infallible and the Mistress of all other Churches that there is a Purgatory with the rest of those Doctrines which they embrace and we reject Nay these opinions with their consequences rather tend to make men much worse than otherwise they would have been Some of them make them more loose and careless in the leading of their lives and some make them most cruel and uncharitable to such as differ from them yea render them many times disobedient to their rulers and furious disturbers of the peace by Plots and Treasons and Rebellions for the advancing of their cause True Christianity puts men upon no such courses but these are the natural effects of Popery as has often been verified by sad experience L. I understand you well and am fully perswaded that we in our Church do embrace all those Christian Doctrines that tend to the promoting of good life and do retain none that are an hindrance to it But what say you to their objections against Calvin and Luther who as my Author says were very wicked men and strange stories he tells of them out of Bolsec and other Writers of their Church T. To this I answer that it sufficiently appears how bad their cause is which must be maintain'd by the most odious lies and forgeries For there are no Books in the world less to be credited than those which their Monks and Priests have written in praise of those they have Canonized for Saints and in dispraise of such as they have damned for Hereticks making the former somewhat more than Angels and the latter worse than Devils But as to Calvin and Luther some of the more ingenuous even of their own Church have given a fairer character of them than their lying Bolsec and such Authors And had they but been as zealous for Popery as they were against it no doubt but they had past amongst them for great Saints with all their faults But in the mean time were they really as bad as they falsely accuse them to be yet are we little or nothing concerned herein since they were not the Reformers of our Church Nor yet if they had is it the goodness of this or that person which we are obliged to defend but the truth of our Doctrine and the lawfulness and necessity of our Reformation Thus they make a great out-cry against Henry the Eighth what a bad man he was and what ill designs he had in throwing off the Popes Supremacy which was the most he did toward the Reformation but let his designs be what they would the thing it self was justifiable and good VVhat if a bad Emperor upon carnal designs should have supprest Heathenism and promoted Christianity as Constantine himself was accused by some is this any dishonour to the Christian Religion But little cause have Papists of all men to talk of ill instruments whilst they may remember from what a Trayterous Murderer and Usurper the Pope first received the title of Universal Bishop for which he had been long quarrelling with the Bishop of Constantinople And however they slander Calvin and Luther we might with much more reason and truth object what kind of creatures multitudes of their Popes have been whom they own as Heads of their Church even such monsters of men for all manner of impiety filthiness and cruelty as the world hath scarce ever heard of the like And this we have from those of their own Church who have written their Lives and their greatest Champions such as Bellarmine and Baronius cannot deny it L. But it s further objected against Calvin and Luther and the first Reformers that they never wrought miracles to shew they had a commission from God T. Our first Reformers never pretended to bring in any new Religion only they cast out Popish Innovations which had corrupted and defaced it and for this they needed no extraordinary commission from heaven nor any miracles to warrant the same For they preached no other but the same old Religion which was taught by Christ and his Apostles and was abundantly confirmed by the miracles which they wrought long ago And with us the Reformation was begun and carried on in a just and regular manner by our Rulers in Church and State who had full authority to make the same even as the Kings and High-Priests of old had to reform any abuses and corruptions which at any time were crept into the Iewish Church And as these needed no new commission from Heaven no new miracles to authorize them to rectifie disorders and reform the Church according to the rules of Moses's Law no more did our Reformers need them for the removing of those errors and superstitions which had by degrees been brought in contrary to our Saviours Gospel L. I see no reason indeed why miracles should be expected from them who only cast out new inventions and keep fast to the old Christian Religion which hath already been confirmed by so many and great miracles But yet my Author says that in their Church they have had miracles wrought in all ages such as curing the blind and deaf raising the dead and casting out of Devils which he accounts to make mightily for the honour of their Saints and of the Church to which they belong T. In the Primitive times indeed such miracles were wrought for proving of the Christian Doctrine that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and all that he taught most certainly true and this Doctrine so confirmed is the Religion which we at this day do openly profess in our Church But then I utterly deny that ever such miracles were wrought to prove the truth of Popish Doctrins properly so called as of Transubstantiation Pargatory Invocation of Saints c. for these were never taught by Christ or his Apostles and therefore could not receive confirmation from the miracles of their working As to any that are pretended to be done in the Church of Rome for the attesting of these they are meer cheats and forgeries or lying wonders agreeable to the nature of those false Doctrines which they are designed to confirm And though your Author talks of healing the sick raising the dead c. I can hear of no such thing done by any of them amongst us whatever they may pretend to in Popish Countries where it s an easie matter for cunning Priests to impose upon credulous people But were indeed any such miracles wrought for the proof of Popish Doctrines one would think they should be done amongst those they call Hereticks who stand in need of such arguments for their conviction rather than amongst their own people who need them not Great Stories they often tell of their casting out of Devils and for this knack are their Priests mightily magnified by their deluded followers and prefer'd before the Ministers of our Church who pretend to no such matter But that this is a gross cheat seems plain enough from hence that what their Priests pretend to in this kind for all that ever I could
their case seems most pitiable who through the disadvantage of their education want due means of instruction and what allowances our gracious God will make on that and the like accounts is fittest for us to leave to his own infinite wisdom Only let us be careful to regulate our own practices by the plain rule of Gods holy Word which through his favour we so plentifully enjoy L. What you say shall teach me more charity to those of them that are sincere than they will allow to us But I do still more and more perceive how little reason there is for my entring into communion with that Church in which there is so great hazard of Salvation even no more than for my venturing into a Pest-house full of infected persons because it 's possible some of them may have so much strength of nature as to overcome that dangerous distemper T. The case is much the same CHAP. V. Of some particular points in difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome and first of the Popes Supremacy L. HAving now received so full satisfaction in this first great point concerning the true Catholick Church what it is and who are the members of it and being upon good grounds firmly perswaded that the Church of England is a very sound part of this Catholick Church in whose communion therefore by Gods grace I hope to live and die I would in the next place gladly hear you discourse of some of those particular points wherein chiefly the difference lyes betwixt us and the Church of Rome For they alledg many plansible reasons and sometimes quote Scripture for those opinions of theirs which we reject as Popery and therefore I would gladly be furnisht with solid and good answers to these their Allegations T. Most readily shall I afford you my assistance herein Only let me premise that suppose in this or that particular opinion you should fancy their Church had the truth on her side yea though it really was so yet is this no sufficient reason why you should go over to their communion since from what has been said you may discern that their Church has no manner of jurisdiction over ours which we shall presently make more plain and you cannot lawfully desert your own Church meerly because you apprehend there is some error commonly received in it whilst you have liberty to hold communion with it without owning and professing that error And though for my own