in a short time to take off from your keenness in the management of this Charge For I hope you will allow that a man may speak the truth without being a Fanatick truth may get hatred I see it hath done so but it will make no man hatefull Without looking back then to your Fiat Lux I shall out of this very Epistle give you to see that you have certainly failed on the one hand in writing about things which you do not at all understand and therefore discourse concerning them like a blind man about colours and as I fear greatly also on the other for I cannot suppose you so ignorant as not to know that some things in your discourse are otherwise than by you represented Nay and we shall find you at express contradictions which pretend what you please I know you cannot at the same time believe Instances of these things you will be minded of in our progress Now I must needs be very unhappy in discoursing of them if this be Logick and Law that for so doing I must be concluded a Fanatick Fourthly You adde Your pert Assertion so oft occurring in your Book that there is neither reason truth nor honesty in my words is but the overflowings of that former intemperate zeal whereunto may be added what in the last place you insist on to the same purpose namely that I charge you with fraud ignorance and wickedness when in my own heart I find you most clear from any such blemish I do not remember where any of those expressions are used by me that they are no where used thus altogether I know well enough neither shall I make any enquiry after them I shall therefore desire you only to produce the instances whereunto any of the censures intimated are annexed and if I do not prove evidently and plainly that to be wanting in your discourse which is charged so to be I will make you a publick acknowledgement of the wrong I have done you But if no more was by me expressed than your words as used to your purpose did justly deserve pray be pleased to take notice that it is lawfull for any man to speak the truth And for my part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he said in Lucian I live in the Countrey where they call a Spade a Spade And if you can give any one instance where I have charged you with any failure where there is the least probability that I had in my heart other thoughts concerning what you said I will give up my whole interest in this cause unto you Mala mens malus animus You have manifested your conscience to be no just measure of other mens who reckon upon their giving an account of what they do or say So that you have but little advanced your Charge by these undue insinuations Neither have you any better success in that which in the next place you insist upon which yet were it not like the most of the rest destitute of truth would give more countenance unto your reflection than them all It is that I give you sharp and frequent menaces that if you write or speak again you shall hear more find more feel more more to your smart more than you imagine more than you would which relish much of that insulting humour which the Land groaned under I suppose no man reads this representation of my words with the addition of your own which makes up the greatest part of them but must needs thinks that you have been sorely threatned with some personall inconveniencies which I would cause to befall you did you not surcease from writing or that I would obtain some course to be taken with you to your prejudice Now this must needs savour of the spirit of our late dayes of trouble and mischief or at least of the former dayes of the prevalency of Popery amongst us when men were not wont in such cases to take up at bare threats and menaces If this be so all men that know the Author of the Animadversions and his condition must needs conclude him to be very foolish and wicked foolish for threatning any with that which is as far from his power to execute as the person threatned can possibly desire it to be wicked for designing that evil unto any individuall person which he abhorres in hypothesi to be inflicted on any upon the like account But what if there be nothing of all this in the pretended menaces What if the worst that is in them be only part of a desire that you would abstain from insisting on the personall miscarriages of some that profess the Protestant Religion lest he should be necessitated to make a diversion of your Charge or to shew the insufficiency of it to your purpose by recounting the more notorious failings of the Guides Heads and Leaders of your Church If this be so as it is in truth the whole intendment of any of those expressions that are used by me for the most part of them are your own figments whereever they occurre what Conclusion can any rationall man make from them Do they not rather intimate a desire of the use of moderation in these our contests and an abstinence from things personall for which cause also fruitlesly as I now perceive by this your new kind of ingenuity and moderation I prefixed not my Name to the Animadversions which you also take notice of than any evil intention or design This was my threatning you to which now I shall adde that though I may not say of these Papers what Catullus did of his Verses on Rufus Verum id non impunè feceres nam te omnia secla Noscent qui sis fama loquitur anus Yet I shall say that as many as take notice of this discourse will do no less of your disingenuity and manifold falshood in your vain attempt to relieve your dying Cause by casting odium upon him with whom you have to do like the Bonassus that Aristotle informs us of Hist. Animal lib. 9. cap. 24. which being as big as a Bull but having horns turned inward and unusefull for fight when he is persued casts out his excrements to defile his persuers and to stay them in their passage But what now is the End in all this heap of things which you would have mistaken for Reasons that you aym at it is all to shew how unfit I am to defend the Protestant Religion and that I am not such a Protestant as I would be thought to be But why so I embrace the Doctrine of the Church of England as declared in the 29 Articles and other approved publick writings of the most famous Bishops and other Divines thereof I avow her rejection of the pretended Authority and reall Errours of the Church to be her duty and justifiable The same is my judgment in reference unto all other Protestant Churches in the world in all things wherein they agree among themselves which is in all things necessary that
