which, though disowned and disbelieved by factious." That the reader may the better be able to judge of the justness of these censures, I will add what was requested by the puritans at this conference: and this was, 1. That the doctrine of the church might be preserved in purity, according to God's word. 2. That good pastors might be planted in all churches to preach the same. 3. That church government might be sincerely ministred, according to God's word. 4. That the book of Common Prayer might be fitted to more increase of piety. This was all that was asked, and one would have thought, as the difference in doctrine was little, that it had been a very easy matter to have reconciled things. But James's hatred of the puritans, the stiffness of the bishops, and their unwillingness to own any thing in the constitution of the hierarchy to be wrong, though seen to be such by all indifferent observers, hindered a coalition of parties, and produced the troubles and persecutions of a great number of honest, well-meaning men. May the same temper never again prevail! but may it be the ambition of princes and prelates, to reform whatever is amiss in the church; that it may be so pure and spotless that every honest and sincere Christian may be looked on as a member of it, and entitled to all its privileges. Then will our church indeed be the bulwark of the reformation, the glory of the nation, the promoter of truth and virtue. Infidelity will fail; schism and heresy, those ecclesiastical scarecrows, be no more heard of among us, but peace, unity, and b Barlow, p. 149. * Oldcastle's Remarks, p. 217. many, yet cannot, I think, reasonably be" love flourish and prevail among all those who profess the religion of the meek and holy Jesus. 39 The powder-plot-cannot, I think, reasonably be doubted of.] The history of this is so well known, that 'tis needless to relate it in this place. I will only observe, that the writers of the narratives of this affair, pay a compliment to James's understanding at the expence of truth; for it was not he that guessed from the expression in the letter to lord Monteagle, "that they should receive a terrible blow this parliament, and yet they should not see who hurts them." I say, it was not he who guessed that it should be some sudden danger by blowing up of powder, but the earl of Suffolk, lord chamberlain, and the earl of Salisbury, as the latter himself relates in a letter to Sir Charles Cornwallis, dated Nov. 9, 1605, However, the writers on this subject are excusable, having authority to rely on. For such was the flattery of James's courtiers, that they get it inserted into the preamble of the act for a public thanksgiving to almighty God, every year on the fifth of November, that "the conspiracy would have turned to the utter ruin of this whole kingdom, had it not pleased almighty God, by inspiring the king's most excellent majesty with a divine spirit, to interpret some dark phrases of a letter shewed to his majesty, above and beyond all ordinary construction, thereby miraculously discovering this hidden treason." This appears to be gross flattery, and 'tis amazing how any man, who knew it to be such, could thus publicly receive it, much more the most great, learned, and religious king that ever reigned in this kingdom, as in the said preamble James is stiled. But the drawers of this a Winwood, vol. II. p. 171. doubted of. Every body knows, that in consequence of the discovery, several of the act, I dare say, knew his taste, and were willing to gratify it, though thereby they exposed him to the laughter of those who were in the secret, as great numbers must have been. However, by the way, it ought never to be permitted to recite falshoods for truths in statutes; for these being enacted by the highest authority, the facts in them declared should be strictly true; otherwise whatever obedience may be yielded, the enactors will have little esteem or regard from the people, to whom the dealers in untruths seldom appear in an amiable light.—'Tis well known, that many of the papists then and now have denied the fact, and imputed the whole of the affair to the artifice of Salisbury; and we are told, that others of opposite principles have confidently asserted, "that there never was any such thing really as the gunpowder plot, but that it was a plot of king James's contriving, to endear himself unto the people"." But whether this is not all idle talk will appear, if we consider a few confessions of Roman catholics themselves. That worthy good-natured man, Dr. Tillotson, speaking of this horrid affair, says, "Sir Everard Digby, whose very original papers and letters are now in my hands, after he was in prison, and knew he must suffer, calls it the best cause; and was extremely troubled to hear it censured by catholics and priests, contrary to his expectation, for a great sin. Let me tell you (says he) what a grief it is, to hear that so much condemned which I did believe would have been otherwise thought of by catholics. And yet he concludes that letter in * Casaubon of Credulity and Incredulity, vol. I. p. 202, 8vo. Lond. 1668. chief conspirators were executed, and an annual thanksgiving ordained. And in these words: in how full of joy should I die, if I could do any thing for the cause which I love more than my life. And in another letter he says, he could have said something to have mitigated the odium of this business, as to that point of involving those of his own religion in the common ruin. I dare not, says he, take that course that I could, to make it appear less odious; for divers were to have been brought out of danger, who now would rather hurt them than otherwise. I do not think that there would have been three worth the saving, that should have been lost. And as to the rest that were to have been swallowed up in that destruction, he seems not to have the least relenting in his mind about them." Dr. Burnet tells us, he had the same papers in his possession, and gives the like account from them".- -But to put the matter beyond all dispute, I will give part of a speech of lord Stafford at the bar of the house of lords, Dec. 1, 1680. which, as far as I know, has never been quoted by any writer. Every body almost knows that this unfortunate nobleman was strongly attached to the Romish religion; and that upon the evidence of those times he was convicted and executed for the popish plot. It may well enough therefore be supposed, that he would not blacken his own side on this occasion, or endeavour to render his prosecutors more apprehensive of the enterprizing spirit of the catholics, than the truth compelled him to do. His evidence therefore being unexceptionable, let us attend unto it. "My lords, • Tillotson's Sermon before the House of Commons, Nov. 5, 1678. b Burnet, vol. I. p. 19. order the better to secure the obedience of the catholics, the oath of allegiance*, by au said he, I have heard very much of a thing that was named by these gentlemen of the house of commons, and that very properly too, to wit, of the gunpowder treason. My lords, I was not born then, but some years after heard very much discourse of it, and very various reports; and I made a particular enquiry, perhaps more than any one person did else, both of my father, who was alive then, and my uncle, and others; and I am satisfied, and do clearly be lieve, by the evidence I have received, that that thing called the gunpowder treason, was a wicked and horrid design (among the rest) of some of the Jesuits, and I think the malice of the Jesuits, or the wit of man, cannot offer an excuse for it, it was so execrable a thing. Besides, my lords, I was acquainted with one of them, that was concerned in it, who had his pardon, and lived many years after: I discoursed with him about it, and he confessed it, and said, he was sorry for it then; and I here declare to your lordships, that I never heard any one of the church of Rome speak a good word of it: it was so horrid a thing it cannot be expressed nor excused. And God almighty shewed his judgments upon them for their wickedness; for hardly any of the persons or their posterity are left that were concerned in it; and even a very great family too [Peircy, earl of Northumberland, I suppose] that had collaterally something to do in it, is in the male line extinct totally; and I do think God almighty always shews his judgments upon such vile actions." What will any one say to this? needs * Stat. anno tertio Jacobi regis, c. 4. sect. 15. |