part I declare I do not know so much as any one material point of difference wherein the Church of Rome has the truth on her side yet this I speak with respect to those who in some particular cases may be of another mind and afterward may have occasion to make use of it accordingly But now proceed to those several points wherein you desire satisfaction L. I will so and shall herein follow the method in which I find them laid down in this little Book to which I have hitherto had recourse And the first thing here mention'd is concerning one Pope in the Church viz. the Bishop of Rome who is they say to be own'd as the visible Head and Governour of the whole Church under Christ. T. This is indeed the most fundamental point of the Romish faith by which chiefly they stand distinguisht from all other Churches and as such I have often upon occasion mention'd it already and have told you that there is not a word of it in the Apostles Creed which is the summ of the Christian Faith nor yet in the Holy Scriptures whence that Creed was taken which may be sufficient prejudice against it but pray what do they alledg in proof of it L. Both this my Author and others commonly plead that as there is one Emperour in an Empire one King in a Kingdom one Master in a family so there should be one Pope in the Church T. I think they should rather infer the quite contrary that as there is a Master in every Family a King in every Kingdom c. so in every Diocess there should be a Bishop and in every Nation a Primate or chief Bishop or else a Synod of Bishops from whom there should lye no appeal to any foreign Bishop whatsoever It would indeed have look'd a little more like an argument for their purpose if they could have said that as there is one Emperor over all the Kings and Kingdoms of the world so there ought to be one Pope over all Bishops and Churches But as it appears impossible for one man to govern the whole world so neither is it much easier for one Bishop to govern all the Christians in the world especially if all Nations should embrace Christianity as every good man desires they should But to let pass their little similies and idle fancies do you think if it had been a matter of such necessity to salvation as Papists say it is to own the Pope as Christs Vicar and visible Head of the Catholick Church do you think I say that our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles would not have told us of it and have given strict command to all Christians to obey him and to seek to his Infallible judgment in all doubts and controversies and submit to his authority for the composing of all differences whereas we now find not one syllable to this purpose either in the Gospel or Epistles but Christians are exhorted to obey their own Rulers both Sacred and Civil and to take the Doctrine delivered by our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles as the Infallible Rule of their faith and manners and no other Head of the Church do we read of but our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to whom all power is given in Heaven and Earth as he himself tells us Matt. 28. 18. But he no where tells us that he hath transfer'd all this power to any mortal man nor setled any person as his Vicar and Deputy-Governour of all the Christian world L. Yes they say Christ gave this priviledg to Saint Peter stiling him the Rock on which he would build his Church and giving him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Matt. 16 18 19. and from Saint Peter they would have this power to be derived to his Successors the Bishops of Rome T. This is the Text which they commonly bring for their purpose but with how little reason may appear at the very first sight whilst neither is here confer'd upon St. Peter any such power as to be Ruler over all the Christian Church nor the least mention made of any priviledge whatever to be convey'd from him to his Successors at Rome or any other where As to the Rock here spoken of many of the Ancients understand by it the Doctrine which St. Peter had now profest that great fundamental article of the Christian Faith that Iesus was the Christ the Son of the living God But let us suppose it to be meant of his person as he was to be a Preacher of this Doctrine yet
is this no more than what we find said of the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. 20. where Christians are said to be built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Christ himself being the chief corner-stone that is plainly that these Christians were establisht in the belief of that Doctrine which had been more obscurely revealed by the Prophets and of which the Apostles were the chief Preachers being the founders of the Christian Church having received their authority from Jesus Christ the Supreme Ruler and only Head of this his Church To the same purpose you may see Rev. 21. 14. where the twelve Apostles are expresly called twelve foundations So that as St. Peter made his confession in the name of the rest in like manner what was said to him belongs to the rest also which is most plain from Ioh. 20. 23. where the power of the Keys is given to them all that their just sentence delivered on Earth shall be ratified in Heaven and the same doubtless belongs to all their Successors the Bishops and Pastors of the Church whilst they proceed according to the rules of the Gospel L. If the former Text be not sufficient they have another ready to produce for the same purpose viz. Ioh. 21. 15 16 17. where Saint Peter is commanded by our Blessed Saviour to feed his lambs and sheep that is they say to rule over all Christians every where both small and great high and low T. They may say what they please but the Text is very far from saying or intimating any such thing With such corrupt glosses they may force any Text to serve their turn as from those words of our Saviour to St. Peter Luk. 22. 32. I have pray'd for thee that thy faith fail not that he should not utterly fall away from Christ notwithstanding his denial of him hence they would collect that St. Peter had a promise of Infallibility and this too must belong to the Pope in all ages as his Successor But as to the Text you last named would any honest impartial Reader ever imagin that because St. Peter is so earnestly charged as the rest of the Apostles in other places are to be very diligent in Preaching the Gospel in gathering and feeding the flock of Christ that he is thereby made Ruler over the Christian world and the Bishops of Rome after him invested in the same power and jurisdiction whilst there is not a syllable said of any such power nor any mention of Successors Or if these had been concern'd yet is there any intimation given that those at Rome should have this priviledg rather than the Bishops of Antioch where they will grant St. Peter to have been Bishop long before he was at Rome L. These things I confess will very hardly be drawn from that Text. T. So little countenance doth either that or any other Text give to their pretences that it would seem more reasonable and modest for them to wave all talk of Scripture in this case and depend barely upon tradition with which they use to make much noise and yet this if truly searched into will do them little service as I may after shew At present let it suffice to add that these Texts they quote were not understood in that sense they put upon them either by St. Peter himself or the rest of the Apostles no nor by the Christian Church for many hundred years after Whatever precedency St. Peter might have by way of honour yet do we no where find him claiming any power over his Brethren the Apostles nor does he once mention any such matter in either of his Epistles but stiles himself as the rest did a Servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ. And when he speaks to the Elders or Bishops of the Church he does not command them as the Supreme Ruler of all Bishops but with great meekness exhorts them as a brother stiling himself an Elder 1 Pet. 5. 1. and his exhortation to them is at the third vers that they should not carry themselves as Lords over Gods heritage not proudly affect any undue superiority over them but make themselves examples to the flock that so they might receive their reward from the Lord Jesus whom he stiles the chief Shepherd never adding that under Christ he himself was to be reckoned chief Shepherd here upon Earth And if it should be lookt upon as only a piece of modesty in St. Peter a vertue which his pretended Successors have had little share of that he would say nothing of his own great power let it be further considered that as no such power was given him by our blessed Saviour when there was a contention amongst the Apostles who should be greatest so neither was it ever ascribed to him by any Apostle either before Christs death or after it There is no appearance of it in that assembly of the Apostles and Elders Act. 15. 