quiver are these arrows taken Is this fair sober Candid Christian dealing have you no way to defend the Authority of your Church but by Questioning the Authority of the Scripture Did ever any of the Fathers of old or any in the world before your selves take this course to plead their interests in any thing they professed Is this Practice Catholick or like many of your Principles singular your own Donatisticall Is it any great sign that you have an interest in that living Child when you are so ready he should be destroyed rather than you would be cast in your Contest with Protestants 2. Do you think that this course of proclaiming to Atheists Turks and Pagans that the Scripture which all Christians maintain against them to be the Word of the Living GOD given by inspiration from Him and on which the Faith of all the Martyrs who have suffered from their opposition rage and cruelty and of all others that truly believe in Jesus Christ was and is founded and whereinto it is resolved hath no Arguments of its Divine Original implanted on it no lines of the Excellencies and Perfections of its Author drawn on it no power or efficacy towards the Consciences of men evidencing its Authority over them no ability of its self to comfort and support them in their tryals and sufferings with the hope of things that are not seen Is this think you an acceptable service unto the Lord Christ who will one day judg the secrets of all hearts according unto that Word or Is it not really to expose Christian Religion to scorn and contempt And do you find so much sweetness in Delus an Virtus quis in hoste requirat as to cast off all Reverence of God and his Word in the pursuit of the supposed Adversaries of your earthly Interests 3. If your Arguments and Objections are effectuall and privalent unto the end for which you intend them will not your direct issue be the utter overthrow of the very foundation of the whole Profession of Christians in the world And are you like Sampson content to pull down the house that must fall upon your selves also so that you may stifle Protestants with its sall It may be it were well you should do so were it an house of Dagon a Temple dedicated unto Idols but to deal so with that wherein dwels the Majesty of the Living GOD is not so justifiable It is true Evert this Principle and you overthrow the foundation on which the faith of Protestants is built but it is no less true that you do the same to the foundation of the Christian Faith in generall wherein wee hope your own concernment also lyes And this is the thing that I am declaring unto you namely that either you acknowledg the Principles on which Protestants build their Faith and Profession or by denying them you open a door unto Atheism at least to the extirpation of Christian Religion out of the world I confess you pretend a relief against the present instance in the Authority of your Church sufficient as you say to give a Credibility unto the Scriptures though its own self-evidencing Power and Efficacy with the Confirmation of it by Catholick Tradition exclusive to your present suffrage be rejected Now I suppose you will grant that the Prop you supply men withall upon your casting down the foundations on which they have laid the weight of their eternall Salvation had need be firm and immoveable And remember that you have to do with them who though they may be otherwise inclineable unto you Non tamen ignorant quid distent aera a lupinis and must use their own judgement in the Consideration of what you tender unto them And they Ask you 1. What will you do if it be as you say with them who absolutely reject the Authority of your Châ—â—ch which is the condition of more than a moyety of the Inhabitants of the world to speak sufficiently within compass And 2. What will you advise us to say to innumerable other Persons that are pious and rational who upon the meer consideration of the lives of many of the most of the guides of your Church your bloody inhumane practices your pursuit of worldly carnall designs your visible secular interest wherein you are combined and united cannot perswade themselves that the Testimony of your Church in and about things that are invisible spirituall heavenly and eternall is at all valuable much less that it is sufficient to bear the weight you would lay upon it 3. Was not this the way and method of Vaninus for the Introduction of his Atheism first to question sleight and sophistically except against the old approved Arguments and Evidences manifesting the beeing and existence of a Divine self-subsisting Power substituting in their room for the confirmation of it his own Sophisms which himself knew might be easily discussed and disproved Do you deal any better with us in decrying the Scripture's self-evidencing Efficacy with the Testimony given unto it by God himself substituting nothing in the room thereof but the Authority of your Church A man certainly can take up nothing upon the sole Authority of your Church untill contrary to the pretensions Reasons and Arguments of far a greater number of Christians than your selves he acknowledge you to be a true Church at least if not the only Church in the world Now how I pray will you bring him into that state and condition that he may rationally make any such judgement How will you prove unto him that there is any such thing as a Church in the World that a Church hath any Authority that its Testimony can make any thing credible or meet to be believed You must prove these things to him or whatever assent he gives unto what you say is from fanaticall credulity To suppose that he should believe you upon your word because you are the Church is to suppose that he believes that which you are yet but attempting to induce him to believe If you persist to press him without other proof not only to believe what you first said unto him but also even this that whatever you shall say to him hereafter that he must believe it because you say it Will not any rationall man nauseate at your unreasonable importunity and tell you that men who have a mind to be befooled may meer with such Alchymisticall pretenders all the world over Will you perswade him that you are the Church and that the Church is furnished with the Authority mentioned by rational Arguments I wish you would inform me of any one that you can make use of that doth not include a Supposition of something unproved by you and which can never be proved but by your own Authority which is the thing in Question or the immediate Authority of God which you reject A number indeed of pretences or it may be Probabilities you may heap together which yet upon examination will not be found so much neither unless a
