ORIGO PROTESTANTIUM: OR, AN ANSWER TO A Popish Manuscript (OF N. N's.) That would fain make the Protestant Catholic Religion Bear date at the very time when the Roman Popish commenced in the WORLD. WHEREIN PROTESTANCY is demonstrated to be elder than POPERY. To which is added, a JESUITS LETTER With the ANSWER thereunto annexed.  
By John Shaw Rector of Whalton in Northumberland, and Preacher at St. John's in Newcastle upon Tine.  Cypr. Pomp. contr. Ep. Steph. 
Quod & nunc facere oportet Dei Sacerdotes divina Precepta servantes, ut in aliquo si nutaverit & vacillaverit veritas, ad Originem Dominicam & Evangelicam, & Apostolorum traditionem revertamur, & inde surgat actus nostri ratio, undè & origo surrexit.  
LONDON, Printed for H. Brome at the Gun in St. Paul's Churchyard 1677.  
TO The Right Worshipful Sir RALPH CARR MAYOR, Sir ROBERT SHAFTO RECORDER, THE ALDER MEN, SHERIFF, And the rest of the Members of the Ancient Town and County OF Newcastle upon Tine. J. SHAW Humbly presenteth this ensuing TREATISE.   

The Preface.  
WHen it pleased God in his great goodness and mercy to this Persecuted Church and Harassed Kingdom, by a miraculous Providence to restore his Sacred Majesty to his just Rights, and the Church to her Legal and Primitive settlement, I also (who was before necessitated to seek shelter elsewhere till the Tyranny was overpast) returned to my own Native Country; where I found divers (whom I left professed Sons of our Church) turned Renegades, having forsaken their own Mother in the day of Trial, and betaken themselves to that flattering Stepdame of Rome. This I reflected on with much regret, and so much the more, because I found that with this defection from their Mother, they were also grown cool in their Affection to the common Father of their Country, our Sovereign Lord the King, as being soured with Republican or Protectorian Leaven, infused into them by the so much admired Thomas de Albiis, amongst others, I observed further, that the Romanists in these parts grew every day more insolently active to bring more Grist to their own Mill, and List more men in the Pope's Service, not only by Printed Books, but also by private Letters and Manuscripts. The first whereof that came to my hands was the short Letter subjoined to this Treatise, to which I have (upon my Friend's request) framed an Answer, and here annexed to the Letter. The next I met with was a Manuscript (that would fain usurp the Title of Origo Protestantium) scent me by a Gentleman for my opinion thereof, which after having perused and transcribed it, I returned to him again, and have here endeavoured to refute, and therein vindicate the English Reformation. The Author seems to be a man in great request amongst them, especially if he be the same N. N. who assisted in the late Conference; if not, he is probably that N. N. who was Second to Father Knott, as S. W. or W. S. was to Mr. White. Be the Author who he will, you are to understand, that as the design of the former was to seduce unstable Souls from our Church, by suggesting it to be no true Church, through the defect both of Moral and Personal Successions; so also the great business of this latter is, to prove the Nullity of our Church for want of Personal Succession therein, chief upon the old Nagshead Story, which might have passed for current Roman Coin perhaps [in 57] when lily's Almanac and Mother Shipton's Prophecy were in vogue. But they are much out in their Politics who think such like Riff-raff as fitly Calculated for [75]; the World is grown a little Older, and so much Wiser too, than to believe all is Gold that Glisters; and can discern between Legends and true History, however the insinuating Jesuit would fain become again a Pearl for a Lady—  
Other Scripts and Prints of this nature and to this effect are since come to my sight, which perhaps I may (when I have nothing else to do) animadvert upon, holding myself obliged to lend my poor endeavours in scouring these Northern Coasts (especially) of those Popish Pirates, who count all Fish that comes to the Net, and will break all Laws to compass one unlawful Prize.  
Mean while the Reader is desired to Correct such Errata as he may possibly meet with in this Treatise, in regard of the Author's great distance from the Pres, and he will thereby oblige.  
His Humble Servant, J. Shaw.   

Origo Protestantium: OR, PROTESTANCY Before POPERY.  

CHAP. I.  

SECT. I.  
N.N. IN the year 1516 there was no other Religion in our Parts of the World acknowledged Catholic and Apostolic, but that which the Protestants now call Popery.  

SECT. I.  
J.S. 1. Protestant's on the contrary assert, that which now is called Popery, though it was then the prevailing Faction in the Church, yet it was not the acknowledged Catholic Religion in these our parts of the World. Erasmus 
(a) Epist. ad Godeshal. Ros.  hath declared there was nothing in Luther, but might be defended by good Authors; he had good reason to say so, for that the Pope, and his Great Council did politicly devise and erect an expurgatory Office, which they industriously advanced to expunge out those very Doctrines which the Protestants embrace. Particularly the Doctrine of Merits in and about that time was not reputed Catholic: In a Book entitled, A form of Baptism, according to the Practice of the Roman Church; Printed at Paris 
(b) But since Corrected in 6 places, or otherwise prohibited by the Inquisitors of Spain. p. 249.  1575. And in the Roman Pontifical, Venet. 1585., 
(c) Reformed at Rome, Ann. 1602.  under this head. Questions to be made to a dying man, this is one, Credis quod, etc. Dost thou believe that our Lord Jesus Christ died for thy Salvation, and that none be Saved by their own Merits, or by any other means, but only by the Merits of his Passion? And in a Book much elder than these, called Hortulus Animae, 
(d) Since forbidden, Index lib. prohib. p. 156.  A Garden of health for the Soul, there are several Questions of the same nature and import, which were daily used by the ecclesiastics in their visitation of the Laics. The like are to be found in Breviloq. Bonav. in Gerson. de Agon. & interrog. Ansel. published by Cassander; commended by Caspar Vtembergius, and confessed by Martin Eisingreene 
(e) Tract. Apol. de cert. gratiae pro vero & Germano intellectu. Can. 13. Sess. 6. Conc. Triden. c. 8.  a learned man, and Chaplain to the Emperor, to be the ordinary form used at the visitation of the Sick in their last Agonies; further relating, that he found an old Book in the 
(f) Called Rhasme id. ib. p. 484.  Covent of the Augustine Friars wherein the same Questions were: and further adds, that such there were in Agendis veteribus, the ancient Liturgies of Wittenburg, Salsburg, Mentz, etc.  
2. That which Protestants call Popery, and is the Fundamental of all Popish Fundamentals, viz. The Pope's Supremacy over all General Councils, and the Infallibility of his judicial Sentence in causes of Faith, was so far from being acknowledged Catholic and Apostolic Doctrine, that it was condemned for Heresy in that Age. The Council of 
(g) Sess. quarta & quinta, confirmed by Martin V Ep. Synod. Conc. Basil. ad omn. Christ. p. 143.  Constance determined the power of a General Council to be above the Pope, which determination was judicially passed, for that all the public Acts (amongst which this was entered) were Conciliarily Ratified, as appears by the Council of Basil writing to Pope Eugenius. For when the Fathers there assembled, heard that the Pope intended to dissolve them; to prevent that Project, they thus writ to him: It is not likely that Pope Eugenius will any way think to dissolve this Council, seeing it is against the Decrees of the Council of Constance, which both his predecessor Martin V and himself had approved. And indeed if that Decree was not Conciliarily concluded, Martin V had not been true Pope; for in pursuance of this Decree, the other contesting Popes were deposed, and he created 
(h) John Gerson who was present at Council, upon every occasion, in his writings did approve and extol that Decree, which he would not have done unless he had known it to be Conciliarily determined: Ep. Juliani Cardin. ad Eugen. p. 76. inter opera Aen. Sylvii. . After this the Council of Basil 
(i) Confirmed by Eugenius with his Letters read in Council Sess. 16. from which the Fathers concluded decret. quinque conclus. p. 96. his Pontificial Ratification affirmed Decree. Sess. 33.  affirmed the Decree, superadding this their sense of it, that what was decreed was a 
(k) Ep. Conc. Bas. p. 144.  Truth of Catholic Faith, that he who gainsaid it was to be accounted an Heretic, and that the Universal Church ever till then had embraced it, and that so constantly and conformely that never any learned 
(l) Infin. Sess. 45. Conclus. 5. & in decret. quinque Concil. p. 96.  man doubted thereof. It is true, endeavours were soon used to invalidate it, but all the then famous Universities 
(m) Orthuinus Gratius in fasco rer. expet. p. 240.  asserted it, and so did many excellent men far and▪ near, who were famous for their parts and Piety in that Generation; as Card. 
(n) Lib. 2. de concor. Cathol. lib. 17. & 20.  Cusan a Belgian, Joh. de 
(o) Lib. de Auth. Gen. Conc. p. 88  Turrecr. a Spaniard; Card. 
(p) C. significasti extrav. de electione.  Panorm. a Sicilian, and Anton. Rossel. 
(q) Monar. part. 2. c. 15. & part. 3. c. 21.  an Italian. To make sure work (if possible) against all opposition, about four years after the determination of this Council the Pragmatical Sanction (which was received, saith 
(r) De Benefic. lib. 5.11. By the consent of the whole Clergy, and all the Peers of Faanee, Joh. Marius lib. de Schis. etc. c. 28.  Duarenus, with the applause of all good men) was established by Charles the seventh at Bourges for the Confirmation 
(s) Gagninus' annal. Franc. l. 10. & Bin. Not. in Conc. Bitur. ex Gagnino.  of that Decree. Pope Pius the second was hereat much perplexed, and laboured with Lewis the eleventh to have it annulled, but all in vain, for the Parliament at Paris crossed the Pope's design by exhibiting a Book to the King, which convinced him that the Pope's project, if it took effect, would be in an high degree prejudicial to the State. For that if the Pragmatical Sanction were not maintained, there would yearly be transported to Rome 
(t) Defence. Paris. Curiae pro libert. Eccles. Gall. adversus Rom. aulam. num. 67. & inde.  above a thousand thousand Crowns: and that the Pope hath had for three years' last passed for Archbishoprics and Bishoprics above an hundred thousand Crowns, for Abbeys an hundred and twenty thousand, for other Dignities an hundred thousand, and for Benefices five and twenty hundred thousand; by which means the Goldsmith's Shops were drawn so dry, that none but such as made Puppets, and 
(u) Ib. num. 71.  children's Gaudies dwelled in them. But here the matter rested not, for not long after Lewis the twelfth assembled a Council at Tours, 
(w) Genebr. lib. 4. Chron. omn. Epist. Gall. & Chron. Mattaei. Ann. 1510.  consisting of all the Bishops in France, and very learned men, in which it was resolved, the Pragmatical Sauction should be kept inviolably. About this time Julius the second was mounted on the Papal Chair, who resolved by all means right or wrong, to erect and settle the Papacy; at his Election he was sworn to summon a General Council, which Popes utterly dislike, and being after required to remember his Oath, and observe the constitution of the Council of Constance, viz. That after the determination 
(x) Concil. Constan. Sess. 39 Oct. 9 Ann. 1417. Caran. p. 840.  of ten years a new Council should be appointed; Pontifice vel non valente vel non 
(y) Caran. p. 884.  volente, (saith my Author) The Pope either not able or unwilling, (which is more likely) utterly refused: whereupon certain Cardinals at the motion of several Bishops called a Council at Pisa, which was favoured by the 
(z) Sabel. & Onuphr. in vit. Jul. II.  Emperor and Christian King. The Pope being much straitened makes use of his Keys, and the Sword, which he pretended St. Peter and St. Paul left to his management in Chief, whereupon he forthwith excommunicated the King of France, and procured Ferdinand King of Arragon to join in Arms with him against the French King, and other Adherents to the Pisan Council; and after maintained a bloody 
(a) At Ravenna a City of Romaniola, in which many thousands were slain. Caran. p. 884. & 885. Lanquet in his Chron. ad Ann. 1512. saith; it was Fought on Easter-day, and the Pope was discomfited with the loss of 1600 of his Soldiers.  Battle against them, in which many thousands were slain. Historians 
(b) Speculum Pontific. per Steph. Szegidinum p. 105. and a Spaniard in the lives of the Popes, collected out of Dr. Hascar, Friar Joh. de Pineda, etc.  number those that died in this Quarrel within the space of seven years to Two hundred thousand. But here the Pope's fury (for the Man was more enraged, by N. N's good leave, than ever Luther was) stopped not; he proceeds to the Excommunication of John de Albert, 
(c) Plat. in vit. Julii secundi.  King of Navarre who by Marriage to Katherine, right Heir to Blanch Queen of Navarre, held that Kingdom, and by his Bull deprived him of it, and made a Grant thereof to the  Ferdinand to dispose of it as he pleased: whereupon he invaded that Kingdom, and soon became master of Pampelona the chief City therein, and after got possession of the whole. In the year 1513. Albert pressed Ferdinand to do him right and reason by the restitution thereof, but he defended his Invasion and Usurpation by the warranty of the Pope's Excommunication; and to prevent all after-Claims, by virtue of the Pope's Bull, bequeathed it in his last Will and Testament, to his Daughter Jane, Queen of Castille, and ordered the union of the two Kingdoms 
(d) New Heresy of the Jes. p. 37. & inde, out of Monsieur de Hay in his Treatise of the right of the King of France, from the Testimony of Spanish Historians, against the Cavils of Card. du Perron, who attempted the vindication of the Pope, and forecited Spanish Historian from Guicciardine lib. 11.  Castille and Arragon.  
But the Pope had yet a further Game to manage: a Council must be had, whereupon he calls a Counter-Council (as Eugenius before him had convened an Antisynod at Florence) at the Lateran in Rome, where some Cardinals and Bishops who favoured his Pretensions, and some on other motives assembled to him, before whom at first he 
(e) Concil. Lat. Sess. 1.  excused his Perjury by reason of State: his next endeavour was by the publication of a Bull to condemn the Pisan Synod, and by a second to null its Acts, together with the Pragmatical Sanction. To gain validity to this Practice, he procured Francis the first, 
(f) So the Concordate, and from it Relnffusc. licet de seriis & li. 1. ff. de Offic. Cons.  or rather compelled him (for he protested he complied with the Pope much against his mind, being constrained so to do by his pressing necessities) to condescend to the Abrogation of the Pragmatical Sanction. But this Pope dying some ten Months after he had assembled his Partisans and Pensioners, could not perfect his Project. Leo the tenth succeeds him, who falls afresh upon the Pragmatical Sanction; yet upon second and better thoughts he stops the Career for two or three years, resolving however, having the work half done to his hand, to complete it in convenient time, and so at long run in the eleventh Session of that Conventicle upon the 19 of December 1516 (the certain Birthday of the new Popish Church) he passed a Decree point blank contrary to that of Constance, continued and confirmed in those of Basil, Bourges, Tours, and Pisa, viz. That the Pope had authority over all Councils, and that it was necessary to Salvation, that all Christians should be subject to the Pope. This is Origo Papistarum, thus (by such unauthorised Antichristian means) then (upon that 19th day of December) and there (at Lateran) Popery commenced, and had its rise both name and thing: for though some Romanists pretend the title of Papist to be of more ancient extraction, deriving it from Pope Peter, Pope Paul, and Pope Christ; yet Dr. Bristol a bitter enemy to Protestants, and a fast friend to the Cause (witness his great endeavours and attempts in the Rhemish Testament) is better advised, and 
(g) Demand. 8.  speaks out the whole truth. The name (saith he) of Papists was never heard of till the days of Leo the tenth. All which premises being laid together a mean accountant may easily compute of how long standing Popery is according to the true reformed Roman account. The total of all which those 
(h) Sess. 1. And Cassander thinks Papists to be Pseudo-Catholicks, they being such who will not permit the Church to be reform, though corrupt. Lib. de Offic. boni viri, Sect. sunt alii, etc.  very Lateran Assemblers could not deny, but have so far honestly witnessed, that by reason of the malignity of the times the Popes seemed to have tolerated the Pragmatical Sanction, because they could not help it (thanks for nothing) in as much as for all the Popes could do even to that very day it stood in full force and virtue. But for all was then done, the true Roman Catholics even than did not think the Pragmatical Sanction was sufficiently annulled: neither did that Lateran Decree find any kind reception amongst them, but soon after was stoutly rejected as Heterodox; for within four Months after, towards the latter end of March ensuing, the Divines of Paris spoke as undervaluingly of this Lateran Synod, as it had done of the Council of Basil, contemning and condemning it as Conciliabulum & Conventiculum, a Conspiracy or Conventicle 
(i) Appel. Vnivers Paris. à Leon. 10. facta die 27 Martii, An. 1517. Bochell. lib. 8. de decret. Gal. Eccl. c. 4.  not assembled in God's name: and the Cardinal Lorraine writ expressly after that to Pope Pius the fifth, that as the French Church would never receive that of Florence, so they also had always protested against the Lateran made up of a 
(k) New Heresy of the Jesuits, p. 103. out of the History of the Concordate, composed by Monsieur de Puy.  few Italian Bishops. And that this Lateran Decree would be opposed, Pope Leo foresaw; who therefore cunningly contrived a way if not to prevent, yet to smother and stifle all opposition. For 
(l) 70 Decret. p. 534. Caran. p. 893.  in a certain Decretal he ordained that hereafter for ever, no man should Print, or cause to be Printed, any Book or Writing in the City of Rome, nor in any other place, unless first by his Vicar, or Minister of his Palace, or by some Bishop, or other deputed thereto, it be diligently examined and Subscribed: and after the Trent-sticklers finding that Books notwithstanding this Policy were published, and did creep abroad; they made a Rule which they gave in charge to the Inquisitors, That if in the Books of latter Catholics, written since the year 1315, that which needs Correcting can be amended by taking away, or adding a few things, that course should be followed, otherwise let it be 
(m) Caran. p. 894. & instruct. post indicem, etc. Index l. Prohib. p. 25.  altogeeher blotted out. But neither the Pope's Authority, Power, nor Policy, could prevail so far with the Roman Catholics of that time, as to overrule the Council of Basil, or confirm the Lateran; for many of them constantly adhered to the 
(n) As the Germans, Kings of England and France, ad Ann. 1422. in the Margin of his life, p. 101. etc. Ep. Synod. Concil. Basil.  Council of Basil, because Eugenius the fourth by an Authentic Bull (recited in the sixteenth Session) acknowledged, that it was Lawful and General from the beginning of it to that moment, and in the last of the Bulls which he revoked, after he had 
(o) But not till after admonition and citation. Acts of Superiority, 8 pronouncing him contumacious, for threatening of a dissolution. Caran. p. 856.  rejoined himself to that Council, he declared, that in matters of Faith, the opinion of a Council ought to be preferred to that of the Pope, which cannot hold if the Pope be infallible, as the Lateran crew suggested, because there is no opinion which can or aught to be preferred to the judgement of an Infallible Monarch and Umpire: and as those Romanists stuck to the Council of Basil, so did they to the Council of Constance, as a lawful General-Council, and to its Decree concerning the Superiority of a Council above the Pope, and as many do to this day; which also necessarily destroyeth the supposition of the Pope's Infallibility, because no inferior Authority can be Infallible, for that it can be controlled, and corrected by a superior overruling Power, and that which is Infallible cannot, neither aught to be, controlled or corrected, If any Romanists conceive (and some there be, who would be esteemed, and pass for such with otherwise discerning men, to be the more moderate sort) that this is no direct consequence, it were well done of them to reconcile the different pretensions and contradictory persuasions of the Pope, and a Council, and clearly declare, whether the two contesting parties can be both Infallible, (for an Infallibility they will have, and if there be such a thing, it must be seated in the one, or the other, for there are no other pretenders to it:) and if we must have two Infallibles, than which of them for the time being is the most Infallible to end the Controversy? for till this be decided, there can be no end of Controversies; because this Controversy will be still agitated, and few, or none besides shall be satisfactorily determined, because all others do mostly depend on this; or whether it were not more prudent by way of Accommodation to compound the difference betwixt themselves, that by consent the Contestants should take the Infallibility by turns, the Pope have his vicissitude, and the Council theirs; or that it pass, as a long time it hath done, by a standing Rule of Catch that Catch can, provided it can be so ordered, that it be done without hot bicker and canvasings. But the through-paced Papists stand close to their tackle; for where they fix the Supremacy, there also very consonantly to their supposition they lodge the Infallibility; for thus they argue in the ease of the Pope, His Authority 
(p) Bell. l. 4. de Pont. c. 24. Sect. 2. etc. l. 2. de Conc. c. 13. And this is (saith he) the judgement of the best writers, quos recenset ib. Sect. ult. and therefore his judgement is the last and highest, id. l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 1. Sect. Sed nec, & Sect. denique; and because it is the last and highest, therefore it is Infallible, ib. l. 3. Sect. contra, & l. 2. de Conc. c. 9 Sect. accedat, etc. c. 11. Sect the 2. & Sect. de 3.  is Supreme, therefore his judgement in causes of Faith is the last and the highest, and because it is the last and the highest, therefore it is Infallible. But upon the whole matter it is evident from what hath before been avouched, that the Holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul were not the Founders of the present Romish Church, as it is now constituted and managed, but Julius the Second, and Leo the Tenth by their new settlement; and so their pretence of possession (which at the best was tortuous) is quite out of doors, and at last N. N's Original of Protestancy falls out to be indeed the just date and commencement of Popery. Wherefore as the Papists frequently, but foolishly propose to us, Where was your Church before Luther? So we upon the foregoing grounds may more reasonably demand of them, where was your Popish Church before Julius the Second, and Leo the Tenth? which Question they will never satisfy till they renounce their new Faith, and new Foundation of Faith upon which their new Church is superstructed.  
3. Supposing this acknowledgement then (an. 1516.) and there (in our parts of the World,) this is far from rendering it Catholic, because far removed from that Golden Rule of Catholicism delivered by Vin. Lyr. and approved by all good Catholics, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus, etc. For if before that year and age, and in other parts of the World, that which Protestants now call Popery was not acknowledged Catholic Doctrine, it must not now be acknowledged Catholic; neither aught it then and in our parts of the World to have been acknowledged Catholic: the ancient Primitive is to be more respected and reverenced, than the Church of the last Century; and other parts of the Christian World have been and are as truly and univocally parts of the one Holy Catholic Church, as ours can be, and the true Faith is one and the same in all ages and places. But will or can N. N. answer to Bell. who l. de notis Eccl. c. 7. positively declares, that if only one Province should retain the Catholic Faith, yet it should be truly and properly called the Catholic Church as long as it might be showed (as Protestants have) it was the same which it was at other times, in other places of the World? & Driedo dogmat. Eccles. lib. 4. part. 2. seems to be of his mind. And what will he say to Dr. Bristol? who motive the 45. confesseth, some there have been in many ages in some poinis of the Protestants opinion, insomuch that there is scarce one piece or Article of our whole Faith, but by one or other first or last it hath been called in Question, and that with such liking for the time, that they all have in a manner drawn after them great herds of followers; these some and all were long before this Origenists Aera 1516. and what if these some of Bristol prove to be very many, as the Cardinal of Praeneste reckoned them, Vicards, poor people of Lions, Speronists, Arnoldists, and Waldenses, who, as Reinerus reports, were far spread, and of long standing in the Church. For thus he relates the matter (refort Illyric. Catal. test. devit. tom. 2. p. 543, but in an old Edition, p. 32. lit. D.) they continued so long as no Sect hath, some say it hath been since Sylvester, some since the Apostles, (there is universality of time) and there is almost no country wherein it spreadeth not, (there is universality of place and persons) they have great show of Piety, living uprightly before men, and believing all things aright concerning God, and all the Articles of the Creed, (and abating his [great show] they were good Catholics, because holy believers, and livers; but that he added a subsequent cause,) only they hate and blaspheme the Church of Rome, and that marred all, otherwise they had passed muster; and St. Bernard is much to the same purpose, Serm. 65. sup. Cant. Edit. Venet. an. 1575. Tom. 1. p. 328. tit. H.  
Si fidem interroges, etc. If you require an account of their Faith, nothing is more Christian; if of their Conversation, nothing more commendable; they frequent the Church, honour the Priests, offer their Gifts, make Confession, and communicate in the Sacraments, (these were no Schismatics,) they hurt none, circumvent none, contemn none, are true and just in all their deal, performing what they promised, (these were not unjust wicked men,) yet he had a pique at them, they did not observe the Monkish Vow of Continence, which he conceived to be scandalous, because he was of that Order.    

