisamente, it is now the ordinary received manual for the fathers confessors of the Jesuits' order. 4. This doctrine, although-" Titulo res digna sepulcri”—yet is nothing if compared with Mariana.* For 1. he affirms the same doctrine in substance. 2. Then he descends to the very manner of it, ordering how it may be done with the best convenience: he thinks poison to be the best way, but yet that, for the more secrecy, it be cast upon the chairs, saddles, and garments of his prince. It was the old laudable custom of the Moors of Spain. 3. He adds examples of the business, telling us that this was the device, to wit, by poisoned boots, that old Henry of Castile was cured of his sickness. Lastly, this may be done, not only if the pope judge the king a tyrant, (which was the utmost Emanuel Sà affirmed,) but it is sufficient proof of his being a tyrant if learned men, though but few, and those seditious too, do but murmur it, or begin to call him I hope this doctrine was long since disclaimed by the whole society, and condemned “ad umbras Acherunticas." Perhaps so; but yet these men who use to object to us an infinity of divisions among ourselves, who boast so much of their own union and consonancy in judgment, with whom nothing is more ordinary than to maintain some opinions quite throughout their order, (as if they were informed by some common "intellectus agens,") should not be divided in a matter of so great moment, so much concerning the monarchy of the see apostolic, to which they are vowed liegemen. But I have greater reason to believe them united in this doctrine, than is the greatness of this probability. For 1. There was an apology printed in Italy, "permissu superiorum," in the year 1610, that so.m i Præsertim cum in hoc opus per annos ferè quadraginta diligentissime incubuerim. * De Rege et R. Institut. lib. i. c. vi. Qui est l'artifice dont je trouve que les rois Mores ont souvent usé, c. 7. Postquam à paucis seditiosis, sed doctis, cœperit tyrannus appellari. says, "They were all enemies of that holy name of | Jesus, that condemned Mariana for any such doctrine." I understand not why, but sure I am that the Jesuits do or did think his doctrine innocent for in their apology put forth in the name of the whole society against the accusations of Anticoton, they deny that the assassin of Henry IV., I mean Ravaillac, was moved to kill the king by reason of Mariana, and are not ashamed to wish that he had read him. Perhaps they mean it might have wrought the same effect upon him, which the sight of a drunkard did upon the youth of Lacedæmon; else I am sure it is not very likely he should have been dissuaded from his purpose by reading in Mariana, that it was lawful to do what he intended. 3. I add, they not only thought it innocent, and without positive hurt, but good and commendable; so that it is apparent that it was not the opinion of Mariana alone, but that the Moors of Spain had more disciples than Mariana. 1. He says it himself; for, commending the young monk that killed Henry III., he says he did it "having been informed, by several divines, that a tyrant might lawfully be killed." 2. The thing itself speaks it, for his book was highly commended by Gretser and Bonarscius, both for style and matter,―higher yet by Petrus de Onna, provincial of Toledo, who was so highly pleased with it, he was sorry he wanted leisure to read it the second and third time over, and, with this censure prefixed, was licensed to the press. Further yet, for Stephen Hoyeda, visitor of the Jesuits for the same province, approved it not only from his own judgment, but as being before approved by grave and learned men of the Jesuits' order, and so with a special commission from Claudius Aquaviva, their general, with these approbations, and other solemn privileges, it was printed at Toledo and Mentz;" and lastly, inserted into the catalogues of the books of their order by Petrus Ribadineira. What negligence is sufficient that such a doctrine as this should pass so great supervisors, if in their hearts they disavow it? The children of this world are not such fools in their generations. The fathers of the society cannot but know, how apt these things of themselves are to public mischief, how invidious to the christian world, how scandalous to their order; and yet they rather excuse, than condemn, Mariana: speaking of him, at the hardest, but very gently, as if his only fault had been his speaking a truth" in tempore non opportuno," "something out of season; or as if they were forced to yield to the current of the times, and durst not profess openly of what, in their hearts, they were persuaded. I speak of some of them, for others, you see, are of the same opinion. But I would fain learn why they are so sedulous and care ful to procure the decrees of the rector and deputies of Paris, rescripts of the bishop, revocation of arrest of the parliament which had been against them, and all to acquit the fathers of the society from these scandalous opinions; as if these laborious devices could make what they have said and done, to be unspoken and undone, or could change their opinions from what indeed they are; whereas they never went ex animo" to refute these theorems, never spake against them in the real and serious dialect of an adversary, never condemned them as heretical, but what they have done they have been shamed to, or forced upon, as Père Coton by the king of France, and Servin to a confutation of Mariana (from which he desired to be excused, and after the king's death wrote his declaratory letter to no purpose); the apologists of Paris, by the outcries of christendom against them; and when it is done, done so coldly in their reprehensions with a greater readiness to excuse all, than condemn any. I say, these things, to a considering man, do increase the supicion, if at least that may be called suspicion, for which we have had so plain testimonies of their own. X I add this more, to put the business past all question; that when some things of this nature were objected to them by Arnald, the French king's advocate, they were so far from denying them, or excusing them, that they maintained them in spite of opposition, putting forth a book, entitled, "Veritas defensa contra actionem Antonii Arnaldi." What the things were, for which they stood up patrons, hear themselves speaking, “Tum enim id non solum potest papa, sed etiam debet, se ostendere superiorem illis principibus. Exceptio hæc stomachum tibi commovet, facit ut ringaris, sed oportet haurias, et de cætero fatearis tibi nec rationem esse, nec conscientiam." Hard words these! The advocate is affirmed to be void both of reason and honesty, for