6. when St. Paul writes to the Romans he says nothing of this great priviledg belonging to that See And when he writes to the Corinthians and reproves them for their factions and sidings whilst some were for Cephas others for Apollos c. by which Cephas it's plain must be meant St. Peter yet he says not a word on this so fair an occasion to enjoyn their preferring Cephas before all others but exhorts them to peace and quietness in their subjection to Christ and his Ministers without being puft up for one against another yea writing to the Galatians he tells them that upon a just occasion he withstood Saint Peter to the face saying nothing by way of Salvo to his supreme jurisdiction To conclude no where do we read in all the New Testament of any other Head of the whole Church but Jesus Christ himself as he is expresly stiled Col. 1. 18. Ephes. 1. 22. and in many other places Nor would I have named any but that I remember I once met with an ignorant Papist who quoting 1 Cor. 12. 21. The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you would thence prove that Christ could not be the Head of the Church because he may say he has no need of us as if because that place was not meant of him no other was But it 's no great wonder to hear a Papist arguing so weakly out of Scripture in which they are so little conversant L. And no greater wonder is it that they have so little regard for that which does them so little service and particularly I perceive they have no help from it for the confirming this great article of the Popes Supremacy But though the Holy Scripture does so little befriend their cause yet I have often heard them brag much of Councils and Fathers how these do all with one consent acknowledg and assert this his Supremacy which though I am not able to disprove yet I am very backward to take it on their bare word because I find such ill dealing in their quotation of Scripture and
articles of Faith so that no Church on Earth has any power to coin and impose new ones not revealed in the Scripture which I say acquaints us with all things needful to Salvation And this I am sure is plainly enough taught in the Scripture it self 2 Tim. 3. 15 16 17. The Holy Scriptures they then enjoy'd viz. the Writings of the Old-Testament are said to be able to make him wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Iesus being profitabâ—e to all things necessary thereto as you may there find it fully exprest So Joh. 20. 31. These things are written that you might believe that Iesus is Christ the Son of God and that believing you might have life through his name So that if we believe in Jesus Christ according to all that is written of him in the Gospel this Faith if it produce Obedience will certainly procure everlasting Life And indeed our own reason may well tell us that since the very design of the Holy Scripture is to reveal to us the whole Will of God in order to our Eternal happiness surely there is revealed in them all that is necessary to this end Can we imagine that those Holy Men who committed to Writing the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour with an account of his Life and Death his Resurrection and Ascension c. that they would omit any thing which was necessary for us to know and believe in order to our Salvation when they wrote these things purposely that we might be saved Especially if we consider that they have given us a very large account of things much more than was of absolute necessity And in such abundance would they leave out things more necessary than those they have Recorded The necessary Articles of Faith are comprized in a little room and have generally been thought to be comprehended in the Apostles Creed This was the judgement of the Primitive Fathers and many Learned men of the Church of Rome have acknowledged as much Now the Articles of this Creed I hope are all contained in the Holy Scripture being there both largely exprest and frequently inculcated So that the ground-work of the Reformation remains firm and unshaken viz. that the Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to Salvation and therefore those new Articles which the Roman Church hath invented besides yea contrary to these Scriptures ought by no means to be admitted L. The Doctrine of our Church concerning the Sufficiency of Holy Scripture seems very plain and the inference you make from it clear and natural But the Sixth Argument will give you occasion to discourse further on this Subject For my Author says it will be for confirmation of his former Proposition and thus it runs We would fain have Luther Calvin and other Sectaries shew where they find written that the Gospel according to St. Matthew is Holy Scripture rather than the Gospel of Nicodemus which seeing they cannot do and yet they believe too the Gospel of St. Matthew as to Holy Scripture they must needs confess that they believe some things which are not contain'd in Scripture T. His former Argument truly stands in much need of confirmation but is like to receive little from this which he brings to strengthen and enforce it Since if we grant him the whole of it I cannot see that it will do any service to his cause or any prejudice to ours For who ever denied but that we believe some yea many things which are not contain'd in Holy Scripture We believe there is such a Country as France and such a City in it as Paris though there be nothing of them in Scripture Or which is nearer to our purpose we believe there was such a Man in the World as Iulius Casar and that the Book which goes under his name called Casars Commentaries was indeed written by him This we believe on account of the current Tradition and constant opinion of the World from his time down to this present Age there being no ground to doubt of the truth of it since all circumstances concurr to render it credible Even thus to come to the Case in hand we believe the Gospel according to St. Matthew and the other Sacred Books to be Written by those persons whose names they bear in the Title as Authors of them because this hath been the constant judgement of the whole Church of God from the very Age wherein these Books were Written to this present time And on the other hand we have good reason to reject a Book pretended to be written by Nicodemus because none such was admitted by the Primitive Church which must needs have known of it if any such Book there had been For this reason it was never own'd as Canonical by the Catholick Church in any Age since nor therefore do we now receive it as such Where now I beseech you lies the strength of this his mighty Argument L. I confess I am so far from discerning the strength of it that I do not well understand what he aims at by it T. I 'le tell you then in a few words He would by his way of arguing force us to acknowledge that Holy Scripture does not contain all things necessary to Salvation but that there are some Traditions of the Church to be received with equal reverence and esteem as particularly that such and such Books are Canonical Scripture others not and that it is on account of the authority of the Church of Rome that these Traditions are to be received and therefore lastly they hence infer that all other Traditions which their Church proposes to us are by the same reason to be received without doubting or disputing This is their common way of arguing and this Author here and in other places insinuates the same But now to shew further how little of force or solid reason there is in this smooth and subtle talk pray consider with me seriously two or three things which I shall suggest to you L. I promise you my most diligent attention T. 1 Then we must ever carefully distinguish betwixt the tradition or delivery of the holy Scripture it self from one generation to another and those other traditions whether Doctrines or customes beside the holy Scripture which yet are by the Roman Church made of equal authority with it the former we own but not the latter For we most readily grant that there hath been a tradition of the holy Scripture as that which was written by such and such men inspired by the Holy Ghost from one age to another ever since the time of its first writing and so hath it been brought down to us in these days And those Books which the Primitive Church embraced as thus Sacred and Canonical and so delivered them to succeeding ages these do we embrace with all reverence and submission as the rule both of faith and manners containing the whole will of God in order to our salvation But then for this very reason do we utterly deny