To clear this Proposition, N. N. thus sets out. SECT. II.  
N. N. ANno 1517. Leo the tenth granted Indulgences to such as voluntarily contributed towards the War against the Turk, who at that time threatened all Christendom, having added Syria and Egypt to the Ottoman Empire. The business of divulging these Indulgences in Germany was committed to the Archbishop of Mentz, who appointed John Tetizel a Dominican Friar to Preach, which Office long time before had been given to the Augustine Friars, amongst whom Martin Luther a Famous Preacher expected the place; but seeing his hopes frustrated, he resolved now to write against Indulgencies and the Pope, as he had prepared to Preach in favour of both before.  
The first occasion which offered itself were certain abuses (unavoidable in things which pass through many hands) in the management of this affair, against which, or rather Indulgencies, he framed certain Libels, and Conclusions, which were condemned and burnt, as heretical, by John Titzell his Competitor, who then exercised the Office of Inquisitor in Germany. This fire did so warm Luther, and added such flames to his hot disposition, that most part of Europe felt the smart of it; for being once engaged and enraged by Titzell's declaration against him, he would not recant his first error, but added others, denying Purgatory, the Pope's Authority, Merits, the necessity of good Works, etc.  

SECT. II.  
J. S. 1. THis Narrative concerns not the Church of England; they who desire to be informed how the Affairs were managed in Germany, may consult Sleidan and Guicciardine. It will not be amiss to recite one testimony from him ad An. 1520. where he chargeth N. N's certain (not, as he suggesteth, unavoidable) abuses on Leo the tenth, affirming he was the cause of what was done in Germany; because he, after complaint upon complaint that his Indulgencies and Bulls were sold in Shops, the Buyers and the Sellers playing the money at Dice, did not redress those faults, nor attempted to redress them: further adding, all the World knew, the Money was not gathered (as was pretended) to make War against the Turk. but indeed to maintain the Pomp and Lust of the Pope's Sister Magdalen. See the Author of the Hist. of the Council of Trent, fol. 5. and withal reporting that Adrian the sixth, immediate Successor to Leo the tenth, intended to reform the abuses, fol. 22. etc. but first he would reform the corrupt manners of the Court of Rome, because he saw all the World desired it earnestly, fol. 26.  
2. Be it so for once, that Luther was engaged and enraged, yet this was no bad Argument of the Cause he had undertaken; for to satisfy N. N. that which engaged him was the sorry shifting defences the Indulgence-mongers framed for themselves: for they finding themselves too weak for Luther in the particular case of Indulgencies, which had no other foundation than the Bull of Clement the sixth made for the Jubilee an. 1350. betook themselves for shelter to common-places, such as the Pope's Authority, the Church's Treasury of Merits, the Doctrine of Penance and Purgatory. 
(r) Hist. Coun. Trent. fol. 6.  Thus Tetzel and Eckius managed their Plea, and would have avoided Luther's objections; but Sylvester Prierias, 
(s) Contra Lutherum, Jewel. def. of Apol. fol. 49.  Master of the Pope's Palace, above all other gave Martin the occasion to pass from Indulgencies to the Authority of the Pope; for he having upon a forced-put delivered, that Indulgentiae scripturarum, etc. Indulgencies are not warranted by Authority of Scripture, but of the Roman Church, and Popes, which is greater, put Luther upon it to examine and discuss this bold Affirmation.  
That which enraged Luther, (if it were so, oppression maketh a wise man mad) was, that he knew very well what counsel Friar Hogostrate 
(t) Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 7.  had given to Pope Leo not to meddle with him by Argument, but to confute him with Chains, Fire and Flames, and he knew this would be his Fate, if he fell into the Pope's Power. Neither could he expect to find further favour from Adrian his Successor; for the Cardinal of Praenest●, who had been employed in Civil Affairs in the Papacies of Alex. Julius and Leo, and was then Adrian's Confident, told him, No man ever extinguished Heresies by Reformation (the Council of Trent it seems was not convened for that end, whatsoever was pretended) but by Crusadoes, and by exciting Princes and People to vote them out; That Innocent the third did by such means (a sure evidence of Usurpation by the known measures of Tyranny, and that their Religion cannot endure a fair trial) happily suppress the Albigenses in the Province of Languedock; and the next Popes by the same means in other places rooted the Waldenses, Picards, poor people of Lions, Arnoldists, Speronists, and Patavines, so that now there remaineth no 
(u) Hist. Coun. Trent. fol. 23.  more of them but the name only. And Adrian himself exhorted the Princes themselves assembled at the Diet of Noremberge, 1522. to reduce Martin and his followers into the right way by fair means, if they could, but if not, to proceed to sharp and fiery remedies, to cut the dead members from the body, as anciently was done to Dathan and Abiram, to Ananias and Saphira, to Jovinian and Vigilantius; and finally, as their Predecessors had done to John Huss, and Hierom of Prague; whose example, in case they cannot otherwise do, 
(w) Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 25.  they ought to imitate. The forementioned Cardinal declared no Reformation could be made, that would not totally diminish the Rents of the Church; for that if Indulgencies were stopped, one quarter of the Revenues of the Church would be cut off, there being but four Fountains, whereof this was one.     

CHAP. II.  

SECT. I.  
N. N. HENRY the Eighth, among others who writ against Luther, composed a Learned Book in defence of the Seven Sacraments, the Pope's Authority, etc. which gained him the Title of Defender of the Faith. But being weary of his lawful Wife Q. Katherine, (despairing to have issue-male by her,) and enamoured of Ann Bullen, cast off all obedience to the Pope, because he would not declare his Marriage with Q. Katherine invalid, and by Act of Parliament made it Treason to acknowledge any Spiritual Jurisdiction of the Pope in his Dominions, himself being proclaimed Spiritual Head of the Church. This was the occasion and beginning of the pretended Reformation in England. Notwithstanding, Henry the Eighth observed the old Religion in all Points, except the Pope's Supremacy, (which he borrowed of the new, to marry Ann Bullen, and enrich himself by the spoils of the Monasteries) and persecuted all other Novelties and Heresies in such degree, that though many crept into England in his Reign, yet very few durst profess them, because as many as did, were burnt by his command.  

SECT. I.  
J. S. TO this suggestion it will be seasonable to premise a general Narrative of the matter of Fact, and then to discover the imperfections and mistakes therein. It is the Papal Power which was challenged in Ecclesiastical Affairs, and which was by Act of Parliament and Convocation cast out of this Kingdom, but the method used therein was solemn and regular. For it was debated in the Universities and chief Monasteries, An aliquid Authoritatis, etc. Whether any Authority did of right belong to the Pope more than to any other Foreign Bishop in this Kingdom of England? It was resolved in the negative, which resolution was soon after concluded in 
(a) An. 1537. and validly asserted in a Book Entitled The Institution of a Christian Man.  the Convocation, in which also a rude draught of Reformation was chalked out, as may be seen in the 
(b) And the King's Injunctions by the Lord Cromwell. Fox Acts and Monuments in Henr. 8. p. 1104.  Records; whereupon some Superstitious abuses were suppressed. For we find a Letter of Henry the eighth, directed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, in which he was commanded to suppress the Worship of Images, Relics, and Superstitious Pilgrimages, as being contrary to his Injunctions, and accordingly the Images of the Lady of Walsingham, and and the Lady of Ipswich were burned 
(c) Speed in Hen. 8. n. 100 and l. 6. c. 9 n. 13. Sand. de Schis. Angl. l. 1. p. 165. 166.  at Chelsey; and more than so that King declared esse sibi, etc. He and the King of France were thinking to abolish the Mass in their respective Dominions. About this time a Tract was written de vera differentia, etc. Of the true difference of Regal and Ecclesiastical Power, Composed by John Stokesley Bishop of London, Cuthbert Tunstal Bishop of Durham, Stephen Gardiner of Winchester, and Dr. Thirlby after of Westminster, in which the Resolution of the Universities, Monasteries, and Convocation, was asserted from the practice of the Saxon, and first Norman Kings; and than what was thus concluded, and asserted, was confirmed by Act of Parliament. All which is agreeable to the Canon-Law, which fully settles the King's Supremacy; Inter personas Ecclesiasticas intro Regni sui terminos Rex est Supremus Gubernator, qui in Ecclesia summum potestatis culmen obtinet, etc. citante Drezouch de Script. Jur. & Jud. Eccles. Part. 1. Sect. 2. p. 3.  
This being premised, and the main of it acknowledged by Learned Romanists, the cavils which N. N. hath framed are next to be considered.  
1. He tells us, Henry the eighth first gained, etc. If by gaining he mean this Title was not assumed by the former Kings of England, or that Henry the eighth acquired a right thereto by the bounty of the Pope, he may be mistaken; for our Kings have a right thereto 
(d) From a Parliament in the conquerors time, the first words of Magna Charta, and the King's Coronation Oath, and Stat. of 24 Henr. 8. c. 12.  Jure Coronae, and it was anciently used by them, as appears by several Charters by former Kings to the University of Oxford, particularly that of Richard the second; and long before in Ann. 435, Guithilinus Archbishop of London in his speech to Constantine then King of England, styles him the Defender and Restorer of the Faith, assuring him he was Christ's immediate Vicar and Vicegerent in his Kingdom, by, for, and under whom he should Reign, and Conquer as well as Constantine the great. He that would be farther satisfied in this particular, may consult Sir Isaak Wake his 
(e) And the Present State of England, first Treatise, p. 88  Rex Platonicus. Certain it is, all this King gained by this Compliment of Pope Leo, was just as much as his Daughter Queen Mary gained by the courtship and cunning of Paul the fourth, who (forsooth) for her sake would undertake to form Ireland into a Kingdom, which had been one long before, and would bestow on her the Title of Queen of Ireland, which her Father had assumed, and her Brother enjoyed.  
2. He talks of his lawful Wife, etc. This is but one Doctor's opinion, he may give his betters leave to speak, who were not of N. N's private judgement. For this matter was debated at Oxon, before the Bishop of Lincoln, and at Cambridge before Stephen Gardiner, and Dr. Fox, who concluded the King's marriage with Katherine to be unlawful: so did the Universities of Paris, Orleans, Anjou, Burges, Milan, but none of them more fully than that of Bononia, the Pope's retiring place, and part of St. Peter's Patrimony, confidently averring the Marriage was horrible, accursed, and abominable, etc. and that the Pope had no power to grant a Dispensation in that case. Our own Historians report, that the Pope privately gave out a Bull to declare the Marriage unlawful, if his Legate Cardinal Campeius could have obtained his desires from the King; but the Author of the History of the Council of Trent, fol. 68 confidently affirms, that there was a Brief framed in which the King was declared free from that Marriage with the most ample Clauses that were put into any Pope's Bull. Whereas therefore N. N. saith, King Henry borrowed of the New Religion his Supremacy to marry Ann Bullen, it is most false: For Stephen Gandiner assures us, that whereas the Sentence of God's Word (that is the Old Religion) had been sufficient in that affair, yet his Majesty disdained not to use the censures of the gravest men, and most famous Universities; and Guicciardine 
(f) Lib. 19 p. 891.  relates, that the Pope himself thought that the Divorce of King Henry was lawful.  
3. N. N. is offended that the Pope's Jurisdiction is taken away by the extinguishing Act. This he misunderstands. That Power which the Pope was devested of was termed Spiritual, but not in that sense that the Power of the Keys is Spiritual, (for this is properly and formally Spiritual, extending only to the Conscience) but in that sense the Courts of the Church are styled Spiritual Courts, because of their Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Those words in the Act, No Foreign Prelate shall exercise any Spiritual Power, etc. (any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction) are not meant of Power properly such, but external and coactive, (which as Rivet distinguisheth) is Spiritual Objective, though not formaliter. That this is the true sense is evident from 
(g) 25 Hen. 8. cap. 21. provis. 1. and in the extinguishing Act. 28 Hen. 8. c. 10.  the Act itself, which is a purely Political Ordinance framed upon reasons, and respecting only such ends and uses as are merely civil, viz. to preserve this Realm from Rapine, etc. as it is declared, Proviso the first. Hereupon the Title of Supreme was 
(h) By the King. 26 Hen. 8. c. 1. Staplet. de tribus Thom. in Thom. Cant. complained and cried out that Henry the second clandestinely demanded, what Henr. 8. openly usurped.  reassumed by the King, which signifies only a Political Governing Head, (as Saul was of the Tribes of Israel, 1 Sam. 15.17.) to see that all Subjects do their duties in their several places, and respective Functions, which Power Mr. Hart in his Conference with Dr. Rainolds confesseth to belong to Kings in the judgement of St. Augustine: and that no more was intended by that Title is evident from that King's Answer to the Convocation at York, which at first scrupled to acknowledge him Supreme Head, but upon his Declaration that he challenged no more by that seemingly-offensive Title, than what Christian Princes in the Primitive times had assumed to themselves in their own Dominions, they at last freely consented thereto.  
4. He quarrels with the Motives inducing him, viz.  
[1.] His despairing, etc. But if the King desirous to have Issue Male was enamoured on Ann Bullen in hopes thereof, this cannot be objected against him as a crime: for he being satisfied of the unlawfulness of marrying his Brother's Relict, as it was not unreasonable to him to desire Issue male, so there was a necessity he should be enamoured of some Lady for a Wife, and if Ann Bullein were his choice, why not she as soon as any other?  
[2.] His intention to enrich himself, etc. But this is more than N. N. knows, or can prove. The Post-fact does not always infer an Antecedent intention, many at long last have done that which in the first attempt they never designed. But supposing he did so intent, this, as it is  to his rejection of the Pope's Supremacy, so the Pope without Demur could dispense with this, provided he had a share in the spoils, according to his Lust, or that his Interest thereby be advanced. He gave the example and encouragement to this ruin by consenting to Cardinal Wolsey's Request, for the suppression and alienation of divers Religious houses.  
[3.] But to what end are these Motives urged? If that which the King did in extinguishing the Pope's usurped Supremacy, and in the Divorce from Katherine were in themselves justifiable Acts, both in respect of the matter thereof, the competency of the Power, and the manner of their management, it matters not what moved him to do so, or how inclinable he was to undo what he had done, (as some surmise;) for as it was honourable and just to defend his own Rights and Prerogative, and to preserve his Subjects from Rapine and Oppression; so it could not be a fault in him, as the matter stood, to desire Issue-male, and for that end to be enamoured on a Lady.  
5. N. N. fancieth this to be the occasion, etc. He guesseth amiss; that which chief occasioned these Transactions, was the Pope's Dissimulation, and his unjust Claims. The beginning came from Zealous Romanists, with the concurrence of others, who being sensible of the Pope's indirect deal, and gross Usurpations, sadly resented the condition of the King and Kingdom, and therefore employed their Counsels and endeavours to redress and rectify those grievances under which they suffered: But these were no Reformers, nor this the Reformition, for Reformation in the sense then used, imported and respected; only the redress of corrupt Doctrine and Manners, or rectifying abuses in the Worship of God, and therefore did not concern the Pope's Supremacy further than it was conceived unjustly Usurped, or tyrannically exercised by him. But if N. N. will have that to be the beginning of the Reformation, than his own Grave, Learned, and Conscientious Divines (as he after styles them) were the first Reformers.  
6. He at last comes in with a cross observation, Notwithstanding, etc.  

[1.] This was rashly observed, for hereby it is visible, if Henry the eighth did any thing in favour of Papacy, neither the Pope, nor any of his Partisans will quarrel him for taking too much upon him; but if he Act any thing in prejudice to the Pope and his Pretensions, than it must be irregular and Sacrilegious. But this is to be observed from the Author of the History of the Council of Trent, fol. 90. That the Pope can blow both hot and cold with one breath. It is to be marvelled (saith he) how the Pope, who before thundered against that King, upon the making the Edict for the six Articles, was constrained to praise his actions, and to propose him for an Example to the Emperor for his imitation. So that a man's personal interest makes him commend and blame the same person.  
[2.] He observed, That Henry the eighth observed his Old (New) Religion, etc. But this is contradicted by some of his old Friends.   
The Author of the Book (viz. Dr. Worthington) entitled, The Anchor of Christian Doctrine, Printed at Douai 1618. Permissu Superiorum, is not so confident, 
(i) Preface, p. 4. and is evident by the King's Injunctions.  maintaining still (saith he) in most (that is not all, except the Supremacy as this Originist fancieth) points the Romish Religion: But welfare Saunders, he speaks out at an high rate, Haeretica 
(k) Sand. de Schism. Angl. l. 1. p. 153, 154. This may be one reason of the Pope's Bull against him, for therein he traduceth him for publishing Heretical Doctrine in his Kingdom. Hist. Trent. fol. 89.  multa tenebat, etc. He held many Heretical points, for he affirmed there were only three Sacraments, Baptism, the Eucharist, and Penance; and as to that Sacrament. he denied Auricular Confession to be instituted by Christ, and by no means would he allow the name of Purgatory. If this be truth, was the King in all points except Supremacy, of N. N's. Old Religion? which is not yet full an hundred and twenty years old: however this be, either Saunders or N. N. deserves to be marked. Next he enlargeth upon Edward the sixth.    

SECT. II.  
N.N. EDward the sixth, a Child of nine years old succeeded his Father, Lord Seymour his Uncle who inclined to Zwinglius his Heresy, was made Protector of the King and Kingdom, upon the sixth of March, scarce 20 days after he was invested in the Protectorship, he sent away Commissioners into all parts of the Realm, to pull down Images, and other Ecclesiastical Ornaments. He also invited out of Germany divers Sectaries of what Religion soever, especially Apostate Friars that had tied themselves to Sisters, assuring himself they would be most for his purpose; and so there came into England Martin Bucer, who had been a Dominican Friar, and an earnest Lutheran, Peter Martyr a Canon Regular, who inclined to Zwinglius, yet came with an indifferency to teach what he should be appointed, Bernard Ochine a Capuchin, weary of that Austere life, took a Woman, and wrote a Book in defence of having two Wives at once, but after Repent, and died Catholic.  
These three Apostles of the Reformation were distributed into the three Fountains of the Land, London, Oxford, and Cambridg; with these joined Coverdale an Augustine Friar, Ball a Carmelite, Hooper, and Roger with other Apostates, who did so vary in their Doctrine, that all was in confusion; and the Common-Prayer Book which Cranmer, Ridley, etc. were then composing, obstructed, especially after Hugh Latimer had sided with them, who was of great account among the common People. In this Confusion the Protector calls a Parliament, 1547, but the Common-Prayer Book did not then pass; yet all former Statures made against Heretics, or Sectaries, were recalled and annulled. In the ensuing Parliament the Book was approved, because it seemed in matter of the Sacraments to humour divers Sectaries who before had opposed it; yet the Common People of England took Arms in defence of the Old Roman Catholic Religion, complaining that most Sacraments were taken from them, and they had reason to fear the rest. This was King Edward's Reformation, which could not be perfected, because he lived but six years,  
It is remarkable how in this King's time it was resolved, that whatsoever should be determined by six Bishops (such as they were) and six Learned men in the Law of God, or the major part of them, concerning the Rights, Ceremonies, and Administration of the Sacraments, that only should be followed. Never did any Sectaries before this time presume so far as ours did in preferring the judgement of seven men, (for that is the major part of twelve) before that of the Christian World, in changing the matter and form of Sacraments, abolishing the Sacrifice of the Mass, and ancient Rites and Ceremonies of the Church Catholic, confirmed by so many General Councils, and approved by all the Ancient Fathers. Heresy is always accompanied with presumption, but this exceeds all Parallel.  

