Continued from Chapter VI. The Armada Against England.

(Note: There’s definitely more than 9 minutes of reading on this page! There’s a coding error somewhere on it. I hope to fix it.)

In spite of all the lessons of Bloody Queen Mary’s reign, and the Papal plots against the Thrones of Elizabeth and James I., this young King of 25 years married a Roman Catholic Princess, Henrietta, daughter of Henry IV of France. Charles’ mother, Queen of James I., was a secret Roman Catholic, whilst publicly attending the services of the Church of England, as Queen of England. Mark the terrible consequences to the nation.

Within a year both Houses of Parliament protested to the King against the growth of Romanism in the kingdom, and against the appointments of an excessive number of Roman Catholics to the highest posts in the Civil Service and in the Government. Parliamentary History, VI., p. 378.

One of the first monstrously wicked acts of the reign of Charles I was his secret arrangement with the King of France, to hand over for 18 months, the Vanguard, a ship of the Royal Navy, along with seven other Merchant ships, to Cardinal Richelieu to enable him to capture La Rochelle, a Huguenot stronghold on the coast, and destroy the liberty of the Huguenots, James I had promised these ships shortly before his death, and signed the contract.

A Captain Pennington was appointed to command the Ships. On June 9th, 1625, the English ships sailed for Dieppe.

The crews on learning that they were to be used in an attack on La Rochelle refused to a man to fight against their French Protestant brethren. So firm were the sailors that on June 27th, Captain Pennington was obliged to bring the ships back to England.

The Captains sent in a protest to the King on July 11th, stating that their men would rather be killed or thrown overboard than be forced to shed the innocent blood of their fellow Protestants in France.

Buckingham, the. corrupt Minister of Charles, then sent an order to take the ships back to France. Charles also wrote an order in his own hand, commanding Pennington to hand over the ships to the King of France, and if the crews refused to obey to use all forcible means in his power to compel them, even to their sinking. This order was given from the Court at Richmond on July 28th, 1625.

Captain Pennington on receiving the Royal Warrant, issued the disgraceful order, and threatened to sink the ships and shoot or hang up the marines who refused to obey. The whole of the crews, with the exception of two sailors, refused to obey and told him to do his pleasure with them, but go against the Huguenots they never would.

Seeing that these determined sailors would not be forced to fight their fellow Protestants, Captain Pennington commanded them to quit their ships and return to England. All but two did so, and the eight English ships were then delivered over with all their guns, ammunition and stores, to the French King, who manned them with French and foreign sailors, and attacked La Rochelle, destroyed the Huguenot Fleet and ruined that famous Protestant City with most of the Protestants in it.*

*Calendar of State Papers, Charles I, Domestic, 1625. See Gardiner’s History of England, V, pp. 305-387.

Because the nation at heart was Protestant, this led to tremendous internal dissensions and brought on the terrible Civil War, which lasted the seven years from 1642 to 1649, when Charles was dethroned and beheaded.

It is here that Roman Catholic historians are dishonest. They do not tell their people in their histories these facts.

During Charles I’s reign, the infamous High Church Archbishop, restored the High Altars, Tapers, Confession, the Crosier, and the Crucifix of the Church of Rome, cast out at the Reformation.

These two tyrants endeavoured to force Puritans and Roman Catholics alike to conform to Laud’s Anglo-Catholic Church. They also caused the great seven years’ Civil War between Parliament and the King. Numbers of both religions were put to death. Both Laud and Charles were themselves beheaded for their tyrannies—Laud in 1645, and Charles I in 1649.

An Act Against Popish Education Abroad,

The purpose was to compel disloyal English subjects to come out in their true colours. Many were acting as spies on the Continent for the Jesuits.

The greatest calamity of the reign of Charles I was the attempt of Archbishop Laud to reverse the Reformation in England and Scotland, and Romanize the Church of England. Laud was a thorough-going Romish idolator, with this difference, that he endeavoured to be Pope himself in England and to teach and practise the doctrines of the Church of Rome in the Church of England as Christianity. He became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633.

His first act was to restore the illegal Romish Altars in the East end of the Church of England; set up the illegal Crucifix over the High Altar, copy the forms of prayer from the Romish Mass Book, employ the ritual and ceremonial of the Church of Rome, and the Confessional. Only Anglo-Romanist Clergymen were promoted to Livings. He also attempted to alter the 39 Articles of the Church of England. The House of Commons protested vehemently against Laud’s attempt to be a Dictator in matters secular as well as spiritual.

With the connivance of King Charles I, Laud became Dictator of England. He then became a most savage persecutor of those who openly opposed his illegal acts in both Church and State. The Rev. Alexander Leighton, a Scottish Minister, a Professor in Edinburgh University, was prosecuted by Laud for writing a pamphlet to Members of Parliament, protesting against Laud’s illegal acts. Leighton was sentenced to pay a fine of £10,000, degraded from the Ministry, whipped through the streets of London, set in the pillory, have both ears cut off, his nose slit on both sides, and to be branded with a hot iron on the forehead, and shut up in a dungeon until released by death. This savage and inhuman sentence was carried out. He was kept in prison in a filthy cell for 8 years.

