THE JUDGEMENT Of the late ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH, And I Primate of Ireland, 

1. Of the Extent of Christ's death and satisfaction, etc.  
2. Of the Sabbath, and observation of the Lords day.  
3. Of the Ordination in other reformed Churches:   With a Vindication of him from a pretended change of opinion in the first; Some Advertisements upon the latter; And, in prevention of further injuries, A Declaration of his judgement in several other subjects. By N. Bernard, D. D. and Preacher to the Honourable society of Grays-inn, London.  Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost: Joh. 6. 12. 
London, Printed for John Crook, at the Ship in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1658.   

TO THE READER.  
THE first Treatise containing the Judgement of the most eminent Primate of Ireland, concerning the True Intent and Extent of Christ's death, and satisfaction upon the Cross, was written by him, at the request of a Friend, a little before the Synod of Dort: a Copy of which being taken, was (unknown to him) carried thither by a Member of it: upon the multiplying of them exceptions were taken by divers, and by one Pen contracted into a Letter to him; which the second Treatise is an answer unto: both these I had from him about twenty eight years agone, and now upon the desire of such, whose judgements I subscribe unto, and the prevention of other mistaken Copies, which possibly might be produced, I have been hastened to the printing of them. That which hath given the occasion, is the mistake lately published of the change of his Judgement in it, a little before his death: But by the view of these, I believe the Author will receive satisfaction. In the vindication of which two Letters, being desired from me long agone, (which have been hitherto deferred the public) I have been importuned to permit them to be annexed.  
Unto which I shall here add but this, That not only in the forenamed subjects, but in the rest relating to the Remonstrants, the Primate concurred with Bishop Davenant, whose Lectures Demorte Christi, & praedestinatione & reprobatione, he caused to be published, only that little Treatise added in the conclusion of it, entitled Sententia Ecclesiae Anglicanae de praedestinatione & capitibus annexis, etc. taken to be Bishop Davenants, and employed so by the Printer (ab eodem, uti fertur, Authore, which possibly hath occasioned the apprehension of a change in him also) I have been assured by a Person of Eminency, (who affirms it out of his own knowledge) that it was Bishop Overals.  
And now upon this occasion I have thought fit to publish a Learned Letter of the Primates wrote many years agone to Doctor Twisse, concerning the Sabbath, and, Observation of the Lords day; having two Copies, corrected throughout with his own hand, with parts of two other Letters of the same matter, which I had together with the former: as also his judgement in divers other subjects, both in Doctrine and Discipline, with some Advertisements for the clearing and preventing of any further misapprehensions.  
Unto which is added his Reduction of Episcopacy to the form of Synodical Government, etc. before published; And at the request of the Printer, a distinction of those Books which are owned by the Primate, from such as are not.  
If the Readers Opinion shall descent in any of the abovenamed, or swell into an opposition, let him not expect any defensive Arms to be taken up by me, it being my part to declare his judgement as I find it, Which with the most Pious and Learned, I doubt not but will be (as it hath been) of a Reverend and high esteem: If it may but moderate the heat, which hath lately broken out among us about some of them, the fruit expected is reaped; And as these shall be of profit and acceptance, I shall be encouraged to a further gathering up of the like fragments.  
N. B.   

The Judgement of the late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland, of the true Intent and Extent of Christ's death, and satisfaction upon the Crosse. Written in Answer to the request of a Friend, March 3. 1617.  
The true Intent and Extent of Christ's Death, and Satisfaction upon the Crosse.  
THe all-sufficient satisfaction of Christ, made for the sins of the whole World. The true intent and extent, is Lubricus locus to be handled, and hath, and doth now much trouble the Church: this question hath been moved sub iisdem terminis quibus nunc, and hath received contrary resolutions; the reason is, that in the two extremities of opinions held in this matter, there is somewhat true, and somewhat false; The one extremity extends the benefit of Christ's satisfaction too far, as if hereby, God, for his part, were actually reconciled to all mankind, and did really discharge every man from all his sins, and that the reason why all men do not reap the fruit of this benefit, is the want of that faith whereby they ought to have believed, that God in this sort did love them: Whence it would follow, that God should forgive a man his sins, and justify him before he believed, whereas the Elect themselves, before their effectual vocation are said to be without Christ, and without hope, and to be utter strangers from the Covenants of Promise, Ephes. 2. 2.  
2. The other extremity contracts the riches of Christ's satisfaction into too narrow a room; as if none had any kind of interest therein, but such as were elected before the foundation of the World; howsoever by the Gospel, every one be charged to receive the same: whereby it would follow, that a man should be bound in conscience to believe that which is untrue, and charged to take that wherewith he hath nothing to do.  
Both extremities then, drawing with them unavoidable absurdities: The Word of God (by hearing whereof, faith is begotten, Eph. 1. 13.) must be sought vuto by a middle course, to avoid these extremities.  
For finding out this middle course, we must, in the matter of our Redemption, carefully put a distinction betwixt the satisfaction of Christ absolutely considered, and the application thereof to every one in particular: The former was once done for all, The other is still in doing: The former brings with it sufficiency abundant, to discharge the whole debt; the other adds to it efficacy. The satisfaction of Christ, only makes the sins of mankind fit for pardon, which without it, could not well be; the injury done to God's Majesty being so great, that it could not stand with his honour to put it up without amends made. The particular application makes the sins of those to whom that mercy is vouchsafed to be actually pardoned: for, as all sins are mortal, in regard of the stipend due thereunto by the Law, but all do not actually bring forth death, because the gracious Promises of the Gospel stayeth the execution: even so all the sins of mankind, are become venial, in respect of the price paid by Christ to his Father (so far, that in showing mercy upon all, if so it were his pleasure, his justice should be no loser,) but all do not obtain actual remission, because most offenders do not take out, nor plead their pardon as they ought to do. If Christ had not assumed our Nature, and therein made satisfaction for the injury offered to the divine Majesty, God would not have come unto a Treaty of peace with us, more than with the fallen Angels, whose nature the Son did not assume: But this way being made, God holds out unto us the golden Sceptre of his Word, and thereby, not only signifieth his pleasure of admitting us unto his presence, and accepting of our submission, which is a wonderful Grace, but also sends an Embassage unto us, and entreats us that we would be reconciled unto him, 2 Cor. 5. 20.  
Hence, we infer against the first extremity, that by the virtue of this blessed Oblation, God is made placable unto our nature (which he never will be unto the Angelical nature offending) but not actually appeased with any, until he hath received his son, and put on the Lord Jesus. As also against the latter extremity, that all men may be truly said to have interest in the merits of Christ, as in a Common, though all do not enjoy the benefit thereof; because they have no will to take it.  
The wellspring of life is set open unto all (Apoc. 22. 17.) Whosoeever will, let him take of the water of life freely, but many have nothing to draw with; and the Well is deep, Faith is the vessel whereby we draw all virtue from Christ, and the Apostle tells us, That Faith is not of all, (2 Thes. 3. 2.) Now the means of getting this Faith is the hearing of the word of truth, the Gospel of our salvation (Ephes. 1. 13.) which ministereth this general ground for every one to build his Faith upon.  
Syllogism. What Christ hath prepared for thee, and the Gospel offereth unto thee, that oughtest thou with all thankfulness to accept, and apply to the comfort of thy own Soul.  
But Christ by his death and obedience hath provided a sufficient remedy for the taking away of all thy sins, and the Gospel offereth the same unto thee. Therefore thou oughtest to accept, and apply the same to the comfort of thine own Soul.  
Now this Gospel of salvation many do not hear at all, being destitute of the Ministry of the Word; and many hearing do not believe, or lightly regard it; and many that do believe the truth thereof, are so wedded to their sins, that they have no desire to be divorced from them, and therefore they refuse to accept the gracious offer that is made unto them. And yet notwithstanding their refusal on their part, we may truly say, That good things were provided for them on Christ's part, and a rich price was put into the hands of a Fool, howsoever he had no heart to use it (Prov. 17. 16.)  
Our blessed Saviour, by that which he hath performed on his part, hath procured a Jubilee for the Sons of Adam; and his Gospel is his Trumpet, whereby he doth proclaim Liberty to the Captives, and preacheth the acceptable year of the Lord (Luke 4. 18, 19) If for all this some are so well pleased with their Captivity that they desire no deliverance, that derogates nothing from the generality of the freedom annexed to that year. If one say to sin his old Master, (Levites 25. 24. Exod. 21. 5. Deut, 15, 26:) I love thee, and will not go out free, he shall be bored for a slave, and serve for ever. But that slavish disposition of his, maketh the extent of the privilege of that year not a whit the straighter, because he was included within the general Grant as well as others; howsoever, he was not disposed to take the benefit of it: The Kingdom of Heaven is like to a certain King that made a marriage of his Son, and sent his servants to those that were bidden to the Wedding with this message; Behold, I have prepared my Dinner; my Oxen, and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready, Come to the Marriage, (verse 4.) If we look to the event. They they that were bidden made light of their entertainment, and went their ways; one to his Farm, and another to his Merchandise. (verse 5.) but that neglect of theirs doth not falsify the word of the King (verse 4.) viz. That the Dinner was prepared, and these unworthy Guests were invited thereunto; For what, if some did not believe, shall their unbelief disannul the Faith, and truth of God? (Rom. 3. 3, 4.) God forbid; yea, let God be true, & every man a liar, as it is written, that thou mayest be justified in thy sayings, and overcome when thou judgest. Let not the house of Israel say, the way of the Lord is unequal. For when he cometh to judge them, the inequality will be found on their side, and not on his. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal, and your ways unequal? saith the Lord, Ezek. 18. 29, 30.) The Lord is right in all his ways, and holy in all his works. All the ways of our God are mercy and truth; when we were in our sins it was of his infinite mercy that any way, or remedy should be prepared for our recovery. And when the remedy is prepared, we are never the nearer, except he be pleased of his free mercy to apply the same to us, that so the whole praise of our Redemption, from the beginning to the end thereof, may entirely be attributed to the riches of his grace, and nothing left to sinful flesh wherein it may rejoice.  
The freeing of the Jews from the Captivity of Babylon, was a Type of that great deliverance, which the Son of God hath wrought for us.  
Cyrus, King of Fersia, who was Christus Domini (and herein but a shadow of Christus Dominus, the Author of our Redemption) published his Proclamation in this manner; Who is amongst you of all his people, the Lord his God be with him, and let him go up, (2 Chron, 36. 23. and 1 Ezra 2.) Now it is true, they alone did follow this Calling, whose spirit God had raised to go up, (Ezra 1. 5.) But could they that remained still in Babylon, justly plead, That the Kings Grant was not large enough, or that they were excluded from going up by any clause contained therein? The matter of our Redemption purchased by our Saviour Christ lieth open to all, all are invited to it, none that hath a mind to accept of it, is excluded from it. The beautiful feet of those that preach the Gospel of peace, do bring glad tidings of good things to every house where they tread. The first part of their Message being this, Peace to this house, (Rom. 10. 15. Luke 10. 5. Luke 17.) But, unless God be pleased out of his abundant mercy to guide our feet into the way of peace, the Rebellion of our Nature is such, that that we run headlong to the ways of destruction and misery, (Rom. 3. 16.) and the ways of peace do we not know. They have not all obeyed the Gospel, Rom. 10. 16. all are not apt to entertain this Message of peace, and therefore, though God's Ambassadors make a true ten-tender of it to all unto whom they are sent, yet their peace only resteth on the sons of peace, but if it meet with such as will not listen to the motion of it, their peace doth again return unto themselves, (Luke 10. 6.) The Proclamation of the Gospel runneth thus: Apoc. 22. 17. Let him that is a thirst come, for him this Grace is specially provided, because none but he will take the pains to come; But lest we should think this should abridge the largeness of the offer, a Quicunque vult, is immediately added, and whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely: yet withal this must be yielded for a certain truth, that it is God who must work in us to will and to do, of his good pleasure; and though the call be never so loud and large, yet none can come except the father draw him, (John 6. 46.) For the universality of the satisfaction derogates nothing from the necessity of the special Grace in the application: neither doth the speciality of the one any ways abridge the generality of the other. Indeed Christ our Saviour saith (Joh. 17. 6.) I pray not for the world, but for them that thou hast given me: but the consequence hereby inferred may well be excepted against, viz. He prayed not for the world, Therefore, He paid not for the world; Because the latter is an Act of his satisfaction, the former of his Intercession: which being divers parts of his Priesthood are distinguishable one from another, by sundry differences. This his satisfaction doth properly give contentment to God's justice, in such sort as formerly hath been declared: His Intercession doth solicit God's mercy. The first contains the preparation of the remedy necessary for man's salvation; The second brings with it an application, of the same. And consequently the one may well appertain to the common nature, which the son assumed, when the other is a special Privilege vouchsafed to such particular persons only, as the father hath given him. And therefore we may safely conclude out of all these premises, That the Lamb of God offering himself a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, Intended by giving sufficient satisfaction to God's Justice, to make the nature of man, which he assumed, a fit subject for mercy, and to prepare a medicine for the sins of the whole world; which should be denied to none that intended to take the benefit of it: Howsoever he intended not by applying this all-sufficient remedy unto every person in particular to make it effectual unto the salvation of all, or to procure thereby actual Pardon for the sins of the whole world. So, in one respect he may be said to have died for all, and in another respect not to have died for all; yet so as in respect of his mercy he may be counted a kind of universal cause of the restoring of our Nature, as Adam was of the depraving of it; For as far as I can discern, he rightly hits the nail on the head that determineth the point in this manner.  Thom, Contra Gentiles, lib. 4ᵒ. 55. Mors Christi est quasi quaedam wiversalis causa salutis; si cut peccatum primi hominis fuit quasi universalis causa damnationis. Oportet autem universalem causam applicari ad unumquodque s●ecialiter, ut effectum universalis causae participet. Effectus igitur peccati primi parentis pervenit ad unumquemque per carnis originem; effectus autem mortis Christi pertingit ad ad unumquemque per spiritualem regenerationem per quam Christo homo quodammodo conjungitur & incorporatur.  

