John Poynder.

A history of the Jesuits, to which is prefixed a Reply to Mr. Dallas's defence of that order online

. (page 12 of 39)
Online LibraryJohn PoynderA history of the Jesuits, to which is prefixed a Reply to Mr. Dallas's defence of that order → online text (page 12 of 39)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

<yf jdoNOttfJt^s Imvkig cBad ui die aatte opinio»)«*^rst; Ae uni-
vetlal lUMferstaocliiig iumI belief of France (nith ihe exotptian
af certain Jesints, ivka will demy tfaii , 6r any otfaer^ioBtile ev|-
denoe), thatthase €&Aiptes Rendma wert the genuiBe produe-
tionB of the wtiten .fipodi wbobi they pilrport tbcbme : Sdly^
the intrinsic evidence of thfese documents to tibcix^ onpxulity
and troth z ddly^ the ^erilattoal evidence fiDcAishad by iba do-
caments theniselvesy frcm the.wcarka of the Jendts^ in suppofrt
of tbeiacts they detail ; and lastly^ the express assUrioce 9S Pb#-
FB8SOE BoBSUaoii; that the two Indhnduak mh<m ohixacters
are thm aspersed, and wl wa c trritjags itoe thus disputed by M»,
Da&LAs, were ^ aasFftCTAiLE MAOistEid^st akh itu^AiiX'
'^'WEiTKBs :^ but fiirther we h«v^ tlua sCrikiDg obs^nratiop of
PabraisoB:B0Bnii8Oit'oii the Compte$.JitendM (mlisii it did
not answer Ha. DAiXAaV)>uipo6e to produce); ^^I nest not ny
./^ narmtiYe'' {says he) /f Xipon. tbeir authority^ but up^n \f^
^tiumenl^' pMBagcd whidi they ha^e esk^w^ 6bqs^ tl^
'^ ConstiliitioQa of the Order deposited ip Ibcnr hand#.^j *:

If, dierisferef Mil Daixas hJui succeeded m proi^ing th^
Compter Sendus to be wiittett by oth^ perscfas than tfa^gr
puiport to be (wfaid^ however, he has eKmly kHed to do),
he mtist, in addition, annihikte.the ConstkutioM of the Jesuitf,
befooe he Tcaa ex^nguidi the important light which the CofUft^i

In p. S5, Me. Daixas says, << the Pwrhament hated th^

'^ Jesuits as ftiettds.of the Pope ; aod the Umvernty, as tivd

.^^teadiers; and thp«e two bo<hes combined <o ei^temihHK|e

It ia thus Aat he proposes to exiittguish the blaae of tvi^
.4enoe iuraidied by the emiimied oppoatiasi of ,tb^ s^acal
IJniversitieft md Flsriiamfiila of SVnoe, dMXig m period iof
^ro biAAred yeursli I

Lest Me. BAUAiA^mpde of sli^iiy jbjy»irtBi|i Aoold
ioduoein biilicf dM^ was vmidy iha fmmrifikikV^i^

Digitized byv


*18 - ccExar m the LXAoirjtr ^

' lit^ of Fajhs- whidi declared' against the JesoitSy^ it may be

nght to olMtfte that they west opposed at dtficrent periods,

-and with vasiods success (to say nodiing of the Parliament of

.£ngkmd),.by the Parliaments of Laiqruedoc, Giuenne, Bur*

-gandy, Ncmnandy, Provence, Brittany, and of the Low

• Countries ; and by the Univeratiesof Thouknue, Montpellier^

, Orleans, Cahors, Angers, Aix, l^iietiers, Caen, Valence,

Bourges, Boindeaux, Rheims^ Douay, Louvain, and Ati-

>gnon; and by those of Padua in Italy, Coimbra in Portugri,

Prague in Bohemia, DUlingen in Suabia, Vienna in Geiv

-many, and Cracow in Poland.

