THE CONSIDERATIONS WHICH OBLIGED PETER MANBY DEAN Of LONDON-DERY, TO EMBRACE THE Roman Catholic RELIGION.  
Humbly Dedicated to His GRACE the Lord Primate of IRELAND.  PSALM XLII. Judica me Deus, & discern causam meam de Gente non sancta. Emitte lucem tuam & veritatem tuam. Ipsa me deduxerunt & adduxerunt in Montem Sanctum tuum, & in Tabernacula tua. 

Dublin Castle the 11th. of March 1686/7.  
This following Discourse is Allowed to be Printed.  
Tho. Sheridan Secretary   
LONDON, reprinted for NATH. THOMPSON at the Entrance into the Old Spring Garden near Charing Cross. 1687.   

TO THE READER.  
When a Protestant rehearses this Article of his Creed, I believe one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, I would fain understand what Church he means? Whether the Church of England alone as established by Law, or the Church of England in Communion with other Churches? If the former, than his meaning is, I believe one Holy Protestant Church as settled in England by Act of Parliament. If the latter, I desire to know, with what other Church under the Heavens does the Church of England Communicate in Sacraments and Liturgy? Whether with Lutherans, Calvinists, Waldenses or Greek Church? If with none of all these, why does he pretend to believe One Holy Catholic Church? This Church Established by Law being Catholic, neither as to Time, nor Place; because not Visible any where for many Ages before Edward VI.  
Good Reader, if we believe ourselves Catholics, let us not fancy to ourselves a Church divided from all the rest of the World. And therefore I crave leave to ask St. Paul 's Question, What? came the Word of God out from you (the established Church) or came it unto you alone? 1 Cor. 14.36. Hath the Divine Goodness left all the World in Darkness except our Island? And Us too, for so many Ages until Henry VIII. took a fancy to Ann Bolen? Is the Catholic Church dwindled away to the Church of England? Perhaps you will Answer me, that by One Holy Catholic Church, you understand all the variety of Protestants; as Church of England-men; Presbyterians, Lutherans, Independants, Anabaptists, Fifth-Monarchy-men, Quakers, etc. But all these wanting that first and Essential Mark of the Catholic Church called Unity, cannot be That one Holy Society intended by our Creed. And moreover, this makes Protestancy so wand'ring and uncertain a thing, that I for my part do not well understand it. Can you say that Lutherans and the Church of England-men are the same in all Material points, the Lutherans holding a Corporal Presence in the Sacrament, and the Church of England denying it? Or that Calvinists and good Protestants are the same in all necessary matters, the former having no Orders of Priests and Bishops, consequently not true Sacraments, nor Power of Binding, and Absolving Sinners; Besides, the Catholic Church can never fail: But as for those Sects of Protestants, Who ever saw, or heard of them for many Ages before Henry VIII.  
Well, but you will insist upon it that God hath his People amongst all sorts of Protestants; which Answer I have sometimes heard out of the Mouths of Protestants. And it calls to my mind those excellent words of the late King's second Paper, viz. The Protestants are not of the Church of England as 'tis the true Church from whence there can be no Appeal, but because the Discipline of that Church is conformable at that present to their Fancies, which as soon as it shall contradict, or vary from, they are ready to embrace or join with the next Congregation of People, whose Discipline or Worship agrees with their own Opinion at that time, etc. And further, it brings into my remembrance these words of a certain Person, once of my Acquaintance; he was a Presbyterian, and gave his Son leave to go for New-England to seek his Fortune. Why, said a Friend of his, they are all Independants there, and your Son will be in danger of losing his Principles: I care not what he be, replied the other, so he be not a Papist.  
In a word (dear Reader) it concerns thee to understand aright that Article of thy Creed, I believe one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; Because the only way to be at rest in this World, and happy in the World to come, is to find out that Church upon whose Authority thou mayst rely. Noah 's Dove found no rest for the sole of her Foot, until she returned into the Ark. No more wilt Thou, but shalt be tossed too and fro upon the unstable Waters of Schism, until thou return into the Ark of one Holy Catholic Church. I pray recollect what St. Paul admonishes concerning Schism. I beseech you Brethren by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no Schisms among you, 1 Cor. 1.15. But that ye glorify God with one Mind, and one Mouth: That is, that ye serve God, not only saying the same things, but the same Words, especially about your Sacraments and Liturgy. For by one Spirit We (meaning all Christians,) are Baptised into one Body. Therefore he exhorts them to take heed of such Teachers as have no Mission or Authority for what they say, but only good Words and fair Speeches to deceive the hearts of the simple.  
In the following Discourse, I hope the Reader shall find it briefly, and yet fully made out to him, that the first Reformers had no Mission for what they did; nor any pretence to justify their Separation and breach of Unity, but only the Scripture as interpreted by themselves, not only without, but against the Authority of the present Catholic Church: Out of which a man may have all things, except Salvation, said St. Augustin. And further he shall find me pressing for an Answer to such Questions as these, viz.  
What Priesthood or Holy Orders had the first Reformers, but what they received from the Hands of Roman Catholic Bishops?  
Whether a Presbyterian Minister, having received Orders from a Protestant Bishop, can by virtue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church?  
Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by pretence of the Mission they received from her Bishops.  
Whether an Act of Parliament in France, Spain, or Germany, be not as good an Authority for Popery there, as in England for Protestancy? And in case there, be no Judge to determine, who have the true sense of Scripture, Roman Catholics or Protestants. Whether the Catholic sense be not as good as the Protestants?  
