substance now that it was before the Reformation then it is plain that by our Reformation we made no Separation from the Church we only laid aside the corruptions i. e. those unsound and unwholsome additions which the Church of Rome had made to the ancient Structure of Christ's Religion and when those were removed the Church which was by them obscured appeared again in her primitive Lustre and Beauty Now if the Church be the same still it will necessarily follow that we who are of that Church do now hold the same Communion in all the Substantials and Essentials of Religion with all other Christian Churches that we did before For as to all the Essentials of a Church we hold the same Faith the same Worship and the same Government now that we did before the Reformation and which now is and always hath been owned by the Catholick Church in all Ages And if so then can we not possibly be guilty of any Schismatical Separation 2. Schism is a Separation from a Christian Church i. e. from such a Society between which and us there is or ought to be a Religious Union and Conjunction That we cannot upon that score be justly charged with any Schismatical Separation either from the Catholick or any particular Christian Church I hope is sufficiently made out in the 4th Sect. of this Discourse to which I refer the Reader being unwilling either to give him or my self an unnecessary trouble 3. Schism is a Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church in Faith Worship and Government considered as Bonds of Communion And here we are roundly charged by the Church of Rome with a Schismatical Separation from her and a manifest breach of all these great Bonds of Communion But having in the beginning of this Sect. I hope sufficiently vindicated the Church of England from any Schismatical Separation from the Catholick or any other Christian Church in her Reformation and cleared her innocency as to the breach of any of these great Bonds of Communion in the 5th 6th 7th and 8th Sections I shall not need to say any more of it here There is only one thing which as yet I have taken no notice of and with which they often twit us viz. The Derivation of our Orders from them Mr. Harding in his answer to Bishop Jewel's Apology doth mightily triumph in this telling us That a Church cannot subsist without lawfull Pastours and Governours that there can be none such without lawfull Ordination by imposition of hands that we neither have nor ever had any such but from the Church of Rome that those who received that power from her becoming Schismaticks and Hereticks by their Separation from her forfeited that power and could not convey it to others that therefore we have now no such thing as lawfull Priests and Bishops among us without which we cannot be a Church that herein we have broken the great Bond of Communion viz. Government by departing from that Church from which ours had its Being and therefore cannot be excused from the sin of Schism To this B. Jewel hath given a long learned and full answer to which I shall refer the Reader He may find it in the second part of the defence of the Apology of the Church of England Chap. 5. Division 1. But to shew you in how empty and insignificant a show this mighty triumph ends I shall here offer some few things to consideration 1. That the conferring of Orders giveth no Power or Jurisdiction to him or them by whom they are conferred over him or them on whom they are conferred For do we not know that the Bishop of Rome is always consecrated by the Bishop of Hostia and yet I hope they will not say that the Bishop of Hostia is therefore above the Bishop of Rome 2. Let it be granted that we derive our Orders from the Church of Rome not as from the Fountain or Original of Orders but as from the conduct or means of conveyance I would ask this question do they believe their Orders to be good and valid or not If not why do they presume to exercise those high and holy Functions to which they are admitted thereby If they do then our Orders must be good and valid too and we have as good right as they have to that Succession which they so much boast of 3. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England are true and rightfull Successours to those that have been before them being elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in as an effectual a manner as they were If their Predecessours were deceived in any thing they succeed them in Place but not in Errour For though they were indeed their Predecessours in Office yet were they not the Rulers and Standards of their Faith. And it cannot be denyed but that a Succession in Faith and Doctrine is far more considerable than a Succession of Persons and that God be thanked we are able to make good from the pure and uncorrupted Fountain In Doctrine therefore we succeed the Church of Rome as the Day succeedeth the Night as the Light succeedeth Darkness and as Truth succeedeth Errour 4. That those Bishops and Pastours who have once been duly elected consecrated confirmed and admitted in and to those sacred Functions do not by departing from the Errours and Superstitions of any other Church though it be that from which they received their Orders lose the power that was thereby committed