In 1634, William Prynne, a young Oxford Graduate, a Barrister of Lincoln’s Inn, published a book attacking Laud’s “cringings and duckings at the Altar, and his bellowing chants in the Church.” Laud prosecuted him in the Star Chamber. Prynne was sentenced to pay a fine of £5,000, to have his ears cut off, and his nose slit both sides, to stand at the pillory at Westminster, and afterwards to be imprisoned for life. This sentence was also carried out. In 1637 Prynne was again put in the pillory for writing pamphlets from prison.

From the pillory he defied all Lambeth with the Pope at its back, to prove that these sentences were according to the Law of England. As the hangman sawed at Prynne’s ears, crowds of at least 100,000 people surged round the pillory and cursed, hissed and booed the hangman and Laud. Prynne’s ears, having already been cut off 3 years before, were now actually dug out by the roots for this second act of defiance,

Dr. Bastwick, a physician, and Rev. Henry Burton, a London Vicar, for denouncing Laud’s Service Books and acts, were also sentenced to a fine of £5,000, to stand in the pillory, have both ears cut off, to be branded on both cheeks and afterwards imprisoned for life. These sentences were carried out. To remove all these sufferers from public sympathy, Laud had them sent to distant parts of the country, far from each other. Prynne to Carnarvon Castle, Burton to Cornet Castle in the Channel Isles, and Bastwick to the Scilly Isles. 100,000 London citizens cheered them as they went, for 2 miles beyond Highgate. Honours were showered upon the prisoners by the people as they passed through the cities, towns, and country to their prison homes.

After seven years under this tyrant’s heel, Parliament met on November 3rd, 1640, and decided to impeach Laud. Oliver Cromwell at this point first appears on the stage of English history, as one of its greatest figures. He was a member of this Parliament which impeached Laud.

On Nov. 7th, 1640, the House of Commons passed an order that Laud’s victims of the Star Chamber sentences, Prynne, Bastwick and Burton, should be sent for from their distant prisons, and called upon to state to the House by whose authority they had been mutilated, branded and imprisoned. Messengers mounted the swiftest horses, flew as if on the wings of the wind, to Cornwall and the Channel Isles to bring back the captives. The three lopped and tortured men were welcomed with acclamations by the people as they passed through Plymouth, Exeter, Southampton and other towns and cities. It was like a triumphal procession all the way to London.

On November 28th, 1640, they entered London, attended by 5,000 citizens on horseback, and thousands lining the streets as they were escorted to the House of Commons. The House after hearing their statements awarded each £5,000 damages, to be paid by Laud and his associates in the Star Chamber. Laud lay in the Tower for three years.

After a recital of Laud’s cruel deeds which made Members weep with anger, pity and shame, Parliament decided to prosecute Laud. He was arrested and sent to the Tower of London on December 18th, 1640, to await trial. He lay there for three years owing to great political disturbances in the country occupying the attention of the Government.

In April, 1644, the House of Lords sent a request to the House of Commons to bring Laud to trial. The Commons drew up 14 Articles of Impeachment, and fittingly appointed Prynne, still smarting from the ear-lopping and branding cruelties of the tyrant Archbishop to convey their decision to Laud in the Tower, and collect the evidence for the Trial. A change of fortunes as terrible and dramatic as that of Mordecai and Haman in the Book of Esther! Prynne arrived at the Tower in the early morning as daylight was breaking.

The Governor and Warders announced to Laud that a Messenger from the House of Commons was waiting outside his cell. Prynne was at once shown in. Laud received a terrible shock as he gazed into the face of that ear-less man with those livid brand marks on his cheeks and his nose slit on both sides. It was like an apparition from another world.

As Prynne delivered his stern message that the House of Commons had decided to bring the Archbishop to trial for his tyranny and cruelty, Laud suddenly realized that the mutilated and branded man standing before him was none other than Prynne, the lawyer whom he had imprisoned and mutilated 10 years before. As dramatic a change of fortunes as that of Mordecai and Haman as we have already said. What must have been Prynne’s thoughts also? *

*The bedroom is still to be seen at the Tower.

Prynne collected all Laud’s papers and his diary, and on October 24th, 1644, the Archbishop was called to the Bar of the House of Lords to stand his trial and answer the charges. He was found guilty and sentenced to death. The verdict was confirmed by both the House of Lords and House of Commons. On January 10th, 1645, he was beheaded on Tower Hill. Note that both Houses of Parliament confirmed the sentence.

