Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance and accursed all that performed obedience unto her s The same power he takes upon him in many other Kingdomes but his hatred to England which he takes for an hereticall and Apostaticall Kingdom above others gives just cause of speciall caution for the Church and State of England against his usurpation TO these particulars I might adde other Protestant tenets of our Church out of the Books of Homilies wherin though there be some things doubtfull there are many very true and Orthodox Doctrines very soundly stated and proved and zealously pressed against the Heresies of Popery and among these thirty-nine Articles there are some others opposite to Popery which I have not mentioned as the tenth of Freewill and the thirteenth of workes done before Justification because the Antithesis betwixt the Protestant and Popish Doctrine by the subtile and ambiguous formes of expression on the Popish-side is made more intricate and problematicall then in the rest and in these we have exprest there are some other which are necessarily implied as by mutuall relation defending or destroying one another So it is betwixt a Purgatory and prayers for the dead for if there be a Purgatory as Papists affirme prayers for the dead will be needfull and profitable offices of the living on their behalfe if no Purgatory as our 22. Article orthodoxally determineth prayers for the dead are frivolous and fruitlesse services for if there be only two places for receipt of soules after death Heaven and Hell to pray for those in Heaven is needlesse for them in Hell bootlesse To them no good thing is wanting for these no good thing will be obtained not so much refreshing as a drop of water from the tip of the finger Luk 16. 24. These then may be sufficient both to informe such as make this Protestation what Doctrine of our Church is opposite to Popery and to assure those that do propound it of their minds to the Religion established who willingly present themselvâ— to promise vow and protest in the forme fore-mentioned for they that are Protestants and Antipapists in these points will never side with the Popish-party against the Religion established or the Parliament assembled Thus much of matter of Doctrine mentioned both in the Oath of the sixt Canon and the late Protestation Wherin though they materially agree yet considering what hath beene said by way of b doubt against the meaning of the Canon which hath no place in this Protestation They that were affraid of the former in this respect have no cause to make scruple of the latter Of that wherin the Oath of the sixt Canon and the Protestation do differ in respect of the matter contained in either which the other hath not THe most doubts for number and the most perplexing for difficulty for the Oath of the Canon are in that part of it which concerneth discipline and government by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Arch-deacons with that boundlesse c. beyond which we can find no shore and wherin our line and plummet can reach no bottom especially if rites and Ceremonies be reduced to discipline as I have observed inâ— my c first particular doubt of the Oath from all this perplexity wherwith the Canon entangleth a timerous conscience the Protestation giveth very good and undoubted Security expresly declaring that these words The true reformed Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England against all Popery and Popish Innovations within this Realme contrary to the same Doctrine are not to be extended to the maintaining of any forme of worship discipline or government nor of any rites or Ceremonies of the said Church of England wherin as they do not require the ratification of any such particulars so neither do they disaâ—ow them but leave them as controversed points to such a decision as is due unto them This Declaration was not in that Protestation you sent unto me if it had it may be you had not mooved the doubt as you did Whether my doubts against the Oath did not stand up and invite to scruples against the present Protestation But though all this doubtfull matter be discarded from it which was the most dangerous part of the charge of the Canon yet there is other matter of much doubt and great moment within the Protestation which the Canon contains not as the Power and Priviledges of Parliaments the rites and liberties of Subiects which are points of too high a pitch for common capacities and it may be difficult enough for the wiser sort well and truly to understand I will not as I said before take upon me to expound the meaning of these termes for generall satisfaction for so it belongeth to them that made the Text to make the Comment the Authours are the best and most Authenticke Interpreters of their owne words who alone can make the one as generall as the other but for the guiding of mine own conscience touching the sence of these words I have this