These lines show the estimation in which Elizabeth was held by foreign Protestants; and they furnish an answer to the oft-repeated slander, that the Queen was a favourer of popery. Beza and his brethren did not entertain any such notion; they were grateful to the Queen for her support, and they viewed the Church of England as the bulwark of the reformation. Elizabeth's memory has also been exposed to another modern slander, but of exactly an opposite character to that of a Popish leaning, so frequently alleged by Dissenters. The papal historian says that she "celebrated her triumph with the immolation of human victims. A commission was issued; a selection was made from the Catholics in prison on account of religion, and six clergymen were indicted for their priestly character." I have abundantly proved, in a The number that escaped, it fell them faire: But how were all these things miraculous done! His power secured thee, when presumptuous Spain, Her gloomy monarch, doubtful, and resigned * LINGARD, V., 509. former work, that those priests who were executed during this reign, were put to death for treasonable practices, and not on account of their religious views*. It is a subject respecting which there need be no dispute, for the proceedings on the trials show that the parties were implicated in the crime of treason. Sir Francis Walsingham, alluding, in a letter to the Secretary of France, to the charge of cruelty alleged against Elizabeth, asserts, that the Queen's " proceedings towards the Papists was with great lenity, expecting the good effects which time might work in them." After stating that the Queen did not revive the laws of Henry's reign, respecting the oath of supremacy, he adds, "her Majesty not liking to make windows into men's hearts and secret thoughts, except the abundance of them did overflow in overt and express acts or affirmations, tempered her laws so as it restraineth every manifest disobedience." Walsingham proceeds to show, that after the BULL of Pius V., the Queen merely enacted a law against bringing in any bull from Rome: and in reference to a subsequent period, he proceeds, "when about the twentieth year of her reign, she had discovered in the King of Spain an intention to invade her dominions, and that a principal point of the plot was to prepare a party within the realm that might adhere to the foreigner: and that the seminaries began to blossom and to send forth daily priests and professed men, who * See the State of Popery and Jesuitism in England. should, by vow taken at shrift, reconcile her subjects from their obedience, yea and bind many of them to attempt against her Majesty's sacred person; and that by the poison which they spread, the humours of most Papists were altered, and that they were no more Papists in conscience and of softness, but Papists in faction, then were there new laws made for the punishment of such as should submit themselves to such reconcilements, or such renunciations of obedience. And when this poison was dispersed so secretly, as that there was no means to stay it, but by restraining the merchants that brought it in, then there was added another law, whereby such seditious priests of new erection were exiled, and those that were at that time within the land shipped over, and so commanded to keep hence upon pain of treason." Can it be said that such persons were not traitors? Let it be observed that the old English priests were not affected by these laws; they related only to those who were made priests on the continent, and came to England to seduce the Queen's subjects. Walsingham adds, that none were in danger, even of those who came within the statute, "if they would but protest, that in case this realm should be invaded with a foreign army by the Pope's authority, they would take part with her Majesty and not adhere to her enemies*." Is it to be doubted whether such men were guilty * CABALA, 372-3. of treason? and can Dr. Lingard's assertion, that several were put to death on account of their priestly character, be deemed true? Yet such are the proceedings of Popish writers in the nineteenth century! They labour hard to make it appear that the priests, who suffered, were martyrs to the faith; and, if mere assertions were proofs, the evidence in their favour would be overwhelming. Fortunately, the pages of history are open to all; and no one who peruses them, with a desire of ascertaining the truth, can avoid the conclusion that the priests in question were traitors, and that Dr. Lingard's statement is obnoxious to the charge of dishonesty*. * Besides the medals already mentioned, I may mention two others struck by the Dutch. On one is the name Jehovah in Hebrew characters, encompassed with a glory, from which the Pope and cardinals are flying in confusion. The motto is Quem Deus conficiet Spiritu oris sui. The other represents the Pope, cardinals, and Popish princes sitting in council blindfold, and treading on iron spikes. There are two mottos: Durum est contra Stimulos Calcitrare: and O Cœcas Hominum mentes, O Pectora Cœca! K 130 CHAPTER VII. The consequences had the Armada succeeded. Persecuting character of the Church of Rome. Elizabeth's danger. The Pope and the Church of Rome implicated. The Bull, the source of all. Its history. Felton. The intentions of the Papists. Don Pedro de Valdez. Instruments of Torture. Conclusion. THE narrative of the proceedings connected with the fitting out, the sailing, the dispersion and ruin of the Invincible Armada, also of Queen Elizabeth's preparations, is now completed. The reader will observe the finger of Divine Providence in the whole series of events: he will perceive that the Lord fought for England. I shall now notice a few matters, which could not be included in the preceding chapters. It may be desirable to consider what might have been the present condition of England, if King Philip and the Pope had succeeded in the year 1588. Had they been successful, Popery would have been restored, and the country subjugated to the Spanish yoke: and who can say what consequences might have resulted? There are not a few persons, in the present day, who deny that there is anything in Popery, hostile to civil and religious liberty. They consider the fact that Papists do not persecute; and they arrive at the conclusion, that they do not wish to persecute, or that |