Laud, at the hour of his execution, like Mary Queen of Scots, showed no sign of repentance before God for past crimes. Not a word of confession concerning his inhuman tortures and mutilations of his fellow men. Not a word of repentance for introducing idolatry into, and Romanizing the Church of England. King Charles I, Laud’s partner in these crimes was also beheaded four years later in 1649. Oliver Cromwell was then called upon to lead the nation back to liberty.
See State Trials, 1640-49. Brit. Mus.

It is strange that leaders of the Toc H Movement claim to be followers of Laud to-day. What a strange idea of a holy man!

Major G. G, Walker, F.R.H.S., the Producer of the Tower Pageant in 1935, had his “Fanatical Puritan Preachers,” at the execution of Archbishop Laud, but where were Rev. Henry Burton, the London Vicar, Rev. Alexander Leighton, the Scottish Professor and Dr. Bastwick, the Physician, whom Laud had so cruelly and fiendishly mutilated?

Was it an oversight on Major Walker’s part, or was it Anglo-Roman “history,” or was it a lack of knowledge of State Papers?

The Protestant Truth Society protested against such gross misrepresentation of history, and offered to send characters well versed in the records of the State Trials, to represent these brave martyrs on condition that the Pageant Committee would supply the costumes,

The Pageant Officials refused the offer, as it would have disclosed Laud’s true character and tyranny. See Daily Mirror, May 30th, 1935.

LAUD’S TRIAL, OCTOBER, 24th, 1644.
State Trials, 1640-49, p. 319-335. Brit. Mus.

There were 14 Charges before the House of Commons in February and 10 more additional on October 24th, 1644, when he was brought to his Trial before the Lords. Briefly the charges were as follows:—

ARTICLES.

(1) Introducing arbitrary power into the Government without any limitation of Law.

(2) Perverting the Truth of God to defend the lawlessness of men.

(3) Corrupting His Majesty’s Judges by letters containing threats or promises.

(4) Selling JUSTICE IN CAUSES which came before him.

(5) Establishing by perjury an oath that can neither be taken nor kept.

(6) Making the King’s Throne but a footstool for his own pride.

(7) Undermining and subverting religion by cherishing and defending Popery. With power and violence severely punishing those who opposed his Popish doctrine and opinions.

(8) Wicked care taken in disposing of Livings and Promotions to those favouring Popery. Corruption of religion in Universities.

(9) Appointing Chaplains’ grossly addicted to Popery, who licensed books full of falsehoods and scandals.

(10) Traitorously endeavoured to reconcile the Church of England with the Church of Rome. Confederates with Priests and Jesuits, negotiated with the Pope at Rome, and permitted a Roman Hierarchy to be set up in this Kingdom.

(11) By the abuse of the Spiritual Keys, he shut up the doors of Heaven, and opened the gates of Hell, and let in ignorance and superstition. Cruelly persecuted and suspended orthodox Ministers of God’s Word.

(12) He suppressed the privileges granted to the Dutch and French Refugee Churches settled in this country, and denied them to be of the same faith and religion as with us.

(13) Advised His Majesty to use violence in introducing ecclesiastical innovations in Scotland tending to Popery. Caused tremendous riots in Edinburgh and Glasgow and other large cities.

(14) Sought to undermine Parliament, and the Bench of Judges, and deprive the people of relief of grievances, so as to prevent himself being questioned for his traitorous actions.

Many Anglo-Roman Clergy have been promoted by Archbishop Lang and other Bishops since the defeat of the Romanized Prayer Book in 1927-28. Those who opposed it have been marked men ever since. This is exactly how Laud treated the Church of England Clergymen who opposed his Romanizing practices 300 years ago.

How dangerous to the Protestant Church of England and to the nation to have this Archbishop with his Anglo-Roman doctrines for 25 years as friend and spiritual adviser to the King and Court! God judges an Archbishop by his deeds, not by his charming words.

ARTICLE 7. Endeavoured to advance Popery and superstition, harboured Popish Priests and Jesuits, viz: one named Santa Clara, who wrote a book traducing and scandalizing the 39 Articles of the Church of England. The said Archbishop had several conferences with this Jesuit whilst he was writing this said book. He also entertained at Oxford a Popish Priest named Father S. Giles.

(8) Declared his intention to shake and alter the true Protestant Religion established in the Church of England.

Laud was found guilty of all charges by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords on all 24 Charges.

See State Trials, 1640-49, p. 319-335. Brit. Mus. Lib.

The Earl of Strafford Executed as a Tyrant.

At Strafford’s Trial on the charge of High Treason, on April 5th, 1641, several of the charges were the same as those for which Laud was indicted. At the Hearing of April 5th, 1641, Strafford was charged with raising an army of Irish Papists, for the ruin and destruction of England, and altering and subverting the fundamental laws and government of this kingdom.

Strafford said that he meant to use this Irish Army in Scotland, to crush the Covenanters.