SECT. II.  
J. S. HEre again something in General is to be premised to remove those prejudices which N. N. hath raised against the procedure of Edward the sixth.  
It is granted that King was but a Child, yet it must not be denied, that the Laws of the Kingdom committing the exercise of Supreme Power in that case to a Protector, what was regularly done by him, aught to be deemed as valid as if the King had been of age and done it himself. The Reformation made in Jehoash his minority, 2 Chron. 23, though it was the immediate Act of his Uncle Jehojada, was firm to all intents and purposes. It is acknowledged also, That Images were pulled down, a Body of English Liturgy form, etc. But what was done in these particulars was done without confusion or contradiction. For it was done by Authority of the Supreme Power, with the advice and consent of the major part of the Bishops, not opposed by the Convocations, but rather approved (for that the Clergy in the respective Dioceses generally practised the prescribed form) and after confirmed by Parliament. This appears from the Provisional Injunctions 1 Edw. 6. and the Acts of Parliament 2 & 3 Edw. 6. to which the Bishops had so great a respect, that as they practised themselves, so they took care for the uniform observation of these Injunctions and Statutes, requiring conformity to them from the Inferior Clergy, which accordingly they submitted to. For we find a charge was drawn against Stephen Gardiner, one Article whereof was, He observed not the Book of Common-Prayer, nor ordered the observation thereof in his Diocese; to which charge he made this Answer to the Duke of Somerset with five others of the Council, viz. That he having deliberately perused the Book of Common Prayer, although he would not have made it so himself, yet he found such things in it as satisfied his Conscience, and therefore he would use it himself, and see his Parishioners do so too: the same in effect he said to the Lord Treasurer, Secretary Peter, and Sir William Herbert, when they came to him with Articles from the King himself.  
To confirm this procedure it is to be observed,  
[1.] The whole affair was managed by an approved Catholic Rule, which was to reform what was amiss, according to the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures and usage of the Primitive Church; not to form any New Religion, but retrieve the Old, and to reduce it into that state as Christ had left it, the Apostles practised, and the Primitive Church had received, and observed, as the King declared to the Romish Rebels.  
[2.] It was ordered as the Tridentine Assemblers thought most fit, Decreto de Celebratione Missae, (in which Institutions were read concerning abuses to be corrected in the Celebration of the Mass, the substance whereof was) that the Bishops ought to forbid all things brought in by Avarice, Irreverence, or Superstition: If it be alleged the Bishops were so to do, as Delegates of the See of Rome the Return is obvious, Our Bishops as Commissioners of the Supreme Power might do what they did with better Authority and Warranty. For,  
1. Learned Romanists do confess that particular Nations have a Power to purge themselves from Corruptions as well in Church as State, without leave from the See of Rome. This is acknowledged by Seren. Cressy in his Answer to Dr. Pierce's Sermon, p. 285. But what if the Pope issue out a Prohibition, and interdict the whole Nation? very many of them do conceive it may be waved and opposed, because no reason can be assigned, why the Church should continue under known Corruption for the Pope's re●lyeness to have them redressed. Aeneas 
(l) De Conc. Basil. l. 1.  Silvius (after Pius the second) was once of this mind, for that if the Pope's recusancy may hinder the proceed of a General Council, to the disturbance of the Church, corruptions of the Minds of Men, and the destruction of their Soul, all would thereby be undone without remedy. Cardinal 
(m) De concord. Conc. l. 2. c. 12. & l. 3. c. 15.  Gusan goes yet higher, affirming, that the Emperor in duty was obliged by his Imperial Authority to Assemble a Synod when the great danger of the Church required it; which determination was also resolved in the first 
(n) Conc. Pis. impress. Lutet. 1612. fol. 69.  Pisan Council. Quintinus 
(o) A Lawyer, and pablick Professor at Paris, in repet. lectione de Civitatis Christianae Aristocratia.  Heduus, who lived in Henry the eighth's time, hath approved by many Canons, that if the Pope command, and the King forbidden, the King is to be obyed; therefore when the King calls together the Prelates of the Church, to reform the state thereof, they are bound to obey, though the Pope forbidden it 
(p) Franc. praelect. 4. a. 161. at this day a General Council may be called against the Pope's mind by the Emperor and the Christian Princes, whether he will or not.  Baron 
(q) Ad Ann. 553. n. 2.  confesseth the second General Council is approved, though Pope Damasus with might and main opposed it. Vigilius, though once he consented to the calling of the first General Council, yet when he was called to give his personal appearance, and afford his assistance, and concurrence, being commanded so to do by the Emperor, and solicited thereto by twenty 
(r) Baron. 553. n. 35.  Metropolitans, whereof three were Patriarcks, the sturdy insolent Pope utterly refused: whereupon the Emperor (the necessity of the Church, which was then in a general Tumult and Schism about the 
(s) Ibid. Ann. 547. n. 29.  three Chapters, so requiring)▪ Commanded the Holy men assembled to protract. 
(t) Inst. Ep. ad Synod. Collat. 1. p. 520.  the time no longer in expectation of the Pope's presence, but to debate, and deliver a speedy Judgement upon the Controversy depending before them; which they readily submitted to, and accordingly did discuss and 
(v) Ibid. Coll. 2. p. 524.  determine the matter without the Pope's Placet, and contrary to his good liking and 
(w) Baron. Ann. 553. n. 212.  affections.  
2. The practice not only of Heathen and Jewish Kings do confirm this, but of Christian also, who have challenged and exercised this Power as their Original Right, derived to them from God. The first, famously known, Christian Emperor, Constantine the Great said to his Bishops, You are the Bishops of those things within the Church, but I am appointed of God to be Bishop of those things without the Church; meaning thereby that the oversight of the external Government of things belonging to the Church was by God committed to him as the administration of Holy things of God within the Church was deputed to them 
(x) Cited in the Book De vera differentia, written An. 1634.  King Edgar in an Oration to the Clergy required them to make a Reformation by a conjunction of his and their Power, committing the whole affair to so many Bishops as he then nominated. Charles the Great convocated the Bishops to him, to Counsel him how God's Law should be recovered; and in the Preface of the Capitulary wrote thus to the Clergy, of his Empire, We have sent our Deputies to you, etc. Let no man censure this as a Presumption to correct what is amiss, etc. For we have read in the Book of Kings, how Josiah restored the Service of God in the Kingdom which he had given him. Maximilian in Ann. 1512. Declared, though he of his clemency had tolerated the Pope and the Clergy, as his Father Frederick had done, yet it appertained to his Duty that Religion decay not, that the Worship and 
(y) Abbot Vrspreg. Grth. Grat. Easc. Whereupon he. with Lewis the twelfth of France, and some Cardinals called a Council at Pisa, and cited the Pope in it. Onupher. in vit. Julii secundi.  Service of God be not diminished.  
3. It is the Duty of Sovereign Princes to do as Josiah did by the directions of faithful men, though the majority of the Priests express their unwillingness and averseness. For many Kings have been severely reproved for not reforming the Idolatrous abuses of God's Worship in their Reigns, which would never have been done, unless they in Duty had been obliged to do it; and obliged they could not have been, unless God had settled a Power in them to do it, of which because there is no revocation, or limitation in the Gospel, therefore the first Grant and Commission standeth good; for the Gospel doth not destroy the Law, but perfect it.  
4. Ad hominem, did not Queen Mary in her huddled reduction of Popery exercise this Power? Did she not introduce the Popish form of Solemn Mass, which was then abolished by standing Laws? Did not she to drive on her design, imprison one Archbishop, displace two, and deprive eight Bishops? Did not she with the consent of a sorry Convention, which she called five days after her Coronation, repeal some Statutes made by Henry then eighth, and others, by Edward the sixth? Sir Henry Spelman in his larger History of Tithes, c. 29. p. 170. tells us, he had heard there was but twenty persons to give their voice with the Bill, and yet carried it. Did not she for a colour when the work was done, some few days after call a Convocation, which she soon after dissolved by her peremptory Mandate? but not a word of this from our cunning Origenist, because it was done for the advancement of the Catholic Cause. Popish Princes may do what they like, in order to the Good old Cause, and never be checked or censured for it; but Protestant Sovereigns must be bound up till the Pope's Licence, or a Vote in Convocation lose them.  
5. Although Synods be the most prudential, and safe way to determine Church-matters, yet without them God's Worship may be Reform, and the Catholic Doctrine restored. In the case of the Catholics and Arrians, Nazianzen (ad Procopium) complained he saw no good end of Councils; certainly in those where Faction prevailed, and Votes passed not by weight, but number. Not that he thought so absolutely and Universally, but pro hic & nunc in respect of the Times, and Persons assembled. For he knew if a Council had been called when the Arrians were the overruling party in the Church, the Catholics would be overpowered by multiplicity of Votes; yet for all this, He and other Catholics did endeavour the suppression of Arrianism.  
6. Neither in such times and cases must the business be delayed till a General Council be summoned, especially when he who pretends to have the sole Power of calling it, and the parties called are aforehand agreed by Clandestine correspondencies, they will do nothing towards a Reformation, but either obstruct or baffle it. Henry the eighth said well, A General Council would do well where all may speak their Judgements, but it cannot be called a General Council, where they only are heard who are resolved to be on the Pope's side in all matters, and where the same men are Plaintiffs, Defendants, Advocates, and Judges. Hist. Conc. Trid. Angl. fol. 85.  
7. Supposing there wanted a formal Synodical concurrence in this Transaction of Edward the sixth, there was in effect that which to all intents and purposes is equivalent, viz. a General submission and conformity to the Provisional Injunctions, and Acts of. Parliament by the Clergy.  
8. There was a Synod to carry on this matter in Edward the sixths' time, for though the first Edition of the Liturgy was only framed by the advice and suffrage of Bishops, and elected Divines, which yet was afterwards revised and completed with the addition of a form of Making and Consecrating Bishops, Priests and Deacons, (but whether the Synod then in being composed and form it, or passed their Power (which is more probable) for the forming of it to the selected persons appointed by the King (and so may properly enough be said to have done it, because by those to whom they had consigned their Authority) I shall not pretend to determine:) yet this may be safely resolved on, a Synod there was, which appears from the Statute-Book, which makes mention of a Subsidy of six Shillings in the Pound granted by the Clergy unto the King, 2 & 3 Edw. 6. and it is notoriously known such a Grant in those times passed not without a Convocation; and it is certain, mention was made of a Synod 1 Mariae, held in King Edward's days; and Mr. Philpot a member of the Convocation 1 Mar. maintained the Catechism exemplified in the Common-Prayer Book, to be Synodical, upon this account, that the Convocation in King Edward's time had passed their Authority to certain Persons Deputed by the King to make Spiritual Laws 
* Fox Act. & Mon. . So that though nothing appears apud Acta, because perhaps not so carefully registered, or not at all, because it was the Personal Act of their Deputies, or in that primo Mariae (which is likely enough) expunged and destroyed, yet a Synod there was to carry on this work, upon the foregoing Reasons; to which may be added what Bishop Jewel def. Apol. fol. 520, affirms, which Mr. Harding 
(a) Scoffing at it as a small obscure meeting of a few Calvivinists Def. Apol. fol. 521. which Bishop Jewel farther avers, Defen. Apol. fol. 645.  could not deny: We have not done (saith he) what we have done altogether without Bishops or a Council, the matter hath been treated in open Parliament with long Consultation, and before a notable Synod, and Convocation.  
Having premised thus much, the less shall be said to N. N's exceptions, and reports, and nothing at all to his angry, scurrilous, malicious invectives and expressions.  
[1.] Edward the sixth was a Child, etc. This is a close reflection on his incompetency to act in that kind, but N. N. might have considered that Kings in the eye of the English Laws are never Minors, and that though he was a Child in years, yet not so in understanding; for during the time of his Reign he kept a most exact judicious Journal of all the most principal 
(b) Hayward's Ed. 6.  affairs of State, and his abilities were so great, far beyond his years, that he could encounter Gardan, and disputed his new devised Paradoxes with so much acuteness, and strength of Reason, that Cardan reported his parts to be miraculous. And as to his Knowledge in matters of Religion, his Answer (formerly related) to the Romish Rebels, sufficiently shows, he was no Candidate thereof, but a solid understanding Christian. But if his being a Child be so great an offence to the Romish tender Consciences, why should not their Universal Monarch's being a Child work the same effect in them? Such they have had, Benedict the ninth was a Lad almost ten years old, John the eleventh a stripling, and a Bastard to boot, which one of their stout sticklers grants, and makes a pleasant Fanatic 
(c) A. D. Soc. Jes. in his Reply to Dr. White, p. 289. Sect. to the seventh.  Apology for their youth, viz. in these words. The young years of our Bishops cannot be a hindrance to debar them, (of being Infallible Pastors and Universal Monarches in the Church,) since out of the Mouth of Babes our Lord can work his own praise; neither is Ignorance, want of Learning, or Discretion any , when by the mouth of an Ass God can instruct a Prophet.  
[2.] They did vary (as he runs on) and so were in confusion. The Antecedent is beggarly without proof, and the consequence is naught: every variation in judgement and opinion doth not infer or imply Confusion. The members of the Trent-Assembly in far more and more importing Doctrines did vary almost at every turn, yet I presume this man of confidence will not adventure to conclude, that all was there in a Confusion. But King Edward's Doctors did not vary, for they were perfectly agreed, and took an effectual course to prevent discord and confusion. For,  
[3.] The Common-Prayer Book was not obstructed, but generally and Religiously observed. For in 1 Edw. 6. it was Authorized by Proclamation, recommended to the Bishops by special Letters from the Lords of the Privy Council to see it practised, and in 2. Edw. 6. a penalty was imposed by Act of Parliament on such as should deprave or neglect the use thereof: if any disturbance therein, it proceeded from the Popish party, and their Preachers, which occasioned a Proclamation to be issued out to silence them.  
[4.] He relates every one might Preach what he pleased, etc. This is false, for a Proclamation was published, none should Preach, unless he were Licenced.  
[5.] Hugh Latimer (saith he) was in great esteem, etc. If so then probably the Common People would have sided with him, for the Common-Prayer Book which he so highly esteemed, that he judged all those who condemned it to be Factious and Seditious, as in particular he charged Thomas Lord Seymour upon that account.  
[6.] He tells us the Common People took Arms, etc. Surely not those who so much respected Hugh Latimer; they were some who affected Popery, that is no news such should prove Rebels when they dare; he might have spared this, to save the Credit of his Old Religion. This practice is sufficient to prove them no true Roman Catholics, for the Old Religion, taught Subjects Submission and Suffering for Religion, and forbade Resistance and Rebellion, and taking up Arms against their lawful Sovereign.  
[7.] He supposeth Edward the sixth's Reformation could not be perfected, etc.  
In good time! by the same reason Queen Mary's reduction of Popery could much less be perfected, for she lived but five years.  
[1.] He presents his grand remarkable, in this King's time, etc. But he is so reserved and wary as not to specify the year of his Reign: if he means 1 Edw. (as is most probable) he misseth one of the number, for thirteen were appointed, this is a pardonable mistake. That which follows is a downright Calumny, as hath been sufficiently proved, for those seven men had a real respect to the Judgement of the Christian World, and Practice of the Catholic Church. If he pitch on 2 & 3 Edw. 6. then 32 persons were nominated to examine Ecclesiastical Laws, viz. such as concerned the Jurisdiction and Rights of the Church in foro externo, which indeed were but so many Regulators of the Canon-Law. If he relate to 6 Edw. 6. only eight persons were named in the King's Letters Patents, with a power to call into their Assistance whom they pleased. But this is remarkable, that when N. N. lays claim to all the Christian World, many General Councils, and all the Fathers for their Matter and Form of Sacraments, and their Sacrifice of the Mass, he is then fallen into the braving humour of his old Thrasonical Bragadochio Colleagues; Testor omnes patres, omnia Concilia, etc. No less than all was the nothing Brag of Father Campian, but the Author of the Apologetical Epistle published Ann. 1601, goes far beyond him in this swelling ranting ventosity; That Faith which I defend is taught in all the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, and all ancient Glosses and Scholies on their Latin and Greek, by all the learned Fathers, Historians, Antiquaries, and Monuments, by all Synods, Councils, Laws, Parliaments, Canons and Decrees of Popes, of Emperors, and Kings, by all Martyrs and Confessors, and Schools, by all Friends and Enemies, even Mahumetans, Jews, Pagans, and Infidels, all former Heretics and Schismatics. All these he had carefully and with diligence studied, and considered them; this is a right Don Glorioso. But somewhat is still behind, his Faith is approved by all the Testimonies that can be devised, not only of this World, but of God, of Angels, and Glorious Souls, of Devils, and Damned Spirits in Hell, (the fittest Witnesses of all:) and here he stops his Career. Other puling Heretics have boasted of this or that Council, or of some few Fathers; but these have attained to that pitch of Impudence, that all makes for them, all is theirs; when upon a just examination none at all appears for them. Heresy is always accompanied with Vanity and Insolency, but this exceeds all Parallel; but that we find it the constant custom of the Romish Hector's.    

SECT. III.  
N. N. AFter Edward died his Sister Queen Mary Reigned, who being a Catholic, restored Religion by Act of Parliament; Cardinal Pole, the Popes, Legate absolved the Kingdom from the Excommunication and Schism incurred. Some Histories report that three thousand Sectaries, all Strangers, were Banished out of England, and among the rest the two holy Apostles Peter Martyr, and Bernard Ochine. All King Edward's Bishops were Deposed, and Imprisoned, the Catholic Bishops set at liberty and restored to their Sees.  

SECT. III.  
J. S. 1. QVeen Mary did reintroduce Popery, but this she did contrary to the solemn Promise made to the Gentry of Norfolk and Suffolk: to violate such an obligation will scarce be proved either Honourable or Religious.  
2. She did not regularly restore her Religion, but confusedly shuffled it up as hath been before declared, that if any Protestant Prince had done the like, an hideous Hubbub would have been raised.  
Bishop Jewel relates the manner thus: 
(a) Reply to Harding, Art. 13. fol. 358.  The Papists first scattered it and forced their Mass against a Law then in force against them, than established it by Law; and next after had a Solemn Disputation at Oxford, to try whether the Law were good or no. This (saith he) Mr. Harding is your Lidford Law: for in order of nature the Disputation should have been first, than the Law, than the Execution thereof; but, as Tertullian saith, Haeretici ex Conscientia infirmitatis suae nihil tractant ordinary.  
3. He cannot but his hand must slip though he have no visible advantage by it; for all King Edward's Bishops were not Deposed, the Bishops of Lincoln and Hereford were not; the Bishops of Litchfield, Salisbury, Norwich, Bangor. St. Asaph, and Landaffe complied.  
4. If the deposed Bishops were but pretended Bishops, than your restored Bishops were so too, for some of these received their Ordination from them and those who ordained them.  
But now the Originist after all these Sallies falls afresh on his great work, on which he spends much Paper and time, wherein he most triumphs, and glories: and thus he makes his first approach and onset.     

CHAP. III.  

SECT. I.  
N. N. QUeen Mary deceased without issue, her Sister Elizabeth is proclaimed Queen. The Reformation is established by Act of Parliament, notwithstanding the great opposition made by all the Bishops and others in the Upper-house. The Queen was resolved to pull down Catholic Religion, because Cecil and others of her Council persuaded her, she could not be secure as long as the Pope's Authority was acknowledged in England, seeing the Apostolic See had declared her a Bastard, and all Catholics looked upon the Queen of Scots as true Heir to the Crown. Nevertheless it was judged expedient for her quiet, and the peace of the Realm, to keep always a Resemblance of it in the Clergy, as the best remedy against Puritanism, which was thought by her Majesty dangerous to Monarchy. The titles therefore of Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deans and Chapters were retained, as also in her own Chapel some Images, the Altar and a Crucifix upon it. But what will they do for Ordination? That Form which was instituted in Edw. the sixth's time was judged invalid, by public Judgement in Queen Mary's days, insomuch that Leases made by King Edward's Bishops, though confirmed by Dean and Chapter, were not esteemed good, because, saith the Sentence, they were not consecrated, nor Bishops: see Brook's Novel Cases, Plac. 463. fol. 101. impress. London, 1604. Seeing therefore it concerned the Queen to have consecrated Bishops, she endeavoured by all means to have such as she named for Bishoprics consecrated by Catholics; but they all resolved not to make Bishops in the Church, whereof themselves refused to be members. The Queen, notwithstanding the reluctancy of Catholic Bishops, named in her Letters Patents Kitchen Bishop of Landaff, among others, to consecrate Mr. Parker, and his Fellows; he being the only man, among all the Catholic Bishops, that took the Oath of Supremacy in her Reign. But many others who complied with Henry the eighth in that particular, refused now to consecrate, and Landaff was resolved to do the same; yet at last, by fair words and promises, they prevailed with the old man to give them a meeting at the Nagshead in Cheapside, where they hoped he would have ordained them Bishops, despairing that ever he would do it in a Church, because that would be too great and notorious a scandal to Catholics, among whom Landaff desired to be numbered. Bonner's Bishop of London hearing of this, sent Mr. Neal, his Chaplain, to forbid the exercise of giving Orders in his Diocese, under pain of Excommunication, wherewith the old man being terrified, and otherwise also moved in his Conscience, refused to proceed in that Action, alleging chief for reason of his forbearance, want of sight. This excuse being interpreted an evasion by Mr. Parker and his Fellows, lessened his entertainment, some of them reviling him, and saying, this old Fool thinketh we cannot be Bishops, unless we be greased, alluding to the Catholic manner of Episcopal Unction. Being thus deceived in their expectation, they resolved to use Mr. Scories' help, an Apostate irreligious Papist, who had born the name of Bishop in King Edward's time, and was thought to have sufficient power to perform the Office: he having cast off, with his religious habit, all scruple of Conscience, willingly went about the matter, which he performed in this sort; having the Bible in his hand, and they all kneeling down before him, he laid it upon every one of their heads and shoulders, saying, Take thou Authority to Preach the Word of God sincerely, and so they risen up Bishops of the new Church of England.  

SECT. I.  
J. S. TO this long lying Section, the fittest method will be to discover the several falsities, and vain conjectures, as they lie in order.  
First, He vainly surmiseth great opposition was, etc. This is one misadventure, for there was but fourteen Bishops then living, whereof four were absent; and then a Question may be made, whether all those ten who were present did oppose it? for some of them had learned the Art of compliance so exactly, that they could suit to the times without any opposition: for the others, there was but one Abbot of Westminster, and only two Lords Temporal, the Earl of Shrewsbury, and Viscount Montacute, who did oppose it: these thirteen, if they had all combined, could not make any great opposition.  
2. The Queen (saith he) did resolve, etc. This is most false, for thus she expressed and declared herself: 
(a) Cambden, Ann. p. 35, 36.  England embraceth no new Religion, nor any other than that which Christ hath commanded, the Primitive and Catholic Church hath practised, and the Ancient Fathers have always with one mind and will approved. If N. N. hath another Catholic Religion, let him keep it to himself.  
3. The Pope did declare her a Bastard, etc. Perhaps this may be true, but if he did so, he declared against his own Conscience, if Guicciardine say true: but whether this were so or no, the Pope hath a faculty to determine and declare contradictions: If once he did declare her a Bastard, he hath a cleanly conveyance to call in his Declaration, and pronounce her Legitimate. Our English Authors of good account, probably upon common report, have written that Pius the fourth, as he offered very large Concessions, so, (if the terms could be agreed on which were proposed,) to revoke the ●cateace against erer Mother's Marriage. This seems to Mr. Fuller to be a light conjecture, but others as modest, and more knowing than himself in that point, have averred it. Bishop Babington on Num. the seventh affirms of Clement the eighth, and Bishop Andrews Tort. Torti. p. 142. is very positive in it,  ill●●d rentatum constat, de cuteris si— ut vero Primatus, etc. Mr. Fuller himself relates, the Pope sent by his Nuntio, the Abbot of St. Saviour's, a Letter to her, in which he promised to grant her whatsoever she would desire for the establishing and confirming of her Princely Dignity, and assured her (having furnished the Abbot with secret Instructions) he should deal more largely with her, entreating her to give the same credit to his Speeches which she would do to himself. If these Instructions contrived for that pretence and proffer were not publicly to be seen, this was but a piece of Pope-crafe; for the matter was so to be managed, that nothing was to be concluded, till the Abbot certainly found the Letter would take, and produce the designed effect. But before this Paul the fourth promised, though not so frankly, yet home enough; that if she would refer herself wholly to his free (crooked) disposition, he would do whatsoever might be done with the 
(b) Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 411. ad An. 1558.  honour of the Apostolic See; and we know that the Popes have ready inventions, they can any time off-hand find an expedient to salve its honour.  
This Pope in the year 1554, being a moderate good man, by a Letter to Queen Mary, whom he knew to be zealously addicted to the Papal Interest, granted a close Dispensation to confirm and ratify the alienation of the Possessions and Revenues of the Church, and forged six reasons to satisfy the World, that such a Dispensation might be granted with honour and conscience. This Letter, with the reasons, was found in the Offices of the King's Papers, the original whereof was there preserved: but the next year following the tender-conscienced man changed his mind, and in private discourse often told the English Ambassadors with deep protestations, that he could not profane the things dedicated to God, and that his Authority reached not so far as to approve Sacrilege, and therefore under an Anathema restitution must be made of church-good and Revenues; adding withal, they could not hope that St. Peter would open Heaven to them, so long as they usurped his Goods upon Earth, Hist. Counc of Trent, fol. 392, & 393. ad An. 1555.  
This was a pure piece of Pope-craft to get Peter-pences from the people, and Annates from the Crown for himself, which he gained by this Artifice, and let the Church shift for her Rights as well as she could.  
The Pope and his Adherents do generally charge the Greeks with Heresy and Schism, yet by an accord the Greeks may have his good leave to be Heretics and Schismatics; let them but acknowledge his Supremacy, they may keep their Religion, and be either Heretics or Schismatics: but if they prove refractory, and refuse, then presently they are pronounced Heretics and Schismatics.  
For in Ann. 1594 Articles were drawn and concluded betwixt the Pope and the Bishops of South-Russia, the main whereof was, he was to permit to them the liberty of the exercise of their Religion, and they were in lieu of that to acknowledge his Supremacy; which they submitted to, but with special reservation of their Religion and Rites, Brerewood Inquiries, p. 138. taken out of Th. a Jesus, What Arts the Popes have used to maintain their Reputation, the Author of the Hist. of the Couno. of Trent hath reported for fine stories of Reconciliation, fol. 382, and 383, which he truly and properly styles shadows of Obedience. For Saligniacus the Pope's Protonotary Itenr. to 8. c. 2. refert Brerewood, p. 161. expressly affirmeth, that the Christians in Egypt never yielded obedience to the Pope.  
Let the Pope's Interest be either bettered or secured, he can with honour allow Heresy and Schism; and so sober and moderate a man is he, he will not stand with you upon the strict account of Religion.  
Neither is N. N. certain that all the Catholics did take the Queen of Scots to be true Heir to the Crown; yea it is false for not those sure who concluded the Marriage of King Henr. the eighth with Katherine to be unlawful, and Divorce lawful; not those sure who owned Elizabeth their natural Liege-Prince, as Heath Archbishop of York, and Oglethorp Bishop of Carlisle who Crowned her; not those who judged the Act of Succession valid, neither the Secular Priests, who in their Book entitled Important Considerations, Printed An. 1601, and now reprinted An. 1675, bound with the other Treatises, did acknowledge her their true and lawful Queen, and themselves her Highness natural born Subjects, p. 53. and 64; and as such did profess their Allegiance to her, as highly as the most Loyal Subjects could or should do, p. 85, 86. Nay, nor Father Parsons and his Comrades, who entitled the King of Spain, and the Infanta his Daughter to the Crown, in his Book entitled Dolman, and as the Secular Priests affirm, Import. Consid. p. 82.  
Philip King of Spain treated with Queen Elizabeth to Marry his Son Charles, which he would not have done, if he either valued the Pope's Declaration, 
(f) Which none of those Roman-Church (and there are great store of them) do, who deny his Infallibility in matters of Fact and Right.  or thought the Queen of Scots to be true Heir, unless he had been assured of a Dispensation, and by virtue thereof disseise and debar the right Heir. But this project failing, he gave out words he would take her for his own Wife, insomuch that the King of France feared a Marriage betwixt them, which moved many of the more inquisitive and considering sort to believe, that the reason why the Pope did not draw in his Declaration, proceeded only from the practices of the French King, Hist. Counc. of Trent. fol. 411. An. 1558.  
4. He fancieth Ordination of Bishops was not to be had, etc. why so? The Form, etc. how comes it to pass? the Leases, etc. But if the Leases were adjudged not good, yet consecrated Bishops they were, for the goodness of a Lease depends on the Laws of a Kingdom, the validity of Consecration is derived from the Law of Christ, according to whose Institution they were Ordained. But how is it the Leases were not good? this doth not appear; for Brooks doth not say, adjudicatur, but dicitur, it was so suggested, not it was so adjudged: but if he and all the Temporal Judges had passed this Sentence and public Judgement, yet it was null in Law; for sententia juris, etc. even a legal Sentence, when pronounced by an improper incompetent Judge, is void in Law; and it is certain they have no power to determine either the Regularity or the Validity of either the Form, or the Ordination itself. It belongs to others to meddle with the Institutions of Christ.  
Alas, they did exceed their bounds in giving such a judgement: Pope Paul and Cardinal Pool judged otherwise; for their ratification of the Ordinations in King Edward's time could not be valid, unless the Ordinations themselves were valid antecedently to the Pope's superfluous Confirmation. It implies to confirm a Nullity, and ratify a Nothing. However N. N. is desired to declare his private Judgement, how he liketh the public Judgements which have palled on his Fellows in, and since Queen Elizabeth's time; and so farewell to N. N.'s public Judgement, and his private Judgement to boot.  
5. He conceiveth Queen Elizabeth endeavoured to employ his Catholics, etc. as if none else could consecrate but they. This is a false supposition in the judgement of his Catholics, as after will appear, but this he vents at a venture; for Mr. Harding, who had reason to know more of this matter than N. N. could not say so; the ancient Bishops (said he) were not required, or else refused, but if they did refuse, yet her concern could not be prejudiced thereby; for she had sufficient in readiness to perform that office. N. N. acknowledgeth Landaff and others were named in the Queen's Letters Patents, if it had been for his interest he could have named those others, those seven, whereof six were Bishops, one a Suffragan, for whose Authority, see Bell. de Sacr. Ord. lib. 1. c. 7.  
6. He reckons Landaff among his Catholics, etc. But a Friend of his told Mr. Harding, we had but one Fool, meaning Landaff, and him they have gotten, and at last many of his good Catholics complied. Bishop Jewel told Mr. Harding so, and he could not gainsay it. At first they subscribed against us with the very same hands with which, not long before, they had openly protested, and solemnly sworn against the Pope, and with which since they have received and embraced our whole Religion. Bishop Jewel def. Apol. f. 521.  
7. He suggests they prevailed with Landaff, etc. But he did not meet with them, neither did they meet for Dr. Parker's Consecration, but his Confirmation, at which he was not present himself, being confirmed by his Proxy Dr. Bullingham.  
8. But Bonner terrified Landaff, etc. But he was secure enough from his thunderings, he himself being then secured and imprisoned for his obstinacy, and legally deprived of his Bishopric. But had he been at liberty, and in power, Landaff needed not to fear his Scarecrows; for the Bishop of London hath no Authoritative Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Landaff, they are Pares in all accounts of Power; neither was Bow-Church subject to his Jurisdiction, being a peculiar under the Archbishop of Canterbury, and this was the place where the meeting was for Dr. Parker's Confirmation. But why should Bonner forbid the exercise? especially if he thought (as N. N. seems to do) that the performance of that action in that clandestine place, and irregular manner, renders the act invalid; for Bonner would have rather connived at it, that thereby he might take an occasion (as a subtle enemy would do) to make the scandal stick more close to them.  
9 He further adds, they were deceived in their expectation. But N. N. is deceived in his Relation, which is false; for  
[1.] They had no need of Landaff neither did he refuse, as that signifies an obstinate Recusancy, such as is alleged in his Catholics, who, as N. N. reports, refused.  
[2.] He allegeth they resolved to use Mr. Scories' help, etc. If they did, they resolved well; for Mr. Scorie did not only bear the name of a Bishop, but was a regular valid Bishop, being Consecrated Aug. 30. 1551, by Canterbury, London, and Bedford. But N.N. thinks they thought him to have sufficient power to perform that Office: this is false too, for there were three besides him ready to join with him in the performance, who were all employed, and did Act; and he with others were sufficiently empowered by the Canons of the Church to perform that Office, and yet if he alone had done it, his Consecration had been as Canonical and valid as that of Pope Pelagius, who was but a Deacon, whom the Western-Bishops refused to Consecrate, and had an un-canonical 
(g) Only by two Bishops and a Presbyter of Octia.  Consecration only, and yet he passed for Pope. And in some cases the performance of Consecration by one Bishop only, is justifiable from good Precedents, and the Authority of Gregory the Great to boot.  
N. N. having cast off all scruples of Conscience, adds sin to sin, one lie to another, in reporting he performed it in this sort, having, etc. For he only did not perform it, neither in that sort he suggesteth, which is demonstrated by as good Evidences as are to be found in the Vatican; for thus, as appears by them, it was performed: On the 17th. of Decemb. 1559, the Persons nominated in the Queen's Letters Patents, viz. Bishop Barlow, Coverdale, Scory, and the Suffragan of Bedford assembled at Lambeth-Chappel for Archbishop Parker 's Consecration, where first Morning-Prayer was read, than a Sermon Preached, (this Bishop Scory did, and it was all he did along) then the Sacrament of the Eucharist was Administered, than they (all four) proceeded to the Consecration; whereat the Prescript-form in the Book of Ordination was strictly observed, not laying the Bible, etc. (as N. N. falsely relateth) though if so it had been done, there is a Book-Case for it, Conc. Carth. 4. C. 2. But delivering to him according to an old Roman rite; neither saying only, (take thou Authority, etc. which N. N. only takes notice of,) but using the solemn formal words of Consecration, (Receive ye the Holy Ghost,) and then Remember, etc. according to the method of the Ritual.  
4. N. N. hath the ill-luck to be still out, and deceived; for whereas he surmiseth others were Consecrated when Archbishop Parker was, he is much mistaken: For he only was Consecrated then, the others not till afterwards, and upon several days.  
5. But N. N. is wronged, is being reproved for falsehood and misadventures, he, good man, will say nothing but that for which he hath good authorities, and good proofs; which, whether they be regular, and valid, is next to be examined.    

