A DISCOURSE, Prepared for the Ears of some ROMANISTS (At a general Quarter Sessions, in the North, When they were Summoned to take the Oaths.) By Sr. Christopher Wyvill Baronet, One of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace in those Parts: And now proffered to the Eyes of them all  
YORK. Printed by Stephen Bulkley, and are to be sold by Richard Lambart Bookseller, 1679.   

Imprimatur,  
Robert Feild. Aug. 29. 1679.   

A DISCOURSE, Prepared for the Eears of some ROMANISTS, etc.  
I Am not only sorry and troubled, but afflicted, to see so many Persons standing there, who (could they but quit themselves of one or two needless scruples, pardon me Gentlemen, if I use that term) were fit to sit here and manage the Affairs of the Country.  
Realy, I would not wish any of you (upon the mere account either of your purses or Persons) to turn your backs of one Fundamental Doctrine, that appears such, upon a serious and impartial enquiry; but even in consideration of those your temporal concerns, you may have just occasion, to review your Notions, and after due search easily find.  
1. That that sort of Supremacy which the Laws require, on the behalf of our Kings, does no way violate, or invade the Priestly Function.  
2. That that sort of Supremacy, which the Pope now clayms, was utterly unknown to the Primitive Church; and is neither consistent with, nor at all becoming the Priestly Function.  
3. That this sort of Supremacy has straggled, in the world, to the cost of many Crowned-heads, and the destruction of numberless Christian People.  
4. That this sort of Supremacy was (first) founded in blood, and so fostered ever since; having been formerly, and formally (in direct, plain words) declared against, both by a Council, and a Pope.  
5. That the chief and most celebrated Authors, in the Romish Church have writ in defence of their exorbitant supremacy, after such a manner, as does rended it rational, yea necessary (especially it being compared with their former known actings, and the posture of this day) to keep on foot the old, and perhaps to make new Laws, in prejudice of Recusants.  
1. That we may discover the truth, or falsehood of this Proposition, it will be requisite to know distinctly, 

What the challinges of the King are.  
What he absolutely and freely disowns.    
He expects then to be Custos uriusque Tabulae; this was no more than all the Kings of juda exercised; and those of them that were most zealously active in the purging the Temple, in the preserving, or restoring the true worship of God, (as josiah) we find most commended, most Celebrated in holy Writ: we find too, (to Note that by the way) they still called to the Law, the written Law, and to the Testimonies, making them their Rule. 2. Chorn. 17th. jehosophat 29 Hezekiah 34. josiah, he expects further, that all the Members of the Church within his Dominions, should be subject to his Courts; and Clergymen, as well others, (in case of notorious Crimes) tryable there. He expects to nominate, appoint, and call to any spiritual preferments, what persons he please, without the interposition of any Foreign power, or Potentate: this is no more than every Patron of a Parish-Church looks at, as his own right. The whole of this is no more, than Elutherius, Bishop of Rome, declared to be in Lucius King of Britain, when he sent to him to desire, not his leave, but advice, in the Resetling a Christian Church; for the Gospel had been both Preached and owned here before; and without any help from Rome; though, at that time sadly overrun again with Paganism.  
But now negatively, Let us see what the King pretends not to; Not the conferring of Orders; not Administration of Sacraments; not to Preach the Word; not (of himself) to define Articles of Faith; and herein, both the preamble of the Statute, and the Injunctions which were afterwards purposely framed, (to satisfy such as seemed to mistake the point) are so plain, that it's a wonder how a considering man, can have any religious fear or scruple about it. These together, are such an innocent kind of Supremacy, so just and so frequently exercised by Christian Emperors, and Kings of England, (even all that had any thing of Judgement, spirit, or good fortune) as certainly none that has looked at all into History only, will deny his Prince.  