When one remembers that Laud’s attempt to force the Romanized Prayer Book on the unwilling Scottish people in 1637, caused the Covenanter persecutions, we can understand why Laud’s twin tyrant raised an army of Irish Papists also to crush them. See Strafford, Dict. Nat. Biog.

Archbishop Laud’s Cruelty as a Star Chamber and High Commission Court Judge.

The Encyclopedia Britannica, 14th Edition says:—

1649 A.D. OLIVER CROMWELL

The Great Oliver Cromwell then took over the reins of Government, and for eleven years the Commonwealth restored the nation to the proud position of leader amongst the powers of Europe.

JESUIT SECRET INSTRUCTIONS
HOW TO DESTROY THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

In 1551 the following Secret Instructions were sent from the Council of Trent to the Jesuits of Paris setting forth the most effective way of undermining and destroying the Church of England.

Father Thomas Heath, a Jesuit, after preaching in Rochester Cathedral in October, 1568, dropped a copy of these instructions in the pulpit, where they were found by the Verger after he had left. Heath’s lodgings were searched and a licence from the Jesuits and a Bull from Pope Pius V were found concealed in his boots, authorizing him to preach whatever he might judge best fitted to inflame the animosities and widen the divisions of the Protestants.

Father T. E. Bridgett in 1890, disputed the truth of this story, and claimed that the document on which it was based was a forgery. Rev. Dr. E. W. Bullinger in editing the 1892 edition of Dean Goode’s Rome’s Tactics, proved conclusively that Bridgett’s scholarship and good faith were alone at fault and not the original document. In 1932, the Superior of Bridgett’s Redemptorist Order at Clapham, was challenged by the Protestant Truth Society to come to the British Museum to inspect this supposed forged document, indicated by Bridgett. Passes were obtained at the Museum ready for the inspection but no Priest turned up and no reply has ever been received. See p. 113.

Archbishop Laud gave the Jesuit counter interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures relating to Babylon and the Beast his full support and set streams of false interpretation flowing which ever since have continued to lead multitudes of Christian ministers and others astray.

The great Reformers all taught that Rome is the great apostacy foretold in Holy Scripture. Laud on the other hand regarded the Pope as head of the Western Christian Church and the Church of Rome as the real Church of Christ. In so doing Laud was reversing the Reformation. He was actually in secret communication with both the Pope and the Jesuits. The letters were found after his death confirming these facts.

THE DIVINE INTERPRETATION OF THE REFORMERS.

The WALDENSES in 1108, in their Treatise on Antichrist branded the Church of Rome as the Man of Sin and Antichrist.

WICKLIFFE (1378) wrote The Mirror of Antichrist in which he branded the Pope as Antichrist.

LUTHER on October 6th, 1520, published his treatise The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, in which he denounced the Papacy as the Kingdom of Babylon and Antichrist. On November 4th, 1520, he published his Martin Luther against the Execrable Bull of Antichrist.

MELANCTHON, about 1530, wrote: “The Roman Pontiff with his whole order and kingdom is the very Antichrist.”

CALVIN wrote: “The Pope in furiously persecuting the Gospel demonstrates that he is Antichrist.”

KNOX, at St. Andrews in 1547, launched the Reformation in Scotland by preaching a sermon on Dan. VII in which he branded the Pope as Antichrist and the Man of Sin.

THE TRANSLATORS OF OUR BIBLE in 1611 in the Preface to the Bible brand the Pope as Antichrist and the Man of Sin.

THE WESTMINSTER DIVINES in their Confession of Faith which was ratified by the English Parliament in 1649 declared: “The Pope of Rome is that Antichrist, that Man of Sin and Son of Perdition that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ.”

Laud repudiated the teaching of all these great Reformers and filled the Church of England with Clergy of like mind. Not knowing the Holy Spirit himself he rejected the interpretation taught the Reformers by the Spirit of God Himself.

This evil doctrine has continued in the Church of England and in the Nonconformist churches also right down to our own day.

The present Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Lang, has twice approached the Pope of Rome to cooperate with himself in great international movements. The latest was on October 21st, 1935, when Archbishop Lang approached Pius XI to join with all the Christian Churches of Europe in a declaration of loyalty to the League of Nations.

Think of it! The Archbishop of Canterbury, the head of the greatest Christian Church in the world, approaching the Devil’s Vicar upon Earth to join in a movement to defeat the Devil and destroy his own kingdom. Naturally the Pope refused. The Church of Rome is not out for peace.

When we think of the fact that hundreds of churches under this Archbishop are full of Romish images, celebrate Mass and conduct full Romish idolatrous Services in the name of the Church of England, can we be surprised that the blessing of God has departed from the nation?

God blessed old Israel when she put away her idols, images and sin, and followed His Word. When she turned to idols again after great light and blessing, God allowed her enemies to overwhelm her and carry her into captivity.