Finally, I entreat the Protestant Reader to peruse Dr. Heylin 's History of the Reformation, a Book that speaks bitterly enough against Popery; yet as to matter of Fact, so Honestly written, that, notwithstanding all Dr. Burnet 's industry to diminish its credit, it hath opened the Eyes of many good Protestants. See Dr. Burnet 's character of it in his Preface to his first Volume, where he censures it not for telling untruths in matter of History, but rather for speaking too much truth. He doubts not but Dr. Heylin was a sincere Protestant, but violently carried away by some particular conceits, (these are Burnet 's words,) and is not to be excused that he never vouched any Authority for what he writ, 〈◊〉 This is the worst he could say, and 'tis an untruth that Heylin writ u●●● uncertain grounds, as Dr. Burnet would insinuate. For thus Heylin himself will satisfy the Reader in the Preface to his History, viz. As fo● my performance in this work; in the first place I am to tell thee, tha● towards the raising of this Fabric, I have not borrowed my Materials only out of vulgar Authors, but searched into the Registers of th● Convocation, consulted all such Acts of Parliament as concerned 〈◊〉 purpose, advised with many Foreign Writers of great Name and Credit, exemplified some Records and Charters of no common Quality, many rare Pieces in the Famous Cottonian Library, and not 〈◊〉 few Debates and Orders of the Council Table: And next I am to l●● thee know, that in the whole carriage of this Work, I have assumed unto myself the freedom of a just Historian, delivering nothing for ● Truth without good Authority; but so delivering the Truth as t● witness for me, that I am neither byased by Love, or Hatred. If I seem sharp at any time, as sometimes I may, it is but in such case only, and on such occasions in which there is no good to be done b●● lenitives, etc. I have transcribed this passage, lest the Reader shoul● be imposed on by Burnet 's Character of the Ingenious Heylin, who●● History he would disparage to advance the Reputation of his own. And pray the Reader to observe, that Dr. Burnet does not instance one passage of any moment in all Heylin 's Works, wherein that he dares say he is false which certainly he would have done, had he found any such. But he delivers many things in such a manner and so strangely, that on● would think (says Burnet) he had been secretly set on by those 〈◊〉 the Church of Rome, though I doubt not but he was a sincere Protestant, etc. But what sort of People they were who set on Dr. Burnet● writ his History is very well known. I will instance some passages out 〈◊〉 Heylin, which I suppose did not please Dr. Burnet, viz. All that wa● done in order to a Reformation under Henry VIII. seemed to be accidental only, and by the by; rather designed on private ends that out of any settled purpose to Reform the Church, and therefore intermitted and reassumed again as those ends had variance. But no● the work was carried on with a constant hand, (under Edward VI the Prelates of the Church co-operating with the King and his Council, etc. And scarce had they brought it to this pass when King Edward died, whose death I cannot reckon for an Infelicity to the Church of England, (saith the Doctor.) For being ill Principled i● himself, and easily inclined to embrace such Councils as were offered to him, it is not to be thought but that the rest of the Bishoprics (before sufficiently impoverished,) must have followed the Fate of Durham, and the poor Church left as destitute of Lands and Ornaments, as when she came into the World in her natural nakedness. Nor was it like to happen otherwise in the following Reign, (to wit, of the Lady Jane Grey) if it had lasted longer than nine days wonder. For Dudley Duke of Northumberland, who then ruled the roast, and had before dissolved, and in hope devoured the Wealthy Bishopric of Durham, might easily have possessed himself of the Bishoprics of York and Carlisle, etc. Dudly's Son was Married to the said Lady Jane, Proclaimed Queen, to maintain whose Interest and Title, the poor remainder of the Church's Patrimony was in all probability (says Heylin) to have had been shared amongst those of that Party to make 'em sure; but the Wisdom of this great Achitophel (Dudley) being turned to foolishness, he fell into the hands of the public Hangman, etc. Reader, Behold the spirit of Reformation which governed those times. They are Heylin 's own words.  
But what is all this (you will say) to Cranmer, and other Clergymen, whose intentions of Reformation were sincere and honest? As for Cranmer, then, you may judge of his spirit by what I shall remark to you out of Doctor Burnet 's Records. Only observe the Duke of Somerset 's History in short, (thus out of Heylin●) Being condemned to die by his own Brethren of the Reformation, he was so defective in his judgement, as not to crave the benefit of his Clergy which might have saved his life: Whether it were some secret judgement on him from above, that he who had destroyed so many Churches, invaded the Estate of many Cathedrals, deprived many learned men of their means and livelihood (for being Papists) should want the benefit of his Clergy in his greatest extremity, etc. Observe the remarkable Fates of those grand Reformers. Now as for Cranmer 's spirit, take notice of it from his own words recorded by Dr. Burnet; which the Reader may consult, to save me the labour of transcribing, one or two Passages I cannot omit: Cranmer, with the rest of the English Bishops, being desired to return their Answers severally to this Question; Whether in the New Testament be required any Consecration of a Bishop or Priest? Cranmer Answers thus under his hand, viz. In the New jestament, he that is appointed to be a Priest or Bishop, needeth no Consecration by the Scripture, for Election thereunto is sufficient. In which assertion all the rest of the Bishops, except one, were against him.  
And being consulted about another Question, Whether Bishops and Priests only may Excommunicate by God's Law? To which he returns this Answer under his Hand, viz. A Bishop or Priest, by the Scripture, is neither commanded nor forbidden to Excommunicate, but where the Laws of any Country give them Authority to Excommunicate, there they ought to use the same in such Crimes as the Laws have such Authority in. And where the Laws of the Country forbidden them, there they have no Authority at all. And they that be no Priests may also Excommunicate, if the Law allow thereunto. Here he had the spirit of Hobbs of Malmsbury.  
