holy breathings after Christ the love to God! the heavenly mindedness the hatred of all known sin the humility self-denial meekness c. that I have discerned as far as effects can shew the heart to others in abundance of those people that differ from you in some smaller things which occasioned your frequent bitter reproaches if God love them not I have not yet met with the people whom I may say he loveth if he do love them he will scarcely take your dealing well especially when you rise to such bloody desires of hanging them as the better remedy then burning their Books as in your History of Sabbath pag. 254. Ecclesia vindicata Preface and passim you express 7. I am not an approver of the violence of any of them nor do I justifie M. Burtons way nor am I of the minde of the party you most oppose in all their discipline as a Book now in the Press will give the world an account but I am sure the Church must have unity and charity in the ancient simplicity of Doctrine Worship and Government or not at all And if you would have men live in peace as Brethren our union must not be Law or Ceremonies or indâ—fferent Forms nor must you make such rigorous Laws for all and hang them that are against you Scripture and reason and the primitive practise and great experience do lead us all to another course But of these words if I could procure your pardon I expect no more because of our difference 8. To pass by many others I am also much unsatisfied in three things you say concerning Popery 1. That the Papist was the more moderate adversary and the Puritan faction hurried on with greater violence c. Preface to Ecclesia vindicata 2. That you maintain against M. Burton that the Religion of the Papists is not rebellion nor their faith faction I prove both 1 That Religion which defineth the deposition of Princes and absolving their Subjects from their fidelity by the Pope because they deny Transubstantiation c. is rebellion Doctrinal but such is the Popish Religion The Minor is evident That which is defined by a Pope and general Council is the Papistâ— Religion It is defide yea and essential because they will have all essentials and deny our distinguishing them from the rest But the aforesaid Doctrin is defined by a Pope and an approved general Council viz at the Laterane under INNOCENT III. That if any Protestant Writers should teach the same that puts it not into our Creed as this is in theirs 2. If it be an Article of the Papists faith that none are members of Christ and his Church but the Subjects of the Pope then the Papists faith is faction But the Antecedent is true being defined by Pope LEO X. in a general Council 3. I am a sorry Lawyer but truly I would fain understand whether it be true that written by M. Dow and you his page 185. and yours 210. of the History of the Sabbath That the Popes decretals the body of the Canon Law is to be accepted as not abrogated which being made for the direction and reiglement of the Church in general were by degrees admitted and obeyed in these parts of Christendom and are by Act of Parliament so far still in force as they oppose not the Prerogative Royal and the municipal Laws and Statuâ—es of this Realm of England these are your words and M. Dow gives some reason for them out from a Statute of HEN. 8. But little know I by what Authority the Popes decretals are Laws to the Church in general or to us and I will yet hope they are not in force But if ever I live to see another Parliament if I be mistaken I shall crave a freedom from that bondage I thought the Acts that impose the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy had disobliged us from all forreign power and nulled the Popes authority in England 9. I am very glad that you who are esteemed the Primipilus among the defenders of the late turgid and persecuting sort of Prelacy do so freely disclaim the Grotian Religion which I never charged you with I hope the more confidently that most of the Prelatical Divines will disown it but if ever you put your self to the trouble of writing to me again I should be glad to understand how you can take the Popes decretals and the body of the Canon Law as a Law for the government of the Church in general and here received to be still so far in force as you affirm and yet not hold that the Pope and his Council have the power of making Laws for the government of the Church in general and see that we and all other Christians are his Subjects Sir I crave your pardon of the displeasing plainness of these lines and remain Your unfaignedly well willing Brother and fellow Servant R. Baxter Octob. 20. 1658. To this Letter being thus received and seriously considered of I thought my self obliged to return an Answer and such an Answer as might satisfie him in all particulars which were in difference between us and it is here chearfully presented to the eye of the Reader The Answer of Peter Heylyn D. D. to M. Baxter's Letter of Octob. 20. SIR YOur Letter of Octo. 20 last I received on Saturday the 30. of the same Month at what time I was preparing for a Journey to London from whence I returned not till that day Month I had there so much other business to take up my thoughts that I could not give my self the leasure to read and consider the Contents of that your Letter much less of dispatching an Answer to it But being now at home in full peace of minde and health of body I thank God for it I have more thorowly considered of all particulars which may sâ—em necessary for me to take notice of in order to my owne defence and your satisfaction which shall go hand in hand together 10. But first I must needs tell you that I could not chuse but wonder at the extream but most unnecessary length thereof and the impertinencies of the greatest part of it in reference to that Letter of mine which it was to Answer and whereunto you had given so full an Answer in the first 25. lines which make but the fifth part of the whole that there was no need of any thing to be added to it The cause of my address unto you was to let you know how much I wished that you had spared my name in your Preface to your Book of the Grotian Religion unless you could have proved me to have been one of that Religion which I thought you could not or had had some more particular charge to have laid against me then I sound you had And secondly To desire you to let me know in what Book or Books of mine you had found a Puritan defined to be a Conformist who was no Arminian a description of whom one Peter Heylyn had
were subject to the Pope Neither indeed was there any need at that time of this Councel that any such Definitions should be made no new Heresie or any new doctrine which by them might be called Heresie being then on foot for Luther did not rise in Germany till this Counsel was ended which might create any disturbance to the peace of that Church If any such priviledges were arrogated by Pope Leo the 10. that none should be accounted members of Christ and his Church but such as were subject to the Pope which you cannot find definitively in the Acts of that Councel you must rather have looked for it in the Bulls of that Pope after Luther had begun to dispute his power and question his usurped authority over all the Church In one of which Bulls you may finde somewhat to your purpose where you shall find him saying that the Church of Rome is Mother and Mistress of all Christians and that her doctrines ought to be received of whosoever would be in the Communion of the Church If this be that you mean much good do it you with though this be rather to be taken for a Declaration then a Definition 45. But if your meaning is as perhaps it may be that the Papists Faith may be called Faction because they appropriate to themselves the name of the Church and exclude all other Christians from being members of Christ and his Church which are not subject to the Pope as indeed they do take heed you lose not more in the Hundreds then you got by the County for then it may be proved by the very same Argument if there were no other that the Puritan Faith is Faction and so to be accounted by all that know it because they do appropriate unto themselves the name of the Church as the old Affrican Scismaticks confined it intra partem Donati For proof whereof if you please to consult Bâ—shop Bancrofts book of Dangerous