SECT. I.

J.S. 1. PRotestants on the contrary assert, that which now is called Popery, though it was then the prevailing Faction in the Church, yet it was not the acknowledged Catholick Reli­gion in these our parts of the World. Eras­mus Epist. ad Godeshal. Ros. hath declared there was nothing in Luther, but might be defended by good Authors; he had good reason to say so, for that the Pope, and his Great Council did politickly devise and erect an expurgatory Office, which they industriously ad­vanced to expunge out those very Doctrines which the Pro­testants embrace. Particularly the Doctrine of Merits in and a­bout that time was not reputed Catholick: In a Book entituled, A form of Baptisme, according to the Practice of the Roman Church; Printed at Paris But since Corrected in 6 places, or other­wise prohi­bited by the Inquisitors of Spain. p. 249. 1575. And in the Roman Pontifi­cal, Venet. 1585,Reformed at Rome, Ann. 1602. under this head. Questions to be made to a dying man, this is one, Credis quod, &c. Dost thou believe that our [Page 2]Lord Jesus Christ died for thy Salvation, and that none be Saved by their own Merits, or by any other means, but only by the Me­rits of his Passion? And in a Book much elder than these, called Hortulus Animae, Since forbidden, Index lib. prohib. p. 156. A Garden of health for the Soul, there are several Questions of the same nature and import, which were daily used by the Ecclesiasticks in their visitation of the Laicks. The like are to be found in Breviloq. Bonav. in Gerson. de Agon. & interrog. Ansel. published by Cassander; commended by Caspar Ʋtembergius, and confessed by Martin Eisingreene Tract. Apol. de cert. gratiae pro vero & Ger­mano intel­lectu. Can. 13. Sess. 6. Conc. Tri­den. c. 8. a learned man, and Chaplain to the Emperour, to be the ordinary form used at the visitation of the Sick in their last Agonies; further relating, that he found an old Book in theCalled Rhasme id. ib. p. 484. Covent of the Augustine Friers wherein the same Questions were: and fur­ther adds, that such there were in Agendis veteribus, the anci­ent Liturgies of Wittenburg, Salsburg, Mentz, &c.

2. That which Protestants call Popery, and is the Fundamental of all Popish Fundamentals, viz. The Popes Supremacy over all General Councils, and the Infallibility of his judicial Sentence in causes of Faith, was so far from being acknowledged Catholick and Apostolick Doctrine, that it was condemned for Heresy in that Age. The Council of Sess. quarta & quinta, con­firmed by Martin V. Ep. Synod. Conc. Basil. ad omn. Christ. p. 143. Constance determined the power of a General Council to be above the Pope, which determination was judicially passed, for that all the publick Acts (amongst which this was entered) were Conciliarily Ratified, as appears by the Council of Basil writing to Pope Eugenius. For when the Fathers there assembled, heard that the Pope intended to dis­solve them; to prevent that Project, they thus writ to him: It is not likely that Pope Eugenius will any way think to dissolve this Council, seeing it is against the Decrees of the Council of Con­stance, which both his predecessor Martin V. and himself had ap­proved. And indeed if that Decree was not Conciliarily con­cluded, Martin V. had not been true Pope; for in pursuance of this Decree, the other contesting Popes were deposed, and he createdJohn Gerson who was present at Council, upon every occasion, in his writings did approve and extol that Decree, which he would not have done unless he had known it to be Conciliarily determined: Ep. Juliani Cardin. ad Eugen. p. 76. inter opera Aen. Sylvii.. After this the Council of Basil Confirmed by Eugenius with his Letters read in Council Sess. 16. from which the Fathers concluded decret. quinque conclus. p. 96. his Pontificial Ratification af­firmed Decree. Sess. 33. affirmed the Decree, superadding this their sence of it, that what was de­creed [Page 3]was aEp. Conc. Bas. p. 144. Truth of Catholick Faith, that he who gainsaid it was to be accounted an Heretick, and that the Uni­versal Church ever till then had embraced it, and that so con­stantly and conformely that never any learnedInfin. Sess. 45. Conclus. 5. & in de­cret. quinque Concil. p. 96. man doubted thereof. It is true, endeavours were soon used to invalidate it, but all the then famous Ʋniversities Orthu­inus Gratius in fasco rer. expet. p. 240. asserted it, and so did many excellent men far and▪ near, who were famous for their parts and Piety in that Generation; as Card. Lib. 2. de concor. Cathol. lib. 17. & 20. Cusan a Belgian, Joh. de Lib. de Auth. Gen. Conc. p. 88. Turrecr. a Spaniard; Card. C. signi­ficasti ex­trav. de e­lectione. Panorm. a Sicilian, and Anton. Rossel. Monar. part. 2. c. 15. & part. 3. c. 21. an Italian. To make sure work (if possible) against all opposition, about four years after the determination of this Council the Pragmatical Sanction (which was received, saithDe Bene­fic. lib. 5.11. By the con­sent of the whole Clergy, and all the Peers of Faanee, Joh. Marius lib. de Schis. &c. c. 28. Duarenus, with the applause of all good men) was established by Charles the seventh at Bourges for the ConfirmationGagni­nus annal. Franc. l. 10. & Bin. Not. in Conc. Bitur. ex Gagnino. of that Decree. Pope Pius the second was hereat much perplexed, and laboured with Lewis the eleventh to have it annulled, but all in vain, for the Parliament at Paris crossed the Popes design by exhibiting a Book to the King, which convinced him that the Popes project, if it took effect, would be in an high degree prejudicial to the State. For that if the Pragmatical Sanction were not maintained, there would yearly be transported to Rome Defens. Paris. Curiae pro libert. Eccles. Gall. adversus Rom. aulam. num. 67. & inde. above a thousand thousand Crowns: and that the Pope hath had for three years last past for Archbishopricks and Bishopricks above an hundred thousand Crowns, for Abbies an hundred and twenty thousand, for other Dignities an hundred thousand, and for Benefices five and twenty hundred thousand; by which means the Goldsmiths Shops were drawn so dry, that none but such as made Puppets, andIb. num. 71. Chil­drens Gaudies dwelt in them. But here the matter rested not, for not long after Lewis the twelfth assembled a Council at Tours, Genebr. lib. 4. Chron. omn. Epist. Gall. & Chron. Mattaei. Ann. 1510. consisting of all the Bishops in France, and very learned men, in which it was resolved, the Pragmatical Sauction should be kept inviolably. About this time Julius the second was mounted on the Papal Chair, who resolved by all means right or wrong, to erect and settle the Papacy; at his Election he was sworn to summon a General Council, which Popes utterly dislike, and being after required to remember his Oath, and observe the constitution of the Council of Constance, viz. That [Page 4]after the determination Concil. Constan. Sess. 39. Oct. 9. Ann. 1417. Ca­ran. p. 840. of ten years a new Council should be ap­pointed; Pontifice vel non valente vel nonCaran. p. 884. volente, (saith my Author) The Pope either not able or unwilling, (which is more likely) utterly refused: whereupon certain Cardinals at the mo­tion of several Bishops called a Council at Pisa, which was favoured by theSabel. & Onuphr. in vit. Jul. II. Emperour and Christian King. The Pope being much straitned makes use of his Keys, and the Sword, which he pretended St. Peter and St. Paul left to his manage­ment in Chief, whereupon he forthwith excomunicated the King of France, and procured Ferdinand King of Arragon to joyn in Arms with him against the French King, and other Adhe­rents to the Pisan Council; and after maintained a bloodyAt Ra­venna a Ci­ty of Ro­maniola, in which ma­ny thou­sands were slain. Caran. p. 884. & 885. Lan­quet in his Chron. ad Ann. 1512. saith; it was Fought on Easter-day, and the Pope was discomfited with the loss of 1600 of his Souldiers. Bat­tle against them, in which many thousands were slain. Histo­riansSpecu­lum Ponti­fic. per Steph. Szegidinum p. 105. and a Spaniard in the lives of the Popes, collected out of Dr. Hascar, Friar Joh. de Pineda, &c. number those that died in this Quarrel within the space of seven years to Two hundred thousand. But here the Popes fury (for the Man was more enraged, by N. N's good leave, than ever Luther was) stopped not; he proceeds to the Excommunication of John de Albert, Plat. in vit. Julii secundi. King of Navarre who by Marriage to Katherine, right Heir to Blanch Queen of Na­varre, held that Kingdom, and by his Bull deprived him of it, and made a Grant thereof to the above-named Ferdinand to dispose of it as he pleased: whereupon he invaded that King­dom, and soon became master of Pampelona the chief City there­in, and after got possession of the whole. In the year 1513. Albert pressed Ferdinand to do him right and reason by the restitution thereof, but he defended his Invasion and Usurpa­tion by the warranty of the Popes Excomunication; and to pre­vent all after-Claims, by virtue of the Popes Bull, bequeathed it in his last Will and Testament, to his Daughter Jane, Queen of Castile, and ordered the union of the two KingdomsNew Heresy of the Jes. p. 37. & inde, out of Monsieur de Hay in his Trea­tise of the right of the King of France, from the Testimony of Spanish Historians, against the Cavils of Card. du Perron, who attempted the vindication of the Pope, and forecited Spanish Historian from Guicciardine lib. 11. Ca­stile and Arragon.

But the Pope had yet a further Game to manage: a Coun­cil must be had, whereupon he calls a Counter-Council (as Eu­genius before him had convened an Anti-Synod at Florence) [Page 5]at the Lateran in Rome, where some Cardinals and Bishops who favoured his Pretensions, and some on other motives assembled to him, before whom at first heConcil. Lat. Sess. 1. excused his Perjury by reason of State: his next endeavour was by the publication of a Bull to condemn the Pisan Synod, and by a second to null its Acts, together with the Pragmatical Sanction. To gain va­lidity to this Practice, he procured Francis the first,So the Concor­date, and from it Relnffusc. licet de seriis & li. 1. ff. de Offic. Cons. or ra­ther compelled him (for he protested he complied with the Pope much against his mind, being constrained so to do by his pressing necessities) to condescend to the Abrogation of the Pragmatical Sanction. But this Pope dying some ten Months after he had assembled his Partisans and Pensioners, could not perfect his Project. Leo the tenth succeeds him, who falls a­fresh upon the Pragmatical Sanction; yet upon second and bet­ter thoughts he stops the Carreer for two or three years, re­solving however, having the work half done to his hand, to compleat it in convenient time, and so at long run in the eleventh Session of that Conventicle upon the 19 of December 1516 (the certain Birth-day of the new Popish Church) he passed a Decree point blank contrary to that of Constance, continued and con­firmed in those of Basil, Bourges, Tours, and Pisa, viz. That the Pope had authority over all Councils, and that it was necessary to Salvation, that all Christians should be subject to the Pope. This is Origo Papistarum, thus (by such unauthorized Antichristian means) then (upon that 19th day of December) and there (at Lateran) Popery commenced, and had its rise both name and thing: for though some Romanists pretend the title of Papist to be of more antient extraction, deriving it from Pope Peter, Pope Paul, and Pope Christ; yet Dr. Bristow a bitter ene­my to Protestants, and a fast friend to the Cause (witness his great endeavours and attempts in the Rhemish Testament) is better advised, andDe­maund. 8. speaks out the whole truth. The name (saith he) of Papists was never heard of till the days of Leo the tenth. All which premises being laid together a mean accomptant may easily compute of how long standing Popery is according to the true reformed Roman account. The total of all which thoseSess. 1. And Cas­sander thinks Pa­pists to be Pseudo-Catholicks, they being such who will not permit the Church to be reformed, though corrupt. Lib. de Offic. boni viri, Sect. sunt alii, &c. very Lateran Assemblers could not deny, but have so far honestly witnessed, that by reason of the malig­nity of the times the Popes seemed to have tollerated the [Page 6] Pragmatical Sanction, because they could not help it (thanks for nothing) in as much as for all the Popes could do even to that very day it stood in full force and virtue. But for all was then done, the true Roman Catholicks even then did not think the Pragmatical Sanction was sufficiently annulled: neither did that Lateran Decree find any kind reception amongst them, but soon after was stoutly rejected as Heterodox; for within four Months after, towards the latter end of March ensuing, the Divines of Paris spoke as undervaluingly of this Lateran Synod, as it had done of the Council of Basil, contemning and con­demning it as Conciliabulum & Conventiculum, a Conspiracy or Conventicle Appel. Ʋnivers Paris. à Leon. 10. facta die 27 Martii, An. 1517. Bo­chell. lib. 8. de decret. Gal. Eccl. c. 4. not assembled in Gods name: and the Cardi­nal Lorraine writ expresly after that to Pope Pius the fifth, that as the French Church would never receive that of Florence, so they also had always protested against the Lateran made up of aNew Heresy of the Jesuites, p. 103. out of the Hi­story of the Concor­date, com­posed by Monsieur de Puy. few Italian Bishops. And that this Lateran Decree would be opposed, Pope Leo foresaw; who therefore cunningly contrived a way if not to prevent, yet to smother and stifle all oppo­sition. For70 De­cret. p. 534. Caran. p. 893. in a certain Decretal he ordained that hereafter for ever, no man should Print, or cause to be Printed, any Book or Writing in the City of Rome, nor in any other place, unless first by his Vicar, or Minister of his Palace, or by some Bishop, or other deputed thereto, it be diligently examined and Subscribed: and after the Trent-sticklers finding that Books notwithstanding this Policy were published, and did creep a­broad; they made a Rule which they gave in charge to the Inquisitors, That if in the Books of latter Catholicks, written since the year 1315, that which needs Correcting can be amended by taking away, or adding a few things, that course should be fol­lowed, otherwise let it be Caran. p. 894. & instruct. post indicem, &c. Index l. Prohib. p. 25. altogeeher blotted out. But nei­ther the Popes Authority, Power, nor Policy, could prevail so far with the Roman Catholicks of that time, as to over-rule the Council of Basil, or confirm the Lateran; for many of them constantly adhered to theAs the Germans, Kings of England and France, ad Ann. 1422. in the Mar­gin of his life, p. 101. &c. Ep. Synod. Concil. Basil. Council of Basil, because Eugenius the fourth by an Authentick Bull (recited in the sixteenth Session) acknowledged, that it was Lawful and General from the beginning of it to that moment, and in the last of the Bulls [Page 7]which he revoked, after he hadBut not till after admonition and citati­on. Acts of Superiori­ty, 8 pro­nouncing him contu­macious, for threat­ning of a dissolution. Caran. p. 856. rejoyned himself to that Council, he declared, that in matters of Faith, the opinion of a Council ought to be preferred to that of the Pope, which can­not hold if the Pope be Infalible, as the Lateran crew sug­gested, because there is no opinion which can or ought to be preferred to the judgment of an Infallible Monarch and Umpire: and as those Romanists stuck to the Council of Basil, so did they to the Council of Constance, as a lawful General-Council, and to its Decree concerning the Superiority of a Council above the Pope, and as many do to this day; which also necessarily de­stroyeth the supposition of the Popes Infallibility, because no inferiour Authority can be Infallible, for that it can be con­trouled, and corrected by a superiour over-ruling Power, and that which is Infallible cannot, neither ought to be, controuled or corrected, If any Romanists conceive (and some there be, who would be esteemed, and pass for such with otherwise discerning men, to be the more moderate sort) that this is no direct consequence, it were well done of them to reconcile the different pretensions and contradictory perswasions of the Pope, and a Council, and clearly declare, whether the two contesting parties can be both Infallible, (for an Infallibility they will have, and if there be such a thing, it must be seated in the one, or the other, for there are no other pretenders to it:) and if we must have two Infallibles, then which of them for the time being is the most Infallible to end the Controversy? for till this be decided, there can be no end of Controversies; because this Controversy will be still agitated, and few, or none be­sides shall be satisfactorily determined, because all others do mostly depend on this; or whether it were not more prudent by way of Accommodation to compound the difference betwixt themselves, that by consent the Contestants should take the Infallibility by turns, the Pope have his vicissitude, and the Council theirs; or that it pass, as a long time it hath done, by a standing Rule of Catch that Catch can, provided it can be so ordered, that it be done without hot bickerings and canvassings. But the through-paced Papists stand close to their tacklings; for where they fix the Supremacy, there also very consonantly to their supposition they lodg the Infallibility; for thus they argue in the ease of the Pope, His AuthorityBell. l. 4. de Pont. c. 24. Sect. 2. &c. l. 2. de Conc. c. 13. And this is (saith he) the judgment of the best writers, quos recenset ib. Sect. ult. and therefore his judgment is the last and highest, id. l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 1. Sect. Sed nec, & Sect. denique; and because it is the last and highest, therefore it is In­fallible, ib. l. 3. Sect. contra, & l. 2. de Conc. c. 9. Sect. accedat, &c. c. 11. Sect de 2. & Sect. de 3. is Su­preme, [Page 8]therefore his judgment in causes of Faith is the last and the highest, and because it is the last and the highest, therefore it is Infallible. But upon the whole matter it is evident from what hath before been avouched, that the Holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul were not the Founders of the present Romish Church, as it is now constituted and managed, but Julius the Second, and Leo the Tenth by their new settlement; and so their pretence of possession (which at the best was tortious) is quite out of doors, and at last N. N's Original of Protestancy falls out to be indeed the just date and commencement of Popery. Wherefore as the Pa­pists frequently, but foolishly propose to us, Where was your Church before Luther? So we upon the foregoing grounds may more reasonably demand of them, where was your Popish Church be­fore Julius the Second, and Leo the Tenth? which Question they will never satisfy till they renounce their new Faith, and new Foundation of Faith upon which their new Church is super­structed.

3. Supposing this acknowledgment then (an. 1516.) and there (in our parts of the World,) this is far from rendring it Catho­lick, because far removed from that Golden Rule of Catholicism delivered by Vin. Lyr. and approved by all good Catholicks, quod ubi (que), quod semper, quod ab omnibus, &c. For if before that year and age, and in other parts of the World, that which Protestants now call Popery was not acknowledged Catholick Doctrine, it must not now be acknowledged Catholick; neither ought it then and in our parts of the World to have been acknowledged Ca­tholick: the ancient Primitive is to be more respected and re­verenced, than the Church of the last Century; and other parts of the Christian World have been and are as truly and univocally parts of the one Holy Catholick Church, as ours can be, and the true Faith is one and the same in all ages and places. But will or can N. N. answer to Bell. who l. de notis Eccl. c. 7. positively de­clares, that if only one Province should retain the Catholick Faith, yet it should be truly and properly called the Catholick Church as long as it might be shewed (as Protestants have) it was the same which it was at other times, in other plaees of the World? & Driedo dogmat. Eccles. lib. 4. part. 2. seems to be of his mind. And what will he say to Dr. Bristow? who motive the 45. confesseth, some there have been in many ages in some poinis of the Protestants opinion, in­somuch that there is scarce one piece or Article of our whole Faith, but by one or other first or last it hath been called in Question, and that with such liking for the time, that they all have in a manner drawn [Page 9]after them great herds of followers; these some and all were long before this Origenists Aera 1516. and what if these some of Bri­stow prove to be very many, as the Cardinal of Praeneste reckoned them, Vicards, poor people of Lions, Speronists, Arnoldists, and Waldenses, who, as Reinerus reports, were far spread, and of long standing in the Church. For thus he relates the matter (refort Illyric. Catal. test. devit. tom. 2. p. 543, but in an old Edition, p. 32. lit. D.) they continued so long as no Sect hath, some say it hath been since Sylvester, some since the Apostles, (there is universality of time) and there is almost no countrey wherein it spreadeth not, (there is universality of place and persons) they have great shew of Piety, living uprightly before men, and believing all things aright concerning God, and all the Articles of the Creed, (and abating his [great shew] they were good Catholicks, because holy believers, and livers; but that he added a subsequent cause,) only they hate and blaspheme the Church of Rome, and that marred all, otherwise they had passed muster; and St. Bernard is much to the same purpose, Serm. 65. sup. Cant. Edit. Venet. an. 1575. Tom. 1. p. 328. tit. H.

