I Am not onely sorry and troubled, but afflicted, to see so many Persons standing there, who (could they but quit themselves of one or two needless scruples, pardon me Gentlemen, if I use that term) were fit to sit here and man­nage the Affaires of the Country.

Realy, I would not wish any of you (upon the meer ac­compt either of your purses or Persons) to turn your backs of one Fundamentall Doctrine, that appears such, upon a serious and impartial enquirie; but even in consideration of those your temporal concerns, you may have just occasion, to review your Notions, and after due search easily find.

1. That that sort of Supremacie which the Laws require, on the behalfe of our Kings, doe's no way violate, or invade the Priestly Function.

2. That that sort of Supremacie, which the Pope now clayms, was vtterly unknown to the Primitive Church; and is neither consistent with, nor at all becoming the Priestly Function.

3. That this sort of Supremacie has stragled, in the world, [Page 6] to the cost of many Crowned-heads, and the destruction of numberless Christian People.

4. That this sort of Supremacie was (first) founded in bloud, and so fostered ever since; having been formerly, and formally (in direct, plain words) declared against, both by a Council, and a Pope.

5. That the chief and most celebrated Authors, in the Romish Church have writ in defence of their exorbitant supre­macie, after such a manner, as does rended it rational, yea necessary (especially it being compared with their former known actings, and the posture of this day) to keep on foot the old, and perhaps to make new Laws, in prejudice of Recusants.

1. That we may discover the truth, or falsehood of this Proposition, it will be requisit to know distinctly,

• What the challinges of the King are.
• What he absolutely and freely disowns.

He expects then to be Custos urius (que) Tabulae; this was no more then all the Kings of Iuda exercised; and those of them that were most zealously active in the purging the Temple, in the preserving, or restoring the true worship of God, (as Iosiah) we find most commended, most Celebrated in holy Writ: we find too, (to Note that by the way) they still called to the Law, the written Law, and to the Testi­monies, making them their Rule. 2. Chorn. 17th. Iehosophat 29 Hezekiah 34. Iosiah, he expects further, that all the Members of the Church within his Dominions, should be subject to his Courts; and Clergie-men, as well others, (in case of notorious Crimes) tryable there. He expects to nominate, appoint, and call to any spiritual preferments, what persons he please, with­out the interposition of any Forraign power, or Potentate: [Page 7] this is no more then every Patron of a Parish-Church looks at, as his own right. The whole of this is no more, then Elutherius, Bishop of Rome, declared to be in Lucius King of Brittain, when he sent to him to desire, not his leave, but advice, in the Resetling a Christian Church; for the Gospel had been both Preached and owned here before; and without any help from Rome; tho, at that time sadly over-run again with Paganisme.

But now negatively, Let us see what the King pretends not to; Not the conferring of Orders; not Administration of Sacraments; not to Preach the Word; not (of himself) to de­fine Articles of Faith; and herein, both the preamble of the Statute, and the Injunctions which were afterwards purposely framed, (to satisfie such as seem'd to mistake the point) are so plain, that it's a wonder how a considering man, can have any religious fear or scruple about it. These together, are such an innocent kind of Supremacie, so just and so fre­quently exercised by Christian Emperors, and Kings of England, (even all that had any thing of Judgement, spirit, or good fortune) as certainly none that has lookt at all into Historie only, will deny his Prince.

2. Doubtless if our Blessed Lord had meant, That this prodigious sort of Supremacie (joyned with a never failing Infallibilitie) should ever have been the main Article of our Faith, he would not have answered his inquisitive Disciples so unsatisfactorily, as he he did; Mark 9.34, 35. ver. nor would he have left the world without a clear direction, in a matter of so vast concernment (to all it's future Generations) Now that he did not so, is evident, since St. Paul when he sadly foretold the Church, How, after his departure, grievous Wolves should enter in; and amongst them, many should arise speaking perverse things; advises them not, to make their addresses to any one that should (then) happen to be Bishop of Rome; but commends them to the word of Gods grace, to be built up [Page 8] thereby: as we read Acts. 20.29, 30, 31, 32. A shrewd signe, that the Apostle did not understand Tu es Petrus in the Popish sence; nor in that other place, which has a minatorie exhortation to Rome (as well as to other Gentile Churches) least she also might be cut off, Romans 11.18, 19, 20, 21. ver.