to them but are still in a capacity to convey the same unto others 5. That the Bishops and Pastours of the Church of England being legally possessed of having duly exerted and constantly and regularly exercised this power the Orders conferred by them by virtue thereof are to all intents and purposes good and valid and consequently our Church cannot be said to want true and lawfull Pastours and Governours 6. That though the Church of England in her Reformation have cast off the Usurpations and laid aside the corruptions of the Church of Rome yet hath she not thereby broken any Bond of Communion with the Christian Church and therefore cannot justly be charged with the guilt of Schism For whilst she holds fast those three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government in all the substantial and essential Parts thereof the guilt of that horrid Schism which hath so much bruised and wounded rent and torn the Church of God can never be laid at her door These things I thought good to offer to consideration and when they are seriously and deliberately weighed I do not doubt but that the ingenuous Reader will so well improve them as to satisfie himself and others that all this mighty triumph is no more than a vain and empty show 4. Schism is a voluntary and causeless Separation from the Communion of a Christian Church i. e. When men have full liberty to make their own choice having no force nor constraint put upon their inclinations nor any cause or
A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England From the foul Aspersions of Schism and Heresie Unjustly cast upon Her by The Church of Rome In Two Parts After the way which they call Heresie so worship I the God of my Fathers believing all things which are written in the Law and the Prophets Acts 24.14 LONDON Printed by J. H. for Luke Meredith at the King's Head at the West End of St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXVII IMPRIMATUR Ex Aedib Lambeth Nov. 30. 1686. Guil. Needham RR mo in Christo P. ac D. D. Wilhelmo Archiepisc Cantuar. a Sacr. Domest Advertisements of Books lately Printed BIshop Taylor 's Opuscula The Measures of Friendship With Five Letters to persons changed and tempted to a change in their Religion To which is now added his Moral Demonstration proving that the Religion of J. Christ is from God. Price bound 1 s. Two Treatises The First concerning Reproaching and Censure The Second An Answer to Mr. Serjeant's Sure-Footing To which are annexed Three Sermons Preached upon several Occasions and very usefull for these Times By the late Learned and Reverend William Faulkner D. D. Some Queries to Protestants Answered and an Explanation of the Roman Catholicks Belief in four great Points considered 1. Concerning their Church 2. Their Worship 3. Justification 4. Civil Government Price stitch'd 6 d. The Creed of Pope Pius the Fourth Or a Prospect of Popery taken from that Authentick Record With short Notes A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England c. The INTRODUCTION THere is nothing more frequent among those of the Romish Communion than to charge those of the Reformation with the guilt of Schism and Heresie They blacken us with those odious names of Schismatick and Heretick and though we do publickly declare our abhorrence of those Crimes and disavow both the name and thing yet must we be represented as such and under that Character be exposed to the World. Whether this Charge be just or unjust will appear by the sequel of this Discourse But whethersoever it be certain it is that it is generally taken for granted among them that we are such A late Authour of theirs in answer to this Question Why are you a Catholick having as he thinks charged these Crimes home upon Protestants at length summs up his harangue in these words p. 12. Now it being impossible for Protestants to excuse much less to justifie their manifest Schism to what purpose is it to enter into debate with them about particular points of Doctrine As long as the Charge of Schism subsists uncleared by them and this Schism grounded on pretended dangerous errors in the Catholick Church being Schismaticks they are Hereticks too and so condemned by themselves and consequently not to be hearkned to when they will raise particular Controversies since this one general Controversie determines against them all particular debates And now who would not think that here were a fair end put to all debates between the Church of Rome and us for if we be really Schismaticks and our Schism so manifest that it will admit of no excuse much less of any justification then this Gentleman is in the right that it is to little purpose to enter into debate with us about particular points of Doctrine But if we be not only Schismaticks but Hereticks too then ought we not to be hearkned to in any particular Controversie whatsoever But if this Gentleman should happen to be mistaken in all this and that we are neither Schismaticks nor Hereticks but that our Separation from the Church of Rome is not only excusable but justifiable too being grounded not on pretended but really dangerous errors not in the Catholick Church but in the particular Church of Rome then I hope we may stand upon even ground with