his Apostleship If you will then have any to succeed him in the enjoyment of any or of all these Privileges you must bespeak him to succeed him in his Apostleship and not in his Bishoprick Besides as I said before this imaginary Episcopacy which limits and confines him unto a particular Church as it doth if it be an Episcopacy properly so called is destructive of his Apostolical Office and of his Duty in answering the Commission given him of preaching the Gospel to every Creature following the Guidance of Gods Providence and conduct of the Holy Ghost in his way Many of the Ancients I confess affirm that Peter sate Bishop of the Church of Rome but they all evidently use the word in a large sense to imply that during his abode there for that there he was they did suppose be took upon him the especial Care of that Church For the same Persons constantly affirm that Paul also was Bishop of the same Church at the same time which cannot be otherwise understood than in the large sense mentioned And Ruffinus Prafat Recog Clement ad Gâ—udent unriddles the mystery Linus saith he Clâ—tus fuerunt ante Clementem Episcopi in â—rbe Roma sed superstite Petro videlicet at illi Episcopatûs Curam gererent iste verò Apostolatûs simpleret officium Linus and Cletus were Bishops in the City of Rome before Clemens but whilest Peter was yet alive they performing the Duty of Bishops Peter attending unto his office Apostolical And hereby doth he utterly discard the present new plea of the foundation of your faith For though he assert that Peter the Apostle was at Rome yet he denies that he ever sate Bishop there but names two others that ruled that Church at Rome joyntly during his time either in one Assembly or in two the one of the Circumcision the other of the Gentile-Converts And if Peter were thus Bishop of Rome and entred as you say upon his Episcopacy at his first coming thither whence is it that you are forced to confess that he was so long absent from his charge Five years saith Bellarmine but that will by no means salve the Difficulty Seven saith Onuphrius at once and abiding at one place the most part of his time besides being spent in other places and yet allowing him no time at all for those places where he certainly was Eighteen saith Cortefius strange that he should be so long absent from his especiall Cure and never write one word to them for their instruction or consolation whereas in the mean time he wrote two Epistles unto them who it seems did not in any speciall manner belong unto his Charge I wish we could once find our way out of this maze of uncertainties This is but a sad disquisition after Principles of faith to settle men in Religion by them And yet if we should suppose this also wee are farre enough from our journeys end The present Bishop of Rome is as yet behind the curtain neither can he appear upon the stage untill hâ— be ushered in by one pretence more of the same nature with them that went before And this is V. That some one must needs succeed Peter in his Episcopacy But why so why was it not needfull that one should succeed him in his Apostleship Why was it not needfull that Paul should have a successor as well as Peter and John as well as either of them Because you say that was necessary for the Church not so these But who told you so where is the proof of what you averre who made you judges of what is necessary and what is not necessary for the Church of Christ when himself is silent And why is not the succession of an Apostle necessary as well as of such a Bishop as you fancie had it not been better to have had one still residing in the Church of whose Infallibility there could have been no doubt or question One that had the power of working Miracles that should have no need to scare the people by shaking fire out of his slieve as your Pope Gregory the 7 th was wont to do if Cardinall Benno may be believed But you have now carried us quite off from the Scripture and Story and probable conjectures to attend unto you whilest you give the Lord Jesus prudentiall advice about what is necessary for his Church It must needs be so it is meet it should be so is the best of your proof in this matter Only your fratres Walenburgici adde that never any man ordained the Government of a Community more weakly than Christ must be supposed to have done the Government of his Church if he have not appointed such a Successour to Peter as you imagin But it is easie for you to assert what you please of this nature and as easie for any one to reject what you so assert if he please These things are without the verge of Christian Religion 〈◊〉 Towers and Palaces in the ayr But what must S t Peter be succeeded in his Episcopacy and what therewithall his Authority Power and Jurisdiction over all Churches in the world with an unerring judgement in matters of faith But all these belonged unto Peter as far as ever they belonged unto him as he was an Apostle long before you fancie him to have been a Bishop As then his Episcopacy came without these things so for ought you know it might goe without it This is a matter of huge importance in that Systeme of Principles which you tender unto us to bring us unto settlement in Religion and the Unity of Faith would you would consider a little how you may give some tolerable appearance of proof unto that which the Scripture is so utterly silent in yea which lyes against the whole Oeconomy of the Lord Jesus Christ in his ordering of his Church as delivered unto us therein dic aliquem dic Quintiliane colorem But we come now to the Pope whom here we first find latentem post Priâ—cipia and coming forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with his Claim For you say VI. That the Bishop of Rome is the man that thus suecceds Peter in his Episcopacy which though it were settled at Rome was over the whoee Catholick Church So you say and so you profess your selves to believe And we desire that you would not take it amiss if we desire to know upon what grounds you do so being unwilling to cast away all Consideration that we may embrace a fanatical Credo in this unlikely business We desire therefore to know who appointed that there should be any such succession who that the Bishop of Rome should be this Successor Did Jesus Christ do it we may justly expect you should say He did but if you do we desire to know when where how seeing the Scripture is utterly silent of say such thing Did S t Peter himself do it Pray manifest unto us that by the appointment of Jesus Christ he had power so to do and that