SECT. II.  
N. N. THis Narration of the Consecration at the Nagshead, I have taken out of Hollywood, Constable, and Dr. Champney's Works. They heard it from many of the ancient Clergy, who were Prisoners in Wisbitch-Castle, as Mr. Bluel, Dr. Watson Bishop of Lincoln, and others; these had it from Mr. Neal, and other Catholics who were present at Mr. Parker's Consecration at the Nagshead, as Mr. Constable affirms. The story was divulged, yet being so evident a truth, none durst contradict it, notwithstanding both the Nullity, and Illegality was objected against them in Print not long after, by the Famous Dr. Stapleton's Counterblast, fol. 301.  

SECT. II.  
J. S. ALL this here presented, amounts to thus much;  
1. Mr. Neal and Mr. Constable reported the story, therefore it is true. Neal was an eye-witness, and Constable took it upon trust, and all the rest hear-say men. So that the whole depends upon their credit and honesty, who have cracked their credit by their holy Fraud, and lying Legends, and practising the black Art of Equivocation; and their honesty is justly suspected, who care not what they say, so they say something for the advantage of the good old Cause, as will hereafter be declared.  
2. Dr. Bishop, a fast Friend to the Cause, in his Repr. of Dr. Abbot's Defence, p. 120, confutes this way of Argumentation, saying; Any man not past all care of his Reputation, would be ashamed to cite such late partial Writers; it is either where their testimony is not contradicted by their Adversaries, when they set themselves industriously to detect falsifications in their Allegations, or else those Protestants do annex the Authorities and Reasons on which their testimonies are grounded.  
Testimonies of private men, or hear-say men, when crossed by Authentic Records, are always slighted, and contemned. If the Homagers of a Manor swear to a custom, (which is more than speaking to it,) yet if there be any Court-Roll extant, and produced, which declares the contrary to their Depositions, their testimony is thereby utterly invalidated. Baronius in the point of Maxentius his Birth, presumed to correct all former Historians by the discovery of an ancient Coin, certainly an ancient Record is better than an ancient Coin can be; for standing Records have always by all Nations, and the consent of Mankind, been esteemed the strongest human testimonies, and the best assurances of Faith, which ought not to be disbelieved or disputed upon the reports of particular men, because they have been purposely devised and preserved for the discovery of Truth, and the decision of Controversies which might arise in after-Ages, and the rectifying of particular men's several apprehensions. Such as these we produce in this case, which have convinced and fully satisfied more ingenuous Adversaries than N. N. or his Narrators seem to be: When Dr. Reynolds shown these Records to Mr. Hart, he confessed they were undeniable. The Bishop of Chalcedon acknowledged that Father Oldcorn, alias Hall, took the leisure and pains to search the Records, who thereupon concluded them authentic. Archbishop Whitgift, with four other Bishops, prevailed with four Popish Priests to view these Records, which when they had done, they declared to them freely that they were not to be doubted of.  
3. It hath been the common practice of such as these Narrators were, (as shall after more fully appear) to divulge stories by an holy fraud, either to stagger weak minds, or to settle the over-credulous Bigots of their party in a detestation of. Archbishop whitgift's life, (whom the Romanists may believe if they please, if they will not take his word let them choose, and show the contrary,) hath given us a pregnant testimony hereof; for he informs us, that that Archbishop going to Dover, at his entrance into the Town, an Intelligencer from Rome landed, who wondered to see an Archbishop in England, and so honourably attended: but seeing him the Sunday following waited on with a nobler Train, and hearing the solemn Service of the Church, he was overtaken with admiration, and told an English Gentleman, Sir Edw. Hobby, who accompanied him, that they were led in great blindness at Rome by our own Nation, who made the people there believe that there was not in England either Archbishop or Bishop, or Cathedral Church, or any Church-Government, but, etc.  
4. These his Narrators could never agree in the most material circumstances of the story, they cannot speak either to the number of the Consecrators or Consecrated, nor to the determinate place and time.  
5. The Story was contradicted, assoon as it was divulged, as hereafter will be more fully declared.  
6. Dr. Stapleton's Objection did not run on the Nag's-Head Score, he never so much as mentioned it, and therefore may reasonably be presumed, either not to have heard any thing of it, or not to believe it; the former is more probable, for it was not divulged in his time.  
7. If the matter had been performed clandestinely, or intended so to have been, Mr. Neal and the other Catholics could not have been admitted, neither should its clandestine performance have rendered the Act invalid. When John the twelfth ordained a Deacon in a Stable, I demand, whether in N. N's private judgement the Ordination were invalid?    

SECT. III,  
N.N. THey being not able to make good the Ordination against Catholics, were forced to beg an Act of Parliament, whereby they might enjoy their Temporalities, notwithstanding the defect of their Ordination against the Canons of the Church, and Law of the Land. For albeit King Edward's Rite of Ordination was established by Act of Parliament, 1 Eliz. yet it was notorious that the Ordination of the Nagshead was very different from it, and framed ex tempore by Scories Puritanical Spirit. The Words of the Act are, Such from and order for Consecrating Archbishops, Bishops, etc. as was set forth in Edward the sixth's time shall stand and be in full force and effect; and all Acts, or Things heretofore done or made by any person or persons elected to the Office and Dignity of Archbishop, etc. by virtue of the Queen's Letters Patents, or by Commission, since the beginning of her Reign, be, and shall be by Authority of this Parliament declared and judged good and perfect in all respects and purposes, etc. See Poulton in his Calendar p. 141. n. 5. by which Act it appears, that not only King Edward's Rite, but any other used since the first of the Queen's Reign upon her Commission was enacted good, and so consequently the Nagshead might pass. Hence it was they were called Parliament Bishops.  

SECT. III.  
J. S. THE chief Argument which N.N. framed in this Section runs thus.  
1. Their Ordinations were defective, as not ordered according to the Canons of the Church and Laws of the Land, therefore they were invalid: which is a gross Non sequitur; for the validity of an Ordination is distinct from the Canonicalness and Legality thereof: But the Antecedent is false, for Archbishop Parker's Consecration was according to the Canons of the Church-Catholick, but not of the Roman; which obviates one of Dr. Stapleton's pretended illegalities, and according to King Edward's Rite (as hath been proved) which was then established by Law, as N. N. here confesseth, which is another Counterblast to Dr. Stapleton, who thought otherwise, and was the ground of Bishop Bonners Plea.  
2. The Preamble of the Act (which N. N. misrepresents) shows the purpose of it; viz. The Parliament finding by the reproaches of some, and the suspicion of others, that many were not satisfied with the form then used, (therefore that form was then used, and upon that usage the Parliament concluded their Ordination Legal) conceiving and objecting it was not sufficiently provided for by the Statute of Repeal, 1 Eliz. (though N. N. and the Author of the Anchor with his Superiors think it was) to remove these surmises and slanders, they did declare for the then, and after Consecrations made according to the Queen's Letters Patents (as they all were) that they were, notwithstanding these surmises and slanders, good in Law, and if any such were, these also which were made by Commission (as none were) provided they were performed by King Edward's Rite, as they were directed; and so consequently the Act confirms no Consecrations, nor entitles to Temporalities where the Rite was not observed.  
The subsequent clause of the Act, (which N. N. cunningly conceals) clears this, which restrains all former and subsequent Consecrations to the form, and Order prescribed in the Ritual of Edward the sixth, and so consequently, if there had been any such Consecration as is suggested, even by this Act they were not Bishops in Law, and were debarred of the Temporalities, because by no Law they could claim them, and by this Law disenabled to enjoy them.  
3. N. N. falls here very flat and dull; in his vapouring humour he was Positive and Magisterial (thus it was performed) but here he is so modest, (it might be, or it might pass,) will serve his turn: and so absurdly argues, thus it might pass, therefore thus it did pass, endeavouring to prove a certain thus it was, by an uncertain, thus it might be.  
4. He adds, Hence it was, etc. This Calumny hath been oft confuted before he vented it: for our Bishops depend not on Authority of Parliament, for the validity of their Ordination; and was long before sharply retorted by Bishop Jewel in these words: You had then (viz. in Queen Mary's Reign) a Parliament Faith, a Parliament Mass, a Parliament Pope, etc. fol. 521.    

SECT. iv  
N. N. THE Story of the Nagshead was first contradicted by Mr. Mason in the year 1613, yet so weakly and faintly that he feared to be caught in a lie by some aged persons that might be then living, and remembered what passed in Queen Elizabeth her time.  

SECT. iv  
J. S. THis that is related by N. N. here, is another Falsity. For the Story was contradicted by the Act of Parliament, and Archbishop Parker's Life, and by Bishop Goodwin, who wrote his Book 1600, as he averreth, p. 534, the rest is idle talk; however he contradicted as it was openly divulged.    

SECT. V  
N. N. IN Ann. 1603, none of the Protestants durst call it a Fable, or a Tale of a Tub, as some now do.  

SECT. V  
J.S. THis also is false; for he cannot but know (if he know any thing concerning this report) who called it so, and since hath proved it a Fable. That which was used as a pretext to Huckster it, was this: At Archbishop Parker's Confirmation (where he was not personally) a Dinner (as the Lord Chancellor Egerton related to Bishop Williams) was provided at the Nagshead for the Civilians who attended that work) according to Custom: this place was pitched on as most convenient for its nearness to Bow-Church, where he was Confirmed; and a Dinner at a Tavern Dr. Reeves utterly resused, for that he had heard the Dining at a Tavern gave all the colour to that malicious lie of Dr. Parker's being Consecrated at the Naggs-Head, and for aught he knew captious and malicious people would be ready to say the like upon the same occasion.    

SECT. VI  
N. N. BIshop Bancroft being demanded by William Alabaster, how Dr. Parker and his Colleagues were Consecrated; he answered, he hoped in case of necessity a Priest (alluding to Scory) might ordain Bishops. This Answer was objected in Print against him, and all the Protestant Clergy by Hollinwood, Bancroft being alive then, but not a word replied.  

SECT. VI  
J. S. 1. WHether this Relation have any truth in it, may be justly doubted, many of the Popish Priests of those times, and both before and after trading in Lies, some to gain Proselytes, others to keep up their Credit, and the People in heart, others to defame their Adversaries. The Secular Priests of that time complained of the spite of the Jesuits 
(h) And that often, passim in Import. Consid. & Joh. Gee. Foot out of the Snare.  against the State. The pretended Brethren of the Society (say they) do in their Writings calumniate the Actions thereof, be they never so judiciously proceeded in, never so apparently proved true, and known to be most certain to raise and nourish and manner of Reports to discredit their Adversaries, etc. And if they were so bold with the State, they would not stick at the defaming of great Persons, and eminent Offices of the Church. The like might be said of them, one of N. N's Narrators Dr. Watson may be an instance. The Papists in their Pamphlets gave out that Dr. King Bishop of London, was a little before his death Reconciled to the Church of Rome, because Mr. Musket a Secular had averred in a Book, entitled The Bishop of London 's Legacy. This being proved a malicious Lie by the Testimony of eye-witnesses who were present at his departure; being thus caught in it, they resolved to forge another, if possible, to make it good, adding sin to sin; which was, That Father Preston was the man who did Reconcile him, whereupon he was summoned to appear before divers Honourable Commissioners appointed to take his Examination, December 20. 1621.: but the honestly declared (protesting before God, and as he hoped to be saved by Jesus Christ) that he never saw that Bishop to his knowledge, nor could know him from another man if he did see him, and he knew nothing of any such Reconciliation,  
2. If such a demand was proposed, probably he slighted it, as being a demand full of ignorance and impudence.  
3. His Answer (if any such was) was good and argumentative ad hominem, not alluding to Scory, whom he knew to be a lawfully Consecrated Bishop upon every account, and in every respect, but to the practice of the See of Rome, which allows a single Priest both to Ordain and Confirm by Papal Dispensation.    

SECT. VII.  
N. N. I Have spoken both with Catholics and Protestants that remember near 80 years, and acknowledge that so long they have heard the Nagshead Story related as an undoubted Truth.  

SECT. VII.  
J.S. DOughtily argued! from the authority of the Common People (who as they do not at all understand the matter, so they as little concern themselves in such affairs, and what they have take all on trust) to conclude an undoubted Truth. But if this will pass, than the Papists were guilty of the Barbarous Murder of our late Glorious and Pious King, (though I am persuaded many of them abhorred the Fact, and the Plot leading thereto) because it hath been reported, that they did devise and forward the Fact, and when the villainous Act was done, much rejoiced at it. This Argument at the best, is a Topick from vulgar Fame, which as the Lawyers speak, is praesumptie levis & temeraria, and so no proof in Law.    

SECT. VII.  
N. N. THE Queen's Dispensation seems to acknowledge it, which Mr. Mason is willing to shadow with a distinction; The Queen (saith he) did but dispense with the Trespass against her own Laws, not essential points of Ordination, but only accidental; not in Substance, but in Circumstance. But if the Consecration was at Lambeth, and according to the form of Edward the sixth, what need was there of any Dispensation, especially given not in conditional, but in absolute terms, since both Substance and Circumstance had been according to the Protestant Law.  

SECT. VII.  
I, S. THis is N. N's best seeming Argument, but the best is, it seems but so: For,  
1. Dispensations are granted ex abundanti, and in majorem cautelam, even at the Court of Rome, though the work itself be exactly performed, sometimes they are used to obviate sleeping defects, oft for better security, and to prevent Mistakes and Cavils, as in this Queen's time it happened in another case; for she passed a Bill for the restitution of Archbishop Cranmers Children, who needed none in strictness, for their Father was not Condemned for Treason, as some surmised, but (as Mr. Harding confesseth, fol. 574.) for Heresy, which taints not the Blood, nor makes any forfeiture of Estate: yet because the Archbishop had formerly been accused for High-Treason, the Act was useful to make sure work.  
2. He pretends the Dispensation respected Archbishop Parker's Consecration, which is a mistake; for it concerned only his Confirmation, which was eight days before, on December 19 1559.  
3. He suggests, It was given not in conditional, but, etc. This is False, for the words are, Si quid, etc. If any thing; etc. which heretofore hath always been taken for a conditional term.    

SECT. VIII  
N. N. BIshop Bonner excepted against his Indictment, because the Oath of Supremacy was said to be tendered to him by Robert Horn Bishop or Winchester, who was by no Law Bishop, and thereupon had no Authority to tender him the Oath, and upon his Plea was never more troubled any further. See his Case Abridgement of Dier's Reports, 7 Eliz. p. 234.  

SECT. VIII.  
J.S. 1. IF Bishop Bonner or N. N. by no Law, mean the Law of Christ, neither the Judges nor Jury could take Cognizance of it; if they conceive the Law of the Realm, which his reference only respected, they might, if the matter had been tried.  
2. The ground of Bishop Bonner's Plea was, that King Edward's form was not sufficiently received (which by the way supposeth Dr. Horn was Consecrated by it) by the Statute 1 Eliz. which a Friend to the Cause the Author to the Anchor, p. 4. and with him his Superiors who approved his Book, hath acknowledged it was; saying Queen Elizabeth renewed the Form of Common-Prayer Book much like that in King Edward's time, and so hath N. N. his own dear self, more than once, and more fully.  
3. The Exceptions against this Indictment show only that Bishop Bonner was put to a desperate shift; for three of his Exceptions to this Indictment were excepted against, and overruled by all the Court: this indeed, which was last, (which he kept for a reserve, though it failed him too,) was allowed with a restriction, and upon conditional terms, (which proves nothing till the supposition be validly asserted) viz. That if the truth of the matter were so indeed (that he was not Consecrated by King Edward's Rite) he might Plead it, and the Jury Try it; which Resolution was according to Law. But it never came to any issue, for the Parliament cleared his Consecration, and so stopped further Proceed: this being made good, that he was legally Consecrated by the highest public Judgement should stand good with N. N. and his Colleagues, because he once but falsely pleaded an Inferior public Judgement for his own purpose, and the credit of his Narrators.  
4. He allegeth a reason for the goodness of Bishop Bonner's Exceptions (for if it signifies not this it is impertinently inserted) he was never troubled any further. Most absurd! for it is usual with Higher-Powers not to trouble those any further whom they have secured, unless N. N. be as bloody as Bishop Bonner and his Comrades were, who thought it was nothing to imprison those who refused Obedience to their Orders, unless they burned them with Fire and Faggot. Protestants are not so merciless and cruel as Papists; and such was the Clemency of the then Higher-Powers (which N. N. had he been ingenuous would have commended) that they thought, that Bishop Bonner being deprived, and imprisoned for his Obstinacy, greater severity was more than needful, and would rather argue Revenge than Justice. But whatsoever N. N. thinks, some men in the world think, that deprivation and continued imprisonment is trouble enough, and would be thankful in such cases they were troubled no further.    

SECT. IX.  
N. N. BUT to salve this sore Mr. Mason that quicksighted Gentleman hath spied out Authentic Records, which for fifty odd years lay in a Saint-Solitude, invisible to Mr. Jewel, Mr. Horn, and others of those times, who were severely taxed for the Nullity and Illegality of their Orders. For questionless if any such had appeared in their days, they would not have lost so great advantage by concealing them, when the producing of them would have much foiled their Enemies, if not absolutely routed them. Mr. Fulk denies ordinary Calling to be always necessary, which he would not have done if he had known the Records, which if they had been authentical and extant, would have saved him from that desperate shift.  

SECT. IX.  
J. S. 1. THE Records were not hung out of the Registers Office as Haberdashers and Milliners do their Wares, and so did not appear: but when the Office was open at usual times, or perhaps upon a sudden emergent at other times, any who had a desire might with the usual Fee (and perhaps without) have seen them, and so they did appear they were not concealed.  
2. Many Records by this account lie in a Saint-solitude for more than fifty years ten times told over, as hereafter shall appear from a pretended discovery of Turrians, who brought to light that which lay in darkness for a good store of hundred years.  
3. Bishop Jewel, and other Protestants of those times, were not required to produce the Records by Dr. Stapleton, Dr. Harding, Mr. Rascal, and other Romanists of those times, who never urged any thing in defence of N. N's Story, and to the prejudice of the Records.  
4. They were virtually, and in effect, produced by the Parliament in their reference to them, and were alleged and mentioned in Dr. Parker's Life, as N. N. acknowledgeth in the next Paragraph.  
5. The advantage got by producing them, could only have proved their Legality; and the advantage lost by concealing, might have brought their Legality into dispute, but could not destroy their Validity.  
6. The producing them would not have foiled their enemies; for produce them, (unless it be to an ingenious Adversary,) the Sticklers have a desperate shift, they were forged; if this be cleared, they produce another desperate shift, now most in request with them, supposing (say they) there be materials Mission in the Church of England, yet it is not to the true intent and purpose, or, as some express it, their Ordination doth not enable them to offer true substantial Sacrifice, and so from one desperate shift unto another in infinitum.  
7. They did not produce them, therefore they were not extant, is another of N. N's absurd inconsequences; for it is an Argument from Authority negatively, which, though in some cases it may hold, yet here it cannot; for it is as if we should thus argue, Neither N. N. nor any of his Comrades were so quicksighted as to spy such a Sentence in St. Aug. therefore there is not any such extant in his Writings.  
8. What he affirms of Dr. Fulk, we are not directed where to find it: probably if he had been at leisure, he would have referred to his Answer to the Rhemish Annotators, and if there it he, than it is to be found in Rom. 10. Sect. 5. p. 471. where he hath so strongly proved his Position out of Ruff. Theodor. etc. that all his Nagshead Narrators durst never undertake a refutation; neither was this any desperate shift in him upon that pretended reason which N. N. hath alleged, for this he had bassed in the foregoing Sentence, (which N. N. unworthily, and purposely conceals,) saying; No man ought to intrude himself into that (Priestly) Office without lawful Calling. How lewd and desperate then was N. N. to tell the World he was put to desperate shifts, when he giveth God thanks he had no temptation, nor occasion to use any thing! If it be suggested he bluntly declared any such expressions, he will be found still to be the same man, and of the same Judgement.    

