The practical divinity of the papists discovered to be destructive of Christianity and mens…

I intend not here to impeach any Maxim peculiar to the Jesuits, but that Doctrine of the Romanists which is far more extensive, delivered by Canonists and Divines Secular and Regular of every sort, and in part by the Canon Low and their Councils (who sometimes glance at this Subject, though they make it not their business;) that which in most particulars, and those of greatest moment, is ancienter than the Society; and in many points such, as the Censurers of the Jesuits Morality do not touch, but either approve themselves, or dare not condemn, least they should involve the whole Church in the Condemnation. I cannot discern that the Practical Divinity of the Jesuits is more corrupt, then that of other Romish Writers, their Contemporaries: And those that view the Moral Discourses of both, and compare them, will (if I much mistake not) discern no other. I never yet met with any Author of that Order, so intolerably licentious, but might be matched, if not out-vied by others: there is no need to except Esc•bar or Bauny (though most branded) nor do their keen Antagonists do it, ⟨image 4⟩when they speak of others, whom they know to be no Jesuits ⁽ⁿ⁾as the most extravagant that ever were. There is no reason why the Odium which a Community incurs, should be appropriated to a party: nor that the Society only should be noted as the sink, when the corruption is apparent every where. So far as the Jesuits are concerned herein, it hath been sufficiently exposed by others; upon which account I decline those of that Order, not putting the Reader, to rely upon any Evidence from their Writing. Only because it is requisite to show their concurrence in some Points, which otherwise might not pass for the Common Doctrine, I make use of Bellarmine freely (whom none can count a Corrupter of Popery, however Christianity hath been treated by him:) and of Suarez sometimes (whose Judgment alone is counted equivalent to a thousand others, by some ^(o)that are none of the Society.) I allege beside; though rarely, one or two more of those Fathers, of like eminency and authority, in that Church: but none of them, save in such points wherein they have not been noted for extravagances by others; or in such wherein those of other Orders concur with, or go beyond them. The greatest advantage I make of them, is, to represent the opinions of others, not their own;