And about another Question, whether by Authority of Christ's words, Quorum remiseritis peccata, remittuntur illis, Christians are bound to confess their secret sins to a Priest? He answered in the Negative against all the rest of the Bishops, except one. Let the Reader consult Burnet, and compare him with Heylin; in both which it will appear, that the Grand Reformers, Somerset, Dudley, etc. Made their Breakfast only of Abbey Lands, intending to Dine upon the Bishop's Lands. Burnet strains all his wit to palliate their Do, and paint them out to Advantage. Heylin represents them honestly for the most part, and in their own colours; and in my poor opinion, writes more Truth, and better. English: He was full of a Generous Indignation to see so much Stripping and Plundering of God's House under pretence of Resorming it.  Tu abominaris Idola & Sacrilegium facis. Rom. 1. 22. 
FAREWEL.   

May it please your Grace,  
I Humbly beg leave to send Your Grace this short Account of my Reconcilement to the Roman Catholic Church. God be praised it was not any consideration of Temporal Interest that inclined me to it, as all that have known me these several years past can witness. But having often reflected on the uncertainty and variety of the Protestant Spirit, and perused the Books of Catholics without prejudice, especially the Mass itself, I found myself deceived by the Reports which I had entertained of Catholic Religion.  
THere are three Points chief wherein I could never satisfy myself, since I began to Study the Controversy between both Churches. One is the Authority or Mission of the first Reformers. The second is the want of Confession in the Church of England. The Third is the Answer given by Protestants to that Question in His late Majesty's Papers, Where is that one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which we do profess to believe in the two Creeds.  
As to the first, I have seen Dr. Bramhall's and Mr. Mason's Vindications of the Church of England; but could never find any satisfactory Answer to this Question, Who Authorised the first Reformers to Preach their Protestant Doctrine, and Administer their Protestant Sacraments? Their Priestly or Episcopal Character, whether valid or no, I meddle not with to prevent Disputes: Although I think it no easy matter to find out who Ordained the first Protestant Bishops; there being none to do it except Roman Catholic Prelates, who never use to Consecrate any Protestants. This Testimony I lately met with in the Records annexed to Dr. Burnet's second Volume of his History of the Resormation.  
In the Month of March anno 1553. Queen Mary sent this, amongst other Articles, to the Bishop of London, viz. Touching such persons as were heretofore (meaning the days of Edward the VI) promoted to any Orders after the new sort and fashion of Orders, considering they were not ordered in very deed; the Bishop of the Diocese finding otherwise, sufficiency, and ability in those men, may supply that thing which wanted in them before, and then according to his discretion admit them to Minister, etc. This Royal Testimony, with the Honest Protestant Reader, will not be despisable. I shall not insist upon it, but only observe at present, that Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Latimer Bishop of Worcester, at the time of their Confecration were professed Roman Catholics in all points, except. perhaps the Pope's Supremacy; But afterwards turning Protestants, and pronouncing the Church of Rome Idolatrous, I would fain know by whose Authority.  
The truth is, they were first Ordained Catholic Bishops according to the Roman Pontifical, and afterwards made themselves Protestant Bishops. But I understand not how a Man can forsake the Church of England, and Preach Presbyterian Doctrine by virtue. of his Protestant Orders; nor how any man can justify his Protestant Doctrine by Authority of his Popish Mission.  
This was Cranmer and Latimer's case, who at the time of their. Consecration (which was in the days of Henry the VIII.) professed Seven Sacraments; whether they believed so many, is a Question: Afterwards, anno 1536. retrenched them to Three, that is to say. Baptism, Penance, and the Lord's Supper: Then to Two, anno 1548 By whose Authority or Mission, I cannot tell. So that Protestancy seem to me to have been born into the World not like Honestly begotten Children, whose Parents are known, but rather like a By-blow whose Father is doubtful. I have known some Pre byrerians; when questioned about their Mission, pretend they did receive it from the Church of England Prelates; But being further interrogated, Did that Church Authorise you to Preach against her Sacraments or Liturgy? There was no Answer to be had. I know it will be said that the Protestant Religion is Authorised by Act of Parliament, and so is not Presbytery. A Parliamentary Mission then our first Reformers had, and no other that I can find. But whether the Parliament, being a Civil Authority, has Power to send Missioners to Preach the Gospel, and Administer Sacraments, I do not well understand. If they have I suppose every Member of Parliament may Preach, and Administer Sacraments if he pleases; because no man can give that Authority unto others which he hath not himself. And if English Parliaments may Preach, and Administer Sacraments, I doubt not but the French, Spanish, Scotch, and Irish may do the same; and than what Unity of Spirit, or agreement in Faith Christians are like to have, I could never understand.  
To this, two Answers are wont to be given, which I will not conceal from the Reader. One is, that Cranmer and his Associates were sent and ordered by the Roman Pontifical to instruct the people according to the Scriptures. This is the Answer of Dr. Burnet. The Church (saith he) was overrun with Errors and Corruptions; this Cranmer saw, and was obliged to undeceive the people! Very good. But I entreat the Reader to inspect the Records aforesaid, published by the Doctor himself, and annexed to the first and second Volume of his History: where he shall find Cranmer, and one or two Bishops more pretending Errors and Corruptions, and driving on a Reformation against the Major Vote of the English Bishops. He shall find the same Cranmer at the time of his Consecration, owning and professing those very Doctrines which afterwards he called Errors and Corruptions; so that still I must ask the old Question, by whose Authority did he condemn that Church from whom he received his Mission and Holy Orders? I desire to know whether an honest Man can Preach against the Liturgy, Sacraments, or Constitution of any Church, by virtue of any Commission he received from it? And whether such Preacher be not liable to the Censures of that Church? Did ever any Church Authorise her Priests or Bishops to go and Preach the Gospel according to their own private Sense and Conscience, in contradiction to her declared Doctrine and Worship; Does the Church of England give any such Power at this day? No, by no means. Read the Form appointed by her for the Ordination of a Priest, where the Bishop is to interrogate the Party thus, viz. Do you think in your heart, that you be truly called according to the Order of this Church of England, to the Order and Ministry of Priesthood? The Answer is, I think so. Will you then (saith the Protestant Bishop) give your diligence always to Minister the Doctrine and Sacraments as this Church and Realm hath received the same according to the Commandments of God? The Answer is, I will do so by the help of God.  