them and be admitted to debate the matter in difference between us which if we be as they hitherto have done so I hope they always will find us ready to stand the shock and make good our ground As for the Crimes they charge us with we have as great it may be a greater abhorrence of them than they have let them draw them in the most frightfull shapes imaginable let them expose them under the most black and dismal Character that is possible yet can they not represent them worse than we already think of them So far are we from owning either the name or thing We believe they are most horrible sins so dangerous and destructive that Men are thereby out of the ordinary ways and means of Salvation they tear in pieces the Mystical Body of Christ and are an inlet to all those mischiefs that do or can happen to the Church of God. And after such a Declaration as this can we be thought to believe our selves guilty of them We are thus far agreed that Schism and Heresie are dangerous sins destructive of the peace and order the well-being at least if not the Being of God's Church and such sins as without a true and timely Repentance will unavoidably and eternally ruine those that are guilty of them It will therefore greatly concern all Persons as well Papists as Protestants to clear themselves of these Crimes To wipe off this scandal which is so unjustly thrown upon the Church of England and those in Communion with her is the design of these Papers And to effect this I know no better way than by laying open the nature and true notion of these two Crimes viz. Schism and Heresie and then considering to whom they are applicable This I shall endeavour to doe as briefly and as plainly as I can But because they are different Crimes to avoid confusion I shall consider them apart and in the first place shall begin with that of Schism SECT I. Of Schism in general THE word Schism in its original signification imports no more but only a Division Rent or Breach and is more properly applicable unto things than Persons I could if it were necessary produce several instances out of prophane Authours where it is thus used but waving these I shall at present offer you only one instance in which our Blessed Saviour thus applies the word No Man saith he puts a piece of new Cloth into an old Garment for that which is put in taketh from the Garment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Rent or Breach is made worse Matt. 9.16 When therefore we meet with this word applied to Persons it is not properly but Metaphorically used importing a Division among them occasioned by misunderstanding diversity of opinions discontent or otherwise Now forasmuch as every Division supposes an Unity and that Unity broken it cannot be applied to single Persons but Persons in Society who live in Communion with one another and are obliged so to doe by some common Ties and Obligations There are two great and eminent Societies in the World viz. the Civil and Ecclesiastical and both these are the Subjects of Schism i. e. they are both liable to have their Unity broken their Peace
false Prophets out of the Holy Scriptures to whom St. Peter compares false Teachers in the time of the Gospel And by this you may easily discern them for if you find any at this day so teaching and so doing as they then taught and did you ought to mark them for false Teachers and such whose business it is to deceive you and privily bring in damnable Heresies But there is once place of Scripture more in which we have a more particular account of the Nature of Heresie and from which we may more plainly learn what it is that makes an Heretick And that is in St. Paul's Epistle to Titus where he gives him this direction Tit. 3.10 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself In this place St. Paul directs Titus and not onely him but all the Governours of the Church how to deal with Hereticks and instructs both them and us what Heresie is and what it is that makes an Heretick Hereticks are to be dealt with in this manner 1. They are to be admonished i. e. they are by the Governours of the Church to be warned to forsake that or those errours which they have espoused For that they are in an Errour is implyed otherwise there would be no occasion for an admonition 2. That admonition is to be repeated i. e. they are to be admonished a first and second time 3. If they continue obstinate after the first and second admonition they are to be rejected i. e. the Censure of the Church is to pass upon them and they are thereby to be cast out of the Society of Christians and avoided lest others should be infected by them What Heresie is or what it is that makes an Heretick he likewise teacheth us when he describes the Heretical man he here speaks of 1. A man that is an Heretick is one that is subverted i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is gone astray who hath turned aside from the right path forsaken and corrupted the true faith Thus their own Lyra understands it saying Lyra in loc A man that is an Heretick is one who having received the Catholick Faith doth afterwards corrupt it Gl. Ord. apud Lyr. And with him the ordinary Gloss agreeth telling us he is an Heretick who by the words of the Law opposeth the