The real nature and cause»of audi a fiNrmidable and con-
•tinued opposition on ihe part €f those Bodies will appear in
so deta^ed a form in the following Histoiy, diat it is unneces-
sary to notice fhem here ; but it may be wdl tto observe, thtft
'Mb. DallaIb^ assertion (p. 26), that the UniveiSBi^ and Par-
Hament of Paris took a principal diare in thb Leaoitk, will
-not prove that .trc JiestnTs wei« innocent of contribotii^ lb
^ihe horrors of that unhappy period. There can be little dc^bt
that those of tfhe- Catholic Clergy of Paris who were not Je-
"siiits, abhorred and opposed Hkk%y IV. befbre he became a
CathoKc, quite as much as the' Jesuits did. So long as the
thunders and anathemas of Pope GaECoar XIII. were out
. against that Monarch, it was, m the estimation of all good
^Catholics, a point of duty and consdeace to obey the injune*
tions of the Head of their Church, and to expose, to the ut*
•most c£ thdir power, an exoommunicated Heretic. But what
does Mil. Dallas gain by establishing this htt? Timt there-
-forethe Jesuits were guiltless of the miseries of that distress-
ing period ? By no means^They were doubtless united ia
one cause; equally resisted their lawful Soveneign; and alike
-resold ^6 arms for the purpose of preventing his occupation
'}0f a throne which' the- P<^ had -declared him unworthy to fiH;
^nce the Pope, in the opinion of the whole Cathcrfic Church,
-whether Jesuits or not, ootdd not be miitakfen. ' •
'- There is a smgular hardihood m M«^- Dau«as?8 i


Digitized by



(p. 26), that <^ the Parliaments and the Doctors, in finneHtiiig
^* the League, were seoonded by aU the Rdiig^s ordere, ths
" Jesuits excepted T and further Qn p. «7), that " not a
^^ Jesuit was eveb pboyed to hate ekteeed into th*
<^ League, and that no weitse accuses them of it,


*^ EXCEPTED*^ — The following History will prove how com*
pletely unfounded this assertion is— At present, it can only
be briefly stated, that independently of the printed prods
suj^lied by FAsauiEE in his ^^ CaUchmne des^ Je^uUes^ and
the solemn and oflicial acts of the University, to neither of
which authorities Mr. Dallas has any right to object),
Mezeeai, in his Abrtg6 Chronokgique^ provesthat the Jesuits
had a principal share in various Leagues throughout France,
the grand centre of which was the League at Paris ; and,
that the members were bound by oath ; that Matthieu the
Jesuit was expressly named ^^ the Courier of the LecLgue^ on
account of his frequent journeys between Home and Paris;
and Mezeeai further shews, that it was the intr^ues of the
Jesuits which led to the treaty between the King of ^pain and
the Dukes« of Guise, dated 81st December, 1584, which
provided, that, %n the event qf tfte death qf Henry IIL the
Cardinal de Bourbon (a creature <^ the Jesuits) should be
proclaimed King.

VHistoire dee dermere Troubles de France shews, that
two Jesuits endeavoured to obtain the Sling^s sanction to the
League— that Pope Sixtus Y. in 1589, sent Caedinal Ca-
JETAN into France, as his Legate, aaogning him the two Je-
suits Bellaemine and Tyeeius for advisers, with Instruc-
tions to use all the efforts in thar power to get a King elected
who should be of the Catholic Religion— that (he Jesuits in
l^aris, who were at the head of that and the other Leagues, in
order to amuse the paofde during the severe sitge of the ca-
{tttal, and to divert them fixim a sense of the misery to which
they were reduced, prescribed puUic.pBrocattcms, double fiists,
and rsligiausvows; and, together with other manli^ kepi

F 4

Digitized by



the walch io tuni~diat at the heed of the Council of 6ix«
teen, the Jesuits gave an impulse to seditkm, ^bidi was fdt
both in the cajntal and throughout the Kingdom ; that they
j^reached revolt in their Sermons, circulated it by thar writ-
bgs, and inculeated it in their congregatkms.