So that, as no honest Man can turn Presbyterian or Independent. Preacher, by virture of his Protestant Mission; so neither can he Preach Protestant Doctrine, by pretence of a Commission he received from the Church of Rome. If any body should ask me, what if the. Church be manifestly corrupted with Superstition and Idolatry? In this case, why may not able Men Preach without any Mission? I must beg leave to ask him again, what if the Church finds those Men of Abilities manifestly intoxicated with mistakes of Holy Scripture? With a Spirit of perverseness, and a desire of change? Or perhaps an evil Eye at the Lands of the Church? What is to be done in this case? Let the Scripture (he will say) determine the business: But the Scripture admits of various Interpretations: and I would fain know what Rebel or Heretic shall ever be convicted, that must be tried by a Law whereof himself must be the Interpreter.  
Well, but Cranmer, tho' he had no Mission to Reform, was perhaps a Holy Man: as for his Sanctity, the Reader may be pleased to see him subscribing to a Letter in Foxes Acts and Monuments for Excluding his Lawful Sovereign the Princess Mary, from Succession to the Crown: And afterwards Recanting the Protestant Religion, and relapsing into it again, when he saw no hopes of a Reprieve. The truth is, when I reflect that Cromwell and He were the chief Engineers of the Reformation, first to Divorce Henry VIII. from his most Virtuous and Innocent Wife Queen Katherine, then to Marry him to Anne Bolen, and afterwards to dissolve that Marriage: Then to destroy Religious Houses, and hang up the poor Abbots; disband four or five Sacraments; set the People a madding after new Lights: I cannot but look upon those two Politicians as the Ringleaders of all that Confusion and Mischief, which has since broke out upon the Stage of Great Britain.  
So much for the former Answer, that Cranmer and his Associates were sent, and ordained by the Roman Pontifical to teach the People according to the Scriptures, which they did according to their own Sense of the Scriptures.  
If it be said that he Preached no new Doctrine, nor Administered any new Sacraments, but only the Primitive Doctrine and Sacraments of Jesus Christ, according to the Sense of the Ancient Fathers, which is the second Answer: I pray the Reader to remember, that this was the very Answer of Luther, Socinus, Zuinglius, Calvin, and other Reformers. I am not disputing what Doctrine he Preached, but who sent him to Preach his Protestant Doctrine, and Adminster his Protestant Sacraments? 'Tis not his Doctrine, but Mission I am now enquiring after. How shall they Preach except they be sent? saith St. Paul 'Tis not a pretence of true Doctrine, without External and Lawful Mission, that makes a Man a Preacher of the Gospel. The necessity of Mission appears from God's own word, Jerem. 23. I have not sent these Prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they Prophesied, vers. 21. Therefore they shall not profit this People at all, saith the Lord, verse 32.  
There are but two sorts of Mission in Holy Scripture, the one Ordinary, the other Extraordinary: The former is the Licence and Approbation of the Church in being: The latter is the immediate Voice and Inspiration of God himself, ever attested by Miracles, Prediction of future and public Events, etc. Now, as for the first Preachers of Reformation, some body must send them by an Ordinary or Extraordinary Commission, or they must run on their own heads. Fur & latro est (says St. Cyprian) qui à nemine Missus nisi à seipso: That is to say, he enters not by the Door as honest Men do, but seeks Windows, Corners, or Byways of his own; as if the Divine Providence were wanting (when necessity requires) to send Preachers into the Church, or to furnish them with sufficient Credentials, so as to leave us without excuse. Did not the Hand of God strike Vzzah with sudden death, for presuming to put forth his hand, un-commanded, to support the Ark from falling, 2 Sam. 6. And King Vzzah with a Leprosy to the day of his death, for Offering Incense which appertained to the Priests alone? Are not these things Recorded for our instruction?  
The not considering this matter, hath brought a World of confusion upon these Kingdoms; and till the people can be brought to understand it, we are never like to see an end of our Religious Distractions. For why may not I (may a Presbyterian Minister say) having the same Authority of Scripture as Cranmer pretended to, Preach against the Superstition of Common-Prayer, as well as He against the Idolatry of the Mass.  
The second point wherein I was disatisfyed, was the want of Confession to a Priest. I found Protestant Sermons had some Authority with the people, but not much for lack of this Curb upon their Vices, Catholics commit sin, 'tis true: but call themselves to an account for it, by Confession and Submission to their Ghostly Fathers. Protestants sin likewise, without calling themselves to any such reckoning; because they can make a shift without it.  
I have divers times discoursed with Protestant Ministers, and some Protestant Bishops about this matter. I was sorry to find no Harmony in their Opinions. Some said it was a thing allowed by the Church of England, as very expedient in some cases, but no matter of necessity. Others thought it but a Picklock of secrets, and a matter of ill consequence. But when I urged that the Church of England seems to require it in her Offices for the Communion and Visitation of the Sick; the reply was, she does it with this Proviso, If a man be troubled with any doubts or scruples; Which reply did but add more to my dissatisfaction: For thought I, is Confession nothing else but to be resolved in our scruples and doubts? I have sometimes wished her Exhortation before the Communion, otherwise worded, then saying, If there be any of you which cannot quiet his own Conscience, let him come to Me, or some other Learned Minister of God's Word, and open his grief, etc. Which words seem to allow as much, as that sinners may satisfy their own Consciences well enough without troubling themselves for the Absolution of a Priest, although a Priest may be had.  