that there are any other traditions of equal necessity to salvation which are not contain'd in these holy Scriptures 2 Note well that though the Church of God hath been a most faithful preserver of these holy Scriptures and hath carefully transmitted them from one generation to another yet it is not the Church which gives authority to the Scriptures as if she by any power in her could make that to be the word of God which is not so or unmake that which is indeed so No but the Church received for the word of God that which was delivered by holy men inspired by the Holy Ghost who gave full evidence of this their inspiration both by the nature of that Doctrine which they delivered and by the mighty miracles which God enabled them to work for the attesting the truth of this Doctrine both preached and written Now the Church which was in being in the first ages when these holy men committed their Doctrine to writing was a most competent witness of their writing those Books which go under their names and accordingly received them as the Sacred writings of such persons divinely inspired and so convey'd them to the next generation Thus the Iewish Church received the Books of Moses and the Prophets and thus the Primitive Christian Church received the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles as also the Books of the Old Testament both upon the tradition of the Iewish Church and also upon the authority of our Blessed Saviour who own'd and approved of the same And thus the Books both of the Old Testament and the New have ever since by the good Providence of God been preserved in the Christian Church and handed down from one generation to another and so shall be we need not question to the end of the world And this same tradition of the Church whereby these holy Books are distinguished from all others and carefully delivered by the former age to the next following this we give all just regard to and do freely grant that this is of singular use for our information what Books belong to the Canon of Scripture what not and by this tradition we learn that this Book was written by this man under whose name it goes and another by that as for instance this by St. Matthew that by St. Mark c. But whilst the Church thus bears testimony to the Scripture to which testimony we give all due regard she does not I say give authority to it For there is a vast difference betwixt these two It 's the Kings hand and seal which gives authority to a writing containing suppose a grant of this or that priviledg but some credible persons his Secretaries or others who were witnesses to his signing or sealing of that writing may give testimony to it and so procure it to be own'd as authentick Thus the holy Scriptures which are recommended to us by the testimony of the Church derive their authority from God only who hath set to his seal that they are true as I have said both by the miracles that were wrought to confirm the Doctrine contained in them by the holiness of that Doctrine and many other circumstances relating thereto 3 Yet again take notice when I say we give such regard to the testimony of the Church I do not hereby mean the Roman Church as distinct from all others no by no means but the truly Catholick even the whole Christian Church whether of the East or West the North or South For this hath been the constant tradition of the whole Church in all ages ever since the Apostles that these Books were written by men divinely inspired and were given to be the rule of our faith and manners If some doubt was for a while made concerning a Book or two yet when these doubts were removed they were received into the Canon with the rest And this hath been the opinion not only of the Catholick Church but of most Hereticks and Schisinaticks also whose testimony here may be of great force whilst they could not but own the authority of Scripture even though they were confuted by it Yea to this I may add the acknowledgment of Heathens themselves or of Iews who lived in those times that the Books which go under the names of St. Matthew St. Paul c. were indeed written by them Thus we have a general current tradition not only of the Roman but of all other Churches in the world that such and such Books belong to the Canon of Scripture and this is commonly granted by Hereticks and Schismaticks themselves And even Heathens and Infidels who wrote against the Christian Religion have own'd these Books to be written by those persons whose names they bear who were eminent in that age for the propagating of our holy Religion So that we have a much more famous and uncontroulable tradition for it than that the Books which are said to be written by Tully Virgil c. are indeed their works which I think no body makes any doubt of Lastly from what hath been said you may infer that though we give just regard to this current tradition of the Universal Church by which these holy Books are convey'd to us as Canonical Scripture yet it does not in the least follow that we are therefore obliged to embrace all those Doctrines and practices of the Roman Church which she would impose upon us under the venerable name of Traditions of the Catholick Church whilst they are for the most part only the private opinions and usages of their own Church many of them of very late date and expresly contrary to the judgment and practice of the Christian Church in the first and purest ages of it as well as to the holy Scripture it self So that there is no more reason for our embracing these traditions of the Romish Church than there was for our Saviour and his Apostles to receive all the traditions of the Iewish Church by many of which they had made void the Commandments of God After all then Tradition rightly understood makes nothing against but apparently for us For if there be any other Tradition as universal as this of the Books of Holy Scripture our Church readily embraces it as before has been exprest And we will own that the summ of our Faith is brought down by Tradition viz. in the very form of baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and more largely in the Apostles Creed wherein this form is explain'd We grant also that at first the Christian Faith was thus planted by the Preaching of the Gospel before the Books of the New Testament were written But now this our Faith is most plainly and fully contained in these Sacred Books whereas the additional Doctrines of the Romish Church are no more brought down by Universal Tradition than they are contain'd in the Holy Scripture which we assert to be the only sure and perfect rule of Faith and manners and upon all accounts much
more fit to be so than bare tradition which they of the Church of Rome so vainly boast of But for your further satisfaction in this point I shall refer you to a most solid and rational discourse concerning the Rule of Faith done by a Reverend Divine of our Church and shall now hasten to what remains L. His seventh Argument is this It cannot be shewn that for these 1500 years there hath been any Catholick who held that the Pope of Rome was Antichrist or that did revile and rail at the holy Sacrifice of the Mass or lastly that did blame Invocation of Saints the usual praying for the Dead and such like works of piety belonging to Faith and Religion which the whole world hath laudably practised and reverenced for 1500 years Wherefore it is most evident that Lutherans Calvinists c. do most wickedly when they dare revile such things T. These points have all of them been sufficiently discust already I have told you how one of their Popes did assert him to be the forerunner of Antichrist who should assume the title of Universal Bishop which his Successors have now a long time done whilst they claim a Supremacy over the Universal Church But which is more material I have she-wn how contrary the Doctrines and practices wherein Popery consists are to the nature and design of true Christianity and therefore may well enough be stiled Antichristian I have shewn that there is not properly a Sacrifice in the Communion but a commemoration of Christs Sacrifice only once offered and have also manifested that there is neither Scripture Reason nor good Antiquity to be pleaded on behalf of that Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead which are now used in the Church of Rome As for railing and reviling I would not be guilty of it 'T is enough to disprove their errors and renounce them to shew the falshood and mischiefs of them and this I hope is not to be accounted railing In a word whatever he pretends no Christian Writers for four or five hundred years after our Saviour did assert the Bishop of Rome to be Christs Vicar on Earth and under him supreme Governour of the whole Christian Church Nor did they teach or practise such Invocation of Saints and praying for the Dead as are now in use amongst Papists And upon this account our Church hath with great reason and religion reformed her self from these and the like corrupt innovations L. Doubtless she has so and the weakness of his Arguments do the more assure me of it His last is nothing else but a repetition of what he has often said viz. That the first Authors of Christian faith in Germany Spain England c. have acknowledged and brought in no other faith nor have our forefathers received any other Faith than the Holy Catholick Roman which self-same we have received from our forefathers and have hitherto conserved Whence he concludes that Sectaries his common name for all Protestants have invented new opinions of their own and presented them to the people as a certain rule of Faith and the pure word of God and that consequently they are liable to the curse denounced against those who preach a new Gospel nor can ever hope to please