SECT. IX.  
N. N. DR. Bristol, Motive 21. what Church is that whose Ministers are very Laymen, unsent, uncalled, etc. Mr. Rainolds, Calv. Tarc. l. 4. c. 15. There is no Herdman in all Turkey which doth not undertake the Government of his Herd upon better Reason, Right, Order, and Authority, than those your magnificent Apostles and Evangelists can show for this Divine Office of governing of Souls. Dr. Stapleton's Counterblast against Horn, fol. 7, 8, 9 To say truly, you are no Lord of Winchester, etc. Is it not notorious that you and your Colleagues were not Ordained according to the Prescript, I will not say of the Church, but even of the very Statutes, etc. fol. 301. You are without any Consecration at all, your Metropolitan himself (poor man) being no Bishop at all. Dr. Harding in his detection against Mr. Jewel, fol. 129. You tell not half my tale, etc. I ask you of your Priesthood and Bishoply Vocation and Sending, etc. These being my Questions, you answor neither by what example hands were laid on you, nor who sent you, etc. Those who took upon them to give Orders in King Edward's days were altogether out of order themselves, and ministered them not according to the rite and manner of the Catholic Church, as who had forsaken the succession of Bishops in all Christendom, etc. and had erected, etc. Mr. Jewel answers this with profound silence, only he says without any proof, our Bishops, etc. To this Dr. Harding replies, your Metropolitan who should give authority to all your Consecrations, himself had no lawful Consecration; the Ancient Bishops were either not required, or refused to Consecrate you, which is an evident sign you sought not for such a Consecration as had ever been used, but such an one whereof all the former Bishops were ashamed. To this sharp Reply directly affirming the Nullity of Mr. Parker's Ordination, and by consequence of all the English Clergy, Mr. Jewel answers not one word to the main Point, nor mentions Mr. Mason's Records; what then can any man of an indifferent Judgement think in this case, but the Records were not then extant, or forged? How is it they should not be produced by Horn, Jewel, Parker, and the rest, whom it specially concerneth to make proof of their own calling? being so often and so earnestly urged thereto by their Adversaries, triumphing over them for want of due Authentic proof thereof; yet the Records were never mentioned by any of them. If they were extant, and not produced against the Catholics, it was, because in Queen Elizabeth's time many were living who could have proved them to be forged; so that the Act of Parliament, and Parker's Life, makes them more incredible than if no mention were made.  

SECT. X.  
J. S. TO this tedious nothing, (for N. N. hath now almost emptied his Budget of broken Wares,) which deserves no return in itself, that shall be replied only, which will discover how willing some Romanists are to fight with their own shadows; and, like drowning men, to catch at sticks and straws to buoy up their sinking Cause.  
1. Those Authors he here mentions never touched at the Nagshead, if they had known or heard of any such thing, they would have divulged it with open mouth; neither did they in all these Quotations ever so much as hint at, or reflect upon the Records, only Dr. Stapleton presumes they were not Ordained according to the Prescript of the Statutes themselves, because he conceived (as formerly hath been said) that the Statute was not revived in Law primo Eliz. if otherwise, he thought the Parliament may be presumed to be more knowing than he was in that Case; and we may further and justly presume, that those who left no stone unturned for the advantage of the good old Cause, would not overleap such Stumbling-blocks; for the two first of these Authors, they were so deep in rage, that they quite stifled reason; but Dr. Bristol met with his match, one that paid him home in his own Coin; for Mr. Rainolds, he acted the part of a Renegado, who would be sure by the fortiter calumniari, his high calumnies, to decline the shame of his Revolt. Dr. Stapleton, by Catholic Church, meant the Roman Enclosure, and so he fairly begged the Question; and what he affirms, he proves not; for Dr. Harding, he was taken with the same beloved fallacy, which they always make use of when they are put to a pinch. Thus their Argument proceeds, they were not Ordained by Romish Bishops, nor after the Rite then used in the Romish Church, therefore they were not lawful Bishops, which is all one with this: Dr. Stapleton and Dr. Harding did not Commence Doctors at Oxon. or Cambridg, therefore they were not lawful Doctors. The Antecedent is granted; and for this reason it was improper and impertinent to produce the Records, for to what purpose is it to produce them in proof of that which is confessed? no more than for to produce the Registeries of Oxon. for a Doctor's taking his Degree at Louvain; but the Consequence is denied, being impossible to be proved; for there have been, and there are now lawful Bishops in the Christian World, who were neither Ordained by Roman Bishops, nor according to the Prescript of the Roman Church, as confessedly the now Bishops of the Greek Church are, whom they all acknowledge for lawful Bishops.  
2. Whereas he saith, Bishop Jewel answered not a word to the main Point, it will be found he searched the Point to the quick, both in relation to his Priesthood; being Ordained Priest the same time Mr. Harding was, def. fol. 125, and 129; and in relation to his Episcopacy, saying, Our Bishops succeed the Bishops that have been ever before our days, being Elected, Confirmed, and Consecrated, etc. as they have been. Further adding, that Mr. Harding himself was one of his Electors, none of this Mr. Harding could deny: and therefore he fell to the old Game of Tergiversation, turning his back from the main Question, and starts a new one for a desperate shift, having nothing else to say but this; they were not (forsooth) Confirmed by the Bishop of Rome, which is an implicit confession that all those recited Acts were performed, only they wanted the Pope's Confirmation: which yet the Bishop with great evidence of Reason, and Primitive Authority, proved to be unnecessary, and is contrary to all Antiquity, and the Practice of the Greek Church; and withal told Dr. Harding in civil terms, he would never give over that idle trade of begging. Thus this Bishop Jewel maintained both the Regularity and the Legality, both of his Priesthood and Episcopacy, though not with express reference to the Records themselves, yet implicitly to the Subject-matter thereof, particularly, Election, Confirmation, and Consecration to his Episcopal Dignity and Office; and also propugned the Validity of both Orders from Scriptures, and the perpetual Tradition of the Catholic Church, pursuing Dr. Harding in all his shifts from Post to Pen, till he drives him to his Non ultra.  
3. All that N. N. dared conclude from Dr. Harding, is only, that by his sharp Reply he directly affirmed the Nullity of Dr. Parker 's Consecration; but Protestants are not so lame as to take every Affirmation of Mr. Hardings for a proof, they expect he should make his bold Affirmation good, by good Authority or Reason: neither, by N. N's good leave, did any thing that he affirms, affirm a Nullity; what he alleged (if it were true and home) would only have rendered those Ordinations Irregular, or Illegal, but not Null; his (not lawful Consecration) respected only the manner of the Catholic Church, that is, theirs in their usual restriction, and such as they had used.  
4. Whether the Records were extant, N. N. cannot affirm; but in his indifferent judgement, if they were, than they were forged, which, in the judgement of all indifferent men, will certainly pass for a desperate shift. Just such a work Dr. Harding made about the 
(k) From his counterfeit Athanasius, Bishop Jewel's Reply. fol. 157.  Nicene Canons, they were burnt, yet falsified; they were falsified, yet burnt, etc. Such a Blunder also Baronius made concerning a pretended Edict of the Emperor Justinian, it was an Edict, and it was not an Edict; it was 
(l) Baron. an. 564. n. 3.  an Edict put out by the Emperor in favour of the Aphthardokites, (who denied the Body of Christ to be subject to Passions, and Death,) for these two Reasons the 
(m) Id. an. 564. n. 1.  Orthodox contemned it, and the Emperor persecuted all those 
(n) Id. ib. & n. 3. & an. 563. n. 12. vid. n. 3.8, 9  who did oppose it; and it was not an Edict, it was only a Cabinet-paper; for this Reason the Emperor indeed writ it, but never 
(o) Id. an. 565. n. 4. so Evagr. l. 4. Hist. Eccl. c. 40.  published it: if so, than no Edict; the Popes, as bad as they are, make a Publication of their Decrees. But this is all mere impostures, for his Edict oppugned that Heresy of the Aphthardokites, Edict Justin. p. 492, & 495. which Pope Agatho witnesseth in his Epistle directed to the Emperor Constant. Pogonat. as it is to be seen Act. 4. Conc. gen. 6th. p. 21. which Baron. himself confesseth, An. 681. n. 21, 24. & n. 25. to be approved of the whole Roman Synod consisting of 125 Bishops.  
5. But N. N's Catholics triumphed, etc. Did they so? that is an old trick of their Men of War, to do as Agesilaus commanded his Soldiers, still to shout Victoria, to brag when they are worsted, which they must do to keep up their Credit with their deluded Partisans and Proselytes. But who triumphed when his Grave and Learned Divines pitched a Field, time, place, and order of Battle, (contrary to the rules of all Combatants,) yet, like the Children of Ephraim, who being harnessed, and carrying Bows, (as if they would do strange seats of Chivalry, who but they!) turned their backs in the day of Battle? For did not your old Friends both challenge and order a Disputation 1 Eliz. upon the Points in Controversy? and did not they, upon the approach of the Enemy, after a Pickeer or two, face about, and dastardly forsake the field? How often have the Protestants triumphed over you with the story of Madam Donna Seamore, Pope Joan? Bishop Goodwin hath produced thirty several well-known Authors to attest the Story, and it is not much above an hundred years since her Picture was standing in the Church of Sienna in Italy, where 
(q) Papir. Massin. de Episc. Vrbis l. 6. in Pio. 3.  the Pictures of the Popes were set up; which so moved Baronius his patience, that he solicited the Pope and Duke of Florence to take it down, which accordingly at his intercession they caused 
(r) Florimund Fab. Joan. c. 22. n. 2.  to be done. Such an ancient Picture in confirmation of other reports, is as good an evidence that there was such a Madam Pope, as Baronius his ancient Coin, in contradiction to all former Histories, was to prove the determinate time of Maxentius his birth, and had N. N. and his Narrators such a proof for their dusty weatherbeaten Nagshead, they would do wonders with it, and pursue it hotly with Hue and Cry from Country to Country.  
6. Though several Reasons have before been assigned, and more might, why our Writers in those times, such as Bishop Jewel, etc. did not expressly appeal to the Records: yet I take the Chief to be this; The than Romanists did pretend to a mixed Succession, but chief insisted upon the Moral and Doctrinal; so Dr. Stapleton, Graeca Ecclesia, etc. The Greek Churches, though they have lineal Succession, yet because of the Heresies which they hold, and the Schism they make, they have not lawful 
(s) Staplet. Princ. doctr. l. 13. c. 6.  Succession; and again, Successio de qua agitur, etc. The Succession of which we dispute, is not of places and persons, but of true 
(t) Id. relect. c. 1. qu. 4. art. 1. & 2. notab. 5.  and sound Doctrine. Thus also Mr. Harding, def. fol. 119. Did Capon, Shaxton, or ever any Bishop of that See before you, teach your Doctrine? whom have you succeeded, as well in Doctrine, as in outward sitting in that Chair? To which Question, if Bishop Jewel had appealed to the Records he had trifled, because they are only evidences of mere matter of Fact, not at all of Doctrines taught.  
7. But N. N. is a man of confidence, he believes there were many living in Queen Elizabeth's time could have proved them Forged: this is strange! forgery is a work of darkness carried on by a few, (these are too many to be privy to the Fact) and very closely, with all the securities of secrecy; and therefore a man of indifferent judgement will hardly be persuaded that many can be accessary and privy to a designed Forgery.  
8. On a sudden this great Undertaker grows dull, for he supposeth that to make the Records more incredible, which to all others makes them most credible. To N. N. they are more incredible upon testimony of public Authority, which is indeed to destroy all human security, and contrary to the common notices of mankind. But N. N. is resolved to speak the Truth at last.    

SECT. XI.  
N. N. THE truth is, most of the Clergy of England in those times were Puritans, and inclined to Zwinglianism; they therefore contemned and rejected Consecration as a Rag of Rome, and were contented with the extraordinary calling of God, and his Spirit, as all other Churches do who pretend to Reformation: neither is it credible there was any other Consecration of Parker and his Comrades, but that which passed at the Nagshead.  

SECT. XI.  
J. S. THE truth is, there is no truth in any of these Affirmations; for,  
1. The Clergy of England then had a Liturgy with Rites and Ceremonies, (witness N. N. in what he said before,) which they orderly observed: they did own and defend the three Orders 
(u) Bishop Jewel, Apol. c. 3. divis. 1. & defence, fol. 85.  of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, (witness the Ritual which N. N. also acknowledgeth to be the allowed Form of the Church of England,) to have been ever in Christ's Church since the time of the Apostles, which the Puritans do not: if they did, the Romish Emissaries would lose some Proselytes, and therefore N. N.'s suggestion that the Clergy then did condemn Consecration as a rag of Rome, is a most malicious untruth.  
2. The Clergy then neither followed Zwinglius, nor any other Person, nor any Sect, or Sectaries of Men, farther than they followed the Scripture, and the Practice of the Primitive Church; these they took for their rule.  
3. If by Zwinglianism he intends (as it is usually called Zwinglianism) the rejecting that monstrous Figment of Transubstantiation, they were therein followers of the Apostles and Doctors of the Catholics; if he conceive Zwinglius opposed Episcopacy, he is deceived, for he and the Helvetians did honour it. What he adds of other Reformed Churches, is most false; for most of them have and do own Bishops, either name, or thing, or both; as in the Dominions of the King of Sweden, Denmark, and the most of them in High Germany, even as many as subscribed to the Augustane Confession, those under the Duke of Saxony, Luxenburg, the Marquis of Brandenburg, the Prince of Anhault, and many others; and those of the Reformed Churches which have no Bishops, account it their want, an infelicity. It is a bad Cause which must be underpropped with impious Frauds, and is supported only with hideous and palpable Lies.  
4. In the close of this Section N. N. brings by head and shoulders his Nagshead again, to show he can write as well against common sense, as without common honesty; for his suggestion neither is it credible, and is contrary to the apprehensions of all Impartial Judges; for it is morally impossible the Fable should be credible, because Dr. Parker's Consecration was performed, as is before related in the presence of four of the most eminent Notaries Public in the Kingdom, one whereof was principal Actuary at Cardinal Pool's Consecration.    

SECT. XII.  
N. N. HEar the Judgement of Whitaker and Fulk, who lived in and about that time the English Ordinations were first called in Question; I would not have you think (saith Whitaker) we make such reckoning of your Orders, as to hold our own Vocation unlawful without them. Cont. Dur. p. 821. Mr. Fulks more plainly, you are highly deceived, if you think we esteem your Offices of Bishops, etc. better than Laymen. Ans. to Counterf. Cath. p. 50. and in his Retentive, p. 67. with all our hearts we difie, abhor, detest, and spit at your stinking; greasy Antichristian Orders. Is it credible these prime Protestants would answer thus, if they had not known that the Story of the Nagshead was true?  

SECT. XII.  
J. S. HItherto N. N. hath been a fabulous Romancer and Legendary, he now falls under the suspicion of a Plagiary; for in all probability he hath by a trick of Legerdemain filched these Quotations from some Puritan Pamphleteers, many of which have made use of them upon another design. But,  
1. In the different Judgement of N. N. the Question was started in Archbishop Parker 's time, though not pursued indeed, nor moved for many years after, at which time Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulk were either but Schoolboys or Freshmen; but when they were Writers, the Romanists thought fit to let it lie in a Saint-solitude, and smother it with profound silence, hoping to get a better opportunity to market the Fable.  
2. Supposing the English Ordination was first questioned in their times, by what Magic will N. N. infer his conclusion, or prove his Fable credible? His Argument ●●us from the Staff to the Corner, for thus he demonstrates; Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulke defied and slighted; yea, scorned the Popish Ordinations, therefore they believe the jolly merry Fable; Dr. Whitaker saith, We hold our Vocation lawful without their Form and Orders: N. N's wild inference from hence is, Therefore he knew the Story to be true, which if it had been so, would have rendered it unlawful. Dr. Fulk, The Romish Orders are stinking, greasy, Antichristian, etc. therefore he full well knew the Story to be true, and the English Ordinations naught; whereas their words were direct proper Answers to the Romish Objections against them, viz. They were not Ordained by Romish Bishops after the Romish Rite; and import no more but this, Bishops and Priests are lawfully Ordained, who were not Ordained after the Roman Rite, and by Romish Bishops, which is an undeniable truth, assented to by the Romanists themselves.  
3 To confirm this N. N. is admonished to hear this Judgement concerning Episcopacy and Ordination: Bellarmine Objects against Protestants, that they had taken away Bishops; Dr. Whitaker Contr. 2 de Eccles. q. 5. c. 3. makes so bold with Bellarmine, as to give him the Lie, saying, We do not condemn the Order of Bishops, as he falfely slanders us, but only those false Bishops of the Church of Rome; near the same place, condemning the ancient Constitution, that three Bishops be present at the Ordination of a Bishop, for a Godly Sanction. Dr. Fulk in Tit. 1. fol. 781. speaks as fully, Among the Clergy for. Order and seemly Government, there was always one Principal to whom the name of Bishop was, etc. which in his defence against Gregor. Martin c. 6. Sect. 20. p. 182. he thus expresseth; That the Title of the Bishop was a very old time used to signify a degree Ecclesiastical, higher than Presbyter or Priest, or Elder, we did never deny, we know it right well: and then will any man of an indifferent judgement ever believe N. N. to be a lover or reporter of Truth, when he hath broached so prodigious a Lie, that most of the Clergy of England in those times were Puritans? these two Prime Protestants were not, who thus apologized for themselves and their Brethren the Clergy. But because N. N. will have them Puritan, let him know that English Protestants are as far from being Puritans (as he himself aterwards confesseth) as his Catholics are; and the rather because they beg their Principles of Rebellion and Sedition against the King, and their Schism against Bishops from the rest of the Papists, the Jesuits, and whatsoever else they hold contrary to sound Doctrine, either from Regulars of another Order, or from some of their Schoolmen. But because perhaps he will except against these two Prime Protestants, for his further satisfaction, let him  
4. Hear the judgement of the two Prime Pontificians: Cudsenius 
(w) De desperata Calvini causa. c. 11.  the Jesuit ingeniously confesseth, The English Nation are not Heretics, because they remain in a perpetual succession of Bishops, which Confession totally destroys all N. N's Fabric; Monsieur 
(x) To the King of Great Britain, p. 6. Charles the second.  Militiere is not much short of him, saying, The English Nation retaining the ancient Order of Episcopacy (which is utterly inconsistent with the contempt and rejection of Consecration as a Rag of Rome, and there being contented with the extraordinary Calling of God and the Spirit) as instituted by Divine Authority, have thereby preserved the Face and Image of the Church Catholic.    

SECT. XIII.  
N. N. AS to the Opinion of forgeing so many Records in several Courts, it is easily answered, that is no more than that the Consecrators, and others concerned, should have conspired to have given in a false Certificate, that the Consecration was performed with due Ceremonies, and Rites, and thereby deceive the Courts, or make them dissemble: and this is a thing more possible and probable (Protestant's being so dexterous in falsifying of Scriptures, as appears by Gregory Martin's Discovery of Corruptions) than that all the Protestant Clergy should have conspired not to produce the Registers when they were so hardly pressed by their Adversaries, or that so many Catholics should be so foolish to invent, and maintain the Story, when if it had been false; they might have been convinced by Thousands of Witnesses, or that so many grave and learned Divines who for Conscience sake lost all, should without fear of Damnation engage themselves and Posterities in damnable Sacrilege, by occasioning so many sacrilegious Ordinations upon their charging Protestants with no Ordination. No moderate or prudent man can suspect such Persons should damn their Souls out of mere spite to the Church of England. If we Catholics should reordain Protestant Ministers, which after their Conversion have been made Priests, upon the title of Heresy, and not of their known Invalidity, we should also reordain the Grecian Priests, which is against our known Practice and Tenants: insomuch as we hold ourselves obliged to examine with all diligence, whether there be any probability, of the Persons receiving valid Orders; and finding but my probable appearance thereof, the Practice is, and hath been for divers Ages, to give Orders, not absolutely but conditionally; whereas it is notorious, that all such Ministers receive their Orders in absolute terms, without any condition adjoined, in the same manner we use in the Ordination of Laymen.  