Si fidem interroges, &c. If you require an account of their Faith, nothing is more Christian; if of their Conversation, nothing more commendable; they frequent the Church, honour the Priests, offer their Gifts, make Confession, and communicate in the Sacraments, (these were no Schismaticks,) they hurt none, circumvent none, contemn none, are true and just in all their dealings, performing what they promised, (these were not unjust wicked men,) yet he had a pique at them, they did not observe the Monkish Vow of Conti­nence, which he conceived to be scandalous, because he was of that Order.

SECT. II.

J. S. 1. THis Narrative concerns not the Church of England; they who desire to be informed how the Affairs were managed in Germany, may consult Sleidan and Guicciardine. It will not be amiss to recite one testimony from him ad An. 1520. where he chargeth N. N's certain (not, as he suggesteth, un­avoidable) abuses on Leo the tenth, affirming he was the cause of what was done in Germany; because he, after complaint upon complaint that his Indulgencies and Bulls were sold in Shops, the Buyers and the Sellers playing the money at Dice, did not redress those faults, nor attempted to redress them: further adding, all the World knew, the Money was not gathered (as was pretended) to make War against the Turk. but indeed to maintain the Pomp and Lust of the Pope's Sister Magdalen. See the Author of the Hist. of the Council of Trent, fol. 5. and withal reporting that Adrian the sixth, immediate Successor to Leo the tenth, intended to reform the abuses, fol. 22. &c. but first he would reform the corrupt manners of the Court of Rome, because he saw all the World desired it earnestly, fol. 26.

2. Be it so for once, that Luther was engaged and enraged, yet this was no bad Argument of the Cause he had undertaken; for to satisfy N. N. that which engaged him was the sorry shifting defences the Indulgence-mongers framed for themselves: for they finding themselves too weak for Luther in the particular case of Indulgencies, which had no other foundation than the Bull of Clement the sixth made for the Jubilee an. 1350. betook them­selves for shelter to common-places, such as the Pope's Authority, the Churches Treasury of Merits, the Doctrine of Penance and [Page 11] Purgatory. Hist. Coun. Trent. fol. 6. Thus Tetzel and Eckius managed their Plea, and would have avoided Luther's objections; but Sylvester Prierias, Contra Lutherum, Jewel. def. of Apol. fol. 49. Master of the Pope's Palace, above all other gave Martin the occasion to pass from Indulgencies to the Authority of the Pope; for he having upon a forced-put delivered, that Indul­gentiae scripturarum, &c. Indulgencies are not warranted by Autho­rity of Scripture, but of the Roman Church, and Popes, which is greater, put Luther upon it to examine and discuss this bold Af­firmation.

That which enraged Luther, (if it were so, oppression maketh a wise man mad) was, that he knew very well what counsel Friar Hogostrate Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 7. had given to Pope Leo not to meddle with him by Argument, but to confute him with Chains, Fire and Flames, and he knew this would be his Fate, if he fell into the Pope's Power. Neither could he expect to find further favour from Adrian his Successor; for the Cardinal of Praenest [...], who had been employed in Civil Affairs in the Papacies of Alex. Julius and Leo, and was then Adrian's Confident, told him, No man ever extinguished He­resies by Reformation (the Council of Trent it seems was not con­vened for that end, whatsoever was pretended) but by Crusadoes, and by exciting Princes and People to vote them out; That Inno­cent the third did by such means (a sure evidence of Usurpation by the known measures of Tyranny, and that their Religion can­not endure a fair trial) happily suppress the Albigenses in the Pro­vince of Languedock; and the next Popes by the same means in other places rooted the Waldenses, Picards, poor people of Lions, Arnoldists, Speronists, and Patavines, so that now there remaineth noHist. Coun. Trent. fol. 23. more of them but the name only. And Adrian himself exhorted the Princes themselves assembled at the Diet of Norem­berge, 1522. to reduce Martin and his followers into the right way by fair means, if they could, but if not, to proceed to sharp and fiery remedies, to cut the dead members from the body, as anci­ently was done to Dathan and Abiram, to Ananias and Saphira, to Jovinian and Vigilantius; and finally, as their Predecessors had done to John Huss, and Hierom of Prague; whose example, in case they cannot otherwise do,Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 25. they ought to imitate. The fore­mentioned Cardinal declared no Reformation could be made, that would not totally diminish the Rents of the Church; for that if Indulgencies were stopped, one quarter of the Revenues of the Church would be cut off, there being but four Fountains, whereof this was one.

SECT. I.

J. S. TO this suggestion it will be seasonable to premise a ge­neral Narrative of the matter of Fact, and then to dis­cover the imperfections and mistakes therein. It is the Papal Power which was challenged in Ecclesiastical Affairs, and which was by Act of Parliament and Convocation cast out of this King­dom, but the method used therein was solemn and regular. For it was debated in the Ʋniversities and chief Monasteries, An aliquid Authoritatis, &c. Whether any Authority did of right belong to the Pope more than to any other Forreign Bishop in this Kingdom of England? It was resolved in the negative, which resolution was soon after concluded inAn. 1537. and validly as­serted in a Book Entituled The Institution of a Christian Man. the Convocation, in which also a rude draught of Reformation was chalked out, as may be seen [Page 13]in theAnd the Kings In­junctions by the Lord Crom­wel. Fox Acts and Monuments in Henr. 8. p. 1104. Records; whereupon some Superstitious abuses were suppressed. For we find a Letter of Henry the eighth, di­rected to the Archbishop of Canterbury, in which he was com­manded to suppress the Worship of Images, Reliques, and Su­perstitious Pilgrimages, as being contrary to his Injunctions, and accordingly the Images of the Lady of Walsingham, and and the Lady of Ipswich were burnedSpeed in Hen. 8. n. 100. and l. 6. c. 9. n. 13. Sand. de Schis. Angl. l. 1. p. 165. 166. at Chelsey; and more than so that King declared esse sibi, &c. He and the King of France were thinking to abolish the Mass in their respective Dominions. About this time a Tract was written de vera differentia, &c. Of the true difference of Regal and Ecclesiastical Power, Composed by John Stokesley Bishop of London, Cuthbert Tunstal Bishop of Durham, Stephen Gardiner of Winchester, and Dr. Thirlby after of Westminster, in which the Resolution of the Ʋniversities, Monasteries, and Convocation, was asserted from the practice of the Saxon, and first Norman Kings; and then what was thus concluded, and asserted, was confirmed by Act of Parliament. All which is agreeable to the Canon-Law, which fully settles the Kings Supremacy; Inter personas Ecclesiasticas intro Regni sui terminos Rex est Supremus Gubernator, qui in Ecclesia summum potestatis culmen obtinet, &c. citante Drezouch de Script. Jur. & Jud. Eccles. Part. 1. Sect. 2. p. 3.

This being premised, and the main of it acknowledged by Learned Romanists, the cavils which N. N. hath framed are next to be considered.

1. He tells us, Henry the eighth first gained, &c. If by gain­ing he mean this Title was not assumed by the former Kings of England, or that Henry the eighth acquired a right there­to by the bounty of the Pope, he may be mistaken; for our Kings have a right theretoFrom a Parlia­ment in the Conque­rours time, the first words of Magna Charta, and the Kings Coronation Oath, and Stat. of 24 Henr. 8. c. 12. Jure Coronae, and it was anciently used by them, as appears by several Charters by for­mer Kings to the University of Oxford, particularly that of Richard the second; and long before in Ann. 435, Guithilinus Archbishop of London in his speech to Constantine then King of England, stiles him the Defender and Restorer of the Faith, as­suring him he was Christs immediate Vicar and Vicegerent in his Kingdom, by, for, and under whom he should Reign, and Conquer as well as Constantine the great. He that would be farther satisfied in this particular, may consult Sir Isaak Wake hisAnd the Present State of England, first Treatise, p. 88. Rex Platonicus. Certain it is, all this King gained by [Page 14]this Complement of Pope Leo, was just as much as his Daugh­ter Queen Mary gained by the courtship and cunning of Paul the fourth, who (forsooth) for her sake would undertake to form Ireland into a Kingdom, which had been one long before, and would bestow on her the Title of Queen of Ireland, which her Father had assumed, and her Brother enjoyed.

2. He talks of his lawful Wife, &c. This is but one Doctors opinion, he may give his betters leave to speak, who were not of N. N's private judgment. For this matter was debated at Oxon, before the Bishop of Lincoln, and at Cambridge before Stephen Gardiner, and Dr. Fox, who concluded the Kings mar­riage with Katherine to be unlawful: so did the Universities of Paris, Orleans, Anjou, Burges, Padua, but none of them more fully than that of Bononia, the Popes retiring place, and part of St. Peters Patrimony, confidently averring the Marriage was horrible, accursed, and abominable, &c. and that the Pope had no power to grant a Dispensation in that case. Our own Historians report, that the Pope privately gave out a Bull to de­clare the Marriage unlawful, if his Legat Cardinal Campeius could have obtained his desires from the King; but the Au­thor of the History of the Council of Trent, fol. 68. confidently affirmes, that there was a Brief framed in which the King was declared free from that Marriage with the most ample Clauses that were put into any Popes Bull. Whereas therefore N. N. saith, King Henry borrowed of the New Religion his Supremacy to marry Ann Bullen, it is most false: For Stephen Gandiner assures us, that whereas the Sentence of Gods Word (that is the Old Religion) had been sufficient in that affair, yet his Majesty disdained not to use the censures of the gravest men, and most famous Ʋniversities; and Guicciardine Lib. 19. p. 891. relates, that the Pope himself thought that the Divorce of King Henry was law­ful.

3. N. N. is offended that the Popes Jurisdiction is taken away by the extinguishing Act. This he misunderstands. That Power which the Pope was devested of was termed Spiritual, but not in that sense that the Power of the Keys is Spiritual, (for this is properly and formally Spiritual, extending only to the Con­science) but in that sence the Courts of the Church are stiled Spiritual Courts, because of their Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Those words in the Act, No Forreign Prelate shall exercise any Spi­ritual Power, &c. (any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction) are not meant of Power properly such, but external and coactive, (which as [Page 15] Rivet distinguisheth) is Spiritual Objective, though not for­maliter. That this is the true sense is evident from25 Hen. 8. cap. 21. provis. 1. and in the extinguish­ing Act. 28 Hen. 8. c. 10. the Act it self, which is a purely Political Ordinance framed upon reasons, and respecting only such ends and uses as are meerly civil, viz. to preserve this Realm from Rapin, &c. as it is de­clared, Proviso the first. Hereupon the Title of Supreme wasBy the King. 26 Hen. 8. c. 1. Staplet. de tribus Thom. in Thom. Cant. com­plained and cryed out that Henry the second clande­stinely de­manded, what Henr. 8. openly usurped. re­assumed by the King, which signifies only a Political Governing Head, (as Saul was of the Tribes of Israel, 1 Sam. 15.17.) to see that all Subjects do their duties in their several places, and respective Functions, which Power Mr. Hart in his Confe­rence with Dr. Rainolds confesseth to belong to Kings in the judgment of St. Augustine: and that no more was intended by that Title is evident from that King's Answer to the Convoca­tion at York, which at first scrupled to acknowledg him Su­preme Head, but upon his Declaration that he challenged no more by that seemingly-offensive Title, than what Christian Princes in the Primitive times had assumed to themselves in their own Dominions, they at last freely consented there­to.

4. He quarrels with the Motives inducing him, viz.

[1.] His despairing, &c. But if the King desirous to have Issue Male was enamoured on Ann Bullen in hopes thereof, this can­not be objected against him as a crime: for he being satisfied of the unlawfulness of marrying his Brothers Relict, as it was not unreasonable to him to desire Issue male, so there was a ne­cessity he should be enamoured of some Lady for a Wife, and if Ann Bullein were his choice, why not she as soon as any other?

[2.] His intention to enrich himself, &c. But this is more than N. N. knows, or can prove. The Post-fact does not always infer an Antecedent intention, many at long last have done that which in the first attempt they never designed. But supposing he did so intend, this, as it is extrinsecal to his rejection of the Popes Supremacy, so the Pope without Demur could di­spence with this, provided he had a share in the spoils, ac­cording to his Lust, or that his Interest thereby be advanced. He gave the example and encouragement to this ruine by con­senting to Cardinal Wolsey's Request, for the suppression and ali­enation of divers Religious houses.

[3.] But to what end are these Motives urged? If that which the King did in extinguishing the Popes usurped Supremacy, and in the Divorce from Katherine were in themselves justi­fiable [Page 16]Acts, both in respect of the matter thereof, the com­petency of the Power, and the manner of their management, it matters not what moved him to do so, or how inclinable he was to undo what he had done, (as some surmise;) for as it was honourable and just to defend his own Rights and Prero­gative, and to preserve his Subjects from Rapin and Oppression; so it could not be a fault in him, as the matter stood, to de­sire Issue-male, and for that end to be enamoured on a Lady.

5. N. N. Fansieth this to be the occasion, &c. He guesseth amiss; that which chiefly occasioned these Transactions, was the Popes Dissimulation, and his unjust Claimes. The beginning came from Zealous Romanists, with the concurrence of others, who being sensible of the Popes indirect dealings, and gross Usurpations, sadly resented the condition of the King and King­dom, and therefore employed their Counsels and endeavours to redress and rectify those grievances under which they suf­fered: But these were no Reformers, nor this the Reformition, for Reformation in the sense then used, imported and respected; only the redress of corrupt Doctrine and Manners, or recti­fying abuses in the Worship of God, and therefore did not concern the Popes Supremacy further than it was conceived unjustly Usurped, or tyrannically exercised by him. But if N. N. will have that to be the beginning of the Reforma­tion, then his own Grave, Learned, and Conscientious Divines (as he after stiles them) were the first Reformers.

6. He at last comes in with a cross observation, Notwith­standing, &c.

• [1.] This was rashly observed, for hereby it is visible, if Henry the eighth did any thing in favour of Papacy, neither the Pope, nor any of his Partisans will quarrel him for taking too much upon him; but if he Act any thing in prejudice to the Pope and his Pretensions, then it must be irregular and Sa­crilegious. But this is to be observed from the Author of the History of the Council of Trent, fol. 90. That the Pope can blow both hot and cold with one breath. It is to be mar­velled (saith he) how the Pope, who before thundered against that King, upon the making the Edict for the six Articles, was con­strained to praise his actions, and to propose him for an Example to the Emperour for his imitation. So that a man's personal interest makes him commend and blame the same person.
• [2.] He observed, That Henry the eighth observed his Old [Page 17](New) Religion, &c. But this is contradicted by some of his old Friends.

The Author of the Book (viz. Dr. Worthington) entituled, The Anker of Christian Doctrine, Printed at Doway 1618. Per­missu Superiorum, is not so confident,Preface, p. 4. and is evident by the Kings In­junctions. maintaining still (saith he) in most (that is not all, except the Supremacy as this Ori­ginist fancieth) points the Romish Religion: But well-fare Saun­ders, he speaks out at an high rate, Haeretica Sand. de Schism. Angl. l. 1. p. 153, 154. This may be one rea­son of the Popes Bull against him, for therein he traduceth him for publishing Heretical Doctrine in his Kingdom. Hist. Trent. fol. 89. multa tene­bat, &c. He held many Heretical points, for he affirmed there were only three Sacraments, Baptisme, the Eucharist, and Penance; and as to that Sacrament. he denied Auricular Confession to be instituted by Christ, and by no means would he allow the name of Purgatory. If this be truth, was the King in all points except Supremacy, of N. N's. Old Religion? which is not yet full an hundred and twenty years old: however this be, either Saun­ders or N. N. deserves to be marked. Next he enlargeth upon Edward the sixth.

SECT. II.

J. S. HEre again something in General is to be premised to remove those prejudices which N. N. hath raised against the procedure of Edward the sixth.

It is granted that King was but a Child, yet it must not be denied, that the Laws of the Kingdom committing the ex­ercise of Supreme Power in that case to a Protector, what was regularly done by him, ought to be deemed as valid as if the King had been of age and done it himself. The Reformation made in Jehoash his minority, 2 Chron. 23, though it was the im­mediate Act of his Uncle Jehojada, was firm to all intents and purposes. It is acknowledged also, That Images were pulled down, a Body of English Liturgy formed, &c. But what was done in these particulars was done without confusion or con­tradiction. For it was done by Authority of the Supreme Power, with the advice and consent of the major part of the Bishops, not opposed by the Convocations, but rather approved (for that the Clergy in the respective Diocesses generally practised the pre­scribed form) and after confirmed by Parliament. This ap­pears from the Provisional Injunctions 1 Edw. 6. and the Acts of Parliament 2 & 3 Edw. 6. to which the Bishops had so great [Page 20]a respect, that as they practised themselves, so they took care for the uniform observation of these Injunctions and Statutes, requiring conformity to them from the Inferiour Clergy, which accordingly they submitted to. For we find a charge was drawn against Stephen Gardiner, one Article whereof was, He observed not the Book of Common-Prayer, nor ordered the observation there­of in his Diocess; to which charge he made this Answer to the Duke of Somerset with five others of the Council, viz. That he having deliberately perused the Book of Common Prayer, although he would not have made it so himself, yet he found such things in it as satisfied his Conscience, and therefore he would use it him­self, and see his Parishioners do so too: the same in effect he said to the Lord Treasurer, Secretary Peters, and Sir William Herbert, when they came to him with Articles from the King himself.

To confirm this procedure it is to be observed,

[1.] The whole affair was managed by an approved Ca­tholick Rule, which was to reform what was amiss, according to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures and usage of the Pri­mitive Church; not to form any New Religion, but retrieve the Old, and to reduce it into that state as Christ had left it, the Apostles practised, and the Primitive Church had received, and observed, as the King declared to the Romish Rebels.