God and attain eternal happiness being destitute of the right faith whereupon he advises his Scholar considering the nearness of death and the eternity of Hell torments to prefer the salvation of his Soul before all sublunary things T. So far his advice is good but 't is a wonder that any man who pretends to have a regard to his own or others souls and believe there is an Hell provided for such as make and love a lye dare be guilty of such notorious forgeries and calumnies as are contain'd in this his charge against Protestants as if they had proposed some new opinion of their own devising for a rule of Faith whilst it 's well known that we make the holy Word of God to be the only certain rule of it And even he himself a little before accused us for saying that nothing is to be believed but what is contained in Gods Word that is nothing as necessary to salvation as I have before granted and proved This he calls the ground-work of the Reformation and we do not deny it And that same Christian Faith which is contain'd in these holy Scriptures at large and briefly summ'd up in the Creed is that same Faith which the first planters of Christian Religion taught and established in our own and other Countries and this self-same do we retain to this day If then the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed as we commonly call it be a new invention so is our faith but if these contain an Abridgement of the truly ancient Catholick Faith then his charging us with new inventions is a most false and malicious slander so far are we from it that a great reason why we reject their Doctrines of the Supremacy and Infallibility of their Pope or Church with the rest of their Errors is because these are new inventions of their own and no part of the ancient Faith Wherefore instead of pronouncing the heavy sentence of damnation upon others which is true Popish charity it behoves them well to consider how they can exempt themselves from the curse threatned to those who preach another Gospel than the Apostles did which in some sort they do whilst they impose the Traditions of their Church of which the Apostles never spoke a syllable as of equal certainty and authority with the Holy Scriptures themselves But I am tired with his Arguments which still lead me so oft to repeat the same things Though I shall not repent it if it any way tend to give you more satisfaction L. I thank God I am well satisfied with your discourse and am now fully convinced that there is small strength in these his Arguments which he pretends to be such pregnant and unanswerable things But after all there remains something which he calls an evident demonstration that the Roman Catholick Church hath been and still is the true Church which I shall desire you to take into examination T. Yes very willingly and I doubt not but we shall soon find how little it deserves the name of a demonstration Though if it be possible for him to produce any thing that has an appearance of truth and reason sure he will now do it in the last place that it may leave the greater impression upon his Reader Let us hear then what he says CHAP. IV. An Answer to a pretended Demonstration That the Roman Church is the true Catholick Church L. THIS Demonstration which he so much boasts of is taken he says from one Dr. Baily who it seems revolted from our Church to that of Rome and thus it runs It will not be denied but that the Church of Rome was once a most excellent flourishing Mother-Church This Church could not cease to be such but she must fall
he hath no need of us nor receives any benefit from us when we have done all that was required we are to account our selves unprofitable servants that we have nothing but what we received from him that though death be properly the wages of sin yet eternal life is the free gift of God through Iesus Christ c. But yet on the other hand considering the gracious promise which God hath made to all true believers that continue patient in well-doing on this account we may safely grant that an holy life shall be most richly rewarded with everlasting happiness and good men in a large and more modest sense of the word may be said to deserve it in that they have by Gods grace performed the condition on which it was promised In this sense the Ancients commonly used the words merit and reward So in holy Scripture we read of a recompence of reward though such a one as is of grace not strict debt and true Christians are said to be worthy of this happiness Rev. 3. 4. and to have a right to enter into life that is according to the tenour of Gods gracious Covenant Revel 22. 14. Wherefore if they of the Romish Church will be satisfied with such concessions as these as perhaps the more modest of them will there need be no contention about these matters And some very learned and judicious Writers of our own and other Reformed Churches when they have come to state the controversie clearly and impartially have freely acknowleded that the difference betwixt us in t ese and some other points is not so great as some hot Disputants on both sides would make it However I shall not further enlarge on them for it is not my business to display all the Errors of the Roman Church nor indeed is it in my power much less do I desire to aggravate things and make any of their opinions seem worse than really they are But my design all along hath been to give you such a true and just account of things as might fix you in communion with the Church of England and preserve you from any inclination or thought of going over to Rome and that in brief for such plain reasons as these even because our Church is a sound part of the Catholick Church and has full authority over you by the Laws of God and the Land and since here all things necessary to Salvation may be enjoy'd and nothing is required that may be an hindrance to it Whereas on the other hand the Church of Rome has no jurisdiction over us in England nor ought to have and does also propose most unjust terms of Communion with which you cannot comply without apparent hazard of your Salvation since she requires all her members to embrace and profess gross Errors for Divine Truths and enjoyns the doing of many things as necessary duties which are very heinous sins against Gods express commands L. These reasons are indeed both plain and weighty such that I can easily understand and do feel their strength and by Gods assistance shall ever remain under the power of them T. I hope you will so And since you are so sensible of their truth and force give me leave before we part to beseech you always so to keep up the sense of them that you may thereby be secured from all attempts that may be made upon you not only by those of the Church of Rome but by such as are commonly called Protestant Dissenters though indeed by their separating principles and practices I think they dissent from all Protestant Churches whatever Let none of these then ever draw you into the way of separation from the Church of England under pretence of bringing you into purer societies where the word is more powerfully preached and Sacraments more purely administred L. I hope I shall never be wrought upon by such pretences as these for whilst in our Church we enjoy all things needful to Salvation and have nothing sinful imposed upon us surely it ought to be esteemed a very pure and sound Church in whose communion I ought to remain Nor can I see the least reason why I should disobey my Superiours and break the peace of this Church and separate from it to seek after I know not what greater purity in this corner or that T. Keep you to this and you will not easily be shaken For let Papists or Separatists object what they please most certain it is that in our Church the Gospel of Christ is most plainly and powerfully preached the holy Sacraments purely administred and the Worship of Almighty God gravely and solemnly performed our Prayers and Praises offered up to the true God in the name of Jesus Christ framed according to the will of God revealed in his Word and exprest in our own Tongue that so all the people may easily understand them be duly affected with them and heartily say Amen to them What then should hinder any good Christian from joyning with a Church so well constituted in a constant reverent attendance upon the Word Prayers and Sacraments which may with so much freedom and lawfulness here be enjoyed L. I am so far from knowing any reason to the contrary that I think we have cause to embrace this priviledg with great readiness and joy and with most hearty thankfulness to Almighty God for his singular mercy in affording us these blessed advantages above most other Nations in the world T. And yet you shall often hear some people either ignorantly or maliciously crying out of Popery Superstition Will-worship and I know not what which ought not to move you in the least L. There 's no reason to be moved with bare noise and ill words whilst I know nothing amongst us that deserves them T. It 's plain there is not for when you come to examine the matter their greatest objections against us are that we have Forms of Prayer there were more reason to object it as a fault if we had none that we kneel at the Communion and why may we not as well as at our Prayers That the Minister sometimes wears a Surplice why not as well as a Gown That he makes a transient sign of the Cross over the Childs forehead after Baptism and what hurt is in doing it more than in speaking the words of listing him under the banner of a Crucified Saviour Are not these very weighty matters to make such noise and disturbance about L. I have heard these things talked against by some people but never met with any solid argument to prove them sinful T. No nor I am confident ever will Very easie it were to answer the common objections against them and to shew the lawfulness of them whilst there is nothing to be found in Gods Word to the contrary and where there is no law there 's no transgression But something of this nature I have done otherwhere and you may find many excellent Discourses to this purpose written by the Divines of