What think you, Would all the Eastern Bishops have stood out so vigorously, and so long (in that controversie about the celebration of Easter) if it had ever been received as a stand­ing rule, That your Vniversal Monarch, in the West, was Gods Plenepotentiarie, in all Causes Ecclesiastical. Would the third Councill of Carthage (wherein St. Augustine was present) have past a Decree, That none should be stiled Head, or Prince of Priests? Would the great Gregory (even when he sat in the Pontifical Chaire) have pronounced such a pretender the fore­runner of Anti-Christ. Even St. Peter (from whom you seek to derive it) demonstrates, That he neither had, nor desired any such Lordship, or Superiority, 1 Peter 5.2, 3.

Would Heirome have said, Pari omnes, inter se Authoritate fuisse Apostolos? Would Ambrose have slipt so, as to have writ, Non habent haereditatem Petri, qui fidem Petri non habent? Would B [...]sil have assigned to Alexandria, and Antioch, a better title to the succession of Peter? Would he, and so many other old Fathers, have blamed, chid, derided; nay, even contemned the Bishop of Romes pride, if all the world had been obliged to be led by the Nose, what way he should please?

3.4. It is in vain then to seek after the sort of Supremacie, now contended for during the first six hundred years; But I shall presently lead you it's rise: And that leaning upon the Authorities of such Authors, as you will not refuse to call your own; Know then, That not halfe an Age after Gregory was gone off this stage: A certain Man that went by the name of Boniface had a mind to be Paramount in the Church, and there (luckily) fell out to be at the same time, a Person of great Power, who long'd to be Emperor; these two, struck a [Page 9] bargain; Mauritius (the rightfull Master of them both) to­gether with his whole family, cruelly was murder'd: Ph [...]cas got the Scepter; and Boniface was by him constituted Univer­sall Bishop: From hence, all men must date the Original of this fatal Supremacie; Fatal, I say, because it has been so fruitfull, and teeming in slaughters, Rebellions, (you must bear with the term, since matter of Fact, in almost every Age bears testimonie thereof) and Massacres. It was indeed a fine cast of this new Office, which Anno 747. was given to Chilpric (the last of the First Royal house in France) by the then Pope Zacharie; poor Chilpric was an unactive, easie Creature, and therefore must be sent into a Monasterie (where you may suppose, he lived not long after.) But Pepin was a brave Young blade, and Zacharie stood need of such an one: he presently absolves him from his sworne Allegiance, and mounts him up to the Throne. But tush! this was nothing to the Freaks; the subsequent Holinesses play'd all the Empire, (nay well-nigh) all Europe over, by pulling, yea kicking off Crowns (Anno 1080, Gregorie the 7th. by arm­ing Subjects (yes sonns) against their Princes (Anno 1110. Paschal second.) The two last Henry's of Paris felt the weight of the two Swords, which the Pope clayms as his own, though they fell but by two sorry knives in the hands of two wretch­es, but both Disciples of the Iesuits; And all to make room for this Monstrous Supremacie; at the cost, not only of Albi­gences, Waldenses, Hussites, (and such as they will call Here­ticks) but even of their own Children, who mistook that Step­dame of Rome for their true Mother.

Tis true, St. Ambrose (pretty, early when the Discipline of the Primitive Church was yet in it's right state and just vigor) did stave off the hands of the Emperor, from touching the sacred Elements, when he found them polluted with it in­nocent blood. But, I beseech you consider (for this very per­ticular may serve to rectifie your judgements.)