In short, I confess my dulness understands neither the Piety nor Policy of leaving off the practice of a thing so approved and frequented by all the Christian World, except the people of our Islands, and some few others that call themselves Reform. And that only for some Abuses which possibly may attend it. By this means the Church of England appears to me to have lost that Interest in the Consciences of the People, which both the Roman and Greek Priests are happy in at this day.  
And what if some Catholics are never the better for it? What are many Protestants the better for all the Sermons they hear, and Sacraments they receive? If we confess our sins, God is faithful, and just to forgive us our sins, saith St. John. Faithful and just to what? Even to his own promise which he hath thrice repeated in the Gospel, Whosoevers sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them. But another promise, that he will do it without the Ministry of his Priests, we read not of in the New Testament. I pray the Reader to consider whether private Sinners in the Church of England do not offend God at a much cheaper rate than in the Church of Rome; since in the Church of Rome they are bound to some Penance: But in the Church of England they may Confess to their Ministers, and do Penance if they will; or if they will not, they may let it alone. If they cannot satisfy their own Consciences (saith the Common-prayer) let them come to me, or some other Discreet and Learned Minister, and open their Grief, etc. That Christians may receive the Communion of Christ's Body and Blood without a previous Confession and Absolution by a Priest, was never heard of in the Catholic Church until the days of Henry the VIII.  
The third difficulty was the Answer given by Protestants to that Question in the late King's Papers, Where is that one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which we do profess to believe in the two Creeds? Was there any such Society as one Holy Catholic Church extant upon the face of the Earth when Cranmer began his Reformation? And what Provinces of the Earth did this Church inhabit? This is a plain Question, and desires no Answer but of the ubi or place where to find it, This Society, if it be not an Idea Platonica, must appear somewhere: And when That is known, the next doubt is, Did Cranmer believe himself a Member of it? and if so, I would fain know who gave him Authority to Reform this one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church; To set up Altar against Altar, etc. If there were no such Church extant upon the face of the Earth, as there must be none, in case she were lapsed into Idolatry, what became of our Saviour's Prediction, that the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against his Church? I am told that Dr. S—eet has answered these Questions, by saying, that the Church of Rome are Idolaiers, and yet a true Church at the same time: Which Answer I confess I do not understand. For what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols, (saith St. Paul) and what concord hath Christ with Belial? For ye are the Temple of the living God, what communion hath light with darkness? 2 Cor. 6.16. What? Idolaters, and yet a true Church? 'tis as much as to say, they are in the way to Heaven and Hell at the same time. But such Answers must the given when there are no better. I confess I never read this Answer in him, I only have it by Hear-say. Surely, to teach and practise Idolatry, destroys the very Being of a Christian Church. And it the Church of Rome be no Christian Church, there is an end of the Episcopal Succession of the Church of England, and consequently of the Church itself.  
To conclude, that which obliged me most of all to the Church of Rome, was the perusal of her Books of Devotion; such as Saint Francis Sales Bishop of Geneva, his Introduction to a Devout Life. Neirembergius of the difference betwixt Temporal and Eternal. Lewis Gratensis of the Love of God. Kempis of the following of Christ, etc. Especially the Mass itself; which I read without prejudice, and compared the Spirit of Piety, which I found there, with the Spirit of Reformation.  
Instead of Idolatry, I found the most Elevated and Judicious Prayers to the Holy Trinity; concluding in the Name or our Saviour Jesus Christ; besides the daily Sacrifice offered up to Almighty God, according to his own appointment, Do this in remembrance of me. All this I observed, and then said within myself, God forgive the wickedness of those people who quarrel at this, and persecute it with so blind and furious an aversion. So did the Jews Crucify our Saviour.  
What fault can any ingenious Protestant find with This, or any other Prayer of the Mass? Suscipe sancte Pater, omnipotentes aeterne Deus hanc immaculatam hostiam quam ego indignus famulus tuus offero tibi Deo meo vivo & vero, etc. Accept, O Holy Father Almighty and Eternal God, this unspotted Sacrifice which I thy unworthy Servant offer unto thee, my living and true God, for my innumerable sins, offences and negligences, and for all here present, as also for all Faithful Christians both living and dead, that it may avail both Me and Them unto everlasting life, Amen. If this be the Mass, who but a perverse ill-natured Fanatic can except against it?  
As for the Confiteor said at the beginning of Mass, the Reader shall find Protestants objecting nothing against it, but what Presbyterians do against that Canticle in the Common-Prayer-Book, called, benedict omnia opera. O Ananias, Azarias and Misael, Praise ye the Lord, is a● rank Popery with the Presbyterians, as any thing in the Mass, or Litanies of our Lady. For what's that (say they) but to invocate dead men, who don't hear us. Thus they will interpret it in their own Sense, and not in the Sense of the Church of England.  
In a word, I found the Church of England beholding to the Mass for the best Flowers in her Communion Service. And since some Protestants will believe nothing but their Senses, let them read it as I have done, and believe their own eyes. The objection of its being said in the Latin Tongue, allows every man to hear it that understands Latin. And as for unlearned Catholics, if the Truth were known, they understand as much or more of it than Illiterate Protestants do of the Common-Prayer. What does the Protestant Multitude understand of the Predictions of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, read in their Churches by appointment of the Common-Prayer? How many Expositions of the Mass are extant in Print by the commandment of the Church? So that no man can be ignorant of it that desires to be informed. How much more Universal and Vulgar is the Latin than the English Tongue? Had not the Jewish Church, (being then the only true Church in the World) almost all her Scriptures and public Service for fourteen Generations, that is to say, from the Captivity of Babylon unto Christ in the old Hebrew? A Language not then understood by the common People. Did our Saviour or his Apostles ever reprehend the Jews for this? or for not Translating their Scriptures into the vulgar Language? If the Service of God must be said in the Maternal Language of every Nation, where shall an Englishman in France or Spain, that understands not the Language, go to serve God upon the Lord's Day? This would destroy all community of Sacraments and Liturgy between the Members of the Catholic Church; which being one Body or Society of men, cannot be like the bvilders of Babel, who would not understand one another's Language. Now I beseech you Brethren, (saith St. Paul,) by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no Schisms among you, that ye may with one mind and one mouth Glorify God, 1 Cor. 1.10. Rom. 15.6.  