AN Answer of the said Archbishop of Armagh, to some exceptions taken against his aforesaid Letter, as followeth.  
ICannot sufficiently wonder, why such exceptions should be taken at a Letter of mine, which without my privity came to so many men's hands, as if thereby I had confirmed Papism, Arminianism, and I know not what error of Mr. Culverwels', which (as you write) is, and hath been, opposed by many; yea, all good men. The Papist (saith one) doth thus distingnish; A Mediator of Redemption and Intercession; And Bellarmine (saith another) divides the satisfaction and application of Christ. To which, what other Answer should I make but this? To hold that Christ is the only Mediator of Redemption, but the Saints are also Mediators of Intercession, That Christ by his Merits hath made satisfaction to his Father in gross, and the Pope by his indulgence, and his Priests by their Oblations in the Mass do make a particular application to particular persons. To join thus partners with Christ in this manner in the Office of Mediation is Popery indeed; But he who, attributing the entire work of the Mediation unto Christ alone, doth yet distinguish the Act of Redemption from the act of Intercession, the Satisfaction made by him unto God, from the Application thereof communicated unto men, is as far from Popery, as he that thinks otherwise is from the grounds of the Catechism; For that Christ hath so died for all men (as they lay down in the conference of Hague) ut reconciliationem cum Deo, & peccatorum remissionem singulis impetraverit, I hold to be untrue, being well assured, That our Saviour hath obtained at the hands of his father Reconciliation, and Forgiveness of sins, not for the Reprobate, but Elect only; and not for them neither, before they be truly regenerated, and implanted into himself. For, Election being nothing else but the purpose of God, resting in his own mind, makes no kind of alteration in the party elected, but only the execution of that Decree and Purpose, which in such as have the use of reason is done by an effectual calling, in all by spiritual regeneration, which is the new birth, without which no man can see the Kingdom of God.  
That Impetration, whereof the Arminians speak, I hold to be a fruit, not of his Satisfaction, but Intercession; and seeing I have learned from Christ's own mouth, Joh. 17. 9 I pray not for the reprobate World: I must needs esteem it a great folly to imagine that he hath impetrated Reconciliation and Remission of sins for that world. I agree therefore thus far with Mr. Aims in his Dispute against Grevinchovius, That application and impetration, in this latter we have in hand, are of equal extent; and, That forgiveness of sins is not by our Saviour impetrated for any unto whom the merit of his death is not applied in particular. If in seeking to make strait that which was crooked in the Arminians opinion, he hath bended it too far the contrary way, and inclined too much unto the other extremity, it is a thing, which, in the heat of disputation, hath befallen many worthy men before him; And if I be not deceived, gave the first occasion to this present controversy. But I see no reason why I should be tied to follow him in every step, wherein he treadeth: And so much for Mr. Aims.  
The main error of the Arminians (vid. Corvin. in Defen. Armini. cap. II.) and of the patrons of universal grace is this, That God offereth unto every man those means that are necessary unto salvation, both sufficiently and effectually; and, That it resteth in the free will of every one to receive, or reject the same; For the proof thereof they allege, as their predecessors, the Semipelagians, did before them, that received Axiom of Christ's dying for all men, which being rightly understood, makes nothing for their purpose. Some of their opposites (subjects to oversights as well as others) more forward herein then circumspect, have answered this Objection, not by expounding (as was fit) but by flat denying that famous Axiom: Affirming peremptorily, that Christ died only for the Elect, and for others nullo modo: whereby they gave the adverse party advantage to drive them unto this extreme absurdity, viz. That seeing Christ in no wise died for any, but for the elect, and all men were bound to believe that Christ died for themselves, and that upon pain of damnation for the contrary infidelity; Therefore all men were bound to believe: that they themselves were elected, although in truth the matter were nothing so: 
Non tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis  
Tempus eget.   
Neither is their hope that the Arminians will be drawn to acknowledge the error of their position, as long as they are persuaded the contrary opinion cannot be maintained without admitting that an untruth must be believed, even by the commandment of him that is God of truth, and by the direction of that word, which is the word of truth.  
Endeavouring therefore to make one truth stand by another, and to ward off the blow given by the Arminians in such sort that it should neither bring hurt to the truth, nor give advantage to error, admit I failed of mine intent, I ought to be accounted rather an oppugner than any wise an abettor of their fancies. That for the Arminians. Now for Mr. Culverwell, That which I have heard him charged withal, is the former extremity, which in my Letter I did condemn, viz. That Christ in such sort did die for all men, that by his death he made an actual reconcilement between God and man; and, That the special reason why all men reap not the fruit of this reconciliation; is the want of that faith, whereby they ought to have believed that God in this sort did love them. How justly he hath been charged with this error, himself can best tell; But if ever he held it, I do not doubt, but he was driven thereunto by the absurdities, which he discerned in the other extremity; For what would not a man fly unto rather than yield, that Christ no manner of way died for any Reprobate, and none but the elect had any kind of title to him, and yet so many thousand Reprobates should be bound in conscience to believe that he died for them, and tied to accept him for their Redeemer and Saviour; yea, and should be condemned to everlasting torments for want of such a faith, (if we may call that faith, which is not grounded upon the word of truth) whereby they should have believed that which in itself was most untrue, and laid hold of that in which they had no kind of interest; If they, who dealt with Mr. Culverwell laboured to drive out one absurdity by bringing in another, or went about to stop one hole by making two, I should the less wonder at that you write, that though he hath been dealt withal by many brethren, and for many years, yet he could not be drawn from his error. But those stumbling-blocks being removed, and the plain word of truth laid open, by which faith is to be begotten, I dare boldly say he doth not hold that extremity wherewith he is charged, but followeth that safe, and middle course, which I laid down; for after he had well weighed what I had written, he heartily thanked the Lord and me, for so good a resolution of this Question, which for his part he wholly approved, not seeing how it could be gainesayed. And so much likewise for Mr. Culverwell.  
Now for Mr. Stock's public opposition in the Pulpit, I can hardly be induced to believe that he aimed at me therein; If he did, I must needs say he was deceived, when he reckoned me amongst those good men, who make the universality of all the elect, and all men to be one; Indeed I wrote but even now, that God did execute his Decree of Election in all by spiritual generation: But if any shall say, that by, all thereby I should understand the universality of all, and every one in the world, and not the universality of all the Elect alone, he should greatly wrong my meaning: for I am of no other mind than Prosper was, lib. 1. De vocat. Gent. Habet populus Dei plenitudinem suam, & quamvis magna pars hominum salvantis Gratiam aut repellat aut negligat, in electis tamen & praescitis atque ab omni generalitate discretis, specialis quaedam censetur universitas, ut de toto mundo, totus mundus liberatus, & de omnibus hominibus, omnes homines videantur assumpti. That Christ died for his Apostles (Luke 22. 19) for his sheep (John 10. 15.) for his friends (John 15. 13.) for his Church (Ephes. 5. 25.) may make peradventure against those, who make all men to have a share alike in the death of our Saviour: but I profess myself to hold fully with him, who said, Etsi Christus pro omnibus mortuus est, tamen specialiter pro nobis passus est, quia pro Ecclesia passus est. Yea, and in my former writing I did directly conclude; That as in one respect Christ might have been said to die for all, so in another respect truly said not to have died for all: and my belief is, That the principal end of the Lords death, was, that he might gather together in one the Children of God scattered abroad; (John 11. 52.) and, That for their sakes he did specially sanctify himself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth (John 17. 19) And therefore it may be well concluded, That Christ in a special manner died for these; but to infer from hence, that in no manner of respect he died for any others, is but a very weak collection, specially the respect by me expressed being so reasonable, that no sober mind advisedly considering thereof, can justly make question of it, viz. That the Lamb of God offering himself a sacrifice for the sins of the world, intended by giving satisfaction to God's justice to make the nature of man which he assumed, a fit subject for mercy, and to prepare a Sovereign medicine that should, not only be a sufficient cure for the sins of the whole world, but also should be laid open to all, and denied to none, that indeed do take the benefit thereof: For he is much deceived that thinks a preaching of a bare sufficiency, is able to yield sufficient ground of comfort to a distressed Soul, without giving a further way to it, and opening a further passage.  
To bring news to a bankrupt that the King of Spain hath treasure enough to pay a thousand times more than he owes, may be true, but yields but cold comfort to him the miserable Debtor: sufficiency indeed is requisite, but it is the word of promise that gives comfort.  
If here exception be taken, That I make the whole nature of man fit for mercy, when it is as unfit a subject for grace as may be.  
I answer, That here two impediments do occur, which give a stop unto the peace, which is to be made betwixt God and man. The one respects God the party offended, whose justice hath been in such sort violated by his base Vassals, that it were unfit for his glorious Majesty to put up such an injury without a good satisfaction. The other respects man the party offending, whose blindness, stupidity, and hardness of heart is such, that he is neither sensible of his own wretchedness, nor God's goodness, that when God offers to be reconciled unto him, there must be much entreaty to persuade him to be reconciled to God, (2 Cor. 5. 20.) In regard of the latter I acknowled with the Apostle, That the natural man receives not the things of the spirit, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he, because spiritually discerned, (1 Cor. 2. 14.) And this impediment is not taken away by Christ's satisfaction (which is a work of his Priestly function) but by the enlightening of the mind, and softening the heart of the sinner, which are effects issuing from the execution of the Prophetical, and Kingly Office of our Redeemer. When therefore I say, That by Christ's satisfaction to his Father he made the Nature of Man a fit subject for mercy, I mean thereby, that the former impediment arising on God's part is taken away, that if it were not for the other (for the having whereof we can blame none but ourselves, and in the not removing, whereof, we cannot say God hath done us any wrong) there were no let, but all men might be saved: And if it pleased God to extend his mercy unto all, as he keeps his freedom therein, in having compassion on whom he will have mercy, and leaveing others in blindness, natural hardness of their own heart, yet the worth of Christ's satisfaction is so great, that his Justice herein should be no loser.  
But if this Justice (you will say) be satisfied, how comes it to pass that God exacts payment again from any? I Answer, We must take heed we stretch not our similitudes beyond their just extent, lest at last we drive the matter too far, and be forced to say (as some have done) That we cannot see how satisfaction and forgivenessè can stand together, and so by denying Christ's satisfaction be injurious to God's justice, or by denying remission of sins become injurious to God's mercy. We are therefore to understand, that the end of the satisfaction of God's Justice is to make way for God's free liberty in showing mercy, that so mercy and Justice meeting: and embracing one another, God may be just, and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus, (Rom. 3. 26.) Now the general satisfaction of Christ, which was the first act of his Priestly Office, prepares the way for God's mercy, by making the sins of all mankind pardonable, the interposition of any bar from God's Justice notwithstanding, and so puts the sons of men only in a possibility of being justified, a thing denied to the nature of fallen Angels, which the son was not pleased to assume; But the special application of this satisfaction vouchsafed by Christ unto those persons only whom his Father hath given him out of the world, which is an appendent, or appertaineth to the second Act of his Priesthood, viz. his intercession, produceth this potentia in Actum, i. e. procureth an actual discharge from God's anger; And maketh justification, which before was a part of our possibility, to be a part of our presenr possession.  
If it be said, It is a great derogation to the dignity of Christ's death, to make the sins of mankind only pardonable, and brings in a bare possibility of justification.  
I answer, It is a most unchristian imagination to suppose the merit of Christ's death, being particularly applied to the Soul of a sinner, produceth no further effect than this. Saint Paul teacheth us that we be not only justifiable, but justified by his blood, (Rom. 5. 9) yet not simply as offered on the Cross, but through faith in his blood, (Rom. 3. 25.) that is, through his blood applied by faith. The blood of Jesus Christ his Son, (saith Saint John, 1 John 1. 17.) cleanseth us from all sins, yet cleanse it doth not by being prepared, but by being applied, prepared it was when he poured it out once upon the Cross, applied it is when he washeth us from our sins therein, (Rev. 1. 5.) It is one thing therefore to speak of Christ's satisfaction, in the general absolutely considered; and another thing, as it is applied to every one in particular; The consideration of things as they are in their causes, is one thing; and as they have an actual existence, is another thing. Things as they are in their causes, are no otherwise considerable, but as they have a possibility to be. The application of the Agent to the patient, with all circumstances necessarily required, is it that gives to the thing an actual being. That disease is curable for which a Sovereign medicine may be found, but cured it is not till the medicine be applied to the patient; and if it so fall out, that, the medicine being not applied, the party miscarries, We say, He was lost, not, becanse his sickness was incurable, but, because there wanted a care to apply that to him that might have helped him.  
All Adam's sons have taken a mortal sickness from their Father, which, if it be not remedied, will, without fail, bring them to the second death: no medicine under heaven can heal this disease, but only a potion confected of the blood of the Lamb of God, who came to take away the sins of the world; which, as Prosper truly notes, habet quidem in se ut omnibus prosit; sed si non bibitur non medetur. The virtue thereof is such, that if all did take it, all without doubt should be recovered, but without takeing it there is no recovery; In the former respect it may be truly said, That no man's state is so desperate, but by this means it is recoverable, (and this is the first comfortable news that the Gospel brings to the distressed Soul) but here it resteth not, nor feedeth a man with such a possibility, that he should say in his heart, Who shall ascend into heaven to bring Christ from above? but it brings the word of comfort nigh unto him, even to his mouth and heart, and presents him with the medicine at hand, and desireth him to take it; which being done accordingly, the cure is actually performed.   

A VINDICATION of the late ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH, From some mistakes made by Master Thomas Pierce, both in his Philanthropy, & Postcript at the conclusion of his correct Copy of some Notes of God's Decrees, etc. Affirming a change of judgement in him a little before his death, of some points controverted between Mr. Barlee and himself, but especially of Universal Grace and Redemption, relating to the subject of the former Treatise.  
By Dr. Bernard, Preacher to the Honourable society of Grays-inn.   

The Printer to the READER.  
THese two Letters following, expected from the person to whom they were writ, as an Appendix to another Treatise, being hither to delayed the public, and now conceived very requisite to be inserted here, as having a relation to the former Tractates mentioned in one of them; The Doctor hath been importuned to permit them accordingly also, with some alteration and addition.   