Law it self and puts his own sense thereupon that by the Authority thereof he may strengthen himself in the naughtiness of his own mind 2. A man that is an Heretick is one that sinneth i. e. one that sinneth knowingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Int. Gl. Or as the word imports one who is fallen from the way of Truth and hath embraced the way of Errour violently opposing the one and as obstinately defending the other 3. A man that is an Heretick is one that is condemned of himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that Faith which he once received and owned as true he now opposeth and condemneth as false saith Lyra in Loc. Or because he commendeth Errour and reproacheth Truth saith Gl. Ord. Having thus considered both the importance of the word and the nature of the thing I am treating of I shall now adventure to lay down this short but full and comprehensive Definition of it Heresie is an Errour in the Foundation of Religion openly taught and obstinately defended I call Heresie an Errour in Religion to distinguish it from Philosophical Errours for those according to the strict Ecclesiastical notion of the word cannot fall under that Head. As also to difference it from Schism for though Schism be an Errour yet is it not properly an Errour in the Faith It concerns not the Doctrine but Discipline of the Church i. e. Manners Order and Government I call it an Errour in the Foundation of Religion to distinguish it from Errours in the less considerable parts of Religion For in speculative points such as are matters of Controversie or mere School-niceties relating to times or places or other Circumstances of Religion not being plainly delivered in the word of God nor can be proved thereby Men may safely differ in their opinions without incurring the Guilt of Heresie I say this Errour must be openly taught because though men may be Hereticks by espousing some fundamental Errour and tenaciously holding the same Yet so long as they keep their opinion to themselves and do not endeavour to infect others therewith they are no Hereticks in the Eye of the Church The Church can take no cognizance of their thoughts nor pass any Judgment upon them In this case they stand accountable onely to God and their own Consciences Lastly I say that this Errour must be defended with obstinacy to distinguish it from bare Errour For though a man be as all men are subject to be in an Errour yet if he be willing to be instructed and upon better information to relinquish his Errour he cannot be said to be an Heretick Having thus stated the notion of Heresie I shall now proceed to consider how far it is appliable to the Church of England and for this purpose I shall take the Definition in pieces and consider each part severally 1. Heresie is an Errour in Religion 2. It is an Errour in the foundation of Religion 3. This Fundamental Errour must be openly taught 4. It must be obstinately maintained SECT II. I. Heresie is an Errour in Religion THAT every Heresie is an Errour and an Errour in Religion will be owned by all but that every Errour or every Errour in Religion is Heresie must not be granted for Errour and Heresie are not terms convertible It will be necessary therefore to explain this part of the Definition i. e. to see what it is we stand charged with before we go about to discharge our selves of it By Religion here Jude v. 3. I understand that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints and for the maintenance of which we are commanded earnestly to contend or that common Christianity which we have received from Christ and his Apostles which we all do or ought to profess and defend And by Errour here I understand an Opinion which is contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity Every Errour supposeth a Rule and an aberration from that Rule for what is Errour but a wandring out of the right way mistaking one thing for another esteeming that false which is really true or that true which is really false Heresie therefore being an Errour in Religion must be a going astray from that Rule which the Author of our Religion hath given us to walk by Now who is the Author of our Religion but he who is styled the author and finisher of our faith Heb. 12.2 viz. Jesus Christ the righteous And what standing Rule hath he left us to go by John 5.39 2 Tim. 3.14 15 16
have been very dangerous For it is impossible Heb. 6.4 5 6. that they who were once enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost And have tasted of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come If they fall away that they should be renewed again by repentance seeing they crucifie again to themselves the Son of God and put him to open shame These Instances do plainly discover to us that before conviction though men be in errour yea though it be a dangerous and fundamental errour and industriously propagated by them yet may their case be pityable But when they are better informed or at least have means sufficient for their better information if after this they still remain stubborn and contumacious in their errour and persist in the defence and propagation thereof this their obstinacy will alter the nature of their crime and render their