secondly he actually did so Neither of these can you prove or produce any Testimony worth crediting in confirmation of it Did it necessarily follow from hence because that was the place where Peter died But this was accidentall a thing that Peter thought not of for you say that a few dayes before his death he was leaving that place Besides according to this insinuation why did not every Apostle leave a Successour behind him in the place where he dyed and that by vertue of his dying in that place or produce you any Patent granted to Peter in especiall that where he dyed there he should leave a Successour behind him But it seems the whole weight of your faith is layed upon a matter of fact accidentally falling out yea and that very incertain whether ever it fell out or no. Shew us any thing of the will and institution of Christ in this matter As that Peter should go to Rome that he should fix his seat there that he should dye there that he should have a Successour that the Bishop of Rome should be his Successour that unto this Successour I know not what nor how many Priviledges should be conveyed All these are arbitrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Inventions that men may multiply in infinitum at their pleasure For what should set bounds to the imaginations of men when once they cast off all Reverence of Christ and his Truth Once more Why did not Peter fix a Seat and leave a Successor at Antioâ—h and in other places where he abode and preached and exetcised Episcopal Power without all question Was it because he dyed at Rome This is to acknowledg that the whole Papacy is built as was said upon an accidentall matter of fact and that supposed not proved Further if he must be supposed to succeed Peter I desire to know what that succession is and wherein he doth succeed him Doth he succeed him in all that hee had and was in reference unto the Church of God Doth he succeed him in the manner of his Call to his Office Peter was called immediately by Christ in his own Person the Pope is chosen by the Conclave of Cardinals concerning whom their Office Priviledges Power Right to choose the Successour of Peter there is not one iota in the Scripture or any Monuments of the best Antiquity and how in their Election of Popes they have been influenced by the interest of powerfull Strumpets your own Baronius will inform you Doth he succeed him in the way and manner of his Personal Discharge of his Office and imployment Not in the least Peter in the pursuit of his Commission and in obedience unto the command of his Lord and Master travailed up and down the world preaching the Gospel planting and watering the Churches of Christ in patience self-deniall humility zeal temperance meekness The Pope raigns at Rome in case exalting himself above the Kings of the earth without taking the least pains in his own Person for the conversion of Sinners or edification of the Disciples of Christ Doth he succeed him in his Personal Qualifications which were of such extraordinary advantage unto the Church of God in his dayes his Faith Love Holiness Light and Knowledg you will not say so Many of your Popes by your own confession have been ignorant and stupid many of them flagitiously wicked to say no more Doth he succeed him in the way and manner of his exercising his Care and Authority towards the Churches of Christ as little as the rest Peter did it by his prayers for the Churches personal visitation and instruction of them writing by inspiration for their direction and guidance according to the will of God The Pope by Bulls and Consistorial Determinations executed by intricate Legal Processes and Officers unknown not only to Peter but all Antiquity whose ways practices orders terms S t Peter himself were he upon the earth again would very little understand Doth he succeed him in his Personal Infallibility agree among your selves if you can and give an answer unto this inquiry Doth he succeed him in his power of working Miracles you do not so much as pretend thereunto Doth he succeed him in the Doctrine that he taught it hath been proved unto you a thousand times that he doth not and wee are still ready to prove it again if you call us thereunto Wherein then doth this Succession consist that you talk of In his Power Authority Jurisdiction Supremacy Monarchy with the Secular Advantages of Riches Honour and pomp that attend them things sweet and desireable unto carnall mindes This is the Succession you pretend to plead for And are you not therein to be commended for your wisdome In the things that Peter really enjoyed and which were of singular Spiritual advantage unto the Church of God you disclaim any Succession unto him and fix it on things wherein he was no way concerned that make for your own Secular advantage and interest You have certainly layed your design very well if these things would hold good to Eternity For hence it is that you draw out the Monarchy of your Pope direct and absolute in Ecclesiasticall things over the whole Church indirect at least and in ordine ad Spiritualia over the whole world This the Diana in making of Shrines for whom your occupation consists and it brings no small gains unto you Hence you wire-draw his Cathedrall Infallibility Legislative Authority Freedom from the Judgment of any whereby you hope to secure him and your selves from all opposition endeavouring to terrifie them with this Medusa's head that approach unto you Hence are his Titles The Vicar of Christ Head and Spouse of his Church Vice-Deus Dius alter in Terris and the like where by you keep up popular venexation and preserve his Majestick distance from the poor Disciples of Christ. Hence you warrant his practices suited unto these pretensions and Titles in the deposing of Kings transposing of Titles unto Dominion and Rule giving away of Kingdoms stirring up and waging mighty warres causing and commanding them that dissent from him or refuse to yield obedience unto him to be destroyed with fire and sword And who can now question but that you have very wisely stated your Succession This is the way this the progress whereby you pretend to bring us unto the Vnity of faith If we will submit unto the Pope and acquiesce in his Determinations whereunto to induce us we have the Cogent Reasons now considered the work will be effected This is the way that God hath as you pretend appointed to bring us unto Settlement in Religion These things you have told us so often and with so much Confidence that you take it ill we should question the truth of any thing you averr in the whoe matter and look upon us as very ignorant or unreasonable for our so doing Yea he that believes it safer for him to trust the everlasting concernments of his soul unto the Goodness Grace and Faithfulness of