SECT. XIII.  
J. S. part 1. THis is N. N's last and worst Medium for his Fable, such as if it held would destroy all human Faith, and the best assurance that can be had for the confirmation of the Truth in matters of Fact. But,  
1. This hath been an Old desperate shift of disingenuous Papists; who have forfeited all Christian Meekness and Modesty, when they are hardly pressed by their Adversaries with a pinching Authority, to cry Forgery. Protestants assert Pope Honorius the first was an Heretic, because they find him condemned of Heresy by the sixth General Council under the Emperor Constantius Pogonatus, to which Authority many learned Romanists have given credit. But the more rigid sort have taken N. N's easy Answer for a subterfuge, Forgery was used; for this Condemnation was maliciously inserted into the Acts of the Council by the order of the Emperor, who having the Original in his hand by a Conspiracy with the Actuaries consented to their satisfaction. Pighius is 
(y) Hier. l. 4. c. 8. Sed quoniam.  resolute it must be so, (for the Pope in despite of all evidences to the contrary must be Infallible) for he would have it so. A certain learned man wished 
(z) Pighius diatrib. in Epist. ad lectorem.  Pighius to recant, and draw in his easy Answer; but he falls 
(a) Id. ib. de act. sextae Synodi. . afresh on the matter, and scorning to retract what he formerly had said, still puts in the same easy Answer: whereupon 
(b) Bannes' 22. qu. 1. art. 10. Dub. 2.  Bannes being troubled at the obstinacy of the man, jeers him for his ready Invention, that after Nine hundred years, Pighius being but a man of yesterday, could find all those Witnesses, which were produced against him to have been Conspirators in a Forgery; and 
(c) Loc. l. 6. c. 8. ad 11.  Canus puts this Question to him, How can Pighius clear him whom Usellus, Epiphanius, and Pope Adrian, etc. affirm to have been an Heretic? At this Baronius 
(d) An. 681. n. 31. & n. 5.  is not a little moved, and like a sworn servant of the Papacy, grows Angry and Witty, scoffs Canus, and playing upon his name wishes him more Gravity and Judgement than to have been so rash as to pass a Sentence in so great matters. Father Cambesis a modest and learned Dominican is as much troubled at the Cardinal's mirth and wrath, seriously and soberly telling him, That course which he took was of pernicious consequence, since there is not an Act of any General Council which one may not with as much likelihood affirm to be Forged; but for this his honest freedom of speech Theophilus Raynaud a Jesuit attacks him, and not only bitterly inveighs against him, but writes a most bitter satire against the whole 
(e) New Heresy of the Jesuits, p. 90. & inde.  Dominican Order.  
Part 2. Though N. N. be persuaded he has an easy Answer in readiness, yet it is a part of zealous madness to produce such an easy Answer as is destructive to human society; it is an easy Answer to say all men are Fools or Knaves, which is the effect of his easy Answer, yet none will say so but mad men. But N. N. is resolved to be mad with Reason, for he immediately subjoins his Reason in these words; It is no more, etc. That may be so in some new Atlantis or Utopia; but it is a great deal too much to impeach or suspect so many known persons with so deep guilt, and to charge all the Courts at once, either with Folly or Hypocrisy; it is just so much as to null the Authority of all Courts and Records whatsoever. Let N. N. produce any evidence out of the Vatican, with this easy Answer it will be evaded and baffled; for if it be produced, any that is disposed to dispute it can soon say, it is Forged: and if he be demanded a Reason why he said so, he will Reply with N. N's easy Answer, There hath been a Conspiracy, and this is no more, but that the Pope and all others concerned have combined to give in a false Certificate, and the several Courts have been so lame as willingly to enter into the Combination, or be gulled by it; and not one among them can be found to have either so much common sense as to discover, or so much respect and kindness to common honesty as to detect and divulge the Cheat. Indeed this is as easy a way to invalidate Records as it is to confute Bellarmine, with Bellarmine thou liest; but for this his easy Answer he hath Forged as easy Proofs.  
1. Protestants (saith he) are dexterous, etc. Who would have thought it! take the charge home to your Romish Agents and Factors, who have often been detected to be the most infamous falsifiers both of the Sacred Volumes, and Ecclesiastical Writers, when they conceived any of these not to be favourable to their pretensions and persuasions. Their own Camolensis or Carnolensis (call him as you please) and Agrippa have informed us, that many of N. N's fellows have been so bold with the Scriptures by adulterating and misinterpreting them, for confirmation whereof only two instances shall be produced: Bellarmine and Perer (adhering to the vulgar Latin, which they take themselves obliged to do in their great kindness to the Trent-Assemblers, which defined it authentic) read Gen. 3.15. in the Feminine Gender (thereby to countenance their Adoration of the Blessed Virgin Mary) contrary to all old Translations, and all ancient Interpreters, who have made it either in the Masculine or Neuter, as many Pontificians do. The same Bellarmine (to prove the Pope Infallible) hath often corrupted that Text Deut. 17.12. reading ex Decreto Judicis, by the Sentence of the Judge, instead of &, and of the Sentence, more of which may be found in Dr. James his Tract of Corruptions, Part 4. p. 45. in Bishop Jewel's Reply to Dr. Cole, p. 24. and Sermon at Paul's Cross, p. 54. and so these men which have been so bold, are by their own Law condemned for falsaries; for by it, he is a falsary that in writing addeth, or detracteth, or altereth any thing fraudulently. What their own Canus, Espencaeus, and Ludovicus Vives thought of their famous Fabulous Legends, needs not be exemplified: this may not be omitted, the same Vives Lib. 1, de causis Cor. Art. p. 343. and Erasmus Censur. in lib. Aug. have observed, that within this Four or Five hundred years last passed, it had been almost an ordinary Practice, either to adulterate true Books, or to forge false; and since that a Secular Priest in his Notes upon the Jesuitts Apology, in defence of the Ecclesiastical 
(f) Pag. 123.  Subordination in England, hath found the Gloss corrupted by them; adding, This is no news for the Jesuits to allege Authors corruptly, nipping and cutting off that which confuteth the thing, for which they allege them, which (he saith) he hath noted out of his own experience. The Forgery of the Nicene Canons is confessed by Bishop Tunstal and Dr. Redmaine, two zealous Pontificians, and it is well known who were the Conspirators in it. Constantine's pretended Charter hath been proved another Romish Forgery, by Cardinal Cusan, Valla, Erasmus, Marsil. Petavin. Paul. Cathol. Dantes, (who, poor man, for speaking what he had asserted was after his death condemned to Hell by the 
(g) Barthol. in extravag. ad Rep. Rom. Lancelot. de Imp. Sect. 2. Vol. 1. Qu. 2. n. 12.  Advocates of the Roman Court) Hittan. Wolph. Anton. de Rossel. Freker. Aciat. Crantz. Heming. Arnis. (as John Gryphiander relates, tract. de Insulis c. 24. n. 43, 44. p. 362.) insomuch as one 
(h) Referente Felin. in c. fol. extra. de major. & obedien. Eber. Top. in loc. 11. n. 15.  Pius Auditor of the Rota, was wont to say, He marvelled at those pitiful Lawyers who would take upon them to dispute of the validity of that which was never extant; and Aeneas 
(i) Lib. dial. contr. donat. Constant.  Silvius, who knew enough of the intrigues of the Court of Rome, spoke home, Caute id provisum a Pontificibus, etc. The Popes craftily contrived for the defence of this Forgery, that still a sharp dispute should be kept on foot against the Lawyers to this end, that such his Donation might always be supposed, and taken for granted, as if it had been in being. I shall add one further Testimony from a leading Romanist for my Countrymen's sake, who honour his memory in many respects, Mr. Roger Widdrington, reputed by Strangers as a Secular, or Regular, but was only an active Lay-Gentleman: the Book entitled Apologia pro jure Principum passeth under his name, though when it was first published, it was known to be the work of a far more learned, and sober man, Father Preston; but whether Mr. Widdrington or Father Preston were the Author, thus he, or he, or rather both, p. 343. Non solent Pontifices, etc. The Popes are not wont to permit the Acts or Opinions of their Predecessors which are favovarble to the Papal Authority, to be further oppugned or questioned, and therefore both the Pope and the Ordinaries, and Inquisitors of Heresy, are very careful, lest any Book which seems to derogate therefrom be published; and if any do happen to pass the Press, they take a strict Order it be utterly suppressed, or to be read of none without special Licence in writing, till it be purged, etc. p. 344. It is a very hard matter, in these times especially, either to find in the Books of Catholics any Clause, which may give the least occasion of calling the Pope's Right in Temporals in question; or certainly to know what the Author of those Books thought of the Pope's Power; but they are oftentimes against the Hair compelled to deliver, not their own Opinions, but such as the Inquisitors of the Books do father upon them. Neither Turks nor Jews have gone so far in their presumptions, as to take authority over dead men's writings to alter and change them at their pleasures. The same Author, or Authors p. 35. of that Book hath discovered a shameful Corruption in a Prayer of the Breviary; For not long since (these are the words in that Page) they have blotted out the word Animas, Souls, in that Prayer of their Reformed Breviaries, by command of Clement the eighth. Thus also they corrupted Agapetus his words in Bibl. SS. Pairum, Tom. 1. p. 108. Par. 1571, wickedly 
(k) Index Rom. p. 200.  razing, and perversely glozing that Sentence, viz. Upon earth the King (the Emperor Justinian to whom he writ Epistles, as Baron. testifies, Tom. 7. in Append. p. 665.) hath no man above him, contrary to his express words and meaning: for thus he writeth to him, c. 1. Whereas in honour thou, O Emperor, hasta dignity far above all other men, honour him above all who gave thee this honour, to wit God. etc. p. 27. impose upon thyself a necessity of observing Laws, in as much as thou hast no living Creature in the World to compel thee thereunto. And so those words of Ludovic. Vives, Ep. ad Regem Angl. (Henr. 8.) praefixa Com. Aug. de Civitate Dei, cujus potestas, etc. Whose Authority and Majesty is greatest upon earth, secundum Deum, next after God, are commanded to be expunged. But perhaps the case may be Iliacoes intra muros, etc. Protestants are as criminal this way as Papists, and a charge strongly proved against these, will not clear them. N.N. hath an easy Proof for this; For,  
2. As it appears from Gregor. Martin, etc. But it appears N.N. either knows nothing of Greg. Martin's Discoveries, or craftily concealed them; for Dr. Fulk hath discovered his Discoveries to be mean lose Cavils, in a full Answer thereto, which hitherto hath not been replied to another Discovery he made which his own Fellows taxed him for, and with a lying Discovery and Relation Bugbeared him for attempting new Discoveries, so unlucky was Gregor. Martin in all his Discoveries.  
Part 3. He adds a third Proof taken from the Topics of the Wisdom, Gravity, and Learning, Piety, and Humanity of his Catholic Divines.  
1. As to their Wisdom, it is confessed they were so wise as not to be taken with a Lie, which they might be convinced of by Thousands of Witnesses. The Children of this World are Wise in their Generation, therefore they took a crafty Course not to excuse the Fable till about forty years after the supposed Fact was perpetrated. Neither were there many of his Catholics who maintained it, those who did, took it at the first rebound from a malicious Enemy, and Parasitical Pickthank, Bishop Bonner's Setter. But supposing these Witnesses had been called into a Court, and deposed, all that they could say to the Article, or Quaere, was, they believed it, and believed it, because they had heard it; if they had deposed it any further they had been right Affidavit-men; but this Deposition being cast out, if N.N. had been a feed Proctor in the cause, he then would have set up his possibles, probables, and credibles; if these moved not the Witnesses, (as Ten thousand to One they would not) than he would cast his easy Answers, there was a Conspiracy among the Thousands of Witnesses, to give in false Evidence and deceive the Court.  
2. For their Gravity and Learning, that signifies little, there are Grave and Learned men almost of all Persuasions; yet it is notoriously known, that such have been sometimes overcome with Lies, Visions, Revelations, Miracles and Fables: there are such things in the world as over-credulity and Euthusiasm, which have prevailed with men of known good parts and abilities.  
3. As to their Piety, and good Conscience, that it was so tender in N. N's opinion, that they would not engage, etc. Protestants cannot assent to it; because they know that his Catholics did engage themselves and their Posterities to take the Oath of Supremacy, which when they refused, not out of Conscience, but Compact and Design, because by a Law whereto they were parties and chief instruments it stood established; so with great reason and learning they Preached and pressed the taking thereof upon the Conscience as a Duty. They who can thus play at Fast and Lose with Oaths, without any violation of any of the rules of Charity, may be judged to be either unconscionable Jugglers, or wavering Weathercocks. But those of them who in Queen Elizabeth's time contrived her Murder, and to carry on the Plot with more security and advantage, published a Book, wherein it was declared, that it was not lawful to kill the Queen, that so neither She, nor any of her Council might fear any harm from such Religious Cheats, and counterfeit Champions of Loyalty, cannot possibly be excused. This was proved, and openly confessed at the Arraignment of Babington and Ballard, when also the Letters of Cardinal Como written to Parry were produced, which did testify that the Pope approved 
(l) Fulk Rhem. Test. marginal note on Judas, fol. 847.  the Artifice. Great Villainies are commonly attempted with great Hypocrisy, and if Hypocrites may pass for tender-Conscienced men, or good Roman Catholics, there are great store of these in the world.  
4. However N. N. will have them well-natured persons, They will do nothing in spite against Protestants. He must pardon the Protestants if they do not believe; for they know they have been very spiteful one against another. Stephen the sixth 
(m) Plat. in vit. Steph. 6. Sabellic. Aenead. 9 lib. 1. and. those ordained by him to be re-ordained, Baron. An. 897. n. 2. and Sergius 3. who ruled the Papacy six years after him did the like, Baron 908. n. 2. which is acknowledged T. R. P. in his Answer to some Letters writ by a Protestant, p. 786. & Bellar. de Pont. lib. 4. c. 12.  against Formosus, with Barbarous Inhumanity cutting off his three Fingers, with which he was used to give Benedictions and Orders, and then causing his Body to be cast into Tiber with rage.  
It could be nothing less than Spite in your Popes to thunder out their Interdicts, and publish their seditious and malicious Bulls, against this Church and State. It might be error or mistake in your Grave Learned Divines to pronounce Protestants Heretics and Schismatics; but it was the extremity of Spite, to condemn them to Fire and Faggot without benefit of the Clergy, and doom them to Eternal Flames without the privilege of Purgatory. Indeed the main spite of the whole Sect is against the Church of England; down with it, cry they, and the Puritan-rabble will soon be crushed and quelled, and the little undersets which spring from them, either dwindle away into nothing, or drop into their hands.  
5. He assures us upon his word, (which is not worth a rush) they hold themselves obliged to hold to their known Tenants and Practices; [this is tattle and empty talk. According to their Tenent the Character is indelible, yet Pope Stephen nulled the Orders of Formosus, and caused all those Ordained by him to be Re-ordained. He tells us, it is their Tenent and Practice to Ordain Lapsed Ministers in absolute terms as Laymen are, upon the sole account of the invalidity of their former Ordinations; but Pope Paul and Cardinal Pool either thought, or practised otherwise, when they confirmed and settled the Ordinations made in Edward the sixth's time. He saith 'tis their Tenent, to allow those to officiate who have not valid Orders, is to commit damnable Sacrilege: but the Pope and the Cardinal did allow those who were Ordained (as they speak qui ampullas jactant) in the time of Schism, to officiate; and therefore either did think their Orders valid, or committed damnable Sacrilege: N. N. dare not affirm the latter; if he take to the former, than all his confused heap of Possibles, Probables, and Credibles, are at once blown up with a Puff of the Pope's breath, and are driven away like Down. It hath been the Practice of their Grave and Learned Divines, when any Protestants revolted, to exercise them, as if they had been possessed, for thus was the Form, The Revolter was brought to a Bishop, and falling down on his Knees before him, the Bishop said, I adjure thee, thou unclean Spirit, by the name of God to departed out of the Man. If thus they practised now, they would mar their market, and a half-gained Proselyte, before he was thus charmed, would either start aside, or wheel about.  
Whatsoever their Tenants or Practices be, or have been, (which yet are not heeded by Protestants) there is an old Sitter at Rome, who can change them at his pleasure; which when he is disposed to do, all that N. N. or his Fellows dare do, is to Bless themselves, holding up their hands, and some crying Benedicite, others after the old Mumpsimus mode bennistee, or which is all one, make use of a grave Nod, or discontented Shrug, and so sit down in silence: This is no more than for the Pope to give out Orders to the contrary, or impose Silence by a Decree of Taciturnity; then let the Tenent and Practice be what it will, all is quashed, they are the Pope's Vassals, and must most tamely obey his Orders.     

CHAP. IU.  

SECT. I.  
N. N. goes on, BUT suppose their first Bishops were ordained by Catholics, another Nullity is found in the Form of the Consecration; To wave the Matter of Ordination, let us examine the Form prescribed in the Protestants Ritual. It is a known Principle common both to Protestants and Catholics, that in the Form of Ordination there must be some words expressing the Authority and Power given to the Ordained. The intention of the Ordainer expressed by general words indifferent, and applicable to all, or divers degrees of Holy Orders, is not sufficient to make one a Priest or a Bishop. As for example, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. These words being indifferent to Priesthood and Episcopacy, and used in both Ordinations, are not sufficiently expressive of either in particular, unless Protestants will now at length profess themselves Presbyterians, making no distinction betwixt Priests and Bishops, but they are as far from that as we Catholics. In the Form whereby Protestants Ordain, there is not one word expressing Episcopal Power and Authority. The Form is, Take the Holy Ghost, etc. Let Protestants search all the Catholic Rituals, not only of the West, but of the East. they will not find any Form of Consecrating Bishops that hath not the word Bishop in it, or some other expressing the particular Power and Authority of a Bishop, distinct from all other Degrees of Holy Orders. See Joh. Morin de Sacr. Ord. Par. 1655.  

SECT. I.  
J. S. 1. IT seems N. N's former tedious Harangue at length comes to this, Archbishop Parker, etc. were not Ordained by his Catholics, which is one Nullity. But this is contrary to the Tenants of his Church; witness Bellarmine, who Lib. 1. de Sacr. in Gen. c. 21. determines, that Sacraments administered by Heretics are valid; and to its Practice, allowing the Ordinations of the Arrians and Bonasiosi, and these of Acacius, see in Morin. de Sacr. Ord. and of the Greeks, witness N. N. ut supra.  
2. The other Nullity lies in the Form, he being contented to wave the Matter, but why so? this hath always been accounted an essential part of Ordination. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacr. Ord. c. 9 Sect. ex his, truly relateth, Concilium, etc. The Council of Carthage makes mention only of Imposition of hands. His quarrel then being with the Form, it is to be considered, after some use made of his Concession in this Paragraph, which will by good consequence destroy his whole former discourse: for he confesseth,  
1. That Protestants have a Form or Ritual; then undoubtedly they would use it, and not Bishop Scories extempore Spirit.  
2. They are as far from being Presbyterians as his Catholics; then they were not Puritan, unless his Catholics be so too; then they rejected not Consecration as a Rag of Rome, nor were they contented with Extraordinary Calling; then they are as much for Bishops, and regularly Consecrated Bishops, as his Catholics.  
3. This Form is prescribed, and thereby they Ordained; therefore they did Ordain by their Prescript Form, and not as N. N. surmiseth and suggesteth.  
4. The Form hath these words, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; therefore N. n feigned Form was not used at Archbishop Parker's Consecration.  
5. The Form requires the Consecration of a Bishop to be public in the Church; therefore his suggestion of a Clandestine Consecration is a Calumny.  
6. The Form hath the word Bishop in it; therefore it hath sufficient to express the particular Power and Authority of a Bishop.  
7. The Form requires three Bishops to the Consecration of a Bishop; therefore they did not think the help of one was sufficient: yet this is the Form N. N. is pleased to quarrel with. For,  
3. He pretends there is a known Principle common, etc. But this he misrepresents, this Form must be used, and no other. Bell. inclines to the Affirmative, Lib. 1. de Sacr. in gen. c. 1. Sect. 2. & 20. even the words are determinated (saith he) by God: yet withal he tells us, if they be corrupted, (as suppose the Priest after the old Mumpsimus rate should say, In nomino Patria, Filia & Spirito Sanctu,) or interrupted, (as if the Priest at the Consecration of the Eucharist should first numble (hoc est Cor) and after a little pause cough out (pus meum,) the Form would be good; but Alex. Hales, p. 4. q. 5. mem. 2. art. 1. states it otherwise; The Forms (saith he) of Rome Sacraments are determinate, the Forms of other Sacraments are not; The Forms of Baptism and the Eucharist being appointed by Christ, are kept inviolably without all change, but touching the words of Form to be used in any other of the supposed Sacraments, there is no certainty, but they are diversely and doubtfully declared; the reason whereof is, because they were of human devising. It is declared otherwise by Pope Innocent the Father of the Canonists, saying, The words of Form were instituted by the Church, Hist. Counc. Trent, fol. 594. But Protestants stand not upon words, using only the Form which Christ instituted, and is retained in 
(a) Both in Episcopal and Priestly Ordination, Filicius tract. 9 c. 2. ex Pontifical Rom. and in the Roman Catechism de Sacr. Ord. Bell. de Sacr. in gen. c. 21. & l. 1. de Sacr. Ordin. c. 9  the Western Church in terms, and in the Eastern to the sense. For the Grace or Gift of God creating and promoting, which is the Eastern Form, is the same in substance with receiving the Holy Ghost, for the Gift and Grace of God, Eph. 3.2, 8. 1 Cor. 15.9, 10. 1 Tim. 4. Heb. 12. Tim. 1.6. is exactly the same with power from on high, assured Lu. 24.49. and the promise of the Father, etc. Act. 1.4, 5. which is the receiving this power, and v. 8. These Protestants use, and trouble not themselves with nice Disquisitions and Disputes.  
4. He affirms the intention of the Ordainer, etc. But it is very reasonable to presume the General words are sufficient upon N. N's grounds, because they are used and applicable to all degrees of Holy Orders; For if Episcopacy, and Priesthood, be only divers degrees of the same Order, as he intimates, and is declared in the Roman 
(b) Ib. n. 24. p. 266. & Bell. de Sacr. Ord. c. 5. Sec. sequitur secunda, only by the extension of the Character, id. ib. Sect. tertia: & Sect. seq. with this only difference, that the same efficacy is required to the extension of the character, as to the first impression, id. ib. Sect. respond.  Catechism, than the same Form will serve for both those disparate degrees of the same Order; and the rather, because in their opinion the higher Power, compared to Bishops, is only by extension of the Character; and Protestants stick to this, because it was only used in the Ancient Roman Church, as it was only prescribed in the Old Pontifical, and as the Church then answered the Sophisters of these times, when this very Objection was writ against the Pontifical, so do Protestants now the present Roman Cavillers, who have taken it from them, for thus the Church of Rome defends herself.  
1. The design was fully notified by words in the Pontificial, to which of the respective Orders the Person presented was to be admitted.  
2. The manner of Imposition of hands did sufficiently discover the intention of the Ordainer, and diversity the Act; for in the Consecration of a Bishop divers Bishops impose hands, but in the Ordination of a Priest, one only Bishop, with some assisting Priests. This is the Judgement of both the Ancient Western and Eastern Church, that, that Form, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, which is the Form prescribed both for Priesthood and Episcopacy in the Protestant Ordinal, is sufficient to confer Power and Authority to both Orders; so that it being duly applied, he that is presented to the Capacity of a Bishop, is thereby enabled to do the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of God, and he who is presented for Priesthood, is thereby warranted and empowered for the Office and work of a Priest.  
5. He surmiseth these words, (Receive ye the Holy Ghost,) are not, etc. this is to oppose Christ's Institution, and in effect, to make his Form of Commissionating his Apostles defective, and insufficient. For if that Form was sufficiently expressive of Apostolical Power and Authority, then is it of Episcopal, and it is most properly applied to them, because if not only, yet principally they are the Apostle's Successors, even in the Judgement of many Learned Romanists; and therefore this Form sealed by imposition of hands, Constitutes a Person presented to Episcopacy a full Bishop by the Law of Christ, without the supplement of any other auxiliary Form.  
Father Davenport 
(c) Expos. Paraphr. artic. confess. Angl. p. 322. ad 325.  alias St. Clara. hath evidenced from great Authority, their new Additionals to be unnecessary; Expos. Paraphr. Art. Confess Angl. p. 322. Alii putant, etc. Others think (saith he) Imposition of hands as the Matter, and those words (Receive ye the Holy Ghost) as the Form, is as much as is required by Divine Law to the Essence of Episcopal Ordination: and this they think from the Authority of the Scriptures, which often and only makes mention of these two, as 
(d) Bell. l. 1. de Sacr. Ord. c. 9 saith, we cannot convince Heretics that Order is a Sacrament, because we cannot prove the external Symbol thereof from Scripture, which is not possible for him to do of their new additional either Matter or Form.  Arrudius largely proveth.  
6. He assumes, In the Form whereby Protestants Ordain, etc. But this his Assumption is,  
1. Frivolous; It is absurd to object that against Protestants, which, if it were granted, would render all the Ordinations in the Romish Church for 800 years mere Nullities.  
2. Fallacious; he equivocates in the word (Form,) which is either taken largely, for the whole Office of Administration exemplified in the Ordinal, or strictly, for an Essential part of his Discourse; and in the Conclusion he useth the word [Form] in the most comprehensive sense, for the whole Rite of the Ministry, which hath in it for the more Solemnity, Prayers, Exhortations, Interrogatories, etc. but in the Assumption and middle-part, he taketh it in the restrained sense, for the Essential words, which are the Constitutive Form, as Imposition of hands is concluded to be the Matter: this is their own distinction.  
3. False; for in the Form, that is the Protestants Ritual, there are, and always were express words for the Authority given in the respective Functions of Bishops and Priests, for whose Ordinations there are distinct Forms and distinct Words. The word [Bishop] oftener than three times used in the Office appointed for his Consecration, and the word [Priest] sometimes in that prescribed for his Ordination. Just according to N. N's after-instance of Illustration, if the word [King] be used at his Election, this sufficiently expresseth all Kingly Power and Authority.    

SECT. II.  
N. N. farther adds; THE Form or words whereby men are made Priests, must express Authority and Power to Consecrate, or make present the Body and Blood of Christ, but their Form containeth not one word expressing this Power: see the Ritual Lond. 1607. Deacons did minister and dispense the Body of Christ in Ancient times, but were never thought to have Power of Consecrating, and making present Christ's Body and Blood.  