condition very dangerous if not desperate 1 John 3.20 21. For if our heart condemn us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things But if our heart condemn us not then have we boldness toward God saith the Apostle John. And Blessed is he who condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Rom. 14.22 saith St. Paul. SECT X. The Church of England acquitted from the guilt of Heresie THIS notion of Heresie which hath been laid down and explained in the foregoing Sections being not only Ours but Theirs also being supported by so great and eminent Authorities as that of St. Aug. of their own Angelical Doctour and canonized Saint St. Tho. Aquinas of their great Martin Navarrus and of the most authentick Authority of their own Church at this day the Council of Trent in its Catechism ad Parochos Our Adversaries can have no colourable pretence to except against it And if it be admitted we are ready to joyn issue with them and contented to stand or fall by it The point in difference between us is briefly this Whether the guilt of Heresie according to this Notion be justly or unjustly charged upon the Church of England by the Church of Rome To acquit the Church of England is my task at present in order whereunto I shall take a review of what hath been said and as briefly as may be apply it to our present case 1. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England doth receive believe or teach any other Doctrine than what hath been received believed and taught by the Catholick Church nor broach any new Opinions thereby to divide the Church for any secular advantage to her self nor obstinately defend any false Opinions Then by St. Austin's rule before quoted she cannot be justly charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her And therefore according to this Rule she is unjustly taxed with Heresie by the Church of Rome 2. If it cannot be made appear that the Church of England doth corrupt the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints nor teach any Doctrine contrary thereunto nor dissent from any known established Article thereof nor obstinately maintain any such dissent therefrom Then by the rule of their own Angelical Doctour she ought not to be charged with Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made appear against her Therefore by this Rule she ought not to be charged with Heresie by the Church of Rome 3. If it cannot be made manifest by any publick Act or Record owned as Authentick by the Church of England that she hath renounced or forsaken that Faith into which she was baptized and of which she once made profession nor embraced any false and new Opinions which are contrary thereunto nor doth obstinately believe and maintain any such false and new Opinions Then by the Rule of their Navar. Doctour she cannot be justly charged with the guilt of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be made manifest against her Therefore by this Rule she is unjustly charged with the guilt of Heresie by the Church of Rome 4. If it cannot be proved that the Church of England either doth or ever did neglect and despise the Authority of the holy Catholick Church or doth embrace and hold any wicked Opinions in despight and defiance of that Authority or with a wilfull and obstinate mind defend and maintain any such wicked Opinions Then by the judgment of the Council of Trent in their Catechism ad Parochos she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie But none of all this ever was or can be proved against her Therefore by the Judgment of that Council she ought not to be held guilty of Heresie 5. If there be not pregnant proof that the Church of England hath embraced some Opinions which are contrary to or at least not agreeable with that Faith and common Christianity which was taught by Christ and his Apostles or hath laid a new foundation i. e. made something to be Religion and an Article of Faith which really is not so being not built upon the Foundation of the Apostles and Prophets or doth openly teach any Fundamental Errours in Religion thereby to seduce and withdraw people from fundamental Truth and Holiness or doth stubbornly maintain and defend a fundamental Errour in Religion against repeated Admonitions and clear Convictions Then can she not if this Notion of Heresie be true be justly burdened with the guilt thereof But there is not nor indeed can be any pregnant proof of any thing of all this against her Therefore according to this Notion of Heresie she cannot be justly charged with the guilt thereof I am well aware that the Minor Proposition in all these will stiffly be denied by our Adversaries they will with great boldness and confidence tell the world that all this and more hath been and still may be proved against the Church of England But God be thanked though this may soon be said it can never be proved That they frequently call us Hereticks and both do and have all along endeavoured to represent us as such to the world we very well know and if they were allowed to be Judges it would go very hard with us we should not be able to acquit our selves at their Bar. But this we think to be a very unreasonable thing that they being Parties should be Judges too and therefore we appeal from them And if they ask whither we do appeal I answer we appeal to the Holy Scriptures to the primitive Fathers and to the four first General Councils But because this may seem to be either too tedious or too troublesome a way of trial I have made choice of one more short and easie I have here laid down a Notion of Heresie which is agreed upon both by them and us and therefore unexceptionable by this we are willing to be tried and by this to stand or fall I do not say in any of these Propositions that