hear is still done in some dark corner amongst those of their own party not daring to come into the open light and submit their proceedings herein to the careful examination of skilful and impartial persons Sometimes perhaps they perswade melancholy people that they were possest and they have cured them when they either leave them little better than they found them or else may work a cure by Physick proper for that purpose Sometimes its notorious they have train'd up Cheats for this very purpose A famous instance there was of this some years ago amongst our selves viz. the Boy of Bilson near Wolverhampton in Staffordshire said to be dispossest by some Catholick Gentlemen as they stiled themselves but to the grief and shame of the Authors the whole Imposture was discovered and publish'd to the world by Dr. Morton then Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry L. If they indeed had this miraculous power of casting out Devils which they make such boasts of I wonder they do not shew the same power in working other miracles as well as this T. 'T is very true But this they may chuse to deal in because the Imposture is not so easily found out For here they commonly have to do with poor melancholy people and with young women especially who are sometimes afflicted with strange distempers which both themselves and their friends may ignorantly fancy to be a possession of the Devil and so are lyable to be imposed upon either by a subtile or by a silly Priest who may perhaps be deceived as well as his Patients and if they happen to recover may think he has done great feats by the mighty pains he has taken And truly the method which they use in these their Exorcisms or casting out of Devils as it s described in their own Books is nothing like that of our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles who by the speaking of a few words did presently cast them forth with authority whereas Popish Priests make a long work and keep a great deal of stir about it using such ceremonies and charms such strange ways of proceeding as makes it look like some unlawful conjuring or at best the whole appears very odd and ridiculous they having neither any command or example in the holy Scripture for the warrant of such practices on this occasion And one remarkable difference there is which is worth our notice that in the Primitive times those out of whom the Devils were cast generally were Heathens or Infidels who hereupon commonly became Converts to Christianity whereas now adays those who are said to be dispossest by their Priests are people of their own party who may easily be practised upon or induced to believe whatever their Ghostly Father tells them But I wonder when we hear of a Protestant being possest with Devils and dispossest by a Popish Priest except when there has been much juggling with a new Convert L. I confess I never heard of any If you please we will now proceed to the next mark of a true Church T. Yes presently we will but before I leave this subject of the Holiness of the Church I would desire you to take notice that every good Christian who is no Papist hath in and from himself as full evidence of the falshood of Popery as he has of his own sincerity and true piety for they declare that no man has any true faith or holiness that is not of their Church and on this account the current Doctrine amongst them is That no man out of it can be saved But now if you upon a faithful examination of your own heart and life do find that you do by Gods grace most stedfastly believe the Gospel of our Lord Jesus and do live in sincere obedience to the precepts of it according to the best of your understanding you have then at hand a most plain and undeniable demonstration even from this knowledg of your self that their Doctrine is most false whilst they confine both holiness and salvation to their own party since you who are not of it do believe and obey the Gospel and our blessed Saviour hath promised pardon and salvation to all that do so without requiring them moreover to believe the Pope to be his Vicar and to submit to all his Doctrines and Decrees Hence then I say its very evident to every honest Christian though no Papist that he may be holy and so may be saved without being of the Romish Church and consequently this is not that Catholick Church out of which no salvation is to be had L. This is indeed a plain argument which every good man may fetch from the knowledg of his own faith and godliness whilst I know and feel that I believe in my Saviour and truly love and serve him certainly I may upon good grounds hope for that happiness which he hath promised to all that are so qualified And whilst I thus know my own sincerity I shall not much be concern'd though a thousand Popish Priests should tell me that I have neither faith nor holiness nor can possibly be saved because I am not their follower for sure the testimony of a mans own conscience is of much more value than all their censures and Christs promises are worthy of more regard I hope than the Popes threatnings T. I think they are It may also be worth our notice to consider what a great dishonour is cast upon their proselytes by this Doctrine of theirs for if there be no true faith or holiness out of the Romish Church then these their Converts must confess that they had neither before they turned Papists but were meer Infidels and profane ungodly persons L. This seems evidently to follow upon their principles and I fear it 's often too true For though I will not take upon me to censure those whom I know not yet I must confess so far as I have observed in the place where I live most of those who have been perverted by them were persons of very ill lives before T. Yea and more than this so they commonly remain after For as we shall rarely find any persons of much sobriety and seriousness revolt to them from our Church so never did I for my own part know one that became a better man and stricter liver by his turning Papist For whatever they talk of holiness their chief business like the Pharisees of old is to make proselytes to their own party and then whether after that they grow better or worse as to their Morals is a matter they seem not much concern'd about Get them but once into the bosom of the Church and their business is done As for a poor Protestant let him be never so humble and holy never so obedient to his Rulers and charitable to his brethren never so desirous to know the whole will of God and to do it yet there is no help for him no way but to Hell he must go because forsooth he is an Heretick out of the
Apostles assertion Rom. 14. 17. These are such silly trifling injunctions as those of the Pharisees about washing their hands before Dinner and the like and may as justly be rejected without any thing of a wicked will or any contempt of that Authority which God hath set over us L. But does not our own Church lay the same commands upon its members viz. that they abstain from all sorts of Flesh in Lent and at some other times T. No where that I can tell of Our Church indeed appoints times of fasting and abstinence for such good ends as I have before mention'd and these times are to be observed in such manner with respect to our diet as that these ends may best be obtained but neither in any Rubrick Canon or Homily that ever I met with does our Church place any Religion in the bare distinction of Meats as to the kind of them I mean in abstaining from Flesh of Beasts or Birds rather than from the Flesh of Fishes from Butter rather than Oil from Milk and Eggs rather than Wine and Oysters about these things our Church gives no rule that I know of If at such times we use a very strict temperance somewhat more than ordinary and do thereby become more Humble and Charitable more Devout and Religious the Church is satisfied and her design answered and whether we eat a little Flesh or a little Fish she is not at all concerned As to the Laws of the Land about eating Fish rather than Flesh at certain times they were Enacted upon a Civil account not