[2.] It was ordered as the Tridentine Assemblers thought most fit, Decreto de Celebratione Missae, (in which Institutions were read concerning abuses to be corrected in the Celebra­tion of the Mass, the substance whereof was) that the Bishops ought to forbid all things brought in by Avarice, Irreverence, or Superstition: If it be alleadged the Bishops were so to do, as Delegates of the See of Rome the Return is obvious, Our Bishops as Commissioners of the Supreme Power might do what they did with better Authority and Warranty. For,

1. Learned Romanists do confess that particular Nations have a Power to purge themselves from Corruptions as well in Church as State, without leave from the See of Rome. This is acknowledged by Seren. Cressy in his Answer to Dr. Pierce's Ser­mon, p. 285. But what if the Pope issue out a Prohibition, and interdict the whole Nation? very many of them do conceive it may be waved and opposed, because no reason can be assigned, why the Church should continue under known Corruption for [Page 20]the Popes re [...]lyeness to have them redressed. Aeneas De Conc. Basil. l. 1. Sil­vius (after Pius the second) was once of this mind, for that if the Popes recusancy may hinder the proceedings of a General Council, to the disturbance of the Church, corruptions of the Minds of Men, and the destruction of their Soul, all would there­by be undonne without remedy. Cardinal De con­cord. Conc. l. 2. c. 12. & l. 3. c. 15. Gusan goes yet higher, affirming, that the Emperour in duty was obliged by his Imperial Authority to Assemble a Synod when the great dan­ger of the Church required it; which determination was also re­solved in the firstConc. Pis. impress. Lutet. 1612. fol. 69. Pisan Council. Quintinus A Law­yer, and pablick Professor at Paris, in repet. lecti­one de Civi­tatis Chri­stianae Ari­stocratia. Heduus, who lived in Henry the eighth's time, hath aproved by many Ca­nons, that if the Pope command, and the King forbid, the King is to be obyed; therefore when the King calls together the Prelats of the Church, to reform the state thereof, they are bound to obey, though the Pope forbid itFranc. praelect. 4. a. 161. at this day a General Council may be cal­led against the Popes mind by the Empe­rour and the Christi­an Princes, whether he will or not. Baron Ad Ann. 553. n. 2. con­fesseth the second General Council is approved, though Pope Damasus with might and main opposed it. Vigilius, though once he consented to the calling of the first General Council, yet when he was called to give his personal appearance, and afford his assistance, and concurrence, being commanded so to do by the Emperour, and solicited thereto by twentyBaron. 553. n. 35. Me­tropolitans, whereof three were Patriarcks, the sturdy insolent Pope utterly refused: whereupon the Emperour (the necessity of the Church, which was then in a general Tumult and Schism about theIbid. Ann. 547. n. 29. three Chapters, so requiring)▪ Commanded the Holy men assembled to protract. Inst. Ep. ad Synod. Collat. 1. p. 520. the time no longer in expectation of the Popes presence, but to debate, and deliver a speedy Judgment upon the Controversy depending before them; which they readily submitted to, and accordingly did discuss andIbid. Coll. 2. p. 524. determine the matter without the Popes Placet, and contrary to his good liking andBaron. Ann. 553. n. 212. affections.

2. The practice not only of Heathen and Jewish Kings do confirm this, but of Christian also, who have challenged and exercised this Power as their Original Right, derived to them from God. The first, famously known, Christian Emperour, Constantine the Great said to his Bishops, You are the Bishops of those things within the Church, but I am appointed of God to be Bishop of those things without the Church; meaning thereby [Page 21]that the oversight of the external Government of things be­longing to the Church was by God committed to him as the administration of Holy things of God within the Church was deputed to themCited in the Book De vera dif­ferentia, written An. 1634. King Edgar in an Oration to the Clergy required them to make a Reformation by a conjunction of his and their Power, committing the whole affair to so many Bishops as he then nominated. Charles the Great convocated the Bi­shops to him, to Counsel him how Gods Law should be re­covered; and in the Preface of the Capitulary wrote thus to the Clergy, of his Empire, We have sent our Deputies to you, &c. Let no man censure this as a Presumption to correct what is amiss, &c. For we have read in the Book of Kings, how Josiah restored the Service of God in the Kingdom which he had given him. Maximilian in Ann. 1512. Declared, though he of his clemency had tolerated the Pope and the Clergy, as his Fa­ther Frederick had done, yet it appertained to his Duty that Re­ligion decay not, that the Worship and Abbot Ʋrspreg. Grth. Grat. Easc. Whereupon he. with Lewis the twelfth of France, and some Cardinals called a Council at Pisa, and cited the Pope in it. Onupher. in vit. Julii secundi. Service of God be not diminished.

3. It is the Duty of Soveraign Princes to do as Josiah did by the directions of faithful men, though the majority of the Priests express their unwillingness and averseness. For many Kings have been severely reproved for not reforming the Ido­latrous abuses of Gods Worship in their Reigns, which would never have been done, unless they in Duty had been obliged to do it; and obliged they could not have been, unless God had settled a Power in them to do it, of which because there is no re­vocation, or limitation in the Gospel, therefore the first Grant and Commission standeth good; for the Gospel doth not destroy the Law, but perfect it.

4. Ad hominem, did not Queen Mary in her huddled re­duction of Popery exercise this Power? Did she not introduce the Popish form of Solemn Mass, which was then abolished by standing Laws? Did not she to drive on her design, imprison one Archbishop, displace two, and deprive eight Bishops? Did not she with the consent of a sorry Convention, which she cal­led five dayes after her Coronation, repeal some Statutes made by Henry then eighth, and others, by Edward the sixth? Sir Henry Spelman in his larger History of Tithes, c. 29. p. 170. [Page 22]tells us, he had heard there was but twenty persons to give their voice with the Bill, and yet carried it. Did not she for a colour when the work was done, some few dayes after call a Convocation, which she soon after dissolved by her peremptory Mandate? but not a word of this from our cunning Origenist, because it was done for the advancement of the Catholick Cause. Po­pish Princes may do what they like, in order to the Good old Cause, and never be checked or censured for it; but Pro­testant Sovereigns must be bound up till the Popes License, or a Vote in Convocation loose them.

5. Although Synods be the most prudential, and safe way to determine Church-matters, yet without them Gods Worship may be Reformed, and the Catholick Doctrine restored. In the case of the Catholicks and Arrians, Nazianzen (ad Procopium) complained he saw no good end of Councils; certainly in those where Faction prevailed, and Votes passed not by weight, but number. Not that he thought so absolutely and Universally, but pro hic & nunc in respect of the Times, and Persons assembled. For he knew if a Council had been called when the Arrians were the overruling party in the Church, the Catholicks would be overpowered by multiplicity of Votes; yet for all this, He and other Catholicks did endeavour the suppression of Arria­nism.

6. Neither in such times and cases must the business be de­layed till a General Council be summoned, especially when he who pretends to have the sole Power of calling it, and the parties called are aforehand agreed by Clandestine correspon­dencies, they will do nothing towards a Reformation, but either obstruct or baffle it. Henry the eighth said well, A General Council would do well where all may speak their Judgments, but it cannot be called a General Council, where they only are heard who are resolved to be on the Popes side in all matters, and where the same men are Plantiffs, Defendants, Advocates, and Judges. Hist. Conc. Trid. Angl. fol. 85.

7. Supposing there wanted a formal Synodical concurrence in this Transaction of Edward the sixth, there was in effect that which to all intents and purposes is equivalent, viz. a Gene­ral submission and conformity to the Provisional Injunctions, and Acts ef. Parliament by the Clergy.

8. There was a Synod to carry on this matter in Edward the sixths time, for though the first Edition of the Liturgy was only framed by the advice and suffrage of Bishops, and elected [Page 23]Divines, which yet was afterwards revised and compleated with the addition of a form of Making and Consecrating Bi­shops, Priests and Deacons, (but whether the Synod then in be­ing composed and formed it, or passed their Power (which is more probable) for the forming of it to the selected persons appointed by the King (and so may properly enough be said to have done it, because by those to whom they had consigned their Authority) I shall not pretend to determine:) yet this may be safely resolved on, a Synod there was, which appears from the Statute-Book, which makes mention of a Subsidy of six Shillings in the Pound granted by the Clergy unto the King, 2 & 3 Edw. 6. and it is notoriously known such a Grant in those times passed not without a Convocation; and it is certain, mention was made of a Synod 1 Mariae, held in King Edwards days; and Mr. Philpot a member of the Convocation 1 Mar. maintained the Catechism exemplified in the Common-Prayer Book, to be Synodical, upon this account, that the Convocation in King Edward's time had passed their Authority to certain Persons Deputed by the King to make Spiritual LawsFox Act. & Mon.. So that though nothing appears apud Acta, because perhaps not so carefully registred, or not at all, because it was the Personal Act of their Deputies, or in that primo Mariae (which is likely enough) expunged and destroyed, yet a Synod there was to carry on this work, upon the foregoing Reasons; to which may be ad­ded what Bishop Jewel def. Apol. fol. 520, affirms, which Mr. Harding Scoffing at it as a small ob­scure meet­ing of a few Calvi­vinists Def. Apol. fol. 521. which Bishop Jewel farther avers, Defen. Apol. fol. 645. could not deny: We have not done (saith he) what we have done altogether without Bishops or a Council, the mat­ter hath been treated in open Parliament with long Consultation, and before a notable Synod, and Convocation.

Having premised thus much, the less shall be said to N.N's exceptions, and reports, and nothing at all to his angry, scur­rilous, malicious invectives and expressions.

[1.] Edward the sixth was a Child, &c. This is a close re­flection on his incompetency to act in that kind, but N. N. might have considered that Kings in the eye of the English Laws are never Minors, and that though he was a Child in years, yet not so in understanding; for during the time of his Reign he kept a most exact judicious Journal of all the most principalHay­wards Ed. 6. affairs of State, and his abilities were so great, [Page 24]far beyond his years, that he could encounter Gardan, and disputed his new devised Paradoxes with so much acuteness, and strength of Reason, that Cardan reported his parts to be miraculous. And as to his Knowledg in matters of Religion, his Answer (formerly related) to the Romish Rebels, sufficiently shews, he was no Candidate thereof, but a solid understanding Christian. But if his being a Child be so great an offence to the Romish tender Consciences, why should not their Univer­sal Monarch's being a Child work the same effect in them? Such they have had, Benedict the ninth was a Lad almost ten years old, John the eleventh a stripling, and a Bastard to boot, which one of their stout sticklers grants, and makes a pleasant PhanatickA. D. Soc. Jes. in his Reply to Dr. White, p. 289. Sect. to the se­venth. Apology for their youth, viz. in these words. The young years of our Bishops cannot be a hinderance to debar them, (of being Infallible Pastors and Universal Monarchs in the Church,) since out of the Mouth of Babes our Lord can work his own praise; neither is Ignorance, want of Learning, or Dis­cretion any lett, when by the mouth of an Ass God can instruct a Prophet.

[2.] They did vary (as he runs on) and so were in confusion. The Antecedent is beggarly without proof, and the consequence is naught: every variation in judgment and opinion doth not infer or imply Confusion. The members of the Trent-Assembly in far more and more importing Doctrines did vary almost at every turn, yet I presume this man of confidence will not ad­venture to conclude, that all was there in a Confusion. But King Edwards Doctors did not vary, for they were perfectly agreed, and took an effectual course to prevent discord and con­fusion. For,

[3.] The Common-Prayer Book was not obstructed, but ge­nerally and Religiously observed. For in 1 Edw. 6. it was Au­thorized by Proclamation, recommended to the Bishops by spe­cial Letters from the Lords of the Privy Council to see it practised, and in 2. Edw. 6. a penalty was imposed by Act of Parliament on such as should deprave or neglect the use there­of: if any disturbance therein, it proceeded from the Popish party, and their Preachers, which occasioned a Proclamation to be issued out to silence them.

[4.] He relates every one might Preach what he pleased, &c. This is false, for a Proclamation was published, none should Preach, unless he were Licensed.

[5.] Hugh Latimer (saith he) was in great esteem, &c. If [Page 25]so then probably the Common People would have sided with him, for the Common-Prayer Book which he so highly esteemed, that he judged all those who condemned it to be Factious and Seditious, as in particular he charged Thomas Lord Seymour upon that account.

[6.] He tells us the Common People took Armes, &c. Surely not those who so much respected Hugh Latimer; they were some who affected Popery, that is no news such should prove Rebels when they dare; he might have spared this, to save the Credit of his Old Religion. This practice is sufficient to prove them no true Roman Catholicks, for the Old Religion, taught Subjects Submission and Suffering for Religion, and forbad Resistance and Rebellion, and taking up Arms against their law­ful Sovereign.

[7.] He supposeth Edward the sixth's Reformation could not be perfected, &c.

In good time! by the same reason Queen Mary's reduction of Popery could much less be perfected, for she lived but five years.

[1.] He presents his grand remarkable, in this Kings time, &c. But he is so reserved and wary as not to specify the year of his Reign: if he means 1 Edw. (as is most probable) he misseth one of the num­ber, for thirteen were appointed, this is a pardonable mistake. That which follows is a down-right Calumny, as hath been suf­ficiently proved, for those seven men had a real respect to the Judgment of the Christian World, and Practice of the Catho­lick Church. If he pitch on 2 & 3 Edw. 6. then 32 persons were nominated to examine Ecclesiastical Lawes, viz. such as con­cerned the Jurisdiction and Rights of the Church in foro externo, which indeed were but so many Regulators of the Canon-Law. If he relate to 6 Edw. 6. only eight persons were named in the Kings Letters Patents, with a power to call into their Assistance whom they pleased. But this is remarkable, that when N. N. lays claim to all the Christian World, many General Councils, and all the Fathers for their Matter and Form of Sacraments, and their Sacrifice of the Mass, he is then fallen into the bra­ving humour of his old Thrasonical Bragadochio Colleagues; Testor omnes patres, omnia Concilia, &c. No less than all was the nothing Brag of Father Campian, but the Author of the Apologetical Epistle published Ann. 1601, goes far beyond him in this swelling ranting ventosity; That Faith which I defend is taught in all the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, and all [Page 26]ancient Glosses and Scholies on their Latine and Greek, by all the learned Fathers, Historians, Antiquaries, and Monuments, by all Synods, Councils, Laws, Parliaments, Canons and De­crees of Popes, of Emperours, and Kings, by all Martyrs and Confessors, and Schools, by all Friends and Enemies, even Mahumetans, Jews, Pagans, and Infidels, all former Hereticks and Schismaticks. All these he had carefully and with dili­gence studied, and considered them; this is a right Don Glo­rioso. But somewhat is still behind, his Faith is approved by all the Testimonies that can be devised, not only of this World, but of God, of Angels, and Glorious Souls, of Devils, and Dam­ned Spirits in Hell, (the fittest Witnesses of all:) and here he stops his Carreer. Other puling Hereticks have boasted of this or that Council, or of some few Fathers; but these have at­tained to that pitch of Impudency, that all makes for them, all is theirs; when upon a just examination none at all ap­pears for them. Heresy is alwayes accompanied with Va­nity and Insolency, but this exceeds all Parrallel; but that we find it the constant custom of the Romish Hectors.

SECT. III.

J. S. 1. QƲeen Mary did reintroduce Popery, but this she did contrary to the solemn Promise made to the Gentry of Norfolk and Suffolk: to violate such an obligation will scarce be proved either Honourable or Religious.

2. She did not regularly restore her Religion, but confusedly shuffled it up as hath been before declared, that if any Pro­testant Prince had done the like, an hideous Hubbub would have been raised.

Bishop Jewel relates the manner thus:Reply to Harding, Art. 13. fol. 358. The Papists first scattered it and forced their Mass against a Law then in force against them, then established it by Law; and next after had a Solemn Disputation at Oxford, to try whether the Law were good or no. This (saith he) Mr. Harding is your Lidford Law: for in order of nature the Disputation should have been first, then the Law, then the Execution thereof; but, as Ter­tullian saith, Haeretici ex Conscientia infirmitatis suae nihil tractant ordinarie.

3. He cannot but his hand must slip though he have no vi­sible advantage by it; for all King Edwards Bishops were not Deposed, the Bishops of Lincoln and Hereford were not; the Bishops of Litchfield, Salisbury, Norwich, Bangor. St. Asaph, and Landaffe complyed.

4. If the deposed Bishops were but pretended Bishops, then your restored Bishops were so too, for some of these recei­ved their Ordination from them and those who ordained them.

But now the Originist after all these Sallies falls afresh on his great work, on which he spends much Paper and time, wherein he most triumphs, and glories: and thus he makes his first approach and onset.

SECT. I.

J. S. TO this long lying Section, the fittest method will be to discover the several falsities, and vain conjectures, as they lie in order.

First, He vainly surmiseth great opposition was, &c. This is one misadventure, for there was but fourteen Bishops then living, whereof four were absent; and then a Question may be made, whether all those ten who were present did oppose it? for some of them had learned the Art of compliance so exactly, that they could suit to the times without any opposition: for the others, there was but one Abbot of Westminster, and only two Lords Temporal, the Earl of Shrewsbury, and Viscount Montacute, who did oppose it: these thirteen, if they had all combin'd, could not make any great opposition.

2. The Queen (saith he) did resolve, &c. This is most false, for thus she expressed and declared her self:Camb­den, Ann. p. 35, 36. England embraceth no new Religion, nor any other than that which Christ hath commanded, the Primitive and Catholick Church hath practised, and the Ancient Fathers have always with one mind and will approved. If N. N. hath another Catholick Religion, let him keep it to himself.

3. The Pope did declare her a Bastard, &c. Perhaps this may be true, but if he did so, he declared against his own Conscience, if Guic­ciardine say true: but whether this were so or no, the Pope hath a faculty to determine and declare contradictions: If once he did declare her a Bastard, he hath a cleanly conveyance to call in his Declaration, and pronounce her Legitimate. Our English Authors of good account, probably upon common report, have written that Pius the fourth, as he offered very large Concessions, so, (if the terms could be agreed on which were proposed,) to revoke [Page 30]the [...]cateace against [...]rer Mothers Marriage. This seems to Mr. Fuller to be a light conjecture, but others as modest, and more knowing than himself in that point, have averred it. Bishop Ba­bington on Num. the seventh affirms of Clement the eighth, and Bishop Andrews Tort. Torti. p. 142. is very positive in it, Certe ill [...]d rentatum constat, de cuteris si—ut vero Primatus, &c. Mr. Fuller himself relates, the Pope sent by his Nuntio, the Abbot of St. Saviours, a Letter to her, in which he promised to grant her what­soever she would desire for the establishing and confirming of her Princely Dignity, and assured her (having furnished the Abbot with secret Instructions) he should deal more largely with her, intreating her to give the same credit to his Speeches which she would do to himself. If these Instructions contrived for that pre­tence and profer were not publickly to be seen, this was but a piece of Pope-crafe; for the matter was so to be managed, that nothing was to be concluded, till the Abbot certainly found the Letter would take, and produce the designed effect. But before this Paul the fourth promised, though not so frankly, yet home enough; that if she would refer her self wholly to his free (crooked) disposition, he would do whatsoever might be done with theHist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 411. ad An. 1558. honour of the Apostolick See; and we know that the Popes have ready inventions, they can any time off-hand find an expedient to salve its honour.

This Pope in the year 1554, being a moderate good man, by a Letter to Queen Mary, whom he knew to be zealously addicted to the Papal Interest, granted a close Dispensation to confirm and ratify the alienation of the Possessions and Revenues of the Church, and forged six reasons to satisfy the World, that such a Dispensation might be granted with honour and conscience. This Letter, with the reasons, was found in the Offices of the King's Papers, the original whereof was there preserved: but the next year following the tender-conscienced man changed his mind, and in private discourse often told the English Embassadors with deep protestations, that he could not profane the things dedicated to God, and that his Authority reached not so far as to approve Sacriledg, and therefore under an Anathema restitution must be made of Church-Goods and Revenues; adding withal, they could not hope that St. Pe­ter would open Heaven to them, so long as they usurped his Goods up­on Earth, Hist. Counc of Trent, fol. 392, & 393. ad An. 1555.

This was a pure piece of Pope-craft to get Peter-pence from the people, and Annates from the Crown for himself, which he gained by this Artifice, and let the Church shift for her Rights as well as she could.

The Pope and his Adherents do generally charge the Greeks with Heresy and Schism, yet by an accord the Greeks may have his good leave to be Hereticks and Schismaticks; let them but acknowledg his Supremacy, they may keep their Religion, and be either Hereticks or Schismaticks: but if they prove refractory, and refuse, then presently they are pronounced Hereticks and Schismaticks.

For in Ann. 1594 Articles were drawn and concluded betwixt the Pope and the Bishops of South-Russia, the main whereof was, he was to permit to them the liberty of the exercise of their Religion, and they were in lieu of that to acknowledg his Supre­macy; which they submitted to, but with special reservation of their Religion and Rites, Brerewood Inquiries, p. 138. taken out of Th. a Jesu, What Arts the Popes have used to maintain their Re­putation, the Author of the Hist. of the Couno. of Trent hath re­ported for fine stories of Reconciliation, fol. 382, and 383, which he truly and properly stiles shadows of Obedience. For Salig­niacus the Pope's Protonotary Itenr. to 8. c. 2. refert Brerewood, p. 161. expresly affirmeth, that the Christians in Egypt never yielded obedience to the Pope.