VBiHoire de la ViOe de Thoubmae, by RaTKAL, shews
that A0Oi£:a the Jesuit administered the oath to the Leaguers
of Thoulouse, and that its leaders pledged diemselves never
to adcnowledge Henry lY. as iheir King.

Dk Thou states, that on Matthieu^s death, which hap*
penad in 1588, the General of the Jesuits appointed Odon
PiGSNAT his successor, whom he calls a violent and Jimaticai
LtagUer of the Jesuits. The work, ^titled, ^^ Les Jesuites
<< crimineis de* Lhse Mofestif^ and Callibr's << History ef
^ Marshal de MatignotfT (who was sent to quell the League,
by Henry lY.)) both prove the League of Bourdeaux to have
been instigated by the Jesuits.

The testimony of Du BoouiY and of Sully might be
diljed to the same purpose, as wdl as that of other Historians
equally unexoqptionable, all tending to establish the fisKl diat
the Jesuits were particularly active and fermidable during the
period of the League; a oonfed^nuy whidi had for its general
^ject to extend the Catholic, and to depress the Protestant
Religion throuj^out France ; and for its particular object; to
keep Ihe Throne Cathdic, and prevent the accesnon of Henry
ibe IVtk

Before, therefore, Mb. Dallas had ventinred upon an as-
asctm tor which he can derive no BupjKnrt from History, he
should have ccmodered the importance of Truth Io the PuMk
at large, and ccmsequentfy to all those who undertake to in^
form the Fttblic.

In p. S7, Mm. Dallas endeavours to invdSidate Ifae testi*
xDony ot Svai.7 .^phist the Jesmts (whidi is of tbe utmost
importance), by calling him <<ths LsADsa of the Hugo-
.^^ HOTS.^ This aeounle and luminous Historian is as mwA
Abovct sack imfxitatkni aa I^ascal ; but they serve to shew

Digitized by


«hblMMrlild^ctt€BKniyME. DAixAs tmttfeilllei' (MhtHm
or Flntettints vbo hare dedn^ agiunst t^

** Tros Tyriu»-vc mihi nullo discrimme habctur."

Pascal Litot> flatiricid fin* Mb. Dallas ; and Sullt, that ciDi>>
lu^t FdHAdm aftd faitUul Wmstet, is a Hngcmot, vrnj^ n
^ L/etAt of the Hii^tmots,'' a tern of tvproadi ibr Ftolnt^
loitt whkdi has been hitherto ediupbyed only by Catholica!-^
It was not, however^ to be ex|ie^ diat i^iy Defainier of thfc
JeMiits wouM hftve pardotied the oouipl^te exposition of their
mekedness bcMh of cbctiine ani pfactkw, ifUch a^

Thefe a^axuBy m the same page, a pediliar exadipb of
ittoontetandgaiUedqutiteftkn^bywfaich Stelviimedetoatft
Ann mdtivee wUdi he faanascjf disatowa.

Mn. Dallas says, that << Sullt stopped the f^fooeedm^
^i^gainst the Jesuits by interposiiig die authority of the ab-
^ SMit Kil^ whidi (81^ he) is not to be ooli^x^kmaed jxni^
^ WW pi^ ie f^tSH^ €i ie J^Uokgimi.'^ IAmp^ irfak k is
tMiethatSirtxTabteiltfaM, fab motives for dinng so, as Mited
by tettisdf) at^ tedustebudy ««pp»BSsed by Ma. Daalas;
ullhdcft ^)Mk hk Maders mast snpptm dat Sollt slopfed
ifceproeMifaigs, bs^aiise Im sid^ with dse Jestte^ and^fipoe.
^ Ibs&r eneiiiei. The i»Aofe tnsA is thas told fay Sollt;
tMii irhkh il af^ieai^ that it was « nww mtmoitt of taihpaia^
piitjj by -^Aiidtk he <fid not intend tk> ieosiasiit iha Qt^ or
lamiilf 10 any dsdidsd meairere, butiowhiidi he iiias cmt^pet-
M by the peealiar dMiyniSlai^ <<TbeJe.