The first Letter of Doctor Bernard's to Mr. Barlee, in Answer to some passage in Mr. Pierces Philanthropy.  
Worthy Sir,  
IAm much your debtor for those large expressions of your affection to the late. Archbishop of Armagh, and the readiness to clear him from some injury done him by Mr. Thomas Pierce, in his Answer to a Book of yours. Two eminent men of each University, before I heard from you, had sent unto me for their private satisfaction. And now upon your Letter and directions I have viewed the several passages tending that way, Chap. 1. Sect. 3. 5. Chap. 3. Sect. 17. 7. Chap. 4. Sect. 13. which in sum I find amounts to this, viz. That the late Primate of Armagh was, though a late, yet a serious Convert: And affirmed, a little, or not long, before his death to several persons, that he utterly rejected all those opinions of Calvin. That there were evident marks of a change in him. That a little before his death he professed an utter dislike to the whole Doctrine of Geneva, in those affairs, etc. First; it is possible Mr. Pierces informers might mistake the Doctrine for the Discipline of Geneva, or Calvin, which by some in their Sermons hath been advanced accordingly: or if it were of the Doctrine, he hath taken a great latitude in saying, All the opinions, the whole Doctrine. And the Restriction. viz. In those affairs, is somewhat obscure, being introduced occasionally upon the speech of one or two of them. It had been better to have named the several points he means, from which howsoever, as to Calvin, or Geneva, how could he be said to revolt, when in terminis he did not profess the defence of either. It being the Doctrine of S. Augustine, which hath been confirmed by him.  
And for Calvine, though I do not take upon me the defence of him neither, yet there is one Doctrine of his, and in those affairs (different from some of his own profession in Geneva) which must be exempted from Mr. Pierces Universality, and which, will not be found that the Primate rejected, viz. that massa corrupta was the object of Praedestination, as Bishop Davenant makes it appear, (in his determinations, q. 26.) where he first clears him from the 
a Calvinum criminantur Jesuitae quod defendat Deum, in primo instanti ante omnem praevis●●nem peccati, quosdam absolutè elegisse ad gloriam, alios destinâsse ad interitum. In secundo autem instanti, peccatum Adami eo fine ordinâsse, ut justitiam suam erga Reprobos, & misericordiam erga Electos posset exercere. (determ. q. 26.)  slanders the Jesuits have raised of him in it, viz. That he should hold that God in the first Act before any foresight of sin, elected some to glory, and ordained others to destruction; And in the second place ordained the sin of Adam to that end, that he might exercise justice towards the Reprobates, and mercy towards the elect; and then gives you clearly 
b Verissimam Calvini sententiam, hisce duabus proposicionibus contineri affirmo, etc. Caecus est qui non videt in hisce locis substerni corruptam massam praedestinationis etc. subjectum esse tum Electionis tum reprobationis, non causam, etc. Ibid.  the truth of calvin's judgement in two propositions confirmed out of divers quotations in his institutions, viz. That the corrupt Mass; or man lapsed, was the object of Election and Reprobation, though not the cause: And further, proves, That what the Jesuits put upon Calvine, their own Popish Writers were the prime Authors of, viz. Scotus, Naclantus, Pighius, Catharinus, Galatinus, Alphonsus Mendoza, who aver, That the 
c Decretum praedestinationis non solum deereto lapsus permittendi, sed hominis Creandi prius & antiquiùs esse, etc. Ibid.  Decree of Praedestination is not only before the Decree of permitting the lapse of man, but also before the creating of him. And 
d Hoc tantùm cupio ut indè perspiciatis, ipsos Pontificios Primarios esse hujus sententiae authores, quae negat hominem lapsum fuisse divinae Praedestinationis subjectum. Ibid.  desires it might be taken notice of, That the Popish Writers were the chief Authors of that opinion, which denies 〈◊〉 lapsed to be the subject of Divine Praedestination; which, if some of ours did consider, they would be the slower paced in the defence of that which hath occasioned this digression. Howsoever, as to Calvin's opinion, this Reverend and learned Bishop thus far supports it, that he joins S. 
e Illud sole clarius testimonium est, quod ex Augustino desumptum affertur & probatur à Calvino Institut 3. c. 23. sect. 11. Ibid.  Augustine's suffrage with his own in it; and as it is there declared, I understand not how it is rejected By this Eminent Primate.  
But whatever these points were, if this be Mr. Pierces meaning, That a little before his death he should Verbally retract what he had published in his works, I am assured (though it be hard to prove a Negative) there was no such matter: but that he was constant in them to his end. When he was last in London, continuing here about seven weeks together, I was perpetually with him, taking then the opportunity of a further speaking with him of most of the passages of his life, as of the several Books he had wrote, th● Subjects of them, the occasion of their writing, when some such points (as Mr. Pierce possibly may mean) came into discourse. And then there was not the least change in him. And it is to be presumed, in that last Act of winding up his whole life, if there had been any, he would have then mentioned it, and this was but about five weeks (which is a little, or not long) before his death. And it hath be confirmed to me by a Minister, who was at Ryegate a fortnight before, as by some Honourable persons, who spoke with him of these Subjects a few days before his death; so that I believe Mr. Pierce hath not been well adadvised in publishing this his Information.  
And it is no new thing to have books, as well as opinions, laid to his charge which he knew not: It was presumed in his life, and so the less wonder if it be practised after his death. There is a book entitled a Method of Meditation, which was printed in his name, Anno 1651. And, though by his Commands to me, it was then publicly declared to be none of his, yet since his death (this 1657.) it is reprinted, and, notwithstanding the renewing of that Declaration by the same way wherein I found him abused, it is still sold under his name to the great dishonour of him.  
The passage which Mr. Pierce is most clear in, Chap. 1. Sect. 15. Where, speaking of Universal grace and redemption, he saith, the most Learned Anti-Arminians have been feign to assert it, as well as Arminius. Among us, the late Bishop of Armagh, etc.  
First, He should have done well to have named where he hath asserted it in any of his works, Next, What, or who compelled him, that he was feign to do it; and if by that speech as well as Arminius he means (according to common construction) As full, or in the same terms as Arminius; it will be the hardest proof of the three; whom he scarce ever names in his works: his aim being against Pelagius and his Disciples. Unless that passage in his Pelagian History may be so applied (wrapped up under the Title of Britanniae Antiquitates, Pelagius being a Britain, which he intended to have taken out, and printed as a Treatise by itself) where he having given us at large the bold and rugged language, with which Julian, one of Pelagius his followers, in defence of his Doctrine, greets the most mild and meek Father S. Augustine, he adds this, Chap. 11. p. 312.) Cujus idcirco verba hic describenda putavi; ut in hoc speculo contemplaretur lector, consimiles nostrorum temporum ardeliones; Thrasoni huic adeo geminos, ut in eos, hujus spiritus quasi per Pythagoricam quandam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, immigrasse videatur: I know not how he can call him an Anti-Arminian, unless he confess them to be Pelagians.  
Secondly, In this particular concerning Universal Redemption I have cause to believe there was not any change in him from what his judgement was many years agone: and if he were not totally according to Calvin, must it therefore be argued, he was wholly for Arminius? Might not there be a mean wherein he might tread more safely according to the ancient Doctrine of the Church? And indeed to deal clearly with you, his judgement in this point was in a middle way different, both from yours, and Mr. Pierce, which if it might not expose him to both your pens and censures, but be a reconciliation between you, (the latter of which I see little hope of;) I might be moved the more willingly to declare it. I do the rather mention this; because, As Mr. Pierce saith, you call it the chief head of Arminianism, So he saith, 'tis that with which other opinions in debate must stand, or fall: And Chap. 3. p. 15. excuseth his prolixity on it, because if this error be once disclaimed by the adversary, all the rest will tumble of their own accord, etc.  
In a word, I am sorry to find that heat between you, which being Ministers and Neighbours, is the more unseemly. I shall advise you in your reply to endeavour rather to heal up the breach, than make it wider; the fruits of the spirit appearing much in meekness and Gentleness, etc. and laying aside all verbal animosities and personal reflections, calmly to fall upon the matter, And so I commend you and your labours to God's blessing and direction, and rest  
Your very assured Friend N. BERNARD. Grays-inn, March 11. 1656.   

A Vindication of the Primate, from a late change of opinion. A second Letter, of the said Doctor Bernard to Mr. Barlee, in Answer to a part of a Postscript at the conclusion of a book of Mr. Pierces, viz. a Correct Copy of some Notes of God's decrees, etc. Wherein the former erroneus report raised upon the late Archbishop of Armagh, especially concerning Universal Grace, or Redemption, being more largely affirmed, is here more fully cleared and vindicated.  
SIR.  
I Have lately received from you another book of Master Pierces, which I saw not before, viz. A Correct Copy of God's decrees, etc. In the Postscript of which I find a larger confirmation of what had been affirmed by him, in relation to the late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland: which, at your desire, I cannot refuse to return you my sense of also.  
The Author is a Stranger to me, but appears to be a man of very excellent parts and abilities, and I am sorry he hath been moved to employ them in this particular, in a continued confident declaring the change of opinion in so Learned and pious a Prelate (as himself worthily styles him,) to whom for aught I know he was a stranger, and adding, That what he hath before affirmed to be upon a just ground and mature deliberation, and yet I find no other foundation upon which this is built, than the report of others. The frequent experimental failing of which, when it comes to the proof, hath wrought it out of reputation, with prudent men, to depend upon.  
That which I find in the conclusion of his Postscript, I must begin with, wherein he doth determine, viz. That whosoever shall appear to hold the Negative, That my Lord Primate of Armagh did not declare his rejection of these opinions, which I resist, and which himself formerly embraced, will wrong the memory of the Bishop. As I do not (according to his caveat) take upon me to prove a Negative, so I do not understand the ground of this definitive Sentence, upon whomsoever shall adhere to it. I am sure his meaning is not, because he doth resist them; and less show is there, because the Primate had formerly embraced them; for a changeableness in Doctrine carries in itself a show of dishonour, that with him there should be yea and nay: surely there must be somewhat of gross corruption, or dangerous consequence formerly taught and professed by this good Primate, that should incur this censure; And it is too early a conclusive, while they are yet in Dispute between you, and the matter not heard on the Primates side; Which I expected not from a person so ingenuous, as I read Master Pierce to be. And howsoever the whole implies that the Primate had wronged himself, if not his hearers and readers, in preaching and writing of untruths so long; but much more if he had died without retracting them; and that the injury done to him, is already decreed to lie upon that person that shall affirm otherwise of him in either: yet this must not deter or discourage me in this service of his vindication, leaving it to the judgemnent of others, Which may be thought less injurious, The averring his constancy, or inconstancy in matters of such weight and moment. I shall be contented he do enjoy his opinion, if he will not censure me for not forsaking my own, viz. That I think I should wrong him and myself, at least do neither right, if I should silently let this belief of him pass without putting it to a stand, by producing those probabilities which have prevailed with me to the contrary.  
That which Mr. Pierce professeth, viz. That he published it to the Immortal honour of that great Prelate, doth not well suit with the expressions in the next breath, calling it an error which had possessed him, and intimating it to be a retraction of his aberrations, or a penitency of his sins, which he having no sense of, or not expressing it till then, he must have contracted a great guilt all his life, both in preaching and writing to the subversion, possibly, of many. This if he had found himself guilty of, a verbal retraction would not have sufficed, but he should have given satisfaction also by his pen: His judgement having been by that transmitted beyond the Seas, which one Sermon in a Church in London, or opening his mind to a few in private, could not have expiated: neither would so good a man as he, have rested in it, but with S. Augustine humbly have revoked his error in that way also; but I believe none of those pretended witnesses of his change will say that he gave them that promise or that they did so much as request it of him, though they had time enough to have wrote unto him, if omitted in the conference. And certainly Mr. Pierce, (to use his own expression) had in singleness of affection done him more right and honour, if he had left him wholly to his works; which do sufficiently testify of him, rather than thus to bring him upon the Stage after his death, and give sentence on him only upon hear-say: There being no necessity in this dispute to have so much as named him. Neither can I think those, any Cordial friends of the Bishops (as he styles them) who have been the occasion of putting him upon it. And I do remember that the last time he was in London, he did express a suspicion of some that came to visit him, that they would by wresting his words, make some such use of them, as now appears: who proposed discourses of the like subjects to him, and whereupon he did confirm at full that which had been his judgement of them formerly.  
For that of Mr Pierces offer of proof by some learned and grave Divines, who had conference with the Bishop, and will (as he saith) be glad to attest the same under their hands: As I know not what cause there should be of gladness, or forwardness in this Testimony; So when they shall meet with contrary attestations by the like of their own profession, it makes me sad, to foresee what a fire this may possibly kindle among us, (to the rejoicing of those of the Church of Rome) which I have no mind to burn my fingers in, only I stick firmly to my persuasion in my former Letter confirmed there by several probable Testimonies, that there was no such change as is pretended in him near his death. And if this of Mr. Piercies affirmation should prove to be the raising of a false report, (which he ingenuously confesseth to be so great an evil, and doth so hate and condemn, whether through ignorance, or credulity:) this must be of the first magnitude, when it hath for its object so eminent and pious a person, whose praise being through the Churches, and in special, for those his labours tending to those Subjects, the whole Reformed Church are concerned in it.  
I find him still puuctually observing his former expression, viz. rejecting all the Doctrines of Geneva, in which besides the latitude, there is this ambiguity, whether it be meant according to Calvin, or Beza; for both were of Geneva; between whom in some of these points there was the like difference as between Mr. Perkins and Bishop Abbot, with us, viz. In the Supralapsarian opinion, which 
* Rom. 9 21s Annotat. etc.  Beza was for, but Calvin held it otherwise, as hath been showed in the former Letter. It had been better to have instanced the particulars of those Doctrines, than thus by clouding them in the Generals to put us upon conjectures, which they should be.  
The only point which he names here, is, That the Primate embraced the Doctrine of Universal Redemption, and saith, in that he doth as good as say all. He doth not assert it from his own knowledge, but saith he hath it from many most unquestionable persons which had it poured into their ears, by the Primates own mouth. If it were in a Sermon of his at a Church in London, the last he preached in that City, and many months before his death; (which I am informed by others is the sense of it) I was present at it, and with me there was no new thing observed to have been uttered by him, differing from what his judgement was many years agone, since I had the happiness to be known unto him. It may be some of these persons produced for witnesses being strangers to him and taking him to be of the other extremity might apprehend it as a retractation, If they heard him affirming, That by the death of Christ all men receive this benefit that they are salvabiles or put into a capacity of sulvation; That terms of peace are procured for all mankind, That all men's sins are become pardonable, mercy attainable, (in which state those of the Angelical nature which fell, are not.) That there is some distinction to be made between his satisfaction (rightly understood) and his intercession, according to that of our Saviour, I pray for these, I pray not for the world, etc. It is possible, for aught I know, some such expressions might be his then. But that by this Universal Redemption should be understood such an Universal grace, that the same measure of it, without any distinction, should equally, and alike, be conferred and applied to Judas, which was to Peter; and that the only difference, was, The freewill of Peter in accepting, without any further cause of thanks to God for his grace in inclining him accordingly, etc. This I suppose will not be attested to have been professed by him, either in this, or any other Sermon, or private conference with him. And in this present enlargement, I would not be understood to interpose myself in the controversy; or to affix thus much upon Mr. Piercies judgement, but only to aver, That the Primate at his last in this particular differed not from what he had declared formerly, which the former tractate, I suppose, will confirm, now published, but not resolved on, when this was first written.  
That which he saith, is the sum of what he had said, viz. That the reverend Primate did conform his judgement to all the fathers of the Church for the first four Centuries after Christ, This he might aver without any relation to these points in controversy, it being the term, or thereabouts, which he accepts of in his answer to the Jesuit Malones Challenge in the justfying, or condemning those twelve points of controversy, between us and the Church of Rome, of which one concerning Free will is of this fraternity. What the Primates judgement was of that, is sufficiently declared there, and he continued in the same without any change the last time I saw him, by the discourse I had then with him of it: and S. Augustine (unless we be over-strict) may be admitted within that compass, being accounted by the Primate, at the time when he was consecrated a Bishop, to be but in Anno 410. and Prosper reckons his death, in 433. being then of age, 76. Before whose time these points were never discussed by the Fathers at large singly, nor determined by them jointly in any Council; which Pelagius gave the first occasion of: and 'tis known that the Doctrine of St. Augustine against him is inclined unto, and defended by the Primate in his works.  
And, to say no more, the Articles of Religion, Agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy of Ireland, in the Convocation holden at Dublin, Anno 1615. which fully determine and declare all those points accordingly; he had then the honour to be appointed by the Synod as a principal person to draw them up; Now the last time I saw him (which was after that pretended Testimony of the witnesses of his change, either in public or private) he did fully confirm and commend them to me to be heeded and observed by me as the summary of his judgement in those and other subjects, of which I have said somewhat more, elsewheree.  
That of Mr. Piercies drawing in more to bear him company, viz. King James, B. Andrews, Melancthon, in their changes also for the better, as he is pleased to derermine; doth not concern me to take notice of: only if he have found it as their last Will and Testament in their works, he shall but Charitably err (to use his own words) if he should be mistaken; but no such matter appears here, as to the Primate.  
In a word, I cannot but profess my respect to Mr. Pierce, both for his own worth, as the great esteem which in this Postsript (more than in his former book) he hath expressed of this Eminent Primate, and can easily believe he would account it a reputation to his opinion, that his might patronise it, by the great esteem had of him in all parts of the reformed Church, both for his learning and piety; and I have so much Charity as to believe that this error is more to be imputed to his informers than himself, and if I were known to him I would advise him not to insist any farther in it, it being by these several circumstances so improbable; but, according to his own ingenuous offer, to make an ample satisfaction, and what he hath so highly extolled in the Primate to have been his glory and honour in preferring truth before error, in that his supposed imaginary retractation, I may without offence return the application to himself; which, with all prudent men, will be much more, his own commendation, and though, according to his profession, he be innocent, as to any voluntary injury; thinking he did God and him good service: yet it being a wrong in itself, will deserve some Apology.  
And, indeed, it will be hard for any prudent impartial man to believe, That what the Primate upon mature deliberation and long study for so many years had professed in the Pulpit, and at the Press, he should be so soon shaken in mind, as, without any convincing force of argument from any other, that is known, at once renounce all he had formerly said, and draw a cross line over all he had wrote; and that in a Sermon, not made of purpose for that end, (which had been very requisite, and which must have been of too narrow a limit in relation to so many Subjects here intimated) but only as on the buy; I say, when his works wherein he is clearly seen and largely declared, with a cloud of ear-witnesses for many years, both in public and private, confirming his constancy in them, through the divers changes of the times to his last, shall be produced and laid in one balance; And a few witnesses of some few passages at one Sermon, who in a crowd might be mistaken, and the apt to be so, by the interest of their own opinion; put into the other; will not all unbiased persons cast the Errata into the latter? I shall conclude with a course compliment to yourself; That I have not thus appeared for your sake, to whom I am a stranger, nor out of any opposition to Mr. Pierce, who appears to me to be a person of value: but only out of my duty and high account, I must ever have of the memory of that judicious, holy, and eminent Primate: and so commit you to God's protection and direction, and rest,  
Your assured Friend N. BERNARD. Grays-inn, June 10. 1657.   