a Religious viz. for the encouragement of Fishing-trade and Navigation for the benefit of Sea-Towns and the like as is exprest in some of the Statutes themselves and most plainly taught in the Homily concerning Fasting But let us hear what yet remains CHAP. XV. Of withholding the Scriptures from the Common-People L. THere is only one thing more which he endeavours to vindicate from the exceptions made against it viz. the forbidding to have the Scriptures in the vulgar language so that the people cannot be admitted to read the same who would be glad as he expresses it to read and understand the last Will and Testament of their Father T. And what can he alledge for this their cruelty to the people so contrary both to Reason and to the very design of Writing the Holy Scriptures as well as to many express commands delivered in those Sacred Writings L. He first says it is not forbidden so the Bible be not corrupted by Sectaries and if the people ask leave of their Superiours to whom it belongs to judge whether they are capable of it T. If by the peoples asking leave he mean their obtaining it he may say very truly though very simply that then they are not forbidden viz. when they have got leave But in the mean time it 's very rare that the people do or dare ask this leave since it 's lookt upon as an ill sign of one inclining to heresie as they call it and to very few by their good will do they grant this liberty not commonly to any but such of whom they have all possible assurance that they are most firmly addicted to their party As to his talk of the Bibles being corrupted by Sectaries so far as it concerns our English Bibles as for others they are able to speak for themselves it is a most false and malicious reproach nor are they able to prove it as hath been sufficiently shewn by the Learned Writers of our Church who have vindicated this our Translation from the frivolous objections which some Romanists have made against it But besides that this is a vile slander it is also a meer pretence as they make use of it to defend their forbidding the people to read our English Bibles For why else do they not more generally permit them to read the Bible of their own Translation their Doway-Bible and Rhemish-Testament They dare not well trust their people even with these notwithstanding all their corrupt glosses in the Margent to make the Text speak in favour of their own opinions at least they give little or no encouragement to the reading of them For you shall seldom find them in the hands or houses of Papists amongst us And though they are forced to give somewhat more liberty to such as live in Protestant-Countries or where there are great numbers of Protestants as in France yet if you go but over into Spain or Italy where the Pope and his Clergy bear more sway there you shall hardly find in a whole Country one Bible in their own language in the hands of any of the people Yea if it should be found it might bring them into danger of the Inquisition and perhaps might cost them their lives Thus severe they were also in England at the beginning of the Reformation and most vehemently opposed the Translation of the Scriptures into English and did all they could to suppress them even sometimes burning the Bibles together with the Martyrs in Queen Maries days being wont to say this was the Book that made all the Hereticks And it was indeed the Book from whence they learned those Truths which Papists as falsely call heresie as the Pharisees did that Christian Doctrine which St. Paul preached L. There is little doubt but that common people of the Romish Church are generally kept from reading the Scripture since I find not that my Author himself does directly deny it nay he rather owns it whilst he goes on to plead that all good things are not good for all some abuse wine though it be good and among Sectaries who will read the Bible some understand it one way some another whence arise daily new heresies For there are many hard passages he adds which are ill understood by people that have little or no learning So St. Peter testifies 2 Pet. 3. and therefore as when there is dispute about any clause in a Will the Will is put into the hands of Proctors Lawyers and Iudges skill'd in the Law so in order to our being sufficiently informed of the Will of our Saviour Christ we must go to Sermons and Catechisms there to be instructed in publick or private as much as we will T. This is their common objection against the peoples reading the Scriptures that they are in danger of mistaking the sense of them and so may fall into errour or heresie But pray consider if this be a sufficient reason for their not reading them might it not have served as well to prevent the first writing of them especially in a language which the common people understood yet thus it was at the first for the Law was given to the Iews in their own language and in the same was the rest of the Old Testament written Thus also the New Testament was written in Greek a language then most generally understood in the world And the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the Churches in this same language which the
presses all men to endeavour after perfection in every grace and vertue and especially to be much in works of mercy and charity but yet she does not fright people with stories of Purgatory to bring in their wealth to the Church nor teach them that there is any great perfection in leaving their honest callings to run into a Monastery bringing their riches along with them thither She requires constant temperance and sobriety and sometimes imposes fasting and abstinence but then whether men eat a little flesh or fish oyl or butter she thinks it not a matter of the least moment but leaves all men to their own choice and prudence In a word she does not with the Pharisee teach for doctrines the commands of men but diligently inculcates the express commandments of Almighty God delivered to us in his holy Word And tho' she would not have us so foolish and proud as to think of meriting Heaven by our own good works yet she teaches that upon our patient continuance in well doing we shall through the mercies of God and the merits of Christ certainly obtain eternal life but upon no others terms does she encourage any man to hope for it And thus you see how our Church teaches us to take that same safe and narrow but sweet and pleasant way to salvation which is proposed to us in the Gospel L. I am fully perswaded she does so God grant me grace ever to walk in this holy way and then I shall not doubt of an happy end Pray proceed to his last argument T. I shall so and this it is That Church is not to be heard which has no solid reason for her keeping the Sabbath-day on the day she does keep it but no Church or Congregation of Sectaries has this and therefore none of them ought to be heard What say you to this L. I say that we of the Church of England whom he unjustly calls Sectaries have good reason for our keeping the Sabbath on that day we do keep it even as good reason as the Church of Rome it self has T. He goes on to prove the contrary thus No Church of Sectaries has Scripture for keeping the Sabbath-day on Sunday and no longer on Saturday as God commanded it and yet they reject tradition upon which ground the Roman Church keeps the Sunday in lieu of Saturday and therefore they have no solid reason for what they do c. L. I answer we have Scripture for keeping one day in seven viz. the fourth Commandment And we read that after our Saviours Resurrection the Apostles and Disciples commonly assembled together on the first day of the week which is called the Lords-day Revel 1. 10. And then we have tradition to assure us that this day was observed by the Christian Church ever since which tradition we may plead for our practice I trow as well as the Church of Rome T. Yes certainly we may for though we reject a great many ill things which they would thrust upon us for old traditions many of them being meer novelties of their own devising yet we do by no means reject such traditions as have sufficient evidence of their having been generally received by all Christian Churches from the very times of the Apostles down to our days and of this nature do learned men generally affirm the observation of the Lords-day to be And what you alledg from Scripture may very well serve to recommend to us so ancient and general a practice To all this besides the great equity and reasonableness of the thing in it self you may add the authority of those whom God hath set over us in Church and State all which being put together leaving the nice disputes that have been about this matter is a sufficient ground for our observation of the first day of the week as a Christian Sabbath a day of rest from our common employments devoted to the more solemn worship and service of God both in publick and private As solid reason therefore do we give for our practice herein as the Church of Rome it self can do or any other Church in the world And thus we have done with his five mighty arguments in which upon a little