^ sdts^ (says he) ^< had used great exertioiis on tkfe «cca-
^ sion, and the party was abeady so strdH^y ittiissd, thiftp
^ Wkhdilt HBdcoi^ the Fbpe, l^pein, and their paitisans in
*< 4^ Leagne {who wa*enot a few), they hlul influsnced oab
«t iigif (of ^e Fai&uAent, in^ iatarigd^^Mty ki thdr Ame.
^ Thecaose was in the hands <^the Most dble advoesiesai: tte
'^ B«r, and the puUfic nfflid was wholly ditided in Paris ba-
'" «#M[itwo such po#erfii] laetioiis. I eei^ideKd what die



^ CaiifiDal de Bouibon had conviiiced me o^ tibat dM^ wat
*< no ex t tmn ihf io tdtich tfu Jemits womid not have reoomm^
** if they were driven out of the Kingdom, dither from re-
^ venge, or from the hope of getdng thdr banishment re-
<^ voked ; that thej were abl« bj their intrigueB to stir up a
^ pcnrtion of £un^ ; that they weU knew how to get dia
^* persecution against them to be r^arded as an injury done
^ to religion itself, and to throw on the Sing the odium of
^ being still attadied in heart to the religion he had just
^ quitted (the Protestant); which at that moment might hare
*^ produced the worst effect : the King bdng also engaged in
<^ one of those undertakings, the issue of which is always, no
^ doubtful, and sometimes so critical; and finally, the most
^ powocful Catludics of the Kingdom fearing, or affecting to
<^ feai^ on thdr own bdbalf, that the Cathdic Rdigion was
-^ not sofficiendy protected in France : for these reasons, I
^^ thought that it was moreprudgni noi io commii the auiho^
<^ rit^ qf ihe absent King on account qf a dispute between
^ Prieete and Theologians j and I bad no doubt that his Ma*
*^ jcs^ woold,^ in a like case, have adopted the most niodanal#
*< course. I therefore tdd the Council, that the King did not
«< consider the complaints against the Jesuits suffidendy esta^
^ blished; but that he was resolved to put thequesdmi of ba^
*^ nishing or retaimng them u{km the manner in whidbi thej
<^ diould oonduet themsdves, bodi towards the State and him-
^^ sdf : above all, that until the King should give m(ne po^
^ ritive otders, he (m^bited any violent proceedings against
<< the Jesuits, or any criminating pleadings—No okx expjeeciv
« xn TO ran) m mb a Peotkctob of the Jssmrs.^ — See
,Mem(»ies d^ Sully, Vd. il p. S54— Edit 1768.

The importance of this quotation must apokgive for its
rkngth : it will appear fnrni it, that Ma. Dallas extracts a
sin^ phrase bom the l(Hig statement of Sully, leaving it to
be infierred firom that insulated passage, denuded of its con-
text, that Sully had at least a leaning towards the Jesuita;
^diile it is dear, from the whole statement, that he dreaded

Digitized by


cKiLTSL ccmvKnmi. ^ 8b

'and ^diked diem, andactedoidy fhm tlteimpidie of apru-
^dent policy &i interposing the auiiority of tlie King to pre-
Tent their baniflhment, bec8U98,4ii diat nuHPBnt, he hM every
reoKm tofearitspoMcalooDBequences. -