A Learned Letter of the late Archbishop of Armagh to Dr. Twisse, concerning the Sabbath, and observation of the Lords day.  
Worthy Sir,  
YOur Letter of the first of February came unto my hands the seventh of April, but, my journey to Dublin following thereupon, and my long stay in the City, (where the multiplicity of my public and private employments would scarce afford me a breathing time) was such; that I was forced to defer my Answer thereunto, until this short time of my retiring into the Country: Where, being now absent also from my Library: I can rather signify unto you, how fully I concur in judgement with those grounds, which you have so judiciously laid in that question of the Sabbath, than afford any great help unto you in the building, which you intent to raise thereupon. For when I gave myself unto the reading of the Fathers, I took no heed unto any thing that concerned this argument: as little dreaming that any such controversy would have arisen among us. Yet generally I do remember that the word Sabbatum in their writings doth denote our Saturday: although by Analogy from the manner of speech used by the Jews, the term be sometimes transferred to denote our Christian festivities also, as Sirmondus the Jesuit observeth, out of Sidonius Apollinaris, (lib. 1. Epist. 2.) where, describing the moderation of the Table of Theodorick, King of the Goths upon the Eves, and the excess on the Holy day following; he writeth of the one, that his convivium diebus profestis simile privato est, but of the other. De luxu autem illo Sabbatario narrationi meae supersedendum est, qui nec latentes potest latere personas. And because the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the fourth Commandment pointeth at the Sabbath, as it was in the first institution, the seventh day from the Creation: therefore they held that Christians were not tied to the observance thereof. Whereupon you may observe, that S. Augustine in his speculum (in operum tomo 3o.) purposely selecting those things which appertained unto us Christians; doth wholly pretermit that precept, in the recital of the Commandments of the Decalogue; Not because the substance of the precept was absolutely abolished: but because it was in some parts held to be 
* Vid. Augustin. Praefat. in speculum.  ceremonial, & the time afterwards was changed in the state of the New Testament, from the seventh to the first day of the week: as appeareth by the Author of the 25 Sermon, de Tempore (in 10ᵒ tomo Operum Augustini:) and that place of Athanasius in homil. de sement, where he most plainly saith, touching the Sabbath, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Whereupon Caesarius Arelatensis in his twelfth homily, doubted not to preach unto the people. Verè dico, Fratres, satis durum & prope nimis impium est, ut Christiani non habeant reverentiam diei Dominico, quam Judaei observare videntur in Sabbato, etc. Charles the Great in his Laws, taketh it for granted, that our observation of the Lords day is founded upon the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the fourth Commandment. Statuimus (saith he, 
a Edit. Lindebreg. pag. 842.  libro 1ᵒ. Capitularium, cap. 81.) secundum quod & in lege Dominus praecepit, ut opera servilia diebus Dominicis non agantur; sicut & bonae memoriae genitor meus in suis Synodalibus edictis mandavit: And Lotharius likewise, in legibus Alemannorum, titulo 38. 
b Ibid. pag. 373.  Die Dominico nemo opera servilia praesumat facere: quia hoc lex prohibuit, & sacra scriptura in omnibus contradicit. Accommodating the Law of God touching the Sabbath unto our observation of the Lords day, by the selfsame Analogy; that the Church of England now doth in her public Prayer: Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law.  
The Jews commonly hold two things touching their Sabbath; as Menasses Ben-Israel showeth in his eighth Problem, de creatione; which be published at Amsterdam the last year. First, that the observation thereof was commanded only unto the 
a Whether the Proselyte, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were tied thereunto, is handled in the Talmud of Jerusalem, Seder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fol. 8. d of my edition.  Israelies, (where he speaketh also of the seven precepts of the sons of Noah; which have need to be taken in a large extent, if we will have all the duties that the Heathen were tied unto to be comprised therein) Secondly, that it was observed by the Patriarches, before the coming out of Egypt. For that then the observation began, or that the Israelites were brought out of Egypt, or the Egyptians drowned upon the Sabbath; I suppose our good friend Mr. Mead will not be able to evince, either out of 
b Compare with Deut. 16. 12. 7.  Deut. 5. 15 or out of any other Scripture whatsoever. And the Text, Genes. 2. 3. (as you well note) is so clear for the ancient institution of the Sabbath, and so fully vindicated by D. Rivet from the exceptions of Gomarus; that I see no reason in the earth why any man should make doubt thereof: especially considering withal, that the very Gentiles, both civil and barbarous, both ancient and of latter days, as it were by an universal kind of tradition, retained the distinction of the seven days of the week, which if Dr. Heylin had read, so well proved as it is, by Rivetus and Salmasius, he would not have made such a conclusion as he doth: that because the Heathen (of the four great Monarchies at least) had no distinction of weeks, therefore 
Part. 1. cap. 4. pag. 83, 84. pag. 90.  they could observe no Sabbath; whereas he might have found, that the distinction of the days of the week did reach etiam ad ipsos usque Sauromatas, for even of the Slavonians themselves (while they yet continued in their ancient Paganism:) thus writeth Helmoldus, Chronic. Slavor. lib. 1. cap. 84. Illic secundâ feriâ populus terrae, cum flamine & regulo, convenire solebant propter judicia, the same order of the days of the week being retained by them, which Theophilus the old Bishop of Antioch noteth to have been observed by all mankind. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (saith he, lib. 2. ad Antolycum) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) confounding as it seemeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as also doth Lacta●tius, lib. 7 cap. 14.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Wherewith we may join that other place of Johannes Philoponus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 7. Cap. ult. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who, with showing the cause thereof, thus shuts up the whole work. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
We see it 
a The variation of some rude American breaketh here no square no more than it doth in the unskilful reckoning of their times. [They being mere Savages.  almost generally observed in all Nations, though never so far distant, and strangers one to another, that in their reckoning of Numbers, when they come to ten, they return to their Addition of 1. 2. and 3. again. If it should be demanded, how they did all come to agree upon this kind of Arithmetic; and not some place their period at 8. some at 12. some at 15? I suppose this could not be better resolved, than by saying they had this by tradition from the first Fathers that lived before the dispersion; and that this is not an improbable evidence of that truth propounded by the Apostle unto the Philosophers of Athens, Acts 17. 26. that God made of one blood all Nations of men to dwell on all the face of the Earth. How more when we find a far greater agreement among the Nations, in the computation of the seven days of the week (the selfsame day, which is accounted the first by one, being in like manner reckoned so by all; Notwithstanding, that great variety of differences: which is betwixt them in the ordering of their years and months:) how much more strongly, I say, may we conclude from hence, that the tradition of the seventh day was not of Moses, but of the Fathers, and did not begin with the Commonwealth of Israel, but was derived unto all Nations by lineal descent from the Sons of Noah?  
Add hereunto that those Heathens, who were strangers from the Commonwealth of Israel, though they made not the seventh day as Festival as the Jews did; yet did they attribute some holiness to it, and gave it a peculiar honour above the other days of the week; wherein they retained some Relics, and preserved still some clear footsteps of the first institution. Quinetiam populi jam 
* This word was not well left out by Gomarus, in Investigat. p. 123. The Greek, S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  olim, saith Josephus, (sub fin. lib. 2. contra Apion.) multùm nostram pietatem aemulantur: neque est civitas Graecorum ulla usquàm aut Barbarorum, nec ulla gens, ad quam septimanae, in qua vacamus, consuetudo minimè pervenerit; Jejuniaque & candelabra accensa, etc. of which Rite of lighting of Candles, or Lamps rather, mention also is made by Seneca in his 95th. Epistle: Accendere aliquam lucernam Sabbathis prohibeamus; quoniam nec lumine Dii egent, & ne homines quidem delectantur fuligine. And by Tertullian lib. 1. ad Nation. cap. 13. where he noteth also those to be the Sabbaths observed by the Nations, saying thus unto them. Qui solemn & diem ejus nobis exprobratis, agnoscite vicinitatem: Non longè à Saturno & Sabbatis VESTRIS sumus, wherein though their devotion were somewhat like 〈◊〉 of the Jews, (which is all that those words of Josephus do import; Multum nostram pietatem aemulantur,) yet that it was not done by any late imitation of them, or with any relation at all to their observance; that other place of Tertullian doth seem to evince, in the 16th. Chapter of his Apologeticum. Aequè si diem solis laetitiae indulgemus, aliâ longè ratione quam religione solis; secundo loco ab eis sumus qui diem Saturni otio & victui decernunt, exorbitantes & ipsi à Judaico more, 
a Upon these two words I ground the strength of the Argument: which will hold, notwithstanding the correction of Gottef●edus, out of that in libro, 1. ad Nationes cap. 13. Quod quidem facitis, exo●bitantes & ipsi à vestris ad altenas religiones.  quem ignorant. And that they did not celebrate their Satturdayes, with that solemnity wherewith themselves did their annual festivities, or the Jews their weekly Sabbaths, may appear by the words of this same Author, in the 14th. Chapter of his book de Idololatriâ, thus speaking unto the Christian, (who observed 52 Lords days every year, whereas all the annual festivities of the Pagans put together, did come short of fifty.) Ethnicis semel annuus dies quisque festus est; tibi octavo quoque die. Excerpe singulas solemnitates nationum, & in ordinem texe; Pentecosten implere non potuerunt. And yet, as I said, that they accounted Saturday more holy, and requiring more respect from them than the other ordinary days of the week, may be seen by that of Tibullus. Eleg. 3. lib. 1. 
Aut ego sum causatus aves, aut omina dira.  
Saturni SACRA me tenuisse die.   
And that of Lucian, 
a Oper. Lucian. Graec● lat. pag. 893. edit. Paris. Ann. 1615.  in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of boys getting leave to play 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that of Aelius Lampridius, touching Alexander Severus, using to go unto the Capitols and other Temples, upon the seventh day. Whereunto we may add those verses of the ancient Greek Poets, alleged by Clemens Alexandrinus, (lib. 5. Stromat.) and Eusebius (lib. 13. Praeparat. Evangelic.) which plainly show that they were not ignorant, that the works of Creation were finished on the seventh day, for so much doth that verse of Linus intimate.  

— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   
And that of Homer.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   
And that of Callimachus.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   
The Israelites, by the Law of Moses, were not only to observe their weekly Sabbath every seventh day, but also their feast of weeks once in the year: Which although by the vulgar use of the Jewish nation it may now fall upon any day of the week, yet do the Samaritans until this day constantly observe it on the first day of the week; which is our Sunday, For which they produce the Letter of the Law, Levit. 23. 15, 16. where the feast of the first fruits (otherwise called Pentecost, or the feast of weeks) is prescribed to be kept the morrow after the seventh Sabbath; which not they only, but also amongst our Christian Interpreters, Isychius and Rupertus do interpret to be the first day of the week. Planiùs, saith Isychius, 
Isych. lib. 6. in Levit. cap. 23. Vid. Lidya. De variis annorum formis, cap. 5.  Legislator intentionem suam demonstrate volens, ab altero die Sabbati memor ari praecepit quinquaginta dies: Dominicum diem proculdubiò volens intelligi. Hic enim est altera dies Sabbati, (in hâc enim resurrectio facta est) qua hebdomadae numerantur septem, usque ad alterum diem expletionis hebdomadae. Dominicâ rursus die Pentecostes celebramus festivitatem, in quâ Sancti Spiritus adventum meruimus. 
a i. Consecuti sumus, (juxta usum loquendi veterum.)  Where you may observe by the way, that although this Author made a little bold to strain the signification of altera dies Sabbati, (which in Moses denoteth no more than the morrow after the Sabbath) yet he maketh no scruple to call the day of Christ's Resurrection another Sabbath day, as in the Council of Friuli also (If I greatly mistake not the matter) 
Concil. Forojuliens. cap. 13.  you shall find Saturday called by the name of Sabbatum ultimum and the Lords day of Sabbatum primum, (with some allusion perhaps to that of St. Ambrose, in Psal. 47. Ubi Dominica dies caepit praecellere, quâ Dominus resurrexit; Sabbatum, quod primum erat secundum haberi caepit à primo,) not much unlike unto that, which Dr. 
b Part. 2. cap. 2. pag. 19 1.  Heylin himself noteth out of Scaliger of the Aethiopian Christians; that they call both of them by the name of Sabbaths: the one the first, the other the latter Sabbath; or in their own Language, the one Sanbath Sachristos, (i. e.) Christ's Sabbath, the other Sanbath Judi, or the Jews Sabbath.  
But touching the old Pentecost it is very considerable, that it is no where in Moses affixed unto any one certain day of the month, as all the rest of the feasts are: which is a very great presumption, that it was a movable feast, and so 
c Against Doctor Heylin, part 2. cap. 1. pug. 14.  varied, that it might always fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbath. And if God so order the matter, that in the celebration of the feast of weeks the seventh should purposely be passed over, and that solemnity should be kept upon the first: what other thing may we imagine could be praesignified thereby, but that under the State of the Gospel the solemnity of the weekly service should be celebrated upon that day? That on that day the famous Pentecost in the 2. of the Acts was observed, is in a manner generally acknowledged by all: wherein the truth of all those that went before being accomplished, we may observe the type and the verity, concurring together in a wonderful manner. At the time of the Passeover Christ our Passeover was slain for us: the whole Sabbath following 
1 Cor. 5. 7.  he rested in the grave. The next day after that Sabbath, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or sheaf of the first fruits of 
Levit. 23. 10, 11.  the first (or barley) Harvest was offered unto God; and Christ rose from the dead, and became the first fruits of them that slept; many bodies 
1 Cor. 15. 20. Matth. 27. 52, 53. Levit. 23. 15, 16, 17.  of the Saints that slept, arising likewise after him. From thence was the count taken of the seven Sabbaths; and upon the more after the seventh Sabbath (which was our Lord's day) was celebrated the feast of weeks, the day of the first fruits of the second (or wheat) Harvest: 
Numb. 28. 26. Exod. 34. 22.  upon which day the Apostles having themselves received the first fruits of the spirit, begat three thousand Souls with the word of truth, and presented them as the first fruits of the Christian Church 
Acts 2. 1, 4, 5, 41. Jam. 1. 18. Revel. 14. 4.  unto God, and unto the Lamb. And from that time forward doth Waldensis note that the Lords day was observed in the Christian Church in the place of the Sabbath. Quia inter legalia (saith he) tunc sublata Sabbati castodia fuit unum, planum est tunc intrâsse Dominicam loco ejus: sicut Baptisma 
Thom. Waldens. Doctrinal. Tom. 3. Tit. 16. c. 140.  statim loco Circumcisionis. Adhuc enim superstes erat sanctus Johannes, qui diceret: Et fui in spiritu die Dominicâ, Apocal. 1. cum de Dominicâ die ante Christi Resurrection nulla prorsùs mentio haberetur. Sed statim post missionem Spiritus sancti, lege nouâ fulgente, in humano cultu sublatum est Sabbatum; & dies Dominicae Resurrectionis clarescebat Dominica.  
The Revelation exhibited unto 
Revel. 7. 10.  St. John upon the Lord's day; is by Irenaeus (in his fifth book) referred unto the Empire of Domitian, or, as S. Hierome in his Catalogue more particularly doth express it, to the fourth year of his Reign: Which answereth partly to the forty ninth, and partly to the ninty fifth year of our Lord, according to our vulgar computation; and was but eleven or twelve years before the time, when Ignatius did write his Epistles. Of whom then should we more certainly learn, what the Apostle meant by the Lord's day, then from Ignatius? who was by the Apostles 
Acts 11. 26.  themselves ordained Bishop of that Church, wherein the Disciples were first called Christians; and in his Epistle to the Magnesians clearly maketh the Lord's day to be a weekly holy day, observed by Christians, in the room of the abrogated Sabbath of the Jews: than which, can we desire more? But here you are to know, beside the common edition, wherein the genuine Epistles of Ignatius are foully depraved by a number of beggarly patches added unto his purple by later hands; there is an ancient Latin translation to be found in the Library of Cays College in Cambridge; which, although it be very rude, and corrupt both in many other, and in this very same place also of the Epistle to the Magnesians; yet is it free from these additaments, and in many respects to be preferred before the common Greek Copy, as well because it agreeth with the Citations of Eusebius, Athanasius, and Theodoret, and hath the sentences vouched by them out of Ignatius (and particularly that of the Eucharist, in the Epistle to the Smyrnians) which are not at all to be found in our Greek; and hath in a manner none of all those places in the true Epistles of Ignatius, against which exception hath been taken by our Divines: which addeth great strength to those exceptions of theirs, and showeth that they were not made without good cause. Now in this Translation there is nothing to be found touching the Sabbath, and the Lords day in the Epistle to the Magnesians, but these words only. Non ampliùs sabbatizantes, sed secundùm Dominicam viventes, in quâ, & vita nostra orta est; whereunto these of our common Greek may be made answerable. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
a It may be the three first syll ables of this word were wanting in the Greek Copy, which the Translator used; & thence came his viventes.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. all those other words alleged by Dr. Heylin, (part. 2. pag. 43.) to prove that Ignatius would have both the Sabbath and the Lords day observed, being afterwards added by some later Grecian; who was afraid that the custom of keeping both days observed in his time should appear otherwise to be directly opposite to the sentence of Ignatius, whereas his main intention was to oppose the Ebionites of his own time: who, as Eusebius witnesseth in the third book of his Ecclesiastical History, did both keep the Sabbath with the Jews, and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. By whose imitation of the Church herein, the antiquity of the observation of the Lords day may be further confirmed: Ebion being known to have been St. Paul's Antagonist; and to have given out of himself, that he was one of those that brought the prices of their goods, and laid them down at the Apostles feet: as the universality of the observance may be gathered by the argument drawn from thence by Eusebius towards the end of his Oration of the praises of Constantine) to prove the preeminency of our Saviour Christ, above all the gods of the Heathen: because this prescript of his touching the celebration of this day was admitted and submitted unto, not within the Dominions of Constantine only, but also throughout the compass of the whole world. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Quis n. (saith he) cunctis totius orbis terrarum incobis, seu terra seu mari illi sint, praescripserit ut singulis septimanis in unum convenientes diem Dominicum festum celebrarent; instituentque ut sicut corpora pascerent cibariis, sic animos Divinis Disciplinis refi●erent?  
We see then that the Doctrine, which the true Ignatius received immediately from the hands of the Apostles, was the very same with that was delivered by the Fathers of the Council of Laodicea, about 250 years after, (for the profs produced by the Authors, to whom my 
a D. White.  Lord of Eli, pag. 73. refereth us, for having it to be held before the first Nicene, are nothing worth.) Non oportet Christianos Judaizare & in Sabbatho otiari; sed ipsos eo die operari, diem autem dominicum praeferentes otiari (si modo possint) ut Christianos: the contrary whereunto Pope Gregory the first (in Registr. lib. 11. Epist. 3. esteemeth to be the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist: qui veniens, diem Dominicum & Sabbatum ab omni opere faciet custodiri: which my Lord of Eli, pag. 219.) rendereth; upon the old Sabbath-day, or upon the Sunday: by a strange kind of mistake turning the copulative into a disjunctive.   

A Letter of Doctor Twisse to the Lord Primate, thanking him for the former Letter, and his Book de primordiis, Brit. Eccles. The History of Goteschalcus, etc. where the honour and respect he gives him is exemplary, unto others.  
Most Reverend Father in God,  
I was very glad to hear of your Grace his coming over into England; and now I have a fair opportunity to express my thankful acknowledgement of that great favour wherewith you were pleased to honour me, in bestowing one of your books upon me, de origine Britannicarum Ecclesiarum; which I received from Sir Benjamin Rudierd in your Grace his name, about the end of Summer last, wherein I do observe not only your great learning and various reading manifested at full, but your singular wisdom also in reference to the necessitous condition of these times; taking so fair an occasion to insert therein, the History of the Pelagian Heresy, so opportunely coming in your way. Your History of Goteschalcus was a piece of the like nature, which came forth most seasonably; we know what meetings there were in London thereupon by some; and to what end, to relieve the reputation of Vossius, who laboured not a little when he was discovered to have alleged the confession of Pelagius, for the confession of Austin: As also in fathering upon the Adrametine Monks, the Original of the Praedestinarian Heresy: I was at that time upon answering Corvinus his defence of Arminius, and had dispatched one digression upon the same argument, and in the issue concluded that it was but a trick of the Pelagians to cast the Nickname of the Praedestinarian Heresy, upon the Orthodox Doctrine of St. Austin: But upon the coming forth of your Goteschalcus, I was not only confirmed therein, but upon better, and more evident grounds, enabled in a second digression to meet with the Dictates of— who endeavoured to justify the conceit of Vossius, but upon very weak grounds. Thus I have observed with comfort the hand of God to have gone along with your Grace, for the honouring of the cause of his truth, in so precious a point as is the glory of his Grace. And I nothing doubt, but the same hand of our good God will be with you still, and his wisdom will appear in all things you undertake, whether of your own choice, or upon the motion of others: There being never more need of harkening unto, and putting in practice our Saviour's rule, Be ye wise as Serpents, and innocent as Doves. And have I not as great cause to return your Grace most hearty thanks, for the kind Letters I received in answer to the motions I was emboldened to make; had it been but only to signify the great satisfaction I received thereby in divers particulars, but especially in two principal ones; the one, the mystery of the feasts of first fruits opened to the singular advantage of the honour of the Lords day in the time of the Gospel, the other, in correcting Ignatius by a Latin Manuscript of Cays College; which since I have gotten into my hands, and taken a Copy thereof, and have caused it to be compared with two other Copies, Manuscripts in Oxford, the one in Magdalene, the other in Balliol College Library; I take no small comfort in the hope I conceive of seeing your Grace before your departure into Ireland, I hear of a purpose your Grace hath to see Oxford, and abide some time there, the Lord bless you, and keep you, and make his face to shine upon you.  
Newberry May 29. 1640. Yours in all observance, desiring to sit at your Grace his feet. WILLIAM TWISSE.  
Mr. Chambers of Clouford by Bath, hath long ago answered Dr. Heylines' History of the Sabbath, but knows not how to have it printed.   

A Clause in a Letter of the Primates, to Mr. Ley, of the Sabbath.  
FOr mine own part, I never yet doubted but took it for granted; that as the setting of some whole day apart for God's solemn Worship was Juris Divini naturalis, so that this solemn day should be one in seven, was juris Divini positivi, recorded in the fourth Commandment. And such a jus divinum positivum, here I mean, as Baptism and the Lords Supper are established, both which lie not in the power of any man, or Angel to change, or alter, wherein me thinks, your second position is a little too waterish, viz. That this Doctrine rather than the contrary is to be held the Doctrine of the Church of England; And may well be gathered out of her public liturgy, and the first part of the Homily concerning the place, and time of prayer. Whereas, you should have said that this is to be held undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Church of England. For if there could be any reasonable doubt made of the meaning of the Church of England in her Liturgy, who should better declare her meaning, than self in her Homily? where she peremptorily declareth her mind. That in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men, that upon the Sabbath day, which is now our Sunday, they should cease from all weekly and work-day labour, to the intent, that like as God himself wrought six days, and rested the seventh, blessed and sanctified it, and consecrated it to rest, and quietness from labour, even so God's obedient people should use the Sunday holily, and rest from their common, and daily business, and also give themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service; Than which, what could you devise to say more yourself? For the further maintenance of which Doctrine, I send you herewith a Treatise, written by 
a Mr. Hely of Perry.  a learned man (now with God) against Theophilus Brabourn; who gave occasion to the raising up of these unhappy broils; which, if it may any way conduce to the furtherance of your more exact Treatise, etc. I shall be very glad, and be ready to, etc.   

Part of a Letter of the Primates, to an Honourable person, not long after the coming forth of Doctor Heylins' book▪ of the History of the Sabbath, which I found wrote in the same Paper with the former.  
AS for Dr. Heylins' 
a Hist. of the Sabbath. part. 2. cap. 8.  relation, concerning our Articles of Ireland, it is much mistaken. For first where he saith, they did pass when his Majesty's Commissioners were employed about the settling of the Church, Anno 1615. and chargeth them with this strict austerity (as he termeth it) in the prescript observation of the Lords day, he showeth himself very credulous, there having been no such Commissioners here at that time, and our Articles having been published in Print divers years before the Commissioners (whom he meaneth) came hither, as Sir Nathaniel Rich (who was one of them himself) can sufficiently inform you. Secondly, where he saith, he is sure, that till that time the Lords day had never attained such credit as to be thought an Article of the faith, he speaks very inconsiderately. He that would confound the ten Commandments (whereof this must be accounted for one, unless he will leave us but nine) with the Articles of the faith, he had need be put to learn his Catechism again: And he that would have every thing, which is put into the Articles of Religion (agreed upon in the Synod for the avoiding of diversity of opinions, and for the maintenance of peace, and uniformity in the Church) to be held for an Article of the faith, should do well to tell us whether he hath as yet admitted 
a These two here instanced were not by way of diminution, for he did highly approve of both, as being excellent composures, but because they are either for the most part to be reckoned among the Agenda, rather than the Credenda, or that in both there are some circumstantials observed, and exhorted unto, only for decency and order, according to the wisdom of the Church, which come not within the compass of the Creed, as upon the view of them, without descending to particulars, may easily appear.  the Book of the ordination of Bishops, and the two volumes of Homilies into his Creed, for sure I am he shall find these received in the Articles of Religion, agreed upon in the Synod held at London, 1562. To which Doctor Heylen himself having subscribed, I wonder how he can oppose the conclusion, which he findeth directly laid down in the Homily of the time and place of prayer in the fourth Commandment, viz. God hath given express charge to all men that upon the Sabbath-day which is now our Sunday (for these are the plain words of the Homily, which the Doctor with all his Sophistry will never be able to elude) they shall cease from all weekly, and weekday labour, to the intent thot like as God himself wrought six days, and rested the seventh, and blessed, and consecrated it to quietness, and rest from labour, even so God's obedient people should use the Sunday holily, and rest from their common and daily business, and also give themselves wholly to the heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service. By the verdict of the Church of England, I am sure the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit, as nothing more could be left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles, afterward to add unto it. Thirdly, he shameth not to affirm, That the whole Book of the Articles of Ireland is now called, in (which is a notorious untruth.) And lastly, that the Articles of the Church of England, were confirmed by Parliament in this Kingdom, Anno 1634. where it is well known that they were not so much as once propounded to either House of Parliament, or ever intended to be propounded. The truth is, that the House of Convocation in the beginning of their Canons, for the manifestation of their agreement with the Church of England, in the confession of the same Christian faith, and the Doctrine of the Sacraments (as they themselves profess) and for no other end in the world, did receive and approve of the Articles of England; but that either the Articles of Ireland were ever called in, or any Articles, or Canons at all, were ever here confirmed by Act of Parliament, may well be reckoned among Doctor Heylins' fancies. Which shows what little credit he deserves in his Geography, when he brings us news of the remote parts of the world, that tells us so many untruths of things so lately, and so publicly acted in his Neighbour Nation.   