SECT. II.  
J. S. THat which N. N. designs by this, is, that that Form (Receive ye the Holy Ghost) is defective as to Priestly Ordination, which must be supplied by their new one, viz. Take thou power to offer Sacrifice to God, and to Celebrate Mass both for the quick and the dead. This he knows Protestants do reject, because lately invented, and foisted into the Romish Ritual to foster their gross Figments of Purgatory, Transubstantiation, and their Antichristian Sacrifice of the Mass; and because some Romanists, as St. Clara, thinks it unnecessary, and Bell. saith it is Sacrilegious; for this he positively delivers, It is Sacrilege to change the Form, because determinate, Bell. de Sacr. in gen. l. 1. c. 21. Sect. apud haeret. etc. secunda prop. For Sacraments are instituted by God, therefore the chief part thereof the Form; and to add to, or alter the words of the Scripture, is not lawful, therefore not the words of the Sacraments, Id. ib. in Fin. yet this great Champion never did prove their new Form to be found in, or founded on Scripture, much less instituted by Christ.  
2. If that Form comprehends not all the Essentials of Priestly Ordination, than the Apostles were not empowered to Consecrate, for our Saviour used that and no other to enable them for the execution of the Priestly Office, wherefore Scotus l. 4. dist. 24. hath resolved verba illa, etc. those words, Whosoever sins ye remit, etc. are declarative of the Power formerly given in these [Receive ye the Holy Ghost,] by which Power is passed over all the Sacraments, and therefore that of Sacrificing: Biel l. 4. dist. 19 quaest. un. concurs with him, cull datur, etc. to whom the Principal is given, to him also the accessary is given; but by these words, [Receive ye, etc.] Christ gave the power of the keys: therefore by them he conveyed the power of Consecration, which is a branch of the power of the Keys.  
3. What is added concerned Deacons, is a pure piece of impertinency, no way advantageous to him, nor prejudicial to Protestants; if he were put to it, he would find it a difficult task to prove Deacons were Dispensers' of the Mysteries, who were only Assistants to the Dispensation.    

SECT. III.  
N. N. IN all Forms of Ordaining Priests, that ever were used in the Eastern and Western Churches, there is expressly, set down the word [Priest,] or some other word importing the particular and proper Function and Authority of Priesthood. If any State or Country should choose a Person to be King, in the word King is sufficiently expressed all Regal Power and Authority. Therefore the Greeks using the word Bishop and Priest in their Form, sufficiently express the respective Power of every Order.  

SECT. III.  
J. S. EAch Clause of this Section hath been sufficiently confuted.    

SECT. iv  
N. N. BUT the reason why the English Form of making Bishops and Priests is so notoriously defective and invalid, is, because in Edward the sixth's time, when Zwinglianism and Puritanism did so prevail in the Church, the Real Presence was not believed by them of the Clergy who bore the sway, therefore they did not put in the Form of Priesthood any word expressing Power and Authority to make Christ's Body present. They held Episcopacy and Priesthood to be one and the same thing; wherefore in the Form for making of Bishops, they put not one word expressing the Episcopal Function, only some general words which might seem sufficient to give them Authority to enjoy the Temporalities and Bishoprics. This is also the true reason why Parker and his Colleagues were content with the Nagshead Ordination, and why others returned to extraordinary Vocation in Queen Elizabeth's time.  

SECT. iv  
J. S. THis also is another vain Repetition: Three who bore the sway in King Edward's Reign held the Real Presence, but not in the Popish manner of determination: Those in Queen Elizabeth's time had and did stand for ordinary and orderly Vocation. The Church of England alwries asserted the Divine Right of Episcopacy, and her orderly Orderly Orthodox Sons have constantly maintained it. If some have distinguished Priesthood into the degrees, the higher and the lower, as the Romanists generally do, yet they still conclude the said different degrees of the Acts and Uses (which could not be exercised in a due subordination of the lower to the higher) for a distinct respective Consecration thereto; and did hold those of them who should presume to exercise the Higher Power not being regularly Consecrated thereto, were Schismatical Transgressor's of the Apostolical Order, and Catholic Practice; and that every Act of that usurped Power (when no real necessity to abate or excuse it) to be null and void. It is the Pope and his Colleagues who are the 
(f) For it is not resolved in the Congregation of the Cardinals, that the Pope's Legates should not suffer the determination of the Article of the Institution of Bishops by Divine Right to pass, Hist. Counc. of Trent, fol. 603. And it being perceived that Laynez his Speech was displeasing, and opposed by the Spanish Bishops, this distasted the Legates, ib. fol. 615. therefore Canons came from Rome, which the Pope moved to have proposed, p. 657. which displeased the Fathers, etc. after much contention, because the opinion of Divine Right was as displeasing to the Pope, ib. fol. 737. it was waved.  leading Puritans. It was the Pope who said, the Absolute Divine Right of Bishops was a false and erroneous Opinion; it was the Pope who slighted and scorned those Bishops in the Trent-Assembly, who affirmed 
(g) Ib. fol. 825.  the Institution of Bishops by Divine Right. It was the Pope who first devested them of their Jurisdiction and Power, by his Commissions and Delegations 
(h) Caran. p. 869.  to inferior Priests.    

SECT. V  
N. N. TO conclude the Matter, I say with St. Hierome, Ecclesia non est, quae non habet Sacerdotem: How can the Protestant Church be the true Church, which hath not one Bishop or Priest? Though it were not evident it hath no Valid Ordination, yet so many doubts and uncertainties as they must acknowledge concerning their Ordinations, do demonstrate the Nullity of their Church; for if there remain one solid and prudent doubt of the validity of Ordination in any Church, it is impossible it should be the true Catholic and Apostolic Church, because a doubtful Clergy makes a doubtful Church, and a doubtful Church is no Church: The step to Christian and Catholic Belief is the well-grounded Credibility excluding all prudent doubts, of the Clergy, we have the same of the Church, and of the Faith and Doctrine proposed by its testimony; and the true Faith admits of no such doubts. Therefore Protestants, before they can prudently believe themselves to have true Faith, or be in the Catholic Church, must clear all the doubts objected against their Ordination. For though any Person shall not be convinced of the Nullity of their Ordination, yet he cannot but harbour a prudent doubt thereof, there being so many Reasons and Motives for it. Now, to Receive Sacraments from Priests of so doubtful Authority, is without doubt a damnable Sacrilege, it being in the highest degree against the light of Right Reason, and Rule of Faith, to expose the Reverence of the Sacraments, and Remedy of our Souls, to so manifest an hazard.  

SECT. V  
J. S. THis Conclusion is of the same temper with the Premises; these were a confused heap of Incredibles, Improbables, and Impossibles; this is a wild distempered Sorites carried on with an affected Obscurity to distract and amuse the Reader, by multiplying, confounding, and changing the Terms, huddling up many Conclusions in this one.  
If St. Hierome, by Church, meant the Universal Church, this always has, now hath, and ever will have Bishops, (as Sacerdotes signifies with him:) but if he spoke of a particular Church, than his [is not] is not to be taken absolutely, but respectively; not simply to deny its being and existence, but it's integrity and compliment, viz. there is no through complete Church which hath not Bishops. For we read in the Ancients of some Churches that had received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fullness of Dispensations, and of others which had not attained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the compliment of Necessaries; though in St. Hierom's time all Churches were complete, that he might truly affirm there was no Church without a Bishop. But it may fall out also, that all the Bishops of a wellformed complete Church may die, or by Persecution be so Scattered that they dare not appear, or by an Infidel Conqueror be Banished, or Murdered: but if the remaining Christians in this distressed condition keep their first Faith, they are in a salvable state, and continue true members of the Universal Church; as those Roman Converts were, who believed upon St. Peter's first Sermon, Act. 2. which was long before St. Peter came to Rome, Rom. 16.7.  
2. He suggests It is impossible they should, etc. For once he guesseth right, It is impossible any Church of one denomination can be the true Catholic, Apostolic Church, that is in the usual sense of the Romanists, the Universal, as it is impossible for a Part to be the Whole, or their Catholic Church (which is not the fourth part thereof) to be Universal, as they by their common restriction assume; but it is possible a particular Church may be a true Catholic and Apostolic Church, and the true Catholic and Apostolic Church of such a Nation.  
For the Title Catholic is either taken properly for the Universal Church, which is the Congregation of all Believers dispersed over all the World, in opposition to the Herds of Jews, Pagans, and Infidels; and than it is a contradiction to apply or appropriate it to any particular Church, as the Romanists industriously do to huckster off their false Wares, which otherwise would stick on their hands; or else it is used in the more common signification of an Orthodox Church, which participates in the true Faith with the Universal Church, in a contradistinction to the Conventicles of all Heretical Blasphemers: In this Notion the Protestant Church of England is not only a Catholic and Apostolic Church, but in due Form of construction the true Catholic and Apostolic Church of England, as several particular Churches, viz. Rome, Carthage, etc. have been honoured with the Title of the Catholic Church of those respective Nations, 
(k) For as the Roman Church was called the Catholic Church of Rome, Leo Ep. 12. So that of Antioch, the Catholic Church of Antioch, Conc. Constant. 5. Act. 1. That of Carthage, the Catholic Church of Carthage, Aurel. Epist. Eccl. Cathol. Carthag. So Polycarp was the Bishop of the Catholic Church of Smyrna. Euseb. lib. 4. hist. c. 14. And that famous Epistle to the Smyrnians was directed to all the Holy and Catholic Churches, id. ib. in Princ. Greg. Naz. the Bishop of the Catholic Church of Constantinople in his last Will and Testament, witnessed by four Bishops of their several Catholic Churches, as of Iconium, etc.  Provinces, and Dioceses.  
3. His doubts and uncertainties have a rare virtue (perhaps they may work strongly on weak minds) they can demonstrate. This is the noble demonstrating faculty of Romish Traditors, they can raise doubts and uncertainties where there are none, and by their Magic demonstrate, first, that the Protestant Church is not the Universal, and then it is no Church; first, absurdly without Proof suppose the Nullity of its Ordinations, and thence conclude the Nullity of its Christianity. The best is, this is but one Doctor's opinion, if more there be, yet all his Colleagues are not so Magisterial in their nullifying Sentence. The Bishop of Chalcedon is more solid and Prudent. Persons 
(l) As Bishop Bramhal citys, Reply to the Survey, p. 33.  (saith he) living in the communion of the Protestant Church, if they endeavour to learn the truth, (which if they do not, they are neither good Protestants nor good Christians) and are not able to attain unto it, but hold it implicitly in the preparation of their minds, and are ready to receive it, when God shall be pleased to reveal it, they neither want Faith, nor Church, nor Salvation; which elsewhere he confirms by this reason, A Church may be Heretical, and Schismatical really, yet morally a true Church, because She is 
(m) Bishop of Chalced. Survey, c. 2. Sect. 4.  invincibly ignorant of her Heresy and Schism.  
Pope Innocent was so much offended at the irregularities of the Spanish Ordinations in his time, that at first he inclined to null them; but upon better thoughts be forbore declaring that, for the number of those who were faulty therein, he would not question nor doubt of any of them any ways passed, but rather leave them to God's Judgement. Epist. ad Conc. Tolk. Car. sum. Conc. p. 270.  
4. But (saith he) a solid doubt, etc. This is not Universally true, for a Church which hath a doubtful Clergy by irregularities of Ordination, if She contend for that Faith which was once delivered to the Saints, and cannot avoid those irregularities through not a pretended, or contracted, but a real necessity, is a true part (such an irregularity not absolutely and totally Un-Churching her) of the true Catholic Church: True, but not Complete; not Complete, because it wants that which is required to the Integrity and Perfection of a Church; yet True, because it hath all things essential to a Church. For this reason the most eminent Protestants, who still maintained the Divine Right of Bishops, yet did they clear those Transmarine Churches which have not Bishops from sinning against Divine Right, because their want was not through their own default, but the Iniquity of the Times and Places they lived in; which charitable construction should seem very reasonable to the Romanists, for that the Court of Rome gave the first occasion of all the contests about Episcopacy, by investing Priests with Episcopal Jurisdiction and Power by their Commissions and Delegations: and without doubt Necessity is as strong Dispensation for these Pastors to execute the Ministerial Office, as the Pope's Mercenary Bulls granted upon unworthy avaricious ends can be for their Priests to exercise Episcopal Authority. Those Churches therefore under this want are True, though lame and maimed Members of the Catholic Church: Just as Canus 
(n) Loc. l. 4. c. ult. ad 10.  determines of the Romish Church in a vacancy; It is then left Lame (saith he) and diminished, without Christ's Vicar, that. one Pastor of the Church, the Pope; yet the Spirit of Truth should abide in it: and without doubt the Spirit of Truth will as certainly abide in those Churches which want Bishops, as in their Church wanting a Pope, at least, they should think so, because in their account the Pope is as necessary, if not more, to the being of a Church than Bishops are. To clear this more distinctly, some things are required to the Essence 
(o) This is Stapleton's distinction.  of a Church, as the Doctrine of saving Faith in the Profession and Practice thereof; some only to the Perfection and Integrity of a Church, as the having Regular Pastors by a due Form of Ordination: both these are necessary, though not equally and in the same Degree; the former absolutely and indispensably, the latter de congruo & possibili: viz. it concerns the Church, if possibly it can be obtained to have lawfully Ordained Pastors, and every wilful Omission, much more Rejection, of the Catholic settled Order in this kind is Sacrilegious and Schismatical; yet those Pastors who highly esteem Episcopal Ordination, and much affect it, but cannot obtain it through the Recusancy of Bishops in present Place and Power (who will not Ordain them without sinful compliance and submission to gross Errors and Corruptions evidently contrary to the Law of Christ) if they hold and divide the Word of Truth rightly may be accounted true Pastors, though not in a real Mission, yet by a moral designation, as being deputed and separated to that Divine Office; because in this case, the Necessity is invincible, which makes that allowable, which otherwise would be unlawful, as Dr. Cracken. contr. Spalet. c. 4. observes from the Gloss, and illustrateth from Scipio's Example, who when the Questors denied him a supply of Monies out of the Public Treasury, because it was against Law, presently replied, Necessity hath not Law. The Romanists confess the desire of Baptism is sufficient to excuse the want thereof, and they have it in effect who have it in desire; in all reason, the want of an undoubted Sacrament is more dangerous, than the want of a Sacramental can be, especially where there is a Desire to have the Impediment removed. The Jews were prohibited to build private Altars, yet in case of Necessity, when they were not permitted to go to Jerusalem, the learned Jews determined the Prohibition ceased as to its present effect; and every one knows a Negative Prescript is not so dispensable as an Affirmative.  
It is the opinion of Cornelius a Lapide in Numb. 20.26. that Eleazar was m●de Highpriest, praeter legem & morem, otherwise than by standing Law and Custom he ought; First, because his Father was then living; next, in that the right only of putting on his Father's Garment was used, without any Solemn-Unction or Consecration to the Priesthood.  
5. He subjoins a doubtful Clergy makes a Doubtful Church. This is a Doubtful Proposition: the most he can make of it is, that a Doubtful Clergy makes a Doubtful Church only in Part, not in the Whole; for even Schismatics in those things wherein they have made no separation from the Church (otherwise the Romanists would be in a sad condition) do so far still remain uncorrupted to the Church; so that if that Doubtful Clergy keep the wholesome words of sound Doctrine, (if N. N. doubt of this, he may remember, there is a Clergy of a beyond-Sea Church which hath no Bishops, hath made this good against the choicest Champions of the Roman See) so far they are Catholics.  
6. He is very positive, a doubtful Church is no Church. It is true, he who harboureth a doubt (which he will conclude Prudent, because the issue of his own Imagination, or the suggestion of some over-admired Teacher) of that Church whereof he is a Member, that Church to him is no Church; but where such a doubt is entertained, the Case is only disputable, and questioning doth not disprove or destroy certainty and truth. But such doubtful Propositions as N. N. hath here conjured up, will without doubt damnify his good old Cause, because thereby his Church will be concluded a no Church, by the demonstrating Power of those many doubts and uncertainties, which her chief Members have conceived and uttered against her instances of most important concern. For,  
Part 2. 1. It is a rule with them, that a doubtful Pope, is no 
(p) Crespet. in verb. Papa; Caran. p. 827.  Pope, and that there cannot be two Popes at one and the same time, etiam ex urgentissima causa (as Jac. Castellon. citys out of Navarre— verb. Papa p. 485.) no not upon the most weighty Consideration, because there is but one Monarch, and one Monarchy only for Spiritual concerns by the appointment of Christ: hence they generally conclude, that all those who are not united to that one determinate Head are in the state of damnable Schism, and those who are united to him, are united to the true Catholick-Church. viz. The Church is a Society of men united in the Profession of the same Faith, and participating of the Sacraments under the Government of lawful Pastors, chief of one Vicar of Christ upon Earth, the Roman Pope. This then is obvious at the first view from these Premises, that an undoubted Pope is as fully, and by the word chief in the definition, more necessary to the being and Constitution of the Church than an undoubted Clergy; and a doubtful Pope is as destructive to the Church, as a doubtful Clergy; from whence it necessarily follows, that if a doubtful Clergy makes a doubtful Church, a doubtful. Pope must do so too: and then if this be proved, (there hath been a doubtful Pope, and no one undoubted Pope, by N. N 's demonstration,) it is impossible the Roman can be the true Catholic and Apostolic Church; but this is easily made evident from the many doubts and uncertainties which of the several pretending Popes hath been the one undoubted Pope.  
In the year 1378, upon the death of Gregory the eleventh, a grievous 
(q) Caran. p. 823. Theodoric. de Niem. Bishop of Perda, Vrban's Secretary wrote the History of this Schism, so did Bonin. Segino in the Florentine History, etc. Friar John de Pineda, l. 22. c. 37. Sect. 3, 4.  Schism began which continued more or less till Ann. 1414. the Italians created Vrban the sixth Pope, who 
(r) England. Almain, and Italy favoured him.  resided at Rome; The French elected Clement the seventh, who 
(s) France, Castille, Arragon, and Catalonia owned him.  betook himself to Avignion. The Abbot of St. Pedest endeavoured to prove Vrban was the true undoubted Pope: Joh. de Bigniaco, and the Council of Paris defended Clement's title, Vrban during this Schism had three Successors, Bon. the ninth, Innocent the seventh, and Gregory the twelfth: Clement had but one, Ben. the thirteenth, in Ann. 1409 a Council of Cardinals met at Pisa, who thought fit for the peace of the Church to depose the two surviving Popes and set up another; but for all the Cardinals could do to repair the breach, it proved wider, the two contesting Popes, Gregory the twelfth, and Ben. the thirteenth being unwilling to be so dishonourably ejected, kept their ground, till at last in Ann. 1414, the three Popes, the Italian, French, and Pisan, were Deposed by the Council of Constance, and Martin the fifth was Created. All this while even in the judgement of observing learned Ramanists none could know which of the broken Heads was the true Head of the Church, and lawful 
(t) Marian de reb. Hisp. l. 18. c. 1. Naucler. Val. 2. Gener. 46. for that every one of them had learned Patrons, id. ibid. Gener. 480.  Successor to St. Peter. Azor 
(v) Instit. Moral. part. 2. lib. 25. c. 14.  saith, It was doubtful and uncertain which of the claiming Popes had the right title; Caran. saith, ut supra, It was not known who was the true Pope; and Bellarm. 
(w) Lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. So doth Aemil. de Gest. Franc. lib. 9 Aut. Sum. Hist. part. 3. tit. 22. c. 2.  adds, It was not easy to be determined; and the famous Chancellor of Paris, John 
(x) Lib de signis ruinae Eccl. Sign. of which the same is to be found in Otho Fris. Hist. l. 6. Baron. Tom. 11. Ann. 1044. n. 2.  Gerson goes higher, The Church itself (saith he) was then so full of doubts in this case, that She could not know on what side, or party the Roman See was, unless God himself had been pleased to reveal it to her. It then being proved, that a doubtful Pope makes a doubtful Church, and that there hath been a doubtful Pope in the Romish Church, the conclusion is irrefragable, the Roman Church hath been for a long space of time a Doubtful Church, and by N. N.'s Logic and Peremptory Position, the Church of Rome was then a no Church.  
2. There are many Doubts and uncertainties harboured in the Romish Church concerning the Church itself; as whether their Virtual Church (the Pope) be that Church they would commend to us, for its well-grounded Credibility and Infallibility; or their Representative (a General Council), or the Essential (the diffused body of the Faithful all the world over), or a body compounded of some of these or any others. Some will be contented that the Pope and his Conclave should be that Infallible thing; others will have him to sit in the Assembly of the Bishops of his Province; others will go no less than he must Head a General Council to pronounce an Infallible Sentence. If it be put to the Vote, and most Voices must carry it, the Pope runs lose away with it; he hath the Patronage of the best and most Ecclesiastical Dignities and Preferments. But be it so for once, upon this a fresh Fry of Doubts and uncertainties appears in this very foundation of their Faith and Unity, whether this Man be Pope or no? Whether Gregory the twelfth, or B●n. the thirteenth, or Alexander the fifth, or Martin the fifth. Let Martin be the Man, presently a new Covey of Doubts spring up, whether he be an Infallible Judge? and if so, whether as a Doctor or the Pope? If as Pope, whether when he gives Laws de Concilio Fratrum, by the advice of his College of Cardinals, passing his Decrees upon the Gates of St. Peter at Rome, and in Campo de Flori, or when he speaks E Cathedral, which is (as it is commonly interpreted) when he Proclaims his Decrees, however he be assisted, for a general reception with an intention to Teach and Govern the whole Church, though this be very uncertain? Let this also be presumed, another Set of Doubts is started, wherein is he Infallible? Whether in matters of Right, and Fact, or of Faith? The Jesuits of late will have him Universally Infallible upon all these accounts, as they determined at Clermont, Ann. 1661. but suppose with the soberer sort his Infallibility extends only to Definitions of Faith, yet another Doubt remains unsatisfied, Whether this his restrained Faith be conditional, or absolute? some conceive an absolute Infallibility is too high an entrenching upon God's Prerogative; but others of them will not have him tied to Conditions, viz. To observe the Order of the Primitive Church, and use such holy and needful means as God by his Son Jesus Christ hath appointed for the finding out the Truth: For 
(y) De Pont. Rom. lib. 4. c. 2. Stapl. relect. c. 4. qu. 3. art. 3. conclus. 5.  (say they) if Conditions be required to Perfect and Legitimate the Pope's Definitions besides his own Act of decreeing them, the Faithful (which is very remarkable and apposite) would be Doubtful whether he had observed them or no, and so their Faith would be wavering, and so it must needs be if Doubts do the feat.  
3. It is the Doctrine of their new-founded Church, that the intention of the Bishop or Priest Officiating is so necessary to any Sacrament, that without it none of them is perfected; but to receive the Sacraments from such of whom we can have no assurance, that their intentions be serious and sincere, (and there be many evident reasons and motives to persuade us the Priests are oft Formal in their Ministeries, and False in their intentions) is certainly to expose the reverence (in N. N.'s Language) of the Sacraments, and remedy of our Souls to a manifest hazard. For we are informed by their own Historians, that in some Centuries the Clergy were so ignorant and wicked, that many of them knew not what to do; others cared not what they did. In what a perplexed condition would a prudent man be cast, who being married by a Popish Priest, soon after detected to be a Villain, should consider with himself, very likely this wicked man had no Intention to marry him, or an Intention not to marry him. It is a wonder those Trent-Assemblers should be so rash, and yet so Magisterial in their Definition, when they would not determine what Intention was necessary, because they could not agree about the efficacy of the Sacraments, it being impossible, there should be the same Intention of two who differ in their judgements concerning it. The common Salvo was, that the Intention to do as the Church doth was sufficient, but this satisfied not the scruple, because men ●●ffered in opinion what the Church is, and their opinions herein being different, their Intentions in administering the Sacraments would also prove different. To evade this, it was pretended, all the Priests had the same design; but as it is impossible for any to know the things (that is the purposes) of Man, save the Spirit of Man, which is in him, 1 Cor. 2.11. so it is unconceivable how they should have the same end and aim, who have different Judgements, Humours, Passions, and Interests. At last they were driven to this shift, perhaps there may be some such wretched Priest, yet this case is rare. To this the Bishop of Minori replied, would God (said he) that the case was rare, and that in this corrupt age we had not cause to doubt there were many: but suppose there are but a few, or one only; let a Knave Priest Baptise, who hath not an Intention to administer the true Baptism to a Child, who being after a grown Man is created a Bishop of a great City, so that he hath Ordained a great part of the Priests in his Diocese, it must be said, that he being not Baptised, is not Ordained, nor they Ordained who are promoted by him— Behold Millions of Nullities of Sacraments by the malice of one 
(z) Histor. Council of. Trent. fol. 241.  Priest in one Act only.  
4. To give full measures of Doubts and uncertainties in the most mysterious act of their Religion; Dr. Holden 
(a) Apendix of Schism, p. 445. Refert Dr. Ham. dispatcher. Preface p. 14.  averreth, All Roman Catholics do believe and reverence the Sacrifice of the Mass as the most substantial Act of their Religion; but if it be demanded wherein the substance of this Sacrifice doth consist, no substantial Resolution can be expected from them: their Doubts and uncertainties about the Nature and Essence thereof are so cross and various, There are divers opinions concerning it, (saith 
(b) Azor. l. 10. c. 9 or part 2. l. 2. c. 14.  Azor.) There are six Acts of which it is doubted, in which one, or more of them the Essence of the Sacrifice consisteth, saith 
(c) Tom. 3. dist. 75. art. 1, 2.  Suarez. Some place it in the one Act of Consecration, but the doubters dispute against it; for, say they, Consecration belongeth rather to the nature of a Sacrament than a Sacrifice, and every external Sacrifice (such as the Mass is) must be sensible, but the Conversion made by the words of Consecration is not sensible, for the real change is not; and again, if the Act of Consecration, than the outward Elements only are the Host and matter offered, but we may not say the Species are the Host: others set it in the Oblation, but the dissenting Brethren oppose this, because Christ used no Sacrificial Act at his Last Supper; and if Christ did not, the Priest ought not, though some of them grant it belongs to the intergrity of the Sacrifice. But how the Trent-Divines were divided in their judgement herein, may be read, Hist. Counc. of Trent, fol. 544, etc. Some of them again conceive Consecration, Consumption, or Sumption to be the Essence: this others contradict, because then (say they) the Body and Blood of Christ must be destroyed, for that which is Offered in Sacrifice is to be destroyed, but Sumption can be no part thereof, because the Act of Receiving is not; for although Christ be not received after the Consecration, yet is he truly said to be Sacrificed, and Doctors doubt whether Christ did receive in his last Supper, and the Priest receiving doth nothing in Christ's person but his own: others stood for Fraction, but this the doubters easily disprove, for it is (say they) an Act purely Sacramental, not at all Sacrificial, and Fraction being before Consecration, the Substance of the Bread and Wine remaineth.  
When N. N. hath solved all these Doubts, and satisfied all these Doubters, he may be more confident of the demonstrative Power of Doubts and uncertainties; in the mean time, he may apply them to his own Church in his own words, Mutatis mutandis.  
Therefore the Romanists before they can prudently believe themselves to have true Faith, or be the Catholic Church, must clear all Doubts and uncertainties (not objected by Protestants, but started and pursued by their own Divines) concerning their Church, their Head of the Church, their Ordinations, and the most Substantial Act of their Religion, the Mass, for though any Person should not, etc.  
7. N. N. goes one step forward, the step to Christian and Catholic belief is, etc.  
This hath nothing of usefulness to his Conclusion, unless he prove, that a Clergy not regularly ordained cannot believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith, etc. that the Protestant Church hath a doubtful Clergy, in which his attempts have hitherto been unsuccessful and unlucky to him and his Church. If his meaning be, the well-grounded Credibility of his Church is the foundation of Christian belief, this is to beg the Question, and is false; for Christian Faith is not an assent and adherence to the Objects thereof, upon the bare Testimony of the Church, but on that of God: neither is its warranty derived from the Church's Proposition, but Divine Revelation. True Faith is founded on the writings of Moses and the Prophets, of Christ and his Apostles, Eph. 2.20. which moved Durand thus to define it, It is an habit whereby we assent to the Doctrines of the Scripture for the Authority of God revealing them.  
But if he intent only, that the Church's Proposition is to her members the first motive and preparative of Faith, it will not be gainsaid: but then he must remember, that a prudent Christian will not take the Church for well-groundedly credible, till he find by the Rule of Faith, She deserves to be so esteemed; for it is impossible the Church can appear so to him till he know the Faith it proposeth, which he cannot do but by applying it to the Rule; for every intellectual and moral habit must be sufficiently known before the Acts resulting from them can be predicated of any subject capable to exercise them. As I must know what Prudence is, before I can truly affirm of any man that he is Prudent.  
8. That which N. N. mainly drives at is, to seduce the members of the Church of England from her Communion, and solicit them to Apostate to Rome. To effect this, he took (as he conceived) a seasonable opportunity to perplex the minds of men with his Doubts and uncertainties, by reason of our late sad divisions. Then the Romanists bent all their forces to persuade easy seduceable tempers, This Church was either a dead, or 
(d) Bishop of Chalcedon Survey, c. 2. Sect. 9 Dr. Holden, Anal. of Faith, saying the present State of the Protestant Church, consisting of Protestant Bishops, etc. and their Protestant Flock, not being likely to continue long.  no Church.  
If this design prevailed with some crazy minds, they were as imprudent as the Romish Solicitors were impudent. For the Romish Church has suffered as Tragical and durable divisions, as This than did; for besides that long Schism formerly related, in Alexander the third's time a Schism lasted till fere eversa, etc. as Car. speaks, p. 794. That Church was at her last Gasp: and in this very juncture of time, their contests were so high, that their great Head of Unity was put to all his Pope-craft to smother them; the Disputes betwixt the Jansenists and Molinists were then so hot, that both Parties pressed a decision, and by consent referred the matter to the Pope, who because he did not understand the points in debate, would fain have declined it, pretending that his Predecessor Clement the eighth, after he had appointed Congregations to discuss the Articles, waved it, and commanded silence to both Parties (which pleased neither) and that he was an Old Man and had not studied Divinity: but both sides still moving for a hearing, because each aspersed the other with the guilt of Heresy, at last, being overcome with importunity he condescended. But hear how the Infallible Judge determined the contest; at one Congregation he rebuked the Molinists for corrupting 
(e) 2 Congregation, July 8.  St. Augustin, at another for urging the Authority of the Schoolmen, and not producing the Evidences of Scripture, Councils, 
(f) 10 Congregation.  and Fathers. In all probability the Jansenists had the better of the day; but it proved otherwise, the Pope passed his Sentence in favour 
(g) Ann. 1653, whom before he had branded and paradigmatized with Insincerity.  of the Molinists. All that can be said in excuse of this rash resolution, was the most Christian King commanded the dull Canonist to dispatch, which so startled him, that he durst trifle no longer; but the main reason was, he was at that time so busily bend upon his Papal and Donna's concernments, that he was not at leisure to attend the serious discussion of that too hard Controversy for his soft Head. For then he and his Propagators were consulting how to manage Campanella's Project, in fomenting our intestine broils to reduce this Kingdom into a State. This is certain, his Nuncio Joh. 
(h) ●lench. mot. nuper in Angl. par. 2. p. 7. & inde.  Bapt. Renuncino, after his arrival in Ireland endeavoured the destruction of all that stood for the King and the English Interest, animating the Rebels to the most villainous outrages; and because two Noble persons of the Roman Communion would not be persuaded by him to join with the Rebels, he Excommunicated them. This was not all, the Pope by the instigation of the Barbarini's had another design on foot, as Abbot Gualdi p. 143. relates, even to expel his Catholic King out of his Dominions in Naples upon Ma's Anello's Rebellion, to add it to the Triple Crown. All is Fish that comes to St. Peter's Successors Net; if the Kings be Guelphs, their Kingdoms are Gibelins; if they be Catholics, their Crowns are Heretics. It is the Pope's business to determine emergent Controversies, but upon forced put, his main work is to rule over Nations, to rout out, etc. Jer. 1.10. as his Parasites have profaned that Text. But as the Pope and his Propagators failed in his Enterprises, so N. N. and his Comrades were deceived in their design. For though some were gulled with these Holy Frauds, yet in that levity of disposition and easiness of change, they did not act according to the common received measures of Prudence: which is, to stay where we are, till we know where to be better. For this Church at the worst was much better than that they revolted to; this was a Distressed Church, that a Depraved; this had Scars in the Face, that Ulcers in the Heart; this Wounded in the Skin, that Rotten in the Vitals; this in its Constitution Orthodox and Sound, that Heretical and Corrupt. For to state the case between the Church of England, and that of Rome impartially, the Quaere will be, Whether for some defects in Rituals (be they really such or only pretended) it be more prudent to desert a Church free from Schism, Heresy, and Idolatry, at least less subject to a suspicion of any of these, or to lapse to a Church most deeply Guilty, or most justly presumed to be so in all these Carnalities and Corruptions. If Prudence must resolve the Quaere, the issue and verdict will be, It is easier to remain in the Church of England than to Proselyte to Rome; for no Prudent man will precipitate himself into more, more apparent, and more real danger for fear of a less, less evident and more remote danger. This only remains to be proved, that the Church of Rome is Guilty, or justly presumed to be so, of dangerous Innovations and Corruptions, which will be evidenced by these two Conclusions constringently asserted.  
1. The Church of Rome as it is now ordered, and hath been since the times of Julius the second, and Leo the tenth, at least by the Pope and his Propagators in the Court thereof, hath chopped and changed the Apostolical Rule of Faith, by Composing a new Creed, or which is as bad, hath clogged and charged the Catholic Creeds with new-patched Additionals, which She hath defined to be Essentials of Faith necessary to be believed by all Christians in order to their Salvation.  
2. This Church so managed hath depraved and subverted the Catholic and Apostolic Government and Discipline, by setting up her Bishop as the Universal Monarch and Pastor of the Church, claiming and challenging to him an unlimited Supremacy over he whole Body of Christ, and exercising this Power by Excommunicating full three parts of the Catholic Church, for not submitting thereto.     