England at the Reformation, when she turned from her idols and idolatrous Romish worship to follow the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, was blessed for 350 years as no nation ever has been in the whole history of the world. To-day she has gone back into idolatry and sin, and only 3 in every 100 ever attend the House of God on His Holy Day. The children of this generation are practically growing up as Pagans. If it be true that history repeats itself, our fate may yet be the fate of Israel when, as Jude says, “The Lord having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.”

Practically all of the false and idolatrous teaching in the Christian Church of to-day, can be traced back to the celibate tyrant Archbishop Laud, who beyond doubt carried out the Secret Instructions of the Jesuits in 1551. He mixed the doctrines of the Church of Rome with those of the Churches of England so completely that to-day multitudes of young people are uncertain which Church is the Church of Christ.

CHARLES II, 1660 to 1685.

Took the oath, but was a secret Roman Catholic all through his life. In 1663 he sent a Secret Mission to the Pope. He married a Roman Catholic Princess, Catherine of Braganza, and there were many secret Romanists at Court. Mark the consequences. The Naval Appropriations were squandered by the King; the Dutch Fleet sailed up the Thames and bombarded Sheerness and Chatham. The Great Plague and Great Fire of London followed. The — slaughter of 17,000 Scottish Covenanters brought the whole kingdom to confusion.

Charles II came to the Throne in 1660. Charles, in 1670, signed a secret Treaty with Louis XIV, called the Secret Treaty of Dover, by which the French King agreed to pay Charles £200,000 a year and to assist the King of England with troops and money in case the King’s subjects should not acquiesce and rebel against his said Britannic Majesty, should they oppose his plan to settle the Roman Catholic religion on England, and join with France in making war upon Holland.
Secret History of Court of Charles II, Vol. II, Suppt. 3.

Charles received the last rites of the Roman Church secretly on his death-bed from: a Roman priest named Huddlestone.

His brother, James Duke of York, who succeeded him as James II, requested the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury and other Bishops on a pretext to retire into another room. Whilst they were outside, the priest Huddlestone was smuggled in and administered the Roman rites.

The English Revolution, 1688 A.D.

Was an open Roman Catholic. Took the Coronation Oath and promised in his Speech from the Throne to uphold the Church of England. The Benedictine Father Taunton tells us that James was secretly anointed and crowned first by Father Manket, who used the holy oil from Rheims. Jesuits in England: Taunton, p. 444.

The Privy Council Records of the reign of James II from July 1688 to February 13th 1689, have disappeared.

The Jesuit Father Petre became the King’s secret adviser. James filled the chief Civil Service and University Offices with Roman Catholics. The seven Protestant Bishops imprisoned in the Tower. Judge Jeffreys conducted his Bloody Assizes. James brings over several Irish Regiments to crush the Protestant Party.

The leading nobles and clergy then called upon William of Orange to save the nation. James resolves on flight, and leaves the country, Dec. 23, 1688.

IRELAND, 1154-1934 A.D.

The Irish Question has always been and always will be a religious quarrel, until the day arrives when the people of Ireland rise and expel the Priests of Rome as other oppressed countries have done.

The Roman Priests never tell the Irish people that Pope Adrian IV in 1154 A.D. conferred Ireland on Henry II of England, Pope Alexander II in 1172 A.D., was so pleased with the English King’s rule that he thanked God for such a great victory and exhorted the Irish Bishops to help the English King in governing Ireland.

Here is the letter of Pope Alexander III to the Irish Bishops in 1172 A.D. Lingard and other important Roman Catholic historians admit this letter is genuine. Some unscrupulous Roman Catholic writers have tried to make out it is a forgery. But these writers are unworthy of notice. They are all on a par with that “Rougemont” of modern historical writers, Hilaire Belloc, as Dr. Coulton of Cambridge has described him. Rougemont, the French romancer of bye-gone days, invented history when he could not find it in authentic records.

Pope Alexander III Concedes Ireland to King Henry II of England.

Calendar of Documents. Ireland, 1171-1251 A.D., Public Record Office, Chancery Lane, W.C., p.6. No. 38.

In 1645, an Irish Jesuit named Father Conor O’Mahony, residing in Portugal, Professor of Theology at Evora, wrote his notorious book, Disputatia Apologetica de Jure Regni Hibernice Adversus Haereticos.

Father Henry Foley, S.J., writing in 1883, says that Father O’Mahony “was a great light in moral theology in Lisbon.”*

In this book Father O’Mahony wrote to the Irish rebels:—

* As quoted in Collette’s Reply to Cobbett, p. 256.

Report on Franciscan MSS. At the Convent, Merchants’ Quay, Dublin. COMMAND PAPER, 2867. 1906 A.D.