A Confirmation of the latter clause in this Letter of the Primates, viz. That the Articles of Ireland (determining the observation of the Lords day) were not called in Anno 1634. as Doctor Heylin hath affirmed.  
DOctor Heylin, under the mask of an Observator hath been already offended with me, for joining in a Certificate against what he hath related concerning the abrogating of the Articles of Ireland, which was done by the command of this most Reverend Primate in his life time, and since that, he hath been much more; for my saying in his Funeral Sermon, Some had rashly affirmed it, and that some such presumptuous affections have been lately published, and styling that person a presumptuous (I may say also uncharitable) observator, that should presume to enter into the Lord Primates breast, and aver that the abrogating of them (to use his own term) was the cause of his carrying a sharp tooth, bearing a grudge (and that a mortal one) towards the L. Lieutenant Strafford. The Language with which throughout he pleaseth himself, might have been easily returned, but in regard such pen-combats are unseasonable, and unfitting between those of the same profession (only grateful to the adversary of both) I have left it to the prudence of a third person, who hath a convenient opportunity in his History to clear the whole, in the examination and moderation of all the passages between Mr. L. Strange and him.  
Only thus much upon this occasion, the observator is pleased to give me a share in his Title-page, calling it a rescue from the back-blows of Dr. Bernard; Indeed as to the person smitten, if they were any, they could be no other, for he then turned the back, and not the face, being an Anonymus, and so appearing in that disguise, I might be excused as he was that smote a Clergy man, riding without his Priestly habit, A man that walks in the dark, may meet with a knock by such as mean him no harm. And indeed the apprehension of the Authors disaffection so much expressed to this Eminent, and pious Primate in the endeavours thus to blemish him, (whom the whole reformed Church hath an high esteem of,) gave it suspected, both to myself, and others to have been some Jesuit, or Agent of the Sea of Rome, though as yet, not any one (as I hear of) hath moved his tongue against that true Israelite at his Exit hence, and I am sorry to see his sole enemies to be those of his own house, and profession.  
But for the confirmation of what is here affirmed by the Primate, that the Articles of Ireland were not called in, though his abovementioned Letter is sufficient to all uninteressed persons, yet for the Readers more full satisfaction, I shall give you a brief Narrative of the whole matter, being then a Member of that Convocation.  
First in the House of the Clergy, which was then in the Cathedral of St. Patrick's Dublin, there was a motion made for the reception anew of the Articles of Ireland, and all unanimous were for the affirmative, excepting two, who went out. Another time the whole house of the Clergy being called into the Choir, where the Bishops sat, and the same thing again propounded to them, they all stuck to their former vote, excepting seven. The intent of the whole Clergy being by this sufficiently understood, and it appearing, there was no need of any such confirmation, having been An. 1615. fully and formally established, (viz. signed by Archbishop Jones, Chancellor of Ireland, and then Speaker of the House of the Bishops in Convocation, by the Prolocutor of the House of the Clergy in their names, and signed by the then Lord Deputy Chichester, (by order from King James in his name) that motion was no more repeated, only the Primate was consulted with, concerning the approving and receiving of the Articles of England also, to which he readily consented, there being no substantial difference between them, to which he had subscribed himself voluntarily, long before in England, and conceiving it to be without any prejudice to the other.  
Hereupon the first Canon (being all that was done in relation to them) was drawn up, the Primate approved it, and proposed itself (as Precedent of the Synod) in the House of the Bishops, commended it to the House of the Clergy, where by his motion many assented the more readily, they all gave their Votes, man by man, excepting one person, who suspended his, out of the suspicion that some might make that construction, which is the observators conclusion.  
Now the chief argument, which the observator (if I may not call him Dr. Heylin) spends himself upon, is from what he hath picked out of the words of the Canon, where they do not only approve, but receive the Articles of England, from thence he infers a superinducing of those, and so an abrogating of these of Ireland.  
But I answer, there was not a reception of the one instead of the other, but the one with the other, and there being no difference in substance, but only in method number of subjects determined, and other circumstantials, it argues no more an abrogation than that doth of the Apostles Creed, by our reception of the Nicene Creed and Athanasius', wherein some points are more enlarged, or that the reception into our use the form of the Lords Prayer, according to Saint Matthew, abrogates that of Saint Luke, being the shorter; Neither do I see, but if for the manifestation of our Union with other reformed Churches; We should approve and receive their Articles of Religion, and they receive ours, it were no abrogating of either. And the difference in them being only in circumstantials, and not in substance, all might be called one confession, That as of many Seas one Ocean, of many National Churches one Catholic Church, so of many forms of Canfessions, but one faith amongst them.  
That Argument from the Apostles speech of making void the old Covenant by speaking of a new, or taking in the first day of the week to be the Sabbath, instead of the last, when but one of the seven was to be kept, doth not fit the case: for in these there was a superinduction, and reception of the one for the other: but in the Canon, the Articles of England are received not instead, but with those of Ireland. And that it was the sense then apprehended, not only by the Primate, but by the other Bishops (at least divers of them) appears in this, That afterwards at an Ordination they took the subscription of the party ordained to both Articles. And for further confirmation of this I shall give you the sense of a most eminent, learned, and judicious person, upon the view of what the observator rescued had written of it, I have received (says he) the book you sent me, and have perused it; I see he will have the allowance of our Articles of England, by the Synod in Ireland, to be a virtual disannulling of the Irish Confession; which (I conceive) saith no more, but, That both Confessions were consistent; And the Act of that Synod not a revocation of the Irish Articles, but an approbation of ours, as agreeing with them; He hath his flings at your Sermon, Preached at the Lord Primates Funeral, but in truth, he wrongs himself and our Church in those detractions from him.   

A Letter of the late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland, to Doctor Bernard of Gray's Inn, containing his judgement of the ordination of the Ministry in France and Holland.  
I Received this following Letter from the late Archbishop of Armagh, not long before his death, which (at the desire of some prudent men, and of different opinion in the subject of it) I have been moved to publish, which indced was committed to me by him for that end, and I do it the rather now, in regard somewhat hath been mistaken in the discourse of it, to his prejudice on both sides: So that without breach of trust I could no longer detain it. The occasion of it was this, there was given me by an Honourable person a writing, containg a report raised of the said Archbishop concerning his judgement of the ordination beyond the Sea, which he prayed me to send unto him, which is as followeth: Mr.— asked the Archbishop of Armagh, upon occasion of an ordination, what he thought of them that were ordained by Presbyters? he said he judged their ordination to be null, and looked on them as Laymen. He asked him, what he conceived of the Churches beyond the Sea. The Bishop answered, he had charitable thoughts of them in France. But as for Holland, he questioned if there was a Church amongst them, or not: or words fully to that purpose. This Dr.— confidently reports. This paper according to the earnest desire of the said person, I sent enclosed to the Lord Primate, being then out of Town, from whom immediately I received this answer, containing his judgement of the ordination of the Ministry of the reformed Churches in France, and Holland, as followeth.  
Touching Mr.— I cannot call to mind that he ever proposed unto me the Questions in your Letter enclosed, neither do I know the Doctor— who hath spread that report; But for the matter itself, I have ever declared my opinion to be, That Episcopus & Presbyter, gradu tantum differunt, non ordine; and consequently, that in places where Bishops cannot be had, the ordination by Presbyters standeth valid, yet on the other side holding as I do, that a Bishop hath superiority in degree above a Presbyter, you may easily judge that the ordination made by such Presbyters, as have severed themselves from those Bishops, unto whom they had sworn Canonical obedience, cannot possibly by me be excused from being Schismatical; And howsoever, I must needs think that the Churches, which have no Bishops, are thereby become very much defective in their Government, and that the Churches in France, who, living under a Popish power, cannot do what they would, are more excusable in this defect than the Low-Countries that live under a free State: yet for the testifying my Communion with these Churches (which I do love and honour as true Members of the Church Universal.) I do profess that with like affection, I should receive the blessed Sacrament at the hands of the Dutch Ministers, if I were in Holland, as I should do at the hands of the French Ministers, if I were in Charentone.   

Some Animadvertisements upon the aforesaid Letter, in prevention of any misinterpretations of it.  
1. WHereas in the former part of it, he saith, he hath ever declared his opinion to be, etc. I can witness it from the time I have had the happiness to be known to him, it being not (as some possibly might suggest) a change of judgement upon the occurrences of latter years.  
2. For that superiority only in degree; which, he saith, a Bishop hath above a Presbyter, it is not to be understood as an arbitrary matter at the pleasure of men, but that he held it to be of Apostolical institution, and no more a diminution of the preeminency and authority of Episcopacy, than the denomination of lights given in common by Moses, to all of them in the firmament (Genes. 1.) detracts from the Sun & Moon, whom he calls the greater, and were assigned of God to have the rule of the rest; though the difference between them be only gradual, yet there is a derivative subordination, as the pre-eminence of the firstborn, was but gradual, they were all brethren, but to him was given of God the excellency, or supremacy of Dignity and power, to him they must bow, or be subject, and he must have the rule over them: And that this gradus is both derived from the pattern prescribed by God in the Old Testament (where that distinction is found in the Title of the Chief Priest, who had the rule of the rest, called by the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and from the imitation thereof brought in by the Apostles, and confirmed by Christ in the time of the New; The Primate hath so fully confirmed in that learned Tractate of his, of the Original of Bishops, which he hath deduced from the Apostolical times; that I know not what can be added; And even for that higher gradus of a Metropolitan, or Archbishop, to have been also Apostolical, he hath, from the superscription of John, to the seven Churches, (each of which Cities being Metropolitical, and the rest of the Cities of Asia daughters under them) given very strong probabilities, hard to be gainsaid; unto which (as an excellent comment upon this Letter) I shall refer the Reader.  
3. That in this judgement of his he was not singular; Doctor Davenant, that pious, and Learned Bishop of Salisbury, consents with him in it. (in his determinations, q. 42. produceth the principal pf the Schoolmen, Gulielmus Parisiensis, Gerson, Durand, etc. Episcopatus non est ordo praecisè distinctus à sacerdotio simplici, etc. non est alia potestas ordinis in Episcopis quam Presbyteris, sed inest modo perfectiori. And declares it to be the general opinion of the Schoolmen. Episcopatum ut distinguitur à simplici sacerdotio non non esse alium ordinem; sed eminentiorem quandam potestatem & dignitatem in eodem ordine sacerdotali, etc. And as he grants the Bishop to have dignitatem altiorem, potestatem majorem, etc. so doth the Primate in that he saith he hath a superiority in degree above a Presbyter, and that the Churches which have no Bishops, are thereby become very much defective in their Government; Both of them being far from a parity.  
And whereas the Primate saith, That in cases of necessity, where Bishops cannot be had, the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid, Bishop Davenaut concurres with him also: That where Bishops were Heretical, or idolatrous, and refuse to ordain Orthodox Ministers, that in such and the like cases he saith: Si Orthodoxi Presbyteri (ne pereat Ecclesia) alios Presbyteros cogantur ordinare, ego non ausim hujusmodi ordinationes pronuntiare irritas, & innanes, etc. Necessitas non inscitè lex temporis appellatur, & in tali casu defendat id ad quod coegit, and produceth the opinion of Richardus Armachanus (one of this Primates Predecessors, and one of the most Learned men in his time) to be accordingly. Armachani opinio est, quod si omues Episcopi essent defuncti, sacerdotes minores possunt ordinare, & applies it to the like Protestant Churches, which the Primate mentions. Hac freti necessitate si Ecclesiae quaedam protestantium quae ordinationes ab Episcopis Papistis expectare non poterant consensu Presbyterorum suorum Presbyteros ordinarunt, non inde Episcopali dignitati praejudicasse, sed necessitati Ecclesiae obtemperasse judicandi sint, Thus much for Bishop Davenants concurrence, to which divers others might be added, as in special, Doctor Richard Field sometimes Dean of Gloucester, in his Learned Book of the Church, lib. 3. cap. 39 and lib. 5. cap. 27. where this judgement of the Primates, and this concurrence of Bishop Davenants is largely confirmed, without the least derogation from the preeminency of Episcopacy.  
But that book entitled, The defence of the Ordination of the Ministers of the reformed Churches beyond the Seas maintained by Mr Archdeacon Mason, against the Romanists (who wrote also a defence of Episcopacy, and of the Ministry of the Church of England) is sufficiently known, and I have been assured, it was not only the Judgement of Bishop Overal, but that he had a principal hand in it; He produceth many Testimonies. The Master of the Sentences, and most of the Schoolmen, Bonaventure, Tho. Aquinas, Durand. Dominicus, Soto, Richardus Armachanus, Tostatus, Alphonsus à Castro, Gerson, Petrus, Canisius, to have affirmed the same, and at last quoteth Medina, a principal Bishop of the Council of Trent, who affirmed, That Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, Sedulius, Primasius, chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, were of the same judgement also. And I suppose there is none doubts, but that the Primate joined with Archdeacon Mason in that conclusive wish of his, viz. That wherein the Discipline of France, or Holland is defective, they would by all possible means redress, and reform it, and conform themselves to the ancient custom of the Discipline of Christ, which hath continued from the Apostles time, that so they may remove all opinion of singularity, and stop the mouth of malice itself,  
In a word, If the ordination of Presbyters in such places where Bishops cannot be had, were not valid, the late Bishops of Scotland had a hard task to maintain themselves to be Bishops, who were not Priests, for their Ordination was no other, And for this, a passage in the History of Scotland, wrote by the Archbishop of Saint Andrews is observable, viz. That when tke Scots Bishops were to be consecrated by the Bishops of London, Ely, and Bath, here at London house, An. 1609. he saith, A question was moved by Doctor Andrews, Bishop of Ely, touching the consecration of the Scottish Bishops, who, as he said, must first be ordained Presbyters, as having received no ordination from a Bishop. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Doctor Bancroft, who was by; maintained, That thereof there was no necessity, seeing where Bishops could not be had, the ordination given by the Presbyters must be esteemed lawful, otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any lawful vocation in most of the reformed Churches, This applauded to by the other Bishops, Ely acquiesced, and at the day, and in the place appointed, the three Scottish Bishops were consecrated by the abovesaid three English Bishops, the Archbishop of Canterbury forbearing for another cause there mentioned.  
Now though the ordination of Presbyters in this case of necessity be granted to be valid, yet I have heard this learned Primate wonder at the neglect found in the late Presbyterian way of ordation, viz. That at imposition of hands, they neither used the ancient form of words, with which the first framers of it were themselves ordained, nor used any other to that sense in their room, at least there is no order, or direction for it. For suppose the words of our Saviour to the Apostles, (John 10. 21, 21.) at their ordination were scrupled at, viz. Receive the holy Ghost, whose sins thou dost forgive are forgiven: and whose sins thou dost retain are retained, (which rightly understood, gave no just cause) yet why might not the next words have been continued? viz. and be thou a faithful dispenser of the word of God, and of his holy Sacraments, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost: or the other words upon the solemn delivery of the Bible, into the hands of the person ordained; Take thou authority to preach the word of God, and to minister the holy Sacraments in the Congregation where thou shalt be so appointed. I can imagine no cause against the use of one of these, unless it be because they had been used there, as if in this sense, old things must be done away; and all must be new. To impose hands (according to the injunction of the Apostle, and to have it accompanied with prayer and thanksgiving for the person, is well done (which in the former constitution was solemnly observed before, and after it) but why should the formal transmitting of Authority also in the name of Christ for the power of officiating be left undone, if the scruple in the instrumental cause be satisfied, why might it not have been prevented in the formal, who might have freely given what they had received. Now to give the seal of ordination (as some please to call imposition of hands) without any express commission annexed, or grant of Authority to the person, the Primate was wont to say, seemed to him to be like the putting of a seal to a blank, which being so weighty a business, I wish prudent men would consider of, least in the future it arm the adversary with objections; and fill our own with further scruples; And so much (far larger than I intended) for the prevention of any offence, which might be taken at the one part of the Letter.  
Now for the other clause of his judgement, which he leaves unto me to judge, what in reason I might apprehend to be his, I leave it accordingly to the judgement of others: All that can give any offence, is that term of Schism. But in regard it is not directly determined, but only that he could not be an Advocate to excuse it; and being delivered in that Latitude, that it is dubious whether foreign (to which the question chiefly relateth) or domestic, former times, or latter, may take the application. I shall not offend the Reader with any larger Apology, only wherein any shall find themselves concerned, I wish such humble and meek spirits, that the admonition of so pious, and eminent a Bishop, (whose fame is throughout the Churches) might prevail to the amendmeut of what hath been amiss among us. If I have abounded beyond my measure, to the hazard of the offence of both parties in these advertisements, let it be excused by the impartiality of it, and the unbiased intention for the settling of truth and peace so shaken of later days.   