King amongst his people Deut. 18. nor in that prescription of the manner of the Kingdom which he gave them by Samuel once intimated an exemption of any persons Priests or others from the Rule or Authority of the Prince which he would set over them In the New Testament we have the Rule as the practice in the Old Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers the power that bears the sword the striker And we think that your Clergy men have souls at least pro sale and so come within the circumference of this Command and Rule Chrysostome in his Comment on that place is of our mind and prevents your pretence of an exception from the Rule by special Priviledge giving us a distribution of the universality of the Persons here intended into their several kinds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He sheweth that these things are commanded unto all unto Priests and Monks and not to secular persons only which he declareth in the very entrance of his Discourse saying Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers whither thou be an Apostle or an Evangelist or a Prophet or whatever thou be For subjection overthrows not Piety And he saith not simply Let him obey but let him be subject The very same instances are given by Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophilact Bernard Epist. 42. ad Archiepisc. Senonens meets with your exception which in his dayes began to be broached in the world and tells you expresly that it is a delusion In conformity unto this Rule of St. Paul Peter exhorts all Christians none excepted to submit themselves unto the King as Supreme 1 Epist. ch 2. 13. And what ever we conclude from these words in reference unto the King I fear that if instead of the King he had said the Pope you would have thought us very impudent if we had persisted in the denyal of your monstrous imaginary Headship But in this Principle on these and the like grounds do all Protestants concur And indeed to fancy a â—â—veraign Monarch with so great a number of men as yonr Clergy consists of in many Kingdome exempted from his regal Authority is to lay such an ax unto the root of his Government as whereby with one stroke you may hew it down at your pleasure 2. Protestants affirm that Rex in regno suo every King in his own Kingdom is the Supreme dispenser of Justice and Judgement unto all Persons in all Causes that belong unto or are determinable in foro exteriori in any Court of Judicature whither the matter which they concern be Civil or Ecclesiastical No Cause no difference determinable by any Law of man and to be determined by Coercive Vmpirage or Authority is exempted from his cognizance Neither can any man on any pretence claim any Jurisdiction over any of his Subjects not directly and immediately derived from him Neither can any King who is a Soveraign Monarch like the Kings of this Land yield or grant a power in any other to judge of any Ecclesiastical Causes among his Subjects as arising from any other Spring or growing on any other root but that of his own Authority without an impeachment and irreparable prejudice to his Crown and Dignity neither doth any such Concession grant or supposition make it indeed so to be but is a meer fiction and mistake all that is done upon it being ipso facto null and of none effect Neither if a King should make a pretended legal grant of such power unto any would any right accrew unto them thereby the making of such a Grant being a matter absolutely out of his power as are all things whereby his regal Authority wherein the Majesty of his Kingdom is enwrapped may be diminished For that King who hath a power to diminish his Kingly Authority never was intrusted with absolute Kingly Power Neither is this Power granted unto our Kings by the Acts of Parliament which you mention made in the beginning of the Reformation but was alwayes inherent in them and exercised in innumerable instances and often vindicated with an high hand from Papal encroachments even during the hour and power of your darkness as hath been sufficiently proved by many both Divines and Lawyers Things of meer spiritual order as preaching the word Administration of the Sacraments and the like we ascribe not unto Kings nor the communicating of power unto any for their performance The Soveraign Power of these things is vested in Christ alone and by him committed unto his Ministers But Religion hath many concernments that attend it which must be desposed of by forensical juridical process and and determinations All these with the Persons of them that are interested in them are subject immediately to the power and Authority of the King and none other and to exempt them or any of them or any of the like nature which may emerge amongst men in things relating unto Conscience and Religion whose Catalogue may be endlesly extended from Royal Cognizance is to make meer properties of Kings in things which in a very special manner concern the peace and wellfare of their subjects and the distribution of rewards and punishments among them Of this sort are all things that concern the authoritative publick Conventions of Church Officers and differences amongst them about their interests practices and publick profession of Doctrines Collations of Legal Dignities and Benefices by and with investitures legal and valid all Ecclesiastical revenews with their incidencies the Courts and Jurisdictions of Ecclesiastical Persons for the reigâ—ement of the outward man by Censures and Sentences of Law with the like And as this whole matter is sufficiently confirmed by what was spoken before of the Power of Kings over the Persons or all their Subjects and for to what end should they have such a power if in respect of many of them and that in the chief concernments of their rule and Government it may never be exerted so I should tire your patience if I should report one half of the Laws Instances and Pleas made given and used by the Antient Christian Kings and Emperours in the persuit and for the Confirmation of this their just power The Decrees and Edicts of Constantine the Great commanding ruling and disposing of Bishops in Cases Ecclesiastical the Laws of Justinian Charls the Great Ludovicus his Son and Lotharius his Successor with more innumerable to the same purpose are extant and known unto all So also are the Pleas Protestations and Vindications of most of the Kingdoms of Europe affer once the pretensions of Papacy began to be broached to their prejudice And in particular notable instances you might have of the exercise of this royal power in the first Christian Magistrate invested with supreme Authority both in the case of Athanasius Socrat. Lib. 1. cap. 28. cap. 34. Athan. Apol. 2. as also of the Donatists Euseb. lib. 10. cap. 5. August Epist. 162 166. and advers Crescon lib. 3. c. 17. whereunto innumerable instances in