Let the Pope's Interest be either bettered or secured, he can with honour allow Heresy and Schism; and so sober and mode­rate a man is he, he will not stand with you upon the strict ac­count of Religion.

Neither is N. N. certain that all the Catholicks did take the Queen of Scots to be true Heir to the Crown; yea it is false for not those sure who concluded the Marriage of King Henr. the eighth with Katharine to be unlawful, and Divorce lawful; not those sure who owned Elizabeth their natural Liege-Prince, as Heath Arch-Bishop of York, and Oglethorp Bishop of Carlisle who Crowned her; not those who judged the Act of Succession valid, neither the Secular Priests, who in their Book entituled Important Considerations, Printed An. 1601, and now re-Printed An. 1675, bound with the other Treatises, did acknowledg her their true and lawful Queen, and themselves her Highness natural born Sub­jects, p. 53. and 64; and as such did profess their Allegiance to her, as highly as the most Loyal Subjects could or should do, p. 85, 86. Nay, nor Father Parsons and his Comrades, who entituled the King of Spain, and the Infanta his Daughter to the Crown, in his Book entituled Dolman, and as the Secular Priests affirm, Import. Consid. p. 82.

Philip King of Spain treated with Queen Elizabeth to Marry his Son Charles, which he would not have done, if he either va­lued the Pope's Declaration,Which none of those Roman-Church (and there are great store of them) do, who deny his In­fallibility in matters of Fact and Right. or thought the Queen of Scots to be true Heir, unless he had been assured of a Dispensation, and by vertue thereof disseize and debar the right Heir. But this pro­ject failing, he gave out words he would take her for his own Wife, insomuch that the King of France feared a Marriage be­twixt them, which moved many of the more inquisitive and con­sidering sort to believe, that the reason why the Pope did not draw in his Declaration, proceeded only from the practices of the French King, Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 411. An. 1558.

4. He fancieth Ordination of Bishops was not to be had, &c. why so? The Form, &c. how comes it to pass? the Leases, &c. But if the Leases were adjudged not good, yet consecrated Bishops they were, for the goodness of a Lease depends on the Laws of a Kingdom, the validity of Consecration is derived from the Law of Christ, according to whose Institution they were Ordained. But how is it the Leases were not good? this doth not appear; for Brooks doth not say, adjudicatur, but dicitur, it vvas so suggested, not it vvas so adjudged: but if he and all the Temporal Judges had passed this Sentence and publick Judgment, yet it vvas null in Lavv; for sententia juris, &c. even a legal Sentence, vvhen pro­nounced by an improper incompetent Judg, is void in Lavv; and it is certain they have no povver to determine either the Regu­larity or the Validity of either the Form, or the Ordination it self. It belongs to others to meddle vvith the Institutions of Christ.

Alas, they did exceed their bounds in giving such a judgment: Pope Paul and Cardinal Pool judged othervvise; for their ratifica­tion of the Ordinations in King Edward's time could not be valid, unless the Ordinations themselves vvere valid antecedently to the Pope's superfluous Confirmation. It implies to confirm a Nullity, and ratify a Nothing. Hovvever N. N. is desired to declare his private Judgment, hovv he liketh the publick Judgments vvhich have palled on his Fellovvs in, and since Queen Elizabeth's time; and so farevvel to N.N.'s publick Judgment, and his private Judg­ment to boot.

5. He conceiveth Queen Elizabeth endeavoured to employ his Catholicks, &c. as if none else could consecrate but they. This is a false supposition in the judgment of his Catholicks, as after vvill appear, but this he vents at a venture; for Mr. Harding, vvho had reason to knovv more of this matter than N. N. could [Page 33]not say so; the ancient Bishops (said he) were not required, or else refused, but if they did refuse, yet her concern could not be pre­judiced thereby; for she had sufficient in readiness to perform that office. N. N. acknowledgeth Landaff and others were na­med in the Queens Letters Patents, if it had been for his interest he could have named those others, those seven, whereof six were Bishops, one a Suffragan, for whose Authority, see Bell. de Sacr. Ord. lib. 1. c. 7.

6. He reckons Landaff among his Catholicks, &c. But a Friend of his told Mr. Harding, we had but one Fool, meaning Landaff, and him they have gotten, and at last many of his good Catholicks complied. Bishop Jewel told Mr. Harding so, and he could not gainsay it. At first they subscribed against us with the very same hands with which, not long before, they had openly protested, and solemnly sworn against the Pope, and with which sithence they have received and embraced our whole Religion. Bishop Jewel def. Apol. f. 521.

7. He suggests they prevailed with Landaff, &c. But he did not meet with them, neither did they meet for Dr. Parker's Consecra­tion, but his Confirmation, at which he was not present himself, being confirmed by his Proxy Dr. Bullingham.

8. But Bonner terrified Landaff, &c. But he was secure enough from his thunderings, he himself being then secured and imprison­ed for his obstinacy, and legally deprived of his Bishoprick. But had he been at liberty, and in power, Landaff needed not to fear his Scarecrows; for the Bishop of London hath no Authoritative Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Landaff, they are Pares in all ac­counts of Power; neither was Bow-Church subject to his Jurisdicti­on, being a peculiar under the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, and this was the place where the meeting was for Dr. Parker's Confirma­tion. But why should Bonner forbid the exercise? especially if he thought (as N. N. seems to do) that the performance of that action in that clandestine place, and irregular manner, renders the act invalid; for Bonner would have rather connived at it, that thereby he might take an occasion (as a subtil enemy would do) to make the scandal stick more close to them.

9. He further adds, they were deceived in their expectation. But N. N. is deceived in his Relation, which is false; for

[1.] They had no need of Landaff neither did he refuse, as that signifies an obstinate Recusancy, such as is alledged in his Ca­tholicks, who, as N. N. reports, refused.

[2.] He alledgeth they resolved to use Mr. Scories help, &c. If they did, they resolved well; for Mr. Scorie did not only bear the name of a Bishop, but was a regular valid Bishop, being Consecra­ted Aug. 30. 1551, by Canterbury, London, and Bedford. But N.N. thinks they thought him to have sufficient power to perform that Office: this is false too, for there were three besides him ready to joyn with him in the performance, who were all employed, and did Act; and he with others were sufficiently empowered by the Canons of the Church to perform that Office, and yet if he alone had done it, his Consecration had been as Canonical and valid as that of Pope Pelagius, who was but a Deacon, whom the Western-Bishops refused to Consecrate, and had an un-canonicalOnly by two Bishops and a Presbyter of Octia. Con­secration only, and yet he passed for Pope. And in some cases the performance of Consecration by one Bishop only, is justifiable from good Precedents, and the Authority of Gregory the Great to boot.

N. N. having cast off all scruples of Conscience, adds sin to sin, one lye to another, in reporting he performed it in this sort, ha­ving, &c. For he only did not perform it, neither in that sort he suggesteth, which is demonstrated by as good Evidences as are to be found in the Vatican; for thus, as appears by them, it was performed: On the 17th. of Decemb. 1559, the Persons nomina­ted in the Queens Letters Patents, viz. Bishop Barlow, Cover­dale, Scory, and the Suffragan of Bedford assembled at Lambeth-Chappel for Arch-Bishop Parker's Consecration, where first Morn­ing-Prayer was read, then a Sermon Preached, (this Bishop Scory did, and it was all he did along) then the Sacrament of the Eucharist was Administred, then they (all four) proceeded to the Consecra­tion; whereat the Prescript-form in the Book of Ordination was strictly observed, not laying the Bible, &c. (as N. N. falsely rela­teth) though if so it had been done, there is a Book-Case for it, Conc. Carth. 4. C. 2. But delivering to him according to an old Ro­man rite; neither saying only, (take thou Authority, &c. which N. N. only takes notice of,) but using the solemn formal words of Consecration, (Receive ye the Holy Ghost,) and then Remember, &c. according to the method of the Ritual.

4. N. N. hath the ill-luck to be still out, and deceived; for whereas he surmiseth others were Consecrated when Arch-Bishop Parker was, he is much mistaken: For he only was Con­secrated then, the others not till afterwards, and upon several days.

5. But N. N. is wronged, is being reproved for falshood and misadventures, he, good man, will say nothing but that for which he hath good authorities, and good proofs; which, whether they be regular, and valid, is next to be examined.

SECT. II.

J. S. ALL this here presented, amounts to thus much;

1. Mr. Neal and Mr. Constable reported the story, there­fore it is true. Neal was an eye-witness, and Constable took it upon trust, and all the rest hear-say men. So that the whole de­pends upon their credit and honesty, who have crack'd their cre­dit by their holy Fraud, and lying Legends, and practising the black Art of Equivocation; and their honesty is justly suspected, who care not what they say, so they say something for the ad­vantage of the good old Cause, as will hereafter be declared.

2. Dr. Bishop, a fast Friend to the Cause, in his Repr. of Dr. Abbot's Defence, p. 120, confutes this way of Argumentation, saying; Any man not past all care of his Reputation, would be ashamed to cite such late partial Writers; it is either where their testimony is not contradicted by their Adversaries, when they set themselves in­dustriously to detect falsifications in their Allegations, or else those Protestants do annex the Authorities and Reasons on which their testi­monies are grounded.

Testimonies of private men, or hear-say men, when crossed by Authentick Records, are always slighted, and contemned. If the Homagers of a Manor swear to a custom, (which is more than speaking to it,) yet if there be any Court-Roll extant, and pro­duced, [Page 36]which declares the contrary to their Depositions, their te­stimony is thereby utterly invalidated. Baronius in the point of Maxentius his Birth, presumed to correct all former Historians by the discovery of an ancient Coin, certainly an ancient Record is better than an ancient Coin can be; for standing Records have al­ways by all Nations, and the consent of Mankind, been esteemed the strongest human testimonies, and the best assurances of Faith, which ought not to be disbelieved or disputed upon the reports of particular men, because they have been purposely devised and preserved for the discovery of Truth, and the decision of Contro­versies which might arise in after-Ages, and the rectifying of par­ticular mens several apprehensions. Such as these we produce in this case, which have convinced and fully satisfied more ingenuous Adversaries than N. N. or his Narrators seem to be: When Dr. Reynolds shewed these Records to Mr. Hart, he confessed they were undeniable. The Bishop of Chalcedon acknowledged that Father Oldcorn, alias Hall, took the leisure and pains to search the Records, who thereupon concluded them authentick. Arch-Bishop Whitgift, with four other Bishops, prevailed with four Popish Priests to view these Records, which when they had done, they declared to them freely that they were not to be doubted of.

3. It hath been the common practice of such as these Narrators were, (as shall after more fully appear) to divulge stories by an holy fraud, either to stagger weak minds, or to settle the over-credulous Bigots of their party in a detestation of. Arch-Bishop Whitgifts life, (whom the Romanists may believe if they please, if they will not take his word let them choose, and shew the con­trary,) hath given us a pregnant testimony hereof; for he informs us, that that Arch-Bishop going to Dover, at his entrance into the Town, an Intelligencer from Rome landed, who wondred to see an Arch-Bishop in England, and so honourably attended: but see­ing him the Sunday following waited on with a nobler Train, and hearing the solemn Service of the Church, he was overtaken with admiration, and told an English Gentleman, Sir Edw. Hobby, who accompanied him, that they were led in great blindness at Rome by our own Nation, who made the people there believe that there was not in England either Arch-Bishop or Bishop, or Cathedral Church, or any Church-Government, but, &c.

4. These his Narrators could never agree in the most material circumstances of the story, they cannot speak either to the num­ber of the Consecrators or Consecrated, nor to the determinate place and time.

5. The Story was contradicted, assoon as it was divulged, as hereafter will be more fully declared.

6. Dr. Stapleton's Objection did not run on the Nag's-Head Score, he never so much as mentioned it, and therefore may reasonably be presumed, either not to have heard any thing of it, or not to believe it; the former is more probable, for it was not divulged in his time.

7. If the matter had been performed clandestinely, or in­tended so to have been, Mr. Neal and the other Catholicks could not have been admitted, neither should its clandestine performance have rendered the Act invalid. When John the twelfth ordained a Deacon in a Stable, I demand, whether in N. N's private judgement the Ordination were invalid?

SECT. III.

J. S. THE chief Argument which N.N. framed in this Section runs thus.

1. Their Ordinations were defective, as not ordered according to the Canons of the Church and Laws of the Land, therefore they were invalid: which is a gross Non sequitur; [Page 38]for the validity of an Ordination is distinct from the Canoni­calness and Legality thereof: But the Antecedent is false, for Archbishop Parker's Consecration was according to the Canons of the Church-Catholick, but not of the Roman; which obviates one of Dr. Stapleton's pretended illegalities, and according to King Edwards Rite (as hath been proved) which was then established by Law, as N. N. here confesseth, which is ano­ther Counterblast to Dr. Stapleton, who thought otherwise, and was the ground of Bishop Bonners Plea.

2. The Preamble of the Act (which N. N. misrepresents) shews the purpose of it; viz. The Parliament finding by the reproaches of some, and the suspition of others, that many were not satisfied with the form then used, (therefore that form was then used, and upon that usage the Parliament con­cluded their Ordination Legal) conceiving and objecting it was not sufficiently provided for by the Statute of Repeal, 1 Eliz. (though N. N. and the Author of the Anker with his Superi­ours think it was) to remove these surmises and slanders, they did declare for the then, and after Consecrations made according to the Queens Letters Patents (as they all were) that they were, notwithstanding these surmises and slanders, good in Law, and if any such were, these also which were made by Commission (as none were) provided they were per­formed by King Edward's Rite, as they were directed; and so consequently the Act confirms no Consecrations, nor entitles to Temporalities where the Rite was not observed.

The subsequent clause of the Act, (which N. N. cunningly conceals) clears this, which restrains all former and subsequent Consecrations to the form, and Order prescribed in the Ritual of Edward the sixth, and so consequently, if there had been any such Consecration as is suggested, even by this Act they were not Bishops in Law, and were debarred of the Tempo­ralities, because by no Law they could claim them, and by this Law disenabled to enjoy them.

3. N. N. falls here very flat and dull; in his vapouring hu­mour he was Positive and Magisterial (thus it was performed) but here he is so modest, (it might be, or it might pass,) will serve his turn: and so absurdly argues, thus it might pass, therefore thus it did pass, endeavouring to prove a certain thus it was, by an uncertain, thus it might be.

4. He adds, Hence it was, &c. This Calumny hath been oft confuted before he vented it: for our Bishops depend not on [Page 39]Authority of Parliament, for the validity of their Ordination; and was long before sharply retorted by Bishop Jewel in these words: You had then (viz. in Queen Maries Reign) a Parlia­ment Faith, a Parliament Mass, a Parliament Pope, &c. fol. 521.

SECT. IV.

J. S. THis that is related by N. N. here, is another Fal­sity. For the Story was contradicted by the Act of Parliament, and Archbishop Parker's Life, and by Bishop Goodwin, who wrote his Book 1600, as he averreth, p. 534, the rest is idle talk; however he contradicted as it was openly divulged.

SECT. V.

J.S. THis also is false; for he cannot but know (if he know any thing concerning this report) who called it so, and since hath proved it a Fable. That which was used as a pretext to Huckster it, was this: At Arch­bishop Parkers Confirmation (where he was not personally) a Dinner (as the Lord Chancellor Egerton related to Bishop [Page 40]Williams) was provided at the Nags-Head for the Civilians who attended that work) according to Custom: this place was pitched on as most convenient for its nearness to Bow-Church, where he was Confirmed; and a Dinner at a Tavern Dr. Reeves utterly resused, for that he had heard the Dining at a Tavern gave all the colour to that malicious lye of Dr. Parkers be­ing Consecrated at the Naggs-Head, and for ought he knew captious and malicious people would be ready to say the like upon the same occasion.

SECT. VI.

J. S. 1. WHether this Relation have any truth in it, may be justly doubted, many of the Popish Priests of those times, and both before and after trading in Lies, some to gain Proselites, others to keep up their Credit, and the People in heart, others to defame their Adversaries. The Secular Priests of that time complained of the spight of the Jesuites And that often, pas­sim in Im­port. Consid. & Joh. Gee. Foot out of the Snare. against the State. The pretended Brethren of the Society (say they) do in their Writings calumniate the Actions thereof, be they never so judiciously proceeded in, never so appa­rently proved true, and known to be most certain to raise and nou­rish and manner of Reports to discredit their Adversaries, &c. And if they were so bold with the State, they would not stick at the defaming of great Persons, and eminent Offices of the Church. The like might be said of them, one of N. N's Nar­rators Dr. Watson may be an instance. The Papists in their Pamphlets gave out that Dr. King Bishop of London, was a little before his death Reconciled to the Church of Rome, because Mr. Musket a Secular had averred in a Book, entituled [Page 41] The Bishop of London's Legacy. This being proved a malicious Lye by the Testimony of eye-witnesses who were present at his departure; being thus caught in it, they resolved to forge another, if possible, to make it good, adding sin to sin; which was, That Father Preston was the man who did Reconcile him, whereupon he was summoned to appear before divers Honour­able Commissioners appointed to take his Examination, Decem­ber 20. 1621: but the honestly declared (protesting before God, and as he hoped to be saved by Jesus Christ) that he never saw that Bishop to his knowledg, nor could know him from another man if he did see him, and he knew nothing of any such Re­conciliation,

2. If such a demand was proposed, probably he sleighted it, as being a demand full of ignorance and impudence.

3. His Answer (if any such was) was good and argumen­tative ad hominem, not alluding to Scory, whom he knew to be a lawfully Consecrated Bishop upon every account, and in every respect, but to the practice of the See of Rome, which allows a single Priest both to Ordain and Confirm by Papal Dispensation.

SECT. VII.

J.S. DOughtily argued! from the authority of the Common People (who as they do not at all understand the matter, so they as little concern themselves in such affairs, and what they have take all on trust) to conclude an undoubted Truth. But if this will pass, then the Papists were guilty of the Barbarous Murther of our late Glorious and Pious King, (though I am perswaded many of them abhorred the Fact, and the Plot leading thereto) because it hath been reported, that they did devise and forward the Fact, and when the vil­lanous Act was done, much rejoyced at it. This Argument at [Page 42]the best, is a Topick from vulgar Fame, which as the Lawyers speak, is praesumptie levis & temeraria, and so no proof in Law.

SECT. VII.

J, S. THis is N. N's best seeming Argument, but the best is, it seems but so: For,

1. Dispensations are granted ex abundanti, and in majorem cautelam, even at the Court of Rome, though the work it self be exactly performed, sometimes they are used to obviate sleeping defects, oft for better security, and to prevent Mistakes and Cavils, as in this Queens time it happened in another case; for she passed a Bill for the restitution of Archbishop Cran­mer's Children, who needed none in strictness, for their Father was not Condemned for Treason, as some surmised, but (as Mr. Harding confesseth, fol. 574.) for Heresy, which taints not the Blood, nor makes any forfeiture of Estate: yet because the Archbishop had formerly been accused for High-Treason, the Act was useful to make sure work.

2. He pretends the Dispensation respected Archbishop Par­kers Consecration, which is a mistake; for it concerned only his Confirmation, which was eight days before, on December 19. 1559.

3. He suggests, It was given not in conditional, but, &c. This is False, for the words are, Si quid, &c. If any thing; &c. which heretofore hath always been taken for a conditional term.