2. Doubtless if our Blessed Lord had meant, That this prodigious sort of Supremacy (joined with a never failing Infallibility) should ever have been the main Article of our Faith, he would not have answered his inquisitive Disciples so unsatisfactorily, as he he did; Mark 9.34, 35. ver. nor would he have left the world without a clear direction, in a matter of so vast concernment (to all it's future Generations) Now that he did not so, is evident, since St. Paul when he sadly foretold the Church, How, after his departure, grievous Wolves should enter in; and amongst them, many should arise speaking perverse things; advises them not, to make their addresses to any one that should (then) happen to be Bishop of Rome; but commends them to the word of God's grace, to be built up thereby: as we read Acts. 20.29, 30, 31, 32. A shrewd sign, that the Apostle did not understand Tu es Petrus in the Popish sense; nor in that other place, which has a minatory exhortation to Rome (as well as to other Gentile Churches) lest she also might be cut off, Romans 11.18, 19, 20, 21. ver.  
What think you, Would all the Eastern Bishops have stood out so vigorously, and so long (in that controversy about the celebration of Easter) if it had ever been received as a standing rule, That your Universal Monarch, in the West, was God's Plenepotentiarie, in all Causes Ecclesiastical. Would the third Council of Carthage (wherein St. Augustine was present) have past a Decree, That none should be styled Head, or Prince of Priests? Would the great Gregory (even when he sat in the Pontifical Chair) have pronounced such a pretender the forerunner of Antichrist. Even St. Peter (from whom you seek to derive it) demonstrates, That he neither had, nor desired any such Lordship, or Superiority, 1 Peter 5.2, 3.  
Would Heirome have said, Pari omnes, inter se Authoritate fuisse Apostolos? Would Ambrose have slipped so, as to have writ, Non habent haereditatem Petri, qui fidem Petri non habent? Would B●sil have assigned to Alexandria, and Antioch, a better title to the succession of Peter? Would he, and so many other old Fathers, have blamed, chid, derided; nay, even contemned the Bishop of Rome's pride, if all the world had been obliged to be led by the Nose, what way he should please?  
3.4. It is in vain then to seek after the sort of Supremacy, now contended for during the first six hundred years; But I shall presently lead you its rise: And that leaning upon the Authorities of such Authors, as you will not refuse to call your own; Know then, That not half an Age after Gregory was gone off this stage: A certain Man that went by the name of Boniface had a mind to be Paramount in the Church, and there (luckily) fell out to be at the same time, a Person of great Power, who longed to be Emperor; these two, struck a bargain; Mauritius (the rightful Master of them both) together with his whole family, cruelly was murdered: Ph●cas got the Sceptre; and Boniface was by him constituted Universal Bishop: From hence, all men must date the Original of this fatal Supremacy; Fatal, I say, because it has been so fruitful, and teeming in slaughters, Rebellions, (you must bear with the term, since matter of Fact, in almost every Age bears testimony thereof) and Massacres. It was indeed a fine cast of this new Office, which Anno 747. was given to Chilpric (the last of the First Royal house in France) by the then Pope Zacharie; poor Chilpric was an unactive, easy Creature, and therefore must be sent into a Monastery (where you may suppose, he lived not long after.) But Pepin was a brave Young blade, and Zacharie stood need of such an one: he presently absolves him from his sworn Allegiance, and mounts him up to the Throne. But tush! this was nothing to the Freaks; the subsequent Holinesses played all the Empire, (nay well-nigh) all Europe over, by pulling, yea kicking off Crowns (Anno 1080, Gregory the 7th. by arming Subjects (yes sons) against their Princes (Anno 1110. Paschal second.) The two last Henry's of Paris felt the weight of the two Swords, which the Pope clayms as his own, though they fell but by two sorry knives in the hands of two wretches, but both Disciples of the jesuits; And all to make room for this Monstrous Supremacy; at the cost, not only of Albigences, Waldenses, Hussites, (and such as they will call Heretics) but even of their own Children, who mistook that Stepdame of Rome for their true Mother.  