to say First for the Power and Priviledges of Parliaments d King Iames taught me to take them in a very large extent where he repeated and approoved the Speech of that old wise man as he cals him the Treasurer Burleigh who was wont to say he knew not what an Act of Parliamâ—nt could not doe in England doubtlesse it may doe any thing but what is contrary to his Acts or Statutes whose least word hath more right to rule in all Lands then any Laws that are made by men in any one Country or Kingdome whatsoever 2. For the Rights and liberties of Subjects I find no cause to doubt of them in the generall since the word lawfull is added unto them and indeed throughout the whole Protestation here are such words of Caution and limitation as may serve for prevention of all scruples in this respect for though the length of it be not fully twelve lines there are thus many clauses to give it a relish of regular construction as farre as lawfully I may lin. 2. lawfull rites lin. 6. lawfull pursuance and as farre as lawfully I may lin. 7. by all good wayes lib. 8. inâ— all iust and honourable waies lin. 10. there are no such words of caution to the conscience in the Canonicall Oath There is one clause in it which seemeth to limit one part of it to the rule of right for it requireth a ratification of the Governement by Archbishops Bishops Deans Arch-deacons c. as of right in ought to stand which words are like a Picture in a â—urrowed Table equivocally varying the aspect according to the site or placing of him that looketh towards it These limitations are none such but very plain and they are so placed as to diffuse an influence of fidelity and Justice the Protestation throughout and that may suffice for assent unto it in generall termes and when any particular is singled out for approbation or pursuit I doubt not but it
second demand you presently make a third viz. whâ—t I meane by necessity To which I need not make a particular reply in this place for I have made answer to it already under the first part of your charge wherin you would have chainâ—d your Seminary and me togâ—ther in an hainous breach of the Sacramentall combination And yet even the word necessity maketh a maine and materiall diffâ—rence betwixt the halfe Communion of the Papists and that which I propound and plead for in my Case of Conscience viz. the lawfulnesse and sufficiency of one Element alone in case of necessity where both cannot be had or cannot be taken which is g extraordinary and rare But the Popish parting of the Sacrament and putting a part for the whole saving a few exceptions of conficient or consecrating Priests or Princes is generall and ordinary and that by Canon discharged with a dreadfull curse as hath before been observed so that when you professe to hold That the Eucharist ought to be communicated by such as are able and fit both Priests and people in both Elements and not in one of them indifferently You hold nothing against me for your limitation of able and fit maketh for such indulgence as I defend otherwise and out of such cases of exception I hold as you doe that all both Pastours and people ought to receive in both Elements and not in one of them indifferently Though the faithfull receive whole Christ with onâ— part of the Sacrament yet it is utterly â—nlawfull either to administer the Sacrament in the Popish Church with 〈◊〉 kindâ— or so to receive it though none other exception were to be taken at the Religion then their broken communion with the inducements to it and consequences upon it FRom that which hath been said of receiving whole Christ by or with one element only it will not follow that either the Popish Doctrine and practise concerning the dismembred administration of the Eucharist is not to be â—â—ndemned as unlawfull and no lesse then sacrilegious and hereticall nor that any one may lawfully receive the Sacrament in one kinde only in their Church though nothing els wâ—re amisse in it then their maiming and mangling this holy Sacrament And for their pretence of whole Christ under one kind to defraud the people of the other it is easily answered First that Christ knew that much better then they and yet he did institute the Sacraments in both kinds and so delivered it to his Disciples as is confessed in the Councell of a Constance and b Trent and so it was accustomed to be from the beginning of Christian Religion as is likewise confessed by many learned c Papists and the constant practice of it for d twelve hundred yeeres is averred by Protestant Divines and the Papists themselves in part conforâ—e to the originall rule and example in consecrating the Sacrament in both kinds as in the Priests and Princes receivinâ— in both kinds to which purpose you have e cited sundry testimonies of Romish Writers which make much against their with-holding of the consecrated Cup from the Lay Communicants But what matter is it saith f Becaâ—us if they have whole Christ though they have but one halfe of the Sacrament Suppose saith he that a 〈…〉 a legaâ—y of a thousand Florens bequeathed to him in two codicills or wills each containing the same summe it is sâ—fficient for him to have the one of them which will be as beneficiall as both But he is well answered by g Chamier that the Testator in this case appoints as well both the codicils to be delivered as the legacy it selfe for it was instituted by our Saviour at the first and so delivered over in his name to the Church by the Apostle 1. Cor. 11. Nay to say the truth he trusteth the Ministers of the Church only with the codicils or outward evidences of this legacy the gift of himselfe he reserveth to himselfe and he giveth himselfe to those only whom he and he alone knoweth by faith to be meetly qualified to receive him They then who are trusted with two tokens of Christs love and charged to deliver them both to his people and keepe backe one halfe doe proove themselves both disobedient and unfaithfull to their Lord and injurious unto men Ob. But while they administer in one kind and in that kinde whole Christ unto the people though thâ—y may have some wrong they have neither damage nor danger by keeping back the other part of the Sacrament Sol. The answer to this will require a second reason against their halfe Communion and it is that which you have touched in your Letter to me as well as the former yet in both you will I hope give me leave if you give me not thanks to expresse mine exceptionâ— against this Popish Sacriledge in mine own way and for that I say that if we consider either the significancy of the signes or energy of effect where both may be had there is a double maime in that single administration without the Cup of the Sacrament For the first where there is but one Element the signification is defective and that two wayes 1. In regard of fullnesse 2. Of clearnesse For the former Our Saviour meant by theâ—e outward signes to signifie a h perfect refection to the soule of the faithfull by mâ—at and drinke which makes up a full and compleat repast so that whatsoever is needfull for our nourishment is reduced to one of them this we may call a reall fâ—llâ—esse and there is a personall also wherto the Elements must in their use and application be extended so that they must signifie such a full refreshing to the Laity as well as to the Clergy since as it is well said in the * Augustan Confâ—ssion the Sacrament was instituted not for a part of the Church but for the whole Church both Priests and people 2. For clearnesse as this is more fully so it is more clearly signified in two distinct â—lements which must be received in a distinct and severall manner according to their kind as bread by it selfe in the manner of eating and wine by it selfe in the manner of drinking not according to the confused concomitancy of the Papists wherby they fancy the bâ—dy of Christ to be drunâ—e in the Cup and his blood 〈…〉 in the 〈◊〉 2. For efficacy where both may be had and either is refused there may be a question whether there be any gracious efficacy at all and more liâ—e that there is not for me thinks that sounds to good reason which Dr. Francis White hath delivered against Fisher the Iesuite i The Church saith he cannot expect that Christ should fullfill his promise in giving his flesh and his blood unlesse shee observe his ordinance and do that which he hath appointed But if there be any benefit by such a receiving it is like to be lesse k according to our Protestant Tenet then might
where they cite him as such an enemy to the sacred Trinity that he could not indure the words Trinity person {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and therefore wished they were buried and they quote for proof lib. 1. Iâ—stit c. 13. Sect. 5. wheras there he reproves the perversnesse of the Arrian spirit in their distaste and detestation of those words yet shews his owne indisposition to a logomachy or strife of words so far that he wishes that those words were buried but upon this condition which these Popish yea divellish slanderers conceale that the â—aith of the Trinity were soundly asserted as I have more lagely shewed in the fourth Chapter of mine Apology for the Geneva annotations against the â—mputation of Iudaisme and Arriâ—â—isme And your selfe in your f late detection of papisticall fraud observe how forward they were to falsifie Sir Humphry Linds words touching the number of Sacraments and most absurdly to make him to dispute against himself and the Church of England and your selfe perhaps may be abused by them in the like kinde for they may say you plead for the use of the much abused termes g Priest Altar Sacrifice with an affectionate relish of the romish-Romish-Religion and from your tenet of Episcopacy by h divine Right they may 〈◊〉 that you condemne all the reformed Churches that 〈◊〉 â—ot under the government of Episcopall Authority And some on the quite contrary side may 〈◊〉 use of your words in favour to the Lay-Presbytery in that i you allâ—adge such instances of Lay-men made Bishops as k Gersom Bucer bringeth in for establishment of Laicall Presbyters and if a man will set himself to cavill at your words it may be he may impose upon you that which is as farre from your purpose as Popery from mine viz l that making Timothy a Bishop and ordained and consecrated to that office by the office of the Presbytery which you say may be done by one then a Presbyter may ordain a Bishop and so Presbytery shall be superiour to Episcopacy But for my Tenet touching commâ—nicating in one kind as I have stated it I feare no just occasion of offence since m D. Featly delivered the same in disputation with M. Everard and the n French-Church hath both decreed and as occasion required administred the Sacrament accordingly and yet no scandall hath been given no advantage taken therof by the Papists so far as I have either read or heard So much for your charge and my clearing or if you like better for your doubts and my resolution wherin if the truth be further cleared and confirmed as I doubt not but you will acknowledge upon your unpartiall peruâ—all of what I have written neither you nor I shall have cause to wish that those lines had bin obliterated which you took for the ground of this intercourse betwixt us Which I trust for my part you will take as a testimony both of my love to the truth and of my respect to your self and that you will be no more displeased with me for my reply o then I am with you for your provocation unto it since I strive not p as with an adversary for victory but for the prevailing of truth aboue errour which may be a contestation not incompatible with the affections of very good friends and such a one I shall be glad upon all good occasions to approve my sâ—lf on your behalf that you may account me 〈◊〉 â—â—dworth in 〈◊〉 Juâ—â— 26. 1641. Yours as power and opportunity enable me to doe you Service John Ley. a Proverbium nodum in Scyrpo quaerere in anâ—â—ium dicebatur nimisque diligentem aut meâ—iâ—ulosuâ—â— qui illic scrupulum moverâ—t ubi nihil esset ad dubi â—andum Eâ—asm Châ—liad p. 158 Col. 1. b That is the Protestation dated the third of May 1641â— c 2. Partiâ— doubt p. 16. d 4. Partiâ— doubt p. 32. e 5 Partiâ— doubt p. 37. f Stowâ— Annals p. 1074. a Per suos Apostolos tanquam fontem omnis salutaris veritatis morum disciplinae omni creaturae praedicari iussit perspiciensque hanc veritatem disciplinam contineri in libris Scriptis sine Scripto traditionibus quae ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae aut ab ipsis Apostolis S. S. dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nosusque pervenerunt Concil. Trid. Ses. 4. Tom. 9. Concil. pag. 354. col 1. a. Edit. Bin Paris 1636. b Ne cui dubitatio suboriri possit quinam libri sint qui ab ipsa Synodo suscipiuntur sunt infra scripti Testamenti veteris 5. libri Mosis Gen. Exod. Levit. Numb. Deut. Jos. Judg. Ruth 4. Regum 2 Paralipon Esdr. 1. 2. qui Nehemias Tobias Judith Esther Job Psalterium Davidicum 150. Psalmorum Parabolae Ecclesiastes Cantic. Canticor Sapientiae Ecclesiasticus Esias Jerem. cum Baruch Ezech. Dan. Prophetae minores prout in nostris codicibus post eos 2 Maccab. Lib. Concil. Trid. Ses. 4. Tom. 9. p. 354. Col. 1. c Siquis autem hos libros integros cum omnibus suis partibus prout in Ecclesia catholica legi consueverunâ— in veteri vulgata latina editione habentur pro sacris canonicis non susceperit traditiones praedictas sciens prudens contempserit Anathema sit ibid. d See the letters f. g. e Hanc coâ—cupiscentiam quam aliquando Apostolus dicit non quando ut supra sed aliquando Caranza Sum. Con. Concil. Trid. Sâ—s 4. fol. 480 b. 487. b. f Siquis dixerit sola fide impium iustificari ita ut intelligat nihil aliud requiri quod ad iustificationis gratiam cooperetur anathema sit Concil. Trid. Ses. 6. Can. 9. Tom. 9. pag. 362. col 2. g Concilium perfectionis vocamus opus bonum à Christo nobis non imperatum sed demonstratum non mandatum sed commendatum Bel. de Mon. l. 2. c. 7. tom 2. p. 146. h Rhemists Annot. in 2 ad Corinth 8. 14. See also their Annot. on 2 Cor. 2. 10. i Gloriosam Virginem Dei genetricem Mariam perveniente operante divini numinis gratia singulari nunquam actualiter subiacuisse originali peccato sed immunemsemper fuisse ab omni originali actuali culpa Concil. Basil. oecumen. Ses. 36. Tom. 8. p. 97. col 1. prope finem k Declarat haec sancta Synodus non esse suae intentionis comprehendere in hoc decreto ubi de peâ—cato originali agitur beatam immaculatam Virginem Mariam Dâ—i genetricem Concil. Trid. Sess 5. Tom. 9. pag. 357. col 1. l Bel. de Concil. l. 2. ca. 2. Tom. 2. pag. 22. Col. 1. m Romanae Ecclesiae fides per Petrum super petron aedificata nec hactenus defecit nec deficiet in secula Epist. Leon pap 9. c. 32. Tom. 7. Conc. par 1. p. 239. col 2. n Romana Ecclesia nunquam erravit nec in perpetuum errabit