SECT. VIII.

J.S. 1. IF Bishop Bonner or N. N. by no Law, mean the Law of Christ, neither the Judges nor Jury could take Cog­nizance of it; if they conceive the Law of the Realm, which his reference only respected, they might, if the matter had been tried.

2. The ground of Bishop Bonners Plea was, that King Ed­ward's form was not sufficiently received (which by the way supposeth Dr. Horne was Consecrated by it) by the Statute 1 Eliz. which a Friend to the Cause the Author to the An­ker, p. 4. and with him his Superiours who approved his Book, hath acknowledged it was; saying Queen Elizabeth renewed the Form of Common-Prayer Book much like that in King Ed­wards time, and so hath N. N. his own dear self, more than once, and more fully.

3. The Exceptions against this Indictment shew only that Bishop Bonner was put to a desperate shift; for three of his Exceptions to this Indictment were excepted against, and over­ruled by all the Court: this indeed, which was last, (which he kept for a reserve, though it failed him too,) was allow­ed with a restriction, and upon conditional terms, (which proves nothing till the supposition be validly asserted) viz. That if the truth of the matter were so indeed (that he was not Con­secrated by King Edwards Rite) he might Plead it, and the Jury Try it; which Resolution was according to Law. But it ne­ver came to any issue, for the Parliament cleared his Conse­cration, and so stopped further Proceedings: this being made good, that he was legally Consecrated by the highest publick Judgment should stand good with N. N. and his Colleagues, [Page 44]because he once but falsly pleaded an Inferiour publick Judg­ment for his own purpose, and the credit of his Narrators.

4. He alledgeth a reason for the goodness of Bishop Bon­ner's Exceptions (for if it signifies not this it is impertinently inserted) he was never troubled any further. Most absurd! for it is usual with Higher-Powers not to trouble those any further whom they have secured, unless N. N. be as bloody as Bishop Bonner and his Comrades were, who thought it was nothing to imprison those who refused Obedience to their Orders, un­less they burned them with Fire and Faggot. Protestants are not so merciless and cruel as Papists; and such was the Cle­mency of the then Higher-Powers (which N. N. had he been ingenuous would have commended) that they thought, that Bishop Bonner being deprived, and imprisoned for his Obstinacy, greater severity was more than needful, and would rather ar­gue Revenge than Justice. But whatsoever N. N. thinks, some men in the world think, that deprivation and continued im­prisonment is trouble enough, and would be thankful in such cases they were troubled no further.

SECT. IX.

J. S. 1. THE Records were not hung out of the Registers Of­fice as Haberdashers and Milleners do their Wares, and so did not appear: but when the Office was o­pen at usual times, or perhaps upon a sudden emergent at other times, any who had a desire might with the usual Fee [Page 45](and perhaps without) have seen them, and so they did appear they were not concealed.

2. Many Records by this account lie in a Saint-solitude for more than fifty years ten times told over, as hereafter shall appear from a pretended discovery of Turrians, who brought to light that which lay in darkness for a good store of hundred years.

3. Bishop Jewel, and other Protestants of those times, were not required to produce the Records by Dr. Stapleton, Dr. Har­ding, Mr. Rascal, and other Romanists of those times, who never urged any thing in defence of N. N's Story, and to the prejudice of the Records.

4. They were virtually, and in effect, produced by the Parliament in their reference to them, and were alledged and mentioned in Dr. Parker's Life, as N. N. acknowledgeth in the next Para­graph.

5. The advantage got by producing them, could only have proved their Legality; and the advantage lost by concealing, might have brought their Legality into dispute, but could not de­stroy their Validity.

6. The producing them would not have foiled their enemies; for produce them, (unless it be to an ingenious Adversary,) the Sticklers have a despe [...]te shift, they were forged; if this be cleared, they produce another desperate shift, now most in request with them, supposing (say they) there be material [...] Mission in the Church of England, yet it is not to the true intent and purpose, or, as some express it, their Ordination doth not enable them to offer true substantial Sacrifice, and so from one desperate shift unto ano­ther in infinitum.

7. They did not produce them, therefore they were not extant, is another of N. N's absurd inconsequences; for it is an Argu­ment from Authority negatively, which, though in some cases it may hold, yet here it cannot; for it is as if we should thus argue, Neither N. N. nor any of his Camrades were so quick-sighted as to spie such a Sentence in St. Aug. therefore there is not any such extant in his Writings.

8. What he affirms of Dr. Fulk, we are not directed where to find it: probably if he had been at leisure, he would have re­ferred to his Answer to the Rhemish Annotators, and if there it he, then it is to be found in Rom. 10. Sect. 5. p. 471. where he hath so strongly proved his Position out of Ruff. Theodor. &c. that all his Nags-head Narrators durst never undertake a refutation; neither was this any desperate shift in him upon that pretended [Page 46]reason which N. N. hath alledged, for this he had bassed in the foregoing Sentence, (which N. N. unworthily, and purposely conceals,) saying; No man ought to intrude himself into that (Priestly) Office without lawful Calling. How lewd and desperate then was N. N. to tell the World he was put to desperate shifts, when he giveth God thanks he had no temptation, nor oc­casion to use any thing! If it be suggested he bluntly declared any such expressions, he will be found still to be the same man, and of the same Judgment.

SECT. X.

J. S. TO this tedious nothing, (for N. N. hath now almost emptied his Budget of broken Wares,) which deserves no return in it self, that shall be replied only, which will disco­ver how willing some Romanists are to fight with their own sha­dows; and, like drowning men, to catch at sticks and straws to buoy up their sinking Cause.

1. Those Authors he here mentions never touched at the Nags-head, if they had known or heard of any such thing, they would have divulged it with open mouth; neither did they in all these Quotations ever so much as hint at, or reflect upon the Records, only Dr. Stapleton presumes they were not Ordained according to the Prescript of the Statutes themselves, because he conceived (as formerly hath been said) that the Statute was not revived in Law primo Eliz. if otherwise, he thought the Parliament may be presumed to be more knowing than he was in that Case; and we may further and justly presume, that those who left no stone un­turned for the advantage of the good old Cause, would not over­leap such Stumbling-blocks; for the two first of these Authors, they were so deep in rage, that they quite stifled reason; but Dr. Bristow met with his match, one that paid him home in his own Coin; for Mr. Rainolds, he acted the part of a Renegado, who would be sure by the fortiter calumniari, his high calumnies, to decline the shame of his Revolt. Dr. Stapleton, by Catholick Church, meant the Roman Enclosure, and so he fairly begged the Question; and what he affirms, he proves not; for Dr. Harding, he was ta­ken with the same beloved fallacy, which they always make use of when they are put to a pinch. Thus their Argument proceeds, they were not Ordained by Romish Bishops, nor after the Rite then used in the Romish Church, therefore they were not lawful Bishops, which is all one with this: Dr. Stapleton and Dr. Harding did not Commence Doctors at Oxon. or Cambridg, therefore they were not lawful Doctors. The Antecedent is granted; and for this reason it vvas improper and impertinent to produce the Records, for to what purpose is it to produce them in proof of that vvhich is confessed? no more than for to produce the Registeries of Oxon. for a Doctor's taking his Degree at Lovain; but the Consequence [Page 48]is denied, being impossible to be proved; for there have been, and there are novv lawful Bishops in the Christian World, vvho vvere neither Ordained by Roman Bishops, nor according to the Prescript of the Roman Church, as confessedly the novv Bishops of the Greek Church are, vvhom they all acknovvledg for lawful Bishops.

2. Whereas he saith, Bishop Jewel answered not a word to the main Point, it vvill be found he searched the Point to the quick, both in relation to his Priesthood; being Ordained Priest the same time Mr. Harding vvas, def. fol. 125, and 129; and in relation to his Episcopacy, saying, Our Bishops succeed the Bishops that have been ever before our days, being Elected, Confirmed, and Consecrated, &c. as they have been. Further adding, that Mr. Harding himself was one of his Electors, none of this Mr. Harding could deny: and therefore he fell to the old Game of Tergiversation, turning his back from the main Question, and starts a nevv one for a de­sperate shift, having nothing else to say but this; they vvere not (forsooth) Confirmed by the Bishop of Rome, which is an implicit confession that all those recited Acts were performed, only they wanted the Pope's Confirmation: which yet the Bishop with great evidence of Reason, and Primitive Authority, proved to be un­necessary, and is contrary to all Antiquity, and the Practice of the Greek Church; and withal told Dr. Harding in civil terms, he would never give over that idle trade of begging. Thus this Bishop Jewel maintained both the Regularity and the Legality, both of his Priesthood and Episcopacy, though not with express reference to the Records themselves, yet implicitly to the Subject-matter thereof, particularly, Election, Confirmation, and Consecration to his Episcopal Dignity and Office; and also propugned the Validi­ty of both Orders from Scriptures, and the perpetual Tradition of the Catholick Church, pursuing Dr. Harding in all his shifts from Post to Pen, till he drives him to his Non ultra.

3. All that N. N. durst conclude from Dr. Harding, is only, that by his sharp Reply he directly affirmed the Nullity of Dr. Parker's Consecration; but Protestants are not so lame as to take every Af­firmation of Mr. Hardings for a proof, they expect he should make his bold Affirmation good, by good Authority or Reason: neither, by N. N's good leave, did any thing that he affirms, affirm a Nul­lity; what he alledged (if it were true and home) would only have rendred those Ordinations Irregular, or Illegal, but not Null; his (no lawful Consecration) respected only the manner of the Ca­tholick Church, that is, theirs in their usual restriction, and such as they had used.

4. Whether the Records were extant, N. N. cannot affirm; but in his indifferent judgment, if they were, then they were forged, which, in the judgment of all indifferent men, will certainly pass for a desperate shift. Just such a work Dr. Harding made about theFrom his counter­feit Atha­nasius, Bi­shop Jewel's Reply. fol. 157. Nicene Canons, they were burnt, yet falsified; they were falsified, yet burnt, &c. Such a Blunder also Baronius made con­cerning a pretended Edict of the Emperor Justinian, it was an Edict, and it was not an Edict; it wasBaron. an. 564. n. 3. an Edict put out by the Emperor in favour of the Aphthardokites, (who denied the Body of Christ to be subject to Passions, and Death,) for these two Reasons theId. an. 564. n. 1. Orthodox contemned it, and the Emperor per­secuted all thoseId. ib. & n. 3. & an. 563. n. 12. vid. n. 3.8, 9. who did oppose it; and it was not an Edict, it was only a Cabinet-paper; for this Reason the Emperor indeed writ it, but neverId. an. 565. n. 4. so Evagr. l. 4. Hist. Eccl. c. 40. published it: if so, then no Edict; the Popes, as bad as they are, make a Publication of their Decrees. But this is all meer impostures, for his Edict oppugned that He­resy of the Aphthardokites, Edict Justin. p. 492, & 495. which Pope Agatho witnesseth in his Epistle directed to the Emperor Constant. Pogonat. as it is to be seen Act. 4. Conc. gen. 6th. p. 21. which Baron. himself confesseth, An. 681. n. 21, 24. & n. 25. to be approved of the whole Roman Synod consisting of 125 Bi­shops.

5. But N. N's Catholicks triumphed, &c. Did they so? that is an old trick of their Men of War, to do as Agesilaus commanded his Souldiers, still to shout Victoria, to brag when they are worsted, which they must do to keep up their Credit with their deluded Partisans and Proselytes. But who triumphed when his Grave and Learned Divines pitched a Field, time, place, and order of Battel, (contrary to the rules of all Combatants,) yet, like the Children of Ephraim, who being harnessed, and carrying Bows, (as if they would do strange seats of Chivalry, who but they!) turned their backs in the day of Battel? For did not your old Friends both challenge and order a Disputation 1 Eliz. upon the Points in Controversy? and did not they, upon the approach of the Enemy, after a Pickeer or two, face about, and dastardly forsake the field? How often have the Protestants triumphed over you with the story of Madam Donna Seamore, Pope Joan? Bishop Good­win hath produced thirty several well-known Authors to attest the Story, and it is not much above an hundred years since her Picture was standing in the Church of Sienna in Italy, wherePapir. Massin. de Episc. Ʋrbis l. 6. in Pio. 3. the Pictures of the Popes were set up; which so moved Baronius his patience, that he sollicited the Pope and Duke of Florence to [Page 50]take it down, which accordingly at his intercession they causedFlori­mund Fab. Joan. c. 22. n. 2. to be done. Such an ancient Picture in confirmation of other reports, is as good an evidence that there was such a Madam Pope, as Baronius his ancient Coin, in contradiction to all former Histo­ries, was to prove the determinate time of Maxentius his birth, and had N. N. and his Narrators such a proof for their dusty weather-beaten Nags-head, they would do wonders with it, and pursue it hotly with Hue and Cry from Country to Country.

6. Though several Reasons have before been assigned, and more might, why our Writers in those times, such as Bishop Jewel, &c. did not expresly appeal to the Records: yet I take the Chief to be this; The then Romanists did pretend to a mixt Succession, but chiefly insisted upon the Moral and Doctrinal; so Dr. Stapleton, Graeca Ecclesia, &c. The Greek Churches, though they have lineal Succession, yet because of the Heresies which they hold, and the Schism they make, they have not lawful Staplet. Princ. doctr. l. 13. c. 6. Succession; and again, Successio de qua agitur, &c. The Succession of which we dispute, is not of pla­ces and persons, but of true Id. relect. c. 1. qu. 4. art. 1. & 2. notab. 5. and sound Doctrine. Thus also Mr. Harding, def. fol. 119. Did Capon, Shaxton, or ever any Bishop of that See before you, teach your Doctrine? whom have you succeeded, as well in Doctrine, as in outward sitting in that Chair? To which Question, if Bishop Jewel had appealed to the Records he had trifled, because they are only evidences of meer matter of Fact, not at all of Doctrines taught.

7. But N. N. is a man of confidence, he believes there were many living in Queen Elizabeth's time could have proved them For­ged: this is strange! forgery is a work of darkness carried on by a few, (these are too many to be privy to the Fact) and very closely, with all the securities of secrecy; and therefore a man of indifferent judgment will hardly be perswaded that many can be accessory and privy to a designed Forgery.

8. On a sudden this great Undertaker grows dull, for he sup­poseth that to make the Records more incredible, which to all others makes them most credible. To N. N. they are more in­credible upon testimony of publick Authority, which is indeed to destroy all human security, and contrary to the common notices of mankind. But N. N. is resolved to speak the Truth at last.

SECT. XI.

J. S. THE truth is, there is no truth in any of these Affirma­tions; for,

1. The Clergy of England then had a Liturgy with Rites and Ceremonies, (witness N. N. in what he said before,) which they orderly observed: they did own and defend the three OrdersBishop Jewel, Apol. c. 3. divis. 1. & defence, fol. 85. of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, (witness the Ritual which N. N. also acknowledgeth to be the allowed Form of the Church of England,) to have been ever in Christ's Church since the time of the Apostles, which the Puritans do not: if they did, the Romish Emissaries would lose some Proselytes, and therefore N. N.'s sug­gestion that the Clergy then did condemn Consecration as a rag of Rome, is a most malicious untruth.

2. The Clergy then neither followed Zwinglius, nor any other Person, nor any Sect, or Sectaries of Men, farther than they fol­lowed the Scripture, and the Practice of the Primitive Church; these they took for their rule.

3. If by Zwinglianism he intends (as it is usually called Zwin­glianism) the rejecting that monstrous Figment of Transubstan­tiation, they were therein followers of the Apostles and Doctors of the Catholicks; if he conceive Zwinglius opposed Episcopacy, he is deceived, for he and the Helvetians did honour it. What he adds of other Reformed Churches, is most false; for most of them have and do own Bishops, either name, or thing, or both; as in the Dominions of the King of Sweden, Denmark, and the most of them in High Germany, even as many as subscribed to the Au­gustane Confession, those under the Duke of Saxony, Luxenburg, the Marquess of Brandenburg, the Prince of Anhault, and many [Page 52] others; and those of the Reformed Churches which have no Bi­shops, account it their want, an infelicity. It is a bad Cause which must be underpropped with impious Frauds, and is supported only with hideous and palpable Lies.

4. In the close of this Section N. N. brings by head and shoul­ders his Nags-head again, to shew he can write as well against common sense, as without common honesty; for his suggestion nei­ther is it credible, and is contrary to the apprehensions of all Im­partial Judges; for it is morally impossible the Fable should be credible, because Dr. Parker's Consecration was performed, as is before related in the presence of four of the most eminent Nota­ries Publick in the Kingdom, one whereof was principal Actuary at Cardinal Pool's Consecration.

SECT. XII.

J. S. HItherto N. N. hath been a fabulous Romancer and Le­gendary, he now falls under the suspition of a Plagiary; for in all probability he hath by a trick of Legerdemain filched these Quotations from some Puritan Pamphleteers, many of which have made use of them upon another design. But,

1. In the different Judgment of N. N. the Question was started in Arch-Bishop Parker's time, though not pursued indeed, nor moved for many years after, at which time Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulk were either but School-boys or Freshmen; but when they were Writers, the Romanists thought fit to let it lie in a Saint-soli­tude, and smother it with profound silence, hoping to get a better opportunity to market the Fable.

2. Supposing the English Ordination was first questioned in their times, by what Magick will N. N. infer his conclusion, or prove his Fable credible? His Argument [...]us from the Staff to the Corner, for thus he demonstrates; Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulke defied and sleighted; yea, scorned the Popish Ordinations, therefore they believe the jolly merry Fable; Dr. Whitaker saith, We hold our Vocation lawful without their Form and Orders: N. N's wild inference from hence is, Therefore he knew the Story to be true, which if it had been so, would have rendered it unlawful. Dr. Fulk, The Romish Orders are stinking, greasy, Antichristian, &c. therefore he full well knew the Story to be true, and the English Ordinations naught; whereas their words were direct proper Answers to the Romish Objections against them, viz. They were not Ordained by Romish Bishops after the Romish Rite; and import no more but this, Bishops and Priests are lawfully Ordained, who were not Ordained after the Roman Rite, and by Romish Bishops, which is an undeniable truth, as­sented to by the Romanists themselves.

3 To confirm this N. N. is admonished to hear this Judg­ment concerning Episcopacy and Ordination: Bellarmine Objects against Protestants, that they had taken away Bishops; Dr. Whi­taker Contr. 2 de Eccles. q. 5. c. 3. makes so bold with Bellar­mine, as to give him the Lye, saying, We do not condemn the Order of Bishops, as he falfely slanders us, but only those false Bishops of the Church of Rome; near the same place, condem­ning the antient Constitution, that three Bishops be present at the Ordination of a Bishop, for a Godly Sanction. Dr. Fulk in Tit. 1. fol. 781. speaks as fully, Among the Clergy for. Order and seemly Government, there was always one Principal to whom the name of Bishop was, &c. which in his defence against Gregor. Martin c. 6. Sect. 20. p. 182. he thus expresseth; That the Title of the Bishop was a very old time used to signify a degree Ec­clesiastical, higher than Presbyter or Priest, or Elder, we did ne­ver deny, we know it right well: and then will any man of an indifferent judgment ever believe N. N. to be a lover or re­porter of Truth, when he hath broached so prodigious a Lye, that most of the Clergy of England in those times were Pu­ritans? these two Prime Protestants were not, who thus apo­logized for themselves and their Brethren the Clergy. But be­cause N. N. will have them Puritans, let him know that Eng­lish Protestants are as far from being Puritans (as he him­self aterwards confesseth) as his Catholicks are; and the rather [Page 54]because they beg their Principles of Rebellion and Sedition a­gainst the King, and their Schism against Bishops from the rest of the Papists, the Jesuites, and whatsoever else they hold con­trary to sound Doctrine, either from Regulars of another Or­der, or from some of their Schoolmen. But because perhaps he will except against these two Prime Protestants, for his fur­ther satisfaction, let him

4. Hear the judgment of the two Prime Pontificians: Cudse­nius De de­sperata Cal­vini causa. c. 11. the Jesuite ingeniously confesseth, The English Nation are not Hereticks, because they remain in a perpetual succession of Bishops, which Confession totally destroys all N. N's Fabrick; Monsieur To the King of Great Bri­tain, p. 6. Charles the second. Militiere is not much short of him, saying, The English Nation retaining the antient Order of Episcopacy (which is utterly inconsistent with the contempt and rejection of Con­secration as a Rag of Rome, and there being contented with the extraordinary Calling of God and the Spirit) as instituted by Divine Authority, have thereby preserved the Face and Image of the Church Catholick.