In fine, let the Reader compare that Devotion which Catholics pay to the Sacrifice of the Mass, with that which most Protestants show to the Common-prayer, and then see how much better we are by Reforming the Mass into English. As for St. Paul's 14th. Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians, I humbly think it not well understood by Protestants. If any man be ignorant, saith he, let him be ignorant, Wherefore Brethren, covet no Prophecy, and forbidden not to speak with tongues, ver. 39 God is not the Author of Confusion, but of Peace, ver. 33.  
Upon the whole matter, I desire to be informed whether the Protestant Church had any other foundation (setting aside an Act of Parliament,) than every man's own Reason, or which is the same thing, the Scripture interpreted by every man's Reason. There are but two Bases whereupon to settle ourselves, the Scripture, and Fathers expounded by my own Reason, or the Scriptures and Fathers expounded by the voice of the present Visible Church. This later is Popish, and cannot support a Reformed Fabric.  
I have sometimes wondered at this Assertion of Calvin, Instit. lib. 4. cap. 1. (so incoherent with his own Principles of Reformation,) Extra Ecclesiae gremium nulla speranda salus nec remissio peccatorum, quia non est alius in vitam ingressus; Which I think may be thus rendered into English: He that will enter into Life, let him mortify the pride of his own Reason, and humbly cast himself at the feet of the Catholic Church. If this be the meaning of his words, as it must be in case he believed any such thing as one Holy Catholic Church; how he will justify his Reformation at the day of Judgement, I cannot imagine.  
In this Paper therefore I presume not to assert my own Reason (which I confess to be as weak as any body else can think it,) but the Authority of the Church against the Arrogance of the first Reformers. This difference I understand betwixt the spirit of Catholics and of Heretics; the former make use of their Reason with Submission, the later with Contradiction and Petulancy against the Church, and against the express words of Christ; He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me.  
Cranmer had no Mission from Heaven, nor yet from the present Visible Church to authorise his do; but made himself Judge, Witness, and Accuser. So did Luther, so did Calvin, Socinus, Knipperdoling, etc. How they will Answer it at the last day, I cannot understand.  
A word or two more before I make an end. I know divers Loyal Persons of the Church of England, who are Protestant's by the Tyranny of Prejudice or Interest, but Catholics by Inclination: Of them I beg leave to ask a few Questions. What Priesthood or Holy Orders have Protestants, but what they Confess to have received from Roman Catholic Bishops? Who gave them Authority to pronounce themselves Sound Members, and the Church of Rome a Corrupt Arm of the Catholic Church? Did not the Presbyterians, anno 1641. pretend the very same warrant of Scripture for Reforming the Church of England? And the Independants for supplanting the Presbyterians, anno 1647. The Presbyterians (said Hugh Peter) are no other than Gibeonites, who may help to hue Stones, and square Timber for a more Glorious Reformation.  
Now as for Roman Catholics, do they ever say Mass to any other Object, but the Living God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Read the Catechism of the Council of Trent, and see whether they attribute any thing to Angels or Saints, but as the Ministers and Favourites of the Living God, receiving from him whatever understanding they may have of our Affairs upon earth. The Angels must know our Affairs, because They are ministering Spirits, sent forth for the good of those who shall be Heirs of Salvation; And because they rejoice at the Conversion of Sinners: And have glorified Saints no Communication or Intelligence with the Angels? As for the Images of Christ's humane Nature, see the 25th. Session of the Council of Trent, and inquire whether Roman Catholics pay any more respects to Them, than Protestants do to the Elements of Bread and Wine, which (say they) are but a Figure or Image of Christ's Body and Blood. Omnis Superstitio in imaginum usu sacro tollatur, saith that Council; Let all Superstition be taken away in the use of Images; and then gives it in charge to all Bishops to look to it. The Church of England Protestant's are every jot as offensive to us (say the Presbyterians) kneeling before the Elements of Bread and Wine, as the Pupists kneeling before the Images of Christ. I humbly recommend to Protestant's the perusal of a late Book, Entitled, Pax Vobis: And of another, styled, Considerations upon the Council of Trent, by R. H.  
I say no more, only give thanks to Almighty God with all my heart, that I am escaped out of the unstable waters of Schism into the Ark of Christ's Church. And I beseech him to inspire me with that Spirit of Devotion which I observed in the Mass, and other Books of Catholics. As for the ill practices of some, and the ill Opinions of other Roman Catholics, which Protestants are wont to charge upon the whole Church, I pass it over as no Argument at all: All Protestants are no more Saints, than all Papists. In the Council of Trent an unprejudiced Reader shall find nothing but what is Judicious and Pious. And let him view Popery not as Protestants, but as Papists represent it, who should best know their own Religion.  
In the Church of Rome he shall find variety of Religious Orders, but no Schism, nor discord about their Sacraments or Liturgy. In veste Ecclesiae varietas est, scissura non est. No confusion of Sects, nor disobedience to Superiors; but all things performed in excellent order, and God Almighty served, as he is the Creator and Emperor of the World, with Reverence and distance.  O quam dilecta sunt Tabernacula tua Domine virtutum! concupiscit & deficit Anima mea in Atria Domini. Beati qui habitant in domo tuâ, in Saecula Saeculorum laudabunt te. Amen. Psal. 84.  