which we resolve by God's grace to hold fast This is that which hath been always held and taught by the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church This is the foundation upon which our Religion is built viz. upon the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone And therefore unless they can shake this Foundation unless they will impeach Christ and his Apostles unless they will charge the whole Church of God with the guilt of Heresie all their attempts and batteries levelled against us will be vain and fruitless The Church of England will still stand like a Rock against which those waves may break themselves whilst she remains unbroken by them Thus you see how impossible it is for our Adversaries to make good their charge against the Church of England and if they cannot doe it we may safely conclude they have not done it and if they neither have nor can doe it then is it a foul aspersion by them unjustly cast upon us For which their unjust uncharitable and unchristian censure I pray God forgive them Having thus secured that Post which was most likely to be attacqued by the Enemy I shall now take the boldness to make a short Sally upon them and take an account of their strength by considering some of the most material Arguments which have been offered by their Champions to make good their charge Arg. 1. Pope Nicholas as I find him cited by Bishop Jewel in the defence of his Apology p. 2. makes short work of it and very magisterially doth at once determine the whole matter For saith he Whoso denieth the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome hath renounced the Faith and is an Heretick De Major Obed. unam Sanctam Dist 22. Omnes Ans To this I answer 1. If the privilege and supremacy of the See of Rome be an Article of Faith we desire to know in which of the three Creeds or in what part of the Bible we may find it for we would not willingly be wanting in our compliance with any Article of Faith. 2. If this be so then the Council of Chalcedon consisting of 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers gathered together from all parts of the world was a pack of Hereticks for they gave equal privileges to the See of Constantinople with that of Rome 3. If this be so then Pope Gregory the great and I take him to be altogether as infallible as Pope Nicholas was an Heretick for he calleth him who usurps such an arrogant style the forerunner of Antichrist 4. If subjection to the see of Rome be a necessary part in the Definition of Heresie then all the Christians in the world except those of the Roman Communion are Hereticks for all of them as well as we do unanimously oppose the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Arg. 2. Their Angelical Doctour and Canonized Saint S. Tho. Aquinas thus argueth 22. q. 11.2.3 When a matter is once determined by the Authority of the Catholick Church if any one shall obstinately gainsay such Determination he is to be reputed an Heretick which Authority saith he doth principally reside in the Pope Ans This Argument is founded upon several false Suppositions viz. 1. That the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church which we cannot consent to because we cannot believe that a part is the whole 2. That the Determinations of that Church are obligatory to all other Churches This we cannot agree with him in because Par in parem non habet imperium Equals have no authority over one another 3. That the Authority of the Catholick Church is principally lodged in the Bishop of Rome This we cannot believe because we have no warrant for it either from the Holy Scriptures or from the four first General Councils or from any authentick Antiquity Arg. 3. Protestants are Hereticks because they oppose divers Truths propounded for divine by the visible Church Ans This Argument is also supported by these false Suppositions 1. That to oppose any Truth propounded by the Church is Heresie This we deny We grant indeed that to oppose any Truth howsoever or by whomsoever propounded is an Errour but it cannot be called an Heresie unless it be such a Truth as is an Essential part of the Gospel of Christ 2. That the Doctrines of the Church of Rome which are opposed by Protestants are divine-Truths This we take to be a false Supposition for we do not oppose any Truth much less any divine Truth that is held by them but only such false and new invented Articles as are by them superadded to the Catholick Faith. 