Some further light is thrown on the objects of the rebels by the letters of Father Hugh Bourke, at that time Commissary of the Irish Friars Minors in Germany and Belgium. They are printed in the Report on Franciscan Manuscripts, issued by the Historical MSS. Commission, H.M. Stationery Office. The Editor of the Report says that “Father Hugh Bourke as intermediary in the Netherlands between Rome and Ireland, was exceptionally well-informed of the state of affairs.” *

*Report on Franciscan Manuscripts, Command Paper 2867. 1906 A.D, H.M. Stationery Office.

Writing on December 7th, 1641, Father Bourke affirms that the War was “begun solely in the interest of the Catholic and Roman religion.”

On December 29th, 1641, after falsely stating that it was intended by the English Government to send 20,000 English and 10,000 Scots to Ireland, to destroy all that was Catholic, he adds that:—

Dec. 29th, 1641.

Feb. 22nd, 1641.

On April 12th, 1642, Father Bourke wrote to Father Luke Wadding:—

July 17th, 1642, G. Baron to Father Luke Wadding.

*Report on Franciscan Manuscripts, pp. 111-163 2060.K.

At the Requiem Mass for Cardinal Bourne in Westminster Cathedral on January 11th, 1935, the Admiralty was the only Government Department officially represented out of 80 Departments. This Mass was of course an idolatrous Pagan Service, condemned as a blasphemous fable in Article 31 of the Nation’s Prayer Book. The King and the Government Departments as a matter of respect for Divine Truth remained away. The Admiralty trampled the Prayer Book Declaration underfoot. The Secretary, Sir O. Murray, attended with the Chaplain of the Fleet.*

*The Earl of Granard, a Roman Catholic Court Official, drove to the funeral in a Royal Household Carriage. The Press reported that he represented the King. This was quickly denied. “The Tablet” afterwards admitted that the King was not represented. Why did Granard use a Royal Carriage? Many of the Public took it to mean that the King was represented.

The Plot to Abolish the Lord Chancellorship and set up a Ministry of Justice.

A SCENE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

On Tuesday, December 11th, 1934, Lord Hewart, Lord Chief Justice of England disclosed to an astonished House of Lords and nation that for several years past there had been a plot in high Government circles to abolish the Office of Lord Chancellor and set up a Ministry of Justice in its place. This was the first the British public ever heard of these underground intriguers endeavouring to abolish one of the great safeguards of the nation against Romish aggression.

Lord Hailsham, three nights later, in the ensuing Debate, disclosed also for the first time that these intriguers had been at work ever since 1910, when the great Irish agitation to alter the King’s Accession Declarations came to a head. The same vital Protestant and National issues were at stake in both cases. Little doubt the same underground intriguers were behind both movements, i.e. the Jesuits. British Government Departments are honeycombed with them, and only close observation discloses their hand. The author knows some by name and by sight.

Lord Hailsham also disclosed the fact that a Report on the plan for a Ministry of Justice had been brought forward in 1913. Mysteriously he does not reveal who proposed the plan then, but he tells us that in 1918, Sir Philip Gregory (note carefully this man’s name) prepared a Report on the scheme and submitted it to Sir Claude Schuster, Secretary that year to the Lord Chancellor. Sir Claude opposed it.

Who was this Sir Philip Gregory? He was the father of J. D. Gregory, a Roman Catholic Chief of a Department in the Foreign Office, who accompanied Sir Henry Howard to Rome in 1914, as Secretary to the illegal British Mission to the Vatican. He (the son) was dismissed from the Foreign Office in 1928 over the great Francs Scandal in that year. He was the central figure. This proved to be only a diplomatic dismissal, He was secretly reinstated afterwards.

The disturbing feature in the House of Lords Debate is that not one word was said by any Speaker concerning the vital interest of the Church of Rome in getting rid of the Lord Chancellor and replacing his great Office with a Ministry of Justice. Lord Hailsham and every other Lord deliberately avoided the crux of the whole question and left the nation in the dark as to the real significance of this Plot. The Press was undoubtedly gagged and absolutely silent; not even a letter to the Editor was published in any London Daily paper. Little doubt that this was done on Government orders.

When the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act was passed in 1829, Article XII provided that no person professing the Roman Catholic religion could hold the Office of Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain.

Rome was beyond doubt behind this Ministry of Justice Plot, as by doing away with the Lord Chancellor, the Act of 1829 would be circumvented and the road open for a Roman Catholic to be a Minister of Justice with all its dangers to a Protestant Nation which has suffered so terribly in the past.

The Lord Chancellor is Keeper of the King’s Conscience. It is his duty to ensure that the King is a real Protestant in accordance with his Accession and Coronation Oaths.

Lord Chief Justice Hewart told the House of Lords that he knew what had been going on behind the scenes for the last ten years at least. He knew that Lord Sankey is an Anglo-Romanist, and like the Archbishop of Canterbury sees no danger from Rome. In fact, his Patronage department is filling the Church of England with Romanizing Vicars and Curates who are following the teachings and practices of Archbishop Laud, whilst all the time sailing under Church of England colours.