Positions anâ— Proceedings c. part 3. chap. 15. you will find them writing in this manner viz I know the state of this Church make known to us the state of the Church with you Our Churches are in danger of such as having been of us do renounce all fellowship with us It is long since I have heard from you saith one Blake of the state of the Church of London Another By M. West and M. Brown you shall understand the state of the Churches wherein we are A third If my offence may not be passed by without a further confessiâ—n even before God and his Churâ—h in London will I lye down and lick the dust off your feet where you may see what it is which the heavenly-mindednesse the self-denial meeknesse and Humility which the brethren aim at and confesse it c. I have received saith the fourth a Letter from you in the name of the rest of the Brethren whereby I understand your joining together in choosing my self unto the service of the Church under the Earl of Leicester I am ready to run if the Church command me according to the holy Decrees and Orders of the Discipline Lay all which hath been said together and tell me he that can my wits not being quick enough for so great a nicety whether the Papists Faith or that of the Puritans most properly and meritoriously may be counted Faction 46. The third thing in which you seem unsatisfied in what I say concerning Popery is whether it be true or not that the Popes Decretals the body of the Canon Law is to be accepted as not being abrogated which being made for the direction and reiâ—lement of the Church in general were by degrees admitted and obeyed in these parts of Christendome and are by Act of Parliament so far still in force as they oppose not the Prerogative royal or the municipal laws and statutes of this Realm of England These words I must confesse for mine owning Hist Sab. pa. 2. ch 7. p. 202. and not 210. as your Letter cites it your parenthesis being only excepâ—ed and you name it this Kingdome in stead of the Realm of England though both expressions be to one and the same effect In which you might have satisfied your self by M. Dow who as you say gives some reason for it out of a Statute of Hen. 8. But seeing you remain still unsatisfied in that particular I shall adde something more for your satisfaction In order whereunto you may please to know that in the Stat. 29. Hen. 8. ch 19. commonly called the Statute of the submission of the Clergy it is said expresly First that the Clergie in their convocation promised the King in verbo Saâ—erdoris not to enact or execute any new Canons but by his Majesties royal assent and by his authority first obtained in that behalf and secondly that all such Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Provincial as were made before the said submission which were not contrary or repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customes of this Realm nor to the dammage or hurt of the Kings Prerogative Royal were to be used and executed as in former times By which last clause the Decretal of preceding Popes having been admitted into this Land and by several Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England and the main body of the Canon-law having for a long time been accounted for a standing rule by which all proceedings in the Courts Ecclesiastical were to be regulated and directed remain still in force and practice as they had done formerly But then you are to know withall that they were no longer to remain in force and practice then till the said preceding Canons and Constitutions as appears by the said Act of Parliament should be viewed and accommodated to the use of this Church by 32. Commissioners selected out of the whole body of the Lords and Commons and to be nominated by the King But nothing being done therein during the rest of the Kings reign the like authority was granted to King Edw. 6. 3. 4. Edw 6. c. 11. And such a progresse was made in it that a Sub-committee was appointed to review all their said former Canons and Constitutions and to digest such of them into form and order as they thought most fit and necessary for the use of this Church Which Sub committee consisted of eight persons only that is to say Thomas Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Lord Bishop of Eli Dr. Richard Cox the Kings Almoner Peter Martyr his Majesties professor for Divinity William May and Rowland Taylor Doctors of the Law John Lucas and Richard Gooderick Esquires who having prepared and digested the whole work into form and order were to submit the same to the rest of the 32. and finally to be presented to the King for his Royal Assent and confirmation And though the said Sub-committee had performed their parts as appears by the Book entituled REFORMATIO LEGUM ECCLESIASTICARUM ex authoritate primum Regis HENRICI VIII inchâ—aâ—a Deinde
puts it not into our Creed as this is in theirs But first I hope you do not think that whatsoever is agreed in a General Councel is presently put into our Creed or becomes an Article of the Faith there being some things determined in the first General Councel held by the Apostles in Jerusalem which being long disused are not now binding at all and such as are now binding not being observed because they were decreed in that Councel but as they have their foundation in the Moral Law Secondly if you think the doctrine of Deposing Kings is put into the Papists Creed you must tell me in what Creed it is in none of their old Creeds I am sure of that nor in the new Creed made by Pope Pius the fourth nor in the Roman Catechism published by the authority of the Councel of Trent nor in any other Authentick Record or publick Monument of that Church for if this doctrine had been made a part of their Creed as well before as since the Laterane Councel so many learned men in the Church of Rome as Brian Marsepius Butavinus and divers others had not writ against it nor had so many secular Priests living or abiding here in England so freely written in behalf of the Oath of Allegiance in which this doctrine is disclaimed had it been entertained in that Church as a part of their Creed And on the other side why may we not conceive that this doctrine of Deposing Kings is made an Article of the Creed by the Sect of Calvin considering first how generally it is defended how frequently practised and endeavoured by them as before was said considering secondly that though many National and Provincial Synods have been held by them in their several and respective Churches yet did they never in any one of them disclaim this doctrine or seek to free their Churches from the scandal of it All which clearly shews that they did very well approve the doctrine together with all the consequents thereof in the way of practice And then quid interest utrum velim fieri an gaudeam factum as the Orator hath it what will the difference be I pray you between advising before hand such ungodly practises and approving of them on the post-fact as they seem to do For were it otherwise amongst them they never had a better oportunity to have cleared themselves from being enemies to Monarchical Government from justifying such seditious writings from having a hand in any of those commotions which had before disturbed the peace of Christendome then in the Synod of Dort Anno 1618. where the Commissioners or Delegates of all the Calvinian Churches both in the higher and the lower Germany those of Geneva and the Switzers being added to them were convened together Their doing nothing in it then declares sufficiently how well they liked the doctrine and allowed the practice 42. Having thus justified M. Burton in his first assertion you next proceed unto the maintenance of his second which is that the Papists Faith is Faction and how prove you that Marry thus You say if it be an article of the Popish Faith that none are Members of Christ and his Church but the subjects of the Pope then the Popish Faith is Faction But the Antecedent is true being defined by the Pope Leo the 10. in a General Councel This is the Argument by which you hope to justifie M. Burtons second proposition though afterwards you would be thought to be no approver of his wayes But let me tell you M. Baxter your Hypothetical Syllogism is as faulty and halts as much on both legs as your Categorical For taking it for granted that such an article of the Faith was made by Pope Leo the 10. in a General Councel yet can you not with any reason or justice either upbraid the whole Faith of the Papists with being a Faction because of the obliquity and partiality of one article of it Nor 2ly can the Papist Faith be termed Faction supposing that any such article had been made in that Councel for it would follow thereupon that if a Canon had been made in the Convocation of the Bishops and Clergie which make the representative body of the Church of England that whosoever should oppose the Rites and Ceremonies by Law established should not be capable either of the Sacraments or Sacramentals that Canon might be called Faction whereas the Faction lies not in the Canon but in them that do oppose the Ceremonies Or if any act or statute should be made in a free and lawful Parliament that every one who shall not pay the Subsidies and Taxes imposed on them by the same should be put out of the protection of the Laws of the Land that Statute could not be or be called Faction because the Faction lies not in the Act or Statute but in them who do refuse the payment My reason is because the main body of a Church or State or any of the Products or results thereof cannot in any propriety of speech be held for Faction whether considered in themselves or in relation to some few who dislike the same and violently pursue their dislikes thereof For Faction to speak properly is the withdrawing of a smaller or greater number from the main body either of a Church or State governing themselves by their own Councels and openly opposing the established Government as here in England they who communicate not with the Church in favour of the Pope of Rome are commonly called the Popish Faction as they are called the Puritan Faction who conform not to the Rites and Ceremonies by Law established But on the other side the whole body of the Church is by no means to be called a Faction in reference to either of the opposite parties And then again you should have told us whether you take the word Faith in your proposition for a justifying historical temporary Faith or a Faith of Miracles whither you take it for the Habit or Act of Faith by which they believe or for the Object of Faith or that is to say the thing believed If you can take the word Faith in none of these senses as I think you cannot it must be taken in a more general comprehension for the true knowledge and worship of God and then it signifies the same with the word Religion the Christian Faith and the Christian Religion denoting but one and the same thing under divers names so that upon the whole matter you are but where you were before the Papists Religion being no more properly to be called faction in this Proposition then it was Rebellion in the former Had you formed your Proposition thus viz. If it be an Article of the Papists faith that none are members of Christ and his Church but the Subjects of the Pope then the Papists faith or rather that one Article of the Papists faith tends to the making of a faction you had come neerer to the truth but standing in the same tearms in
from the death of Bishop Andrews and Archbishop Harsâ—et then he had taken those of York on this last occasion But I hope onâ— Author was somewhat more then half asleep when this note fell from him for otherwise me thinks he could not be so much a stranger to the affairs of the Church as not to know that ever since the time of William the second for so long that ill custome hath continued nothing hath been more ordinary with the Kings of England then to enter on the temporalities of all vacant Bishoppricks whether it be by death promotion or what way soever and to receive the mean profits of them till the new Bishop after the doing of his homage hath taken out a writ for their restitution 47. Our Author now drawes toward an end and for a conclusion to his Book contrary in a manner to all former Precedents addresseth an Epistle To the Religious Learned and judicious Reader In which he feeds himself and his Reader also with the hopes of this that there are no more Errors to be found in his History then those which have been noted in the Animadversions This I will add saith he for thus he doth bespeak his Reader for my comfort and thy better confidence in reading my Book that according to the received rule in Law Exceptio firmat Regulam in non exceptis it followeth proportionably that Animadversio firmat Regulam in non Animadversis And if so by the Tacit consent of my Adversary himself all other passages in my Book are allowed sound and true save those few which fall under his reproof But if so as it is much otherwise the passages which fall under the Reproof of the Animadvertor are not so few as to give the Reader any confidence that all the rest are to be allowed for sound and true Non omnem molitor quae fluit unda videt as the Proverb hath it The Miller sees not all the water which goes under his Mill much of it passing by without observation and if the blind eat many a fly as the English Adage saith he doth he may swallow many an Error also without discovery when he first finds them in his dish And so it was with me in the Review of our Authors History the second perusal whereof presented many Errors to my consideration which had not been noted in the first And since the publishing of the Animadversions I have fallen accidentally upon divers others not observed before of which I shall advertise him in a private way whensoever he shall please to desire it of me 48. And here I thought I should have ended but the Appealant puts me to the answering of two Objections against the Bishops having place in Parliament as a third Estate Which two Objections may be Answered without being heard as being made against the clear letter of the Law the express words of several Statutes and Records of Parliament as also against the positive determination of Sir Edward Cook the most learned Lawyer of our times whose judgement in that point may seem to carry the authority of a Parliament with it because by Order of this Parliament his Books were appointed to be Printed But since the Appealant doth require it in the way of curtesie I will serve him in it as well as I can at the present without engaging my self in any further enquiry after those particulars And first as to the Bishop of Man the reason why he hath no vote in Parliament is not because he doth not hold his Lands per integram Baroâ—iam as is implyed in the Objections but because he doth not hold his Lands of the King at all The Bishop of Man is Homiger to the Earl of Darby as the chief Lord of the Island of his sole nomination and dependance and therefore there could be no reason which might induce the King of England to admit those Bishops to a place and vote in Parliament who held nothing of them and of whose dutie and affections they could promise little And so much I remember to have read in the learned Work of Francis Mason de Ministerio Anglicano building therein if my memory do not too much fail me upon the judgement and authority of the learned Andrews in his Elaborate Apologie against Cardinal Bellarmine To the second Objection That some Statutes have been made absente or Exclusâ— clero which notwithstanding are esteemed to be good and valid therefore that the Bishops sit not in the Parliament as a third Estate I shall for brevity sake refer the Appealant to my answer to the Book called The stumbling Block c. cap. 5. Sect. 7. 8. c. where he shall find the point discoursed more at large then these short Remembrances can admit of I shall onely now adde thus much that in the Protestation made by the twelve Bishops which was enrolled amongst the Records of that house they thereby entred their Protest against all such Laws Orders Votes Resolutions and determinations as in themselves null and of none effect which in their absence since the 27th of December 1641. as were already passed and likewise against such as should hereafter pass in that most honourable house during the time of their forced and violent absence from it c. Which certainly so many Grave Learned and Judicious men would never have done if they had not looked upon themselves in the capacity of a third Estate according to the Laws of the Realm exprest in several Acts and Records of Parliament And whereas he requests me when my hand is in to answer an Objection taken from a passage in the Parliament at Northampton under Hen. the second in which the Bishops claimed their place not as Bishops but Barons Non sedemus hiâ— Episcopi sed Barones c. it must be understood with reference to the case which was then before them in which they thought themselves better qualified to pass their judgements in the capacity of Barons then in that of Bishops For that the Bishops sat in Parliament in a double capacity will be no hard matter to evince considering that they sat as Bishops in all publick Councels before the entrance of the Normans and that when William the Conqueror changed their tenure from Frank Almoigne to Bâ—râ—nage he rather added some new capacity to them which before they had not then took any of their old Capacities from them which before they had But this dispute is out of doors as the case now stands which makes me willing to decline all such further trouble which the Appealant seems desirous to impose upon me 50. That which I have already done in Order to his satisfaction is more then he can challenge in the ordinary course of Disputation or hath deserved at my hands in the managing of it He tells us in the Third Chapter of his Apparatus that finding himselfe necessitated to return an answer to the Animadversions he was resolved first to abstain from all Rayling that being a
per Regem EDW. VI. provecta c. Reprinted not long since at London 1641. But that King also dying before the said Canons so digested and accommodated could be confirmed and ratified by the Royal Assent and authorised under the Great Seal of England the former Canons Constiâ—utions and Ordinances and consequently the Decretals of the Popes and the body of the Canon law according to the limitations and restrictions by the Statute of King Hen. 8. did remain in force and so continue to this day so that your hopes of their not being in force amongst us declares you for as sorry a Lawyer as you confesse your self to be 47. Next when you say how little you know by what authority the Popes Decretals are laws to theâ— Church in genâ—ral or to us I will improve youâ— knowledge in that particular also as far as I can and for so doing I am to put you in mind that the Popes for a long tract of time were possessed of the Supreme power in Ecclesiastical matters over all the Churches in the Western and North-western parts and amongst others in this also and that he did pretend the like authority over all the Churches in the East and South so that their Decretals were made by them intentionally to serve for a rule and reiglement of the Church in general but were admitted only in the Churches of the Western and North-western parts which did acknowledge his Supremacy and made themselves subject to his power But having now shaken off his power in the three Kingdomes of England Scotland and Ireland in the three Realms of Denmark Norway and Sweden in the united Provinces of the Netherlands and many great Provinces and Estates of the Higher Germany besides some thousands of the Protestant Churches in the Realm of France he hath now lost that power which before he challenged of making laws for the Government of the Church in general though such of them as we here received are still so far in force as I have affirmed that is to say according to the sad restrictions and limitations before laid down And therefore I can well maintain that the Pope and his Councels had a power you never heard me say he hath of imposing his Decretals and the body of the Canon law as a law for the Government of so much of the Church as was then actually under his command having been made intentionally for the reiglement of the Church in general and that being here received are still so far in force that is to say in such form and maner as I have affirmed and yet not grant that he and his Councels have any such power at this present time or that are and all other Christians must be thought to be his Subjects which is the thing you seem glad to understand if ever I should put my self to the trouble of writing to you again as I have done now 48. Having thus laid before you the true state of the Question I am in the next place to answer such Objections as you make against it and your Objections being built chiefly on your own thoughts and such hopes as you had fancied to your self For want of knowledg in these matters will be easily answered You object first That you will yet hope that they are not in force but I have proved to you that they are And you object next That you thought the Acts that impose the Oathes of allegeance and supremacy had disobliged us from all forreigue power and nulled the Pope's authority in England and though you thought well enough in this yet if you think that because those Acts of Parliament above mentioned have disobliged us from all forreign power and nulled the Popes authority in England and therefore that all the Decretals of the former Popes or Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical made in times of Popery are either by those Acts and Oths anulled and abrogated your thoughts will prove to be as deceitful as your hopes are groundless and therefore when you say that if ever you live to see another Parliament which you are like to do very shortly if the news be true you will crave a freedom from that bondage I would fain know from what bâ—ndage you desire this freedom If from subjection to the Pope you are freed from it by the Act primo Eliz. cap. 1. by which all the Popes authority and jurisdiction in the Realm of England as well over the consciences as the pens of men were finally exterminated and abolished If from their Canons and Decrees made and in force within this Realm before the 25. of King Henry 8. they were confirmed by the Parliament of that year according to the limitations before expressed and are so complicated since that time with the Laws of the Land that the alteration will be far more difficult then you may imagine so that you may do well to spare your address to the following Parliament and reserve that strong influence which you believe you have upon it for some greater occasions or at the least for such as are more possible to be compassed then this present project Besides you may be pleased to know that a great part of the Civil or Imperial Laws are in force amongst us and that they are the standing rules by which the Court of Admiralty as also that for the probate of Wills and Testaments are generally regulated and directed and yet you may conclude as strongly that because no forreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction power superiority preheminence or authority within this Realm no not the Emperour himself though honoured with the Title of Augustus Cesar and such like glorious attributes belonging to the Roman Empire therefore the Civil and Imperial Laws so long continued in this Kingdom are to be reckoned of no force and effect amongst us but to be utterly abrogated and abolished also which if it should be took for granted as you take the other you must then double your design in moving and soliciting the next Parliament to free you from that yoke of bondage that the Pontificial and Imperial laws may be for ever banished and expelled this Kingdome that so it may be said of us as Haman once objected against the Jews their Laws were contrary to all Nations Divisâ—s orbe Brittannos even in that sense also It is reported of Alphonso surnamed the Wise one of the Kings of Castile in Spain that he used many times to say never the wiser for so saying that if he had stood at Gods elbow when he made the World many things should have been ordered better then they were in the first Creation Take heed left that you be thought no wiser then Alphonso was in pressing at the Parliament dores and urging your desires for abrogating all those ancient Canons and Constitutions by what name soever they are called and by what Authority soever they were first enacted which so many Kings and Queens of
Bishop it is distinctly called an Order all which he could not chuse but see in that very Chapter of the Book called Respondit Petrus in which he finds me questioning the Lord Primates Iudgement touching the universality of Redemption by the death of Christ The Books confirmed by Act of Parliament in the 5th and 6th of Edw. 6. Repealed in the first yeare of Queen Mary continuing notwithstanding in use and practise for the first seven years of Queen Elizabeth and reconfirmed by Parliament the next year after upon occasion of a difference between Bonâ—er the late bloody Bishop of London and Horn then Bishop of Winchester His Grace had therefore very good Reason not to change his judgement and to press very hard on Bishop Hall not to wave that point for which he stands censured by our Adversary p. 24. and to insist upon it more then at other times when the Scotish Presbyterians had began to revive the question for which he stands condemned also p 25. 23. But see the Candor of the man and how like he seems to Aesops Dog when he lay in the Manger not giving the Arch-Bishop a good word himselfe nor suffering any other to do it without snarling at him I had signified in my first Letter that the Arch-Bishops memory was too precious amongst all that loved the Church of England to suffer him to be so defamed and by such a person Your Adversary doth not deny because he cannot that in many things he had deserved well of the Vniversity but will not yield himself convinced that his memory should be so precious as my Letter intimates to all that love the Church of England And a squint eye he casts on some body for a Temporizer whose design it was to ingratiate himself with great ones and could complement a Prince so highly as to style himself his Creature and the workmanship of his hands But who it is whom he so decyphereth or whether he means any one man or not but onely casts abroad his censures as Boyes throw their stones without any proper aim or object but the love of the sport I am not able to find out in my best remembrance Passing by therefore such Aenigma's as I cannot unriddle I must needs take notice how he applyes the Character to him of which Isidore Pelusi gives unto one Eusebus a wretched fellow of those times and one who took upon himself the name and office of a Bishop The Character to be found in the 24. Epistle of his second Book and the Epistle recommended to my diligent Reading 23. He tells me that the Character contained therein doth two well suit with the Arch-Bishop but I find it otherwise Eusebius as the Author tells us would not know the difference between the Temple and the Church between the place of the Assembly and the Congregation sparing no cost to build repair and beautifie the one but vexing disquieting and expelling the righteous soul to many of which he had given great matter of offence or scandal dum multis offendiculis causam prebet probos viros expellere c. The same he florisheth over again in the following words concluding with this Observation That in the Primitive times when there were no Temples the Church was plentifully adorned with all heavenly Graces but that in his time the Temples were adorned beyond Moderation Ecclesia vero Canviciis Cavillis in cessitur but the poor Church reproached and reviled upon all occasions such is the Character which Isidore gives to this Eusebus But that this Character should suit too well with the late Arch-Bishop is a greater scandal then ever Eusebus gave to the weak brethren of the Church of Pelusium For will your Adversary confine the Church as some wild Affricans did of old intra partem Donati within the Conventicles and Clancular meetings of the Puritan Faction Or hath he confidence to averre that any Righteous and Religious person was expelled this Church understand me of the Church of England whom either Faction or Sedition in conformity or disobedience spiritual pride or fear of punishment did not hurry out of it Just so it was Railed out by Brother Burton in his Libel falsly called a Sermon where he affirms that the edge of Dscipiline was turned mainly against Gods people and ministers even for their virtue piety and worth and because they would not conform to their the Bishops impious Orders Just so it was once preached in a Latine Sermon at St. Maryes in Oxon by Bayley one of the old brood of Puritans in Magdalen Colledge that good and Godly men were purposely excluded from preferments there ob hoc ipsum quod pii quod boni onely because they were enclined to virtue and piety With spight and callumnie enough but not to be compared with his who so reproachfully hath handled this Renowned Prelate and the poor sequestred and ejected Clergy of the Church of England But Judas did the like before to his Lord and Master And thereupon St. Cyprian very well inferres nec nobis turpe esse pati quae passus est Christus nec illis gloriam facere quae fâ—cerat Judas 24. And here I would have ended with your puissant Adversary but that his Letter carries me to a new ingagement He tells me there that in the Historical part of his discourse he hath proved that till D. Laud sat in the Saddle our Divines of prime Note and Authority did in the five points deliver themselves consonantly to the determination of the Synod of Dort and that they were enjoyned Recantation who were known either to preach or print that which is now called Arminianism and thinks that no body can deny it for a truth infallible But first if we allow this for a good and sufficient Argument it will serve as strongly for the Papists against all those who laboured in the Reformation For what one point do we maintain against those of Rome in which the Divines of prime Note and Authority in the Church of Rome did not deliver themselves as consonantly to the preceding Doctrines of the Schoolmen there and to the subsequent determinations of the Council of Trent and for opposing which manner of Persons were constrained to a Recantation who either preacht or printed in defence of that which is now called Protestantism And 2dly if we behold the constitution of our University when D. Humphrys a moderate non-conformist but a non-conformist howsoever as M. Fuller is pleased to call him possest the Divinity Chaire for almost forty years and D. Reynolds a Rigid non-Conformist publiquely read a Divinity Lecture founded by Sir Francis Walsingham the principal Patron of the Sect as you will find in the beginning of his Lectures on the Books Apocriphal it is no marvail if we find that the Doctrine and Discipline of Calvin should be so generally received by the Students there or being so generally received that they should put all manner of disgraces upon all or any of those
mildness of his Majesties Government and the great Moderation shown by Bishop Laud in the use of his power in not compelling men to say or do any thing against their Conscience a moderation which we find not amongst those of the Sect of Calvin when any of the opposite party fell into their hands Sixthly whereas it might be thought that the Ancient Protestants as he merrily calls them had past many such severe censures upon those whom he stiles Arminians he instanceth in none but in Barret and Bridges which make too small a number for so great a bragg Quid dignum tanto and the rest And finally for answer to the Prelatical oppressions I shall referre you to my former Discourse with Mr. Baxter num 20 21 23 repeating only at the present that the Proceeding of the Bishops were mild and gentle compared with the unmerciful dealings of the Presbiterians by whom more Orthodox Learned and Religious Ministers were turned out of their Benefices within the space of three years then by all the Bishops in England since the Reformation 46. But the King must not think to carry it so the Puritan Faction being generally Calvinistical in Doctrine as well as in Discipline prevailed so in the House of Commons Jan. 28. 1628. that they agreed upon this Counterpoise or Anti-declaration following viz. We the Commons now assembled in Parliament do claim profess and avow for truth the sense of the Articles of Religion which were established in Parliament 13. Eliz. Which by the publick Acts of the Church of England and the general current Exposition of the Writers of our Church have been delivered to us and we reject the sense of the Jesuites and Arminians and all other wherein they differ from us Which counterpoise made in direct opposition to the Kings Declaration your adversary makes a product of the Civil Authority whereas the House of Commons was so far at that time from being looked on as the Civil Authority of the English Nation that it was of no Authority at all nor could make any Order to bind the Subject or declare any thing to be Law and much less Religion till it was first countenanced by the Lords and finally confirmed by the Royal assent But this he doth in correspondence to the said Protestation in which the Articles of Lambeth are called the publique Acts of the Church of England though made by none but the Arch Bishop of Canterbury two Bishops of which onely one had actually received Consecration one Dean and half a dozen Doctors and other Ministers or thereabouts neither impowered to any such thing by the rest of the Clergy nor authorized to it by the Queen And therefore their determinations can no more properly be called the Acts of the Church then if one Earl with the eldest Sons of two or three others meeting with half a dozen Gentlemen in Westminster Hall can be affirmed to be in a capacity of making Orders which must be looked on by the Subject as Acts of Parliament 47. Your Adversary begins now to draw toward the Lees and in the Dreggs of his discourse offers some Arguments to prove that those doctrines and opinions which he calls Arminianism were countenanced to no other end but to bring in Popery And for the proof hereof he brings in Mr. Prinn's Report to the House of Commons in the Case of Montague An. 1626. In which it is affirmed that the whole frame and scope of his book was to discourage the well affected in Religion and as much as in him lay to reconcile them unto Popery He gives us secondly a fragment of a scattered Paper pretended to be written to the Rector of the Jesuites Colledge in Bruxels In which the Writer lets him know that they had strongly fortified their Faction here in England by planting the Soveraign Drug Arminianism which he hoped would purge the Protestants from their Heresie Thirdly he backs this paper with a clause in the Remonstrance of the House of Commons Anno 1628 where it is said that the hearts of his Majesties Subjects were perplex'd in beholding the dayly growth and spreading of the faction of Arminianism that being as his Majesty well knew so they say at least but a cunning way to bring in Popery All which he flourishes over by a passage in the Lord Faucklands Speech before remembered in which it is affirmed of some of the Bishops that their work was to try how much of a Papist might be brought in without Popery and to destroy as much as they could of the Gospel without bringing themselves in danger of being destroyed by the Law c. To all which being but the same words out of divers mouths I shall return one answer only which is briefly this Your adversary cannot be so ignorant as not to know that the same points which are now debated between the Calvinians and the Old Protestants in England between the Remonstrants and Contra-remonstrants in the Belgick Churches and finally between the Rigid and Moderate Lutherans in the upper Germany have been as fiercely agitated between the Franciscans and Dominicans in the Church of Rome the old English Protestants the Remonstrants and the moderate Lutherans agreeing in these points with the Franciscans as the English Calvinists the Contra-Remonstrants and the Rigid Lutherans do with the Dominicans So that there is a complyance on all sides with one of the said two parties in the Church of Rome And therefore why a general compliance in these points with the Friers of St. Dominick the principal Sticklers and Promoters of the Inquisition should not be thought as ready a way to bring in Popery as any such compliance with the Friers of St. Francis I would fain have your Adversary tell me when he puts out next 49. The greatest of the storm being over there remains only a few drops which will make no man shrink in the wetting that is to say the permission of some books to be frequenly printed containing the Calvinian Doctrine and the allowance of many questions to be maintained publiquely in the Act at Oxon contrary to the sence of those which he calls Arminians Amongst the Books so frequently printed he instanceth in the Practise of Piety Perkins his Principles Balls Catechism c. which being incogitantly licensed to the Press at their first coming out could not be afterwards Restrained from being Reprinted notwithstanding the many inconveniences which ensued upon it till the passing of the Decree in Star-Chamber July 1637. concerning Printing by which it was ordered to the great grief and trouble of that Puritan faction that no Book whatsoever should be reprinted except Books of the Law till they were brought under a review and had a new License for reprinting of them And though D. Crakanthorps Book against the Archbishop of Spalato was but once printed yet being called Defensâ—o Ecclesiae Anglicanae it serves your Adversaries turn as well as if it had been Printed an hundred times over How so because
them and one that hated the Idolatries and superstitions of the Church of Rome with a perfect hatred This Reverend Father must not be consulted in the business for fear it might be thought that it was not to be done without him A Parish Vestry must be called by which M. Sherfield is inabled to take down the offensive Pictures and put new white Glass in the place though he be transported with a fit of unruly zeal instead of taking it down breaks it all in pieces Here then we have an Eldership erected under the Bishops nose a Reformation undertaken by an Act of the Vestry in contempt of those whom God and his Majesty and the Laws had made the sole Judges in the case An example of too sad a consequence to escape unpunished and such as might have put the people upon such a Gog as would have leâ—t but little work to the late Long Parliament Non ibi consistent Exemplaubi ceperunt sed in tenuem recepta tramitem latissime evagandi sibi viam faciunt as my Author hath it 52. But he proceeds according to his usual way of asking Questions and would fain know in what respect they may be accounted the obedient Sons of the Church who study by all their learning to take off that ignominous name of Antichrist from the Pope of Rome which had bin fastned on him by King James Archbishop Whitgift Bishop Andrews and the late Lord Primate and finally by the whole Clergy in their Convocation An. 1605. In the recital of which Proof I find not that the name of Antichrist was ever positively and and in terminis ascribed unto the Popes of Rome by any Article Homily Canon or injunction or by any other publick Monument of the Church of England which leave it to the Liberty of every man to conceive therein according as he is satisfied in his own mind and convinced in his understanding Arch-bishop Whitgift the Primate Bishop Andrews conceived the Pope to be Antichrist and did write accordingly Archbishop Laud and Bishop Mountague were otherwise perswaded in it and were not willing to exasperate those of the Popish Party by such an unnecessary provocation yet this must be accounted amongst their crimes For aggravating whereof he telleth us that the Pope was proved to be Antichrist by the Pen of King James which is more then he can prove that said it K. James used many Arguments for the proof thereof but whether they proved the point or not may be made a question Assuredly the King himself is to be looked on as the fittest Judge of his own intentions performance And he declared to the Prince at his going to Spain that he writ not that discourse concludingly but by way of Argument to the end that the Pope and his Adherents might see there was as good Arguments to prove him Antichrist as for the Pope to challenge any temporal Jurisdiction over Kings and Princes This your Antagonist might have seen in his own Canterburies doom fol. 264. Out of which Book he makes his other Argument also which proves the name of Antichrist to be ascribed unto the Pope by the Church of England because the Lords spiritual in the upper house and the whole Convocation in the Act of the subsidy 3. Jacobi so refined â—â— If so If any such Definition passed in the Convocation it is no matter what was done by the Lords Spiritual in the upper House of Parliament for that I take to be his meaning as signifying nothing to the purpose Wherein Gods name may such an unstudied man as I find that definition not in the Acts of Convocation I am sure of that and where there was no such point debated and agreed upon all that occurs is to bee found onely in the preamble to the Grant of Subsidies made at a time when the Prelates and Clergy were amazed at the horror of that Divellish plot for blowing up the Parliament Houses with the King Prelates Peers Judges and the choicest Gentry of the Nation by the fury of Gun-powder But were the man acquainted amongst Civilians they would tell him that they have a Maxime to this Effect that Apices juris nihil ponuns The Titles and preambles to Laws are no definitions and neither bind the subject in his purse or Pater-noster 53. As for the rest of the Bishops I find two of them charged particularly and the rest in General Mountague charged from D. Prideaux to be merus Grammatius and Linsel charged from M. Smart to have spoken reproachfully of the first Reformers on the Book of Homilies But as Mountague was too great a Scholar to be put to School to D. Prideaux in any point of Learning of what kind soever so Linsol was a Man of too much sobriety to use those rash and unadvised speeches which he stands accused of And as for Mr. Smart the apology of D. Cosens speaks him so sufficiently that I may very wel save myself the labour of a Repetition More generally he tells us from a speech of the late Lord Faulkland that some of the Bishops and their adherents have destroyed unity under pretence of uniformity have brought in superstition and scandal under the title of Reverence and decency and have defiled our Churches by adoring our Churches c. p. 40. and not long after p 64. That they have so industriously laboured to deduce themselves from Rome that they have given great suspition that in Gratitude they desire to return thither or at least to meet it half way Some have evidently laboured to bring in an English though not a Romish Papacy not the out side and dress of it onely but equally absolute a blind dependence of the People on the Clergy and of the Clergy on themselves and have opposed Papacy beyond the Sea that they might settle one beyond the water But these are onely the evaporations of some discontents which that noble Orator had contracted He had been at great charges in accommodating himself with necessaries for waiting on his Majesty in his first expedition against the Scots in hope of doing service to his King and Country and gaining honour to himself dismist upon the Pacifiation as most of the English Adventurers without thanks of honour where he made himself more sensible of the neglect which he conceived he suffered under then possibly might consist with those many favours which both Kings had shewed unto his Father But no sooner had that noble soul dispers'd those clouds of discontent which before obscured it but he brake out again in his natural splendor and show'd himself as zealous an advocate for the Episcopal order as any other in that house witness this passage in a speech of his not long before the dismissing of the Scottish Army Anno 1641. viz. The Ground of this Government by Episcopacy is so ancient and so general so uncontradicted in the first and best times that our most laborious antiquaries can find no Nation no City no Church no Houses
all Subterfuges which wit or cunning can devise to save himself from the sence and guilt of a conviction In which Respect as the Lord Chancellor Egerton was wont to say of Dr. Day then being Dean of Windsor and Provost of Eaton that he was the best at creeping out of the Law of any that ever came before him so it may be affirmed of the present Appealant that he hath an excellent way of avoiding that Argument the strength whereof he cannot Master as will appear to any equal and judicious Reader And other Arguments there are which he â—o avoideth as to make no Answer to them at all of which sort most especially are those Charges in the Adnimadversions as that about the Brittish Laws a Copy whereof was desired from Luciuâ— by Pope Euleutherius num 14 His bringing the Hâ—ns and Vandals out of the Cimbrick Chersonese the first whereof inhabited beyond the Fennes of Meotis in the Greater Asia the othes in the Dukedom of Mertlenburg on this side of the Bullich num 49. His bringing of the Brittish Lawes into the Collection made by K. Edward the â—onfessor num 53. that about St. Stephens Chappel num 64. His making of Cardinal Beawfort to be the founder of the Hospital of S. Owsse near Winchester num 106. His skipping over the Head of Henry of Albret the second Husband of the Dutchess of Alanzon sister to King Francis the first of France num 108. His making Cain to be one of the four primitive persons in the beginning of the world which must be understood of the time when he killed his Brother num 129. His not distinguishing between the first Liturgy of K. Edw. the 6th and a form of administring the Communion made the year before And numb 136. his not Answering to the Argument in behalfe of the Articles agreed upon in Convocation An. 1552. nor numb 141. to that against Conning of Loyalty by Heart out of the Statute of succession derived from the short time which intervened between the making of that Statute and the Raign of Queen Mary And num 143. His making Callis not to be worth the charge which it cost in keeping num 150. His Ascribing the precedings of some Bishops to a power given them by the Canons at what time no such Canons were made as the Author dreams of num 165. His passing over the Statute 23. of Eliz purposely made for suppressing the impetuosities of the Puritan faction num 175. His two mistakes in making Bancroft Bishop of London to be present at the framing of the Lambeth Article and num 189. and the Lady Margarets Professor in Cambridge to continue in his place from three years to three years num 190. Thesulri his placing the Earl Marshal before the Constable as if the one had gone before the other in that Royal Pomp when as they march by two and two num 229. Some he cuts off with an c as numb 130. in Baulking the Discovery of such Lands as are held Tith free under colour of belonging to the Cistercians Templers and Hospitalers and num 135 about the sitting of the Lords of the Councell on Sundays as well as others Holy-days for affairs of State and num 144. about the Priviledges granted in the Convocation by Act of Parliament and num 855. touching the reasons which induced Queen Elizabeth not to commissionate the Clergy in her first Convocation to treat of any thing which concerned Religion besides divers others And many Paragraphs there are in the Animadversions which he hath totally preter mitted without taking any notice of them at all as viz. Num. 130. 135. 138. 140. 158. 163. 176. 177. 178. 182. 197. 201. 202. 204. 207. 208. 209. 210. 212. 218. 275. 278. 279. 280. 282. 297. 312. 320. to which for brevity sake I refer the Reader and to his Judgment also I refer the consideration of all those particulars whether he thinks them pretermitted as unanswerable or not worth the answering 5. Such being his Avoidings in matters which relate to the story only we must next see how he doth traverse such Indictments as had been brought against himself He stands suspected in the Animadversions for harbouring some disaffection to the Regal and Episcopal Government the power and Rulers of the Church and the Orders and the members of it First being touched in point of Loyalty for laying down a dangerous Doctrine in reference to the person of King Henry 6. Lib. 4. to 190. he pleads the benefit of one of the Erratas in the Animadversions where fol. 109. is mistaken for 190. and finding nothing to the purpose in the place mistaken conceives himself to be discharged by Proclamation from the Crime objected But when it comes to be considered in its proper place he maks so sorry a defence that the last words of it though but few viz. The less we touch this Harsh-string the better Musick make the best part of the Answer pag. 2. fol. 52. In the beginning of the Raign of Queen Elizabeth he advocates iâ— behalf of some violent spirits who being impatient to attend the leisure of Authority fell before hand to beating down of some superstitious Pictures and Images and several reasons are alledged for their justification without pretending unto any other Author out of whom he had them and this he traverseth by saying that he subjoyned somewhat in confutation of their extravigancies and somewhat is subjoined indeed but that which rather speaks the sense of others then his own Others saith he condemned their indiscretion herein because although they might reform the private persons and families yet publique reformation did belong to the Magistrate Where first those others whom he speaks of are of a different sense from him who puts such tempting reasons into the mouths of those violent hot-spurs and then he makes those others to be so indifferent as to condemn them only of some indiscretion and no higher Crime pag. 2. fol. 53. 6. Being indicted for pleading so coldly for the Hierarchy of Bishops as if he had a minde to betray the Cause he traverseth the point and tells us that possibly he might do it weakly for want of ability but not coldly for want of affection and therefore that from thence-forward he would stand by and resigne his place at the Barr to better pleaders then himself More fully thus in the Church History fol. 143. I will now saith he withdraw my self or at leastwise stand by as a silent Spectator whilst I make room so for my betters to come forth and speak in the present controversie of Church Government call it not cowardise but count it caution in me if desirous in this difference to ly at a close ward and offer as little play as may be on either side which words of his whether they do not argue rather a coldness for want of affection then any weakness or want of ability is left to the verdict of the Jurie Acoused for mitigating the scandalous offences of the
zeal and ignorance A writing is subscribed on the 10th of May by Finch Lord Keeper Manchester Lord Privy Seal Littleton Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Banks Atturney General Witsield and Heath his Majesties Serjeants at the Law in which it was declared expresly that the Convocation being called by the Kings writ ought to continue till it was dissolved by the Kings Writ notwithstanding the dissolution of the Parliament But what makes this unto the purpose Our Author a more learned Lawyer then all these together hath resolved the contrary and throw it out as round as a boul that after the dissolution of the Parliament the Clarks of Diocesses and Cathedrals desisted from being publick persons and lost the notion of Representatives and thereby returned to their private condition The Animadvertor instanced in a convocation held in the time of Queen Eliz. An. 1585. which gave the Queen a Benevolence of two shillings in the pound to be raised on the Estates of all the Clergy by the meer censures of the Church without act of peachment Against which not able to object as to the truth and realty of it in matter of Fâ—ct he seems to make it questionable whecher it would hold good or not in point of Law if any turbulent Clergy-man had proved Recusant in payment and having slighted by the name of a blâ—ck â—wan a single instance of an unparliamented inpowred Convocation he imputes the whole success of that â—ash adventure rather unto the popularity of so Peerless a Princess the necessity of her occasions and the tranquillity of the times then to any efficacy or validity in the act it self And to what purpose all this pains but to expose the poor Clergy of the Convocation An. â—640 to the juster censure for following this unquestioned precedent in granting a more liberal benevolence to a gracious soveraign by no other authority then their own 34. If the â—ppealant still remain unsatisfied in this part of the Churches power I shall take a little more pâ—ins to instruct him in it though possibly I may tell him nothing which he knows not already being as learned in the Canons as in the common Law In which capacity I am sure he cannot chuse but know how ordinary a thing it was with Bishops to suspend their Clergy not onely ab officio but a Beneficio and not so onely but to sentence them if they saw just cause for it to a deprivation Which argues them to have a power over the property of the Clergy in their several Diocesses and such a power as had no ground to stand on but the authority of the Canons which conferred it on them And if our Author should object as perhaps he may that though the Canons in some cases do subject the Clergy not only to suspentions but deprivations of their cures and Benefices â—in which their property is concerned yet that it is not so in the case of the Laity whose Estates are not to be bound by so weak a thred I must then lead him to the Canons of 1603 for his satisfaction In which we find six Canons in a row one after another for providing the Book of Common Prayer the Book of Homilies the Bible of the largest Edition a Font for Baptism a fair Communion Table with a Carpet of Silk or other decent stuff to be laid upon it a Pulpit for Preaching of Gods Word a Chest to receive the alms for the Poor and finally for repairing of the Churches or Chappels whensoever they shall fall into any decay all these provisions and reparations to be made at the charges of the several and respective Parishes according to such rates as are indifferently assest upon them by the Church wardens Sides men and such other Parishioners as commonly convened together in the case which rates if any did refuse to make payment of they were compellable thereunto on a presentment made to the Ordinary by the said Church-wardens and other sworn Officers of the several and respective Parishes And yet those Canons never were confirmed by Act of Parliament as none of the like nature had been formerly in Queen Eliz time though of a continual and uncontroled practise upon all occasions The late Lord Primate in * a Letter more lately published by D. Barnard assures the honourable person unto whom he writ it that the making of any Articles or Canons at all to have ever been confirmed in that Kingdom by Act of Parliament is one of Dr. Heylyns Fancies And now it must be another of the Doctors Fancies to say that never any Articles or Canons had ever been confirmed by Act of Paliament in England though possible they may relate unto the binding of the subject in point of Poperty 35. But our Author hath a help at Maw and making use of his five fingers hath thrust a word into the proposition in debate between us which is not to be sound in the first drawing up of the issue The Question at the first was no more then this whether such Canons as were made by the Clergy in their Convocations and authorized by the King under the broad Seal of England could any further bind the subject then as they were confirmed by Act of Parliament And Secondly Whether such Canons could so bind either at such times as the Clergy acted their own Authority or after their admission to King Hen. the 8. in such things as concerned Temporals or temporal matters otherwise then as they were confirmed by national Customes that is to say as afterwards he expounds himselfe until they were consirmed by Act of Parliament Which points being so clearly stated by the Animadvertor in behalf of the Church that no honest evasion could be found to avoid his Argument the Appealant with his five fingers layes down life at the stake and then cryes out that the Animadvertor arrogates more power unto the Church then is due unto it either by the laws of God or man maintaining but he knows not where that Church men may go beyond Ecclesiastical Censures even to the limbs and lives of such as are Recusants to their Constitutions p. 2. so 53. And having taken up the scent he hunts it over all his Book with great noise and violence assuring us that such Canons were constantly checkt and controlled by the Laws of the Land in which the temporal Estate life and limbs of persons were concerned p. 2. fol. 27. As also that the King and Parliament though they directed not the proceedings of Ecclesiastical Courts in cases of Heresie which is more then his History would allow of yet did they order the power of Bishops over declared Hereticks without the direction of the Statute not to proceed to limb and life p. 2. fol. 45. And finally reduceth the whole Question to these two Propositions viz. 1. The proceedings of the Canon Law in what touched temporals of life limb and estate was alwayes limited with the secular Laws and national Customes of England And