In p. Sf7 Mft. Dallas endeAVours to cff&tdMm tk&Eri-
deiice':agaiii8t Chatkl, who aimed at the Hfe of Hmnnr IV.
by asserting that the crime imputed to him is ^^ wixnour a
^ shadow of nooF.^ Th^re is an eftu nfery in this asstrtion
which requkes distinct reflatation. Let us bear Smi^Y^s ac-
tount of the n^tlery who stMes that he was waustmhT FEsmiT
When HEKitirV Hfe was attemptBd; «< On the A6th of De-
** eember, IfytT (sajs StrLLT), ^^ thte King was in the Chamber
*^ of the Ubutre) where he was ^ving audience t» Mearieut^
^ de Ibggmf andde M^ofUigifiy^ wfth whmh alaigecrowd had
V^ entered ; as he was in the act of stoopng to salute one of
-^ ihdm, he r^e^iv^ a wound m Ins face from a knife whidi
^ the assassin dropped, in the hdpe of escaping in the cmwd.
^ I was present — Observing the Kng aD oiver Mood, and
^ fearing that the wound was in the throat, I approached him
-'^ more dead ^than alive. He received us with nuldness
^ and composure, and we soon saw that he had in fact sus-
^ tained no other injury than a cat Hp, for the blow had be^i
^ akned too l^h, and had been stopped by a tooth whidi it
^ had broken : the Criminal was cKsdovered without cEfl-
^eulty, akhougfa concealed in die crowd; he was a stu-
^ dtot named Jba-n Chatsl : he replied to the first questions
^ winch were put to him, that he had come flom the Collba%
^ 0f Jnsorrs, amd hc Brrrs&LT aspioACREn those fa-
<< THEES. Hie Sng, ^o heard him, said, with a vivad^
^ which few could have evinced on such an occasion, that he
<^ abeady knew from the mouths of many respeetaUe p^sons,
^*< that the Soae^ did not love him, but that he had just been
<< convinced of it^^tmi his own fwndh. Cbatel was dehver-
'* ed up to justice ; and the proceedings against the Jesuits,
*^ which had been suspended, being revived with greater vi*
-'^ gbur thm ever, they terminated in the expubion of that

Digitized by



*< Ond^r ; thor FaAer €rmoKAfi3» was hung Air hit crinumi
^^wrkiiigB ilgaiiktt'die. aullmty and lives €f rKings; Jbajt
^ GtTUttTv Funn Vaeadb, Ai^bxandkb Mayvs, FMAmqoH
** Jacob, and Jean IdUBiiy mbmbebs of tbb socibtYi were
>< senMnosd to p«petual baobluncnt as aooo«i{dioe» in Una
« craDe.''^S6e M^moim cle SuUf» VdL ii. Book 7, p. 448,
Edit 13«a

If the above Extract shtmld not b^ thoii^ eonduaive,
Ae fUlowing IfistxHry will forther demonsttate with wha^ an
iittar oo n t e m p tfiirhiatorioaltestipftony Ms. Dauas has aaseri-
ad that the crime of Chatk. i» ^ ^ without a aha<few of pgwif/'

In p. flft Me. DALLaa quotes 11 JLallx Toi^mAi. m
fiiTor of the JcamtSi as he had be£dre done in p. IC. :

ThedtationofJi^ifi^fetf^iffiOfifetf is always opett tacertasn
objections Botxieeeisary to be here enumera wh^tever^saagr
have been the motives whi(^ induced M. Laixit Toukoac
to oome forward in fisivor of the Jemiits, it ia somewhat ^Sfi^
.euk to persuade ourselves to attach anj great importanoe 4o
the opinion of 1l man who voted tar JAam$bai. Nif. Ub-
dodbledly, if M. Laxxt Tolbndal bdieved t)iat signal eiflpnt
to have been ianooent^ he did perfiwtly r^ht in votii^ Ibr his
acquittal; but, in entertaini^ such an ofkiojif ioie great
ina|ority cf mankind will consider him as hn^vteg a^ted^ .mt
0iAy without sufficiosit reasQii» but in utter idefian^ft <^ att tea*
aon: — iB it not possible then, that he may. hikve permitted hi*-
'Self to be e<}uaBy deeaved tipta thequestimcC th^guUt or in-
nooenoe of the Jesuits ; andtf he should hawe been-se dfaciv
ed, is it any reason that we should ddiver up our jmilgmanis
to him, and detenaune to be deceived also ?•

Mb. Dallas imdces fm (^ S8«nd M) an att«nqit ^ ia-
v u Watc the testimony given i^ainst the Jesuits by the £■-
tTBAiTs nEs AssEBTiOMs, ccTtainly upon no belter gspunda
than in other instances of disputed authorkies.