his Successors may be added 3. Protestants reach unanimously that it is incumbent on Kings to find out receive embrace and promote the Truth of the Gospel and the Worship of God appointed therein confirming protecting and defending of it by their Regal Power and Authority as also that in their so doing they are to use the Liberty of their own judgements informed by the wayes that God hath appointed for that end independently on the dictates determinations and orders of any other Person or Persons in the world unto whose Authority they should be obnoxious Heathen Kings made Laws for God Dan. 3. chap. 6. Jona 3. And the great thing that we find any of the Good Kings of Judah commended for is that they commanded the worship of God to be observed and performed according unto his own appointment For this end were they then bound to write out a Copy of the Law with their own hands Deut. 14. 18. and to study in it continually To this purpose were they warned charged exhorted and excited by the Prophets that is that they should serve God as Kings And to this purpose are there innumerable Laws of the best Christian Kings and Emperours still extant in the world In these things consists that Supremacy or Headship of Kings which Protestants unanimously ascribe unto them especially those in England to his Royal Majesty And from hence you may see the frivolousness of sundry things you object unto them As first of the Scheme or Series of Ecclesiastical Power which you ascribe to Prelate Protestants and the Laws of the Land from which you say the Presbyterians dissent which you thus express By the Laws of our Land our Series of Government Ecclesiastical stands thus God Christ King Bishop Ministers People The Presbyterian Predicament is thus God Christ Minister People So that the Ministers head in the Presbyterian Predicament toucheth Christs feet immediately and nothing intervenes You Pretend indeed that hereby you do exalt Christ but this is a meer cheat as all men may see with their eyes For Christ is but where he was but the Minister indeed is exalted being now set in the Kings place one degree higher then the Bishops who by Law is under King and Bishops too If I mistake not in my guess you greatly pleased your self with your Scheme wherein you pretend to make forsooth an ocular Demonstration of what you undertook to prove whereas indeed it is as trivial a fancy as a man can ordinarily meet withal For 1. Neither the Law nor Prelates nor Presbyterians ascribe any place at all unto the Kings Majesty in the Series of Spiritual Order he is neither Bishop nor Minister nor Deacon or any way authorized by Christ to convey or communicate power meerly spiritual unto any others No such thing is claimed by our Kings or declared in Law or asserted by Protestants of any sort But in the series of exteriour Government both Prelate Protestants and Presbyterians assign a Supremacy over all Persons in his Dominions and that in all Causes that are inquirable and determinable by or in any Court exercising Jurisdiction and Authority unto his Majesty All sorts assign unto him the Supreme place under Christ in external Government and Jurisdiction None assign him any place in Spiritual Order and meerly Spiritual Power Secondly If you place Bishops on the Series of exterior Government as appointed by the King and confirmed by the Law of the Land there is yet no difference with respect unto them 3. The Question then is solely about the Series of Spiritual order and thereabout it is confessed there are various apprehensions of Protestants which is all you prove and so do magno conatu nugas agere who knows it not I wish there were any need to prove it But Sir this difference about the Superiority of Bishops to Presbyters or their equality or Identity was agitated in the Church many and many a hundred year before you or I were born and will be so probably when we are both dead and forgotten So that what it makes in this dispute is very hard for a sober man to conjecture 4. Who they are that pretend to exalt Christ by a meer asserting Ministers not to be by his institution subject to Bishops which you call a cheat I know not nor shall be their advocate they exalt Christ who love him and keep his Commandments and no other 2. You may also as easily discern the frivolousness of your exclamation against Protestants for not giving up their differences in Religion to the Vmpirage of Kings upon the assignment of that Supremacy unto them which hath been declared When we make the King such an Head of the Catholick Church as you make the Pope we shall seek unto him as the fountain of our faith as you pretend to do unto the Pope For the present we give that honour to none but Christ himself and for what we assign in profession unto the King we answer it wholly in our practical submission Protestants never thought nor said that any King was appointed by Christ to be supreme infallible Proposer of all things to be believed and done in the Worship of God no King ever assumed that power unto himself It is Jesus Christ alone who is the Supreme and absolute Lawgiver of his Church the Author and finisher of our Faith and it is the honour of Kings to serve him in the promotion of his Interest by the exercise of that Authority and duty which we have before declared What unto the dethroning and dishonour as much as in you lyeth of Christ himself and of Kings also you assign unto the Pope in making him the Supreme head and fountain of their faith hath been already considered This is the substance of what you except against Protestants either as to Opinion or Practice in this matter of deference unto Kingly Authority in things Ecclesiastical What is the sense of your Church which you prefer unto your sentiments herein I shall after I have a little examined your present pretensions manifest unto you seeing you will have it so from those who are full well able to inform us of it Fas mihi Pontificum sacrata resolvere jura atque omnia ferre sub auras â—Siqua tegunt tenear Romaenec ligebus ullis For your own part you have expressed you seâ—f in this matter so loosely generally and ambiguously that it is very hard for any man to collect from your words what it is that you assert or what you deny I shall endeavour to draw out your sense by a few enâ—quiries As 1. Do you think the King hath any An â—ority vested in him as King in Ecclesiastical affairs and over Ecclesiastical Persons You tell us That Catholicks observe the King in all things as well Eeclesiastick as Civil pag. 59. that in the line of Corporal power and Authority the King is immediately under God p. 61. with other words to the same purpose if they are to any purpose at all