SECT. XIII.

J. S. part 1. THis is N. N's last and worst Medium for his Fable, such as if it held would destroy all human Faith, and the best assurance that can be had for the confirmation of the Truth in matters of Fact. But,

1. This hath been an Old desperate shift of disingenuous Pa­pists; who have forfeited all Christian Meekness and Modesty, when they are hardly pressed by their Adversaries with a pinching Authority, to cry Forgery. Protestants assert Pope Ho­norius the first was an Heretick, because they find him con­demned of Heresy by the sixth General Council under the Em­perour Constantius Pogonatus, to which Authority many learned Romanists have given credit. But the more rigid sort have taken N. N's easy Answer for a subterfuge, Forgery was used; for this Condemnation was maliciously inserted into the Acts of the Council by the order of the Emperour, who having the Original in his hand by a Conspiracy with the Actuaries consented to their satisfaction. Pighius isHier. l. 4. c. 8. Sed quoni­am. resolute it must be so, (for the Pope in despight of all evidences to the con­trary must be Infallible) for he would have it so. A certain learned man wishedPighius diatrib. in Epist. ad lectorem. Pighius to recant, and draw in his easy Answer; but he fallsId. ib. de act. sextae Synodi.. a-fresh on the matter, and scorning to retract what he formerly had said, still puts in the same easy Answer: whereupon Bannes 22. qu. 1. art. 10. Dub. 2. Bannes being troubled at the ob­stinacy of the man, jeers him for his ready Invention, that af­ter Nine hundred years, Pighius being but a man of yesterday, could find all those Witnesses, which were produced against him to have been Conspirators in a Forgery; andLoc. l. 6. c. 8. ad 11. Canus puts this Question to him, How can Pighius clear him whom Usellus, Epiphanius, and Pope Adrian, &c. affirm to have been an Heretick? At this Baronius An. 681. n. 31. & n. 5. is not a little moved, and like a sworn servant of the Papacy, grows Angry and Witty, scoffs Canus, and playing upon his name wishes him more Gra­vity and Judgment than to have been so rash as to pass a Sen­tence in so great matters. Father Cambesis a modest and learned Dominican is as much troubled at the Cardinal's mirth and [Page 56]wrath, seriously and soberly telling him, That course which he took was of pernicious consequence, since there is not an Act of any General Council which one may not with as much likelihood affirm to be Forged; but for this his honest freedom of speech The­ophilus Raynaud a Jesuit attacks him, and not only bitterly inveighs against him, but writes a most bitter Satyr against the whole New Heresy of the Jesuites, p. 90. & inde. Dominican Order.

Part 2. Though N. N. be perswaded he has an easy Answer in readiness, yet it is a part of zealous madness to produce such an easy Answer as is destructive to human society; it is an easy Answer to say all men are Fools or Knaves, which is the ef­fect of his easy Answer, yet none will say so but mad men. But N. N. is resolved to be mad with Reason, for he immedi­ately subjoynes his Reason in these words; It is no more, &c. That may be so in some new Atlantis or Ʋtopia; but it is a great deal too much to impeach or suspect so many known persons with so deep guilt, and to charge all the Courts at once, either with Folly or Hypocrisy; it is just so much as to null the Authority of all Courts and Records whatsoever. Let N. N. produce any evidence out of the Vatican, with this easy An­swer it will be evaded and baffled; for if it be produced, any that is disposed to dispute it can soon say, it is Forged: and if he be demanded a Reason why he said so, he will Reply with N. N's easy Answer, There hath been a Conspiracy, and this is no more, but that the Pope and all others concerned have com­bined to give in a false Certificate, and the several Courts have been so lame as willingly to enter into the Combination, or be gulled by it; and not one among them can be found to have either so much common sense as to discover, or so much re­spect and kindness to common honesty as to detect and di­vulge the Cheat. Indeed this is as easy a way to invalidate Re­cords as it is to confute Bellarmine, with Bellarmine thou liest; but for this his easy Answer he hath Forged as easy Proofs.

1. Protestants (saith he) are dexterous, &c. Who would have thought it! take the charge home to your Romish Agents and Factors, who have often been detected to be the most infamous falsifiers both of the Sacred Volumes, and Ecclesiastical Writers, when they conceived any of these not to be favourable to their pretensions and perswasions. Their own Camolensis or Car­nolensis (call him as you please) and Agrippa have informed us, that many of N. N's fellows have been so bold with the Scriptures by adulterating and misinterpreting them, for con­firmation [Page 57]whereof only two instances shall be produced: Bel­larmine and Perer (adhering to the vulgar Latine, which they take themselves obliged to do in their great kindness to the Trent-Assemblers, which defined it authentick) read Gen. 3.15. in the Feminine Gender (thereby to countenance their Adoration of the Blessed Virgin Mary) contrary to all old Translations, and all antient Interpreters, who have made it either in the Masculine or Neuter, as many Pontificians do. The same Bellar­mine (to prove the Pope Infallible) hath often corrupted that Text Deut. 17.12. reading ex Decreto Judicis, by the Sentence of the Judge, instead of &, and of the Sentence, more of which may be found in Dr. James his Tract of Corruptions, Part 4. p. 45. in Bishop Jewel's Reply to Dr. Cole, p. 24. and Sermon at Pauls Cross, p. 54. and so these men which have been so bold, are by their own Law condemned for falsaries; for by it, he is a falsary that in writing addeth, or detracteth, or altereth any thing fraudulently. What their own Canus, Espencaeus, and Ludovicus Vives thought of their famous Fabulous Legends, needs not be exemplified: this may not be omitted, the same Vives Lib. 1, de causis Cor. Art. p. 343. and Erasmus Censur. in lib. Aug. have observed, that within this Four or Five hundred years last past, it had been almost an ordinary Practice, either to adulte­rate true Books, or to forge false; and since that a Secular Priest in his Notes upon the Jesuitts Apology, in defence of the Ec­clesiastical Pag. 123. Subordination in England, hath found the Gloss cor­rupted by them; adding, This is no news for the Jesuits to alledg Authors corruptly, nipping and cutting off that which confuteth the thing, for which they alledg them, which (he saith) he hath no­ted out of his own experience. The Forgery of the Nicene Ca­nons is confessed by Bishop Tunstal and Dr. Redmaine, two zealous Pontificians, and it is well known who were the Conspirators in it. Constantine's pretended Charter hath been proved another Romish Forgery, by Cardinal Cusan, Valla, Erasmus, Marsil. Petavin. Paul. Cathol. Dantes, (who, poor man, for speaking what he had asserted was after his death condemned to Hell by theBarthol. in extravag. ad Rep. Rom. Lan­celot. de Imp. Sect. 2. Vol. 1. Qu. 2. n. 12. Advocates of the Roman Court) Hittan. Wolph. Anton. de Rossel. Freker. Aciat. Crantz. Heming. Arnis. (as John Gryphi­ander relates, tract. de Insulis c. 24. n. 43, 44. p. 362.) insomuch as oneReferente Felin. in c. fol. extra. de major. & obedien. Eber. Top. in loc. 11. n. 15. Pius Auditor of the Rota, was wont to say, He mar­velled at those pittiful Lawyers who would take upon them to di­spute [Page 58]of the validity of that which was never extant; and Aeneas Lib. dial. contr. donat. Constant. Sylvius, who knew enough of the intrigues of the Court of Rome, spake home, Caute id provisum a Pontificibus, &c. The Popes craf­tily contrived for the defence of this Forgery, that still a sharp dispute should be kept on foot against the Lawyers to this end, that such his Donation might alwayes be supposed, and taken for granted, as if it had been in being. I shall add one further Testimony from a leading Romanist for my Countrymen's sake, who honour his memory in many respects, Mr. Roger Widdrington, reputed by Strangers as a Secular, or Regular, but was only an active Lay-Gentleman: the Book entituled Apologia pro jure Principum passeth under his name, though when it was first published, it was known to be the work of a far more learned, and sober man, Father Preston; but whether Mr. Widdrington or Father Preston were the Author, thus he, or he, or rather both, p. 343. Non solent Pontifices, &c. The Popes are not wont to permit the Acts or Opinions of their Predecessors which are fa­vouarble to the Papal Authority, to be further oppugned or questioned, and therefore both the Pope and the Ordinaries, and Inquisitors of He­resy, are very careful, lest any Book which seems to derogate therefrom be published; and if any do happen to pass the Press, they take a strict Order it be utterly suppressed, or to be read of none without special Li­cense in writing, till it be purged, &c. p. 344. It is a very hard matter, in these times especially, either to find in the Books of Catholicks any Clause, which may give the least occasion of calling the Popes Right in Temporals in question; or certainly to know what the Author of those Books thought of the Popes Power; but they are oftentimes against the Hair compelled to deliver, not their own Opinions, but such as the In­quisitors of the Books do father upon them. Neither Turks nor Jews have gone so far in their presumptions, as to take authority over dead men's writings to alter and change them at their pleasures. The same Author, or Authors p. 35. of that Book hath discovered a shame­ful Corruption in a Prayer of the Breviary; For not long since (these are the words in that Page) they have blotted out the word Animas, Souls, in that Prayer of their Reformed Breviaries, by command of Clement the eighth. Thus also they corrupted Agapetus his words in Bibl. SS. Pairum, Tom. 1. p. 108. Par. 1571, wickedlyIndex Rom. p. 200. razing, and perversly glossing that Sentence, viz. Ʋpon earth the King (the Emperour Justinian to whom he writ Epistles, as Baron. testi­fies, Tom. 7. in Append. p. 665.) hath no man above him, contrary to his express words and meaning: for thus he writeth to him, c. 1. Whereas in honour thou, O Emperour, hasta dignity far above all other men, honour him above all who gave thee this honour, to wit God. &c. p. 27. impose upon thy self a necessity of observing Laws, [Page 59]in as much as thou hast no living Creature in the World to compel thee thereunto. And so those words of Ludovic. Vives, Ep. ad Regem Angl. (Henr. 8.) praefixa Com. Aug. de Civitate Dei, cujus potestas, &c. Whose Authority and Majesty is greatest upon earth, secundum Deum, next after God, are commanded to be expunged. But per­haps the case may be Iliacos intra muros, &c. Protestants are as criminal this way as Papists, and a charge strongly proved against these, will not clear them. N.N. hath an easy Proof for this; For,

2. As it appears from Gregor. Martin, &c. But it appears N.N. either knows nothing of Greg. Martin's Discoveries, or craftily concealed them; for Dr. Fulk hath discovered his Discoveries to be mean loose Cavils, in a full Answer thereto, which hitherto hath not been replied to another Discovery he made which his own Fellows taxed him for, and with a lying Discovery and Relation Bugbeared him for attempting new Discoveries, so un­lucky was Gregor. Martin in all his Discoveries.

Part 3. He adds a third Proof taken from the Topicks of the Wisdom, Gravity, and Learning, Piety, and Humanity of his Ca­tholick Divines.

1. As to their Wisdom, it is confessed they vvere so vvise as not to be taken vvith a Lye, vvhich they might be convinced of by Thousands of Witnesses. The Children of this World are Wise in their Generation, therefore they took a crafty Course not to excuse the Fable till about forty years after the supposed Fact was perpe­trated. Neither were there many of his Catholicks who maintained it, those who did, took it at the first rebound from a malicious Enemy, and Parasitical Pickthank, Bishop Bonner's Setter. But sup­posing these Witnesses had been called into a Court, and deposed, all that they could say to the Article, or Quaere, was, they believed it, and believed it, because they had heard it; if they had deposed it any further they had been right Affidavit-men; but this Depo­sition being cast out, if N.N. had been a fee'd Proctor in the cause, he then would have set up his possibles, probables, and credibles; if these moved not the Witnesses, (as Ten thousand to One they would not) then he would cast his easy Answers, there was a Conspiracy among the Thousands of Witnesses, to give in false Evidence and deceive the Court.

2. For their Gravity and Learning, that signifies little, there are Grave and Learned men almost of all Perswasions; yet it is notoriously known, that such have been sometimes overcome with Lyes, Visions, Revelations, Miracles and Fables: there are such things in the world as over-credulity and Euthusiasm, which have prevailed with men of known good parts and abilities.

3. As to their Piety, and good Conscience, that it was so ten­der in N. N's opinion, that they would not engage, &c. Prote­stants cannot assent to it; because they know that his Catho­licks did engage themselves and their Posterities to take the Oath of Supremacy, which when they refused, not out of Con­science, but Compact and Design, because by a Law whereto they were parties and chief instruments it stood established; so with great reason and learning they Preached and pressed the taking there­of upon the Conscience as a Duty. They who can thus play at Fast and Loose with Oaths, without any violation of any of the rules of Charity, may be judged to be either unconscion­able Jugglers, or wavering Weather-cocks. But those of them who in Queen Elizabeth's time contrived her Murther, and to carry on the Plot with more security and advantage, published a Book, wherein it was declared, that it was not lawful to kill the Queen, that so neither She, nor any of her Council might fear any harm from such Religious Cheats, and counterfeit Champions of Loyalty, cannot possibly be excused. This was proved, and openly confessed at the Arraignment of Babington and Ballard, when also the Letters of Cardinal Como written to Parry were produced, which did testify that the Pope ap­provedFulk Rhem. Test. marginal note on Jude, fol. 847. the Artifice. Great Villanies are commonly at­tempted with great Hypocrisy, and if Hypocrites may pass for tender-Conscienced men, or good Roman Catholicks, there are great store of these in the world.

4. However N. N. will have them well-natured persons, They will do nothing in spight against Protestants. He must pardon the Protestants if they do not believe; for they know they have been very spiteful one against another. Stephen the sixthPlat. in vit. Steph. 6. Sabellic. Aenead. 9. lib. 1. and. those or­dained by him to be re-ordained, Baron. An. 897. n. 2. and Sergius 3. who ruled the Papacy six years after him did the like, Baron 908. n. 2. which is acknowledged T. R. P. in his Answer to some Letters writ by a Protestant, p. 786. & Bellar. de Pont. lib. 4. c. 12. against Formosus, with Barbarous Inhumanity cutting off his three Fingers, with which he was used to give Be­nedictions and Orders, and then causing his Body to be cast into Tyber with rage.

It could be nothing less than Spite in your Popes to thun­der out their Interdicts, and publish their seditious and ma­licious Bulls, against this Church and State. It might be error or mistake in your Grave Learned Divines to pronounce Pro­testants [Page 61]Hereticks and Schismaticks; but it was the extremity of Spight, to condemn them to Fire and Faggot without bene­fit of the Clergy, and doom them to Eternal Flames with­out the priviledg of Purgatory. Indeed the main spight of the whole Sect is against the Church of England; down with it, cry they, and the Puritan-rabble will soon be crushed and quelled, and the little undersets which spring from them, either dwindle away into nothing, or drop into their hands.

5. He assures us upon his word, (which is not worth a rush) they hold themselves obliged to hold to their known Tenents and Practices; [this is tattle and empty talk. According to their Tenent the Character is indelible, yet Pope Stephen nul­led the Orders of Formosus, and caused all those Ordained by him to be Re-ordained. He tells us, it is their Tenent and Practice to Ordain Lapsed Ministers in absolute terms as Lay-men are, upon the sole account of the invalidity of their for­mer Ordinations; but Pope Paul and Cardinal Pool either thought, or practised otherwise, when they confirmed and settled the Ordinations made in Edward the sixth's time. He saith 'tis their Tenent, to allow those to officiate who have not valid Orders, is to commit damnable Sacriledg: but the Pope and the Car­dinal did allow those who were Ordained (as they speak qui ampullas jactant) in the time of Schism, to officiate; and there­fore either did think their Orders valid, or committed dam­nable Sacriledg: N. N. dare not affirm the latter; if he take to the former, then all his confused heap of Possibles, Probables, and Credibles, are at once blown up with a Puff of the Popes breath, and are driven away like Down. It hath been the Practice of their Grave and Learned Divines, when any Pro­testants revolted, to exercise them, as if they had been possessed, for thus was the Form, The Revolter was brought to a Bishop, and fal­ling down on his Knees before him, the Bishop said, I adjure thee, thou unclean Spirit, by the name of God to depart out of the Man. If thus they practised now, they would mar their market, and a half-gained Proselite, before he was thus charmed, would either start aside, or wheel about.

Whatsoever their Tenents or Practices be, or have been, (which yet are not heeded by Protestants) there is an old Sitter at Rome, who can change them at his pleasure; which when he is disposed to do, all that N. N. or his Fellovvs dare do, is to Bless themselves, holding up their hands, and some crying Benedicite, others after the old Mumpsimus mode bennistee, [Page 62]or vvhich is all one, make use of a grave Nod, or discon­tented Shrug, and so sit dovvn in silence: This is no more than for the Pope to give out Orders to the contrary, or impose Silence by a Decree of Taciturnity; then let the Tenent and Practice be vvhat it vvill, all is quashed, they are the Popes Vassals, and must most tamely obey his Orders.

SECT. I.

J. S. 1. IT seems N. N's former tedious Harangue at length comes to this, Arch-Bishop Parker, &c. were not Ordained by his Catholicks, which is one Nullity. But this [Page 63]is contrary to the Tenents of his Church; witness Bellarmine, who Lib. 1. de Sacr. in Gen. c. 21. determines, that Sacraments administred by Hereticks are valid; and to its Practice, allow­ing the Ordinations of the Arrians and Bonasiosi, and these of Acacius, see in Morin. de Sacr. Ord. and of the Greeks, witness N. N. ut supra.

2. The other Nullity lies in the Form, he being contented to wave the Matter, but why so? this hath alwayes been ac­counted an essential part of Ordination. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacr. Ord. c. 9. Sect. ex his, truly relateth, Concilium, &c. The Coun­cil of Carthage makes mention only of Imposition of hands. His quarrel then being with the Form, it is to be considered, af­ter some use made of his Concession in this Paragraph, which will by good consequence destroy his whole former discourse: for he confesseth,

1. That Protestants have a Form or Ritual; then undoubted­ly they would use it, and not Bishop Scories extempore Spirit.

2. They are as far from being Presbyterians as his Catho­licks; then they were not Puritans, unless his Catholicks be so too; then they rejected not Consecration as a Rag of Rome, nor were they contented with Extraordinary Calling; then they are as much for Bishops, and regularly Consecrated Bishops, as his Catholicks.

3. This Form is prescribed, and thereby they Ordained; there­fore they did Ordain by their Prescript Form, and not as N. N. surmiseth and suggesteth.

4. The Form hath these words, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; there­fore N. N's feigned Form was not used at Arch-Bishop Par­ker's Consecration.

5. The Form requires the Consecration of a Bishop to be publick in the Church; therefore his suggestion of a Clandestine Consecration is a Calumny.