• [Page 10]1. What he was.
• 2. How far he proceeded.

He was Bishop of Millaine, a Place alwayes reckoned in the Territories of Italy; not Bishop of Rome: nor acting by any Authority derived from thence.

He went no farther then the Episcopal Power would bear him out: He kept him from the Holy Communion; but he did not Dethrone Him: He did not Absolve His Subjects from their Allegiance: He did not give away His Domini­ons, to any that could catch them.

That these things were Acted in the face of the Sun, Plae­tina, Baronius, Guiccardin de Serres, with I know not how ma­ny more, are uncontroulable Witnesses. Let honest Mathew Paris (the Monk of Saint Albans) tell you, How common it was for every Priest, Prelate, or Fryar, transalpinare, to hite away to Rome, and bring back with them an Interdict, (or not unfrequentedly, an Excommunication) against the King, and whole Kingdom of England. But let him tell you too, How often the Legate (a later) and other Domineering, Ex­torting Agents from that proud See, have been kept on the further side of the Dike, and not suffered transfretare, unless upon such Terms, as our Governours would admit of, and prescribe, notwithstanding all the power they pretended, or produced from his holiness.

5. As to this last Charge (wherein much of the present occasion seems to lie) Whether your Church in her Head, in her Members, in her Decretalls, in her Canon-Law, in some of her approved Councills, have not made such Declarations as must warn (nay compel) all Princes and States, to make de­fensive [Page 11] Laws against such Encroachments? Doe but (I beseech you) peruse what the present Right Reverend Bishop of Lin­coln has both candidly, and charitably, offered you: I shall con­tent my self with instancing in a few; Let the Language of Clement the eights Brevis (when Queen Elizabeth had (now) one foot in the Grave) be first heard; He strictly (therein) Forbids all his Catholicks to suffer any to succeed (how near soe­ver in Bloud, or Right) unless such as should preingage to become a Vassal to this Romish Church. And (to see the luck of a thing) these Breves were directed to the hand of one Henry Garnet; who, not long after, was found to have, more then a finger, in the Powder-plot: With one Arm he would have kept King Iames from; with the other, he would have blown Him out of His three Kingdoms.

Next, be pleased to consult Bellermine (who was made, in his time, and I think esteemed so ever since, but a little lower then the very Pope.) Ask him, How we can be assured that his Catholicks will prove good Subjects? His answer is legible (Lib. 1. de Clericis) They stand not bound to the Laws of any Prince coactively; but directively onely? Ask him further, What if they will not be directed, but tread those Laws under their feet? Yet (says he, with the same front, and truth) they may by no means receive punishment, by any secular Magistrate, nor at all be brought before His Trybunal.

But what if they should chance (and what has been may be) to be found ingaged in Treason? The words of Zimanca (in his Aphorismes, de Confessione) are positive, A Clerks Rebellion is not Treason; for he is not Subject to the King: This is pret­ty well for the Clergy, the Notion being extended (as they intend it) to all their several Orders of Monks and Fryars. But what say they to the Laity? Take the summ of the whole matter from Creswell, who, in pure love (no doubt) to his [Page 12] Country-men, gives this Forraign Advice; It is an undoubted point of Faith (says he) that any Christian Prince whatsoever, if he have manifestly swarved from the Catholick Faith, and would draw others to do so, falls immediately from His Power, and Dignity; and that, even before the Pope have given Sen­tence, His Subjects may, and ought, if they have power, to remove Him: (Andr'. Philopat'. page 109. Edit. 1592.)