'tis true, St. Ambrose (pretty, early when the Discipline of the Primitive Church was yet in its right state and just vigour) did stave off the hands of the Emperor, from touching the sacred Elements, when he found them polluted with it innocent blood. But, I beseech you consider (for this very particular may serve to rectify your judgements.)  

1. What he was.  
2. How far he proceeded.   
He was Bishop of Milan, a Place always reckoned in the Territories of Italy; not Bishop of Rome: nor acting by any Authority derived from thence.  
He went no farther than the Episcopal Power would bear him out: He kept him from the Holy Communion; but he did not Dethrone Him: He did not Absolve His Subjects from their Allegiance: He did not give away His Dominions, to any that could catch them.  
That these things were Acted in the face of the Sun, Plaetina, Baronius, Guiccardin de Serres, with I know not how many more, are uncontrollable Witnesses. Let honest Matthew Paris (the Monk of Saint Alban) tell you, How common it was for every Priest, Prelate, or Friar, transalpinare, to hite away to Rome, and bring back with them an Interdict, (or not unfrequentedly, an Excommunication) against the King, and whole Kingdom of England. But let him tell you too, How often the Legate (a later) and other Domineering, Extorting Agents from that proud See, have been kept on the further side of the Dike, and not suffered transfretare, unless upon such Terms, as our Governors would admit of, and prescribe, notwithstanding all the power they pretended, or produced from his holiness.  
5. As to this last Charge (wherein much of the present occasion seems to lie) Whether your Church in her Head, in her Members, in her decretals, in her Canon-Law, in some of her approved Councils, have not made such Declarations as must warn (nay compel) all Princes and States, to make defensive Laws against such Encroachments? Do but (I beseech you) peruse what the present Right Reverend Bishop of Lincoln has both candidly, and charitably, offered you: I shall content myself with instancing in a few; Let the Language of Clement the eights Brevis (when Queen Elizabeth had (now) one foot in the Grave) be first heard; He strictly (therein) Forbids all his Catholics to suffer any to succeed (how near soever in Blood, or Right) unless such as should preingage to become a Vassal to this Romish Church. And (to see the luck of a thing) these Breves were directed to the hand of one Henry Garnet; who, not long after, was found to have, more than a finger, in the Powder-plot: With one Arm he would have kept King james from; with the other, he would have blown Him out of His three Kingdoms.  
Next, be pleased to consult Bellermine (who was made, in his time, and I think esteemed so ever since, but a little lower than the very Pope.) Ask him, How we can be assured that his Catholics will prove good Subjects? His answer is legible (Lib. 1. de Clericis) They stand not bound to the Laws of any Prince coactively; but directively only? Ask him further, What if they will not be directed, but tread those Laws under their feet? Yet (says he, with the same front, and truth) they may by no means receive punishment, by any secular Magistrate, nor at all be brought before His Trybunal.  
But what if they should chance (and what has been may be) to be found engaged in Treason? The words of Zimanca (in his Aphorisms, de Confession) are positive, A Clerk's Rebellion is not Treason; for he is not Subject to the King: This is pretty well for the Clergy, the Notion being extended (as they intent it) to all their several Orders of Monks and Friars. But what say they to the Laity? Take the sum of the whole matter from Creswell, who, in pure love (no doubt) to his Countrymen, gives this Foreign Advice; It is an undoubted point of Faith (says he) that any Christian Prince whatsoever, if he have manifestly swarved from the Catholic Faith, and would draw others to do so, falls immediately from His Power, and Dignity; and that, even before the Pope have given Sentence, His Subjects may, and aught, if they have power, to remove Him: (Andr'. Philopat'. page 109. Edit. 1592.)  