denying the pope's dominion over kings. The reason follows, "The pope could not keep them to their duties, unless he kept them in awe with threatening them the loss of their kingdoms." But this is but the least part of it. They add, "If the subjects had been but disposed as they should have been, there was no time but it might have been profitable to have exercised the sword upon the persons of kings." y Let them construe their meaning, those are their words. But see further. The damned act of Jacques Clément, the monk, upon the life of Henry III. of France, of Jean Chastel and Ravaillac upon Henry IV. are notorious in the christian world, and yet the first of these was commended by F. Guignard, in a discourse of purpose, and by Mariana, as I before cited him. The second had two apologies made for him, the one by Constantinus Veruna, the other, without a name indeed, but with the mark and cognizance of the Jesuits' order, and the last was publicly commended, in a sermon by a monk of Cologne, as it is reported by the excellent Thuanus. 66 Not much less than this is that of Baronius, just, I am sure, of the same spirit with James and John, for he calls for a ruin upon the Venetians, for opposing of his holiness. Arise, Peter, not to feed these wandering sheep, but to destroy them; throw away thy pastoral staff, and take thy sword." I confess here is some more ingenuity, to oppose murdering to feeding, than to make them all one, as Sanders doth, but yet the same fiery spirit inflames them both, as if all Rome were on fire, and would put the world in a combustion. Further yet. Guignard, a Jesuit of Clerimont college in Paris, was executed by command of the parliament, for some conclusions he had written, which were of a high nature treasonable; and yet as if either there were an infallibility in every person of the society, or as if the parliament had done injustice in condemning Guignard, or lastly, as if they approved his doctrine, he was apologized for by Lewis Richeome, and Bonarscius. I know they will not say, that every Jesuit is infallible, they are not come to that yet; it is plain then, they are of the same mind with Guignard, or else (which I think they dare not say) the parliament was unjust in the condemnation of him; but if they do, they thus proclaim their approbation of these doctrines he was hanged for; for that he had such, was under his own hand, by his own confession, and of itself evident, as is to be seen in the arrest of the parliament against him. Lastly, more pertinent to the day is the fact of Garnet,-who, because a Jesuit, could have done nothing for which he should not have found an apologist, for even for this his last act of high treason he was apologized for, by Bellarmine, & Gretser, h and Eudæmon Johannes.i Thus far we have found out persons fit enough to match any malice; Boanerges all, and more than a pareil for James and John: but I shall anon discover the disease to be more epidemical, and the pest of a more catholic infection; and yet if we sum up our accounts, we shall already find the doctrine to be too catholic. For we have already met with Emanuel Sà, a Portuguese: Mariana and Ribadineira, Spaniards; Bonarscius, a bas Almain : Gretser, a German; Eudæmon Johannes, a false Greek; Guignard, Richeome, and the apologists for Chastel, Frenchmen; Bellarmine and Baronius, Italians; Garnet and Sanders, English. The doctrine, you see, they would fain make catholic; now, if it prove to be but apostolic too, then we have found out an exact parallel for James and John, great disciples and apostles: and whether or no the see apostolic may not sometime be of a fiery and consuming spirit, we have so strange examples, even in our own home, that we need seek no farther for resolution of the Quære.' In the bull of excommunication put forth by Pius Quintus against Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory, there is more than a naked encouragement, as much as comes to a "Volumus et jubemus ut adversus Elizabetham, Angliæ reginam, subditi arma capessant." -"Bone Jesu! in quæ nos reservasti tempora ?" Here is a command to turn rebels, a necessity of being traitors. "Quid eo infelicius, cui jam esse malum necesse est." The business is put something further home by Catena and Gabutius, who wrote the life of Pius Quintus, were resident at Rome, one of them an advocate in the Roman court; their books both printed at Rome," con licenza," and "con privilegio." And now hear their testimonies of the whole business between the queen and his holiness. "Pius Quintus published a bull against Queen Elizabeth, declared her a heretic, and deprived her of her kingdom, absolved her subjects from their oath of allegiance, excommunicated her, and gave power to any one to rebel against her," &c. This was but the first step; he therefore thus proceeds; "He procures a gentleman of Florence to move her subjects to a rebellion against her for her destruction." "m Further yet; he thought this would be such a real benefit to christendom to have her "destroyed, that the pope was ready to aid in person, to spend the whole revenue of the see apostolic, all the chalices and crosses of the church, and even his very clothes, to promote so pious a business as was the destruction of Queen Elizabeth."n The witnesses of truth usually agree in one. The same story is told by Antonius Gabutius,° and some more circumstances added. First, he names the end of the pope's design, it was "to take her life away, in case she would not turn Roman catholic."-"To achieve this, because no legate could come into England, nor any public messenger from the see apostolic, he employed a Florentine merchant to stir her subjects to a rebellion for her perdition." Nothing but "sollevamento," "rebellion," perdition and destruction to the queen could be thought upon by his holiness. More yet; for when the Duke of Alva had seized upon the English merchants' goods which were at Antwerp, the pope took the occasion, instigated the king of Spain to aid "the pious attempts of those who conspired against the queen:" they are the words of Cabutius.9 This rebellion was intended to be under the conduct of the Duke of Norfolk, "viro dendo, che ciascuno andar contra le potesse, &c. Girolamo Catena, p. 114. m Il quale muovesse gli animi al sollevamento per distruttione d'Elisabetta, p. 113. n L'andare in persona, impegna e tutte le sostanze della sede apostolica, e calici, e i proprj vestimenti, p. 117. • De Vitâ et Gestis Pii V. lib. iii. c. 9. P Qui incolarum animos ad Elizabethæ perditionem, rebellione factâ, commoveret. a Efflagitabat ab rege, ut Anglorum in Elizabetham piè conspirantium studia foveret. |