These Ejct&aits dbs Assxetions are ao other thaft the.
u sser t b n s extracted in the year 1761 by Ufte PadiamMtef
Paris fiora the writings^ the Jesuits tiasmsalvest and JaiAbar

Digitized by



in tht^Xii^tt proof isftbecnin^^ ^vorfc

;ir)iidb fNnaifnto to potteriQr ao kdl^Uhle reeovd ^ the corrupt
fMDfaiilgr of tbe Society «8 mithcnsM by ifto aupmon: theiip
Me alxNre two 4iiou8aad ExtraqtB £ma the Jesaitai" own i^nfi.
jaip thiia i^feisfied by the PerfiMWit The piopoatkms coo-
tabed in these Extracts bad abeady been eoodenuied by the
Pop^ AleiaiMkr VII. Innooent XI. and Akunder YIII. ; by
ifaeSeihQnm; l^xwny of thaflratPrdliite^ and partiodarfy
hfM. sm OmnttiKaadtbeotbeiswhoaneweredaiidoaBaiind
Ae Jeamta' Jpakgj^JbrihfiCmsmits; as also by the AjMmbiy
of the Clergy in 1700, of whose movemeBt^ the oelefaeattd
JlosauBT was the main spring. The General of the Society
had never disowned (xt censured the authors of diese* worioii
jsor had the Supeonorsof the S^eietf retracted their approba-
ikm of them; but, en the eontnury, they had been repriiitsd
•evoal thnea during the whdb century preeeding the pariad
whoi the PavliameDt made the £%traets in question.

The diacge^ therefore, of Mb. DAUJks, that the EMtm^
^ AmetiAms are <^ a woric rqdela with studied fidbrioatums,*
mH not avail him; and widi respect to the answer wfaiok
Bbaumomt, the ArcUxshop of Paris (or soaie one for idm}^
fB{!Vie to tins work, m the Imifiuetion Beawmmty it
is only 'neeesaary to refior to the character hereafter given of
that Pidatc^ in order to judge what degree of oiiechtis due ti»
his testimony in dns matter^.

It is easy to account for the quarrel of Me. Daixas and
die other friends of the Jesuits with the Extracts dmwn from
those accredited writings in which the Casuists so fully deve-
loped what has been called *' raart ie diicaner woec DieuJ* A
oansideraUe degree of anger must always be excited by the
exposure which the Jesuits suffered by the pubiieation of s«ch

* The notorious illiteracy of this Prelate (to say nothing of other
parts of his character) was almost proverbial : it is impossible to ad«
vert to his name> without being reminded of the Episcopal question*
** Avin «u9us hi mtm Mandenunt ^* to which a wag repUed> by asking
anothtr qiietfioii> *< JJbennjgwAiry ftftMS ?oy t lu ?^

Digitized by



Doeumcnts. The Paadiament of 17KI olify fdibw6d:t&
eauonple of the Clergy of Paris, who alio jpuUiihed EztraoH
' timn the then existing writings of die Jesoits, a fuH Centorj
befim; and both these Bodies had tfie hij^iett authority &r
«udi a step : ^ Our of thike own mouth wiQ I judge iim^
^ thou wicked Servant''— Zidfe, xix. «•

The Jesuits and their advocates find it eanerlo deal with
pHnd statements, than with specific facta; and it is therefbte
mo natter of surprise, that, when they are pres s ed by. such ar*
gaments as these, they should lose all patience, and substitute
invective for reasoning.

Hie next Historian whose testimony is sought to be invali*
dated is Pbyknk.

It would have been strax^ indeed if he had been spared,
sinee it was principally owing to his exertions that the desigaa
of die Jesuitt and thdir adherents of the Catholic r^gpon m
the end of the ragn of James I. and throughoiit that of
Charles I. were detected and defeated. The character of such
% writer can no more escqpe the aqiersions of those who d».
ftod the Jesuits and thdr friends at this time, dion Pannix
himself could escape the resentment of the Jesuits and their
friends when he lived. The ofience of Prtvkk is too deep
to be forgiven, and too recent to be ^Nrgottsn; anoe the body
of Evidence ooUeeted ahd brought forward by turn if;ainBt the
Jesuits and Pajnsts, is <me of the most important links in the
chain of the History of Popery in England.