The Primates judgement of several Subjects.  
THe mifinterpretations, which have been already made of this most Reverend and Learned mate, of a change of judgement in him towards his latter end, (which I have been moved here to vindicate) giving it suspected to be the forerunner of more of the like, which may be raised hereafter, I have been advised upon this occasion, both in answer to, and prevention of any other false rumours for the future to declare more fully what I did of him briefly in his Funeral Sermon, as to some particulars then whispering of him (omitted at the press, but not with my will,) And I do it the rather in regard, as I was desired then by some of different judgement, to make an impartial relation of his there (there each like Israel and Judah, for David, claiming an interest in him) so finding that omission to be diversely interpreted to my censure, and conceived by some to be the occasion of those several mistakes raised of him since, (whereby, as (praef. to disp. of Sacram.) Mr. Baxter complains, The good Bishop must now be what every one will say of him, one feigning him to be of one extreme, and the other of the other extreme) which the publishing might have prevented, I have thought fit to discharge that trust reposed in me, both in relation to his Doctrine and practice, and I know no person of more general reputation, and more like to be an exemplary pattern in this his moderation, which I conceived fit to be known unto all men.   

The late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland, his judgement in matter of Doctrine, Discipline, and other subjects; of which there have been some different opinions among others, and some misinterpretations of him.  
IN Doctrine he did fully approve the Articles of Religion of the Church of England, as the same more enlarged in the Articles of Ireland: The discipline and constitutious of both, he did also approve.  
For the Liturgy in the public prayers, as while he lived at Drogheda in Ireland, they were constantly observed in his family, so he had them in estimation to his last; And the last time he was in London upon the occasion of some rash groundless rumours raised of him to the contrary, (to his no small grief) he gave his judgement accordingly to an Honourable person, wrote with his own hand, which he showed unto me; He had constantly prayers in his family four times a day; At six in the morning, and eight at night, they were such, wherein the gifts of those, who were his Chaplains were exercised, but before Dinner and Supper in the Chapel, was the forenamed also observed; Indeed he was not so rigid, as to tie all men in the private, to an absolute necessary use of it, or in the public, that a Sermon was not to be heard, unless that did precede; And for the healing or preventing of those distractions and divisions, which have been among Ministers as others, and the moderating of each extremity in relation to the use of it whereby there might be a return of that wished-for peace and unity, which of late years we have been strangers to, He conceived some prudent moderate accommodation might have been thought of (and yet may) by wise men, in order to the present continuance of the substantial part of it, (each side yielding somewhat, after the example of Saint Paul in circumstantials) which might have better borne the name of a reformation, than thus to have a total suppression of it, whereby with the intention of gathering up the Tares, the Wheat hath been rooted up also.  
As for some arbitrary innovations, not within the compass of the rule, and order of the book, he did not affect, and often wished they had not been introduced, as foreseeing the issue of it, what was commanded he readily observed, but did not take upon him to introduce any Rite, or Ceremony upon his own opinion of decency, till the Church had judged it so; and thought they most owned the book, who neither added, or diminished from the rule of it.  
And for bowing at the Name of Jesus, though he censured not those that did, either in our, or other Reformed Churches, according to the custom of each, yet he did not conceive the injunction of it could be founded upon that of the Apostle, Phil. 2. 10. and wondered at some learned men's assertions, that it was the Exposition of all the Fathers upon it, And as the wise composers of the Liturgy gave no direct injunction for it there, so in Ireland he withstood the putting of it into the Canon, Anno 1634.  
That a form of prayer, not only by way of direction, but punctually composed were fit to be had in the public he was ever for, as much conducing to the benefit of the vulgar people, which are the major part of the Nation, and especially in the administration of Baptism, and the Communion, as well for the shunning and preventing the disorder, and scandalous confusion found in some men's performances of them, as the testifying of an unity and unanimity among us, which Saint Paul prefers as the more excellent way, before the variety of all Spiritual gifts whatsoever.  
He often wished The judgement of Calvine concerning it (who was a wise and learned man) in his letter to the L. Protector of England, in Edward the sixth's time, were more known than it is, in regard of his esteem with such, who have oppsed it, who doth 
a o Quod ad formulam precum & rituum Ecclesiasticorum valde probo, ut certa illa extet à qua pastoribus discedere in functione sua non liceat, tam ut consulatur quorundam simplicitati & imperitiae, quam ut certius ita constat omnium inter se Ecclesiaerum consensus; postreme etiam ut obviam eatur desultoriae quorundam levitati, qui Novationes quasdam affectant; sic igitur statum esse Catechismum oportet statam Sacramentorum administrationem, publicam item precum formulam; vid. Ep. Anno 1546. Protectori Angliae.  much approve that there should be a certain set form of prayer, from which it should not be lawful for the Pastors to depart in their function, both that some care might be had of the more simple, and ignorant sort, as also that the consent of all the Churches within themselves might the more evidently appear. And lastly, for the prevention of the inconstant levity of some, who are affecters of novelty, and so adviseth to have a set Catechism, a set form of public prayers, and administration of Sacraments.  
He was for the Minister's improving of their gifts, and abilties in prayer, before Sermon and after, according to his own practice: but if that were done, he saw no reason why the other should be left undone; The Church of God being like a great family, whereein some being Infants and Children, as well as of full age, a provision must be had of Milk, as stronger meat, and all aught to be equally taken care of, even the ignorant, and simpler sort, as well as those of greater education.  
For Ordination, or an ordained Ministry, such was his judgement of the necessity of it, That he took it to be a fundamental, and one of those principles of Christian Doctrine, (Hebr. 6. 2.) called, laying on of hands; the great neglect of which he much lamented, as fearing it would prove to be the undermining the foundation of our Church, which Mr. Cartwright, in his 
a Answer to the Rhem. ●est  Commentary upon the place, confirms to the full, and in a higher expression, as if it were the overthrow of Christianity. And yet, as you have heard, he was not so severe as to condemn, and disown the Ministry of other reformed Churches, or refuse Communion with them, because in every particular, as to some persons usually ordaining, they were defective.  
For Episcopacy, he was not wanting with Saint Paul to magnify his own office, by two several Tractates he hath published, (none being more able to defend the ancient right of it) for which he was by Letters importuned, by some of the most eminent persons of his own profession, yet how humbly without any partiality to himself, and the eminent degree he had obtained in it, did he declare his judgement, is evident by the abovesaid Tractates, and the Letter before mentioned, And his prudence in the present accommodation of things in that Treatise of his, viz. The reduction of it to the form of Synodical Government, for the prevention of that disturbance, which did afterwards arise about it, is as apparent also; if others concerned in these transactions had been of that moderation, humility, and meekness, the wound given, might have been healed before it grew incurable.  
That the Annual Commemorations of the Articles of the faith, such as the Nativity, Passion, Resurrection, of our Saviour, etc. were fit to be observed (which Saint Augustine saith, in his time were in use through the whole Catholic Church of Christ) and is now in some Reformed Churches, as a means to keep them in the memory of the vulgar, (according to the pattern of God's injunction to the Israelites in the Old Testament, for the Types of them) appeared sufficiently to be his judgement, by his then constant preaching upon those subjects.  
The Friday before Easter (i e. the Resurrection, East in old Saxon, signifying rising) appointed for the remembrance of the Passion of our Saviour, he did duly at Drogheda, in Ireland, observe as a solemn fast, (inclining the rather to that choice out of Prudence, and the security from censure, by the then custom of having Sermons beyond their ordinary limit in England;) when (after the public prayers of the Church) he first preached upon that subject, extending himself in prayer and Sermon beyond his ordinary time, which we imitated, who succeeded in the duties of the day, and which being known to be his constant custom, some from Dublin, as other parts, came to partake of it; which most excellent Sermons of his upon that occasion, he was by many Godly Religious persons importuned much for the publishing of them, and his strict observation of this fast was such, that neither before, or after that extraordinary pains would he take the least refreshment, till about six a Clock, and which did not excuse him from Preaching again on Easter day, when we constantly had a Communion.  
That Tractate of his, entitled, The Incarnation of the Son of God, was the sum of two, or three Sermons, which I heard him preach at Drogheda, at that Festival, when we celebrate the birth of our Saviour.  
That he was for the often public reading of the ten Commandments, and the Creed, before the Congregation, according to the custom of other reformed Churches, I suppose none can doubt of, and not only that, which is commonly called the Apostles Creed, but the Nicene and Athanasius, his book of the three Creeds sufficiently persuade it.  
What his judgement was of the use of the Lords Prayer, his practice showed it in the constant concluding of his prayer before Sermon with it. And his approbation of that gesture of kneeling at the Communion was often apparent before many witnesses.  
For confirmation of Children (which Calvine, Beza, Piscator, and others do much commend, and wish it were restored among them) he was not wanting in his observation, as an ancient laudable custom, by which was occasioned the more frequent having in memory the principles of religion, with the younger sort. At his first public giving notice of the time of that his intention, (it having been long disused in Ireland) he made a large speech unto the people of the antiquity of it, the prudence of the first reformers in purging it from Popish superstitions, with the end of it, and then such youths presented to him, who could repeat the public Catechism were confirmed, and so often afterwards, and indeed the apprehension of his piety and holiness moved the Parents much, to desire that their Children might by him receive that Benediction, which was seconded with good, and spiritual instruction, that stuck to them when they came to further years.  
The public Catechism, containing the sum of the Creed, the 10. Commandments, the Lords Prayer, and Doctrine of the Sacraments, despised by some for its plainness, he thought therefore to be the more profitable for the vulgar; And at Drogheda in Ireland, gave me orders every Lord's day in the afternoon, (beside the Sermon which was not omitted) to explain it.  
He was very exemplary in the careful observation of the Lords day in his family; The Sermon preached by him in the forenoon, being constantly repeated in the Chapel by his Chaplain, about five of the Clock in the afternoon, unto which many of the Town resorted.  
For Habits, he observed such, which were accustomed by those of his profession; for the Organ, and the Choir, he continued them as he found them in use before him. And as in all things, so in his ordinary wearing Garments, he was a Pattern of gravity, approving much of a distinctive Apparel in the Ministry that way.  
Lastly, for the Ecclesiastical Constitutions of Ireland, as he was in An. 1634. (being then the Primate) the chief guide in their establishment, so before he was a Bishop, An. 614. being then a Member of the Convocation, he was employed as a principal person for the Collecting, and drawing up such Canons as concerned the Discipline, and Government of the Church, and were to be treated upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy of Ireland, (divers taken out of the Statutes, Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions, and the Canons of England, 1571.) which I have lately found, written then with his own hand. The two first of which being in these words.  
1. That no other form of Liturgy, or Divine service, shall be used in any Church of this Realm; but that, which is established by Law, and comprised in the book of Common-Prayer, and Administrations of Sacraments, etc. 2. That no other form of Ordination shall be used in this Nation, but which is contained in the book of ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, allowed by Authority, and hitherto practised in the Churches of England, and Ireland, make it apparent that his judgement concerning many of the abovementioned subjects, was the same in his younger, as Elder years.  
And yet notwithstanding all this, there were always some, and still are too many, who are apt to blur him with the title of a Puritan, (which is is one occasion of this enlargement) though in none the sense of it is more uncertain then in his application, and from none a greater lustre would be given unto it than by his reflection. In whom, with his conformity to the Discipline, Liturgy, and Articles of the Church of England, labour in writing, constancy in preaching against the errors of Popery, and such as border upon it, so much humility, holiness, and charity, and other fruits of the spirit did so eminently shine. Indeed I have seen divers Letters, wrote unto him from those, who heretofore were so aspersed, full of respect, and large expressions of their love to him, and many receiving satisfaction, have concurred with him in the abovesaid particulars, his humility and meekness prevailing more than others strict austerity, but how that said Title could be fixed on him, I am yet to seek, unless it bear a better sense than the Authors of it will own.  
Nay, some of the simpler sort, hearing of a conjunction of Popery and Prelacy, have thought they could not be parted in him, though most of his Sermons, as well as his writings, sufficiently clear him that way. I remember many years agone, the late Archbishop of Canterbury wrote unto him into Ireland, of a strong rumour then raised of him here at Court, That he was turned a Papist (presumed to be by a Letter of some Popish Priest from thence.) But it fell out to be at the same time, or immediately after he had in two Learned Sermons given his judgement at large, that the Papacy was meant by Babylon, in the 17, and 18, of the Revelation, which in the return of his answer to that report he did affirm, and was his judgement to his last, though the reply made to him did not consent in that.  
I am not a stranger to such a design of some of the Romish party, a little before his death, for the raising of the like rumour, by some Letters wrote unto him from some of eminency among them, which I disdain any further to mention.  
And thus upon this occasion I have endeavoured to prevent for the future, any more injurious mistakes of him, by an impartial declaring, according to my knowledge, his judgement, and practice in these particulars, wherein he may well be esteemed of us (as Erasmus saith of Saint Augstine) Vividum quoddam exemplar Episcopi, omnibus virtutum numeris absolutum. And I wish in these divided times, wherein each party hath a great, and a reverend opinion of him, they would show it in this, by taking his spirit of moderation for their Copy to write after, and for my own part, I would to God not only they, but also all that read, or hear this of him, were both almost, and altogether such as he was.   

THE REDUCTION OF EPISCOPACY Unto the Form of Synodical Government, Received in the ANCIENT CHURCH: By the most Reverend and learned Father of our Church Dr. JAMES USHER, late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ireland. Proposed in the year 1641. as an Expedient for the prevention of those Troubles, which afterwards did arise about the matter of Church-Government.  
Published by NICHOLAS BERNARD. D. D. Preacher to the Honourable Society of Grays-inn, London.  
LONDON, Printed, Anno Domini. 1658.   

TO THE READER.  
THE Original of this was given me by the most Reverend Primate, some few years before his death, wrote throughout with his own hand, and of late I have found it subscribed by himself, and Doctor Holseworth, and with a Marginal Note at the first Proposition, which I have also added. If it may now answer the expectation of many pious, and prudent Persons, who have desired the publishing of it, as a seasonable preparative to some moderation in the midst of those extremes, which this Age abounds with, it will attain the end intended by the Author: And it is likely to be more operative, by the great reputation he had, and hath in the hearts of all good men, being far from the least suspicion to be biased by any privivate ends, but only aiming at the reducing of Order, Peace, and Unity, which God is the Author of, and not of confusion. For the recovery of which, it were to be wished, that such as do consent in Substantials, for matter of Doctrine, would consider of some conjunction in point of Discipline, that private interest and circumstantials, might not keep them thus far asunder.  
Grays-inn, Octob. 13. 1657. N. BERNARD.   