P: S:  
IF any Protestant Reader, instead of a material Answer to this Discourse, shall think fit to revile the Author, 'tis but what I expect, and what I intent to take no notice of. But I entreat him to read the following Queries without his Spectacles of Prejudice and Interest.  

Dubia quaedam super Reformatione Anglicanâ.  
ECclesia Anglicana vel est tota Ecclesia Catholica vel membrum illius, si membrum duntaxat, ostende mihi sub sole Ecclesiam vel coetum cujus Sacramenta amplectitur, nisi sit à reliquo corpore absc●ssum?  
Num recipit Sacramenta Lutheranorum vel Calvinistarum?  
Vnde Missas est Cranmerus primus ille Reformator Ecclesiae Anglicana? quis misit illum ad praedicandum Evangelium suum Reformatum? utrum licitum ei vel honestum fuerit rebella●e adversus Ecclesiam Romanam virtute Missionis ab ea acceptae.  
An liceat Episcopo vel Ministro ab Ecclesia Anglicana fugitivo praedicare contra eam obtentu Ministerii ab ea co●●a●i?  
Vtrum defectus Missionis sit error in fundamentis? ratio dubitandi est, quia furtum & latrocinium est non ingredi per Ostium in Ovile.  
Vtrum Cranmerus intravit per Ostium Parliamentarium vel forsan per Portam Scripturarum? at haec est cantilena omnium Sectariorum Scripturas sibi vendicantium. Quaero igitur nonne varius & multiplex est Scripturarum sensus? unde necesse est assignari Judicem aliquem qui verum sensum à falso dijudicet, nisi mavis altercari in aeternum.  
Ad haec Postulata saepius quaesivi responsum sed nullum hactenus inveni. Si dixeris (quod a multis obtendi solet) Cranmerum cum suis sodalibus Ordines Sacros accepisse a Christo & Apostolis per manus Episcopo um Pontificiorum, sequitur Episcopos Pontificios suos etiam Ordines a Christo & Apostolis accepisse. Sunt ergo veri pastores ac proinde Audiendi. Hoc respouso videntur mihi jugulare causam suam Protestants. At, inquies, Episcopi Pontificii ordines suos non Doctrinam acceperunt a Christo & Apostolis; egregie. Cupio ergo doceri quâ uthoritate insurrexerunt Primi Reformatores adversus Doctrinam Ecclesiae Romanae? aut hic nodus solvendus est, aut simul agis & Judicem & testem & Accusatorem.  
Sed plerumque responderi solet, cuilibet Genti competere jus reformandi seipsam: esto. Ergo pari jure Resormata fuit gens Scotica ad Calvinismum, Saxonica ad Lutheranismum, etc. deinde jalsum est quod sacta erat mutatio Religi●nis in Anglia ex vo●o Genti & cleri Anglicani, sed ex Vertigine pauco●●m res novas quaerentium sub pueritia Edwardi Sexti. Lege illo●um temporum Annales, ubi palam est Episcopos sere omnes (Cranmero & paucis aliis exceptis) a novo Evangelio abhorruisse  
Caeterum dato hoc & non concesso, nempe Reformatam fuisse Religionem ex ment potioris partis Cle●i Anglicani; nescio an licuit Ecclesiae Anglicanae, cum esset Membrun. Ecclesiae Catholicae, semet abscindere a Reliquo corpo e. Si dixeris hoc sactum fuisse non vitio Ecclesiae Anglicanae sed Romanae corruptelas suas Orbi obirudentis, respondeo breviter, quod se Judice omnis haereticus absolvitur. Praeterea animadvertat Lector hoc ipsum solere objici ab omnibus Presbyterianis defectionem suam ab Ecclesia Angicana excusantibus, vimirum so reliquisse non nisi errores & corruptelas Anglicanae Religionis.  
An per Vniversum Orbem depravatus fuit verus Dei cultus ante ortum Cranmerum? si non, dic mihi ubinam gentium exti erit? An apud Waldenses? a● n●scio unde Missus est Petro Waldo Alercator Lugdunensis? nec scio an ●j●s Sacramenta placeant Ecclesiae Anglicanae.  
 um ho●ie extra Regnum Angliae & Hiberniae nullus extet purus & Apostolicus Dei cultus.  
Vtrum liceat populo Anglicano comminisci sibi Ecclesiam a toto Orbe divisam? quae Authoritate damnat Sacramenta & Ritus Ecclesiae Romanae?  
Vtrum Cranmerus fuit primus Archiepiscopus Ecclesiae Anglicanae? Ratio dubitandi est, quia Archiepiscopi Cantuarienses per novem antecedentia saecula fuerunt omnes Pontificii. Si primus fuit, ergo desuit ei successio Episcopalis, quia primus suae Sectae nuli successit. An fuerit leguimus P●stor cui deëarant Successio Missio & Miracula?  
Vtrum sit ve●a Ecclesia quae non h●bet legitimos Pastores? Vel an possint esse vera Sacramenta apud Pastores non veros? Si non, ergo praestat communicare sub una specie cumCatholicis quam sub nulla cum Reformatis.  
Vtrum 39 Articuli Ecclesiae Anglicanae sint Articuli si ei vel non? Sinon; ergo nemo tenetur fidem habere iliis sub periculo salutis. Si sic, ergo Ecclesia Anglicana novos excogitavit sidei Articulos praeter duodecim illos a Ch●isto & Apostolis institutos.  
Vtrum Religio Reformata sit divisibilis in semper divisibiles?  