6. The Form hath the word Bishop in it; therefore it hath sufficient to express the particular Power and Authority of a Bishop.

7. The Form requires three Bishops to the Consecration of a Bishop; therefore they did not think the help of one was suf­ficient: yet this is the Form N. N. is pleased to quarrel with. For,

3. He pretends there is a known Principle common, &c. But this he misrepresents, this Form must be used, and no other. Bell. inclines [Page 64]to the Affirmative, Lib. 1. de Sacr. in gen. c. 1. Sect. 2. & 20. even the words are determinated (saith he) by God: yet withal he tells us, if they be corrupted, (as suppose the Priest after the old Mump­simus rate should say, In nomino Patria, Filia & Spirito Sanctu,) or interrupted, (as if the Priest at the Consecration of the Eucharist should first numble (hoc est Cor) and after a little pause cough out (pus meum,) the Form would be good; but Alex. Hales, p. 4. q. 5. mem. 2. art. 1. states it otherwise; The Forms (saith he) of Rome Sacraments are determinate, the Forms of other Sacraments are not; The Forms of Baptism and the Eucharist being appointed by Christ, are kept inviolably without all change, but touching the words of Form to be used in any other of the supposed Sacraments, there is no certainty, but they are diversly and doubtfully declared; the reason whereof is, because they were of human devising. It is de­clared otherwise by Pope Innocent the Father of the Canonists, saying, The words of Form were instituted by the Church, Hist. Counc. Trent, fol. 594. But Protestants stand not upon words, using only the Form which Christ instituted, and is retained inBoth in Episcopal and Priest­ly Ordina­tion, Fili­cius tract. 9. c. 2. ex Pon­tifical Rom. and in the Roman Ca­techism de Sacr. Ord. Bell. de Sacr. in gen. c. 21. & l. 1. de Sacr. Ordin. c. 9. the Western Church in terms, and in the Eastern to the sense. For the Grace or Gift of God creating and promoting, which is the Eastern Form, is the same in substance with receiving the Holy Ghost, for the Gift and Grace of God, Eph. 3.2, 8. 1 Cor. 15.9, 10. 1 Tim. 4. Heb. 12. Tim. 1.6. is exactly the same with power from on high, assured Lu. 24.49. and the promise of the Father, &c. Act. 1.4, 5. which is the receiving this power, and v. 8. These Protestants use, and trouble not themselves with nice Disquisitions and Disputes.

4. He affirms the intention of the Ordainer, &c. But it is very reasonable to presume the General words are sufficient upon N. N's grounds, because they are used and applicable to all degrees of Holy Orders; For if Episcopacy, and Priesthood, be only divers de­grees of the same Order, as he intimates, and is declared in the Roman Ib. n. 24. p. 266. & Bell. de Sacr. Ord. c. 5. Sec. sequitur se­cunda, only by the ex­tension of the Chara­cter, id. ib. Sect. tertia: & Sect. seq. with this only difference, that the same efficacy is required to the exten­sion of the character, as to the first impression, id. ib. Sect. respond. Catechism, then the same Form will serve for both those disparate degrees of the same Order; and the rather, be­cause in their opinion the higher Power, compared to Bishops, is only by extension of the Character; and Protestants stick to this, because it was only used in the Ancient Roman Church, as it was only prescribed in the Old Pontifical, and as the Church then an­swered the Sophisters of these times, when this very Objection was writ against the Pontifical, so do Protestants now the present [Page 65] Roman Cavillers, who have taken it from them, for thus the Church of Rome defends her self.

1. The design was fully notified by words in the Pontificial, to which of the respective Orders the Person presented was to be admitted.

2. The manner of Imposition of hands did sufficiently disco­ver the intention of the Ordainer, and diversity the Act; for in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops impose hands, but in the Ordination of a Priest, one only Bishop, with some assisting Priests. This is the Judgment of both the Ancient Western and Eastern Church, that, that Form, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, which is the Form prescribed both for Priesthood and Episcopacy in the Protestant Ordinal, is sufficient to confer Power and Authority to both Orders; so that it being duly applied, he that is presented to the Capacity of a Bishop, is thereby enabled to do the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of God, and he who is presented for Priesthood, is thereby warranted and em­powred for the Office and work of a Priest.

5. He surmiseth these words, (Receive ye the Holy Ghost,) are not, &c. this is to oppose Christ's Institution, and in effect, to make his Form of Commissionating his Apostles defective, and insuffici­ent. For if that Form was sufficiently expressive of Apostolical Power and Authority, then is it of Episcopal, and it is most pro­perly applied to them, because if not only, yet principally they are the Apostle's Successors, even in the Judgment of many Learned Romanists; and therefore this Form sealed by imposition of hands, Constitutes a Person presented to Episcopacy a full Bishop by the Law of Christ, without the supplement of any other auxiliary Form.

Father Davenport Expos. Paraphr. artic. confess. Angl. p. 322. ad 325. alias St. Clara. hath evidenced from great Authority, their new Additionals to be unnecessary; Expos. Paraphr. Art. Confess Angl. p. 322. Alii putant, &c. Others think (saith he) Imposition of hands as the Matter, and those words (Receive ye the Holy Ghost) as the Form, is as much as is required by Divine Law to the Essence of Episcopal Ordination: and this they think from the Authority of the Scriptures, which often and only makes mention of these two, asBell. l. 1. de Sacr. Ord. c. 9. saith, we cannot convince Hereticks that Order is a Sacrament, because we cannot prove the external Symbol thereof from Scripture, which is not possible for him to do of their new additional either Matter or Form. Arrudius largely proveth.

6. He assumes, In the Form whereby Protestants Ordain, &c. But this his Assumption is,

1. Frivolous; It is absurd to object that against Protestants, [Page 66]which, if it were granted, would render all the Ordinations in the Romish Church for 800 years meer Nullities.

2. Fallacious; he equivocates in the word (Form,) which is either taken largely, for the whole Office of Administration exem­plified in the Ordinal, or strictly, for an Essential part of his Discourse; and in the Conclusion he useth the word [Form] in the most comprehensive sense, for the whole Rite of the Ministery, which hath in it for the more Solemnity, Prayers, Exhortations, Interrogatories, &c. but in the Assumption and middle-part, he taketh it in the restrained sense, for the Essential words, which are the Constitutive Form, as Imposition of hands is concluded to be the Matter: this is their own distinction.

3. False; for in the Form, that is the Protestants Ritual, there are, and always were express words for the Authority given in the respective Functions of Bishops and Priests, for whose Ordi­nations there are distinct Forms and distinct Words. The word [Bishop] oftner than three times used in the Office appointed for his Consecration, and the word [Priest] sometimes in that prescri­bed for his Ordination. Just according to N. N's after-instance of Illustration, if the word [King] be used at his Election, this sufficiently expresseth all Kingly Power and Authority.

SECT. II.

J. S. THat which N. N. designs by this, is, that that Form (Receive ye the Holy Ghost) is defective as to Priestly Ordination, which must be supplied by their new one, viz. Take thou power to offer Sacrifice to God, and to Celebrate Mass both for the quick and the dead. This he knows Protestants do reject, because late­ly invented, and foisted into the Romish Ritual to foster their gross [Page 67]Figments of Purgatory, Transubstantiation, and their Antichri­stian Sacrifice of the Mass; and because some Romanists, as St. Clara, thinks it unnecessary, and Bell. saith it is Sacrilegious; for this he positively delivers, It is Sacriledg to change the Form, because determinate, Bell. de Sacr. in gen. l. 1. c. 21. Sect. apud hae­ret. &c. secunda prop. For Sacraments are instituted by God, there­fore the chief part thereof the Form; and to add to, or alter the words of the Scripture, is not lawful, therefore not the words of the Sacraments, Id. ib. in Fin. yet this great Champion never did prove their new Form to be found in, or founded on Scripture, much less instituted by Christ.

2. If that Form comprehends not all the Essentials of Priestly Ordination, then the Apostles were not empowered to Consecrate, for our Saviour used that and no other to enable them for the exe­cution of the Priestly Office, wherefore Scotus l. 4. dist. 24. hath resolved verba illa, &c. those words, Whosoever sins ye remit, &c. are declarative of the Power formerly given in these [Receive ye the Holy Ghost,] by which Power is passed over all the Sacraments, and therefore that of Sacrificing: Biel l. 4. dist. 19. quaest. un. con­curs with him, cul datur, &c. to whom the Principal is given, to him also the accessory is given; but by these words, [Receive ye, &c.] Christ gave the power of the keys: therefore by them he conveyed the power of Consecration, which is a branch of the power of the Keys.

3. What is added concerned Deacons, is a pure piece of imper­tinency, no way advantagious to him, nor prejudicial to Protestants; if he vvere put to it, he vvould find it a difficult task to prove Deacons were Dispencers of the Mysteries, vvho vvere only As­sistants to the Dispensation.

SECT. III.

J. S. EAch Clause of this Section hath been sufficiently con­futed.

SECT. IV.

J. S. THis also is another vain Repetition: Three who bore the sway in King Edward's Reign held the Real Presence, but not in the Popish manner of determination: Those in Queen Elizabeth's time had and did stand for ordinary and orderly Vo­cation. The Church of England alwrys asserted the Divine Right of Episcopacy, and her orderly Orderly Orthodox Sons have con­stantly maintained it. If some have distinguished Priesthood into the degrees, the higher and the lower, as the Romanists generally do, yet they still conclude the said different degrees of the Acts and Uses (which could not be exercised in a due subordination of the lower to the higher) for a distinct respective Consecration thereto; and did hold those of them who should presume to ex­ercise the Higher Power not being regularly Consecrated thereto, were Schismatical Transgressors of the Apostolical Order, and Ca­tholick Practice; and that every Act of that usurped Power (when no real necessity to abate or excuse it) to be null and void. It is the Pope and his Collegues who are theFor it is not resol­ved in the Congrega­tion of the Cardinals, that the Pope's Legats should not suffer the determination of the Article of the Institution of Bishops by Divine Right to pass, Hist. Counc. of Trent, fol. 603. And it being perceived that Laynez his Speech was displeasing, and opposed by the Spanish Bishops, this distasted the Legats, ib. fol. 615. therefore Canons came from Rome, which the Pope moved to have proposed, p. 657. which displeased the Fathers, &c. after much contention, because the opinion of Divine Right was as displeasing to the Pope, ib. fol. 737. it was waved. leading Puritans. [Page 69]It was the Pope who said, the Absolute Divine Right of Bishops was a false and erronious Opinion; it was the Pope who slighted and scorned those Bishops in the Trent-Assembly, who affirmedIb. fol. 825. the Institution of Bishops by Divine Right. It was the Pope who first devested them of their Jurisdiction and Power, by his Com­missions and DelegationsCaran. p. 869. to inferior Priests.

SECT. V.

J. S. THis Conclusion is of the same temper with the Premises; these were a confused heap of Incredibles, Improbables, and Impossibles; this is a wild distempered Sorites carried on with an affected Obscurity to distract and amuse the Reader, by multiplying, confounding, and changing the Terms, hudling up ma­ny Conclusions in this one.

If St. Hierome, by Church, meant the Ʋniversal Church, this [Page 70]always has, now hath, and ever will have Bishops, (as Sacerdotes signifies with him:) but if he spoke of a particular Church, then his [is not] is not to be taken absolutely, but respectively; not simply to deny it's being and existence, but it's integrity and complement, viz. there is no through complete Church which hath not Bishops. For we read in the Ancients of some Churches that had received [...] the fulness of Dispensations, and of others which had not attained [...], to the complement of Necessaries; though in St. Hierom's time all Churches were complete, that he might truly affirm there was no Church without a Bishop. But it may fall out also, that all the Bishops of a well-formed complete Church may dye, or by Persecution be so Scattered that they dare not appear, or by an Infidel Conquerour be Banished, or Murthered: but if the remaining Christians in this distressed condition keep their first Faith, they are in a salvable state, and continue true members of the Ʋniversal Church; as those Roman Converts were, who believed upon St. Peter's first Sermon, Act. 2. which was long before St. Peter came to Rome, Rom. 16.7.

2. He suggests It is impossible they should, &c. For once he guesseth right, It is impossible any Church of one denomination can be the true Catholick, Apostolick Church, that is in the usual sense of the Romanists, the Ʋniversal, as it is impossible for a Part to be the Whole, or their Catholick Church (which is not the fourth part thereof) to be Ʋniversal, as they by their common restriction assume; but it is possible a particular Church may be a true Catholick and Apostolick Church, and the true Catholick and Apostolick Church of such a Nation.

For the Title Catholick is either taken properly for the Ʋni­versal Church, which is the Congregation of all Believers dispersed over all the World, in opposition to the Herds of Jews, Pa­gans, and Infidels; and then it is a contradiction to apply or appropriate it to any particular Church, as the Romanists in­dustriously do to huckster off their false Wares, which otherwise would stick on their hands; or else it is used in the more com­mon signification of an Orthodox Church, which participates in the true Faith with the Ʋniversal Church, in a contradistinction to the Conventicles of all Heretical Blasphemers: In this Notion the Protestant Church of England is not only a Catholick and Apostolick Church, but in due Form of construction the true Ca­tholick and Apostolick Church of England, as several particular Churches, viz. Rome, Carthage, &c. have been honoured with [Page 71]the Title of the Catholick Church of those respective Nati­ons, For as the Roman Church was called the Catholick Church of Rome, Leo Ep. 12. So that of Antioch, the Catholick Church of An­tioch, Conc. Constant. 5. Act. 1. That of Carthage, the Catholick Church of Carthage, Aurel. Epist. Eccl. Cathol. Carthag. So Polycarp was the Bishop of the Catholick Church of Smyrna. Euseb. lib. 4. hist. c. 14. And that famous Epistle to the Smyrnians was directed to all the Holy and Catholick Churches, id. ib. in Princ. Greg. Naz. the Bishop of the Catholick Church of Constantinople in his last Will and Testament, witnessed by four Bishops of their several Catholick Churches, as of Iconium, &c. Provinces, and Dioceses.

3. His doubts and uncertainties have a rare virtue (perhaps they may work strongly on weak minds) they can demonstrate. This is the noble demonstrating faculty of Romish Traditors, they can raise doubts and uncertainties where there are none, and by their Magick demonstrate, first, that the Protestant Church is not the Ʋniversal, and then it is no Church; first, absurdly without Proof suppose the Nullity of its Ordinations, and thence conclude the Nullity of its Christianity. The best is, this is but one Doctors opinion, if more there be, yet all his Colleagues are not so Magisterial in their nullifying Sentence. The Bishop of Chalcedon is more solid and Prudent. Persons As Bishop Bramhal cites, Re­ply to the Survey, p. 33. (saith he) living in the communion of the Protestant Church, if they en­deavour to learn the truth, (which if they do not, they are neither good Protestants nor good Christians) and are not able to attain unto it, but hold it implicitely in the preparation of their minds, and are ready to receive it, when God shall be pleased to reveal it, they neither want Faith, nor Church, nor Salvation; which elsewhere he confirms by this reason, A Church may be Heretical, and Schismatical really, yet morally a true Church, because She is Bishop of Chalced. Survey, c. 2. Sect. 4. invincibly ignorant of her Heresy and Schism.

Pope Innocent was so much offended at the irregularities of the Spanish Ordinations in his time, that at first he inclined to null them; but upon better thoughts be forbore declaring that, for the number of those who were faulty therein, he would not question nor doubt of any of them any ways pas­sed, but rather leave them to Gods Judgment. Epist. ad Conc. Tolk. Car. sum. Conc. p. 270.

4. But (saith he) a solid doubt, &c. This is not Universally true, for a Church which hath a doubtful Clergy by irregula­rities of Ordination, if She contend for that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints, and cannot avoid those irregulari­ties through not a pretended, or contracted, but a real neces­sity, [Page 72]is a true part (such an irregularity not absolutely and totally Un-Churching her) of the true Catholick Church: True, but not Complete; not Complete, because it wants that which is required to the Integrity and Perfection of a Church; yet True, because it hath all things essential to a Church. For this reason the most eminent Protestants, who still maintained the Divine Right of Bishops, yet did they clear those Transmarine Churches which have not Bishops from sinning against Divine Right, because their want was not through their own default, but the Iniquity of the Times and Places they lived in; which cha­ritable construction should seem very reasonable to the Roma­nists, for that the Court of Rome gave the first occasion of all the contests about Episcopacy, by investing Priests with Epi­scopal Jurisdiction and Power by their Commissions and Dele­gations: and without doubt Necessity is as strong Dispensation for these Pastors to execute the Ministerial Office, as the Popes Mercenary Bulls granted upon unworthy avaritious ends can be for their Priests to exercise Episcopal Authority. Those Churches therefore under this want are True, though lame and maimed Members of the Catholick Church: Just as Canus Loc. l. 4. c. ult. ad 10. de­termines of the Romish Church in a vacancy; It is then left Lame (saith he) and diminished, without Christs Vicar, that. one Pastor of the Church, the Pope; yet the Spirit of Truth should abide in it: and vvithout doubt the Spirit of Truth will as cer­tainly abide in those Churches which want Bishops, as in their Church wanting a Pope, at least, they should think so, because in their account the Pope is as necessary, if not more, to the be­ing of a Church than Bishops are. To clear this more distinctly, some things are required to the Essence This is Stapleton's distinction. of a Church, as the Doctrine of saving Faith in the Profession and Practice there­of; some only to the Perfection and Integrity of a Church, as the having Regular Pastors by a due Form of Ordination: both these are necessary, though not equally and in the same Degree; the former absolutely and indispensably, the latter de congruo & pos­sibili: viz. it concerns the Church, if possibly it can be obtained to have lawfully Ordained Pastors, and every wilful Omission, much more Rejection, of the Catholick settled Order in this kind is Sacrilegious and Schismatical; yet those Pastors who high­ly esteem Episcopal Ordination, and much affect it, but cannot obtain it through the Recusancy of Bishops in present Place and Power (who will not Ordain them without sinful com­pliance and submission to gross Errours and Corruptions evi­dently [Page 73]contrary to the Law of Christ) if they hold and di­vide the Word of Truth rightly may be accounted true Pastors, though not in a real Mission, yet by a moral designation, as being deputed and separated to that Divine Office; because in this case, the Necessity is invincible, which makes that allow­able, which otherwise would be unlawful, as Dr. Cracken. contr. Spalet. c. 4. observes from the Gloss, and illustrateth from Sci­pio's Example, who when the Questors denied him a supply of Monies out of the Publick Treasury, because it was against Law, presently replied, Necessity hath no Law. The Romanists con­fess the desire of Baptism is sufficient to excuse the want there­of, and they have it in effect who have it in desire; in all rea­son, the want of an undoubted Sacrament is more dangerous, than the want of a Sacramental can be, especially where there is a Desire to have the Impediment removed. The Jews were prohibited to build private Altars, yet in case of Necessity, when they were not permitted to go to Hierusalem, the learned Jews determined the Prohibition ceased as to its present effect; and every one knows a Negative Prescript is not so dispensable as an Affirmative.

It is the opinion of Cornelius a Lapide in Numb. 20.26. that Eleazar was m [...]de High-Priest, praeter legem & morem, other­wise than by standing Law and Custom he ought; First, be­cause his Father was then living; next, in that the right only of putting on his Fathers Garment was used, without any So­lemn-Unction or Consecration to the Priesthood.