It were no hard task, here to rake together, more than a good many of such Dictates as these, from men of this stamp, whose Works have been Licenced, Approved, Printed, reprinted, and generally sold through all Popish Countries without contradiction; and in this case, it may well be said, Qui malum non prohibet, cum prohibere potest, perpetrat. 'Tis true, Mariana's shameful Book, was once at a Crittical season (for fear of a worse clap) censured at Paris; but it was never so at Rome: And I do verily doubt the common Doctrine of the Jesuits (with their Adherents) will be found, that the strongest Knots, of Promises, Oaths, or Vows, made for fidelity to temporal Princes, may be cut asunder by their spiritual Alexander, who (unjustly) would usurp both the Swords; and (perhaps) is sorry he hath not more Worlds to conquer.  
Suffer me now, for a Conclusion, and to abate a little the surprise you may be in, at the severities, at present, exercised towards you, (though the late Proclamations, as well as the Statutes, must needs quit us from any blame in that behalf) to remind you of one or two things, in which I have proof, more than abundant; and of which, some (yet living) can give testimony. 'Tis confessed, some of you gave signal, and very brave Assistances to Our late Sovereign Charles the First, in those unhappy Wars, (upon what Account, or Motive, let it be decided at the last day;) but, that the whole Body of Romanists, could have been content to have sat down under a very Bramble, in stead of the true Oak, was manifest from the Addresses pretended to come from them all; wherein the Catholic Gentleman (in a Book Published presently after Anno 1652. or thereabout, with a great many Arguments for his favour) tells Oliver, They had generally taken, and punctually kept the Engagement:  
(In that Page, towards the latter end; which, in that I have, is marked 41. but should be 127.)  
Next, it would make one admire, how (after the good services Mr. Huddleston, the honest Pendrills etc. had done His present Majesty) the Irish, of the same Communion, and Creed, could be persuaded to lay aside, their own commendable purposes. The Natives of that Kingdom were (most of them) upon the account of the bloody Insurrection, Anno 1641. under the Call, and subject to grievous paenalties at His Majesty's Restauration: But He, according to His Princely clemency, required them, only to let Him have new Tests of their future Loyalty, under the Obligation of those Oaths, you now stick at: He was pleased to allow them (since they seemed willing to the thing, but only were dissatisfied in certain expressions, and those Forms were not Established in Ireland) after Consultation with their own Priests, to offer Him, what might be Equivalent thereto: They did so, and after some time, showed it to the King: He was willing to accept it, according to that Draught: But one of the Pope's best betrusts, then at Brussels, hastens (in that nick of time) to School them better; and they neither durst (it seems) nor would proceed further in that business: And what use then) can a through Paced Roman Catholic make of his own Conscience? if, after such means, being arrived at settlement, he must yet throw away all, and implicitly give up his Faith, to the most imperiously Politic Dictates, of an old (perhaps) doting mortalman.  
And, now Sirs, methinks I hear you say, what I have heard some of you say often (and I verily think sincerely.)  
1. That you are wholly ignorant (which is, in this case, the best sort of innocency) of any Design against His Majesty's Person, or Government.  
2. That, if the Pope himself should Invade this Land, and War against the King, you would fight under the Royal Banner, and endeavour to cut His throat as soon as any man's.  
3. That it's a sad thing, if a few harebrained fellows have embarked in a desperate Action, the whole Communion (though innocent) should be involved in the suffering part.  
As to the two first, I can say little, but this: If I were a Papist (and durst consider the true state of things, and the wild Expectation of the Roman See in these matters) I should not know, how to make my due Obedience to my Sovereign, and my necessary submission to the Pope's commands, lodge in one Breast? And for the last, I do concur with you. 'Tis, indeed, a very sad thing; but (Gentlemen) if you will not do it yourselves, Who can distinguish you? What I have now said, I have said with clear intentions, with an ardent desire to serve you; and after a long diligent Search (to which no man living could be more Engaged then myself.) If any of you desire a farther Discussion of things here briefly touched (either in order to clearer satisfaction, or with a Design of Opposition) they shall at any Opportunity command it, from  
Yours, C. W.