An in re Eucharistica Argumentum a sensibus ductum sit fallibile? Ratio dubitandi est quia Serpens primos fefellit Parentes suadendo illis ut suis crederent oculis, scilicet comederent de ligno scientiae quia erat pulchrum oculis. Quod si ab oculis suis deceptum fuit genus humanum, quaeso unde pus fidei meruerunt caeteri sensus?  
Vtrum Ecclesia Anglicana mutabilis sit ad nutum Parliamenti?  
Vtrum Spiritus Calvini negantis ac Lutheri affirmantis Corporalem Christum praesentiam in Eucharistia sint idem? Si diversi, ergo uterque a Deo esse non potest.  
Nonnè impudentissimus fuit. Johannes Calvinus usurpato sibi munere reformandi Orbem cum Juvenis esset vigenti sex annorum idque absque omni praetextu Mi●aculorum, quod nè ipse Christus susceperat ante annum trigesimum?  
An ex utero Reformationis essluxerint Caedes, rapinae, direptiones templorum, tumultus, Schismata & bella civilia quae emerserunt Anno 1641.  
Vtrum Africa feracior sit Monstrorum quam Britannia Fanaticorum, ubi nulli non licèt intelligere Scripturas pro suo judicio discretionis?  
Vtrum Elisabethae ex Annâ Bolenâ suscepta, vivente adhuc Regina Katherinâ, legitimos habuit natales?  
Vtrum laudanda sit sapientia Henrici VIII. qui expulso uno Papá Romano suscitavit infinitos Papas ex suis subditis;  
Qua Autoritate uxorem suam Katherinam repudiavit Henricus? Sut, vel alienâ? Si suâ quidni possint & alii Reges pro libitu suas dimittere uxores? Quod si Maria filia ejus ex Katherina fuit legitima Regni haeres, ergo Elizabetha non fuit; quia Henrico non licuit habere duas uxores simul.  
Si nefas sit mutare Religionem Parliamentariâ Autoritate stabilitam, und● licuit Elizabethae religionem evertere Catholicam Regni legibus stabilitam? 14 Episcopos Catholicos è sedibus suis expulit Elizabetha ob recusatum juramentum Primatûs. At quomodo poterant jurare eam esse caput Ecclesiae, quando non poterant jurare eam esse caput Regni?  
Nonnè Liturgiam suam suffuratus est Cranmerus ex Missali, Rituali & Breviario Romano?  
Nonnè Juramento Primatus tenentur Protestantes obtemperare Regi ut supremo Gubernatori tam in omnibus spiritualibus sive Ecclesiasticis rebus aut causis quam in temporalibus, etc. quid sibi volunt hac verba tam in omnibus spiritualibus quam temporalibus rebus aut causis, nisi ut Protestantes debeant Regi praestare omnimodam obedientiam tam Religiosam quam civilem? Nonne ergo secundum hoc juramentum oportet eos esse Catholicos cum Rege Catholico, Calvinanos cum Calvinano. Arianos cum Ariano? Dico secundum hoc juramentum, quiae Regia Majestas est unicus supremus Gubernator tam in omnibus spiritualibus quam temporalibus rebus. Haec verba agnoscunt in Rege primatum tam spiritualem quam civilem. At unde constabit ejus Jurisdictio spiritualis absque protestate clavium?  
Dices, obsequendum est Rege quantum licet per leges Dei & Regni; esto. Ergo Rex non est supremum sub Christo caput sed Scriptura & Statuta Regni. At si quod lis surrexerit inter Regem & subditos de ve●o sensu Scripturae, Quis erit Judex? Spiritus privatu an non? hinc, ni fallor, origo & fomes bellorum civilium.  
Cur Reformationem tam avid è amplexi sunt tot nobiles sub Elizabetha? Ob conscientiam an ob lucrum praediorum Ecclesias●icorum?  
Cur plebs Anglicana novitatis avida odit Papismum? forsan quia Papismus non est novitas.  
Ecclesia Anglicana vel est fallibilis vel infallibilis, si fallibilis sit (uti fatentur omnes) ergo non est ●undata super Petram, quia potest falli & fallere.  
Vtrum sapienter ●ecit Cardinalis Wolsae●s evertendo Monasteria ut fundaret Collegia? ratio dubitandi est quia lignum scientia non fuit lignum vitae.  
Nonn● in Ecclesia Anglicana desideratur versio Bibliorum multò emendatior & correctior? quia quam plurimis in locis Vi●iantur textus in favorem carnis & gra●iam Schismatis; exempli caus●, Gal. 5.17. Dan. 4.24. Vbi Propheta alloquitur Regem Nebuchadonosor sic, quamobrem, Rex, consilium meum placeat tibi, & peccata tua eleemosynis redime, & iniquitates tuas misericordiis Pauperum. Quem textum ita reddunt Biblia Anglicana satis vitiose. Wherefore O King, break off thy Sins by Righteousness, and thy Iniquities by showing Mercy to the Poor. Cum verti oportuit, redeem thy Sins by Alms-deeds, and thine Iniquities by showing Mercy to the Poor. Praeterea mal● reddantur haec verba Sancti Pauli ad Corinthios, 1. Cor. 7.9. Quod si non se continent, nubant; But if they cannot contain, let them Marry? Vbi haec vox (cannot) excogitabatur in favorem carnis.  
Rursus verba Christi corrumpuntur, Mat. 19.11. propter indulgentiam carnis sic, non omnes capiunt verbum istud sed quibus datum est. All Men [cannot] receive this saying, but such to whom it is given. Deinde verba Jobi c. 7.1. & alii textus non pauci praesertim, Exod. 20.4. in odium imaginis Christi. Non facies tibi sculptile. Quae vox sculptile à 70 bene vertitur Idolum, quia Deus non prohibuit imagines sed Idota.    
FINIS.