examination there appears nothing of strength or solidity He next musters up some weighty objections as he reckons them against those whom he calls Sectaries which he says ought to make them very much doubt whether they be secure in the way they are in And here according to his usual vain way of bragging he makes this large offer which yet he will never make good that all Priests Jesuits and Catholicks over all the world will turn to their way if they can but get from their Ministers a clear and satisfactory resolution of the following doubts L. It was cunningly done of him to call for a satisfactory resolution since though it be as clear as the light at noon-day yet they may still pretend that it is not satisfactory T. They may so though I question not but it will appear such to all that are impartial and judicious These doubts I shall propose to you in order and hear what you your self can say for the resolving of them L. I shall give in the best answers I am able and where I am at a loss shall still desire your help CHAP. II. A resolution of some doubts and questions proposed to Protestants T. FIrst he demands whether it can be clearly shewn that our Ministers were sent by Almighty God to preach and to reform the Roman Catholick Church or whether they are not some of the false Prophets who say The Lord saith when the Lord hath not sent them Ezek. 13. 6. L. There seems no great difficulty in resolving this doubt since our Ministers had lawful Ordination and thereby had authority to preach the Word of God And by the light of this word they discovered many errors and abuses in the Roman Church wherewith we were foully polluted and by Gods blessing and the assistance of lawful authority they were very instrumental in reforming us from the same Now whilst they proved their Doctrine by this Word of God they are not to be compared to those false Prophets who taught the people lyes and vanity as we have it Ezek. 13. 7 8. T. Your answer is sufficient and very clear For since our first Reformers did not publish a new Religion but rather restored the old by removing those corrupt additions that had been made to it they did not need any extraordinary commission from Heaven such as Moses had from God when he delivered the Law and as the Apostles had from Jesus Christ when they were first sent to preach the Gospel But it was sufficient that they were duly qualified by Gods Spirit for the work of the Ministry and were lawfully called to it by those who had authority in the Church to ordain them to that Office Such as these are truly said to be sent of God and are therefore
either by Apostasie Heresie or Schism 1 Apostasie is a renouncing not only the Faith of Christ but the very name and title to Christianity No man will say that ever the Church of Rome fell thus 2 Heresie is an adhesion to some private or singular opinion or error in Faith contrary to the general approved Doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received Doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me to these particulars 1. By what General Council was she condemn'd 2. Or which of the Fathers wrote against her 3. Or by what authority was she otherwise reproved for it seems to me a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemn'd by every one that has a mind to condemn her 3 Schism is a departure or a division from the unity of the Church whereby that bond and communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided it self by schism from any other body of faithful Christians brake communion or went forth from the society of any Elder Church I pray satisfie me to these particulars whose company did she leave From whom did she go forth Where was the true Church which she did forsake For it appears a little strange to me that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assign'd another Church different from her which from age to age hath continued visible from which she departed Hence he infers That the Church of Rome is the only true Church that leads to an eternity of bliss T. This indeed they commonly boast of as an unanswerable demonstration which they often scatter abroad in papers for the deluding of silly people Now though I see nothing in it but what has already been answered again and again yet for your fuller satisfaction Consider 1 suppose that we should grant his whole argument and every word in it to be true yet will it do little service to their cause nor will by any means yield that inference he would draw from it viz. that the Church of Rome is the only true Church and therefore to her communion we must betake our selves leaving the Church of England if ever we hope for salvation For pray what if we shou'd grant which yet he will never be able to prove that the Church of Rome is at this day as true and sound and flourishing a Church as we own it once to have been and should yield that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism what follows hence I beseech you What that she is the only true Church and the whole Catholick Church No by no means but only that she ought to be look'd upon as a sound part of the Catholick Church and therefore that her members viz. the Christians of that Diocess ought to live in strict fellowship with her and all other neighbouring Churches ought to give her due respect in maintaining such communion with her as sister-Churches are capable of holding one with another But it does not I say in the least follow that she is the supreme Mistress and Governess of all other Churches and therefore that all Christians in the world must render subjection to her and her Bishop otherwise they are to be look'd upon as no members of the Catholick Church nor at present in a capacity of salvation For such a supreme Mistress as this she never was when in her best and purest state nor therefore ought she to be esteemed so at this day neither do we of this Church owe obedience to her nor ought we to leave our own Church for her sake or at her command L. I cannot see how his argument proves us at all obliged thereto nor consequently how it reaches his purpose T. That it does not will still appear plainer if instead of Rome you name any other ancient Church suppose that of Ierusalem which was once very glorious and flourishing and deserved above all others to be stiled a Mother-Church now suppose that at this day it remain'd as sound and good as ever it was and to use his language that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism pray would it hence follow that all other Churches and particularly this of England must therefore yield subjection to the Church of Ierusalem That our Bishops must pay homage to the Bishop of that Church owning their dependance upon him and living in obedience to him And if they should refuse to do thus must our people therefore forsake their own Bishops and Clergy and withdraw from the Churches where they officiate and entertain Bishops or Priests that are sent over to us from Ierusalem and run into corners with them for the worship of God Surely there is not the least reason for any of this and not a whit more is there for our being thus subject to the Bishop of Rome or for our receiving and joyning with the Priests which are sent over to us by his authority There never was nor is now any reason why we should be thus enslaved to the Romish Church For in the very days of the Apostles and some hundred years after when that Church was in its best and purest state we of the Church of England rendred no such obedience to it own'd no such dependance upon it Neither indeed did the Bishops of that Church then claim any such power and Supremacy over us and other foreign Churches Wherefore as our ancestors the British Christians did not subject themselves to the Bishop of Rome nor ever thought such a subjection necessary to their salvation no more have we reason to do Whatever power or precedency the Bishops of Rome might afterwards have in these Western parts either by favour of the Emperor or by consent of the Bishops amongst themselves or most of all by their own daily encroachments by the meer advantage of their Seat without either law or reason this I say nothing at all concerns us at this day since all his power here is utterly abrogated and taken away by just and lawful authority in a most mature and deliberate manner as you before heard And I then told you how in Henry the Eighth's time before our happy Reformation it was generally own'd and declared by the Popish Clergy themselves that the Bishop of Rome had no more authority over us in England than the Bishop of Ierusalem Antioch or any other foreign Bishop And long before that our Laws limited and restrain'd the Popes power as it seem'd good to our Rulers And so do Popish Princes themselves at this day suffering him to have no more power or priviledg amongst them than themselves think fit Since then the Church of Rome in the very days of its primitive purity and glory had no power over us in this Church no more hath it at this day nor ought to have though it were still as pure and good as at first it was