All through the Debate, not one word was uttered by anyone, disclosing the names of the 1910 and 1913 intriguers, or whether Lord Sankey himself was opposed to establishing a Ministry of Justice. Nobody said he was opposed, and he did not say so himself. All that was said was that Sir Claud Schuster was opposed to it in 1918. The real danger spot in the proposed new Act, was completely smothered in a smoke screen concerning Clause II, which Lord Hewart contended was really the thin edge of the wedge of the 1910, 1913, 1918 intriguers. He used the words, “the thin end of the wedge.”

Lord Hewart knew that Clause II was a mere side-issue compared with what he knew was going on behind the scenes, and had been since 1910. He also knew that this was being concealed from the public. Powerful pressure no doubt was brought to bear upon him to refrain from disclosing all he knew. He told the House plainly on December 11th that there was more going on behind the scenes than appeared on the surface.

Lord Sankey’s vehement cries of “Moonshine!”— “Moonshine!”—“Moonshine!” in his reply in the Lords did not carry much conviction to the nation. The Romanising Bishops and Clergy of the Church of England fifty years ago retorted with the same ridicule when their Romanising practices and doctrines were denounced. Not much “moonshine” to-day, when 853 of these Anglo-Romanist Clergy have gone over to Rome since Newman went over.

In the interests of peace, Lord Hewart informed the House that he had decided not to touch on many matters which he had intended when he entered the House.

It is a remarkable thing that this plot has been disclosed in the very same year that another set of intriguers violated the Constitution by issuing an Order for the Royal Navy to Salute the Pope, and in doing so violated the Statute Laws of the Nation.

Several Protestant Societies telegraphed their congratulations to Lord Hewart, during the Debate.

The name of Sir Philip Gregory associated with the 1918 attempt may, if investigated, reveal that the plan originated when this man’s son, J. D. Gregory, was Secretary to the Vatican Mission in 1919.

Both parents and Educational Authorities will need in the future to be carefully on their guard against the attempt of the Church of Rome to falsify the history of the Reformation and Puritan Periods in school books.

Even the B.B.C. is employing Roman Catholic lecturers like G. K. Chesterton, Hilaire Belloc and others to send out talks on English History, which is a complete travesty of the true history as disclosed in the State Papers reprinted in this book.

On January 2nd, 1935, G. K. Chesterton at 6.30 p.m. gave a Talk on the Wireless at the B.B.C. on “Books.” His last words were “For God’s sake don’t trust Macaulay.” When protests were made to the B.B.C. the excuse was given that Chesterton was quoting from the book which he was reviewing: How fortunate for his Roman Catholic propaganda that the expression happened to be in the book! It is a mystery why this convert to Rome is so often allowed by the B.B.C. to air his views in broadcasts. Macaulay’s history agrees with the State Papers reprinted in this book. G. K. Chesterton’s travesty is Jesuit history, and of course does not agree with the facts.

ATTEMPTED FALSIFICATION OF HISTORY BY ROME.

There can be no shadow of doubt that the Jesuits and the Anglo-Romanist party in Britain have gained great influence over the Cable Services, Press Agencies, B.B.C., and chief newspapers of Great Britain; such as The Times, Daily Mail and Daily Express Groups; Daily Telegraph, Yorkshire Post, Manchester Guardian, Scotsman, Liverpool Post, Glasgow Herald, Aberdeen Journal, and many others.

The continuous propagation of Roman superstition and false Roman Catholic history in both news and letters, and the almost complete suppression of Protestant news and authentic history based upon State Papers, shows that some powerful, organised body must be behind it, Again, the Book Reviewers and critics are in far too many cases Roman Catholic or Anglo-Roman.

Nearly all books of a distinctly Protestant character are ignored or slurred over to-day by reviewers, whilst books advocating Romanism or false Stuart, and Laudian or Roman Catholic history, are sedulously propagated and recommended. So pronounced has been the practice in recent years that authors and publishers of distinctly Protestant works, do not now send in their works for review to certain newspapers.

The Tablet of April 19th, 1930, stated:—

Cardinal Newman founded a class in his day to train young men as Press reporters. Whenever a vacancy occurred on the Press, it is said that a dozen or so of these pupils would apply for the vacant post. Usually one of them secured the post.

In the course of nearly a hundred years, Rome has saturated the whole British Press with hundreds of these Roman Catholic Reporters and sub-Editors. Their handiwork can be seen in the flood of Press notices concerning obscure and unimportant Roman Catholics. This is noticeably so of little-known Roman Catholic Doctors, Lawyers, Actors and Actresses and Film Stars, Their names appear in the Picture Press ten times more frequently than non-Roman Catholics, and overwhelmingly so in the case of those of Irish descent. One need only watch the Press and the names for a few months to be convinced that this is a fact.