3. That whatsoever is propounded by the Church of Rome is propounded by the visible Church This we cannot allow because we know that the Church of Rome is but a part and God knows a corrupted part too of the visible Church Arg. 4. The visible Church is Judge of Controversies and therefore Infallible To oppose her therefore is to oppose God. This Protestants doe and therefore are guilty of Heresie Ans It is here taken for granted 1. That the visible Church is Judge of Controversies 2. That she is Infallible 3. That the Roman Church is this visible Church 4. That to oppose her is to oppose God. All which Suppositions are matters of Dispute between us and yet undetermined and therefore very insufficient grounds to build such a charge upon Arg. 5. Want of Succession of Bishops and Pastours holding always the same Doctrine and of the Forms of Ordaining Bishops and Priests which are in use in the Roman Church is a certain mark of Heresie But Protestants want all these things Therefore c. Ans We deny the Major For 1. Nothing but want of Truth and holding Errour can make or prove a Man or Church to be Heretical 2. Because it is not a Succession of Persons but of Doctrine that can secure a Church from Heresie And to such a Succession there are two things necessary 1. That there be an agreement with the Apostles Doctrine 2. That there be an uninterrupted conveyance of it down to them who challenge it Both which we have Arg. 6. Protestants have forsaken a Church confessedly very ancient and besides which there could be demonstrated no other visible Church of Christ upon earth Therefore c. Ans To this I answer 1. That against God and Truth there lies no prescription and therefore it is great wisedom to forsake ancient Errours for more ancient Truths 2. That there are many other visible Churches of Christ upon earth besides the Roman These are the most material Arguments I have yet met with by which our Adversaries have attempted to make good their charge of Heresie against us and how rotten a foundation these are to build such a mighty Superstructure upon I shall now leave to the impartial Reader to judge And because I design brevity and am unwilling to draw out this discourse to too great a length I shall now hasten to a conclusion The CONCLUSION IN this Discourse I have laid down such a Notion of Heresie as is generally received and owned by our Adversaries themselves and by that have strictly examined the Charge which they bring against us and I hope have made it very plain and manifest That the imputation of Heresie to the Church of England is a soul aspersion and cannot without great injustice be cast upon Her. Which is the only thing I have undertaken to make good in this short Treatise I am heartily sorry that there should be any occasion for a Discourse of this nature I am a great lover of Peace and Truth and do greatly abhor both Schism and Heresie by the former of which the Church's peace is disturbed and her Members crumbled into parties and factions and by the latter of which her Truth is fullied her Doctrine perverted and the whole frame of Religion put out of order And therefore I do earnestly pray as my dear Mother the Church of England hath taught me that all those who have erred and are deceived may be brought into the way of truth and that Unity Peace and Concord may flourish in all Nations I have no pleasure in strife and debates and if I were not commanded to contend earnestly for the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints should be very unwillingly drawn to engage in them But when I meet with a loud and ungrounded clamour branding those who embrace and endeavour to hold fast the holy Catholick Faith with the odious names of Schismaticks and Hereticks I cannot forbear according to my poor ability to stand up in the defence of injured Innocency and abused Truth This is that which I did design and have attempted to doe in both the Parts of this discourse and if our Adversaries be angry with me for it I cannot help it nor am I much concerned at it But if through weakness or inadvertency I have failed in my design or not defended the Church of England so well as I ought and as one more able might have done from those foul Aspersions which have been so unjustly cast upon her I humbly beg her pardon and do freely submit both my self and undertaking to her censure well knowing that she is an indulgent Mother and will put a favourable construction upon what was well meant I shall conclude all with a passionate intreaty and earnest request both to those of the Roman and those of our own Communion that they would all devoutly joyn with me in this humble and hearty prayer to Almighty God From all Sedition privy Conspiracy and Rebellion from all false Doctrine Heresie and Schism from hardness of Heart and contempt of thy Word and Commandment Good Lord deliver us FINIS ADVERTISEMENTS SOme Queries to Protestants Answered And an Explanation of Roman Catholick's Belief in Four Great Points considered 1. Concerning their Church 2. Their Worship 3. Justification 4. Civil Government Also lately printed A Seasonable Prospect for the View and Consideration of Christians Being a brief Representation of the Lives and Conversations of Infidels and Heathens as to Religion and Morality in our Age. Together with some Reflexions thereupon in Relation to us who profess Christianity Written by a Gentleman Both Printed for Luke Meredith at the King 's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard