THE Rise, Growth, and Danger OF Socinianism. Together with A plain discovery of a desperate design of corrupting the Protestant Religion, whereby it appears that the Religion which hath been so violently contended for (by the Archbishop of Canterbury and his adherents) is not the true pure Protestant Religion, but an Hotchpotch of Arminianism, Socinianism and Popery. It is likewise made evident, That the Atheists, Anabaptists, and Sectaries so much complained of, have been raised or encouraged by the doctrines and practices of the Arminian, Socinian and Popish Party.  
By FR. CHEYNELL late Fellow of Merton College.  
Vt Judai olim volebant audire Populus Domini cùm essent non populus, Osc. 1. 9 jactabant patrem Abraham cùm essent ex Diabolo, Job. 8. 44. Sic Sociniani quoque titulum Christianorum sibi arrogant, & Fratres nostri Spirituales haberi petunt, cùm unum nobiscum Patrem Deum Trin-unum minimè agnoscant.  Vide D. Stegman. Photinianism. Disp. 1. p. 4. 5. 
{non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, inquit Philosophus; parum itaque Rationales sunt Sociniani qui deteriora sequuntur.  
LONDON, Printed for SAMUEL GELLIBRAND, at the Brazen Serpent in Paul's churchyard. 1643.   

TO THE RIGHT honourable the Lord Viscount Say and seal, &c. Peace.  
NOBLE SIR,  
LEarned Casaubon assures me that when the Greek 

Vide Annotat. Casaub. in G. Nys. Epist. ad Amb. & Bas.  
Pacem ecclesia, pacem Christi amissan quaerere, & turbatam componere, & repertam tenere curavimus Sed hujus ipsius fieri nos vel participes vel autores, nec temporis nostri peccata me ruerunt— nec Antichristi ministri sunt passi, qui Pace sua, id est, Impietatis sua unitato se jactant, agentes se non ut Christi Episcopos, sed Antichristi Sacerdotes. Hilarius contra Auxentium.   Fathers wrote to a wicked man they were wont to salute him with that apostolical benediction, Grace be unto you: but when they wrote to a religious man they used the ordinary Hebraism, Peace be unto you, because Peace doth suppose Grace, and doth comprehend all outward blessings. I am sure your very enemies gave you this testimony at Oxford, that you were a man of Peace, but as it follows in the psalm, when you spoke for peace they were for war. psalm 120. 7. All that your Honour desired was, that (as it became gowned men) they would take up their books, and lay down their arms; that they would not protect Delinquents any longer, but yield them up to a legal trial. You desired that nothing might be tumultuously attempted, but all things orderly reformed. You engaged your Honour to them that what Plate you found in places fit for Plate, the Treasury or the Buttery should remain untouched, and most Societies engaged themselves by a solemn promise, that they would never give their consent that their Plate should be put to any other use than what was suitable and according to their oath, and the intention of the donors, their successors having in all these respects as great an interest in the Plate as themselves; Nay they generally confessed that they had no more power to alien their Plate then their Lands. In confidence of their promise you told them you did leave their Plate in their own custody, which otherwise you would have secured, and in confidence of your honour's promise they brought forth their Plate, and made public use of it, even whilst the soldiers were in town▪ Your Lordship found the University (as the Reverend doctors had left it) groaning under a kind of Anarchy; for it was thought fit by the Round-house, that the University should be dissolved, and every man left to do what seemed good in his own eyes. It was suggested by a Doctor well read in politics, that if they did not dissolve the University, the Parliament would dissolve it▪ But your Honour made it appear how much you did abhor an Anarchy, and honour the university; you assembled those few governors of private colleges which were at home, and the Substitutes of all that were absent, you consulted them how the university might be put into its right posture: You assured them that it was not the intent of the Parliament to change the Government or infringe the Liberties of the university, & that though the new Statutes were justly complained of, yet you conceived it fit that the university should for the present be governed by laws that were none of the best, rather than left quite without Rule, or government; they all confessed that you behaved yourself more like a chancellor than a soldier, for the university was not overawed by a garrison, or overruled by a council of war. You did not impose any Taxes upon the University, you did not go about to persuade them that Guns were mathematical Instruments, and therefore they might buy guns with that very money which was bequeathed and set apart for mathematical Instruments; you did not importune any Scholars to list themselves in your Regiment, nor did you desire that doctors would turn Commanders, or that any Commanders should be created doctors, or boys created Masters, lest there might be an Anarchy even in Convocation by such a Premeditated Confusion; and yet such counsels and practices have been suggested by some, that are none of the meanest rank. When I was commanded by special warrant to attend your Honour, (deputed by both houses of Parliament for the service of King and Parliament to settle Peace and 
Volumus & nos pacem, sed pacem Christi— pacem in qua non fit bellum involutum; pacem, qua non ut adversartes subjictat, sed ut a mices jungat, Hieronym. Ep. ad Th. contra errores Ioh. Hi●ros.  truth in the university of Oxford, and to reduce the said university to its ancient order, right Discipline, and to restore it to its former privileges and liberties) there was notice given of a pestilent book very prejudicial both to truth and peace, and upon search made, the book was found in the chamber of Mr. Webberly, who had translated this Socinian masterpiece into English for his own private use, as he pretended; to which vain excuse I replied that I made no question but he understood the book in Latin, and therefore had he intended it only for his own private use, he might have saved the pains of translating it. Besides the frontispiece of the book under Mr. Webberlies own hand did testify to his face that it was translated into English for the benesit of this Nation. Moreover there was an Epistle to the Reader prefixed before the book; (I never heard of any man yet that wrote an Epistle to himself) and therefore sure he intended to print it. Finally, he submits all to the consideration of these times of Reformation, and the Reformers have thought fit that it should be answered and published. I desired at the first Intimation to decline the service, because it were better to confute Socinianism in Latin; but I have since considered that  
1. The opinions of Abailardus, Servetus, Socinus, are already published in English in a book entitled Mr. Wo●●ns defence against 
See Mr. Gata defence of Mr. Wotte●.  Mr. Walker, and therefore if this Treatise had been suppressed, their opinions would not be unknown, for they are already divulged.  
2. The opinions being published in English without a confutation, it is very requisite that there should be some Refutation of the errors published also, for it is not fit that a Bedlam should go● abroad without a Keeper.  
3. If there be but just suspicion of a design to introduce damnable heresies, it is requisite that the grounds of suspicion should be manifested, especially if it be such a pestilent heresy a●Socinianisme is (which corrupts the very vitals of Church and State) it is fit the heresy should be early discovered left both Church and State be ruined by it.  
4. The Parliament is much blamed for imprisoning the translator without cause: and it is much wondered at that his Chamber should be searched by officers: now the cause of both will appear. The translator and his work were so famous that there was notice given of his good service intended to this Nation, upon notice given there was a search made, now upon search made the book being found, and the translator apprehended, the Parliament is rather guilty of his release then of his Imprisonment.  
5. The translator cannot complain of the publishing of it, because (as hath been shown) he himself intended to publish it, he submits all to these times of Reformation, and so do I, let the Reformers judge. This book belongs to your Honour, because it is but a Prodromus or forerunner to make way for a full answer to Master Webberly's Translation, and therefore I present it to you, not only because Master Webberly's book was seized on by your lordship's warrant; but because I know your Honour hath ever patronised the true Protestant Religion, for Protestants do not place Religion in shadows and ceremonies; and because you justly abhor all superstitious rites, whether old or new, all judicious men will esteem you the stricter Protestant. That you may testify your dislike of schism as well as Heresy, you have discovered and refuted the uncharitable and bitter error of the Brownists. You have studied nazianzen's law of martyrdom, neither to seek nor fear danger; the first would be rashness, and the second cowardliness. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}. You are not of the sect of 

{non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, &c. Gr. Na. zimz Orat. 20. Elcesaita fidem in persecutione negandam docebant & in corde servandam.  
Aug. de Hare sibus ad Quod. vult. Deum.   the Elcesaites whereas Eusebius and Augustine testify) taught men to deny the faith in time of Persecution, and yet to keep it still in their heart, forgetting that of the Apostle, that with the heart man believes unto righteousness, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Rom. 10. 10. You have learned to be a good Christian, and therefore a good Subject; Conscience will bind you to obedience, and no other Bond will hold men close to their duty (to that Allegiance which is due by the Law of God and the Land both) in these treacherous times. It was the wisdom of 
Euseb. de vita Const. l. 1. c. 11.  that famous Emperor to banish all renegadoes from his Court, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, as traitors against God himself, for he considered that they who betrayed God for fear, would not stick to betray their Prince for gain. I dare say that you are the Kings sworn servant, and all men say that in your place you do advance the King's Income to the highest, nay some have been bold to say that you have less care of the subjects profit, then of the Kings. Your devotions speak you a Royalist, none prays more heartily for the 

Vide Dinothuw● d● bell● Ga●ico; cunden de be●o Belgico. Dimetr. Meteran. Hist. Belg.  
P●pellinier●. Memoires de la ligue. Insidi● sub pacis nomine latebant 1572. Barth. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, &c.  
At saptens' quondam rite ho● pradixit Homerus. Exhorts ille, domus, pauperque extorris & exlex, Quem bellum civil juvat, crudele, nefandum.  
Aristop. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}. Vulpt●bus atque leves voltis confidere Mergi? {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Mergus, fulica, Ardea, mihi Gavia videtur esse; a Gull, or Sea. goose, vide observ. Flor. Chr. in locum. Nullâ id ratione queamus Ante lup●s quàm connubio sibi junxerit agnam. At nunquam rectà efficias incedere Cancrum, Non facias unquam ut lavis sict asper Echinus.  
Petra Romana est Mola Asinaria, demergatur sola in profundum maris, in collo nostro non suspendatur. Barret. d● Iur● Regu.   King; It is your judgement that the kingdom cannot be preserved without an union between the three Estates by which the kingdom is governed, and if you might have been heard you would have petitioned, and solicited for an happy union between King and Parliament, only you conceive that an union between a Court of Justice and capital Delinquents, is intolerable, and an happy union between Protestants and Papists altogether impossible: We cannot forget how many leagues the Papists broke in 6. years' space; I reckon from 1572. to 1588. Wise Homer and witty Aristophanes were both in good earnest when they said that no man that had either wealth or Innocence could delight in civil war, and Aristophanes showed himself as good a Statesman as a Poet in his sweet lines of Peace, where he advises all men to beware how they enter into a league of Peace with men that are unpeaceable; and sure Delinquents and Papists are none of the trustiest or meekest men; What (saith he) shall Gulls confide in Foxes?  
{non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}  
The Papists will certainly count us Protestants Gulls indeed (well we may be as innocent as doves, but we are as simple as Gulls) if we confide in Jesuited Foxes; let the wolf and the sheep be first married, and see how they agree: let us try whether we can make a crab go straight forward, or make a hedgehog smooth.  
— {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}  
{non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, &c.  
If we say to the Pope as the men of Jabesh said to Nahash, Make a covenant with us and we will serve thee, the Pope will answer like Nahash the Ammonite, On this condition will I make a covenant with you, that I may thrust out all your right eyes, and lay it as a reproach upon all England, all Israel, all the Reformed Churches, 1 Sam. 11. 1, 2. If we have lost our eyes already, let us be avenged on the Philistines; the Lord strengthen us, as Samson said, that we may overthrow the pillars upon which Rome stands, so shall we be avenged of the Roman Philistines for both our eyes. Judges 16. 28.  
But there are other Philistines namely Arminian and Socinian Philistines, by which Church and State are much endangered, and it is the business now in hand to lay open their mystery of iniquity to the public view. We may say to these pestilent heretics 
Tacit. A●. l. 4. Vibane the 2d. did account my worthy predecessor S. Anselm his own Compeer, and said he was the Patriarch and Apostolic of the other world. The Archbishop his Relat. p. 171. The like privilege offered to this Archbishop by the English friar Bar●●si●s; see the large supplement of Canterbury's self-conviction pag. 20. What offers were made by Signior Co●, I leave to one more skilful to demonstrate.  as well as to malignant Statesmen, Ita nati estis ut mala vestra ad Rempub. pertineant; for there are no greater Statesmen in the world than the English Arminians, and Popish Socinians; for such Monsters hath England nourished as are not to be found in all Africa. Herod and Pilate, the Roman and the Racovian Antichrist, are made friends in England, all the Grand-Malignants, Arminians, Papists, and Socinians are of one confederacy, all united under one head the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Patriarch or Pope of this British world, alterius orbis Papa as his Brother-Pope hath given him leave to phrase it, because he saw the Archbishop too proud to acknowledge his Supremacy, but forward enough to maintain any other point of Popery, & ready to join with him to suppress all Pure Protestants. If this Design take effect, there may well be a reconciliation professed & established between Rome and Canterbury, the two Popes may divide the spoil of the Church between them if they can but agree at parting. Whether some have not endeavoured to make such a Reconciliation; whether all points of Popery almost have not been greedily embraced in England, and that of the Pope's Supremacy only rejected, more out of pride than conscience, let the prudent judge, they have light and evidence enough, and new evidence is daily produced. The Lord unite the King and Parliament, that Truth and justice, Piety and Peace may be established in our days: so prays  
April, 18. 1643.  
Your lordship's humble servant, Fr. Cheynelz.  
It is ordered this eighteenth day of April, 1643. by the Committee of the House of Commons in Parliament concerning printing, that this book intit●led The Rise, Growth, and Danger of Socinianism, &c. be printed.  
John White.   

Chap. I. Of the Rise of Socinianism.  
THe Socinians have raked many sinks, and 
Scribant ● laute & accurate qui ad hoc munus ingenii fiductâ vel officii ratione ducuntur; me verò sublevanda recordationu, vel potius oblivionu mea gratiâ, Commoniterium mihimet parasse suffecerit. Vinc. Li●in. adv. Har.  dunghills for those rags and that filth, wherewith they have patched up and defiled that leprous body which they account a complete body of pure Religion. Ever since the world was possessed with the spirit of Antichrist some Malignant heretics have been ever and anon desperately striking at the Person, the Natures, the offices, the grace and Spirit of Christ. Cerinthius and Ebion began to blaspheme Christ, even in the Apostles time. I need say nothing of Theodot us Byzont in us, Paulus Samosatenus, Arius and the 
a Vide Calovium consid. Theol. Socin. pag. 105. 106. & sequ. 
Vide Stegman Photin. Disp. 1 pag. 1. & 3.  
Hebionei Christun● tantummodo hominem dicunt. Vti Augustinus de Haresibus.  
Euseb. Pamph. Hist. lib. 3. cap. Gr. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}. Lat. 24.   rest; yet it will not be amiss to show wherein the Socinians have refined or enlarged the ancient heresies, which have been long since condemned to hell. Ostorodus would not have the name of Ebionites imposed upon the Socinians, quia vox Ebion Hebraicé egenum significat, Praef. Iust. pag. 10. 11. it seems they would not be counted mean conditioned men: and there are some indeed and those no beggars (Unless it beat Court) who are too much addicted to Socinian fancies; and yet if that be true, which Ostorodus citys out of Eusebius, that the Ebionites were so called because they had a mean and beggarly opinion of Christ, sure the Socinians might well be called Ebionites, for none have baser and cheaper thoughts of Christ, than they. If Ostorodus had thought it worth while to have consulted Eusebius his ecclesiastical history, lib. 3. cap. 24. or Epiphanius Haeres. 33. he might have seen another reason why 
Epihanius Hares. 30.  those heretics were called Ebionites.  
The Socinians take it no less unkindly that they are called Arians. Ex consensu tantùm in principalibus cum Ario de Jesu 
Ariani Patrem & Filium & Spiritum Sanctum nolunt esse univi ejusdemque naturae at que substantiae, aut ut expressius dicatur, essentia. August. de Haeresibus.  Christo, Arianismi jure quis argui potest? saith Smalcius. It is well he confesses that they may be called Arians who agree with Arius in the main, I deny that the Arians had higher thoughts of Jesus Christ, than the Socinians. The Arians were termed {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, because they maintained that Christ was created {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}. Some Arians did acknowledge that 
Ariani omnes dicti antiquitus era●t, licet sententiis inter se discords, qui in pr●c●puum errotem cum Ario conspirabant; nempe Filium Dei Patri consubstantialem esse negantes ●ti Smiglecius Probat.  Christ was equal to the Father in essence and nature, though they denied him to be of the same essence with the Father; and others of them did only say, that the Son was unlike the Father, and were therefore called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}; yet these also were condemned because neither of these sects would acknowledge the Son to be consubstantial with the Father; for if they would have confessed that the Father and the Son were of the same essence, they would never have said that their essence was equal, but rather that their persons were equal, and their essence the same; for equality is ever between two at the least: therefore by saying that their nature was equal, they employed that they had two different natures. And they who talked of a dissimilitude of nature, must necessarily suppose, that the Father and the Son had different natures, for a nature cannot be said to be unlike itself: and if this latter sect by dissimilitude meant an inequality, than they were blasphemously absurd, in fancying that there was majus and minus in the same most indivisible, and single essence. Reverend 
D Bez●, Prasatio prafixa Explicat. Val Gentilis Perfidi● & Perjurii. Sociniani cum Aetionis filium non modo {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, sed etia {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} di●unt. Stegman. Phot. Disp. 1. pag. 7, 8.  Beza hath set this forth to the life, in his preface to the description of the Heresy and Perjury of that archheretic, Valentinus Gentilis, Ariomanitae— in duas minimùm factiones divisi sunt, nempe in {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} & {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}. He disputes the the point, whether {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} did not imply as much as {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}— nisi voxilla {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} (sicut de Dionysio Corinthio, Basilius ad fratrem scribit) commodâ quadam interpretatione (sed plane ut mihi videtur violentâ) leniatur, Nam certè in unâ eademque prorsus essentiâ nullus est neque aequalitatineque inaequalitati locus, utpote quae minimùm in duobus cernantur; ac proinde in hypostasibus, non in essentiâ spectare aequalitatem necesse est. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}— qui Filium Patri faciebant dissimilem, se vel Arianos prodebant vel stolidos, x in simplicissimâ & singularissimâ naturâ, nempe Deitate, majus & minus quiddam imaginarentur, pag. 4. & 5.  
By this and much more which might be added, it doth plainly appear that if the Arians were not more rational, yet they were more devout than the Socinians, they had a a more honourable and reverent opinion of Christ. For the Socinians will not acknowledge that God and Christ are equal, or like in nature. The Socinians make Christ, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, the Arians thought him the most excellent of all creatures, and therefore said, that he was created before any other creature, and used by God as an Instrument to create the rest, as Doctor Stegman observes, Disput. 1. pag. 3. Finally the Arians 

Sociniani insuper Filium De● post munds occasum prorsus non regnaturum cum Ario s●mniant Sociniani. vide Calov. de di. stinct. Theol. S●cin. a priscis haresibus. pag. 116.  
not est ut Photinianum nomen su●terfugiant cum in principalibus se c● Photino convenir● fateantur. D Stegman Photin. Disp. 1. pag 3.   and Socinians agree in this, that both deny Christ to be consubstantial with the Father, and therefore though they differ in telling their tale, in explaining their error, yet both agree in the main, and that's ground enough to call them Arians, if Smalcius may be Judge.  
Doctor Stegman usually calls the Socinians, Photinians, and therefore entitles his own book Photinianismus; and the Socinians do acknowledge that they agree with Photinus in the main, yet they say it is not sufficient ground to call any man Photinian because he agrees with Photinus in Fundamental points; but Smalcius tells us that Socinus was the servant of Christ, they own his doctrine, and own the man as their fellow-servant: Quid Photinus? quid alii? nisi servi Christi? they give him and others that are as bad as he is, the right hand of fellowship; and it is commonly conceived that Mahumetism took his rise from photinianism. I have no book about me, that fhewes so clearly what the Photinians held, as Jacobus ad Portum Professor of Divinity in Academia Lausannenfi, 
Iacobus ad Portum Orthod Fid Defen. advers●● Ostorradium.  in its Epistle Dedicatory, Doc●erunt Christum Iesum naturâ esse {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, gratiâ divinâ tamen insigniter ornatum, eumque tum demum esse coepisse, cùm in utero virgins Mariae conciperetur; ac proinde verbum Dei, vel Deum non aliter in ipso quàm in aliis Prophet is habitasse, nec ipsi {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} aut {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} unitum fuisse, sed tantum gratiâ & efficaciâ ipsi assedisse: ipsum denique esse {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, sed {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} & {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, non autens {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} 

Martin. Thalyaus Anatom. Samosat. Glossema Samosateniorum est ejusdē●oloris cum Turcismo ac judaismo— cum Turcis quidem plus habent affini tatu quàm cum Iudae●— Turcismus en●m ut ex aliis errorum cento nibus, sic ex Samosatenia nismo a Mahume te est conftatus. Pauliani a Paulo Samosateno Christum non semper suisse dicunt sed ej us initium ex quo de Ma. ria natus est asse verant, nec eum ali quid amplius quam hominem putant. Ista haeresis aliquamao cujusdam Artemonii fuit sed cum defecisset ●staurata est a Paulo, & postea sic a Photino confirmata &c. Aug de Hares. Execrandus ille Samosatenus ejus Ecolesiae conspurcator in quâ primi sunt Christiani nominati. D. Beza ubi supra.  
August de Hares. Haresis Samosaten; postea sic a Photino confirmata ut Photiniani quàm P●ultani celebriús nuncupentur— Philaster continuatim ponit ambos (samosatenun scil. & Photinum) sub singulis & propriis numeris quasi haereses duas, cum dicat Photinum in omnibus Pauli secutum fuisse doctrinam.   ut loquuntur, ex quâ infoelici haeresi postmodum Mahumetismus ortus esse perhibetur.  
Others call the Socinians Samosatenians, and therefore Thalyaeus calls his book in which he answers the arguments of Socinus, Eniedinus, Ostorodius, and Smalcius, Anatome Samosatenianismi, in which he shows that the Socinian glosses are of the same colour with Turkish and Jewish blasphemies; the four Professors of the theological Faculty at Leiden, have given a large commendation of Thalyaeus in their approbation, printed before the book, and signed with the hands of all the Professors, in which they with one voice vote Socinianism to be Recoct samosatenianism; Impiam Pauli Samosateni sententiam melior & sanctior Ecclesia sub Cruce adhuc militans, ut enata fuit exhorruit, eaque mox publico Episcoporum judicio execrata est. Scriptum illud conscriptum contra renatum & ab infausto illo Socino ejusque asseclis recoctum Samosatenianismum censemus pie docte & solide &c. The Samosatenians did borrow their name from Paulus Samosatenus Bishop of the Church of Antioch, and therefore his practices were the more abominable, because he poisoned that Church, in which Disciples were first called Christians, with heretical blasphemies against the Lord Christ, as reverend Beza observes. I find in Augustine that Artimonius did first broach this heresy, and Paulus Samosatenus did revive it; but I need say no more of the Samosatenians, having said enough already of the Photinians, for Photinus did confirm that heresy which Samosatenus did revive, and therefore the followers of Paulus Samosatenus. were more commonly called Photinians then Paulians, or Samosatenians. And though Philaster reckon Samosatenus his heresy by itself, & Photinus his heresy by itself, yet to show that they were not different heresies, he saith Photinus did in all things follow Paulus Samosatenus. I do not reckon up all the disorderly heretics in order, take them as it happens. Nestorius denied that the self same person was God and man, he would not acknowledge that the Word was made flesh, only the Word was with that flesh, (by an effectual Presence) which was taken of the substance of the Virgin, Affirmabat enim {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} illi carni ex Mariâ prognatae nonnisi {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} adfuisse, as learned Beza declares it in brief. If any man desire to be further acquainted with the opinion, and the desputes about it, let him read S. Cyril, and peruse the famous and orthodox (not the spurious and surreptitious) Ephesine council, and he may receive full satisfaction. The Socinians are far worse than Nestorius, for they do not only deny, that the self same person who was borne of the Virgin, is the second person in the Trinity, but they utterly deny that there is any second Person, or third Person which is consubstantial with the Father.  
Having mentioned Nestorius, I must not skip over Eutyches, who in opposition to Nestorius his dividing of the Person of Christ, did vainly imagine, that the natures of Christ were mingled, and so he confounded both natures, and their essential properties: Yet the Eutychians did grant that there were two natures in Christ, which the Socinians deny. 

Vide jacobum ad portum Orthodox. fid. defence. Stegman. Disput 1. pag. 4. 7. 8.  
Calovium considerate. Theol. Socin. Preoemial. Gloriantur Sociniani selectes quasdam confessions sua vel directe vel oblique de Deo & Christo favisse, Samosatenum Photinum, Baliardum, Basilidianos, Carpocrat, Gnosticos, Marcionites, Montanistas, Noctianos, Arianos, Berillum, Eutych, Donatum, helvidium Eunomium, Miletium, Sabinum, Praxeam, Manichaum, Sabellium, Photinum, & ejusce furfuris perditissimos hareticos, vide Caloviunt de D●uct, Theol. Socin. à priscis haresibus pag. 106.    
The time would fail me, or at least the Readers patience, should I show how the Socinians agree with the Noetians, who maintained, that there was but one person in the Godhead: with Macedonius, who denied the Holy Ghost to be a Person: with the Pelagians, concerning their denial of the Image of God in Adam before his Fall, and their maintaining of freewill, and denial of original sin since the Fall. In a word, how they agree with the Valentinians, Marcionites, Cerdonians, Manichees, Apollinarists, Sabellius, the Donatists, Sadducees, Papists, Anabaptiss, Schwenckefeldians, Antinomians, and I know not how many more of the like stamp, hath been shown by others already, and the manifestation of their errors in the ensuing Treatise will sufficiently declare. I will pass over many things very observable, because I would willingly discourse at large of some later passages, and subtle inventions by which Socinianism was introduced into foreign parts, and in some parts established by the suffrage and subscription of too many eminent wits, and great Scholars. But I must not in my haste forget Abeilardus, or as Platina calls him, Baliardus, as Bernard, Abailardus, his name in our English tongue may be Balard; he flourished 
Vide D. Stegman Disp. 1. pag. 4.  about the year 1140. he had a very ready discoursing wit, and is by some voiced to be the first founder of school-divinity; whether he maintained all those heresies which Bernard lays to his charge, I shall not now stand to dispute, there is some cause of doubt; Abeilard lived to make his Apology, and if it was but an honest Recantation, he hath made some amends. Learned Mr. Gataker in his postscript 
Learned Mr. Gataker his Postscript to Mr. Wotto●s Defence, pag. 40. 41. Calov. Considerate. Theol. Socinian. Prooemial. p. 120.  to Mr. Wotton's Defence, pag. 40. & 41. will direct you to Authors, from whom you may receive better satisfaction than I can for the present give, unless I were furnished with a better Library.  
I shall not do Postellus so much honour as to take notice of him; as for Servetus, I will not stain my paper with his blasphemies: Mr. Gataker hath shown his chief assertions in the book forecited from the 42. to the 47. page; it is much questioned whether the Senate of Geneva did not deal too severely with him. Samosatenus, Arius and Eutyches did all revive in that Cerberus, he was both admonished and refuted by three learned Divines of that age, Oecolampadius, Melanchthon & Calvin; he had time enough given him to recant, he did stubbornely maintain his cursed blasphemies for thirty years together, as Beza shows; Ob 
Beza Prafat. pra. fix. explicat. H●res. Valent. Gen●. Calovins Consid. Theol. Soc. Prooe●ial. pag. 6. Michael, Servetus p●nas luens, Anno 1553.  triginta annorum blasphemias execrabiles & indomitam pervicaciam ex Senatus Genevensis sententiâ justissimo supplici● affectum, quis non tandem nisi planè furiosus & excors abominetur?  
The Senate of Geneva were in good hope by this exemplary punishment upon Servetus to crush this cockatrice's egg, and kill the Viper; but for all this some under hand, and others more boldly and impudently did seduce the people. Bernardine Ochin seemed to be an Academik, a mere Sceptik in Religion, he questioned all things, and determined nothing; Lalius Socinus carried the matter with such a cleanly 
Nonnulli Geneva iterum è favillis Serveti flammas quasdam hareseos ipsius excitare, tum illis quoque inter alios favit Lalius Socinus. Calov. Decas Dis. pag. 7.  conveyance, that he was scarce taken notice of, though he received some checks and admonitions, yet most men thought charitably of him during his life; his black designs were not fully discovered till after his death; this is the Grandfather of the Socinians; but I will say no more of him yet, till I have shown what pra●kes were played by those bold fellows, who acted those tragedies openly upon the Stage, which Lelius composed behind the curtain, Valentinus 
Impictas Val. Gent. b●evi script● detecta per D. 1. Calvinum vide Valentint Gent. Pro. theses. Confession●. Libellum Antid●torum. Responsum D. Calvini ad Question. Georg Elandratae. Eiusdem Brev. Admonit ad fratres Polonas, nee non confirmat. istius Admonit. Simleri Epistolam Ministris in Polonia & Russia. Theses 1. Hyperii in Acad Marpurg Assert. Doct. Cath. de Trinitate per Alexand. Ale●●um Theses D. Beza in Pra●ect de Trinitate. B. A●etis Histor. Val. Gent.  Gentilis practised at Geneva, George Blandrate a physician in Poland, and Transylvania. Give me leave to make but two or three observations by the way, and I shall open the practices of these impudent heretics more fully to you.  
First, the devil hath done more mischief in the Church by counterfeit Protestants, false brethren, then by professed Papists, open enemies.  
Secondly, observe that vain curiosity did betray the Churches, and make them a mere prey to these subtle heretics; most men have an itching desire to be acquainted with novelties, and at that time the Churches were very inquisitive after a more rational way of Divinity, they began to examine the Articles of faith, especially the Article of the Trinity, by some received axioms of Philosophy, and by that curiosity puzzled their reason, and lost their faith.  
Thirdly, though Poland and Transylvania were grievously infected, yet the mischief came from Italy, as reverend Beza observes, and therefore cries out, Sa●è fatalis esse videtur P●lonis 
Vide Beza Pr●●●●.  Italia. Besides the flame broke out first in the Italian Church at Geneva, though the coals were dispersed and blown too in other places. The Italian Church had some warning given by the execution of Michael Servetus in the year 1553. but that Church was too indulgent for four or five years, yet at last the Elders of the Italian Church, perceiving that some of their flock began to oppose the doctrine of the Trinity, they thought fit to set forth some form of Confession, unto which they required all to subscribe, upon the eighteenth day of May, 1558. They all protested by that Faith whereby they were obliged to God, that they would never purposely and maliciously directly or obliquely oppose that Confession, or favour any form, or Sect which did make the least appearance of dissenting from it; and whosoever 
Confessi● fidei edita in Italica Ecclesia Genevae habetur in Explicat. perfidia Val. Gentilis pag. 1.  did violate this Protestation, should be held a perjured and perfidious man. Valentinus Gentilis made no great haste to subscribe, but being called upon, he testified his consent with his own hand. Yet not long after, he said he was pricked in conscience for subscribing to this form, and 
Ibid. pag 3.  therefore contemned his Protestation, and endeavoured to seduce the simple people; whereupon he was convented before the Senate of Geneva, the points in controversy being rationally discussed, and Valentinus nonplussed, he had nothing to say, but that he was not well versed in the art of disputing, which was notoriously false, for he was an acute subtle man, as appears by his Confessions, Epistles, Replies; his sublime notions about the Essence, and Subsistences of the Trinity and Quaternity; that one question did sufficiently discover his subtlety, An Essentia divina ex Semetipsa absque ullâ consideratione Personarum sit verus Deus; and that Thesis of his, Deus Pater solus verus Deus est Essentiator, hoc est Informator individuorum, nempe Filii Spiritusque. The God of Israel (saith Valentine) is the only true God the Father of Jesus Christ; and so by opposing the Father to the Son, and affirming that the Father only was the true God, he did clearly deny the Son to be the true God. Clare apparet (saith the Senate) x Patrem opponis Filio & uni duntaxat veram Deitatem tribuis, te excludere alterum, quem cum illo confers— Facessat 
Vide Explicat. Prafidia Valent. Gentilis, p. 14, 15, 16.  antithesis inter Patrem & Filium ubi fit Deitatis mentio— In comparatione fingis duo Antitheta, Patrem opponis Filio ac si in solo Patre esset Dei Essentia— Filium essentiatum à Patre dicis, à Seipso esse neg as— Jamsi Essentia divina sit in solo Patre, vel eripies eam filio, vel partibilem finges, utcunque n●nc centies concedas Filium esse verum Deum, spoliatus tamen suâ essentiâ titularis solùm erit Deus.— Individua tibi somnias quorum singula partem Essentiae obtineant— Deus Indefinite est ingenitus, & Pater etiam Personae respectu ingenitus, filius autem respectu Personae à Patre est genitus— Non abstrahimus personas ab Essentia, sed quamvis in ea resideant, distinctionem interponimus. Hoc sensu Individuos Tertullianus vocat Patrem & Filium, non autem (ut tu stul●e imaginaris) Individua, quae sub Specie comprehendantur. To this effect the Senate answered Valentine's subtleties; I have put it close together, that I might not be tedious, and yet manifest upon what grounds this great wit was condemned by that grave judicious Senate.  
He had one question more, which he took much pride in, namely, Utrum Essentia concurrat in Trinitatem? to which the Senate answered, Essentia non concurrit ad distinguendas personas, nec tamen personae sine essentiâ sunt— Veteres ad Personas tantum nomen Trinitatis retulerunt— Quarum rerum dices esse 
Ubisupra pag. 17.  Trinitatem? Respondes, tria concurrere, Essentiam, Filium, & Spiritum. Hinc verò plane perspicitur te essentiam Filii & Spiritus exinanire. This conceit of Valentinus, that the Essence, son, and Spirit, make the Trinity, did at once deny the Person of the Father, and the divine Essence of the son and Spirit; for, observe how he puts in the Essence to make up the Trinity, and so left out the Person of the Father, and by opposing the other two Persons to the Divine Essence, he did imply, that they had an Essence different from the Divine Essence.  
Valentine having received this full answer from the Senate, was much enraged, but upon second thoughts, he fell to his devotions, made some show of repentance, and seemed to be satisfied; nay, he proceeded so far as to write to the Senate, and acknowledge that he was fully convinced by 
Epistola Valentini Gentilis ad senatum Genevensem habetur in Explicat. Perfidia Val. Gent. p. 27.  the clear and solid reasons laid down by the Consistory, in their answer to his objections: Nay, farther yet, he descended to particulars, and confessed that they had manifestly proved, that those three grounds upon which all his fancies were built, were all most false and absurd.  
First, saith he, I have offended in that whilst I affirmed, The only God of Israel to be the Father of Jesus Christ, I considered not that by opposing the only God to Christ, I denied Christ to be God.  
Secondly, I was too rash in considering the Divine Essence out of the three Persons, and concluding from thence, that the Essence and the Trinity of Persons made a Quaternity: for now I perceive that the Divine Essence cannot be considered anywhere, but in the three Persons.  
Thirdly, I have offended, in that I said the Person of the Father was sophistical.  
Upon these rotten ruins (saith Valentine) did I build many false consequences, which now I do abhor and detest, and profess that I believe the doctrine of the Trinity in the sense of your Consistory; O my conscience hath been wounded for my inconsiderate answers to that excellent Divine and servant of God John Calvin! but I have acknowledged my fault with hearty sorrow, and I make no question but the searcher of hearts hath forgiven me; I beseech you likewise to forgive me, for I believe that the trouble of my mind will bring forth such fruits of repentance in my future conversation, as will wipe off this offensive blot wherewith now I am bespotted and stained, I hope the clemency of the holy Ministers is such, that they will receive such a miserable stray beast as I am into their fold again, and triumph at my conversion. he proceeded farther yet, made a solemn and orthodox confession of 
Abjuratio Val. Gentilis ipsius manu sponte scripta, et ad Senatum Genevensem missa. vide explicat. perfidia Val. Gentilis p. 28.  his faith, and a Recantation of his errors on the 29. of August 1558. At last having abjured his errors under his hand, the Senate in hope that his repentance was cordial and sincere, they commanded him to walk bareheaded, barelegged and barefoot thorough every street in the City, with a Trumpet blown before him, and a light in his hand, then to kneel down, ask pardon of the Senate, and burn all his heretical Doctrines with his own hand, all which he did upon the second of September following. Behold the mercy of Geneva to one that was but hopeful, though he had been an heretic, a schismatic, a Seducer, they forgave him, and gave him leave to come forth of prison, without taking any Sureties, because he pleaded that he was a stranger, and poor, only they took an oath of him, that he should not depart 
Er●t in confinio pagus Fargiarum ubi habitabat Gribaldus— aderant ibidem Alciatus— in praefecturâ Gaiensi ditionis mag. Dom. Bernensium Aretius Histor. Val. Gent.  the City without their licence: but he soon broke his oath, and fled not far off to Gribaldus and Alciatus, two of his own stamp, and faction; but he met there with a governor of a resolute spirit, who began to inquire into his dangerous opinions, and being fully informed of their desperate malignancy, he committed him to prison for a while, but not long after released him, and gave him a fair warning, but no sooner he enjoyed his liberty, but he presently published his opinions in print, and abused the governor with a dedication, as if the book had been published by the governor's consent and Authority. Not long after he travails to lions where he was imprisoned for the space of 50. days, but he pretended that he did only oppose Calvin in the carriage of some controversies, and by that means the Antichristian spirit, which reigns in the bosom of Papists, did incline them to forgive and release him; it seems the Papists cares not what Article of faith be denied, nor how much Jesus Christ be dishonoured, so Calvin be opposed, for by this silly shift he got o●t twice from the Papists. Confessionem it a potuit attemper are ut à Papist is admitteretur, solùm Evangelicas 
Gratianopoli.  Ecclesias, & nominatim Calvinum perstringens, &c. and by that means he made his first escape; his second escape was obtained by the self same shift. Libellum Antidotorum & confessionem sic potuit attemperare ut judicaretur solum Calvinum 
Lugduni.  impugnare, non ipsam Trinit atem ideoque solutus carceribus dimissus est; as Aretius relates in his History of Valentine. But he was not satisfied yet, unless he could beguile Protestants as well as Papists, he went therefore over into Poland, and joined with Alciat, and Blandrate, in seducing the Polonian Churches, he confirmed his Doctrines by Sophistry, some fragments out of the Fathers, and some pieces of the Alcor●●, to show that he intended to please the Turks, as well as the Papists, and to quarrel only with the Protestants; his friend Alciat turned direct Mahometist being 
Quid interea bonus ille Hosius Cardinalis cum suis Catholieis? nempe ridere suaviter nostros undique ad extinguendum hoc incendtum accurrentes probrosis libellu lacessere, Regiam denique majestatem de coercendis istis blasphemiis cogitantem arectis consiliis provirtbus avoeare; as merito quidem: Quorsu enim Satanadversus seipsum depugnaret? Beza Prafat. ubi supra.  led to it by his principles; but Valentine expressed himself in a more reserved and cunning way then Alciat or Blandrate, whereupon there fell out some difference between them, and so by God's providence they did the less hurt in Poland, but there they continued above two years, but at last the King of Poland took notice of them, and intended to have published an edict against their heretical blasphemies, but then the Antichristian spirit stirred up Cardinal Hosius, to suggest another course to his Majesty: but God moved the King to banish all strangers, innovators in Doctrine, and Perturbers of the Peace, out of his kingdom, upon the 5. of March, in the year 1566. Being banished out of Poland, and knowing that Calvin was dead, he thought fit to return into the old quarters, never dreaming that he should have fallen into the hands of the old governor, whom he had formerly a bused in so high a nature; but by divine providence the same person though it was not his turn, was governor of that province, (vide supra, p. 10.) as Aretius declares, Gaium ipsum accedens, cui idem adhuc praefectus (prorogat â forte ipsi extra ordinem ejus provinciae administratione) praeerat. Valentine thought it his best course, to put a good face upon the matter, and challenge any man to dispute with him, but the governor well knowing, that he had been often disputed with, and fairly admonished, cried, Fiat quod justum est, and clapped him up close prisoner, upon the 11. day of June, 1566. The province being under the jurisdiction of the Senate of Bern, Valentine appealed from the Governor of Gaium to the Senate of Bern, & he was brought thither upon the 19 day of July. When he was examined, the Senate charged him with heresy, Perjury, blasphemy, 
Neglecta juramŭti religione ad errores abjuratos postlimini● redibat.  Schism; and over and above that, he had joined with Alciat and Blandrate, in seducing the simple people. To which he answered, that he had nothing to do with either of them, for Alciat, saith he, is a Mahometan, and Blandrate is a Sabellian and Samosatenian; he complained that those Churches which were called evangelical, or Reformed Churches, were still too much enslaved to the Pope; and yet when he was among the Papists he saw his own confession, of that which he called his Faith, passed currant enough. Nostras ecclesias 
Aretii Hist. Val. Gent. cap. 2. p 11.  damnari quasi adhuc Papatui servientes, x interim ipse inter Papistas constitutus posset confessionibus editis elabi. He was questioned for a book which he dedicated to the King of Poland, in which he repeated the confession of his faith, which was confuted at Geneva, and subjoined his book of Antidotes, in which he endeavours to refute certain Theses collected out of Augustine's 15. books, de Trinitate, and the 13. chapter of Calvins' first book of Institutions, which treats likewise of the Trinity. Finally, he made some sharp Annotations upon Athanasius, and confirmed his own opinion out of the Alcoran. The Senate picked out all his Calumnies, Impostures, blasphemies, heresies old and new. Wherein Valentine agreed with Arius, is shown by Aretius, in the 8. chapter of his History; if any man desire to peruse the determinations of Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Tertullian, Augustine in this great article of the Trinity, he may read them at large in the same History, from the 13. to the 17. chapter. I must hasten to bring Valentine to his deserved punishment; the Senate had treated with him, from the 5. of August to the 9 of September, and he remained still stubborn, 
August. 1566:  and pertinacious in his blasphemies, and therefore the Senate pronounced sentence of death upon him, which was accordingly executed; for he could not by prayers, tears, arguments, entreaties, be wrought upon to change his mind: he had a fair warning given him before, by the Senate of Geneva, if he had had the grace to have taken it, their Charge ran high, and their Admonition was prophetical. Filium Dei quem praedicamus, in Diabolum transfiguras. 
Rescript. Senat. Genev. habetur in Explicat persidiae Val, Gent. p. 20.  Deum quem colimus, vocas Deum Turcarum, multaque ejus generis, sed vide miser ne te praecipitaverit tuus furor ut voces emitteres quae per jugulum redeant.  
It is now time to draw the curtain and look for Socinus who most of this while, played least in sight, till he went quite out of sight, in the year 1562. Laelius Socinus was the tutor 
Ortgo Socinianisma a Lalto fuit ratione Inventiones, a Fausto ratione Dispositionis.  and uncle, Faustus Socinus was the Nephew and disciple; Laelius did contribute materials, Faustus added Form and method to that monstrous body of errors and blasphemies which we call Socinianism. Laelius Socinus was borne in the 
Eques Polonus in vitâ F Socini. Dissortatio quam eques Polonus F. Socini ope●bus pramitti voluit. Abraham Calov. Decas Dissertat.  year, 1525. his parents were of good rank and quality, his Father was styled, IC. torum Princeps. The life of Socinus is written by a Polonian Knight, who was tender of his honour, who hath also set forth a dissertation, which he desires may be prefixed before the works of Faustus, or rather the notions of Laelius digested into order by Faustus; and out of those two treatises we may pick something to give light to the original of Socinianism; but we are most beholding to D. Calovius, who hath handled this argument more distinctly, than any man that I have met with, and he saith that about four years after Servetus his death in the year 1557. Laelius Socinus did underhand encourage them who had raked in Servetus ashes, and blowed some coals that were yet alive, and from thence raised a blacker flame. Laelius then, no doubt, favoured Valentine, for about the year 1558. Valentine began to show himself, and in that year, the Italian Church put forth their orthodox confession about the Trinity at Geneva, as hath been already showed. Moreover the Polonian Knight saith, that Laelius did take special care of his countrymen, quodque praecipue suos erudierit Italos: and though Laelius did 
I icet Tiguri apud Helvetios sedem fixisses, ad alias tamen Europa regto●es non semelex ●urrebat.  keep his most usual residence amongst the Helvetians, yet his letters traveled up and down the world, and he now and then visited his countrymen in person, who were banished into Poland, and Germany; he went twice on pilgrimage, to gain some Proselytes in Poland, first in the year, 1551. and afterwards in the year, 1557. and there he infected many of the Nobles with his pestilent heresies, which have found such good entertainment ever since, that Poland doth to this very day (the Lord of heaven be merciful to them) labour under that deadly disease. But it was Laelius his chief desire to instruct his three brethren, Celsus, Cornelius, and Camillus, in that which he called his religion; and though they lived far asunder, (Celsus enim Bononiae, reliqui Senis agebant) yet they held such intimate correspondence, that the seeds of this heresy were mutually cherished by their frequent letters. But his nephew Faustus was his best Scholar, and therefore by divers hints and intimations best acquainted with the secrets of his art. Ingenio Nepotis confisum plura divinanti innuisse, quàm discenti tradidisse; (saith the Polonian Knight) non dissimulato inter amicos praesagio pleniùs haec atque foelicius à Fausto orbi prodenda; and Faustus Socinus doth acknowledge that he did owe all his mysterious knowledge to his uncle only, (for he was never taught of God) Praeter unum Laelium patruummeum— vel potius praeter paucula quaedam ab ipso conscripta & multa annotata, nullum prorsus magistrum me habere contigit. Epist. ad Maro. Sq. You may read particulars in D Calovius (pag. 2. & sequ.) I need not therefore descend to particulars since the confession is so general; only be pleased to observe that the heresy doth directly strike at the Nature, Person, Offices, Satisfaction, Sacraments of Christ. And as the Arminians are much offended with the ninth chapter to 
Veruntamen ut unicuique sua constet laus— Me & sententiam illam in Iohannis Evangel. Verbis explicandis, & quae ad eam asserendam vel jam dixi vel posthac dicturus sum magna▪ ex parte ex Laelii Socini Senensis sermonibus dum adhuc viveret, & post ejus mortem ex aliquibus ipsius scriptis quae in manus meas non absque mirabili Dei opera atque consilio pervonerun● & hausisse & desumpsisse non minus libenter quam ingenue fate● or. Frag. 4. duorum S●ript. F. Socini pag. 4. & 5.  the Romans, so the Socinians are as much offended with the first chap. of the Gospel according to Saint John; it was therefore Laelius one of his masterpieces to pervert that Scripture by a devilish gloss. I dare not give a more gentle Epithet: Faustus doth confess that his uncle Laelius did contribute all the stuff out of which he framed his exposition upon the first part of the first Chapter of Saint John; Illam verborum Johannis expositionem, & quae ad eandem adserendam produxit, sese magnâ ex parte è Laelii sermonibus, dum adhuc viveret, & post ejus mortem ex aliquibus ipsius scriptis sumpsisse & deprompsisse. V. Frag. duor. script. Socin. & Epist. 1. ad Dudith. pag. 13. But though Laelius Soci●us carried matters thus closely, and did all by slight of wit and hand, yet about 3. years before his death he was shrewdly suspected for a Seducer, his brother Cornelius was apprehended, the rest fled for fear, Faustus his Nephew and disciple, fled quite out of Italy, to lions in France, Laelius in the mean time died in the year 1562. and the 37. year of his age, as Calovius assures me: Cum Faustus aliquandiu Lugduni in Gallia viveret, Laelius interi●s Tiguri extinctus est anno 1562. Aetatis ejus septimo supra trigesimum. All Laelius his notes were I believe committed to Faustus, qui patruo suo Laelio emortualis extitit, as the same Author, de origine Theol. Soc.§. 25. and therefore certainly most of his opinions would have died with him, had not this unlucky Faustus poisoned the world with them. For Faustus himself acknowledges that Laelius was very sparing in opening himself, except it were in some lighter controversies. Nolebat ille sententiam suamnisi in levioribus quibusdam controversiis omnibus aperire, ne turbarentur Ecclesiae, & infirmi quorum maximam semper habuit rationem offenderentur, & à vero Dei cultu ad Idola fortasse iterum adducerentur. Frag. F. Socini Disp. de Christi naturâ p. 5. Observe by the way that the Socinians do not much differ from the Papists in any point in controversy between the Papists and Reformed Churches, unless it be in the point of Idolatry. But indeed there was one reason more why Laelius was so wary, he knew how it fared with Michael Serv●tus in the year 1553. & that severe example might well keep him in awe for 8. or 9 years after, about which time he died: and indeed Faustus seems to glance at some such reason, for he saith Laelius had observed that there was a custom which grew in request in some Churches, ut Execrabiles haberentur quicunque adversus receptas sententias vel mutire quidem ausi essent, in the place forecited. Nay I can easily guess at a third reason yet, because Laelius had in former time before he was poisoned with Servetus his doctrines taught the same truths which are generally received in the Reformed Churches, and if he should have retracted so many opinions, the people would not have believed him in any thing he had taught, but would have quite fallen off to Popery again, as he conceived: for the people had a great opinion of his doctrine, though he was neither doctor nor Pastor in the Church. Neve tandem divina veritas ab eo praedicata (quineque Pastoris neque Doctoris officio in Ecclesia fungeretur) ob auctoris non parvam (I believe it should be, though 'tis printed magnam) auctoritatem magna Christiani orbis detrimento passim rejiceretur. Faustus Disp▪ de Christi natura, pag. 6. It was therefore Laelius his master-plot to propound doubts & questions to such famous men as Calvin, & others in the Reformed Churches, as if he intended to gain some farther light (when indeed he sought for further advantage) by their determinations. Quod tamen ut omnem offensionem vitaret addiscendi tantum studio a se fieri dicebat: qua tamen ratione ab initio idem vere ab eo factum fuisse verisimile est, quare etiam Discipulum semper se, nunquam autem Doctorem profitebatur. Faustus ubi supra. Master Calvin did easily perceive his subtlety, and therefore gave him a fair but sharp admonition about the Calends 
Vide Calovium de origine Theol. Soci. pag. 6 sect. 16.  of January, 1552. as the Polonian Knight doth confess: Si tibi per aereas illas speculationes (saith Calvin) volitare libet, sine me quae so humilem Christi Discipulum ea meditari quae ad fidei meae aedificationem faciunt— Quod pridem testatus sum, serio iterum moneo, nisi hunc quaerendi Pruritum mature corrigas, metuendum esse ne tibi gravia tormenta accersas. Faustus saith that his Uncle was snatched away by an untimely death, non sine Dei consilio, that so those great mysteries which God had revealed to none but Laelius, might be made known unto the world. Cùm statim fere post mortem ejus, eorum quae ipse palam docere non audebat pars aliqua & literis consignari, & passim divulgari est coepta; id quod eo vivente nunquam fortasse contigisset, amicis ex iis quae ipse scripserat non adhuc plene edoctis, & adversus praeceptoris voluntatem aliquid eorum quae ab ipso didicerant in vulgus prodere minime audentibus. Hac scilicet ratione Deus quae illi uni patefecerat omnibus manifesta esse voluit. Faustus ubi supra, pag. 6. & 7. I am at this great pains of transcribing, because Socinian books are so dear, every man will not pay a groat a sheet, the price that I am forced to, only that I may declare the truth; so much for Laelius.  
Faustus Socinus the Nephew of Laelius was borne in the year 1539, two hours and three quarters before sunrising on the fift of December; so scrupulous are some in calculating the nativity of this monster; and he himself took notice of it in his Epistle Ad excellentissimum quendam virum; He was of no mean parentage, his father was by name Alexander Socinus, and for his policy, Subtilitatum princeps, as he was deservedly styled; his mother was nobly descended, the Polonian Knight hath shown her descent, Matrem habuit Agnetem Burgesii Petruccii Senenfis quondam Reipub. Principis ac Victoriae Piccolomineae filiam. He studied the laws till he was about three and twenty years of age, and then he betook himself to the great Duke of Hetruria his Court, where he spent twelve years, only he had so much leisure at Court, as to write a book about the authority of the Scripture, in which he doth slily pervert the Scriptures, and lay a ground for all his heretical blasphemies. This is all the account that can be given of him for 35. years. I do not hear of any great brags (though the Socinians do make loud brags of him) of his logic, Philosophy, school-divinity, the learned tongues, only he spent some two or three years in digesting his uncle's Notes, and then thought he had learning enough to contradict all the Fathers and counsels, and undertook to censure all the Reformed Churches, and to dispute with the greatest Scholars in the world: the presumption of his wit, besides the badness of his cause, did betray him to his adversaries, especially in the first prizes he played, and he was so subtle as to seem ingenuous in acknowledging such oversights as he could not possibly conceal: Quod vero ais (saith Faustus to Puccius) supellectilem meam Hebraeam & Graeeam— teipsum latere non potest ejusmodi meam supellectilem non valde curtam modò, sed propemodum nullum esse; Graecos enim fontes, ut egomet omnibus dico, leviter admodum degus●avi, Hebraeos vix dum attigi, &c. Socin. Resp. ad Def. Puccii, pag. 49. And he confesses that he made a great flourish in the world before he had any logic, he had vapoured against Puccius, Palaeologus, Volanus, and divers others, he had composed a Commentary on the first part of the first Chapter of S. John, and on the seventh to the Romans, his Animadversions in Theses Posn. de Trino & uno Deo, & alia quaedam Imperfecta, as he saith, cum nondum Dialecticae ullam operam dedissem, ut post hac non mireris si in meis scriptis multa deprehenderis minus rectè tradita ac conclusa. Epist. ad excellentissimum quendam virum. It was no wonder indeed if a man that understood neither Greek nor Hebrew, nor logic, should give many interpretations, and draw many Conclusions which will not hold. Now whether after the delicacies of the Court, and 35. years of his age misspent, he was so apt to mould his stiff brains, and new-cast them into a logical form, let the world judge. Socinus then was not the greatest Scholar in the world, though he thought himself able to teach all the Church, and all the world. The Polonian Knight acknowledges that he was of an hasty choleric disposition, praecipitem ad Bilem natura formaverat; but it seems his heat did evaporate at Court, In vita a●licâ deferbuisse juvenilem illum Socini astum, qui plerumque magna in magnos lapsus pr●cipitat ingenia; and yet Marcellus Squarcialupus Socinus his good friend doth often complain of him for his rashness, &c. as Calovius shows at large: you may read plentiful testimonies cited at length, Consid. Th. Socin. pag. 13. & 15. to him therefore I refer you.  
Faustus then had more subtlety than learning; when he was not able to prove his opinions, he told his auditors, Haec si vera non sint, verisimilia saltem & probabilia deprehendetis. He was of a ma●ignant wit, he knew how to disgrace truth by scoffs and slanders, he thought to affright weak spirited men from the Protestant Religion, by telling them that they held opinions (in particular that Christ is God) which made Christian Religion ridiculous to Jews and Turks, Et exteris denique omnibus, but names none else. Haecque & hujusmodi alia quaedam, quorum ansam illis dedit graeca vox 
* Haer●tici Alogi sive Alogiani dict● quia {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} à Iohanne descriptum & proindeipsum etiam evangelium, secundum johanuen rejiciebant. Vide Aug. de Hares. 30. Vide Petrum Carolinum in Explicat. doctr. de uno vere Deo. p. 16. Nec non Eniedinun Explic. loc. V. & N. T. pag. 136.  {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, ingeniose quidem (ut illis videtur) & foeliciter comminiscuntur quae omnia— cùm ridicula magna ex parte appareant efficitur (proh dolour!) ut Jesu Christi religio— & Judaeis & Turcis & exteris denique omnibus maximè sit ludibrio. Explicat. cap. prim. Ioh. pag. 9 Our superstitious men of late pressed us to comply with them, in hope of converting Papists from their superstition, by conforming ourselves to the self same superstition, and now the Socinians would have us to deny Christ to be God, that we may convert Turks and Jews to the Christian faith: as if the best way to convert men to the Christian faith, were to deny a prime Article of our Christian faith; or as if Jews and Turks would have a better opinion of Christ, if the Christians should deny him to be God, and so harden them in their beloved blasphemies; and yet Faustus Socinus saith his friends did encourage him to write against that inveterate figment of the divine nature of Christ, Hac enim ratione— & Iudaeos & Turcas ad Christianam religionem allici posse, qui portentosis istis opinionibus quae Christianae fidei Axiomata esse creduntur ab eâ amplectenda semper sunt deterriti. Faustus, ubi supra, pag. 2.  
I should tire out my Reader, if I should but reckon up the tricks and devices of this Faustus; for he pretended just as our Translator here, to be a Reformer of the Reformers, nay of the Reformation itself; he makes many glorious pretences in his book called Solutio Scrupulorum. God (saith he) in this last Age intends to make many new discoveries, and to reform his Church more thoroughly than ever. Luther he confesses hath discovered truths enough to carry us to Heaven; Zuinglius and Oecolampadius reformed the Church in matters of great weight and moment; they are justly to be extolled, because they have purged the Church from superstition and Idolatry, and caused all false worships to be abhorred; but he doth very slily intimate, that it was now left to him to confute all errors which Luther, Zuinglius and Oecolampadius had not observed in the Church; for saith he, though the Idols Temple is laid level with the ground, 
Viderem Romani quidem Antichristi regnum ab omnibus dirui atque vastari, Idolorumque templ● everti, interim tamen Christi regnum non resurgere, e●usque templum nedum à quoquam extrui, sed ne Caementa quidem & lapides ad illud extruendum ab aliquo parari. Socin. Explicat. Pri●n. ca. Ioh. p. 2.  no man hath as yet set up the Temple of Christ: nay he goes farther, Nec caementa & lapides ad illud extruendum parari; and we may truly say, Socinus lapides loquitur, as the Comedian said; and he knows full well how to daub with untempered mortar. He hath written two other pestilent Books, in which he hath most cunningly vented his poison, one is a book which I never saw, De SS. Scripturae authoritate, which Calovius tells is one of his most subtle pieces, and seems to be one of his first essays: Dominicus Lopez a Jesuit was so taken (or mistaken) with it, as to print it in the year, 1588. The other Pamphlet is a brief discourse, De causâ ob quam creditur aut non creditur Evangelio Iesu Christi. In this second he speaks plainer than in the former, as they say who have read both, and they conceive that it was purposely put forth as a Commentary upon the other; for Socinus did speak more freely still every year then other, accordingly as he saw his Discourses entertained and applauded by potent abettors; he did not put his name to his Commentary upon John, till he saw how it would take; Libuit antequam nomen nostrum prodamus aliorum exigui hujus laboris nostri judicius cognoscere. Explic. Ioh. p. 4. And Calovius saith, he did not put his name to it till whole Churches (Congregations I suppose he means) had subscribed to Socinus his Tenets, Calovius de Origine Theol. Soc. p. 19 He gained very much by his feigned modesty, he saith it was his hearty desire to bring all men to his opinion, yet such was his charity and modesty, that he would account them brethren, who counted him an heretic, and held his opinions to be pernicious, upon condition they did their best, to live in obedience to Christ's precepts, and sought in a fair way to convince him by Scripture, Explic. cap. prim. Ioh. pag. 4. But though he pretended to be ruled by Scripture, it is most evident that all his Art was to withdraw men from harkening to the plainest Texts of Scripture which do contradict blind carnal reason. He taught the world a new way of disputing in Divinity; we were wont to argue thus, Whatsoever God saith is true: but God saith thus and thus; ergo: but he taught us to prove, That such and such a proposition is true by the causes and proper effects first, or else saith he, it is absurd to think that God said any thing but truth, and therefore unless it can appear by some demonstrative argument, that such a proposition is true, we must not pitch upon that proposition, as the mind of the holy Ghost in any Text of Scripture; what ever the words of the Text seem to hold forth unto us, we must go look out for some other sense which is agreeable to right Reason. Rationis lumen quo Deus nos donavit aperte ostendit non debere nec posse corporalem poenam quam unus debeat ab alio persolvi, idque etiam omnium gentium ac seculorum legibus ac consuetudinibus perpetuo & maximo consensu comprobatum sit, as Socinus in his Tract Deservatore; Behold how the light of Reason, the Laws, nay the customs (and perchance some of them unreasonable) of Nations must overrule God, so that God himself shall not be believed, if he do not speak consonantly to my corrurpt reason, and our vain customs. It is clear and evident, that whatsoever Socinus produces against Christ's satisfaction, or our Justification, is a mere figment of his own brain, for he only urges some colourable arguments, which have but a show or shadow of reason. But I shall not instance in more particulars now, because I desire to pass on and discover Socinus his subtlety, in scattering his errors abroad in Sarmatia, Transylvania, &c. and therefore this shall suffice for the Rise of Socinianism.   

CHAP. II. The Growth of Socinianism.  
ILL weeds thrive apace; Laelius had sown his errors, as hath been already shown, in some five or six years, within ten years' space there were whole Congregations submitted themselves to the Socinian yoke in Sarmatia as Doctor Calovius assures me, Intra decennium integra Ecclesiae accesserunt haeresi ejusdem in Sarmatia, Consid, Th. Soc. Prooemial. pag. 65. And this heresy did spread so fast in Transylvania, that within twenty years after there were some hundreds of Congregations infected, Ut vix 
Vide libellum Ministr. Sarmat. & Transyl. Alba Julia edit, de falsa et vera, &c. D. Wigandi Servetianismum.  triginta elapsis annis aliquot Centuriae Coetuum talium ibidem numeratae fuerint. Ibid. What they maintained upon their first apostasy, may be seen in a book, De falsa & vera unius Dei, Patris, Filii, & S. Sti. cognitione. It pleased God that Franciscus Davidis the Superintendent of those new perverted Proselytes in Transylvania, did lay some rubs in the way of Faustus Socinus; for this Franciscus desired to know why Christ should be worshipped or prayed unto any longer, if he were not God? Blandrate and Faustus did lay their heads together to answer this Quere; but this same Franciscus Davidis maintained stoutly that Invocation and Adoration were parts of divine honour due to God alone; This happened about the year, 1578. some twenty years after the stirs which were in the Italian Church at Geneva, ut supra. But Faustus and Blandrate could not compose the tumults (or answer the objections) which Franciscus had raised in Transylvania, and so Faustus Socinus was forced to return with shame enough into Poland: But when Faustus could not do what he would, he seemed to be content to join with the Davidians, 
In Brestensi Synodo in sinibus Lithuania.  as they were called from Franciscus Davidis, as far as they would go hand in hand with him in opposing the Reformed Churches, and he did prevail very much in a Synod about the year, 1588. in other points also which he did cunningly wind in, and they greedily swallow; and he prevailed very far the next year in another 
An. 1589. in Synodo Lublinensi.  Synod, and within a matter of four years, as Calovius saith, he brought over all (them whom he had wrought upon, to deny the Godhead of Christ) to subscribe to the whole body of Socinianism: and no marvel, for though there are many parts of Socinianism which have no rational dependence upon the denial of the Godhead of Christ; yet when once men come to be sofar blinded as to deny that glorious truth which shines so clearly in the gospel, it is no wonder if they see nothing at all. Besides he was so wise as to strike 
Non exigua indiet facta est accesis●, pracipue inobilib●● & in aula educatis— ut & ● lunierum Pastorum ordine, quippe qui propensiores in nova dogmata, n●c adeo in veritate confirmati fuerant, Calov. de Orig Soc. pag. 70.  in with the Nobles, and the Courtiers, with the most youthful and sharp witted Pastors, and not only with subtle disputants, but smooth Popular orators, men more able to corrupt the people, witness Petrus Steinius; or Statorius, by whose unhappy eloquence the sublimest subtleties of Socinus which transcended vulgar capacities, were so explained and smoothed in a popular, but plausible way, that the most refined notions were made familiar to the common people; Infoelici Steinii suadâ subtiles & à rudiorum captu remotiores Socini sensus populari ratione tradere & flexanimae orationis genio cunctis probare poterat, &c. This blasphemous wretch did travail, ab extremâ Silesiae or a in intimam Lithuaniam, that he might spread his errors, though he did thereby often endanger his life: he lived a long time, he was about 66. years of age when he died; though it was long ere he began to seduce as hath been shown, yet he had 30. years' time to infect a people that were too willing to be infected; he died, as Calovius informs me, in the year 1604. Tandem anno etatis 
D. caloude dist. Theol. Soc à Theol. SS●i. pag. 73.  quinto ultra sexagesimum blasphemam exhalat animam, Aerae Christianae 1604.  Vitaque cum gemitu fugit indignata sub umbras.  

CHAP. III. The Danger of Socinianism.  
LEarned Grotius may remember that there was a time when he himself thought socinianism to be very dangerous, Cum haeresis sit venenum ecclesiae, & quidem praesentissimum, sed tamen haereseos aliqui sint gradus, ut sit hac illâ nocentior priorem aliam non reperiri haresi Socini, ad cujus etiam mentionem pii omnes exhorreant, in his speech to the States called H. G. Pietas. Certain all pious men may well tremble at 
H. Grotit Pietas, ad ord.. Hollande.  the very mention of Socinianism, at the very repeating of their blasphemies. For my part I dare not call them Christians, 

Error Christi Essentiam & personam negaus fidem destruit, & Christianismum tollit. D. Stegm. Photin p 6.   because they deny the Godhead and satisfaction of Christ, they will not be baptised in the name of the Trinity, they labour to pluck up Christianity by the roots, and to overthrow the very foundation of Religion. I cannot but blot out Smalcius his name out of the white roll of Christians, if it were but for that one blasphemy, Christianus esse potest qui divinam Christi 

Vide Smalci● contra nova monstra. Deum invocamus tanquam omnium bonorum solam ac primariam causam, Christum ver● tanquam secundariam Causam a primaria illâ plane pendentem— à Deo quacunque bona petimus à Christe ea solum qua ad Ecclesiam Christi spectant: Deus enim Christo ea largiendi potestatem concessit, non alia, inquit Socinus, Disp. de Adorat. Christi cum Chr, Frank.   essentiam negat. Small, contr. nova monstra. An error that takes away all Prayer to Christ, and worship of him, doth utterly destroy Christian religion: but the denial of the Godhead of Christ doth take away all prayer to Christ and worship of him, ergo. This argument was urged by Franciscus Davidis and Simon Budnaeus, but Fanstus Socinus (ut supra) was not able to give any satisfying answer to this triumphing Reason. The Socinians are mad with reason, if they conceive it reasonable to give Divine honour to any save God alone. None pretend to be greater enemies to Idolatry, than the Socinians, and yet they do clearly maintain this Idolatrous principle, namely that divine Honour may be given to one whom they conceive to be a mere man, Christ blessed for ever.  
The Socinian error is fundamental, they deny Christ's satisfaction, and so overthrow the foundation of our faith, 

Vide D. Stegman. Photin. Disp. 1. pag. 6.  
Socinianismun Barlaus Pestem & ●verr●culū esse Christiana fidei dudum cred●d●t, vianoque sternere ad {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} ejus religionis quam precioso suo sanguine aspersit ater●us aterni Dei silius. Vindis. C. Barlai pag. 8.   the foundation of our Justification; they deny the Holy Trinity, and so take away the very Object of our Faith; they deny the Resurrection of these Bodies, and so take away the foundation of our hope; they deny original sin, and so take away the ground of our Humiliation, and indeed the necessity of regeneration; they advance the power of Nature, and destroy the efficacy of Grace. It is an Antichristian error, because it takes away the very Essence and Person of Jesus Christ, for they deny him to be God, and so take away his Essence; they deny him to be the second Person in the Trinity, and so destroy his very person also. They do in effect rob him of all his offices, for if Christ be not God, he is not that great Prophet foretold by Moses, who is Prince and 
Ea quae negantur a Socintanu ad duo capita revocari possunt, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} seu articulum de SS. Trinitate, & {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} seu Articulum de humani geveru Salute. vide Cal●v. Dist. Th. Socin, a priscis hares. p. 111.  Author of life, Act. 3. 15. 22. ad finem, Act. 7. 37, 38. Nor can he be a Priest able to save by the offering of himself, because the merit of his sacrifice depends upon the dignity of his person: the offering of a mere man cannot satisfy for so many thousands of men: and therefore the Socinians having denied the Godhead of Christ, deny that he hath given God full satisfaction. Nor can Christ be a King, who hath an heavenly and eternal kingdom by nature, if he be not God.  
It is an anti-spiritual error, for they deny the Nature and Person of the holy Ghost, the special grace and saving efficacy of the holy Ghost; they say, we can understand the deepest mysteries of faith, and believe in Christ without the special assistance of the holy Ghost.  
They overthrow the very nature of Faith, for they confound faith and works; Obedience to God's commands is faith itself, or the very substance and form of faith. Fides (quâ justificamur) obedientiam pr●ceptorum Dei non quidem ut effectum, sed ut suam substantiam & formam continet. Socin. Miscls. p. 162.  
They destroy the moral Law which was delivered by Moses, by saying that is imperfect. Christ came to fulfil (that is, say they) to make the Law perfect; and they overthrow the Gospel, by saying that we are justified by the works of the Law, and by their confounding of the Law of Faith, and the Law of works; they say as the Jews say, that the great work of the Messiah is to proclaim and confirm the Law, only they add that it w●● his in●ent, legem Mosaicam ceu minus perfectam perficere & locupletare, and therefore they say, Christ and his Apostles did so often press obedience to the Law, to show that we are to be justified by the works of the Law: and hence it is that they call our blessed Saviour, Mosen Mosissimum, as if Christ had not preached the Gospel, the Law of Faith, as the Apostle calls it, Rom. 3. 27. And by this means the Law of Justification by faith alone without the works of the Law, which is the scope of the Gospel, is quite overthrown.  
They set open a wide gap to atheism, by denying that the soul of man can possibly so subsist by itself after this life, as to be capable of joy or torment, of reward or punishment; they may when they please speak plain English, and say, that there is neither Heaven nor Hell. Animadvertendum est (say they) Christum & Apostolos coactos fuisse quodammodo 
Vide Stegman. Disput. 56. p. 656.  hominum opinionibus, quae tunc plerunque vigebant, se accommodare, quemadmodum satis aperte docet parabola Divitis & Lazari. Nam aliquem in inferno fuisse & ibi torqueri, in sinu Abrahae decumbere, sunt plane fictitia, & similia illis, quae Poetae de Ixione, Sisypho, Tantalo scribunt: hâc etiam prudentiâ hodie apud vulgus Christianorum in hac materiâ utendum, &c. I have transcribed this out of Doctor Josuah Stegman the Reverend Superintendent of Scawenburg, and when ever I cite Stegman briefly in the margin, I intend that learned Author, and not Joachimus Stegman the grand Socinian.  
The Socinians desire to take us off from giving any heed to the received interpretations of 
a Neque Patres propterea recipiunt, quia cum Scripturâ consentiunt; sed scripturam ●o mode in intelligendam censen● quia Patres ita ex plicarunt. Ideoque pri●s de unanimi patrun conciliorunque consensu, quàm de vero Scriptura sensu sunt solliciti. Brev. Disq p. 7.  Fathers or counsels, that so they may obtrude their own fancies and conceits upon us as solid, and rational, most accurate, but very moderate Interpretations, vide Brev. Disq. p. 7. They of all men do most affect the conduct of their own private spirit, which they call Right Reason; and though they pretend that we are more busy in enquiring after the unanimous consent of Fathers and counsels, than the true sense of the Scriptures, yet they do not endeavour by this outcry to extol and enthrone the Scriptures, but to set their own private spirit or 
b Malle se Patribus istis, Conciliisque adh●rere, quàm Privatum, ubi v●cant, Suum de scriptur● sequi iudicium. I● pag. 7.  judgement in the chair, which is indeed to make every man a Pope. This conceit of theirs cannot but take well with the multitude, for every man (as Luther saith) is born with a Pope in his belly; and with a Pope in his brain too, for every one would fain have his reason, his fancy to sit Judge in all controversies, every man is apt to think himself infallible, and that his Private judgement ought to be the public Standard. Finally, every one desires to give a Toleration or a Dispensation to himself, that he may be allowed to maintain such opinions and go on in such courses as are generally condemned by the judgement of Learned and Pious men. There is another quarrel that they pick with the Reformed Churches, and that is for extolling their doctors too highly, such as Luther, Brentius, Melancthon, Bucer, Chemnitius, Calvin, Beza, Zuinglius and the rest, but they would pardon this error, if they did not oblige other men to stand to the Judgement of these and such like Reverend authors; if they might have but their liberty of prophesying according to their own private spirit or judgement they would be content, 
Hoe aut●m ann●● est Ecclesi● ejusque Doctoribus contr●versias cum aliorum obligation judicandi Potestatem adscribere? Brev. Disq. cap. 2. pag. 8, 9  but that the Churches pass their censures upon such as dissent from the most received interpretations of Fathers, counsels and the Reformed Divines, though such interpretations seem unreasonable to the Private Judgement of our acute Socinians.  
But there is a third fault greater than any of the former, & that is, that the Reformed Divines make the Holy Spirit speaking 
Nimirum iudicem ipsi Spiritum sanctum statnunt: Saltem fine eo nullum cutquam de sacr● judicium concedere volunt. Quo ipso Rationis Sanae judicium ante Spiritus sancti illustrationem plane tollitur. Disq br. cap. 30. pag. 9  in the Scriptures (and shining into the hearts and minds of men by a glorious light to enable them to understand the Scriptures) the Judge of controversies, for by this means say they, the judgement of sound Reason is made useless and of none effect or Authority before the illumination of the Holy Ghost: this is an high fault indeed; we are it seems in great danger of being seduced from the dictates of blind carnal reason to follow the light and voice of the Scriptures, & the Holy Spirit. Besides, there is another greater danger, if we follow the Spirit so much, we shall not be able to answer that seraphic doctor, Valerianus Magnus, his book, de Acatholicorum credendi Regulâ judicio, set forth at Prague, 

Brev. Disq cap. 4. Vera de judice sententia.  
Itaque negandum est nullum c●rto assequi verum.   1628. but it may be the book needs no answer, or they that follow the Spirit and the Scriptures are not at leisure, they have better employment.  
But let the Socinians speak their mind clearly, than what is it they would have? why, they would throw the Pope out of his chair, and they would sit there themselves by turns, that so they may be Popes round; for every man say they hath reason enough before he is enlightened by the Holy Ghost to judge of the authority of Scriptures by Histories, and other principles, and to collect out of the Scriptures compared, and the foresaid principles, not only all things necessary to salvation, but many profitable truths besides, though not so necessary. I should be very glad to learn what those other Principles are besides the Scripture out of which we may collect truths necessary to salvation; for this you must look into the seventh Chapter of this Brevis disquisitio, Caterùm ad sacrarum literarum anctoritatem & genuinam mentem dignoscendam principia etiam illa quae Philosophica appellant advocanda esse. But if a man be no Scholar, why, than those principles which are known to him by nature, 
Quare qui istis sive naturali ingenii b●nitate, sive experientiâ vel mediocriter instructus est, is & ●psas Scripturas sacras esse cognoscet &c. Brev. Disq. p. 35.  and his own observation, are the Rules whereby he must examine; first, whether the Scriptures be the word of God, and then, what is the true sense and meaning of them; if such a man have but a good wit, a little experience (saith he) will serve the turn. Nay, he affirms that it will serve the turn, if by the help of those good principles, his own good wit, and conference with others, he do but hear the sum of those few things which the Socinians conceive necessary to 
Quid quod princip●orum ●storum open etiam is qui s●cras literas vel legere non potest, vel nunquam vidit, vel exstare ●●scit, &c. lb. cap. 7. p. 35.  salvation, though he never hear or know, that there is any such book as the book of God. Mr. Chillingworth comes very near this Disquisition-monger in his accurate Treatise, for he saith, The Scripture is not to be believed finally for itself, but for the matter contained in it, so that if men did believe the doctrine contained in the Scripture, it should no way hinder their salvation not to know whether there were any Scripture or no, chap. 2. pag. 65, 66. I thought it had been necessary to have received those material objects or Articles of our Faith, upon the authority of God speaking in the Scriptures; I thought it had been anabaptistical to have expected any Revelation but in the Word of God; for a Revelation, nay a supernatural revelation is necessary to help natural reason, as the same Mr. Chillingworth acknowledges. Knot had very unhappily branded Mr. Chillingworth for a Socinian, because he maintaineth, That nothing ought or can be certainly believed, farther than it may be proved by evidence of natural reason, (where I conceive, saith Mr. Chillingworth, natural reason 
Reason is in some sort God's word saith Mr. Chillingworth. Answer to the Preface, p. 20.  is opposed to supernatural revelation) and whosoever holds so let him be Anathema. Sect. 28. in his Answer to Knots Direction to N. N. Now let Mr. Chillingworth say that either there is a Revelation to be expected out of the Word, as the Enthyfiasts do, or else let him acknowledge, that God hath ordained the Scriptures as the means and instruments to reveal saving truths, and let him teach men to depend upon the Ordinances of God, and not make men stand at a gaze to expect a Revelation in an extraordinary way. Or else let him speak plain, and say there is truth enough written in the hearts of every man by nature to save him, or that it may be learned from Philosophers writings; let him say as Socinus doth, that the substance of the promises is eternal life, that the main thing God looks after is practice, that Heathens and Christians have the same practical rules written in their heart, and so if a man do but hope for eternal life by observing these practical rules (as many Heathens did, witness that verse of Phocylides, {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, and the Discourses of Socrates, Plato, Hermes, &c.) he may be eternally saved; and then we shall know how free he is from socinianism. Or else let him confess, that natural Reason being helped by a supernatural Revelation in the Word, is not able to discern saving truths, so as to believe them after a saving manner, without the special assistance of the holy Ghost, such assistance as is vouchsafed to none but the Elect of God, and then I will acknowledge that he is no Socinian. But otherwise, if either he think as he seems to think, that all the material objects which are necessary to salvation, may be known out of some other book than Scripture, or by some other means; and that if a man believe them merely as truths probable by reason, and do not receive those truths as the Oracles of God, but dictates of Reason, then sure he may be a Socinian still; nay, if he hold a supernatural Revelation by the Word to be necessary, it being the means which God hath ordained, and so is made necessary to us by God's ordinance; yet if he think this outward revelation to be sufficient, without the inward and special revelation of the Spirit, he may be a Socinian still.  
But this by the way, I shall say the less of Mr. Chillingworth, when I come to touch upon his book; sure I am, such dangerous principles as these, will beat green heads from the study of the Scriptures, if they be not censured upon every occasion. I know Master Chillingworth protests that he is willing to stand to the judgement of the Catholic Church, of this and former ages, to the consent of Protestants, the Church of England; but if he put in the Papists into the Catholic Church, as I believe he will; then he will say the Papists do not agree, and therefore the Catholic 

Archbishop of Cant. his Relation. pag.— 150.  
The Church of Rome did promulgate an orthodox truth, which was not then Catholickely admitted in the Church, namely the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son: if she erred in this fact, confess her error.  
The general council held at Ariminum, did deny the son's equality with the Father; the council at Ephesus did confound the two natures in Christ. Vide Calovium de Consensu Patrum ante Concilium Nicenum.  
Sociniani Trinitatem Cerberum, Christum Spurium, incarnationem Christi monstrum absurditatis, Satisfactionem commentum appellitant. D. Stegman. pag. 22. En Christianos Chillingworthianos.   Church of this age is not against the Socinians; nay the Fathers do not all agree, and so there is not a Catholic consent of the Ancients, as Mr. Chillingworth I believe did purposely show at large in the eighteenth Section of his Answer to N. N. that so he might wind himself out the better in this 28. Section: Nay, peradventure he will put the Socinians in for to give a vote, if you ask for the consent of the Catholic Church of this Age, for he calls them a company of Christians in the 29. Section; and though he saith, They are erroneous in explicating (he doth not say in denying) the mysteries of Religion, & allowing greater liberty in speculative matters, (so the Socinians call the Articles of the Christian faith) than any other company of Christians doth, or they should do, yet for their honour he saith, they explicate the laws of Christ with more rigour and less indulgence to the flesh than the Papists do, and that is true, but not much for their commendation, because they thereby disgrace the moral Law of God, and say it was imperfect, till Christ gave new laws; but Mr. Chillingworth was willing to take any occasion to commend them. Moreover if Mr. Chillingworth by the Church of England, mean the Archbishop of Canterbury and his faction, than indeed there will not be a general consent of the Church of England against the Socinians. Once more, if he take in all the Arminians, and some jesuited Papists, that (as Vertumnus Romanus prescribes) come to Church and hear our Common prayers, and receive the Sacrament in some Congregations in this kingdom, though they be of Mr. Fisher, or Mr. Flued his mind, and rank all these amongst Protestants (for we have had strange kind of Protestants for these twelve years' last past,) than I believe there will not be a general consent of such Protestants against the Socinians; and so Mr. Chillingworth may oppose Socinianism, when all these agree together to oppose it. But indeed he hath one Argument which makes me believe that he and more of that faction who countenance many Socinian errors, do not agree with the Socinians in all points, because Socinianism if it be taken in all its dimensions, is such a Doctrine by which no man in his right mind can hope for any honour or preferment either in this Church or State, or in any other. Many men do indeed adventure as far as they dare this way, only they are afraid of thwarting the great design, as I shall hereafter show. I dare not excuse Mr. Chillingworth's dangerous principles, though I account him a very rational man, yet I believe him to be the more dangerous, I dare not therefore give him that liberty which he gives others, and cry, Quisque abundet in sensusuo, because they are not the words of S. Paul, though Mr. Chillingworth father them upon him, chap. 2. pag. 92. the words of the Apostle are, Let every man be fully persuaded, or assured in his own mind, Rom. 14. 5. I go on to show the danger of Socinianism. It is an hotchpotch of gentilism, turcism, Judaism, and I know not what, they have put in some scruples of Christianity to make up the mess. The centuriators say, that Mahomet did compose his Alcoran by the help of the Jews, and Johannes Antiochenus an Arian: and truly turcism doth much savour of Judaism and Arianism. Now Socinianism is compounded of the self same ingredients, Socinus borrowed very much from Servetus, and Servetus from the Alcoran, as Wajekus proves, and Socinus doth acknowledge, vide Antiwajek. Soc. pag. 33. They say we hinder the conversion of the Turks, by departing so far from them; whereas they agree with Turks in denying the Godhead, eternal generation, meritorious satisfaction of Christ, in blaspheming the Trinity: Paul Alciat, and Adam Neuser, two Socinians turned Turks; nay the Turks discourse more solidly about the Prescience of God, than the Socinians, or Arminians do.  
The Resurrection of these very bodies was believed by 
Criminantur Resurrectionem ejusdem carnis esse prorsus Mahometanam & judaicam, Calov. Dist. Theol. Soc. à pris. hares. p. 104.  none but Jews and Turks at first, (as the Socinians would make us believe) and the Protestants have received it from them.  
They open a gap to an atheistical libertinism, by promising salvation to all heretics, ignorant persons, if they live but chaste, sober, just lives, and expect eternal life, for that is the sum of the promises, and they need not know or believe more: all the mysteries of faith are by them counted but mere notions, speculations at best, and it is no great matter if men have diverse and contrary opinions about them they may all fare well enough; truly I think one as well as another, if there be neither heaven nor hell.  
Socinians are not to be permitted in any Church, for they deny that there is as yet any Triumphant Church above, nor is it necessary that there should be any Militant Church here below. The Arminians jump with them in the same 
Regem ' sine regn●, Caput sine memoris, vitem sine ranis, Christum sine Ecclesiâ somniant: ●idei articulum de Catholicâ Ecclesia ●sque ad finem ●nundi evertunt.  conceit, they say, Christ may be a King without a kingdom, an Head without a body: Neque verò necesse esse credimus ad hoc ut Christus rex & caput maneat in terris Ecclesiam veram semper esse. Their reasons are, because Christ's kingdom doth rather consist in his own sovereign Authority, then in the obedience and subjection of any people. Besides, if there were a necessity of it that there must be a Church on earth, than Christ's people would not be a free willing people, and so there would be no spiritual Church, if they are not left at liberty, to accept or refuse Christ; sure that is a rebellious Liberty, for a liberty to reject Christ, is a liberty to rebel.  
No man they say need inquire after the true Church, much less is it necessary that he should be a member of the true Church, Ubinam quaeso est scriptum Christum praecepisse ut unusquisque inquirat, & norit quaenam sit vera Ecclesia? Socinus de Eccles. Thes.  
They would not have any marks given of a true Church, I suppose for fear theirs should be discovered to be a false; but especially they deny, that the pure preaching of the word is a note of the true Church, for with jesting Pilot they ask, What is Truth? How shall it appear, say they, that any Church preaches the saving Truth? Nay Arminians and Socinians both tell us, that there is no need of preaching: saving Truths are sufficiently manifested they say, and yet it seems it is not sufficiently manifested to them, for they cannot tell what it is. They do not see any great use of the Sacraments, they cannot believe that the sprinkling of water upon the body, should have any spiritual effects upon the soul; they cannot believe that our faith can be strengthened, our pardon sealed, Christ and his benefits imparted to us by eating of Bread, and drinking Wine. Now sure a Church that is without Ministers, Sacraments, marks or signs of a true Church, would be but an empty Titular Church, and to such a Church only should Socinians be admitted.  
Socinians are not to be suffered in any State, for they will not show any obedience or respect to Magistrates; they say, they have no power to punish heinous offenders in time of peace, nor have they power to defend themselves or the people by the Sword, in time of war. But especially, they charge the Magistrates to beware how they meddle with good honest heretics, for all heretics in the opinion of Arminians and Socinians (who speak favourably in their own cause) are good pious men. What they say of the Law of Nations, or of a particular State, I had rather you should read in their Writings then in mine.  
I believe your patience is already tired with this brief narration, if any desire to be farther satisfied in particulars let them read this book.   

CHAP. IV. Whether England hath been, or still is in danger to be farther infected with Socinianism.  
FArther infected I say, for it is too evident that it hath been in some measure already infected with this pestilent heresy. I know the Archbishop of Canterbury did pretend to crush this cockatrice of Socinianism, but all things being considered, it is to be feared that his Canon was ordained for concealing, rather than suppressing of Socinianism; for he desired that none but his own party should be admitted to the reading of Socinian books, it was made almost impossible for any that were not of his party, to take the degree of bachelor of Divinity (I can say more in that point then another) or at least improbable they should have means to pay a groat a sheet for Socinian books.  
It is well known that the Archbishop did highly favour, and frequently employ men shrewdly suspected for Socinianism. Master Chillingworth, to speak modestly, hath been too patient, being so deeply charged by Knot for his inclining 

Spreta haud exolesce● ejusmodi calumnia. sed agnita videbitur apud nimis malos, aut nimis credulos, aut minùs ami●os. Vind. C. Barlas p. 7.  
Natural Reason (saith Mr. Chilling.) then built on principles common to all men is the last resolution unto which the church's Authority is but the first Inducement; in the margin. pag. 65.  
Mr. Chill. counts himself no Socinian because he holds supernatural Revelation requisite to help natural Reason. Preface sect. 28. Yet he saith Scripture is not believed Finally for itself. pag. 65. that a man may be saved who knows not whether there be any Scripture or no. pag. 66.   towards some Socinian Tenets: no man in Saint Ieromes opinion ought to be patient in such a a case, and sure no innocent man would be patient. Mr. Chillingworth hath not yet answered— Christianity maintained. The Protestants do not own many of those principles which are scattered in Master Chillingworth's book, and Knot could observe that he proceeded in a destructive way, just as the Socinians do. The Reformed Churches abroad wonder that we could find no better a Champion amongst all our Worthies; they who travailed hither out of foreign parts blessed themselves when they saw so much froth and grounds; so much Arminianism and vanity in Master Chillingworth's admired piece: What doth it advantage the Protestant cause, if the Pope be deposed from his infallible chair, and Reason enthroned that 
It may be human prudence and ordinary discretion did advise Mr. Chillingworth to use no more industry in finding out the truth; or he hath not been at leisure because of some hindrances and● distraction; and then he hopes that none of his errors will be imputed to him. p. 19 Answer to the Preface.  Socinianism may be advanced?  
But I am afraid Doctor Potter may take it unkindly that I have named Master Chillingworth before 

I would willingly know whether D. Potter doth not take in the Socinians into his christian world. p. 255. Why he makes the Church of England to take part with the Jesuits against Piscator and Calvin, & implies that Calvinism is, as the black-mouthed Sorbonist called it, Bestiarum Religio. p. 256, 257, 258. Edit. 2.  
Mangones haresium sub praetextu moderatioris Theologia ● n●stris ecclesiis verè Reformat●s exierunt. Ioh. Peltius.   him; for his Grace employed doctor Potter first, and he was cried up as a Patr●ne of the Protestant Profession, but he soured his Calvinism with so much Arminian leaven, and sweetened Popery with some such gentle Scruples of Moderate Divinity as they call it, that the Jesuits laughed in their sleeves, and Knot was so pleasant that he could scarce refrain from laughing openly.  
That these two great Champions do vent Arminian principles is manifest to any man that hath but 
Remonstrantes aiunt sese cum omnibus aliis sectis, imove Socinianis exceptis fraternitatem posse colere, excepta Reformata Ecclesiâ. Apolog. ad Censur. Prof. Leid.  peeped into their books. Now that Arminianism is a fair step to Socinianism hath been sufficiently proved by Bodecherus, (though he hath been derided, he hath not been answered) Peltius, Vedelius 
Arminian●s & Socinianes in viginti & ultra articulis per vari●s paragraphos distinctis convenire probatumdedit 1. Peltius.  and others, so that I need say no more in that point.  
What Art and care hath been used to propagate the Arminian errors in England, would require a large volume, and I had laid open all their sleights and projects (had not my books and notes been seized on) to the full: God may give me opportunity to say something to that point yet before I finish my course.  
The Church of Scotland complains of his Grace, for he first protected Wederburn, when he fled from Scotland for fear of the Church-censures, because this Wederburn had poisoned the young students in Divinity with Arminianism in the new college at Saint Andrews; his Grace made the same Wederburn Bishop of Dumblane, that so he might be Dean of the King's chapel, and vent all his Arminian errors in the royal chapel, in despite of all the Presbyteries. Then his Grace chose out 24. Royal chaplains, such as were most likely to preach the Deans Arminian Tenets to the State when they saw that all preferment did run that way. I will not say any thing of Master Sydserf, Doctor Forbes, &c. You may read the complaint at large in a book entitled Ladens. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, or the Canterburian self-conviction.  
But that which did most mischief, was a large Declaration procured by his Grace, but sent in the King's name into Scotland, in which their general Assembly was much condemned for passing any censure upon Arminians. Besides, his Grace had two Scouts in Ireland, the Bishop of Derry, and doctor chapel: Behold three kingdoms infected at once with this deadly disease, by the pestilent subtlety of one Archbishop.  
But I shall make it appear that we have gone nearer to Socinianism yet. Acontius was (as learned Peltius calls him) clandestinus Socinianorum assecla; now I have wondered often what was the reason that Acontius was new printed in Oxford by doctor potter's book-binder. Creature I might say, if I did affect the language of the times. They might as well have Printed Bonfinius, for I find him joined with Acontius, they were both sneaking Socinians, they followed Socinus just as Nicodemus followed Christ, by stealth & in the dark. Jacobus Acontius & Bonfinius Socini clandestini asseclae. Judicious and learned Pareus not long before his death writ a letter on the first of March, 1613. ad N. N. in which he expresseth himself after this manner. Arminium vestrum Sociniani in Polonia expresse ut Suum nuper nominarunt, unà cum quodam Bonfinio & Acontio clandestinis asseclis, quorum authoritate postularunt àfratribus Orthodoxis fraternitatem, isti verò fortiter recusarunt. Acta ad me misit Synodus Lublinensis, cui nuper postridie Natalis Domini respondi, &c. Pareus was a man of a very peaceable disposition, willing to compose all differences which might fairly and honestly be compounded, as appears by his Irenicum, and therefore his judgement is to be the more valued, but you see he doth not vent his own private opinion, but declares the judgement of the Synod; I believe that every impartial Reader will think 
Non n●gamus (inquiunt remonstrantes) esse nonnulla ad salutem creditu necessaria pracise, sed ea pauca esse arbitramur. Et hic etiam (inquiunt Profess. Leyd) gentum & spiritum Socinianum animadvertimus— Paucissima ad sal●tem prorsus necessarta sunt (inquit Socinus) nempe ut Deus & Jesus Christus divino honore colatur, praesertim verò Chartt as erga proximum exerceatur. Quam fidem & charitatem putant in eo subsistere qui neget Christum esse eund●m cum Patre Deum & Spiritum Sanctum esse personam, &c. vide Pr●fess. Leyd. censuram Praefationu Re monstr. prefix. Confess. sect. 22.  this passage very considerable. The Socinians have one Principle which draws a great party after them of all heretics, & sectaries. Nothing (say they) is Fundamentally necessary to salvation but only Faith or obedience to the commands of Christ, for they make faith & obedience all one, ut supra. Now Acontius was a great stickler in this point, and therefore learned Peltius saith, this opinion did open a wide gap to let in all heresies into the Church, and yet Acontius and the Socinians thought nothing else fundamental but obedience to Christ's precepts; men might deny the Godhead of Jesus Christ, and almost any Article of the Christian Faith, and yet be Christians good enough in their conceit. Nihilque tandem fore Fundamentale praeter istud (scil. Obedientiam mandatorum) ex mente Acontii & Socinianorum positum. See Peltius his Epistle Dedicatory, prefixed before his Harmony. Well might Acontius his book be entitled Stratagemata Satanae: but sorry I am that doctor Potter should be thought to have such an hand in publishing of it, that it was known in Oxford by the name of doctor potter's Stratagems. I know Acontius doth in that book mince the matter, but the book is so much the more dangerous, and cannot but poison young students more insensibly and irrecoverably. Besides Acontius his pretence of moderation and charity will work much upon men that understand not his Stratagems, they will conceive that he grew every day more moderate and more 
a Caspar Barlaeus Iud●os Deum Abraham● colcre (quāv● constet eos Iesum Christum blasphemare) pios esse posse, Deoque acceptos, itemque Dei amicos secundum Accuratioré Theologiam dici posse statuit, uti Vedellus de Deo Synagogae.  Accurate also, and that he complied so far with the Socinians merely out of a desire of peace. But though the book be close and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth, yet ever and anon he lets fall some hopes of being saved without the acknowledgement of those mysteries which the Church hath long held for necessary Articles of faith. What did the man that was cured of the palsy believe? why, (saith he) he did believe as it was fit, that that man who is called Jesus was from God, (mark he doth not say that he was God) and in favour with God, and hoped that he should be healed by him, and yet his sins were forgiven. Credebat enim ut par est hominem eum qui Iesus diceretur à Deo esse & apud eum gratiosum, itaque sperabat per eum sanitatem se posse adipisci. Illa verò eum cognita etiam habuisse omnia quae diu pro articulis fidei Necessariis habuit Ecclesia quàm sit verisimile, cuique judicandum relinquo. Sunt & alia multa loca quae eódem prorsus tendunt. Nay he conceives Abraham the Father of the faithful to have been ignorant of those Heads of Divinity which we count Articles of Faith, fundamental Articles. Abraham, saith he, believed that he should have offspring, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed, that Canaan should be his, Caeterum de Religionis apicibus istis ignorare opinantur (scil. Reformati) fas non esse mirum est silentium quin, ipsum etiam Salutis mysterium per ejus semen Tecte admodum obscureque promittitur. I put in (scil, Reformati,) for doubtless it is a jerk at the Reformed Churches, and so that passage forecited, Ecclesia diu habuit, is certainly a jerk for the Nicene Fathers, Athanasius and those ancients which required such a distinct confession of faith. You see he seems to leave it doubtful whether Abraham did believe in Christ or no; these oblique passages and many such in his third book especially, do show what a good mind he had to favour them, who at that time about the year 1565. did call the Articles of the Christian faith into question. No marvel if he wrote so warily when Servetus had been made such an example, in the year 1553. Besides Laelius Socinus was now dead, and Faustus not grown up to his maturity. Sabellius he saith was an heretic for saying that the Father did not differ from the Son, but he is not so forward to call them heretics who deny that the Son hath the same nature with the Father; he tells us that* we must believe 
Dr Po●ter recites some such passages p. 117. of his own book, but will not take any notice of Acontius.  Christ to be the son of God, and to be made man, but he doth not press us to believe that Christ is God. We need not wonder at his moderation, when he is very tender even about Transubstantiation, and unwilling to appear on either side. Magna jamdudum fuit & vere tragica controversia de Interpretatione verborum corum, Accipite, hoc est corpus meum; non necesse est autem me hoc loco utrarum sim partium aperire, tantum catenus quidem utrarumque esse me profiteor, quod utrosque adveram Dei ecclesiam pertinere nihil prorsus dubitem, lib. 3.—. and a little after, De verborum sententiâ lis est, non de veritate: this is an excellent device indeed to help off the grossest heretics, and say that they only differ from us about the meaning of some places of Scripture. Christ saith he bids all come unto him that are heavy laden, and what saith he, will you of your own head say to any man that is coming to Christ, Heus tu! frustra accedis qui hoc & illud non credas? But if you reply that Acontius hath not reckoned some points of religion which are of high concernment, and therefore you may safely tell a man unless he believe them he cannot be saved; he hath endeavoured to prevent your reply by this excuse; Si miraris inter ea quae recensuimus cognitu necessaria non 
Dr. Potter might have corrected these passages out of his own principles, because for want of clear Revelation he frees the Church before Christ, and the disciples of Christ from damnable error though they believed not those things which he who should now deny were no Christian, read from p. 245. to 250. of Dr. potter's book of Charity, &c.  numerari quosdam summo quamvis loco habitos Religionis apices, evolve diligenter, Examine saith he whether those high points could be known under the old Testament to the people of Israel, &c. This is just the Socinian Device, I will not trouble you any longer with the unsavoury discourse of that rotten Author, whose main stratagem was a pretended Moderation and feigned Charity.  
Let us now pass on to some later authors; Doctor Francis White was a man countenanced by the Archbishop to write against the Sabbath, and in his Epistle Dedicatory to the Archbishop, well knowing what would please his grace's tooth, he saith that we are beholding to the Testimony of the Bishops, for the weightiest matters in religion, and amongst the rest he saith for the eternal Deity of the blessed Saviour; It seems if the Christian world had not given credit to the testimony of Bishops, the eternal Deity of Christ had not been acknowledged by Christians; what if Bishops had lost their Votes, and credit some ages since, must Christ have lost his Deity, or at least the honour of it? Is there nothing written in Scripture concerning the eternal Deity of Christ? this is just indeed as Tertullian saith, Nisi Deus homini placuerit, Deus non erit. This book was printed 
See Dr. Page his answer to that Treatise; and a little box of Antidotes against some infectious passages in a Tract concerning schism.  in the year 1635. I need say nothing of that little Pamphlet about schism, printed not long since, because other men have said so much of it, I am credibly informed that when the Author of it was asked by a great person in this kingdom, what he thought of the Socinians, he answered, If you could secure my life I would tell you what I think; and truly he hath told us what he thinks in this little tract, viz. that Arianism was but a Rent in the Church upon matter of opinion; p. 9 that those passages in our public forms which offend the Arians, are but private fancies, and therefore he desires there may be such a liturgy as the Arians may not dislike. p. 10. and then the Socinians and Protestants might join in one congregation. But must we not say that Christ is very God of very God that he is the great God, the true God, God blessed for ever, for fear we offend the Arians, Socinians, &c. must we not worship the Trinity of persons, in the unity of the Godhead?  
His Grace will peradventure think it long till he hear what I have to say to his own learned book. I must confess there is good learning in that book of his, which was printed 1624. I should do him wrong if I should deny it; and though there are some passages which sound ill, yet I have charity enough to put a good construction upon most of them; but if a prudent Reader will but compare that book and the enlargement of it together, which was printed in the year 1639. he will find a great deal of alteration in that second Edition, or rather second book, for it is indeed another book. I shall give you a taste of some passages in the latter book which are not in the former, that you may see how much his Grace had altered his Religion in those 15. years.  
In the 76. Page he saith, the Mysteries of Faith do not contradict Reason, for Reason by her own light can discover how firmly the principles of Religion are true. He doth not say reason by the light of Scripture, or by the light of the Spirit, but reason by her own light can discover how firmly the Principles of Religion are true. The Socinians lay this principle as their foundation, and keep so close to it that they reject the weightiest Articles of the Christian faith; because Reason cannot discover them to be true by her own light, that is reason (ante Spiritus sancti illustrationem) before the illumination of the Holy Ghost, as they explain themselves in their Brevis Disquisitio, cap. 3. de Spiritu Sancto. And upon the same ground they do reject the Received interpretations of Scripture, because Reason cannot discover how firmly they are true. Can the Archbishop make it appear by the light of Reason, that there shall be a Resurrection of these self same bodies; that there are three persons and one God: that the Word was made flesh; that God was made man; that Christ was born of a Virgin; that God justifies many thousands of the ungodly by the obedience and satisfaction of one man; must we not believe these Articles till Reason by her own light, without the illumination of the Holy Ghost, doth discover them to be true, and how firmly they are to be believed because true? for that I suppose the Archbishop means, when he saith, Reason can discover how firmly these principles of Religion are true: Why do the Socinians so often challenge us to be tried by reason, by common sense, by the Judgement of all men, but because they conceive, Reason by her own light can discover how firmly the principles of religion are true? I know the Socinians do talk much of the offices of Christ, but they receive nothing from the Scripture, concerning Christ's offices, but what is as they say agreeable to Reason. They say likewise that it is necessary to salvation to know the promises of God, but they affirm that it will suffice, if a man be but acquainted with the substance of them, if he doth but hope for a better life after this, which even some Heathens did without the knowledge of Christ or his gospel. Reason by its own light did discover unto them that the good and great God had prepared eternal happiness for our immortal souls: if this than be enough (as the Socinians say it is) to receive all things as Principles of Religion which Reason by her own light can discover to be true, (and how near the Archbishop comes to them, let the Reader judge) than the Philosophers, especially the Platonists, were in an happy condition, & it will be lawful for a man to cry out aloud, Sit anima mea cum Philosophis, and he shall never be thought an Atheist, nay shall pass for a good Christian. There was a Sermon preached to Sir John Byron when he was in Oxford, which favoured strong of this Heathenish Divinity, and Sir John gave the Preacher solemn thanks for his pains. Let us than Canonize the Heathens for Saints, and put Hermes, Phocylides, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Plotinus, Cicero, Zoroaster, Jamblichus, Epictetus, Simplicius, into our rubric, and let not Aristotle, Alexander or Averro be left out. The 
Sum●● Religion is Socinian● h●c es●, sub spe alterius vit● observare Mandata Dei, uti Calovi●s consid. Th So●in proem p. 86.  Heathens did endeavour to keep God's commands in hope of a better life. What do the Socinians, or indeed Arminians require more? Now Reason by her own light can discover that I ought to love God, better than the world or myself, because he is the chiefest good; Reason tells me that I must do as I would be done to; the Law of nature is written in the hearts of Heathens, the writings of Philosophers do abound with principles of morality and good life, and Socinus 
Sufficit ut s●iamus quae reverae praecipiantur vel vetentur à Deo, adeo ut si in reliquu error occurrat nemo ob eundem calo excludatur. Socin, Epist. 2. ad Dudithium.  saith, it is sufficient for a man's salvation to know what God hath commanded and forbidden; and if he err in other points, he shall not be shut out of Heaven, for such errors as reason cannot by her own light discover to be errors. In like manner the Archbishop, if he will be true to this Principle he hath laid down, must affirm that no man shall be damned for rejecting any Articles of the Christian Faith, which reason by her own light cannot discover to be true, and so manifestly true that they ought to be firmly believed. If this be not Socinianism in the highest, let the impartial Reader judge. That the Archbishop hath added this passage to his old book (perchance upon Master Chillingworth's weighty inducements) will appear if the Reader be pleased to compare the 76. page of his new Book with the 21 page of his old Book.  
There is another suspicious passage in the 25. section of the archbishops Relation, he descants upon a place of Epiphanius, pag. 185. and 186. Epiphanius said, that in Peter were found even {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, The very Niceties, and exactness of the Christian faith, saith the Archbishop, and presently gives this reason. For he professed the Godhead of the son and of the Holy Ghost, pag. 186. How will the Socinians triumph when they hear the Primate of all England discoursing of the Godhead of Christ and the Holy Ghost as Niceties? I grant the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, is most commonly used in an ill sense, but certainly Epiphanius used it here in a good sense, which the Archbishop could not but see, and therefore used the word exactness, but to gratify the Socinians he puts in niceties, as if he had said, If you will be exact, you may say that Christ is God, but that's but a nicety, somewhat more than needs, a man may be saved without it; for the Arminians say Athanasius was too bold to prefix that Proud Preface before his Creed, Whosoever will be saved, &c. and I make no doubt but his Grace was led much by them, he had such high thoughts of the Arminian conceits. The Archbishop doth acknowledge that in the old Latin Edition at Paris, pag. 497. it is thus translated, In hoc omnes Quaestiones ●c Subtilitates Fidei inveniuntur; therefore he might have said that all the mysteries of Faith were maintained by Peter, though by the malice of anti-spiritual men even the Godhead of the Holy Ghost, and such like Mysteries were made Questions, or at best counted subtleties, and Niceties.  
Moreover when the Archbishop comes to speak of the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the son, he persuades the Church of Rome to moderation, and then let's fall a sweet bit for the Socinians to feed upon, pag. 25. And Rome, saith he, in this particular should be more moderate, if it be but because this Article Filiog was added to the Creed by herself; and it is hard to add and anathematise too. The Socinians are apt enough to say that many of the Articles of our faith were framed at Rome, and it seems his Grace would confirm them in that opinion. This was added also to his new book, as will appear, if you compare the 25. page of the new book and the 6. of the old. It is the common practice of men addicted to the Socinian way to speak very favourably in this point.  
These I call very suspicious passages, you must not expect Demonstrations in this point, for I know the Archbishop was too wise to speak plain, though some of these passages 
archbishops relatiion see pag. 309, 310, 311.  are plain enough. And I must profess that I do not believe the Archbishop ever intended to bring in all points of Arminianism, Socinianism, or Popery, but to pick out such points as might stand with the great Desig●e; he was to humour all these three factions, that all three might join with him to suppress Calvinism, and then admire him as the Astolike Patriarch, Pope of this other world of Britain, for he would not have us ignorant that Pope Urbane the second even in a council accounted his grace's worthy predecessor Saint Anselm as his own compeer, (or fellow-Pope) and said 
The Arch B●shops Relation. pag. 171.  he was as the Apostolic and Patriarch of the other world; so he then termed this island. pag. 171. of the new book. But I believe his ecumenical Grace had such a thirst to be a governor of this little world, and yet such a liking to the universal Grace of the Arminians, and the Right Reason of the Socinians, that no man that hath one dram of right reason can possibly free his Grace from contradicting himself, and thwarting his own design, by crying up some 
The Archbishop calls Socinianism an hor●id monster of all He●ies, pag. 310. Talis non paucis Declarantium esset Theologia Sociniana in pluribus Articuli●, quam tamen hacten●● publiee el●gere non ausi funt propter scandalum, ide● ab ●is qua minus i●vtdtosa putarunt insidiose in incipientes, viam illam t●tissimam tentarunt. Profess. Leyd. Censur. Praefat. Rem. Sect. 23.  opinions which could not stand with his own Principles in his old book, and his Plot which now & then peeps out in his new, and yet he hath jumbled all together for no other reason that can be imagined, unless it were his Master-plot to countenance other men's opinions that they might promote his design, and for a copy of his countenance adore him as the Primate and Patriarch of the Britain's, whose Judgement is final, and therefore there lies no appeal from him to Rome or Cracovia, no not to Right Reason assisted by Universal Grace; it seemssuch slaves he had who to satisfy his ambition and their own, would deny both their Principles and his, that the Master-plot might thrive and prosper. For it is observable, that our English Arminians, and Socinians are nothing so true to their own principles, as the Ringleaders 
The old Book. p. ●4. new. 121.  of these factions are beyond the Seas. His Grace both in his old book and in his new, saith that Reason and ordinary grace superadded by the help of Tradition, do sufficiently enlighten the soul to discern that the Scriptures are the oracles of God; here is the Socinians sound, or right reason before the illumination of the Spirit, but to please the Arminians; Ordinary or universal grace comes in also, and the name of Tradition to please the Popish party; and what all these are like to do without the special Grace of the holy Spirit, I leave it to any Protestant to judge.  
There is another Rule which his Grace holds fast in both his books, namely, That the church's Declaration can bind us to peace and external obedience, where there is not express letter 
The old book. p. 9 The new. p. 31.  of scripture and sense agreed on. What, Sir, must there be no deduction, no consequences allowed? must there be express letter of Scripture? there's one Socinian rule. Secondly, when the letter of the text is express, must not the point contained in the Text, and expressed in the letter, be accounted fundamental, because the sense is not agreed upon, but the point called into question by some learned Socinian, or bold Arminian? is the sense of that place of Scripture which hath been received by so many Fathers, counsels, Reformed Churches, Martyrs, not true, or the point not necessary, because it is now called into question by some wanton wits that can hardly agree upon any point? Must we then subscribe to that Arminian and Socinian principle, Nullum dogma controversum est fundamentale? When a point begins to be controverted shall it cease to be fundamental? By this means we may bring in an atheistical libertinism into the Church; we shall have no more Articles of our Faith, than the Arminians, or Socinians please to leave us. I believe we shall have a very short Creed one of these days, if this rule be followed: for as fast as they please to question our Articles we must part with them, especially if our great Patriarch interpose his Authority, his Declaration must pass for the church's Declaration; if he say such a point is controverted and I command you silence, it is not fundamental now, because controverted, than we must be silent and let the truth fall to the ground. This was the old muzzle which was put upon the Ministers mouths to make them lie still, like dumb dogs, whiles the thieves stole away what they pleased, this and that commandment, this and the other Article of the Christian faith: we must it seems for Peace sake, part with our religion, and disobey God that we may obey the Church: sure he that hath the head of a Scholar, and the heart of a Christian, will scarce have any inward Peace if he perform external obedience in such a case.  
This may suffice for a taste of the archbishops Divinity: nor the young Students could not but take notice of such passages, and therefore whet their wits to maintain those opinions which his Grace countenanced. There was a great Scholar who asked one of the Canterburian faction, what he thought of the Primate of Ireland's treatise concerning Christ's Incarnation, in which he demonstrates that the Word was made flesh, and that therefore Christ is God and man; the Canterburian answered, that indeed there was as much produced upon that argument as could be said upon it, but under correction (saith he) I conceive the Primate hath not cleared the point which he undertook to prove. The men of this strain when they were at their height, began to vary their expressions, they called Christ their great Master, or our Lord and Master, at the highest, so that you could scarce tell by their prayers whether they did respect Christ or their patron most, for the chaplains styled their patron their very good Lord and Master. Dr. Taylour in his epistle Dedicatory to the Archbishop, before the sermon on the Gun powder treason, seems to affect that expression of calling Christ our great Master; the Socinians will bear them company in such general expressions, and some have thought of composing such a Liturgy as might give no offence to Arminians or Socinians; that would be an inoffensive Liturgy indeed, and they may do well to enlarge their Charity, and make their Liturgy inoffensive to the Turks and Jews as well as the Socinians; for any Liturgy which will please one that is a thorough Socinian, will please Turks, and Jews also, if it be but warily composed, and they will keep themselves in such general expressions as some do too much affect.  
But of all that I have met with, none comes near Mr Webberly, a bachelor of Divinity, and fellow of Lincoln college, who hath translated a Socinian book into English, for the benefit of this Nation, and prepared it for the press. Now they think they may own the business, they dare appear in their proper colours, and blaspheme Christ in plain English. But because some parts of Socinianism strike directly at the superstition of Rome so highly extolled in our days, and at the pomp of the Clergy, which must be maintained by the sword (for what care they though England swim in blood, so they swim in wealth and pleasure?) therefore Mr. Webberly tells us very honestly, that Socinianism was to be corrected and chastised with respect to the nature of our climate; What need I add more? take all in a word.  
There are some mysterious parts of Socinianism that se●m 
Ab iis quae minus invidiosa putarunt insidiose incip●entes viam illam suam tutissimam tentarunt, ultertus Progressu●● si pro vot● succesiss●t— non dubium est quin Remonstr. Soc. & in unam & eandem sectam coaluerint, etsi non in omnibus alits plane conveniant— publice docent ununquemque in sua fide salvari posse, &c. Profess. Leyd. Cens. Prafat. Sect. 23.  rational, these I think in good earnest, the men of this age have too much doted on. Secondly, some parts of Socinianism they qualify and chastise a little, because there is a little too much quicksilver in them. Thirdly, some parts they do totally reject, because they thwart the main design. Fourthly, some parts of Socinianism are instilled into the people, that they might be made a mere prey to their Courts in times of Peace, and to their army in times of war. Mr. Webberly, for instance, may be so far irrational as to be of the council of war, which no strict Socinian would allow; but then Mr. Webberly would teach the people that they must not defend their possessions against invading enemies, by force of arms, because God hath not given his people any earthly possessions by Covenant under the gospel, as he did under the Law. Surely they have heard of Julian who boxed the Christians on one ear, and bid them turn the other ear that they might be boxed on both sides in obedience to their Master's command.   

CHAP. V. shows that the famous Atheists (Anabaptists and Sectaries) so much complained of, have been raised, or encouraged by the doctrines and practices of the Arminian, Socinian, and Popish party.  
THere hath been a great complaint of late that men are turned Atheists, and surely not without cause, but let us sadly inquire into the reason. The Socinians do deny Christ to be God to the glory of God the Father, as they use to say, and I believe God the Father hath taken it so unkindly at their hands, that he hath given them over to that cursed atheism which reigns in the heart of every man by nature, and is much strengthened by the profane wits of this latter age. I remember a story of reverend Amphilochius who had been an importunate suitor to Theodosius the Emperor, that the Arians might not vent their blasphemies so freely against the Son of God, because he was as God, equal to his Father; but he could not obtain his request; at last the good old man pitched upon this course, he comes to the palace of Theodosius the great, and salutes the Emperor with all due acknowledgements and accustomed reverence, but as for Arcadius the son of Theodosius, who was created coemperour with his Father, Amphilochius passed him by without any respect or reverence at all, & at last very familiarly strokes the young Emperor upon the head, as if it had been some ordinary boy, and cried, God save thee good child; At which the Emperor was extremely enraged, and commanded them to turn Amphilochius out of doors: but this reverend man replied, I beseech your Majesty to consider that if you are so much incensed against them who do not honour your Son as they honour yourself, what will God the Father think of them who deny equal honour to Jesus Christ his Son, who is equal to his Father in nature and power? The Emperor who was wavering before, was much confirmed in his faith, by this seasonable Admonition, and presently forbade the Arians to dispute any more against the Godhead of Christ. You may read the story at large in Sozomen's ecclesiastical History. Now can we imagine that God the Father should take it less unkindly at the hands of the Socinians and all who admire their acute blasphemies, that they deny Jesus Christ to be God? and what punishment is fitter for such blasphemers, then that, Rom. 1. Professing themselves wise, they should become fools, and denying the Godhead of Christ, and the holy Ghost, they should be given over, not only to deny the power of godliness, but to deny that there is any God at all, because they did not like to retain the knowledge of God?  
1. The Scriptures do clearly show that God the Father is no more God than Jesus Christ; But (say the Socinians) Jesus Christ is not God. Who sees not what conclusion will follow? ergo, if they said true, there would be no God at all.  
2. The Socinians do not worship the same God with the Protestants; for we worship the Trinity in unity, that is, all the three Persons as one God, they say it is repugnant to common sense, to hold that the three Persons are one and the same God, and therefore they may when they please leave it to common sense to determine whether there be any God at all.  
3. The Socinians proceed in a destructive way; now destroy all Religion, and atheism will be embraced in stead of Religion. Mr. Chillingworth hath cleared that point sufficiently, that Popery leads men to flat 

The Preface to the Author, &c. Sect. 7, 8. 11. This is the mother, give her the child, &c. c. 2. p. 50. The doctrine of Indulgences takes away the fear of Purgatory, the doctrine of Putgatory, the fear of Hell; the love of God will not be kindled in the hearts of ignorant men by Latin service, nor by the mass if it were in English: because some sins are made venial, the people may well doubt whether there be any mortal; because the Pope hath struck out the second commandment, the people may think he hath Authority to strike out the first. The foundation of all the Papists faith, the church's Authority, is built lastly and wholly upon prudential motives;  
Ac de Atheis quidem non it a fisissem crediturus unquam nisi me tenellum adhue ipsorum agmina, summo discrimine salutu mea s●l●citavissent ante triginta annos, x li●●ris humanioribus operam in Gallia darem ● Iunii sac. parallela praefat.   atheism: and it is plain and evident that if Papists must believe neither more or less than the Pope thinks fit, the Pope may lead them all into atheism when he pleases. And how pleasing atheism hath been to some Popes, I need not stand to declare, the Papists themselves have spoke plain enough. The Papists have extolled the Pope above all that is called God, and therefore the dullest Papist that can but see that the Pope is not God, will be ready to question whether there be any God at all. If the Pope have more Authority than God, than the conclusion will be easy: but according to the Romanists the Pope hath more Authority than God, for the Church is above the Scripture, the Pope above the Church, he is the head of it: Let Papists though our enemies, frame the conclusion, They who maintain the Pope's infallibility, and yet cannot but see how he takes upon him to correct God's own Institutions, will conclude that it is possible for God to be deceived, and then I am sure he is no God: and whether the Pope be God, let the Papists judge.  
What practises there have been by the Popish party for the promoting of the Socinian heresies, I could show at large 
Libellum de SS. Scriptura Authoritate Dominicus Lopez Societ. Iesu anno 1588. Hispali edidit D●Calovius de orig. Theol. Soc. pag. 22.  if it were not too manifest to be proved. Faustus Socinus writ a most pestilent book de SS. Scriptura Authoritate, and this book he did privately send about in writing to his friends; Dominicus Lopez a Jesuit it seems was a great friend of his, and the book coming to his hand he thought fit to publish it for the common good. I need say nothing of Petavius his notes in Epiphan. Haeres. 69. Cardinal Perron his reply to King James, lib. 3. his book of the Eucharist. lib. 2. cap. 7. Mr. Fisher, 
Mr. Chilling. Answer to Knots-directio●s to N. N. sect. 18.  or Mr. Floyd. How easily the Racovian and Roman Antichrists would be reconciled, at least so far as to join against the Calvinists, is evident to any understanding man. And Mr. Webberly in the Appendix or sixth Book of his Translation, shows that the two great Articles which offend the Romanists and Racovians are, 1. The total exclusion of all kind of good works from justifying a man before God: and 2. The total negation of man's Freewill in doing good. They are enemies to the grace of God, in justifying sinners freely by faith alone in Christ, and to the powerful and efctuall grace of God in converting and sanctifying our souls.  
This is the grand quarrel, the Socinians deny Christ to be God, that so they may deny that the blood of Christ did fully satisfy for our sins: these errors strike directly at the Covenant of Grace, which is the foundation of all our comfort, and if once we undermine the foundation, and reject the principles of Christianity, it is then an easy matter to be an Atheist: for if the Protestant religion be deserted, there is nothing in any other religion to keep a man back from being an Atheist; for Popery, to speak strictly, is Antichristianism, 
Ideo di●unt Re●ōstrantes se nolle hareses aut Athelsmū introducere quia non habent pro hare si id quod revera heresis & Atheismus est, & abomns ecclesia qua Deum in tribus personis adorat pro heresi & Atheismo habetur. Uedel. de Arean. Arminianismi lib. 1. cap 1 lib. 2 c. 10. pag. 86, 87.  and I have said enough of Socinianism; Judaism, and turcism, are too near of kin to Socinianism: let any man that doubts of this truth, read doctor Calovius his Decas Dissertationum, Vedelius de Deo Synagogae, and he may receive satisfaction without reading others. And for the Arminian atheism, I refer you to Vedelius his book, de Arcanis Arminian. Anabaptists are justly complained of, but from whence did they suck their poison (I mean the Anabaptists of the last edition, (the men so much complained of) but from the Arminians, Socinians and Papists? from the Arminians they received their doctrine about the Fall and freewill of man; are they not pure Armininians in that great point of Predestination? they oppose the Reformed Churches in their doctrine about original sin, the Socinians have taught them to deny that Infants are conceived and born in sin, and this is the true reason why they deny baptism to infants, though I know they urge many 
Vide Brochmand. de Peccato. c 6. 9 1. Pelagio auxiliares m●nus prabe●t Anabaptistae &c. Colloqu. Frank●a●t. 4 p. 230, 231. Peccatum morte Christi it a expiatum & ablatum esse ut infantes naseantur omnis lab●● expertes, ac eapr●pter lavacro Regeneration●● nonindigeant. Smalcius disp. 2. contr. Francium peccatum originis commentum est & fabula.  other reasons to colour the business: no man need to wonder that baptism of Infants is neglected by all those who deny original sin, Pelagius of old, about the year 420. said that it was a vain thing to imagine, that the sins of infants were washed away by baptism, because they have no sin at all, and therefore Heaven was set open to them. The Anabaptists in the conference at Franckendale, maintained that Infants were born without original sin, nay without the least spot of sin, and therefore there was no need of their being washed in the Laver of Regeneration. The Socinians tell us that original sin is a mere fable, a fancy. They that can go no farther than English, may read a book of freewill, Predestination, the first transgression; subscribed in the Epistle or Preface after this manner, Your brethren the Anabaptiss falsely so called.  
But I believe the reason why the Anabaptiss are complained of at this time, is because they are disobedient to Magistrates; for it is commonly said that they have lately taken up arms in rebellion against the King. I must confess I have wondered often when I have heard of this daily complaint, because I know that an Anabaptist doth not think it lawful to be a Cutler, he thinks no sword ought to be made, because he conceives it unlawful to use a sword. It is well known that the Anabaptists go to Sea without any Ordnance in their ships, that they travail without any sword by their side: But if there be any fighting Anabaptist in these days, I suppose the English Socinians have taught the English Anabaptists to deny those principles in practice, which they maintain in dispute. Who are so active in all counsels of war at Oxford, as men that are shrewdly suspected for Socinianism? If they deny this truth, their letters which are daily intercepted will testify to their faces that they are not true to their own principles. Yet I commend the chaplains for their design, they would fain seize upon men's goods without force or violence, and therefore they tell the people that they ought not now under the gospel to fight for the defence of their goods; and if they could persuade the people to be Anabaptists in this point, than these Reverend Troopers and meek men of war, might seize upon all the people's goods, without force of arms, and so be as true to their Racovian principles, as the Racovians themselves, they might rob without weapons, a whole parish might be plundered by one Sermon as well as by two troops, if the people were but throughly instructed in (or as we say, beaten to) this Conscientious slavery. All the spoil of a whole town would lie no heavier upon the conscience of one of these chaplains, than a rear egg upon his stomach, for they are not ashamed to affirm that God hath not given his people any earthly goods or possessions under the gospel, and therefore plundering is not robbing, they do but take that from men which God never gave them Mr. Webberly in the third chapter of his Treatise, tells us that God hath not given his people any earthly possessions now under the new Testament, they must not regard earth but look after heaven; this is they say the Court-Divinity; but sure the rational Lords that have such vast possessions should not be much taken with these raptures; if they be, it were good for the Lords to turn chaplains or step into a cloister, and let their own chaplains be Lords in their room. How the court-chaplains will maintain this Doctrine, and not be as antimonarchical as the very Anabaptists, I profess I know not, they might have done well to have excepted the Crown-lands; They were wont to preach at the Court, that the Subjects have nothing of their own, but by this doctrine they will leave the King nothing of his own; sure they mean to have all to themselves. They must say that our King lives under the new Testament, they will grant him to be a Christian, and therefore he must not regard earthly possessions, &c. The King may perceive by this, what good friends he hath at Court. Nor do they stick to question the Authority as well as the possessions or Revenues of Kings. The Anabaptists as disobedient to a Parliament as to a King; any person or Court which hath power to fine or imprison, 
Uide Conrad. Heresb. de factione Monast. Theod. Strack. Hist. Anabapt. pag 56.  is by them denied to be a godly person or a Christian court. It was one of the Seditious laws enacted by that lawless faction at Munster, Magistratibus ac Principibus nullus subjiciatur. The Socinians and Arminians think themselves as lawless. The 
* Si qui adeo tenera, aut sic à teneru imbutae conscientiae since ut credant Christian● nulli ne quidem Magistratum gerenti licere sanguinem fundere, aut capital●bus suppliciis in sontes animadvertere, Remonstiantes eos libenter tolerare paratisunt. Exam. Cens. cap. 12 pag. 141.  Arminians say that they can willingly bear with one that conceives it unlawful for a Magistrate to punish any Delinquent with capital punishment, though he do not embrace this opinion out of tenderness of conscience, but only because he hath been trained up in it from his youth. You see the Arminians give fair quarter to the Papists and Socinians; if any man hath been nursed up in this opinion they will bear with him though his conscience be not tender. They excuse Socinus in the same Chapter, and say that many honest men were of this opinion before Socinus was born. The Arminians and Socinians make a King of clouts, and put a wooden or painted sword into his hand to affright children, for they say that he must not draw blood, no not in a legal way, for capital offences. The 
* Defensio contra injustam vim qu● sine potestate effundendi s●ngu●nem est, non est defensio, sed defensionis larva terrend●s pueris. Rem. ubi supra. Nam vox Gladii quemlibet defensionis modum, etiam quae sine sanguine fi●, significare potest. Ibid.  Arminians foresaw this consequence, and are content to let it pass, they will not alter the confession of their faith to avoid this inconvenience. In the confession of our faith say they we use none but this general expression, the power of the sword, and forbear to mention any 
Accedit quod fie●● non possit ut Infirmi isti in quorum gratiam confessi●lus●t Homonymtis magistratus, & justos magistratus tolerent, cum expungant magistratum v●●d●eantē justum (ex officio nomine D●●●capitali supplicto impiorum ex numer● Christian norum, & annumerent Infidelibus & Homic●dis. Isac. Iun. Exam. Apol. R●monstrant. cap. 12. p. 311.  capital punishment, because say they we do not require all that embrace our confession to maintain that Magistrates have power to inflict capital punishments: whereby it appears that they do plainly equivocate even in the confession of their faith, or rather the declaration of their opinion. Non fidei nostrae confessionem, sed sententiae declarationem exhibemus, they use general and slippery terms and teach all their Sectaries (the Socinians and Anabaptiss need no teaching) how to slip their necks out of so wide and loose a collar. Reverend Junius shows that the Arminians teach their Sectaries to blot the name of any Prince or Magistrate out of the number of Christians and make him an infidel, if he punish the greatest offenders with death in a legal way. Do any Reformed Divines maintain this seditious tenant which will certainly ruin any State where it is generally received? Did Melanchthon, Bucer, Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, ever preach such doctrine? nay did they not constantly oppose the Anabaptists in this very point? Nay was not the faction of Anabaptists raised by the Devil and fomented by Rome, on purpose to hinder the Reformation begun by those worthy Reformers? read that great counsellor Conradus Heresbachius his Epistle to Erasmus, and there you will see the devil 

Satan ejusmodi pests illum in finem exctavit, ne scil. R●formatio orbis Christiani in doctrin● & moribus jam a multo tempore a piis majoribus nostris desiderata, & à Deo ter Opt. Max. tandem per Lutherum, Zuing. Melan Bucer. aliosque Dei viros suscepta perficeretur. Arg. Epist. Heresbach Conr●dus Heresbachtus principum Iulia Cliviae montium &c. Institutor & Consiliarius qu● notatu digna inter obsidendum occurrebant probe consignavit, utroque insuper principe ju bent retulit, teste Theod Strackeo.   raised them up in opposition to the Reformers. I know one of late preached valiantly against blessed Luther, and said that Luther's book de libertate Christiana gave the first occasion to the giddy Anabaptists to be so extra vagant; Lambertus Hortensius indeed hath a touch upon it, but he adds withal, that though Thomas Muntzer was well read in that book of Luther, yet being an illiterate man he did not well understand, or else did wrest that book to his purpose; now if the book was not well understood, and worse interpreted, sure the Interpreter was in fault, for if he had no learning he might have had some ingenuity, or at least humility, and left the book to more learned Readers, or candid expositors. Thomas Muntzerus Saxo erat homo ut accepi illiteratus, sed ut apparebat, in hoc libello egregie exercita●us, & scripti interpres parum Candidus, We must distinguish between the first tumults of anabaptistical men, and Deliberate Anabaptism. The first tumults were raised above an hundred years since, by illiterate dreamers, such as Nicholas Storke, Thomas Muncer, Phifer Ringus and the rest; yet Muncer at that time laid a fair foundation 
Docebat Muncerus falsum esse Christum satisfecisse pro no bis, quicquid tandem molles isti Scribae dicant. H Bullinger adversus anabaptistas'. lib. 1 p. 2.  for Servetus, Socinus and the rest to build upon; for he denied the satisfaction of Christ; and what Doctrine is fundamental if the satisfaction of Christ be not? the Socinians make it their grand design to persuade men that Jesus Christ hath not truly and properly satisfied for our sins. The Heresy of the Anabaptiss was not backed with any strength of Argument, nor methodically digested till Servetus and Socinus set to work, I must then look upon Servetus and 
* 
Socini defence Tract de ecclesia sub nomine Nicolaidu: Omnes qui Anabaptista vocantur qui in Polonia degunt,— Belgio, Italia & c— ideoque fraternitatem ●●m omnibus illis (se. Anabaptistis) inire satagun● (nempe Socini asseclae) & quo minus res succedat hactenus per eos nullo medo stat sed per illos penes quos ecclesiarum Evangelicarum regimen est & gubernatio pag. 62. vide Profess. Leydens'. Censuram in confession●m Remonstrantium. Censur. Praesationis. sect. 24.  
Lutherus datis ad Senatum Melhusanum literis monebat lupum hunc perniciosissimum diligentissime cavendum esse. Bullinger adversus Anabaptist. lib. 1 ca. 1.   Socinus as the main pillars of Deliberate and Refined Anabaptism. Luther must be excused, for he was not guilty at all, it was an occasion snatched and not given, snatched by Muncer, not given by Luther, when the Anabaptiss urged Luther's authority; for Luther did utterly disavow any such sense, as they put upon his book, nay he abhorred their design and opposed their faction even at their very first rise. When Muncer was stepped aside to Melhusium, Luther wrote against him to the Senate and desired them to beware of the wolf in a Sheeps. skin; this was very early, in the year 1524. and upon the Lord's day as Bullinger assures me. In the year 1525. and the sixth of Novemb. the Anabaptiss 

Anno 1525. in Curia Tigurina. Cyprian and the Bishops of ●arthage council, are cited by Anabaptists, but they were not pertinacious in their error, as the Anabaptiss now, the Arians and Donatists of old. There is no command for rebaptisation in Scripture, nay not so much as example for it, as the A●●baptists did themselves confess, when they saw that the place, Act. 19 5. made nothing for them, See the conference at Frankendale, Act. 36. art. 12.  
Vide Edictum Amplissimi Senatus urbis Tigurina. Bullinger adv. Anabap. lib. 1. cap. 5. Singuli Anabaptista sufficienter nemine impediente & absquejurgiis sententiam suam exposuerunt denuo tamen firmissimis testimoniis sacrarum literarum declaratum est Zuinglium cum suis sectatoribus anabaptistas' vicisse.   were so confident of their own strength, that they challenged any Reformed Minister to dispute with them; but when they were ready to dispute, one of the Anabaptiss cried out, Zion Zion, rejoice O Jerusalem, they were presently in such a tumult that they were forced to remove to another place; yet the Senate, Zuinglius and other learned men were so patient as to argue with them three days together, and when the Anabaptiss saw themselves confuted by the evident demonstrations which Zuinglius produced out of the word of God, one of them had a design beyond all the rest, he said Zuinglius was a learned man and could prove any thing, but saith he, O Zuinglius I adjure thee by the living God to speak thy conscience, and tell the truth. I will quoth Zuinglius, thou art a seditious clown, since milder answers will not serve the turn, I speak plain and home. Upon the 15. day of November, 1525. the Senate made a decree against the Anabaptiss, and declared that Zuinglius had convinced them, clearly confuted the Anabaptiss, and therefore they would proceed severely against all Anabaptiss. Now about this time Servetus the great grandfather of Faustus Socinus, as hath been shown, began to perk up, for Servetus was put to death in the year 1553. because he had been a blasphemer for thirty years together; so it seems he began to vent his blasphemies as soon as Thomas Muncer himself, about the year 1523. Theodorus 
Serv●tus vetus ille sacrae Triadis, id est omnis vere Deitatis hostis, adeoque mōs●rū— ne à fanaticis nostroum ten porum Sectis abhorrere videretur, Baptismum Infantium quoque horrendis mod●s flagellavit & abominabilem reddere conatus fuit. Strack Epist. Nuncupat.  Strackius (being to set forth the History of the Anabaptiss) slides on a sudden into a long story of Servetus that monster of Men, and enemy of God, nay (as he saith) of the whole true Godhead in the sacred Trinity; this Servetus that he might show his good inclination towards the fanatical sects of these times (saith Strackius) hath endeavoured to make the baptism of Infants not neglected only, but abominated; I dare not mention his other blasphemies, at which I think the very devils tremble. There are so many several sects, both of Socinians and Anabaptiss, who have run away with their mouths full of anabaptistical and Socinian blasphemies, that we must let them all pass for Sectaries of Servetus 

Reliquos Articulos Muncer● urgebant de Verbo Dei Subtili non Script●, de Vi●ionibus & Reve ●ationibus, &c. Bullinger. adversus Anabap. lib. 1. cap. 4.  
The Papists allow a Divorce & the change of an heretical wife as well as the Anabaptiss.  
Iohan. Angelius Werd in Synopsil Bodini de Repub. nihil a Davide Georg●o & tal●bus optim●s Sanctorum alienum locutus. Abominandes omnes anabaptistas' superat blasphemus ille David Georgius. Bulling adversus Ana●ap. lib. 2. c. 14.   and Socinus, though some of them are far more dangerous than others. The Anabaptiss maintain some opinions which are as welcome to the Papists and jesuited party in England, as other parts are to the Socinians; the Anabaptiss did dream at first of an unwritten Word, and a very subtle one too, such as the Pope and Jesuits dream of, and such visions and Revelations as the Priests boast of. The design of the Anabaptiss pleased the Papists well, because they endeavoured to root out Protestant Princes and Ministers, the Papists knew full well that no Church or State could stand without Magistrates and Ministers. There is one Johannes Angelius who commends Servetus and saith he spoke nothing but what David George and such like Saints have delivered; this Jesuited Politician you see hath praises to spare for Servetus, one of the most abominable horrible Anabaptists of all others, as reverend Bullinger observes lib. 2. contra anabaptistas'. cap. 12. because there are 12. or 13. sects of Anabaptists in his account, and Servetus was one of the worst sort; but he saith David George went far beyond even Servetus himself. The truth is, these two were guilty of sublimed 

Vide Consuram Professorum Leydensium in Confess. Remo●strantium, & Censur. Prafat. Remonstr.  
In Arca A●minianorum ut in Arca N●a omnium sp●●ierum animalia, quamus is diverse utentia pabulo, conservantur— politic● stratagemate Libertinis omnibus, Anataptist● etiam professis, aditum prabent, ut utano sibt parent ad eos opprimendos, quos vident suis conatibus obstare. Cens. Pr●fat. Sect. 23 In Synodo sua non obstante Confessione sus Pad●baptismum non esse creditu necessartum statuunt, nec ministros (Anabapt.) e● nomine dimovenaos. Cens pag. 305 De coena Domini error et pontiff & Luth. rejictunt, non Anabaptistarum & Soci●ianorum. Censur. in cap 23. Confess. pag 310.   Anabaptism, deadly Socinianism, though David George differed from Soci●us in a point or two. Now what good friends the Jesuites are to the Socinians hath been already shown, what Patrons the Arminians are of Anabaptism the professors of Leyden declare. This being premitted, let us sadly inquire whether our late writers do incline to the Anabaptiss and Socinians in the great point about the Authority of Princes and Magistrates; For I know it is commonly said that though the first Reformers did oppose the Anabaptists in this point, yet the men that seem to be most zealous for a Reformation in these unhappy days, are arrant Anabaptists in this point.  
We live in an angry time, and men will speak passionately when they are provoked, and vexed, I 
personal defence is lawful against the sudden and illegal assaults of Messengers sent from the Prince, nay if the King himself strike at any one he may ward the King's blows, hold his hands or the like. Dr. Ferne sect. 2. He doth not condemn the people for hindering the execution of a particular, passionate unlawful command of the King by a loving violence and Importunity.  will not therefore take upon me to justify the angry expressions of the most judicious writer, much less can I ever mention those bastard-Pamphlets without indignation, which spring from a Licentious and prostituted press. Let us single out some that have lately studied this weighty controversy, and it may be it will appear that they who are said to write against the King have settled & established his lawful Authority upon surer 
Sect. 2. See the Book entitled Scripture Reason, &c. The Text Rom. 13. doth secure a just ruling Prince from all resistance. pag●. Magistrates must be submitted to by virtue of God's sovereignty. Damnation belongs to obstinate resisters of human laws which are not opposite to God's law. p. 5. 7.  grounds and better principles than those very men who pretend to write for the King. Every man is now accounted an Anabaptist if he do not maintain Monarchy to be Iure Divino; hear than what Dr. Ferne saith. We confess that neither Monarchy, nor Aristocracy, or any other form is Iure Divino. Nay he saith that that Power or sufficiency of Authority to govern which is the ordinance of God, is to be found not only in Monarchy, but in Aristocracy, Sect. 3. Moreover if we consider the qualification of this governing power, and the manner ofexecuting it even according to monarchical government. Dr. Ferne grants that it is the Invention of man, and hath not so much as God's Permissive approbation till that qualification or form is orderly agreed upon by Men; in the self same Sec. Be pleased now to hear Mr. Burroughes: However Princes may be exasperated against puritanical Preachers (sai M. Burroughes) yet they are as much beholding to them as to any people in their kingdoms for bringing people out of conscience to obey Authority; You see here 
Mr. Burroughes his Sermon of the 1. of hosts. pag. 45.  the people are pressed to obey the lawful Authority 
Scripture and Reason the book set forth by divers Ministers. The conscience is bound to obey the lawful commands of Magistrates, God's wrath is upon the conscience of them that disobey. p. 8. Magistr●tes are to be maintained upon the public stock. p. 8. read pag. 12, 13. and judge whether these Divines do not plead the King's cause better than Dr. Ferne; they say that the very houses of Parliament may not resist the Authority of the King commanding according to law. pag. 23. Read the Ministers Epistle to the Reader, and their answer to the 7. Section of Dr. Ferne.  of the King out of Conscience by such as are counted puritanical Preachers. In the answer to the observations printed at Oxford by his majesty's command, I find that Monarchy is not much younger than man himself— that regal Power sprang first from paternal, a regal power belonged to the Pater-familias', pag. 3. as if he meant only to conclude the subjection of the King's children and family: the Patriarchs were Patres Patriae without a Metaphor, they begat their own Subjects. But how came divers families to be subjected to one King or common Father? why, reason (saith he) did direct the people to choose one common Father. p. 6. Monarchy then is grounded upon the people's Reason, and yet quite 
The Papists say that although Kings do govern by the laws of their kingdom, yet because they are against the Catholic Religion, Subjects may rise up against their King and kill him, this doctrine of theirs we abhor.  throughout his book he talks as if the people had no Reason, for he tells them that there may be reasonable motives why a people should consent to slavery, as the Turks and French peasants have done: he teaches them how to perish with a great deal of discretion, or else how to be safe by the benefit of slavery. p. 10, 11. The observator saith that regal dignity was erected to preserve the Commonalty; It was so, saith the Answerer, p. 8. and when Routs became Societies they placed an head over them to whom they paid the Tribute of Reverence for the benefit of Protection: What if the people be not, protected must they pay no tribute? God send his Majesty better protectors than this Champion. Dr. Fern discourses just as wisely when he propounds David's rewarding of false Ziba as a pattern to our King, he would persuade the King to trust Papists as false as Ziba to seize upon the estates of his good Subjects; and bestow their estates upon arrant Ziba's, men that abuse his Majesty and seek their own ends, & when the innocency of the Subject and treachery of these Ziba's, Papists or pickthanks is discovered, yet the King must not reverse his sentence pronounced in favour of the Papists though to the ruin of good Subjects and their posterity, all this Divinity is closely involved by this conscientious doctor, in the 7. Section. How far the Divines of this time differ from the doctrine of Papists is clearly shown by Mr. 
Mr. Burroughes Sermon of the ●. of hosts. p. 41. See Mr. Bridge his Answer to Dr. Fern. The Papists do not only hold it lawful to depose, & thus to depose their Prince, but to kill him also, yea that a private man invested with the Pope's Authority may do thus, all which we abhor. Sect. 5. p. 32. 
Papists owe subjection to a foreign State, cross centred to this of his Majesties, in its interest of State, and meritoriously malicious by its very Articles of faith. The fuller Answer to Dr Ferne. p. 23.  
The name King doth signify a person invested with different power according to the variety of laws in several nations. See an answer to the Observations printed at Oxford by his majesty's command. p. 6. What the laws of the kingdom and privileges of Parliament are, the lawyer's books daily published declare.  
Nemo potest mutare Consilium suum in altertus injuriam. There would be no end if the King should undo what he hath done— there can be no appeal from himself to himself— he is not to pass sentence in a private but in a public and judicial way. Answer to the observations, pag. 22. Set forth by his majesty's command. Potestas {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} est {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}   Burroughes, Mr. Bridge, and therefore it is strange the Papists should be counted the better Subjects. Mr. Burroughes doth acknowledge the King's Supremacy, The King (saith he) is Supreme but not Absolute, because his Authority is limited both by the Law of God and of the Land. For we may and aught (saith doctor Ferne) to deny obedience to such commands of the Prince as are unlawful by the Law of God, yea by the established laws of the Land; for in these we have his will and consent given upon good advice, and to obey him against the laws, were to obey him against himself, his sudden will against his deliberate will, Sect. 1. For instance, it is the King's deliberate will that this Parliament shall not be dissolved, or any forces levied without consent of both houses of Parliament, as appears by two several Acts made this Parliament. If then any take up arms either without consent of Parliament, or on purpose to dissolve this present Parliament, they do certainly take up arms against the King himself, (as Dr. Ferne says) because against the deliberate will of the King. If any Commissions than should be issued out in the King's name to any persons to encourage them to take up arms without the consent of the Parliament, or against the Parliament, such Commissions must be interpreted to proceed from the King's sudden will, which is not to be obeyed, saith Dr. Ferne, against the King's Deliberate Will. They are not the King's friends who advise him to send forth any Illegallcommands.  
There is another answer to Dr. Ferne entitled a 

By Law the King cannot, will not refuse to harken to his great council—  
Answer to the Observation pag. 28. and pag. 37. he saith that by the happy temper of our government, Monarchy is so wisely balanced, that as we are not exposed to the dangers which attend the Rule of the many, so we may avoid the inconveniences which might probably flow from the Atbitrary power of one. The same author doth readily grant that Parliaments are good helps in Government. p. 13. ergo they are somewhat more than counsellors.   fuller answer, in which there is much Law and logic (viz that in a mixed Monarchy there is a coordinate Supremacy, and Coordinata invicem supplent) and a great many things which the common people understand not. This Respondent saith (as Dr. Fern doth) that Monarchy is not God's ordinance, but than he tells the people their duty in plain English, namely, that it is God's ordinance that men should submit without Resistance, to that kind of government which they have by consent established, and therefore they must submit to this Coordinate Supremacy, though it be the Ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, as Saint Peter saith. pag. 17. Here is Submission out of Conscience for the Lord's sake, to all legal Supremacy; what can be desired more, unless they would make the King an Absolute Monarch? (and so give him an absolute Supremacy) which the King himself doth utterly disclaim in his answer to the 19 Propositions.  
The zealous Divines of this very time do abhor the seditious practices and opinions of all Anabaptiss, who because the Church had not Christian Kings at first, cry out with open mouth 
a Quemadmodum Anabaptistae opinantur quod nullus Magistratus in Ecclesia esse possit. Bulling adv. Anabapt. lib. 5. p. 157. See Scripture and Reason set forth by divers learned Ministers.  that the Church cannot be safe if there be any King or Magistrate in the Church; nay they add that if a King turn Christian he must cease to be a King, because Christianity itself is repugnant to Magistracy, and no 
b Vide Bulling lib. 5. cap. 2. cap. 2. Magistratum non posse neque debere curare res religionis.  Magistrate ought to look after any thing that concerns Religion. They maintain that Christians ought not to have any judicial trials before Magistrates, that no Christians ought to punish offenders with death or imprisonment, but with Excommunication only. They would not have heretics punished by the Magistrate, 
c Vide eundem cap. 4, 5. ejusdem libri. Contendunt A●abaptista in Ecclesiâ unicuique libe rum esse debero ut agate & credat quod ipsi visum fuerit, ubi supra. cap. 7.  but every man should be left to his liberty to believe what he thinks fit, just as the Arminians and Socinians dream. I would Kings and Princes did seriously consider that the 
d Nulla Carnalis coercitio nulla poena err●ntibus constituta à Deo est— omnes in seipsum armat qui in alios quos errare credit armatur. Par omnium in omnes Ius est. Qui sibi jus tribuit coercendi alio●, idem aliis in seipsum Idem justus concedat necesse est. Exam. Cens. cap. 24. pag. 259.  Arminians have taught heretics to rebel against any Prince or Magistrate who goes about to inflict punishment upon them in a legal way; for, say they, if the Magistrate goes about to punish an heretic because he thinks the heretic in an error, the heretics may all join together and rise up in arms against the Magistrate because they conceive the Magistrate to be in an error; for the heretics have as much power to kill the Magistrate, as the Magistrate hath to execute such seditious heretics, Par omnium in omnes jus est, is not that pure Anabaptism in the highest? Nay they add 
Lex ista de Apost●tis à Christianisnio non agi● nedum de Apostatis ad judaismum, & c— Religionem Suam liberam Christus esse voluit; qui ab ea deficiant, suo periculo & damno deficiunt. Ex Censur● cap. 24. p. 264.  farther, that though the heretics be seditious, Reipub. Turbones, if they be Apostates, if they turn Jews and blaspheme Christ, yet they would not have them punished by the Magistrates: these Arminian, Socinian, anabaptistical errors are justly abhorred by the Divines of this very time. There is at this very day a great talk of Tubbe-Preachers; if there be any such, the Arminians and Socinians must defend them as long as they keep in private, but if they preach false doctrine 
Tub-preachers.  publicly, than indeed the Arminians would have them grievously punished, the Magistrate may if it be needful (say they) make a whip of Cords and drive them out 
Nihil tamen ali●d colligetur quam ejectionem Hareticorum ex publicis templis ad magistratum pertinentibus licite à magistratu fieri posse, & quidem si necesse sit flagelloè funiculis ei fini facto, ulterius aut plus concludere nemo jure potest. At hoc jus Magistratui plenâ manu tribuunt Remonstrantes; Hac ergo in parte imitetur Magistratus Christum. Exam. Cens. cap. 24. pag. 269. At in p●imá Ecclesia institutions cum ordo non est, au● in ejus restitutione cum ordo collapsus est, Missionem necessariam esse negant (Remonst.) proinde cam de essentia muneris Ecclesiastici, quod in verbi legitimâ praedicatione consistit, non esse habendam. Ex. Cen. c. 21. p. 228 Aut libertas hac communis esse debet & eo usque extendi quo eam quisque sibi Concedi amat, aut vis inferenda aliorum conscientiis Exam. Cens. c. 24. p 277.  of the Temple, as our Saviour did the Hucksters: Thus they abuse our Saviour and the Magistrate both in a breath, they will not allow the Magistrate to do any more. They do not think it necessary that Ministers should expect a Mission in the first constituting of a Church, for then there can be no order, for order is not yet begun, nor must Ministers expect a Mission when a Church is to be reformed, for than they say all order is quite fallen to the ground, and therefore the Word may be lawfully preached by them that are not sent, so the Arminians (Exam. Cens. cap. 21. pag. 228.) state the point. You see if there be any Tubbe-preachers, now our Church is but Reforming, they do punctually observe the Arminians grave instructions. The Arminians allow a liberty of prophesying, if any man shall persuade himself that he hath received some spiritual interpretations of the Word by the inspiration, suggestion, assistance of the holy Ghost, and any Magistrate shall imprison this man, because the interpretation is contrary to the Spirit of the Reformed Divines, the Magistrate doth imprison the spirit and quench the spirit, and the Church of Rome may as well emprison any Protestant because he brings an interpretation contrary to the Spirit of their Church, which is as the Papists conceive infallibly guided by the Spirit. Here'snothing but Qui sibi persuadet, a strong persuasion required to bear out this Enthysiast, though he seems to the Reformed Divines to preach nothing but his own brainsick fancies, nay frenzies, Sed hoc ipsum est Spiritum extinguere, authoritatem sibi arrogare, Spiritum qui cum Spiritu nostro (by our Spirit they mean the Spirit which enlightens the Reformed Divines) non convenit, pro insanâ & corrupta mente, libidine contendendi, adeoque mali spiritus suggestione, censendi, eoque nomine vi armata eum opprimendi— Colloca teipsum coram tribunali Pontificio, Reformationem dogmatum, & Articulorum variorum urgentem & orantem ne spiritum tuum quem divinum esse credis extinguat; quid respondebis si tibi reponat verba tua, an spiritus est quod cuique insana & corrupta mens, contendendi libido, adeoque 
Remonstrantes causam nullam esse vident cur sententia eorum qu● Padobaptismum necessario in ecclesia Christi necessitate seu Pracepti seu Medii retinendum aut usurpandum esse non arbitrantur, ut entolerabilis in Ecclesia censenda sit, a● proinde cur pastores isti qui eum p●r conscientiam usurpare non audent— proveris a● degitimis p●storibus Christi habendi non sint?  malus spiritus suggerit? Exam. Cens. cap. 24. pag. 276. Unless we have that infallible Spirit which the Apostles had to discern spirits, the Arminians tell us we must allow men liberty to prophesy contrary to the Spirit of the Reformed doctors, or else our censure of these Enthysiasts will be doubtful, uncertain. Finally (for I am weary of this subject) they will admit Anabaptists to be true and lawful pastors of Christ. cap. 23. Exam. Cens. de Baptismo. pag. 248. in fine. Sure this is liberty enough, the Socinians need not desire more, the Arminians and Socinians then must patronize these Tubbe-preachers.  
In the next place there is a complaint of Brownists, to which complaint I shall answer briefly, and yet fully.  
First, they are to be blamed who gave the first occasion 
Brownists.  of this Rent: I know between 40. and 50. years ago, there were some followers of Browne, but in the latter end of King James his reign, the number of Brownists properly so called was much decreased, and it was a rare thing to meet with a Brownist; but when Bishop Land began to sit at stern, (and so he did a while even in Archbishop Abbot his time) than the number of Brownists began to increase; the reason was, because ceremonies began to be urged upon the conscience with so much earnestness as if they had been necessary to salvation: and about 6. or 7. years since when 
Where the eause of schism is necessary, there not he that separates but he that is the cause of separation is the schismatic. Tract concerning schism. pag. 4.  the Archbishop was in his ruff, and his Priests began to surrogate it, preaching for doctrines the commandments of men, and consequently worshipping God in vain, Math. 15. 9 men of tender consciences (and those no weak ones neither) began to fear, that they should transgress the commandments of God, by observing Traditions, Math. 15. 3. and conceived it vain, to join with them in worship, who worshipped God in vain.  
Many were prevailed with by this reason, but there were some of a moderate temper, who if they might have the liberty of their conscience, and not be forced to the use of any Ceremonies, would, and did, communicate even in Parish-Churches: But the Archbishop of Canterbury began to lay on greater burdens; Crucifixes must be set up at the East-end, that was too plain; next, the Communion-Table, to colour the Design, or, at least, to add varnish to it, must be advanced into an Altar, & men must by a Tacit consent, (as we were informed at the Visitation of Merton College) expressesome outward reverence, by bowing towards the East, the Altar, the crucifix, choose which you please, all if you will; but in no case must we be commanded to bow, & yet we must be censured as disobedient, if we refuse to bow. This was interpreted by rational men an asking of our consent to bring in Popery: It was now high time to make Protestations that we would neither bow to East, nor host, nor Altar, for if we held our peace we knew not what might come by Tacite consent. We were sure that our actions would speak aloud, and how tacit soever our consent was, it would be known to God & our conscience. I will not take this fair Hint to ton into a long story of what censures were passed upon myself or others, for our Protestation against this superstitious Innovation, but sure I am that by degrees there were so many Innovations both in point of Doctrine, and external worship, that the Papists themselves thought those of greatest worth, learning and Authority in England, knew not well what Religion to be of, or where to fasten. The Jesuit who wrote the directions to N. N. which Mr. Chillingworth endeavours to answer, 
See Mr. Chilling. preface, Sect. 20.  began to triumph in our compliances with Rome. Hark what he saith. Protestantism waxeth weary of itself, the professors of it, they especially of greatest worth, learning and Authority, love temper and Moderation, and are at this time more unresolved where to fasten, then at the infancy of their Church. Their Churches begin to look with a new face, their walls to speak a new language, their Doctrines to be altered in many things, &c. Mr. Chillingworth is so vain as to call this painting of Churches the Beauty of holiness, Sect. 22. But to proceed, If the guides of the Church would not endure so much as a nominal Inconformity with Rome, if they and their Adherents looked so like, and preached so like them, that the Papists themselves took them for Roman Catholics; no marvel if the poor people cried out that England was turned Babylon, and began to separate; for that is 
Hooker's Ecclesiast. Polit l. 5 sect. 65.  very observable which Judicious Hooker delivers in his ecclesiastical polity. The people (saith he) are not accustomed to trouble their wits with nice and subtle differences in the exercises 

Mr Chill. Answer to the Preface. p. 16. Sect. 22.  
There cannot be any schism in leaving Communion with any Church, unless we are obliged to continue in it; man cannot be obliged by man, but to what either formally or virtually he is obliged by God.  
Was it not lawful for Judah to reform herself when Israel would not join? Sure it was or else the Prophet deceives me; that says expressly, Though Israel transgress, yet let not Judah sin.   of Religion— and (saith he) in actions of this kind, (He speaks of adoration of the cross, it may well be applied to adoration towards the East, host, altar, crucifix) we are more to respect what the greatest part of men is commonly prone to conceive, than what some few men's wits may devise in construction of their own particular meanings. They then are to be blamed who invented a few cogging distinctions to juggle with God and their conscience, and thought to salve up all with some curious subtleties which the people understood not. If they that should be lights of the Church gave no better light than an Ignis fatuns, which doth seduce them into bogs and ditches, if they puzzled the people and gave them good cause to doubt whether it was safe to communicate or no, must the people communicate when they are perplexed with such doubts that they cannot communicate in faith? He that doubts is damned if he eat, Rom. 14. 23. The poor people could not be resolved, and durst not be damned; sure the Archbishop was rather schismatical, 

The Archb. of Cant. his Relation. pag. 149.  
See Mr. Chillingworth's Preface, Sect. 44. answer to the 2. Motive.  
There may be just cause to depart from a particular Church in some doct. in's and, practices, though that Church want nothing necessary to salva●ion. Dr. Petter. 2. Edit. Sect. 3. p. 75.  
There may be a necessary separation, which yet incurs not the blame of Schism: The Archb. of Canterbury his Relation. p. 133. in margin.   in imposing such burdens upon tender Communicants, than the people in separating from external Communion. Let Mr. Chillingworth be Judge, sure he is no Brownist; Neither is it always of necessity schismatical to separate from the external Communion of a Church, though wanting nothing necessary. For if this Church supposed to want nothing necessary, require me to profess against my conscience, that I believe some error, though never so small and innocent, which I do not believe, and will not allow me her Communion, but upon this condition; In this case the Church for requiring this Condition is schismatical, and not I for s●parating from the Church.  
Secondly, all Separatists are not Brownists; it is evident from this very place of Mr. Chillingworth; for a man may have just cause to separate from the external 
a Nor can you say that Israel from the t●me of Separation was not a Church. See the Archb. of Cant. Relat. pag. 149.  Communion of a Church, though he think that there are all things necessary to salvation in that Church. But no Brownist doth conceive that there are all things necessary to salvation in any of our Parish Churches. They deny that there is any true Church or Ministers of God to be found in any Parish of England; or that all the Parishes taken collectively can make one Church of God; they say our Congregations and Ministers are limbs of 
b See the defence of the Churches and ministry of England by Mr. Jacob ag●inst Mr. Johnson; the Publishers Epistle to the Reader prefixed before the book.  Antichrist, Babylonians, Idolaters; this Doctrine I have ever preached against, (I preached against it even at Westminster, where they say there are so many Brownists) and resolve to preach against it still.  
3. There are some reverend and learned Ministers in this kingdom, who are commonly called the Independent Ministers, and these are all put down for Brownists, if not Anabaptists, in the Oxford Catalogue, though the Arminians 
Non enim si ab hisce coetibus ad alios forte discedat, protinus eos quos deserit contemnit aut à spe salutu exclusos judicat, sed tantummodo ab impurioribus ad puriores se confert, ut veritatem omnem saluti nostrae aliquatenus servientem sibi cura & cordi esse ostendat, & Deo ac Iesu Christo suo conscientiam suam probet, Say the Arminians in their Preface to their Confession.  have no reason to censure any that go from a Congregation that is less pure, to one that is more pure. I will therefore briefly show that these Ministers are neither Anabaptists nor Brownists. They will not say the Magistrate is an Head of the Church, but they say that Every Christian Magistrate is an Head in the Church, which no Anabaptist will say. They say that the Prelates do not hold from the Head, as all Officers of the Church should do, Ephes. 4. 15, 16. and yet they acknowledge that it is possible for a Prelate, and the Diocese under him to hold the Head, as the phrase is, Colos. 2. 19 and this no Anabaptist or Brownist will acknowledge. They will communicate even in a Parish-assembly, where the Minister and people generally desire and labour by all lawful means to procure a Reformation. They protest against Brownism, as a 
* See Mr. Thomas Goodwin his Fast Sermon preached at Westminster.  bitter error, and full of cruelty; what can be desired more, to clear them from being Brownists or Anabaptists? I heard the same man preach since with much fervency and earnestness of spirit against the Brownists for this their error, and among other inconveniencies which arise therefrom, he mentioned this, that upon the same ground and reason for which they chiefly make the Churches in England no true Churches, nor the Ministers thereof, true Ministers, they must make all those in Scotland, France, and other Reformed Churches, (whom yet they seem to acknowledge) to be no true Churches; and so no true Churches to have been in Europe since the Reformation but themselves, which were a horrid opinion to enter into a man's heart.  
4. Brownists do not, that ever I could learn, differ from Protestants, concerning civil government, and therefore 

See Mr. Burroughs' his S●rmon of the L. of hosts. p. 46. The Jesuits have ●eene the Authors and Instruments of all tu●●ults, seditions, &c. as Dr. Potter shows, Want of Charity, &c. Sect. 1. pag. 9  
The present Church of Rome persuades men they were as good for any hope of salvation they have not to be Christians, as not to be Roman Catholics— be absolutely out of the church's Communion, as be out of her Communion— whether she be not guilty of the same crime with the Donatists, and those zealots of the Mosaical Law, let reasonable men judge. Mr. Chillingworth. c. 3. Sect. 64. See Dr. Potter Sect. 4.   I do not know why men should cry out, that Brownists are greater enemies to the State than Papists themselves: We have not yet forgot the Powder-treason, and we do still groan under the Irish Rebellion.  
5. If the Brownists be as bad as the Donatists of old, if they conceive that there is no true Church but in parte Brownistarum, as they conceived there was none but in parte Donati: if they should deny the Catholic Church (which they do not) and refuse to Communicate with any of the Reformed Churches, or with any Independent Congregation, because they will not communicate with any who are ready to embrace communion with any Parish Church, let their error, schism, pride, uncharitableness, cruelty, and bitterness be aggravated to the highest, yet the Papists have no reason to complain of them; for Papists deny the Catholic Church as directly as the Brownists can be thought to do, they confine it to their own party; the Socinians and Arminians may hold their peace for shame, for they both tell us, that it is possible that Christ may have no Church at all, neither in this part nor that, he may be an Head without a Body, an Husband without a Spouse, a King without Subjects, as hath been shown above, pag. 49. The Socinians say that there is not as yet any triumphant Church above, nor is it necessary there should be any militant Church here below. It was no error in the Donatists that 
St. Augustine and Optatus did acknowledge the Donatists to be their brethren, & their baptism to be true baptism, vide Aug in Psal. 32. Con 2. Epist. 166. Et contra Donat ●post Coll. cap. ult. Optat. l. 1. Aug. contra Crese. lib. 4. cap. 4. de Baptis. contra Donat. lib. 1. c. 10, 11. Dr. Potter doth confess this truth. Sect. 4. p. 107, 108, 109. the first edition.  they held it possible that the Church might be contracted from a larger extent to a lesser, (as Mr. Chillingworth observes) but their error was that they held it done de Facto, when they had no just ground or reason to do so; chap. 3. p. 162. But the Author of the Tract concerning schism doth quite outleape Mr. Chillingworth. It is (saith he) a thing indifferent, the Church may be in any number more or less, it may be in any place, country or Nation, it may be in all, and for aught I know it may be in none, pag. 7. Sure the Brownist is more moderate, he saith there must be a Church.  
6. But the great quarrel with the Brownist is, that he would have the commonprayer book taken away; To which I answer in a word, that they are not all Brownists who desire to have that Law abrogated, by which the commonprayer book is established; Mr. Chillingworth desires that there might be this trial made between us and the Papists, That there might be some form of Worshipping God propounded which is wholly taken out of the Scripture; and herein saith he to the Papists, if we refuse to join with you, then, and not till then, may you justly say we have utterly and absolutely abandoned your Communion. Answer to the Preface. Sect. 23. May not some that are not Brownists say the same to us, we keep our distance from you, merely because your form of worshipping God is not taken wholly out of Scripture, though for the present than we join not with you, yet do not say (till that be done) that we do utterly and absolutely abandon your Communion. The Author of the Tract of schism would have such a form of service, as Donatists, Arians, Papists, all that call themselves Christians, might join in; p 9, 10. You see he dislikes the commonprayer book, and sure dislikes the best part of it, the Creeds, he is far worse than a Brownist. Be pleased to observe that Liturgies were first composed to expel Socinianism, and 

Mr. Chillingw. desires that nothing else should be required of any man to make him capable of the church's communion, then that he believe the Scripture, and that only; and endeavour to believe it in the true sense. His Preface to the Author, &c. answer to the last Motive.  
Ecclesiam nostram in omnibus audiendam esse consequttur duo ● us modu, tum quâ mutaverunt pleraque in Divinis Officiis, tum quâ multa retinuerunt: nam in altero se ad Antichristum pertinere declara●unt; in altero nos esse populum Dei, & se esse simias nostras confessi sunt. Brist. Mot Tom. 2. Mot. 23. p 242. & seq. See BP. Morton's appeal.  
Troubles of Frankford. See Dr Featleys' Advertisement to the Reader, prefixed before Ver●●m●us Romanus.   now this Author would have a liturgy composed to let in Arianism, or at least to humour the Arians, and soothe them up in their heresy, as if the Articles of our Creed were but private fancies, and it concerned us more to please heretics, then preserve our Creed. But there is a learned man of a more moderate opinion, and sounder judgement then either of the former, though they be both very learned men, it is Dr. Featley, be pleased to hear him speak. There is nothing (saith he) in the Protestant liturgy or Service which the Romanists do, or by their own Rules can except at; The Confession, form of Absolution, Prayers, hymns, Collects, &c. are either such as the Papists themselves use, or at least such as they dislike not; in his Annotations on Vertumnus Romanus, p. 16, 17. Now this is the very reason the Papists brag so much, and why some that are not Brownists take offence at our Liturgy. And this learned Doctor tells us, that all who love the truth in sincerity, should with bended knees humbly desire that his Majesty, and the high Court of Parliament, would make some more certain distinctive sign between Papists and Protestants, then monthly coming to Church, and taking the oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy. Now how this present Liturgy which the Papists like so well, can make any such distinction, let the prudent judge. I intend not to run out into the large question, about the necessity or Antiquity of Liturgies; but let men that are so violent in this point consider;  
1. How corrupt those Liturgies are which are voted for ancient. 2. How much Bishop Hall is forced to grant, when this question was agitated between him and the Smectymn●ans. 3. To pass by what is said about the lawfulness of a set-form, let them consider what Arguments are produced against the Imposition of a set-form. 4. If it were granted that a set-form may be imposed, yet those many cartloads of Arguments which are produced against this set-form are considerable. 5. It is confessed, that a Minister should be able to pray as well as preach, and should give and even devote himself to prayer, he should meditate and study how to pray. 6. It is granted on all sides that we ought to pray according to the occasion, and how we should foresee all the wants and straits of a Church, and compose a set-form for them beforehand, it concerns them to declare. When K. James was to advise Prince Henry how to pray, he did not think it sufficient to leave him to the Church-Liturgy, or to any prayers composed by man; the only Rule of Prayer, saith he, is the Lord's Prayer: he advised him to study the psalms of David, because they being composed by a King, he might collect prayers out of them most suitable to his wants, and so he should be enabled to pray according to the occasion; he dissuaded him from following the common ignorant sort, that prays nothing but out of books, for that would breed an uncouth coldness in him towards God: he bids him take heed that he be not over-homely in his expressions, for that would breed a contempt of God: nay he counsels him farther, to pray as his heart moves him, pro re natâ, read his {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}, pag 151. 152. Let these things be well weighed and considered, and then our fierce men will not term every man a Brownist, who desires to have that Law abrogated by which this Common Prayer book is established and enjoined. I need not add what the Arminians and Socinians think of Liturgies, only observe, that though the Arminians beyond Sea were prevailed with to write something for the Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacons, &c. in England yet they write but faintly, Exam. Censurae. cap. 21. and they could not be prevailed with to write a word in defence of our Liturgy, they will not admit, no not of the most received Creeds; there is (they 
Quare nil dubitamus profiteri Athanasium limitem jur● huj us pratergressum esse, quando Symbolo suo super●am istam pr●sationē prascripsit.  say) too much majesty in them, they call the Preface to Athanasius his Creed, Whosoever will be saved must hold, &c. a proud Preface, for this is (say they) to give divine Authority to human forms, and into the assembly of such bold men let not our soul ever enter: you see what they think of human forms. Exam. Censurae Praef. pag. 6. 7. and lastly, the Brownists had been in the right if the Archbishop of Canterbury could have compassed his design, for his project was to root out all that would not comply, which if he had effected, he had made good the Brownists opinion for them, for then there would have been no true Church of God in England indeed; not a true governing Church, for his government would have been tyrannical, not a true practising Church, the practices of his Grace and his adherents are sufficiently known: nor a true teaching Church, as shall evidently be demonstrated in the next Chapter.   

CHAP. VI. The Religion so violently contended for by the Archbishop of Canterbury and his adherents, is not the true pure Protestant Religion.  
I Intend not to transcribe overmuch out of Bishop Montague, Shelford, Pocklington, Dr. Potter, Mr. Chillingworth, Dr. Dowe, Dr. Heylin, &c. Their Books are commonly 

The Canterburians self-conviction shows;  
1. Their avowed arminianism.  
2. Their affection to the Pope, and Popery in the gross, cap. 3.  
3. The Canterburians join with Rome in her grossest 1. dolatries, cap. 4.  
4. Their embracing of Popish heresies and grossest errors, cap. 5.  
5. Their Superstitions, cap. 6.  
6. The Canterburians embrace the mass itself, cap. 7.  
7. Their Maxims of tyranny, cap. 8.  
See the third Edition of this Canterb. Self-Conviction, with the large Supplement which contains sundry very material passages.   sold, and I have given a taste already in the third and fourth Chapters of some of these Authors; ex ungue leonem, as they say; there are a great many passages collected and published already by several men, so that I am forestalled, and by some happily prevented; there is a book entitled Ladensium {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} closely penned, and never answered, in which their Heresies are filled up by dozens, There will come forth a book very shortly, in which the design of Reconciling, or rather uniting Rome and Canterbury, (for there was no great quarrel between them) will be more fully discovered; for these reasons I may well shorten my journey. Let any man that desires satisfaction, but peruse those books which were Printed in England between 1630. and 1639. and compare them with the Harmony of Confessions of the Reformed Churches, and then he may easily judge. Mr. Chillingworth proves undeniably that the Church of Rome is not Infallible, but to what end and purpose? why, that Rome and Canterbury may shake hands, the Pope may abate something in point of Supremacy, his Primacy being grounded upon his Infallibility; but if the Pope, Cardinals, &c. the Archbishop of Canterbury and his adherents were united, the people would be unwilling to part with their mass: why for that if they will but yield thus far, as to turn their mass into English, the good men are agreed; for Mr. Chillingworth tells the Papists, that no Godly Lay man (that is, an ignorant Papist that is well conceited of the mass) who is verily persuaded that there is neither impiety nor superstition in the use of their Latin Service shall be damned as he hopes for being present at it; Excellent Divinity! A strong persuasion will 
Mr. Chillingworth's Answer to the Preface of Charity Maintained, which is as it were a second Preface, for it follows the Preface joined with an Answer to the Direction to N. N. p. 9 Sect. 7.  turn superstition and impiety into godliness. Yet he saith there is some danger as long as the Service is in Latin, because the want of that devotion which the frequent hearing the offices understood might happily beget in them, the want of that instruction and edification which it might afford them, may very probably hinder the salvation of many, which otherwise might have been saved; that is, might have been saved if the Service had been in English; this is plain dealing, the men are likely to agree, the mass in English may beget such devotion, afford such instruction and edification, as is sufficient for salvation. Can the Papists desire fairer quarter, or a foller acknowledgement? Is not this doctrine sufficient to effect an Accommodation between Rome and Canterbury. I dare say all the Papists in England will fight for such a Protestant Religion. Mr. Chillingworth in his Epistle Dedicatory gives his Majesty to understand, That the Papists allow Protestants as much charity as Protestants allow them; and therefore such Protestants and true Papists will easily be reconciled, or indeed are already reconciled. I cannot stand to reckon up Mr. Chillingworth's principles, consider these that follow.  
1. God is not offended with us for not doing what he 
The answer to the Preface p. 19  knows we cannot do. Whiles we are unregenerate God knows we cannot repent and believe; is not God offended with us even then, for our impenitence and unbelief? besides, he conceives that unaffected ignorance joined with implicit faith and general repentance is not damnable.  
2. Mr. Chillingworth is verily persuaded that God will 

In the same Freface.  
The second Preface. p. 19   not impute errors to them as sins, who use such a measure of industry in finding truth, as human prudence and ordinary discretion (their abilities, and opportunities, their distractions and hindrances, and all other things considered) shall advise them unto, in a matter of such consequence. Sure God will judge men with more than ordinary discretion, and therefore though we may justify ourselves when our opinions and practices are scanned by human prudence, yet God may justly condemn us for not attending upon him without distraction; Such loose principles as these will nurse men up in security and ignorance, or else betray them to indifferency in religions, to that 
* Vide Vedelium de Arc●nu Arminianismi: the four professors of Leyden in their approbation of that book declare them to be wilfully blind who do not see that it was the scope of the Arminians to introduce libertinism. Vtnemo deinceps, quinon sponte cacutire velit, de corum ad Libertinismi Introductionem Scopo dubitare possit Approbatio Facultatu Theologica Leydensis. Mr. Chilling first Preface Sect. 29.  Arminian libertinism, which hath been so much admired of late days, and cried up as the only way to maintain peace. For if a man poisoned with this principle be seduced by a Papist, Arminian, Socinian, he need use but ordinary discretion, and therefore take but ordinary care to resist the seducer: Alas his abilities are not great, his distractions not few, and his hindrances many; besides if he have time to consider the Arguments propounded, yet he wants opportunity, and therefore all things considered he had as good yield as stand out, for it is in the eye of human prudence, a matter of no great consequence: for Mr. Chillingworth saith a Papist may be saved, especially if he have the mass in English, and Socinians are a company of Christians, which though they are erroneous in explicating mysteries and take too great a liberty in Speculative matters, yet they explicate and maintain the laws of Christ with less indulgence to the flesh than the Papists.  
3. Mr. Chillingworth thinks it sufficient to believe all those books of Scripture (to be God's Word) of whose 
Cap. 2 pag 64.  Authority there was never any doubt made in the Church: he cannot in reason believe the 
* 
The book of Esther, Job, Ecclesiastes, the Epistle of James and Jude, the second of Peter, the third of John, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the book of the Revelation. We live in a questioning age: & no man knows how soon all the rest may be questioned. You may read more of Mr. Chillingworth's principles, in a book entitled Christianity maintained: the passage about Henry the 8, &c. is too famous to be mentioned. Nos in diem vivi● mus; quodcunque nostros animos probabilitate percussit, illud dicimus. It aque soli sumusliberi hoc est Sceptici, vide Ciceron. Tusc. quast. lib. 5. Answer to the Preface. Sect. 26. The Archbishop himself is more sound. A Church may hold the fundamental point Literally— yet err damnably in the exposition of it: and this is the Church of Rome's case— it hath in the Exposition both of Creeds & counsels quite changed and lost the sense & meaning of some of them.  
The Arch Bishops Relat. pag. 320.   other books so undoubtedly as those books which were never questioned, and he hath the example of Saints in heaven to justify or excuse his doubting, nay his denial. Sect. 38. There is no necessity of conforming ourselves to the judgement of any Church concerning the rest that were never questioned, for that also he urges the Authority of some Saints in Heaven; ancient Fathers, whole Churches by their difference about this point, showed that they knew no necessity of conforming themselves herein to the judgement of any Church. Sect. 34. and yet of this controversy whether such or such books be canonical, the Church is to judge. Sect. 35. And the church's testimony is, though no demonstrative Enforcement, yet an highly probable inducement, and so a sufficient ground of faith. What kind of faith this is like to prove, I know not, which is grounded upon a probable testimony, to which no man need to subseribe or conform.  
4. It is enough to believe by a kind of implicit faith, that the Scripture is true in God's own sense and meaning, though you know not what God meant, if you use such industry as ordinary discretion shall advise for the knowing of God's meaning, of which I have said enough already; this may suffice for a taste. Dr. Potter is very charitable to the Papists, because they receive the Apostles Creed, but whether they receive it in the Apostles sense, is the question. Whether Mr. Rowse or Dr. Potter hath answered that subtle book most like a Protestant, let the learned judge. I have said enough of Dr. Potter already, I refer the Reader to Ladens. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman}.  
I am even ashamed to repeat what Dr. Pocklington hath printed in his Sermon, Sunday no Sabbath, See the first edition p. 48. 50. We must have an Altar with a cross upon it, if we will believe Dr. Pocklington, Altare Christianum. cap. 21. pag. 143. We may comply with the Jews in phrase, and other respects. cap. 22. pag. 147. I hope he doth not mean in Caspar Barlaeus his sense, or as the Socinians mean; he hath a vain conceit that the Christian Church of the Jews had 
Vide Vedelium de Deo Synagoga. Dr. Kellet his Tricenium. The laic must trust in his Priest, the Clergyman in his Church. p. 630. The ●u●harist to be adored. p. 637. and received with our hands framed like a cross. 655. Altars adored. p.— 644. The Arch Bishop of Ca●t. his Relat. pag. 147.  Altars. I hope they did not bow all, to, or towards the Altar when they met. Act. 15. We must if we will believe this Dr. agree with the Jews in external Rites & Ceremonies, p. 147. Give me leave to throw away this book; and Dr. Kellet his Tricenium. When the Arch Bishop of Canterbury was to assign what errors in Doctrine might give just cause of separation, he would not adventure to set them down in particular, lest in these times of discord, he might be thought to open a door for schism; he knew full well that some who were countenanced by him had brought in errors enough, which gáve just cause of separation. Knot the Jesuit spoke plain English to Mr. Chillingworth, when he told him that the Doctrine of the Church of England began to be altered in many things, for which our progenitors forsook the Roman Church. For example, it is said that the Pope is not Antichrist, Prayer for the dead is allowed, Limbus Patrum, Pictures; it is maintained that the Church hath Authority in 
This is the Protestant Religion which the Papists fight for, in thes fighting days.  determining controversies of faith, and to interpret Scripture, about freewill, Predestination, universal grace; that all our works are not sins, Merit of good works Inherent Justice, Faith alone doth not justify, Traditions, commandments possible to be kept. Your thirty nine Articles are patient, nay ambitious of some sense in which they may seem Catholic. Calvinism is accounted Heresy, and little less than treason. Men in talk use willingly the once fearful names of Priests and Altars. What saith Mr. Chillingworth to this bold charge? Why, 

Behold the Protestant Religion which the Armiminians maintain. Mr. Chillingworth might have questioned the salvation of the Jesuites as well as of the Dominicans, Ans. to the Preface. pag. 20.  
First Preface with an Answer to the Directions to N. N. Sect. 26.   some things he excuses, and grants the rest. As for the Popes not being Antichrist, the lawfulness of some kind of prayers for the dead, the Estate of the father's souls before Christ's Ascension, freewill, Predestination, universal grace, the possibility of keeping God's commandments, and the use of pictures in the Church; these are not things fit to be stood upon, we must not break charity for such matters, these points have been anciently disputed amongst Protestants, if you will believe an archpriest Brearley; and so he leaves that point; here is a fair compass, a long rope for a Papist, Arminian, &c. to dance in. But Mr. Chillingworth saith the Protestants have constantly maintained, and do still maintain, that good works are not properly meritorious, and that faith alone justifies; but either this is false, or else men that are counted Protestants have changed their Religion. Franciscus de Sancta Clara will inform him of the extravagancies of some in these points, who passed for such Protestants as England hath been guilty of entertaining of late years. I have heard it publicly maintained in Oxford by Mr. Wethereld of Queen's college, that Bona opera sunt 
Mr. Wethereld his Sermon at Saint Mary's.  Causae Physicae Vitae Aeternae, he had said before that they were moral Causes, by that he meant Meritorious, but that expression would not content him. It is well known what Dr. Duncan maintained at Cambridge; what Shelford printed there, what Dr. Dow and Dr. Heylin have since maintained, and to their power justified; you may read their words at large in Ladensium {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the fifth Chapter.  
The Archbishop of Canterbury hath given us the reason why the Jesuits refused to come to our Churches, (it seems he had invited them) since they themselves acknowledge 
The Archbishop of Canterbury his Relat. Sect. 35. Punct. 5. p. 307. A probable conjecture of his grace's Reason why he altered the Service-book. The difference between the Scotch Li●u●gy and the English is exactly set down in the Canterburians self conviction p. 97. to 113. See M. Newcomen his Sermon preached on the fifth of Novemb.  that there is no positive error in our Liturgy, and it is briefly this. Because though our Liturgy had in it nothing ill, yet it wanted a great deal of that which was good, and was in their Service. I can now give at least a probable conjecture why his Grace altered the Service-book which he sent into Scotland: why, surely to please the Jesuits, for he put in something which the Jesuits counted good, and so in his apprehension made up the defect.  
Mr. Newcomen in his learned Sermon hath shown at large how punctual his Grace was in observing the Jesuits instructions for the alteration of our Religion. How truth hath been sold at a low rate, by the highest Priests, is clearly discovered by Mr. Hill in his accurate Sermon. Revend Dr. Hakewill hath set forth Dr. Heylin to the life, and therefore I will not presume to add any thing to his happy observations. The Ministers Remonstrance will give sufficient light to this point, I hope it will be published ere long. There is a Book which passeth from hand to hand as a precious manuscript called Romano-Catholicus Pacificus, in which there are many fair offers made for a Reconciliation between 

The large supplement of the Canterburian self-conviction pag. 19, 20.  
Bishop Mountagu● saith that the ●igne of the cross is the Instrument of divine power and sufficient to drive away devils, it is to be made in the breast or forehead, &c. Orig. Eccles. Tom. prioris parte poster' pag. 80.  
Scripture and Reason, &c. Set forth by divers; Ministers. The book called jesuitica Negotiatio gave jesuited persons leave to profess the Protestant religion, to keep any office, to pass sentence of death upon any person according to his office, so he was as favourable as possible, and gave timely intelligence of any severe sentence. pag. 74.   Rome and Canterbury, the Archbishop of Canterbury shall enjoy the Cyprian privilege and be subject to no Patriarch, of which you may read at large in the supplement of the Canterburian self-conviction, a passage well worthy the serious consideration of all Statesmen. I might make my book swell if I should but reckon up the tithe of Bishop Montague his Popish expressions, and therefore I leave men to peruse his writings, there are few points of Popery which you may not find in his books or in his Articles at visitation; It seems our guides were gone so far that the Papists thought they might accept of all Propositions of Accommodation which were tendered to them by our gentle Reconcilers.  
Dr. Featley hath excellently discovered what a good opinion the Romanists conceive of some who profess themselves members of the Church of England; Protestants are now counted heretics no longer, if you will speak properly and strictly, saith that Popish Priest, and therefore sure Protestantism is waxed weary of itself, as Knot speaks; you may well know what Protestants this Vertumnus means, such as have been cited in this sixth Chapter: Concerning the book called Jesuitica Negotiatio, the Ministers have said enough already. I admire at the impudence of divers men who have thus freely expressed themselves for the encouragement of the Arminian, Socinian and Popish party, and yet are not ashamed to say that they stand for the Protestant religion. I have seen a letter under Mr. Chillingworth's own hand in which he doth excite Dr. Sheldon of All-souls, and Dean 
Just like the jesuise Dr Potter speaks of, who hoped well of honest Pagans, & rashly damned the best part of Christians. sect. 2. p. 45. I say nothing of Dr. Sheldon his Latin Sermon in which he did highly advance the Power of the Priest.  Potter, &c. to stand in defiance of the Parliament, and advises them to stir up the youth (the young lads of the University as he calls them) to oppose the Parliament; Now can I or any man believe that Mr. Chillingworth doth intend to maintain Calvinism, I mean pure Protestant Religion? I appeal to the conscience of Dr. Sheldon whether he hath not reserved more charity for an Infidel than a Calvinist? he hath expressed himself very slily in his Sermons, and yet plainly enough to intelligent auditors, but I will take the counsel of his Text, and judge nothing before the time. I remember his observations upon that Text, Good Master what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? it is not, saith he, what shall I believe, as the Calvinists would have it, (or to that effect) but what shall I do? Sure the good Dr. forgot the jailer's question, What shall I do to be saved? and the Apostles answer, believe, &c. Is this the Calvinism he jerkes at? Knot I believe had some ground to say that the infection was so general that it had overspread All souls. I would there had been no need of such discoveries, but since things are grown to this pass, it is folly to compliment, we are compelled to speak Plain English in Sober sadness. If our faith will be 
Dr Potter 2 edit. sect. 3. pag. 68  lost except it be kept by a controversy, it is an act both of faith and love for orthodox men to undertake the controversy.  
Dr. Potter doth acknowledge the Church of Rome to be a member of the Church universal, and saith the Church of England hath a true and real union still with that Church in Faith and Charity: nay pag. 76. We do not forsake the Communion of the Church of Rome any more than we forsake the Body of Christ, whereof we acknowledge the Church of Rome a member though 
* Impuritas non in dogmatibus fidei reperitur, sed vel in conclusionibus minus certis, vel in ritibus; alioqui si impuritas ipsum cor & medullam occupet, actum esse de tali ecclesiâ omnes Orthodo ●i censent. Profess. Leyd. Censur. Praefat. Remonst Praefix confess. sect. 23. That proud and cursed Dame of Rome, &c. saith Dr. Potter p. 11. She doth poison her own children, gives them serpents instead of fishes. p. 14. their charity is contrary to the true nature of Charity. p 16 they have more Charity for a Jew and a Turk then a Calvinist. p. 17. we are persecuted with fire & sword and cursed into eternal fire by the Roman Charity, as Dr. Potter saith. p. 13  corrupted. But it seems in 8. or 9 years' Dr. Potter had altered his opinion, for in his Sermon preached at the Consecration of the Bishop of Carlslie, in the year 1628. I find these words; [I am confident were the Fathers now alive they would all side with us in our necessary separation from the abominations, idolatry and tyranny of the papacy, with which no good Christian can hold any union in faith, any communion in Charity.] p. 64, 65. The learned and reverend Bishop Davenant did maintain that the Church of Rome was apostatical in his sad determinations; if it be apostatised from faith as Bishop Davenant saith, and hath no more charity than Dean Potter saith it hath, how can we (especially since our separation from Rome) be said to have a true and real union with it still in Faith and Charity? It is in vain for him now to distinguish between the Church of Rome, and the Court of Rome, though there was once ground for that distinction, for Rome is all Court now; if he will have me use Charrons similitude, the Church is the apple, and the C●ur the worm, the worm hath eaten up the apple, the Court hath devoured the Church; we distinguish between fundamentals and superstructions, and some talk as if the Papists were sound in fundamentals, but the case is clear that they have overthrown the old foundation, and all their superstructions are upon a new foundation, or upon no foundation at all. For if their church's authority be the foundation of all their faith, and their church's Authority be built lastly and wholly upon prudential motives; as Mr. Chillingworth shows, cap. 2. pag. 64. Sect. 35. then sure here is a new Foundation, or else their Church is a Castle in the air, a Church without foundations. I dare appeal to Master Chillingworth whether the Papists do not err grossly (and therefore Fundamentally) in those things which belong to the covenant between God and man in Christ? See whether my inference be not grounded on his Assertion. pag. 17. the answer to the Preface, Sect. 26. Dr. Potter tells us 
* Read the censure of Reverend Dr. Twisse upon this passage of Dr. Potter in his treatise of the morality of the fourth commandment. pag. 34. Damnable i● themselves is in both editio●s, only corrected in the Errata of the second edition, damnable in their issue. D. Twisse gives the reason. 
See Dr Potter 2d. edition p. 254, 255. We shall find that in those Propositions which without all controversy are universally received in the whole Christian World, so much truth is contained as being joined with holy obedience may be sufficient to bring a manunto everlasting salvation. p. 255.   that their errors and practices for which they have been forsaken of Protestants are not damnable in themselves to men who believe as they profess; but the Archbishop of Canterbury is more orthodox, or else the man that gave him this note was more orthodox, (for doubtless the materials of that fair fabric were brought in by men of different religions, the principles are so cross) he saith that error in points not fundamental may be damnable to some men, though they hold it not against their conscience. Sect. 37. Numb. 6. pag. 320. Dr. Potter and some others have a fancy of resting in the profession of such truths as all Christians in the whole world agree upon. Master Chillingworth will put in the Socinians for a company of Christians; I hope Dr. Potter will not join with him; but the Archbishop dislikes this plot, as it comes from A. C. or at least shows the danger of it, and would be better advised in this point. He saith he doth not think it safest in a controverted point of faith to believe that only which the dissenting parties agree upon, or which the adverse party confesses; the Archbishop instances in the Doctrine between the orthodox and the Arian; if that rule be true which was mentioned before, then saith he 'tis safest 
The Arminians say no man is an Herelike who denies a point which is, or may be controverted, and so they may deny the whole creed. De harcticu quaritur, non qut ea qu● in scrip turis aperte decis● sunt convellere audent, sed qui e● qu● controversa sunt, aut controverti pessunt in dubium vo● cant Exam. Cens. cap. 24. p. 276. 
The Archbishop of Cant. his Relat. pag. 309, 310. Dr. Potter his Prayer.   for a Christian to believe that Christ is of like nature with God the Father, and be free from belief, that he is consubstantial with him, &c. His second instance is about the Resurrection. His third about the unity of the Godhead; if we will rest in the acknowledgement of one God (he means, and not confess the Trinity of Persons in the unity of the Godhead, for his Grace hath not framed his argument right) than Jews, Turks and Socinians will be as good Christians as we are. The fourth instance is about the verity of Christ's Godhead. The Archbishops Relat. p. 309, 310, &c. You see whither this charitable principle would lead us, we must take in the Socinian first, as a Christian, and then we may turn Turks with credit. I will conclude all with a part of Dr. potter's prayer; The Lord take out of his Church all dissension and discord, all Heresies, and schisms, all Abuses and false doctrines, all Idolatry, Superstition and tyranny, and unite all Christians in one holy band of truth and Peace, that so with one mind and one mouth we may all join in his service, and for ever glorify the holy name of the most holy and glorious Trinity.  
Amen. Amen. Amen.   

The Printer to the Reader.  
The Author being called from London to a business of higher conc●rnment could not oversee the press, but some few sheets being sent to him, he returned some brief Corrections which he hath desired me to communicate that the Reader might blot out those things which are redundant, and rectify such mistakes as alter the sense of the Author. Be pleased to take special notice of these that follow.  
S. G.   

Errata.  
In Pag. 2. lin. 6. r. he will not confess that they pag. 3. l. 19 dele (if Smalcius be Judge) in pag. 3. l. 6. marg. dele [Sociniani] in pag. 6. l. 18. r. [with him] but consider that Samosatenus p. 10. l. 20. dele [they] p. 27. l. 7. r. but the cause of the quarrel is that the Churches p. 28. l. penult. r. without the word. p. 33. l. ult. r. let them read my answer to Mr. webberley. p. 37. l. 7. dele therefore. p. 38. l. 10. r. istis quos ignorare.