It were no hard task, here to rake together, more then a good many of such Dictates as these, from men of this stamp, whose Works have been Licensed, Approved, Printed, re­printed, and generally sold through all Popish Countries with­out contradiction; and in this case, it may well be said, Qui malum non prohibet, cum prohibere potest, perpetrat. 'Tis true, Mariana's shameful Book, was once at a Crittical season (for fear of a worse clap) censured at Paris; but it was never so at Rome: And I doe verily doubt the common Doctrine of the Iesuites (with their Adhaerents) will be found, that the strong­est Knots, of Promises, Oaths, or Vows, made for fide­lity to temporal Princes, may be cut asunder by their spiri­tual Alexander, who (unjustly) would usurpe both the Swords; and (perhaps) is sorry he hath not more Worlds to conquer.

Suffer me now, for a Conclusion, and to abate a little the surprise you may be in, at the severities, at present, exercised towards you, (though the late Proclamations, as well as the Statutes, must needs quit us from any blame in that behalf) to remind you of one or two things, in which I have proof, more then abundant; and of which, some (yet living) can give te­stimony. 'Tis confest, some of you gave signal, and very brave Assistances to Our late Soveraign Charles the First, in those un­happy Warrs, (upon what Accompt, or Motive, let it be de­cided at the last day;) but, that the whole Body of Romanists, could have been content to have sat down under a very Bram­ble, [Page 13] in stead of the true Oake, was manifest from the Addresses pre­tended to come from them all; wherein the Catholick Gentle­man (in a Book Publish't presently after Anno 1652. or there­about, with a great many Arguments for his favour) tells Oli­ver, They had generally taken, and punctually kept the Engage­ment:

(In that Page, towards the latter end; which, in that I have, is mark't 41. but should be 127.)

Next, it would make one admire, how (after the good ser­vices Mr. Huddleston, the honest Pendrills &c. had done His present Majesty) the Irish, of the same Communion, and Creed, could be perswaded to lay aside, their own commendable pur­poses. The Natives of that Kingdom were (most of them) upon the accompt of the bloudy Insurrection, Anno 1641. un­der the Call, and subject to grievous paenalties at His Maje­sties Restauration: But He, according to His Princely clemen­cy, required them, onely to let Him have new Tests of their future Loyalty, under the Obligation of those Oaths, you now stick at: He was pleased to allow them (since they seem'd wil­ling to the thing, but onely were dissatisfied in certain expres­sions, and those Formes were not Establish't in Ireland) after Consultation with their own Priests, to offer Him, what might be Equivalent thereto: They did so, and after some time, shew'd it to the King: He was willing to accept it, according to that Draught: But one of the Popes best be-trusts, then at Bruxells, hastens (in that nick of time) to School them better; and they neither durst (it seems) nor would proceed further in that business: And what use then) can a through Paced Roman Catholick make of his own Conscience? if, after such means, being arrived at settlement, he must yet throw away all, and implicitly give up his Faith, to the most imperiously Politick Dictates, of an old (perhaps) doting mortal-man.

[Page 14]And, now Sirs, methinks I hear you say, what I have heard some of you say often (and I verily think sincerely.)

1. That you are wholly ignorant (which is, in this case, the best sort of innocency) of any Design against His Majesties Person, or Government.

2. That, if the Pope himself should Invade this Land, and Warr against the King, you would fight under the Royal Ban­ner, and endeavour to cut His throat as soon as any mans.

3. That it's a sad thing, if a few hare-brain'd fellows have imbarked in a desperate Action, the whole Communion (though innocent) should be involved in the suffering part.

As to the two first, I can say little, but this: If I were a Papist (and durst consider the true state of things, and the wilde Expectation of the Roman See in these matters) I should not know, how to make my due Obedience to my Soveraign, and my necessary submission to the Pope's commands, lodge in one Breast? And for the last, I doe concurr with you. 'Tis, indeed, a very sad thing; but (Gentlemen) if you will not do it your selves, Who can distinguish you? What I have now said, I have said with clear intentions, with an ardent desire to serve you; and after a long dilligent Search (to which no man living could be more Engaged then my self.) If any of you desire a farther Discussion of things here briefly touched (either in order to clearer satisfaction, or with a Design of Opposition) they shall at any Opportunitie com­mand it, from