When the unjust and tjoranmcal Court of the Star Cham»>
ber had determined to silence, by whatever means, the loud
and general remonstrances which were heard throughout the
nation against the revival of Pqsery, and its inseparable at-
tendsokty Arbitrary Power, theybegan by inflicting, the most
cruel and odious punishments upon those who had been instru-
mental in apprizing the pec^le of the measiu^s which were in
agitation. The persons who were principally singled out, were
Pa, BunTOK, a Clergyman c^ the Church of England, Da.
Bastwick, a Phyflician^ a^d Ma. PaYNKS, a Barrister; wl|0

Digitized by


nTNUX ransmiED. 87

^wn dl 8iifa}0ct»i to the htaviest ^es, and the most severe
and ignomxnious pumiafaraents, the effisct of which steps, on tlie
pert of the Court, was directly contrary to what was intended:
Ibe Protestants of England, so far fixim being awed into
snhmjswmi by the terrors of this example, espoused the cause
of the acciued, and went the length <^ honouring them by a
public triumpb— From this moment, Pbtkne enjoyed the
cenfld^nce of thechief opponents of the Jesuits and Boraan
Catholics; and it must be confessed, that if considerable
dqpth and Tigour of intellect, an unabated ardour in die
pursuit of his olgect, and a large diare of l^al and juridical
biowledge, entided any one to take a prominent part in a
question cf the deepest national concern, PRTKim was emi-
WSoAj that man. The portion of personal feeling which may
be supposed to have operated with PaTiniE after the punkh-
ment inffieted on him, oug^t undoubtedly to be taken into the
account in judging of the degree of credit to be attached to
his testimoDy; but not, as Mb. Dallas would insinuate, to
dBscredit that testimony, even if it stood smgly. Fortunately,
tic^wever, for the interests of truth, his writings do not rest
upon hn own statements alone, but are amply sustained by the
fiicts he adduces, as well as by much other concurrent testi-
mony of that particular period.

Mb. Dallas refers usfor an account of Pbtnke to Hitme,
die well-known advocate of arbitrary power; who, with his
characteristic levity and contempt for religicHi, notices one of
Pbykne^s works, from whidi he takes occason, as usual, to
sneer at Piety under the name of Puritanism. Pbykks, how*
ev^r, published several others, which it 'did not perhaps i
the purpose <^ Hume and Mb. Dallas to mention : one '


** OF Pabliaments.* This work had two objects — first, to shew
that the Papists and Jesuits, both in England and elsewhere,
had been mvariaUy the advocates of Popery as wdl as the
assertors of arbitrary power, either to be ezerdsed by tl^em^

Digitized by


88^ mnnoE MFimw-

adves, or fay Prinoes under tbw mfimna^ to the exfihamr
of all lawful sovereigns who voif^ op|Xise them ; aad, se*
condly, that the Parliament ci S^igland, as oompoied of thc)
three £)8tates of the reabn, was the only legitiniate farm of
Government for I^igland, as also thai under whkh alooe Am
could really prosper; and be reSon the principal enrars of the
nign of Charles I. as weU as thai Kng^ subsequent misfam
tnnes, to his affection for Popery, and his desive to reign
without Parliaments. Another work from his pen was^


^' PERT r the diief ot^ect of which was, to develope the de-
signs of the Jesuits against the life of Charles I. as also against
the then existing Government: whidi designs he estaUiriiea
from some very important documents discovered by Urn at
Lambeth amwg the papers of Archbishop Laud, wfaidi were
laid by him before the Sing, and aflarwards proved on oadi

Online LibraryJohn PoynderA history of the Jesuits, to which is prefixed a Reply to Mr. Dallas's defence of that order → online text (page 12 of 39)