I desire to know whither you grant in him an Authority derived immediately from God in and over Ecclesiastical affairs as to convene Synods or Councils to reform things amiss in the Church as to the outward administration of them or do you think that he hath such power and Authority to make constitute or appoint Laws with penal Sanctions in and about things Ecclesiastical And Secondly Do you think that in the work which he hath to do for the Church be it what it will be may use the liberty of his own judgement directed by the light of the Scripture or that he is precisely to follow the declarations and determinations of the Pope If he have not this Authority if he may not use this liberty the good words you speak of Catholicks and give unto him signifie indeed nothing at all If then he hath and may you openly rise up against the Bulls Briefs and Interdicts of your Popes themselves and the universal practice of your Church for many Ages And therefore I desire you to inform me Thirdly Whether you do not judge him absolutely to be subject and accountable to the Pope for what ever he doth in Ecclesiastical affairs in his own Kingdoms and Dominions if you answer suitably to the Principles Maximes and practise of your Church you must say he is and if so I must tell you that whatever you ascribe unto him in things Ecclesiastical he acts not about them as King but in some other capacity For to do a thing as a King and to be accountable for what he doth therein to the Pope implyes a Contradiction Fourthly Hath not the Pope a power over his Subjects many of them at least to convent censure judge and punish them and to exempt them in Criminal Cases from his Jurisdiction And is not this a fair Supremacy that it is meet he should be contented withal when you put it into the power of another to exempt as many of his Subjects as he pleaseth and are willing from his Regal Authority 5. When you say that in matters of faith Kings for their own ease remit their Subjects to their Papal Pastor pag. 57. Whether you do not collude with us or indeed do at all think as you speak Do you think that Kings have real power in and about those things wherein you depend on the Pope and only remit their Subjects to him for their own ease You cannot but know that this one Concession would ruine the whole Papacy as being expresly destructive of all the foundations on which it is built Nor did ever any Pope proceed on this ground in his interposures in the world about matters of faith that such things indeed belonged unto others and were only by them remitted unto him for their ease 6. Whether you do not include Kings themselves in youâ— general Assertion pag. 55. That they who after Papal decisions remain contâ—nacious forfeit their Christianity And if so whether you do not at once overthrow all your other Splendid Concessions and make Kings absolute Dependents on the Pope for all the Priviledges of their Christianity and whether you account not among them their very Regal Dignity it self Whereby it may easily appear how much Protestant Kings and Potentates are beholding unto you seeing it is manifest that they live and rule in a neglect of many Papal Decisions and Determinations 7. Whether you do not very fondly pretend to prove your Roman Catholicks acknowledgement of the power of Princes to make Laws in Cases Ecclesiastical from the Laws of Justinian p. 59. whereas they are instances of Regal Power in such Cases plainly destructive of your present Hildebrandine faith and Authority and whether you suppose such Laws to have any force or Authority of Law without the Papal Sanction and confirmation 8. Whither you think indeed that Confession unto Priests is such an effectual means of securing the peace and interest of Kings as you pretend p. 59. and whether Queen Elizabeth King James Henry the third and fourth of France had cause to believe it and whether you learned this notion from Parry Raviliac Mariana Clement Parsons Allen Garnet Gerard Oldcome with their Associates 9. Whether you forgot not your self when you place Aaron and Joshuah in government together p. 64. 10. Whether you really believe that the Pope hath Power only to perswade in matters of Religion as you pretend p. 65. and if so from what Topicks he takes the Whips Wires and Racks that he makes use of in his Inquisition And whether he hath not a right even to destroy Kings themselves who will not be his Executioners in destroying of others I wish you would come out of the clouds and speak your mind freely and plainly to some of these enquiries Your present ambiguous discourse in the face of it faiâ—ed unto your interest gives no satisfaction whilest these snakes lye in the grass of it Wherefore leaving you a little to your second thoughts I shall enquire of your Masters and Fathers themselves what is the true sense of your Church in this matter and we shall find them speaking it out plainly and roundly For they tell us 1. That the Government of the whole Catholick Church is Monarchical A State wherein all Power is derived from one fountain one and the same Person This is the first Principle that is laid down by all your Writers in treating of the Church and its power and that which your great Cardinal Baronius layes as the foundation on whirh he builds the huge Structure of his Ecclesiastical Annals 2. That the Pope is this Monarch of the Church the Person in whom alone the Soveraign Rule of it is originally vested so that it is absolutely impossible that any other Person should have enjoy or use any Ecclesiastical Authority but what is derived from him I believe you suppose this sufficiently proved by Bellarmine or others Your self own it nor can deny it without a disclaimure of your present Papacy And this one Principle perfectly discovers the vanity of your pretended attributions of Power in Ecclesiastical things to Kings and Princes For to suppose a Monarchical estate and not to suppose all Power and Authority in that state to be deâ—ived from the Monarch in it and of it alone is to suppose a perfect contraiction or a State Monarchical that is not Monarchical Protestants place the Monarchical State of the Catholick Church in its relation unto Christ alone and therefore it is incumbent on them to assert that no man hath or can have a power in the Church as such but what is derived from and communicated unto him by him And you placing it in reference unto the Pope must of necessity deny that any power can be exercised in it but what is derived from him so that whatever you pretend in this kind to grant unto kings you allow it unto them only by concession or delegation from the Pope They must hold it from him in cheif or he cannot be the chief