The Reduction of Episcopacy unto the form of Synodical Government, received in the ancient Church; proposed in the year 1641, as an Expedidient for the prevention of those troubles, which afterwards did arise about the matter of Church-Government.  
Episcopal and Presbyterial Government conjoined.  
BY Order of the Church of England, all Presbyters are charged 
a The book of Ordination.  to administer the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Realm hath received the same; And that they might the better understand what the Lord had commanded therein, 
b Ibid. ex Act. 20, 27, 28.  the exhortation of Saint Paul, to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus is appointed to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination; Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock among whom the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers to 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So taken in Mat. 2. 6. and Rev. 12. 5. and 19 15.  Rule the Congregation of God, which he hath purchased with his blood.  
Of the many Elders, who in common thus ruled the Church of Ephesus, there was one Precedent, whom our Saviour in his Epistle unto this Church in a peculiar manner styleth 
d Rev. 2. 1.  the Angel of the Church of Ephesus: and Ignatius in another Epistle written about twelve years after unto the same Church, calleth the Bishop thereof. Betwixt the Bishop and the Presbytery of that Church, what an harmonious consent there was in the ordering of the Church-Government, the same Ignatius doth fully there declare, by the Presbytery, with 
e 1 Tim. 4. 14.  Saint Paul, understanding the Community of the rest of the Presbyters, or Elders, who then had a hand not only in the delivery of the Doctrine and Sacraments, but also in the Administration of the Discipline of Christ: for further proof of which, we have that known testimony of Tertullian in his general Apology for Christians. 
f Ibidem etiam exhortationes, castigationes & censura divina; nam & judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud cert●s de Dei conspectu, summúnque futuri judicii praejudicium est, si qui● ita deliquerit, ut à communicatione orationis. & conventuss, & omnis sancti commecii relegetur▪ president probati quique seniores, honorem istum non pretio, sed Testimonio adepti. Tertul. Apologet. cap. 39  In the Church are used exhortations, chastisements, and divine censure; for judgement is given with great advice as among those, who are certain they are in the sight of God, and in it is the chiefest foreshowing of the judgement which is to come, if any man have so offended, that he be banished from the Communion of prayer, and of the Assembly, and of all holy fellowship. The Precedents that bear rule therein are certain approved Elders, who have obtained this honour not by reward, but by good report, who were no other (as he himself intimates) elsewhere but 
g 〈◊〉 de a●io ●um manibus quam praesidentium ●●mimus, Id de corona ●ilitis, cap. 3.  those from whose hands they used to receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist.  
For with the Bishop, who was the chief Precedent (and therefore styled by the same Tertullian in another place, 
h Dandi quidem Raptis●i habet jus summus sacerdos; qui 〈◊〉 Episcopus: ●●hinc Presbytari & Diaco●i. Id. de Bapt. cap. 17.  Summus Sacerdos for distinction sake) the rest of the dispensers of the Word and Sacraments joined in the common Government of the Church; and therefore, where in matters of Ecclesiastical Judicature, Cornetius Bishop of Rome used the received form of 
i Omni actu ad ●e perlato placuit contrahi Presbyterium, Cornel apud Cyp. epist. 46.  gathering together the Presbytery; of what persons that did consist, Cyprian sufficiently declareth, when he wisheth him to read his Letters 
k Florentissimo alio cle●●●cum praesidenti Cyprian epist. 55. ad Cornel.  to the flourishing clergy: which there did preside, or rule with him: The presence of the Clergy being thought to be so requisite in matters of Episcopal audience, that in the fourth Council of Cartbage it was concluded, 
l Ut Episcopus nullius causam audiet absque praesentia Clericorum suorum, alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi nisi Clericorum praesentiâ confirmetur, Concil. Carthag. IV. cap. 23.  That the Bishop might hear no man's cause without the presence of 〈◊〉 clergy: and that otherwise th● 〈…〉 sentence should be void, u●●●sse it were confirmed by the presence of the Clergy: which we find also to be inserted into the Canons of 
m Excerption. Egberti, c. 43.  Egbert, who was Archbishop of York in the Saxon times, and afterwards into the body of the 
n 15. q. 7. cap. Nullus.  Cannon Law itself.  
True it is, that in our Church this kind of Presbyterial Government hath been long disused, yet seeing it still professeth that every Pastor hath a right to rule the Church (from whence the mame of Rector also was given at first unto him) and to administer the Discipline of Christ, as well as to dispense the Doctrine and Sacraments, and the restraint of the exercise of that right proceedeth only from the custom now received in this Realm; no man can doubt, but by another Law of the Land, this hindrance may be well removed. And how easily this ancient form of Government by the united suffrages of the Clergy might be 〈◊〉 again, and with what 〈…〉 of alteration the Synodical conventions of the Pastors of every Parish might be accorded with the Presidency of the Bishops of each Diocese and Province, the indifferent Reader may quickly perceive by the perusal of the ensuing Propositions.  

I.  
In every Parish the Rector, or Incumbent Pastor, together with the 
How the Church might Synodically be Governed, Arch-Bishops and Bishops being still retained,  Churchwardens and Sides-men, may every week take notice of such as live scandalously in that Cougregation, who are to receive such several admonitions and reproofs, as the quality of their offence shall deserve; And if by this means they cannot be reclaimed, they may be presented to the next monthly Synod; and in the mean time debarred by the Pastor from access unto the Lord's Table.   

II.  
Whereas by a Statute in the six and twentieth year of King Henry the eighth (revived in the first year of Queen Elizabeth) Suffragans are appointed to be erected in 26 several places of this Kingdom; the number of them might very well be conformed unto the number of the several Rural Deaneries, into which every Diocese is subdivided; which being done, the Suffragan supplying the place of those, who in the ancient Church were called Chorepiscopi, might every month assemble a Synod of all the Rectors, or Incumbent Pastors within the Precinct, and according to the major part of their voices, coclude all matters that shall be brought into debate before them.  
To this Synod the Rector and Churchwardens might present such impenitent persons, as by admonitions and suspension from the Sacrament would not be reform; who if they should still remain contumacious and incorrigible, the sentence of Excommunication might be decreed against them by the Synod, and accordingly be executed in the Parish where they lived. Hitherto also all things that concerned the Parochial Ministers might be referred, whether they did touch their Doctrine, or their conversation' as also the censure of all new Opinions, Heresies, and Schisms, which did arise within that Circuit; with liberty of Appeal, if need so require, unto the Diocesan Synod.   

III.  
The Diocesan Synod might be held, once, or twice in the year, as it should be thought most convenient: Therein all the Suffragans, and the rest of the Rectors, or Incumbent Pasters (or a certain select number of of every Deanery) within the Diocese might meet, with whose consent, or the major part of them, all things might be concluded by the Bishop, or 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id est, superintendentes; unde & nomen Episcopi trastum est, Hieron, epist. 86. ad Evagrium.  Saperintendent (call him whether you will) or in his absence, by one of the Suffragans; whom he shall depute in his stead to be Moderator of that Assembly.  
Here all matters of greater moment might be taken into consideration, and the Orders of the monthly Synods revised, and (if need be) reform: and if here also any matter of difficulty could not receive a full determination: it might be referred to the next Provincial, or National Synod.   

IV.  
The Provincial Synod might consist of all the Bishops and Suffragans, and such other of the Clergy as should be elected out of every Diocese within the Province, the Archbishop of either Province, might be the Moderator of this meeting, (or in his room some one of the Bishops appointed by him) and all matters be ordered therein by common consent as in the former Assemblies.  
This Synod might be held every third year, and if the Parliament do then sit (according to the Act of a Triennial Parliament) both the Arch-Bishops and Provincial Synods of the Land might join together, and make up a National Council: wherein all Appeals from inferior Synods might be received, all their Acts examined, and all Ecclesiastical Constitutions which concern the state of the Church of the whole Nation established.   

WE are of the judgement That the form of Government here proposed is not in any point repugnant to the Scripture; and that the Suffragans mentioned in the second Proposition, may lawfully use the power both of Jurisdiction and Ordination, according to the Word of God, and the practice of the ancient Church.  


Ja. Armachanus.  
Rich. Holdsworth.     

AFter the proposal of this, An. 1641. Many Queries were made, and doubts in point of conscience resolved by the Primate, divers passages of which he heath left under his own hand, showing his pious endeavours to peace and unity, which how far it then prevailed, is out of season now to relate, only I wish it might yet be thought of to the repairing of the breach, which this division hath made, and that those, who are by their Office Messengers of Peace, and whose first word to cach house should be peace, would earnestly promote it, within the walls of their Mother-Church, wherein they were educated, and not thus by contending about circumstantials lose the substance, and make ourselves a prey to the adversary of both, who rejoice in their hearts, saying, So would we have it.    

Which are the Primates works, and which not.  

A Catalogue of the Works already printed of Doctor James Usher, late Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of all Ireland, which are owned by him.  

In Latin.  
DE Ecclesiarum Christianarum successione & Statu. Quarto, Londini, 1613.  
Epistolarum Hibernicarum Sylloge, 4ᵒ. Dublinii 1630.  
Historia Goteschalci, 4ᵒ. Dublinii 1631.  
De Primordiis Ecclesiarum Britanicarum, 4ᵒ. Dublinii 1639.  
Ignatii Epistolae cum annotationibus, 4o. Oxoniae 1645.  
De Anno Solari Macedonum, 8o. Londini 1648.  
annal Veteris Testamenti, Fol. Londini 1650.  
annal Novi Testamenti usque ad extremum Templi & Reipublicae Judaicae excidium, etc. Fol. Londini 2654.  
Epistola ad Capellum de Variantibus textus Hebraici Lectionibus, 4o. Londinii 1652.  
De Graeca Septuaginta Interpretum version Syntagma 4o. Londini 1655.   
These four last are sold by John Crook, at the Ship in St. Paul's Churchyard.  

In English.  


AN Answer to a challenge made by the Jesuit Malone in Ireland, Anno 1631.  
A Sermon preached before the House of Commons, Febr. 18. 1618.  
A Declaration of the visibility of the Church, preached in a Sermon before King James, June 20. 1624.  
A Speech delivered in the Castle-Chamber in Dublin, the 22. of November, 1622.  
The Religion professed by the ancient Irish and Britain's, 4ᵒ. 1631.   These five are bound together in Quarto.  
Immanuel, or the Incarnation of the Son of God, 4ᵒ. Dublin. 1639.  
A Geographical Description of the Lesser Asia, 4o. Oxford, 1644.  
The judgement of Doctor Reynolds, touching the Original of Episcopacy more largely confirmed out of Antiquity, An. 1641.  
His Discourse of the Original of Bishops and metropolitans, in 4o. Oxford, 1644.  
His small Catechism re-viewed, 12o. London, 1654.  
☞ His aforesaid Annals of the Old and New Testament; with the Synchronismus of Heathen Story to the destruction of Jerusalem, translated out of Latin into English now at the Press, Fol. to be sold by John Crook, at the Ship in St. Paul's Churchyard.    

In regard there have been, and are divers books printed, which go under the name of the late Archbishop of Armagh, but are not his, and more may be obtruded to the injury of him, I have thought fit, at the request of the Printer, to give the Reader this advertisement following.  
IN Anno● 1640. There was a book printed, entitled the Bishop of Armaghs' direction to the house of Parliament, concerning the Liturgy and Episcopal Government, and Anno 1641. Another book entitled Vox Hiberniae, being some pretended notes of his, at a public fast. Both these at his Petition were suppressed by order from the House of Lords and Commons, 11. Feb. 1641. and I hope will not be revived.  
In Anno 1651. A book called (A Method for Meditation, or a manual of Divine duties, which most injuriously is printed in his name, but is none of his, which he directed me then to declare publicly as from him, yet in 1657. It is again reprinted to his great dishonour.  
For his small Catechism the Reader is to take notice, that there was a false one Printed without his knowledge, and is still sold for his. The injury he received by it compelled him to review it, with an Epistle of his own before it, which is the mark to know the right Edition, though being framed for his private use in his younger years, (about 23.) he had no intention of it for the public.  
If any Sermon-Notes taken from him have been Printed in his life-time under his name, or shall be hereafter) which divers have of late attempted) The Reader is to take notice that it was against his mind, and that they are disowned, by him, which as he endeavoured to his utmost to suppress, while he was living, so it was his fear to be injured in it after his death.  
For a further confirmation of which, I shall give you part of a Letter of his, while he was Bishop of Meath, (upon the like intention of a Printer, who had gotten into his hands some Notes of his Sermons, said to be preached by him in London, and was about to publish them) which he wrote to Doctor Featly, Chaplain to the then Archbishop of Canterbury for the stopping of them, in these words.  
I beseech you to use all your power to save me from that disgrace, which undiscreet and covetous men go about to fasten upon me, or else I must be driven to protest against their injurious dealings with me, and say as Donatus once did, Mala illis sit, qui mea festinant edere ante me.  
But I repose cenfidence in you, that you will take order that so great a wrong as this may not be done unto me. Remember me to worthy Doctor Goad, and forget not in your prayers.  
Dublin, Sept. 16. 1622. Your most assured loving friend, and fellow labourer J. A. MEDENSIS.  
THat book entitled the sum and substance of Christian religion, some of the materials with the Method are his, collected by him in his younger years, for his own private use: but, being so unpolished, defective, and full of mistakes, he was much displeased at the publishing of it in his name. And though it be much commended at home, and by Ludovicus Crocius abroad, yet that he did disown it as it is now set forth, this Letter following, wrote to Mr. John Downham, (who caused it to be printed) doth sufficiently confirm, as followeth.  
SIR,  
YOu may be pleased to take notice, that the Catechism you write of is none of mine, but transcribed out of Mr, Cartwrights Catechism, and Mr. Crooks, and some other English Divines, but drawn together in one Method, as a kind of Common-place-book, where other men's judgements and reasons are simply laid down, though not approved in all points by the Collector; besides that the Collection (such as it is) being lent abroad to divers in scattered sheets, hath for a great part of it miscarried, the one half of it as I suppose (well nigh) being no way to be recovered, so that so imperfect a thing Copied verbatim out of others, and in divers places dissonant from mine own judgement, may not by any means be owned by me; But if it shall seem good to any industrious person to cut off what is weak and superfluous therein, and supply the wants thereof, and cast it into a new mould of his own framing, I shall be very well content that he make what use he pleaseth of any the materials therein, and set out the whole in his own name: and this is the resolution of  
May 13. 1645. Your most assured loving friend JA. ARMACHANUS.  
A Book entitled Confessions and Proofs of Protestant Divines of Reformed Churches for Episcopacy, etc. though it be a very Learned one, yet it is not his; Only that of the Original of Bishops and Metropolitans (Frequently bound up with the former) is owned by him. unto which he was earnestly moved by a Letter from Doctor Hall, the late Reverend and Learned Bishop of Norwich, than Bishop of Exeter; which, showing the great esteem he had of him, is annexed as followeth.  
To the most Reverend Father in God, and my most Honoured Lord, the Lord Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland.  
Most Reverend, and my most worthily Honoured, Lord.  
THat which fell from me yesterday, suddenly and transcursively, hath since taken up my after-midnight thoughts, and I must crave leave, what I then moved, to importune, that your Grace would be pleased to bestow one sheet of paper upon these distracted times, in the subject of Episcopacy, showing the Apostolical Original of it, and the grounds of it from Scripture, and the immediately succeeding antiquity; Every line of it coming from your Grace's hand, would be super rotas suas: as Solomon's expression is, very Apples of Gold, with Pictures of Silver, and more worth than volumes from us: Think, that I stand before you like the Man of Macedon, and that you hear me say, Come and help us: And as your Grace is wholly given up to the common good of the Church, say, whether you can deny it? and if please your Grace to take your rise from my humble motion to express yourself in this question, wherein I am publicly interested, or otherwise, to profess your voluntary resolutions for the settling of many, either misled, or doubting Souls, it will be the most acceptable, and (I hope) the most successful work that your Grace hath ever undertaken; It was my earnest motion long ago to (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) to entreat this labour from your Grace; which now comes from my meanness; your Gracious humility will not even from so low hands disregard it; with my zealous suit, and hopeful expectation of a yielding answer, I humbly take leave, and am  
Your Graces humbly, and heartily devoted JOS. EXON.   
FINIS.