Since Mussolini paid the Vatican the sum of £19,200,000 at the so-called “Settlement” of the Roman Question in 1929, Roman propaganda in the Press of all countries has been increased ten-fold.

There must be strong financial interests through the purchase by Roman Catholic nominees of vast blocks of shares, or by subsidies, or by direct bribery of Proprietors and Editors. In Naples, one Editor admitted to Father Luigi Moretti, a Roman Catholic Priest who left the Church of Rome in 1906, that a Canon of the Church of Rome had paid him to insert several scandalous articles attacking Moretti in the name of the Editor.

It is a remarkable fact that in England to-day, The Times, Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail and Daily Express Groups of newspapers are full of Roman Catholic propaganda, false Tudor, Stuart, Laudian and Elizabethan history. All corrections based on State Papers and Public Record Office Documents are now quietly suppressed by these great newspapers. There must be some reason for it. What is it? They are afraid of losing their Irish circulation.

THE DISGRACEFUL IRISH RIOT IN HYDE PARK,

1932. On Wednesday, July 20th, 1932, there was a tremendous Irish mob attack on the London Police in Hyde Park, after a shameful libel on the British troops in Ireland in 1916. 6,000 (one paper said 15,000) surrounded the Police and savagely kicked them when down. Next day in Court the Irish ruffians defiantly pleaded guilty on all charges and some of them said they would do it again. These were sent to prison for two months.

The B.B.C., The Times, Telegraph, Daily Mail, Express, News Chronicle, Herald, Morning Post, Evening News, Standard and great provincial papers completely suppressed the whole case. The Edinburgh Scotsman and the Irish papers published the facts, but the London Press was silent! A day late The Times published a brief tame paragraph as if it had only been a street scuffle! Some powerful hand ordered or bought this silence.

The author saw the disgraceful attack on the Police and saw the massed mob chasing the police. The Magistrate fined some and gave the worst offenders 2 months and 21 days hard labour. Surely all this was news!

THE CRASH AT MASS, JUNE 29th, 1930.

On Sunday, June 29th, 1930 the Anglo-Romanist Bishop of Nassau celebrated High Mass at a great Anglo-Roman Congress at Stamford Bridge, London. 20 Bishops, 200 Nuns and Monks, and 15,000 spectators were present. Great Altar candles 12 feet high had been brought specially from Rome.

At the very instant the blaspheming Bishop lifted the cup pretending to change the wine and bread into the real flesh and blood of Christ, the great candles crashed down on the Altar, nearly burning the Bishop and wrecking the right-hand side of the Altar.

Women screamed and many were almost struck dumb with awe, at the strange and bewildering scene. Thousands went away wondering what it all could mean. Was God Almighty rebuking the Anglo-Roman Bishops, or was it a mere chance crash? Very remarkable was it not that the crash was not one second too early or one second too late, but just as the Bishop uttered the blasphemous words “This is My Body.”

Now for the Press suppression on a national scale. So completely was the Press dominated by some mysterious power or body that only three out of 40 great newspapers published a full report—the Daily Herald, Yorkshire Post, and the News Chronicle. The Daily Mail and the Daily Express groups were silent!

Strange this great crash occurred at the very moment that 20 Anglo-Romanist Bishops and 15,000 Anglo-Romanists were publicly repudiating the Communion Service of the Church of England as set forth in Scripture and in the Book of Common Prayer!

See Rev. II. 5 & 6.

ANOTHER BLASPHEMOUS HIGH MASS,
1933 A.D.

On Sunday, July 16th, 1933, the Anglo-Romanist Bishops celebrated the Oxford Movement Centenary at the White City, London.

It was meant, like the Stamford Bridge Mass in 1930 to be a public repudiation of the Reformation, by celebrating a High Mass with full Roman Catholic ritual and ceremonial.

At the beginning, the Papal flag was run up, but indignant protests from many were not prepared to go so far, caused it to be speedily hauled down. The leaders afterwards protested that it was a mistake! Why was the Pope’s flag there at all?

At the elevation of the Host and Chalice, the flood gates of Heaven suddenly opened and the blaspheming Bishops were compelled to rush for shelter under the High Altar awning.

The Bishop of St. Albans, the chief Officiant, was practically washed off his stool. It really seemed as if God in Heaven was again rebuking the idolaters, as He did at the Stamford Bridge Mass in 1930, when the giant candles from Rome crashed down on the blaspheming Bishop of Nassau and smashed the altar.

There was actually a succession of storms which drenched the crowds at the White City Mass, ending with thunder and lightning.

Amidst it all a Cinema Operator stood on a platform in the centre, photographing the blasphemous drama.
LONDON Daily Press, July 17th, 1933.

Imagine having a cinema operator at a service which professed to perpetuate the Sacrifice of Christ at the Crucifixion!

(To be continued.)

All chapters of Jesuit Plots From Elizabethan To Modern Times – By Albert Close

Download a PDF file of this article.

Please follow and like us: