Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	church_n	faith_n	pope_n	3,103	5	6.3417	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86280	Certamen epistolare, or, The letter-combate. Managed by Peter Heylyn, D.D. with 1. Mr. Baxter of Kederminster. 2. Dr. Barnard of Grays-Inne. 3. Mr. Hickman of Mag. C. Oxon. And 4. J.H. of the city of Westminster Esq; With 5. An appendix to the same, in answer to some passages in Mr. Fullers late Appeal.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Bernard, Nicholas, d. 1661.; Hickman, Henry, d. 1692.; Harrington, James, 1611-1677.	1659 (1659)	Wing H1687; Thomason E1722_1; ESTC R202410	239,292	425

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

which I find it you are as far from it as ever you were 43. Howsoever taking that your Proposition to be undeniable you proceed and say But the Antecedent is true c. which is a very strange piece of news to me You confess your self to be but a sorry Lawyer and you have shewd your self in this to be but a sorry L●gician neither For tell me what you mean by the Antecedent by which if you understand the terms of Logick●he●e ●he●e can be nothing understood but the first clause or member in your Proposition For in every Hypothetical Silogism the Major P●oposition consisteth of two parts or branches whereof the one is called the Antecedent and the other the Consequent as in this of your● these words viz. If it be an Article of the Papists R●ligion that none are members of Christ and his Church but the Subjects of the Pope make the Antecedent the following words viz. then the Papists faith is faction make the consequent of it Now both these parts or members being laid together the Proposition is entire and perfect and may be either true or false according to the subject matter of it as this of yours is by you affirmed to be true and by me proved to be false But the Antecedent in this of yours as in all other Hypothetical Propositions being conditional imperfect and of no full sense cannot be said to be either true or false as your own reason will inform you For what sense truth or falshood can be found in the first branch of your Proposition 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 until the following words be added Had you formed your Silogism thus 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 it is an Article of the Papists faith that none are members of Christ and his Church but the Subjects of the Pope Ergo the Papists faith is faction Had you contrived it thus I say your Silogism had been made in due form of Logick though either Proposition might haue been denied as it pleased the Respondent c. Had you cast your Argument into the form of an Enthimeme thus viz. It is an Article of the Papists faith that none are members of Christ and his Chu●ch but the Subjects of the Pope Ergo the Papists faith is Faction the Antecedent had been false and therefore of necessity the consequent of Illation could not passe for true And such a sorry Disputant was D. Burges who undertaking to answer in the Divinity Act at Oxon shewed himself so sufficiently ignorant in the terms of Logick that in stead of saying negatur major negatur minor he could say nothing else but negatur id Whereupon D. Prideaux said to him openly with a merry jear tu potes bene praedicare sed non potes bene disputare that he might possibly be a good preacher though he had shewed himself but a silly disputant 44. But taking your meaning along with me and supposing you to have said the Minor as you ought to have called it how do you prove it to be true because say you It was so defined by Pope Leo the 10. in a General Councel The Councel which you mean is called Consilium Lateranense as the other was and you have shewed your self as little skilled in this Laterane Councel as you were in the other So against that which you have said in this answer of yours I have these Exceptions First That all things which are not determined nor defined in a General Councel pass not for Articles of the Faith Secondly The Councel held at Rome by Pope Leo the 10. was no General Councel and Thirdly There was no such Article of the Faith defined in it as you say there was and these three points being proved I shall close the argument Haec tria cum docuero perorabo in the Oracles language And first all things which are determined and defined in General Councels become not Articles of the Faith though for the time they bind mens assent unto them until the point be further canvassed and the mistakes or errours of it manifested in some following Councel But hereof I have spoken already and shall adde but this viz. That if you please to look into the Tomes of the Councels you will find that they do more consist in Laws and Canons for Reformation of Manners then either in the D●claration of points of Faith or the Determination of matters Doctrinal Secondly the Councel held at Rome by Pope Leo the 10. was no General Councel as being called on a particular occasion and consisting of such a slender number of Italian Bishops that it could hardly make good the Reputation of a National Synod which that you may the better see I must let you know the occasion of the calling of that Counsel too which was briefly this Lewis the 12. of France having lately recovered the Dukedome of Millain to which he did pretend some title in the right of his Mother was warred on by Pope Julio the 2. who liked not the neighbourhood of the French Ferdinando King of Spain and some of the Italian Princes confederating with him in that quarrel To curb the insolency of the Pope a Councel is called by the Cardinal S. Severine and Caravaiali at the instigation of the French King to be held at Pisa a Town belonging to the Seig●oury and Estate of Florence Anno 1512. To which some of the French Bishops and as many Italian Prelates as lived within the Dukedome of Millane or elsewhere under the command of the F●ench received order to repair And on the other side the Pope to over ballance that Scismatical Councel ca●sed another to be held in Rome consisting of so many of the Bishops of Italy as could conveniently be drawn together in a time of War But Pope Juli● dying not long after before any thing could be done in that Councel more then the condemning that of Pisa and declaring all the Acts thereof to be null and void the Cardinal John de Medices succeeded by the name of Pope Leo the 10. who being of a sweeter temper then his predecessor closed up that breach admitting the two Cardinals and the rest of the Assembly at Pisa to a redintegration with the whole body of the Church from which they were before divided Nothing determined in this Councel touching matters of Faith but that a Decree was made against some Philosophers or rather phylosophizing Schoolmen what or about that time had began to teach quod anima rationalis sit mortalis that is to say that the rational soul of man was subject to Mortality And therefore thirdly there was no such article of Faith defined in that Councel that none should be counted members of Christ and his Church but such as

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 ind●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 Papist● 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 Statu●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 s●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

hunts the Hare is the Hare which is hunted so that although the Religion of the Church of Rome had defined the Deposition of Kings by the Pope for denying Transubstantiation c. as it never did yet could not the Popish Religion upon that account be called Rebellion Rebellion by the Law of England 25. Edw. 3. c. 2. is defined to be an actual levying of War against our Soveraign Lord the King in h● Realm or an adhering to the Kings enemies in his Realm giving to them aid and comfort in the Realm or elsewhere And by the Civil Law all those qui arripiant arma contra eum cujus jurisdictioni subditi sunt who tak up arms against such persons to whose Authority they are subject are declared to be Rebels for which see Spigelus in his Lexicon of the terms of Law But that Religion which defineth the Deposition of Princes by the Pope because they deny Transubstantiation c. is not an actual levying of War against our Soveraign Lord the King in his Realm or an adhering c.. Nor the the taking up of Arms against such persons to whose Authority they are subject Therefore that Religion which defineth the Deposition of Princes c. neither is really or nominally to be called Rebellion if either the laws of England or the Civil laws do rightly understand what Rebellion is as I think they do And whereas you hope to mend the matter by calling it a Rebellion doctrinal you make it worse on your side then it was before For besides that there is no such thing as Rebell on doctrinal though some Doctrines there may be too frequently preached for inciting the people to Rebellion you find not the word Doctrinal in the proposition which you have undertook to prove and wh en presents it self simply to you in these words that the Religion of the Papists is Rebellion 37. Such being the faultinesse of your Mejor we will next consider whether the Assumption or your Minor be any thing more evident then your Major was Your Minor is that the Popish Religion is such that is to say such a Religion that defineth the Deposition of Kings by the Pope because they deny Transubstantiation c. This is the matter to be proved and you prove it thus That which is defined by a Pope and General Councel is the Popish Religion But the aforesaid Doctrine is defined by a Pope and an approved General Councel viz at the Laterane under Innocent the 3. Erge c. This makes it evident indeed that you never saw the Cannons nor Decrees of the Laterane Councel and possibly your learning may not lie so high but that you took this passage upon trust from some ignorant hand which had seen them as little as your self Your Major I shall grant for true but nothing can be falser or mere unable to be proved then your Minor is Consult the Acts of that Councel search into all Editions of them and into the Commentaries of such Cannonists as have writ upon them and you shall neither find in the one or the other that the Deposition of Kings and Princes by the Pope was defined to be lawful for that I take to be your meaning either for denying Transubstantiation or for any other cause whatsoever Most true it is that the word Transubstantiation then newly hammered on the Anvil by some of the Schoolmen to expresse that carnal presence of Christ in the Sacrament as they then maintained was first received in this Councel and received then ad ●vitanda● haere●icorum tergiversationes as my Author hath it for avoiding the wrangling● and fallacious shifts which Hereticks otherwise might use But that the word was made such an Idol in this Councel that all Christian Kings and Princes which would no● fall down and worship it were to be deposed hath neither colour nor foundation in the Acts of that Councel And therefore I wil first lay down the Canon which I think you aim at for otherwise there is none in that Councel which you can pretend to and then acquaint as well with the occasion and the meaning of it and your own mistakings 38. And first the words of the Canon as these now stand in the Tomes of the Councels are these that follow Si quis Dominus temporalis requisitus monitus ab Ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit ab hac haeretica foeditate per Metropolitanum com provinciales Episcopos excommunicationis ●inculo innodetur Etsi satisfacere contempserit infra annum significetur hoc summo Poniifici ut ex tunc ipse vassallos ab ejus fidelitate denunciet absolutos terram exponant catholicis occupandam qui eam exterminatis haereticis ●ine ulla contradictione possideant in fidei puritate conservent salvo jure domini principalis dummodo super hoc ipse nullum praestet obstaculum nec aliquod impedimentum opp●nat eadem nihilominus lege servata circa eos qui non habent Dominos principales such is the Canon or Decree And this was the occasion of it The Albigenses and Waldenses differing in many points from the received opinions of the Church of Rome and constantly denying the Popes Supremacy amongst other things some years before the calling of this Councel was grown to a very great power and insolencie countenanced therein by the two last Raimonds Earls of Tholouse and some of the Petit Lords of Gascoyn all which though absolute enough in their several Territories in respect of their vassals but were fudataries either to the Empire or the Kings of France as the Lords in chief for the reduction of these Albingenses to the Church of Rome Dominick a Spaniard the Founder afterwards of the Order of Dominical Fryars used his best endeavours in the way of Argument and perswasion but failing of his design therein he instigated Pope Innocent the 3. to call this Councel Anno 1215. and the Prelates there assembled to passe this Canon for the suppressing both of them and their Patrons also for having summed up the principle heads of that Religion which was then publickly maintained in the Church of Rome they framed an Oath to be taken by all secular Magistrates ut haereticos universos ab Ecclesia denotatos bona fide pro viribus ex terminare studeant to use their best endeavours for the exterminating of all Hereticks that is to say all such as did oppose those Doctrines before laid down out of their dominions and then it followeth as before si quis vero dominus temporalis c that if any Temporal Lord being thereunto required by the Church should neglect to purge his Territories of that Infection he should be excommunicated by the Metropolitan and other Bishops of that Province in which he lived and if he gave no satisfaction within the year notice thereof was to be given to the Pope that thereupon he might absolve his vassals from their Allegiance and give their Countries to the next Catholick Invador

his Ink mixt with more of the durty puddle then the Church Historians was with gall and vinegar when he bespattered the poor Clergy in the Preface to his Book of the Grotian Religion with all the filth that could proceed from a Pen so qualified I need not saith he go to M. Whites Centuryes to be acquainted of the qualities of the ejected our Country have had too many of them that have long been a burthen instead of a blessing some never preached but read the Common Prayer Book and some preached much worse then they that were never called Preachers Some understood not the Catechism or Creed many of them lived more in the Ale-house then the Church and used to lead their people in drunkenness cursing swearing quarrelling and other ungodly practises and to amend all by railing at the Puritans Praecisians some that were better would be drunk but now and then and preach once a day remembring still to meet with the Precise least their hearers should have any mind to becom Godly but neglecting most of the Pastoral cure and lived much in worldliness and prophaneness though not so disgracefully as the Rest Which passage when I read over it caused in me so great an horror and amazement that I could not tell whether I might give any credit to my senses or not the words sounding loud in my ears but not sinking at first into my heart For who could possibly believe that one who doth pretend to so much piety should shew himself the master of so little charity To all the Acts and offices of which excellent virtue enumerated by S. Paul in his 1. Epist to the Corinthians cap. 13. he hath shewed himself so great a stranger as if his Soul had never been acquainted with the Graces of it Such as have thrust themselves into other mens livings and they who patronize them in it seem to have quitted all the other properties of Charity to the Sequestred Clergy and retain only to themselves the not seeking their own For they seek after the Benefices and Goods of others The Rear brought up by a young man of * Magdalen Coll. Oxon whom I shall not call a whelp of the same litter though he hath pleased to give me no other title then that of a bird of the same feather who spends his mouth by telling his Reverend brethren of the Brackly breed that the Episcopal Government will be desired by the bad and therefore that they should take care that the Good did not wish it restored also that the Prelatical oppressions were such as might make wise men mad that some of the Prelates might with reason be called Antichristian whose Courts vexed sundry laborious Preachers becaus they could not bow at the name of Jesus when as sundry idle sots whom they might frequently observe to stagger in the streets were never questioned and finally he leaves it unto consideration whether it be not envy rather then conscience which maketh some to exclaim with so much bitterness against the late Ejections Sequestrations Deprivations and whether our late Sequestrations were not more justifiable then those proceedings in the late Archbishops times when men were suspended ab officio beneficio meerly for not Reading the Book of sports In which particulars although he doth not ●ark so loud yet he bites as close as any other in ●he Pack who have deeper mouths I must confess that neither finding my self particularly named in that infamous Century nor concerned more then any other in those general calumnies I did not think my self obliged to take notice of them It was my expectation rather that some one or other of those who sustained most wrong would have done themselves the right of a vindication and not have suffered those reproaches to have gained belief by such a dul and dangerous silence But at the last finding the cry revived by the Civil Historian the Divine Right of Episcopacy called in question the Bishops and Clergy ignorantly censured for their Proceedings in Convocation and the subordinates of the late Archbishops whereof I had the honour to be one so unhandsomely handled I thought it my duty to appear in defence of those points wherein I found the Author either by inadvertency or want of better intelligence to have been mistaken And so far I was liberum Agens prompted by none but my own good affections to the pulick interess to that undertaking But so I cannot say of my engagings with the Church Historian being solicited thereunto by persons of all Orders Degrees and stations as wel Ecclesiastical as Accademical in the pursuance whereof I could not but take notice of that passage before laid down do the poor Clergy so much right as the nature of an Animadversion might comport withal Nec solum ad nos haec in juriavenit ab illo in the Poets words it is not we alone that are the poor sequestred and ejected Clergy but the whole Church which hath been injured by him in her power and priviledges for the asserting whereof and rectifying such mistakes as I found therein I first applyed my self unto that performance What led me to this Letter-Combate with M. Baxter you will find in the discourse it self In which you may perceive how sensible I am of those reproaches which he so prodigally casts abroad upon those poor men whom the late Ordinance for ejecting of ignorant and scandalous Ministers hath brought under his power I must needs say I might have slipt my self out of this employment as one of those whose casting out he hath disowned among many others under the notion of being Prelatical and so far interessed in the late Civil Wars as my attending on the Kings person at Oxon can ascribe unto me But in this case I will not sever my own interess from that of my Brethren my brethren not like Simeon and Levi in the evil of sin but like to Paul and Barnabas in the evil of Punishment when used despitefully and threatned to be stoned to death by the men of Iconium For though we are all guilty through human frailties of our several sins yet for those sins we stand accomptable onely at the Bar of Heaven Those scandalous crimes under colour whereof so many of us have received the punishment of Sequestration and Ejection that the Hands of men falling so short from being proved that the nonproseuting of the Evidence to a legal Tryal may rationally be thought to acquit us of them And therefore I shall weave up your defence in the same peece with my own that as we fell together we may stand together in the recovery of that Reputation which is dearer to us then our lives not suffering our common Adversaries to deal with us as Ignorant Jurors do too often in passing their verdict upon the Prisoners at the Bar when without consideration of the crimes or evidence they resolve to save one half and hang the other Whatsoever I have done herein as it

it that after the Schism made by Pope PIVS V. little or nothing for many years together comparatively with those of the other party was writ against it that being newly translated into the Latine tongue about the year 1618. it gave great content to the more moderate sort of Papists amongst the French as Bishop Hall informeth us in his Quo Vadis and being translated into Spanish at such times as his late Majesty was in Spain it gave no less contentment to the learned and more sober sort amongst the Spaniards who marvelled much to see such a regular order and form of Divine Worship amongst the English of whom they had been frequently informed by our English Fugitives that there was neither form nor order to be found amongst us But on the other side the Genevians beginning to take up the cry called Puritans upon that account in the 6. or 8. year of Q. ELIZABETH animated by Billingham and Benson conntenanced by Cartwright and headed by the Earl of Leicester followed it with such a violent impetuosity that nothing could repress or allay that fury neither the patience and authority of Arch-Bishop Whitgift the great pains and learning of Bishop Bilson the modesty of M. Hooker nor the exactness of D. Co●ens all which did write against them in Q. ELIZABETHS time was able to stop their current till the severity of the Laws gave a check unto them Nor was King JAMES sooner received into this Kingdom but they again revived the quarrel as may appeare by their Petitions Admonitions and other Printed Books and Tractates to which the learned labours of Bishop Buckridge Bishop Morton and D. Burges who had been once of that party but regained by K. James unto the Church were not by them thought to give such ample satisfaction that they must be at it once again during the life of K. James in their Al●are Damuscenam in which the whole body of the English Liturgie the Hierarchy of Bishops the Discipline and Equ●nomy of the Church of England was publickly vi●●ified and decried How egerly this game was followed by them after the first ten years of his late Majesty K. Charles till they had abolished the Liturgie destroyed the discipline and pluckt up Episcopacy both root and branch is a thing known so well unto you that it needs no telling And this I hope hath satisfied you in your first enquiry viz. why and in what respects it was said in the Preface to my Ecclesia Vindicata That the Papist was the more moderate adversary and for the other words which follow viz. That the Puritan faction hurried on with greater violence c. which you find in the 17. Sect. of it they relate only to the violent prosecution against the Episcopal Government in which how far they out went the Papists is made so manifest in that and the former Section that it is no small wonder to me that you should seek for any further satisfaction in it read but those Sections once again and tell me in your second and more serious thoughts if any thing could be spoken more plainly or proved more fully then that the Puritan ●action with greater violence and impetuosity were hurried on towards their design that is to say the destruction of Episcopal Government then the Papists were Secondly You seem much unsatisfied that I maintained against M. Burton That the Religion of the Papists is not rebellion nor their faith faction But this when I maintained against M. Burton I did it not in the way of laying down my own reasons why it neither was nor could be so but in the way of answering such silly Arguments as he here brought to prove it was but now that I may satisfie you and do right both to the Church and State you shall have one Argument for it now and another I shall give you when I shall come in order to answer yours The Argument which I shall give you now is briefly this shall be founded on a passage of the Speech made in the Star Chamber by the late Arch Bishop at the sentencing of D. Bastwick M. Burton c. in which he telleth us That if we make their Religion to be Rebellion then we make their Religion and Rebellion to be all one and that is against the ground both of State and the Law for when divers Romish Priests and Jesuites have deservedly suffered death for Treason is it not the constant and just profession of the State that they never put any man to death for Religion but for Rebellion and Treason only Doth not the State truly affirm that there was never any Law made against the life of a Papist quatenus a Papist only And is not all this stark false if their very Religion be Rebellion For if their Religion be Rebellion it is not only false but impossible that the same man in the same act should suffer for his Rebellion and not for his Religion And this ●aith he K. James of ever Blessed Memory understood passing well when in his Premonition to all Christian Monarchs he saith I do constantly maintain that no Papist either in my time or in the time of the late Queen ever dyed for his conscience therefore he did not think their very Religion was Rebellion thus he And if for all this you shall thus persist and say that the Popish Religion is Rebellion you first acquit Papists from suffering death banishment or imprisonment under the Raign of the three last Princes for their several Treasons and Rebellions and lay the guilt thereof upon the blood-thirstiness of the Laws and of the several Kings and Parliaments by which they were made And secondly you add hereby more Martyrs to the Roman Kalender then all the Protestants in the world ever did besides 36. But this you do not only say but you prove it too at the least you think so Your argument is this 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 that is to say the Popish Religion defineth the Deposition of Kings and absolveth their Subjects from their fidelity by the Pope because they deny Transubstantiation c. The Minor you say is evident but I am willing to believe that you mean the Major that this only is an escape of the pen because you do not go about to prove the Major but the Minor only To the whole Sylogisme I answer first that it is of a very strange complection both Propositions being false and therefore that it is impossible by the Rules of Logick that the conclusion should insue that the Proposition or the Major as they generally call it is altogether false may be proved by this that the thing which teacheth cannot be the thing which is taught no more then a Preacher can be said to be the word by him preached or the Dog which

fair and flattering hopes of an easie victory whensoever you shall enter the Lists again yet as unfurnished as I am of all humane helps but such as I have within my self I little doubt of making good the cause against you if every point thereof should stand in need of re-examining as I think none doth However I have learned of Christ our common Master to agree with mine Adversary while I am in the way with him especially where it may be done not only salva Charitate but salva Veritate also where the agreement may be made as well without any loss to truth as improvement to charity I must needs say you have offered me very fair conditions whereby I am put into the way toward this agreement which I shall follow with the greater chearfulness you may call it passion if you please when I shall see some good effects of your Protestations such reparation made to INJVRED INNOCENCE as is professed in your Appeal Which happy hour whensoever it comes I shall not only give you the right hand of Fellowship as the Apostles did to Paul when from a Persecutor of the Church he became one of the chief Pillars in it but the right hand of precedency also which the old and dim-sighted Patriarch gave to Ephraim though the younger Brother We shall not then enter into the Dispute which of us goes first out of the field or turn our backs toward one another according to your Emblem of the two Lions endorsed which you have very well noted out of Gerrard Leigh for avoiding contentions in the way but hand in hand together as becometh Brethren the Sons not only of the same Father but of the same Mother too Nor shall we then enter into a Dispute which of the two shall be reputed for the good Philemon or which the Fugitive Onesimus there being as great a readiness in me to submit unto you in all points of civility as there can be aversness in you to acknowledg me for your Superiour by way of Argument So doing we shall both be Victors though neither can be said to be vanquished and shall consolidate a friendship without the intervening of a reconcilement And on these tearms none shall be readier to preserve either a valuable esteem whilst we live together or a fair memory of you if you go before me then SIR The most unworthy of your Brethren amongst the true Sons of the Church of England Pet. Heylyn Lacies Court in Abingdon May 16. 1659. The Contents of this Book 1. AN Exchange of Letters with Mr. Baxter occasioned by a passage in the preface to his Grotian Religion page 1. 2. An Exchauge of Letters with Dr. Barnard relating to the Book called Respondit Petrus and the supposed burning of it p. 97. 3. The Intercourse with Mr. Hickman in answer to some passages in his Justification of the Fathers and Schoolmen c. p. 113. 4. A Declaration about Forms of Government the power of the Spartan Ephori and the Jewish Sanhedrim managed Letter-wise with J. H. Esq p. 205. 5. An Appendix to the former Papers in Answer to some passages in M. Fullers late Appeal for Injured Innocence p. 311. An Advertisement touching the Errata THe Reader is to be Advertised touching some mistakes which have occurred at the Press and are desired to be corrected with his Pen before he set himself to peruse these Papers As first p. 159. for these words viz. Should command the Paraphrases of Erasmus to be translated into English studied by Priests c. read thus viz. Should commend the Paraphrases of Erasmus translated into English to be studied by Priests c. And p. 183. for which but only determined not having commanded silence in those points read thus which determined nothing but onely commanded silence c. p. 108. dele these words that information had been made as to the burning of the Book The rest of Erratas being onely literal may be mended thus Page 2. l. 10. for described r. ascribed p. 10 l. 1. for difference r. distance p. 23. l. 8. for instancing r. in standing p. 27. l. 4. for our r. of our p. 29. l. 30. f. lay r. lay not p. 40. l. 5. f. any r. to p. 50. l. 3. f. Spirator r. Spirans p. 53. l. 8. f. no r. any p. 54. l. 19. f. baser r. border p. 68. l. 18. f insue r. be true p. 86. l. 15. d. owning p. 87. l. 1. f. 29. r. 25. p. 95. l. 26. f. Fame r. Tame p. 96. l. ult f. laesives r. Laeseris ibid l. 9. f. Consul r. Councel 105. l. 16. f. way r. worse p. 109. l. 2. 3. f. lata r. tota In the Second Part f. Burlow r. Barlow ubique p. 126. l. 34. f. whos 's r. but he whose p. 130. l. 13. f. Burle r. Barlee p. 135. l. 21. f. Burechus r. Purchas p 145. l. 4. f. 24. r. 246. p. 147. l. 10. f. manner r. all manner ibid l. 19. f. supra r. Sublapsarians p. 148. l. 19. f. Barrow r. Baroe p. 167. l. 13. f. nine ten r. ninteen twenty p. 174. l. 3. for a Mother r. another p. 238. f. Tachee r. Rochel p. 243. l. 5. f. sinking r. six Kings p. 244. l. 17. r. Abeyance p. 251 l. 8. f. Kings r. Consuls p. 253. l. 14. d. it was no. p. 258. l. 30. f. right r. know p. 292. l. 3. Agraramine p. 297. f. Rubbige r. Rabine p. 310. l. 1. to new disputes ad you have had my Answer p. 316. for Bullick r. Ballick p. 317. l. 16. d. Thesulri FINIS * Isa 42. 3. in Mat. 12. c. * Hist of K. Charles fol. 144. * Ch. Hist lib. 11. 207 Preface to the Grotian Religion Ser. 23. Hickmans defence of the Fathers c. * Act. Apost 14. 5. M. Fuller's Appeal was sent unto the Author about four days after the date of this Preface Aesopi Fabuloe * Tac. An. lib. 13. * Mat. 5. v. 11. 12. 1 Pet. c. 2. v. 12. 15. 1 Pet. 2. 23 a Snape to Field b Knewstub to Field c Blake to Field H. B. for Gek. p. 127. pag. 39 40 41. pag. 45. de lege 3. Pol. l. 2. de leg 31. Cal. Just l. c. 20. Sect. 31. Iudg. 20. p. 29. Num. 1. 46. Gro. ad Ex. 18. 21. Num. 21. Deut. 17. 8. Arist Pol. 3. c. 12. Hos 8. 4. B● 5. c. 2 Judg. 1. 3. Pacuvi●● ap Livi. lib. 23. Dan. 1. 7. De jure Blac. p. lib. 1. ch 1. Jer. 38. 5. p. 289 * Iliad p. 254. * I am forced to omit the Greek verses because my Amanuensis is not Scholar enough to transcribe them distinctly for me Vell. Pater Hist 121. * Aliudque cupido mens aliud suadet video melioraproboque deteriora s●equor Ap. p. 23. Ap. p. 2. fol. 20. * Epist Ded. before the Sermons on the Tares Ob. Rese p. 8. p. 2 p. 52. p. 2. fol. 6. p. 1. p. 67. p. 2. fol. 14. p. 2. fl● 15. p. 2. p. 24. Appeal p. 2. f. 56. ● 2. f. 59. p. 2. f. 70. p. 1. f. 47. Judgement of the L P. p. 112. p. 2. f. 43 I see a Lambe in his own can be a Lion in Gods and the Churches cause Ch. Hist l. 9. f. 130. p. f. 2. 19. p. 2 f. 101 p. 3. f. 5. p. 3. f. 4. p. 3. f. 7. C. Hist l. 11. p. 147 p. 3. f. 15. p 3. f. 20. p. 3. f. 54. * 1 Sam. 15. 14. G● 48. 14