the first news of Christianity be once rejected as they are now amongst us as Romish or Romanical and that rejection or Reformation be permitted then may other parts and all parts if the gap be not stopped be looked upon at length as points of no better a condition I have given you sundry instances already undeniably evincing that some opinions of them who first bring the news of Christian Religion unto any may be afterwards rejected without the least impeachment of the Truth of the whole or of our faith therein Yea men may be necessitated so to reject them to keep entire the Truth of the whole But the rejection supposed is of mens opinions that bring Christian Religion and not of any parts of Christian Religion it self For the mistakes of any men whatever whither in Speculation or Practice about Religion are no parts of Religion much less substantial parts of it Such was the Opinion of the necessity of the observation of Mosaical Rites taught with a suitable practice by many believers of the Circumcision who first preached the Gospel in sundry places in the world And such were the Rites and Opinions brought into England by Austin that are rejected by Protestants if any such there were which as yet you have not made to appear There is no such affinity between Truth and Errour however any men may endeavour to blend them together but that others may separate between them and â—eject the one without any prejudice unto the other male sartâ— gratia nequaquam coit Yea the Truth and Light of the Gospel is of that nature as that if it be once sincerely received in the mind and embraced it will work out all those false notions which by any means together with it may be instilled As rectum is index sui obliqui Whilest then we know and are perswaded that in any Systeme of Religion which is proposed unto us it is only error which we reject having an infallible Rule for the guidance of our judgement therein there is no danger of weakning our assent unto the Truth which we retain Truth and falshood can never stand upon the same bottom nor have the same evidence though they may be proposed at the same time unto us and by the same Persons So that there is no difficulty in apprehending how the one may be received and the other rejected Nor may it be granted though their concernment lye not therein at all that if a man reject or disbelieve any point of Truth that is delivered unto him in an entire Systeme of Truths that he is thereby made enclinable to reject the rest also or disenabled to give a firm assent unto them unless he reject or disbelieve it upon a notion that is common to them all For instance He that rejects any Truth revealed in the Scripture on this ground that the Scripture is not an infallible Revelation of Divine and supernatural Truth cannot but in the persuit of that apprehension of his reject also all other Truths there in revealed at least so far as they are knowable only by that Revelation But he that shall disbelieve any Truth revealed in the Scripture because it is not manifest unto him to be so revealed and is in a readiness to receive it when it shall be so manifest upon the Authority of the Author of the wholâ—â— is not in the least danger to be induced by that disbelief to question any thing of that which he is convinced so to be revealed But as I said your Concernment lyes not therein who are not able to prove thâ—â— Protestants have rejected any one part much less substantial part of Religion and your conclusion upon a supposition of the rejection of errours and practises of the contrary to the Gospel or principles of Religion is very infirm The ground of all your Sophistry lyes in this that men who receive Christian Religion are bound to resolve their saith into the Authority of them that preach it first unto them whereupon it being impossible for them to question any thing they teach without an impeachment of their absolute Infallibility and so far the Authority which they are to rest upon they have no firm foundation left for their assent unto the things which as yet they do not question and consequently in process of time may easily be induced so to do But this presumption is perfectly destructive to all the certainty of Christian Religion For whereas it proposeth the subject matter of it to be believed with divine faith and supernatural it leaves no formal reason or cause of any such faith no foundation for it to be parts of it Such was the Opinion of the necessity of the observation of Mosaical Rites taught with a suitable practice by many believers of the Circumcision who first preached the Gospel in sundry places in the world And such were the Rites and Opinions brought into England by Austin that are rejected by Protestants if any such there were which as yet you have not made to appear There is no such affinity between Truth and Errour however any men may endeavour to blend them together but that others may separate between them and reject the one without any prejudice unto the other male sarta gratia nequaquam coit Yea the Truth and Light of the Gospel is of that nature as that if it be once sincerely received in the mind and embraced it will work out all those false notions which by any means together with it may be instilled As rectum is index sui obliqui Whilest then we know and are perswaded that in any Systeme of Religion which is proposed unto us it is only error which we reject having an infallible Rule for the guidance of our judgement therein there is no danger of weakning our assent unto the Truth which we retain Truth and falshood can never stand upon the same bottom nor have the same evidence though they may be proposed at the same time unto us and by the same Persons So that there is no difficulty in apprehending how the one may be received and the other rejected Nor may it be granted though their concernment lye not therein at all that if a man reject or disbelieve any point of Truth that is delivered unto him in an entire Systeme of Truths that he is thereby made enclinable to reject the rest also or disenabled to give a firm assent unto them unless he reject or disbelieve it upon a notion that is common to them all For instance He that rejects any Truth revealed in the Scripture on this ground that the Scripture is not an infallible Revelation of Divine and supernatural Truth cannot but in the persuit of that apprehension of his reject also all other Truths therein revealed at least so far as they are knowable only by that Revelation But he that shall disbelieve any Truth revealed in the Scripture because it is not manifest unto him to be so revealed and is in a