5. He subjoyns a doubtful Clergy makes a Doubtful Church. This is a Doubtful Proposition: the most he can make of it is, that a Doubtful Clergy makes a Doubtful Church only in Part, not in the Whole; for even Schismaticks in those things wherein they have made no separation from the Church (otherwise the Romanists would be in a sad condition) do so far still remain uncorrupted to the Church; so that if that Doubtful Clergy keep the wholesom words of sound Doctrine, (if N. N. doubt of this, he may remember, there is a Clergy of a beyond-Sea Church which hath no Bishops, hath made this good against the choicest Champions of the Roman See) so far they are Ca­tholicks.

6. He is very positive, a doubtful Church is no Church. It is true, he who harboureth a doubt (which he will conclude Prudent, because the issue of his own Imagination, or the sug­gestion of some over-admired Teacher) of that Church whereof [Page 74]he is a Member, that Church to him is no Church; but where such a doubt is entertained, the Case is only disputable, and questioning doth not disprove or destroy certainty and truth. But such doubtful Propositions as N. N. hath here conjured up, will without doubt damnify his good old Cause, because thereby his Church will be concluded a no Church, by the de­monstrating Power of those many doubts and uncertainties, which her chief Members have conceived and uttered against her in­stances of most important concern. For,

Part 2. 1. It is a rule with them, that a doubtful Pope, is no Crespet. in verb. Pa­pa; Caran. p. 827. Pope, and that there cannot be two Popes at one and the same time, etiam ex urgentissima causa (as Jac. Castellon. cites out of Navar—verb. Papa p. 485.) no not upon the most weighty Consideration, because there is but one Monarch, and one Mo­narchy only for Spiritual concerns by the appointment of Christ: hence they generally conclude, that all those who are not united to that one determinate Head are in the state of dam­nable Schism, and those who are united to him, are united to the true Catholick-Church. viz. The Church is a Society of men united in the Profession of the same Faith, and participating of the Sacraments under the Government of lawful Pastors, chiefly of one Vicar of Christ upon Earth, the Roman Pope. This then is obvious at the first view from these Premises, that an undoubted Pope is as fully, and by the word chiefly in the definition, more necessary to the being and Constitution of the Church than an undoubted Clergy; and a doubtful Pope is as destructive to the Church, as a doubtful Clergy; from whence it neces­sarily follows, that if a doubtful Clergy makes a doubtful Church, a doubtful. Pope must do so too: and then if this be proved, (there hath been a doubtful Pope, and no one undoubted Pope, by N. N's demonstration,) it is impossible the Roman can be the true Catholick and Apostolick Church; but this is easily made evident from the many doubts and uncertainties which of the several pretending Popes hath been the one undoubted Pope.

In the year 1378, upon the death of Gregory the eleventh, a grievousCaran. p. 823. The­odoric. de Niem. Bi­shop of Perda, Ʋrban's Secretary wrote the History of this Schism, so did Bonin. Segino in the Florentine History, &c. Friar John de Pineda, l. 22. c. 37. Sect. 3, 4. Schism began which continued more or less till Ann. 1414. the Italians created Ʋrban the sixth Pope, whoEngland. Almain, and Italy favoured him. resided at Rome; The French elected Clement the seventh, whoFrance, Castile, Arragon, and Catalonia owned him. betook [Page 75]himself to Avignion. The Abbot of St. Pedest endeavoured to prove Ʋrban was the true undoubted Pope: Joh. de Bigniaco, and the Council of Paris defended Clement's title, Ʋrban during this Schism had three Successors, Bon. the ninth, Innocent the seventh, and Gregory the twelfth: Clement had but one, Ben. the thirteenth, in Ann. 1409 a Council of Cardinals met at Pisa, who thought fit for the peace of the Church to depose the two surviving Popes and set up another; but for all the Cardi­nals could do to repair the breach, it proved wider, the two contesting Popes, Gregory the twelfth, and Ben. the thirteenth being unwilling to be so dishonourably ejected, kept their ground, till at last in Ann. 1414, the three Popes, the Italian, French, and Pisan, were Deposed by the Council of Constance, and Mar­tin the fifth was Created. All this while even in the judg­ment of observing learned Ramanists none could know which of the broken Heads was the true Head of the Church, and lawfulMarian de reb. Hisp. l. 18. c. 1. Naucler. Val. 2. Ge­ner. 46. for that every one of them had learned Patrons, id. ibid. Gener. 480. Successor to St. Peter. Azor Instit. Moral. part. 2. lib. 25. c. 14. saith, It was doubt­ful and uncertain which of the claiming Popes had the right title; Caran. saith, ut supra, It was not known who was the true Pope; and Bellarm. Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. So doth Aemil. de Gest. Franc. lib. 9. Aut. Sum. Hist. part. 3. tit. 22. c. 2. adds, It was not easy to be determined; and the famous Chancellor of Paris, John Lib de signis ruinae Eccl. Sign. of which the same is to be found in Otho Fris. Hist. l. 6. Baron. Tom. 11. Ann. 1044. n. 2. Gerson goes higher, The Church it self (saith he) was then so full of doubts in this case, that She could not know on what side, or party the Ro­man See was, unless God himself had been pleased to reveal it to her. It then being proved, that a doubtful Pope makes a doubtful Church, and that there hath been a doubtful Pope in the Romish Church, the conclusion is irrefragable, the Roman Church hath been for a long space of time a Doubtful Church, and by N. N.'s Logick and Peremptory Position, the Church of Rome was then a no Church.

2. There are many Doubts and uncertainties harboured in the Romish Church concerning the Church it self; as whether their Virtual Church (the Pope) be that Church they would commend to us, for it's well-grounded Credibility and Infalli­bility; or their Representative (a General Council), or the Es­sential (the diffused body of the Faithful all the world over), or a body compounded of some of these or any others. Some will be contented that the Pope and his Conclave should be that [Page 76] Infallible thing; others will have him to sit in the Assembly of the Bishops of his Province; others will go no less than he must Head a General Council to pronounce an Infallible Sen­tence. If it be put to the Vote, and most Voices must carry it, the Pope runs loose away with it; he hath the Patronage of the best and most Ecclesiastical Dignities and Preferments. But be it so for once, upon this a fresh Fry of Doubts and un­certainties appears in this very foundation of their Faith and Ʋnity, whether this Man be Pope or no? Whether Gregory the twelfth, or B [...]n. the thirteenth, or Alexander the fifth, or Martin the fifth. Let Martin be the Man, presently a new Covy of Doubts spring up, whether he be an Infallible Judg? and if so, whether as a Doctor or the Pope? If as Pope, whe­ther when he gives Laws de Concilio Fratrum, by the advice of his Colledg of Cardinals, passing his Decrees upon the Gates of St. Peter at Rome, and in Campo de Flori, or when he speaks E Cathedral, which is (as it is commonly interpreted) when he Proclaims his Decrees, however he be assisted, for a general reception with an intention to Teach and Govern the whole Church, though this be very uncertain? Let this also be presumed, another Set of Doubts is started, wherein is he Infallible? Whether in matters of Right, and Fact, or of Faith? The Jesuits of late will have him Universally Infallible upon all these accounts, as they determined at Clermont, Ann. 1661. but suppose with the soberer sort his Infallibility extends only to Definitions of Faith, yet another Doubt remains unsatisfied, Whether this his restrained Faith be conditional, or absolute? some conceive an absolute Infallibility is too high an intrench­ing upon God's Prerogative; but others of them will not have him tied to Conditions, viz. To observe the Order of the Primitive Church, and use such holy and needful means as God by his Son Jesus Christ hath appointed for the finding out the Truth: ForDe Pont. Rom. lib. 4. c. 2. Stapl. relect. c. 4. qu. 3. art. 3. conclus. 5. (say they) if Conditions be required to Perfect and Le­gitimate the Popes Definitions besides his own Act of decreeing them, the Faithful (which is very remarkable and apposite) would be Doubtful whether he had observed them or no, and so their Faith would be wavering, and so it must needs be if Doubts do the feat.

3. It is the Doctrine of their new-founded Church, that the intention of the Bishop or Priest Officiating is so necessary to any Sacrament, that without it none of them is perfected; but to receive the Sacraments from such of whom we can have [Page 77]no assurance, that their intentions be serious and sincere, (and there be many evident reasons and motives to perswade us the Priests are oft Formal in their Ministeries, and False in their intentions) is certainly to expose the reverence (in N. N.'s Language) of the Sacraments, and remedy of our Souls to a ma­nifest hazard. For we are informed by their own Historians, that in some Centuries the Clergy were so ignorant and wic­ked, that many of them knew not what to do; others cared not what they did. In what a perplexed condition would a prudent man be cast, who being married by a Popish Priest, soon after detected to be a Villain, should consider with him­self, very likely this wicked man had no Intention to marry him, or an Intention not to marry him. It is a wonder those Trent-Assemblers should be so rash, and yet so Magisterial in their Definition, when they would not determine what Inten­tion was necessary, because they could not agree about the efficacy of the Sacraments, it being impossible, there should be the same Intention of two who differ in their judgments concerning it. The common Salvo was, that the Intention to do as the Church doth was sufficient, but this satisfied not the scruple, because men [...]ffered in opinion what the Church is, and their opinions herein being different, their Intentions in ad­ministring the Sacraments would also prove different. To evade this, it was pretended, all the Priests had the same design; but as it is impossible for any to know the things (that is the pur­poses) of Man, save the Spirit of Man, which is in him, 1 Cor. 2.11. so it is unconceivable how they should have the same end and aim, who have different Judgments, Humours, Passions, and Interests. At last they were driven to this shift, perhaps there may be some such wretched Priest, yet this case is rare. To this the Bishop of Minori replied, would God (said he) that the case was rare, and that in this corrupt age we had not cause to doubt there were many: but suppose there are but a few, or one only; let a Knave Priest Baptize, who hath not an Intention to administer the true Baptism to a Child, who be­ing after a grown Man is created a Bishop of a great City, so that he hath Ordained a great part of the Priests in his Diocess, it must be said, that he being not Baptized, is not Ordained, nor they Ordained who are promoted by him—Behold Millions of Nullities of Sacraments by the malice of oneHistor. Council of. Trent. fol. 241. Priest in one Act only.

4. To give full measures of Doubts and uncertainties in the [Page 78]most mysterious act of their Religion; Dr. Holden Apendix of Schism, p. 445. Re­fert Dr. Ham. di­spatcher. Preface p. 14. averreth, All Roman Catholicks do believe and reverence the Sacrifice of the Mass as the most substantial Act of their Religion; but if it be demanded wherein the substance of this Sacrifice doth con­sist, no substantial Resolution can be expected from them: their Doubts and uncertainties about the Nature and Essence thereof are so cross and various, There are divers opinions concerning it, (saithAzor. l. 10. c. 9. or part 2. l. 2. c. 14. Azor.) There are six Acts of which it is doubted, in which one, or more of them the Essence of the Sacrifice con­sisteth, saithTom. 3. dist. 75. art. 1, 2. Suarez. Some place it in the one Act of Con­secration, but the doubters dispute against it; for, say they, Con­secration belongeth rather to the nature of a Sacrament than a Sacrifice, and every external Sacrifice (such as the Mass is) must be sensible, but the Conversion made by the words of Con­secration is not sensible, for the real change is not; and again, if the Act of Consecration, then the outward Elements only are the Hoast and matter offered, but we may not say the Species are the Hoast: others set it in the Oblation, but the dissenting Brethren oppose this, because Christ used no Sacrificial Act at his Last Supper; and if Christ did not, the Priest ought not, though some of them grant it belongs to the intergrity of the Sacrifice. But how the Trent-Divines were divided in their judg­ment herein, may be read, Hist. Counc. of Trent, fol. 544, &c. Some of them again conceive Consecration, Consumption, or Sumption to be the Essence: this others contradict, because then (say they) the Body and Blood of Christ must be destroyed, for that which is Offered in Sacrifice is to be destroyed, but Sumption can be no part thereof, because the Act of Recei­ving is not; for although Christ be not received after the Con­secration, yet is he truly said to be Sacrificed, and Doctors doubt whether Christ did receive in his last Supper, and the Priest receiving doth nothing in Christs person but his own: others stood for Fraction, but this the doubters easily disprove, for it is (say they) an Act purely Sacramental, not at all Sacrificial, and Fraction being before Consecration, the Substance of the Bread and Wine remaineth.

When N. N. hath solved all these Doubts, and satisfied all these Doubters, he may be more confident of the demonstra­tive Power of Doubts and uncertainties; in the mean time, he may apply them to his own Church in his own words, Mu­tatis mutandis.

Therefore the Romanists before they can prudently believe [Page 79]themselves to have true Faith, or be the Catholick Church, must clear all Doubts and uncertainties (not objected by Pro­testants, but started and pursued by their own Divines) con­cerning their Church, their Head of the Church, their Ordina­tions, and the most Substantial Act of their Religion, the Mass, for though any Person should not, &c.

7. N. N. goes one step forward, the step to Christian and Ca­tholick belief is, &c.

This hath nothing of usefulness to his Conclusion, unless he prove, that a Clergy not regularly ordained cannot believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith, &c. that the Protestant Church hath a doubtful Clergy, in which his attempts have hitherto been unsuccessful and unlucky to him and his Church. If his mean­ing be, the well-grounded Credibility of his Church is the foun­dation of Christian belief, this is to beg the Question, and is false; for Christian Faith is not an assent and adherence to the Objects thereof, upon the bare Testimony of the Church, but on that of God: neither is its warranty derived from the Church's Proposition, but Divine Revelation. True Faith is founded on the writings of Moses and the Prophets, of Christ and his Apostles, Eph. 2.20. which moved Durand thus to de­fine it, It is an habit whereby we assent to the Doctrines of the Scripture for the Authority of God revealing them.

But if he intend only, that the Church's Proposition is to her members the first motive and preparative of Faith, it will not be gainsaid: but then he must remember, that a prudent Chri­stian will not take the Church for well-groundedly credible, till he find by the Rule of Faith, She deserves to be so esteemed; for it is impossible the Church can appear so to him till he know the Faith it proposeth, which he cannot do but by applying it to the Rule; for every intellectual and moral habit must be sufficiently known before the Acts resulting from them can be predicated of any subject capable to exercise them. As I must know what Prudence is, before I can truly affirm of any man that he is Prudent.

8. That which N. N. mainly drives at is, to seduce the mem­bers of the Church of England from her Communion, and so­licite them to Apostate to Rome. To effect this, he took (as he conceived) a seasonable opportunity to perplex the minds of men with his Doubts and uncertainties, by reason of our late sad divisions. Then the Romanists bent all their forces to [Page 80]perswade easy seduceable tempers, This Church was either a dead, or Bishop of Chalcedon Survey, c. 2. Sect. 9. Dr. Holden, Anal. of Faith, saying the present State of the Pro­testant Church, consisting of Protestant Bishops, &c. and their Protestant Flock, not be­ing likely to continue long. no Church.

If this design prevailed with some crasy minds, they were as imprudent as the Romish Solicitors were impudent. For the Romish Church has suffered as Tragical and durable divisions, as This then did; for besides that long Schism formerly related, in Alexander the third's time a Schism lasted till fere eversa, &c. as Car. speaks, p. 794. That Church was at her last Gasp: and in this very juncture of time, their contests were so high, that their great Head of Unity was put to all his Pope-craft to smother them; the Disputes betwixt the Jansenists and Moli­nists were then so hot, that both Parties pressed a decision, and by consent referred the matter to the Pope, who because he did not understand the points in debate, would fain have declined it, pretending that his Predecessor Clement the eighth, after he had appointed Congregations to discuss the Articles, waved it, and commanded silence to both Parties (which plea­sed neither) and that he was an Old Man and had not studied Divinity: but both sides still moving for a hearing, because each aspersed the other with the guilt of Heresy, at last, be­ing overcome with importunity he condescended. But hear how the Infallible Judg determined the contest; at one Con­gregation he rebuked the Molinists for corrupting2 Con­gregation, July 8. St. Au­gustin, at another for urging the Authority of the Schoolmen, and not producing the Evidences of Scripture, Councils, 10 Con­gregation. and Fathers. In all probability the Jansenists had the better of the day; but it proved otherwise, the Pope passed his Sen­tence in favourAnn. 1653, whom be­fore he had branded and para­digmatized with Insin­cerity. of the Molinists. All that can be said in excuse of this rash resolution, was the most Christian King commanded the dull Canonist to dispatch, vvhich so startled him, that he durst trifle no longer; but the main reason vvas, he was at that time so busily bent upon his Papal and Donna's concernments, that he was not at leisure to attend the serious discussion of that too hard Controversy for his soft Head. For then he and his Propagators were consulting how to manage Campanella's Project, in fomenting our intestine broils to re­duce this Kingdom into a State. This is certain, his Nuncio Joh. [...]lench. mot. nuper in Angl. par. 2. p. 7. & inde. Bapt. Renuncino, after his arrival in Ireland endeavoured [Page 81]the destruction of all that stood for the King and the English Interest, animating the Rebels to the most villainous outrages; and because two Noble persons of the Roman Communion would not be perswaded by him to join with the Rebels, he Excommu­nicated them. This was not all, the Pope by the instigation of the Barbarini's had another design on foot, as Abbot Gualdi p. 143. relates, even to expel his Catholick King out of his Dominions in Naples upon Ma's Anello's Rebellion, to add it to the Triple Crown. All is Fish that comes to St. Peter's Suc­cessors Net; if the Kings be Guelphs, their Kingdoms are Gi­belins; if they be Catholicks, their Crowns are Hereticks. It is the Popes business to determin emergent Controversies, but upon forced put, his main work is to rule over Nations, to rout out, &c. Jer. 1.10. as his Parasites have prophaned that Text. But as the Pope and his Propagators failed in his Enterprises, so N. N. and his Comrades were deceived in their design. For though some were gulled with these Holy Frauds, yet in that levity of disposition and easiness of change, they did not act ac­cording to the common received measures of Prudence: which is, to stay where we are, till we know where to be better. For this Church at the worst was much better than that they re­volted to; this was a Distressed Church, that a Depraved; this had Scars in the Face, that Ulcers in the Heart; this Wounded in the Skin, that Rotten in the Vitals; this in it's Constitution Orthodox and Sound, that Heretical and Corrupt. For to state the case between the Church of England, and that of Rome impartially, the Quaere will be, Whether for some defects in Rituals (be they really such or only pretended) it be more prudent to desert a Church free from Schism, Heresy, and Idolatry, at least less subject to a suspition of any of these, or to lapse to a Church most deeply Guilty, or most justly pre­sumed to be so in all these Carnalities and Corruptions. If Prudence must resolve the Quaere, the issue and verdict will be, It is easier to remain in the Church of England than to Prose­lyte to Rome; for no Prudent man will precipitate himself into more, more apparent, and more real danger for fear of a less, less evident and more remote danger. This only re­mains to be proved, that the Church of Rome is Guilty, or justly presumed to be so, of dangerous Innovations and Cor­ruptions, which will be evidenced by these two Conclusions con­stringently asserted.

1. The Church of Rome as it is now ordered, and hath been since the times of Julius the second, and Leo the tenth, at least by the Pope and his Propagators in the Court there­of, hath chopped and changed the Apostolical Rule of Faith, by Composing a new Creed, or which is as bad, hath clog­ged and charged the Catholick Creeds with new-patched Ad­ditionals, which She hath defined to be Essentials of Faith necessary to be believed by all Christians in order to their Salvation.

2. This Church so managed hath depraved and subverted the Catholick and Apostolick Government and Dicipline, by set­ting up her Bishop as the Ʋniversal Monarch and Pastor of the Church, claiming and challenging to him an unlimited Su­premacy over he whole Body of Christ, and exercising this Power by Excommunicating full three parts of the Catholick Church, for not submitting thereto.