CHAP. V.  

SECT. I.  
1. THE first Conclusion is fully evident from the famous Council 
(a) C. 7. (Caran. in can. Pelt. Jesuit. in summa illius capitis, difference as well as contrariety) Conc. Flor. Sess. 10. Conc. Tom. 7. p. 641. D. & 644. B.  at Ephesus, for the maintenance whereof the Popes are sworn, and therefore cannot without the guilt of Perjury reject its Sentence. This Decreed, That it should not be lawful for any man to Publish or Compose another Faith, (or Creed) than that which was defined by the Nicene Council, and that whosoever shall dare to Compose, or offer any such thing to any Persons willingly to be Converted from Judaisme, or Heresy, if they be Bishops and Clerks (as the Popes be) should be Deposed, if Laymen, should be Anathematised. When this Authority was urged by the Greeks to the Latins in the Council of Florence; they only Answered, That this Canon did not forbid another explication agreeable to the truth contained in that Creed; but did indeed forbid all Difference as well as contrariety. Now it is clear, those twelve new Doctrinals of Faith defined by the Pope Pius the fourth, and set at the foot of the Old Creed, if they be not contrary to them, as most of them really are, (which might be proved by an Induction) yet are they different from them; for they are neither implicitly and virtually contained in them, nor can by any direct or immediate consequence be deduced from them, and therefore have no respect or relation to them, nor connexion with them; neither are they applied to the Old Creed as Explications thereof, but were designed as so many supernumerary Articles of Faith, (the Catholic Church having only twelve Articles, the Roman Church twenty four, as some of their own sticklers confess) which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved. For they are dictated and proposed as so many distinct material objects of Faith, to be believed in the same degree of necessity with the other to which they are superadded, and therefore in the judgement of this Council, and of the Latins themselves in their subterfuge, the composition thereof is a dangerous Innovation and corruption in the Rule of Faith, and the severe imposition of it is a Schismatical Presumption, and a tyrannical Antichristian Usurpation.  
2. The second Conclusion is firmly deduced from another Canon of the same Council, 
(b) C. 8. Caran. in can. Pelt. Jesuit. in summa illius capitis. Nicene Council, c. 6.  which runs thus; Let the same course be observed in other Dioceses and in all Provinces , that none of the Holy Bishops seize upon another Province, which was not of old, and from the beginning under his Power. This indeed particularly respected the exemption of the Cypriots from the encroachments of the Patriarch of Antioch; yet forasmuch as the Decree passed in general words without any reservation to the Bishop of Rome, he is thereby concluded as well as any other to be an ambitious Usurper, if he claim or exercise any Jurisdiction over the Churches which from the beginning were not under his Power. Some of N. N's quicksighted Gentlemen have apprehended the Decree to be so highly prejudicial to their pretensions and affections, who therefore have endeavoured by Legerdemain to juggle it out of the Acts of this Council; though if this unworthy Artifice had succeeded, yet these Shufflers had gained nothing by it, for the Nicene Council much earlier than this, had confined the Bishop of Rome to his Bounds, giving the like Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioch within their respective Dioceses, which the Bishop of Rome had within his. The importance of which Order is, That as certain Churches were consigned to the Bishop of Rome, so were certain to the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch, and as those of his Diocese were not subject to them, so neither those of their Dioceses were subject to him, upon this account, that it was not lawful 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for any one to Invade 
(c) Nilus de primatu Papae, and Soz. l. 7. c. 9 taketh this to be the Sense of the second General Council in Constantinople, the words of the Canon confirm Nilus his Interpretation, the Parilis mos, and the ancient Customs. As the Bishop of Rome had Power over all his Bishops, so the Bishop of Alexandria was to have over his, ex more, according to Custom, which Custom too was like; which makes it appear the Roman Bishop was limited to his Diocese, for there is no parity between an Universal Monarch and a Patriarchal Bishop; and as it is absurd to say, Alexandria must have bounds as Rome hath, if Rome then had none, so it is good Sense to say, Let Alexandria be limited to her assignment and partition, for Rome is: the Sense than is, Let the Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop be a Copy, Pattern, or Form for the Bishop of Alexandria, as Pope Nicholas Epist. 8. ad Mich. p. 690, expresseth it; The Nicene Canon took from Rome an Example particularly, what to give to Alexandria; therefore if the Bishop of Rome his Jurisdiction was over all the World, it could not be a Form, or Reason for the limitation and distriction of Alexandria into Cantons; so the African Fathers understood it, Ep. Afric. Conc. ad Coelest. c. 105.  another's Jurisdiction. The Bishop of Alexandria was to have under his charge Egypt, Lybia, etc. the Bishop of Rome had the oversight of the Churches of his Neighbourhood, the 
(d) Ruff. l. 1. c. 6. Hincma. p. 6. c. 4. C. R. was one of the seven Accidental Dioceses, bearer. Diatrib. 1. c. 1. & 3. and Britain was another. id. ib. p. 198.  Suburbicarian Regions, beyond which his Jurisdiction did not extend, and which made up his Diocese, viz. three Islands Corsica, Sicilia, and Sardinia, and seven Provinces on the Continent, Campania, Tuscia, Vicenum suburbicarium, Apulia with Calabria, Brutium, Samnium, and Valeria; and further yet, the Bishop of Rome had but one of the seven Dioceses, (as they were anciently called, or chief Jurisdictions which were appointed to the Western Church, and for those other seven (or, as some 
(e) Mr. Brerewod thinks there were but thirteen Dioceses in the whole Empire, Enquir. p. 170.  number them, six) assigned to the Eastern Church, they were never subject to his Jurisdiction. Pope Agatho about 
(f) Confesseth in 6 Synod. Act. 4. Conc. Tom. 5. p. 60, F. 64. E. & 65. B. So Zonaras.  Ann. 680. confesseth his Authority did not reach. the East, but before that time when St. Ignatius lived, the Church of Rome was only the Church of the chief City of the Regions 
(g) Inscription of his Epist. ad Roman.  of the Romans, and before him in St. Clement's time, it was but the Provincial Church of God at Rome, as the Church of God was but the Provincial Church 
(h) Clemens Title of his Epist. ad Corinth.  of God at Corinth; to both which that Form of Prayer observed in the Church, and exemplified in the Author of the Apostolical 
(i) Lib. 8. c. 10.  Constitutions, is very agreeable: viz. Let us pray for the Episcopacy of the whole World, for our Bishop James of Jerusalem and his Diocese, for Clement of Rome and his Diocese, for Evodius of Antioch and his Diocese. So just was that Censure of a fast Friend to the Cause, once 
(k) Aeneas Silvius, Ep. 288. the most was to preside over the West, as Zonar.  a Pope, which he bluntly delivered; viz. before the Nicene Council little respect was had to the Roman See. But what Respect She had then and like time after, was only Arbitrary at the Courtesy of the Church, which sometime gave her a large Apartment, sometimes Cantoned it. For a time the Church allotted the Bishop of Rome the Government of some Western Churches, which anciently, and from the beginning belonged not to his Diocese, as the Macedonian, 
(l) Zonar. note on the 6 Sardican Canon.  Illyrian, Peloponesian, and the Church of Epirus; yet the Great Council of 
(m) Conc. penult. 28. Act. 16.  Chalcedon thought fit to remand this liberality, and enstate them upon the Bishop of Constantinople, upon this ground, that then Constantinople was the Imperial City: for thus the Order goes, The Fathers orderly gave the Privilege of Chiefty and Headship to the See of Old Rome, because that Ally had the Empire, and moved with like Consideration gave 
(n) Evagr. ●. ●. c. ult.  the like Privileges to the See of Constantinople, thinking it agreeable to reason, that the City of Constantinople being honoured with the Empire and Senate, as Rome had been, should enjoy the like Privileges. These Privileges were not only some Honorary Titles and Dignities, (as some Romanists fancy) but the like that Rome had, which in express words is said to be a Privilege of the Chiefty, or Headship, which some learned Romanists have observed, and therefore render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
(o) Anton. Salm. Dr. Ham. Schis. disarm. p. 94.  Privilegia, Dignitates, & Authoritates, Privileges, Dignities and Authorities. It is true the Precedency of Place (which is merely Honorary) was reserved to the Bishop of Rome, for which Respect and Honour there was great reason, because the Church of Rome was a Metropolitical Church of long standing, whereas the Church of Constantinople was not long before only a Suffragan. This Canon hath put the Romanists to all their Shifts, some pretending the whole last Action to be Spurious and Clandestine; but why then did the Pope's Legates oppose it? a Spurious Act is of itself void, and a Clandestine Act could not prejudice their Master and his Interest; and why do they produce this Scandalous (as they judge) Act as a Proof for the Pope's Plenitude of Power over that of a General Council? These men will play at small game rather than stick out, Sergeant stuff must pass for the maintenance of the Papal Prerogative. Others of them are so bold as to tell the World, that after the Canon was passed, the Patriarches of Constantinople and Antioch (for he of Alexandria was dead, and that See vacant) were ashamed to move it: this is a most disingenuous shameless falsity; for it is notoriously known, and most certain they 
(p) Conc. Tom. 3. p. 475. E.  both subscribed it; others would make the World believe, this Council was not then free, and the Canon extorted by tumultuous importunity. This is another scandalous Calumny; for all the Fathers did own it as their 
(q) Ibid. p. 463.  Act and Deed both by Subscriptions and Attestations, before the Judges deputed by the Emperor to see that Synodal Order was regularly observed, for confirmation whereof they published a Manifesto. But they of all other Shufflers seem to have taken the wisest course, who very cautiously and industriously have left it out of their Editions of the Councils, which saved them the labour of beating their Brains to invent such handsome Excuses, Cavils and Calumnies, which yet were much more, than needed; for this Canon was not Operative but Declarative, not Introductory but Confirmative, in Confirmation of what fifty years before had passed at the first General Council of Constantinople, which resolved, That the Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the Honour of Primacy next after the Bishop of Rome, for that Constantinople 
(r) Conc. Constant. 1. c. 1, 2, 3. Soz. l. 7. c. 9  is new-Rome. And if both these were suspected and failed, or not extant, yet there is another Canon of this Council of Chalcedon, which the Roman Censors have not as yet traduced, either as Spurious or Clandestine, or Forced, and is received in their Editions, which will quite foil and rout out Monarchical Sovereignty. It is this. 
(s) Conc. Chalced. c. 9 Act. 15.  Si vero, etc. If any have a Complaint against the Metropolitan of the Province, let him either repair to the Primate of the same Diocese (or chief Jurisdiction) or to the Royal City of Constantinople, and let him be judged there. Caran. approved by Bell. in his Annot. will have the Bishop of Rome to be the Exarch; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not a Primate but a Prince, and the Roman Highpriest is that Prince. This shift is refelled in the third Council 
(t) Conc. 26, juxt. Car.  of Carthage, which determined; The Bishop of the first See (which the Bishop of Rome is acknowledged to be) shall not be called Prince of the Bishops. As for the word Exarch in the Ecclesiastical notion, it is sometimes applied to an Archbishop: thus in the Greek Euchologue, Notice being given to the Patriarch, that a Church was building, and near finished, he directed a Letter for its Consecration, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the Metropolitan thereof, or in his absence, to some of the Bishops in that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Province; but ordinarily or more frequently it is attributed to the 
(v) Dr. Ham. Ans. to the Animad. on the dissert. p. 177.  Primate, as here, which is confirmed by Anaclitus, who in a Decretal Epistle received by the Romanists (which therefore is of good Authority against them) thus informs us, viz. In the head of the Province Primates are placed by Divine Ecclesiastical Laws, that to them the Bishops when it is needful may resort, and make their appeals: this also is entered into, and recited in the Body of the Canon-Law, approved and published by Gregory the thirteenth. All which is perfectly consonant to the directions for Appeals given in the Council of Chalcedon, Let Appeal be made from the Bishop to the Metropolitan, from him to the Primate or Exarch; and that Law of the Emperor Justinian, Let Patriarches according to the Laws and Canons hear and make an end: But the Bishop of Rome cannot be this Exarch, for here are two Plenipotentiaries appointed in the same Commission, strengthened with equal Power, and Authorized to act jointly and severally in taking Cognisance of the Appeal, and to give Sentence upon it, and the Pope was neither of these Plenipotentiaries or Commissioners, but only in a reserved case, when the Bishop complainant should appeal to him; which Bishop too must be one of his own Diocese, and so had no Power conferred on him, but that which the rest of the Patriarches enjoyed equally with him: for the respective Bishops of their Dioceses might if they pleased 
(w) Conc. Constan. 1. c. 3.  Appeal to their own Primate, or the Bishop of Constantinople: (it was at their discretion to choose which of these they liked, to hear and determine their cause of Complaint) and were tied to make choice of one of these two, but not at all to Appeal to Rome, and the Bishop aggrieved, (though he were one of the Roman Patriarch's Diocese) might wave him, and seek remedy from the Bishop of Constantinople; and therefore the Bishop of Rome had but the same Power which the other Patriarches enjoyed, and the Patriarch of Constantinople had the like in a more ample manner, than either he or any of the rest; for as all those of Rome might Appeal to their own Patriarch, so they might refuse, and those of other Dioceses were prohibited to go to Rome, and were bound either to their own Diocesan, or else to the Patriarch of Constantinople. But suppose the Bishop of Rome had been one of these two Plenipotentiaries, the other joined in Commission with him, had a Coordinate Power, because they were empowered to act severally; and most certain it is that Coordinacy is inconsistent with Supremacy, and Equality incompatible with Sovereignty.  
But the Sultan Pontificians gave one of N. N's easy Answers to these Premises, which their Wits will make use of, viz. They are but wordish Testimonies which are easily despised, or disguised. Their great Achilles hath told us in plain terms, A ready Invention will quickly find an Interpretation to transform them: but withal he is so civil as to show a ready way how to deceive and baffle the Wits, which is to produce Matter of Fact, and Practice of the Church, which is not so easily evaded, nor so liable to misconstruction. If therefore the Usage concur with the standing Laws, the foregoing Conclusion is rightly deduced, and the Romanists concluded guilty of those Crimes articled against them; and what the Practice hath been will be easily known by the ensuing Instances. Fortunatus, Felicissimus, and others being troubled that St. Cyprian having Intelligence hereof, Writ 
(x) Lib. 1. Ep. 3. Ed. Pam. 55.  to Cornelius, and reproved him for assuming a Power to himself to judge of a Sentence passed in Africa; telling him it was a Law amongst them, (and it is fit and just) the Cause be there heard, where the crime was committed; which in plain English is, The Fact was done in Africa under his Jurisdiction, and what had an European to do to meddle with it? for it follows in that Epistle, A certain portion of the Lords Flock is assigned to each Pastor, etc. and the Authority of the African Bishops is no whit inferior to that of the Bishops of Rome, Nisi paucis perditis & desperatis, unless some few desperate lewd Companions think so. The same St. Cyprian dealt as sharply with Stephen, Bishop of Rome, another of his contemporaries; whom he charged with Perfidiousness in undertaking 
(y) Cypr. Ep. add Pompeian. Ed. Pam. 74.  the Cause of Heretics, and with Ambition and Tyranny, for that he made himself Bishop of Bishops, fellow-Bishops to a necessity 
(z) Conc. Carthag. inter opera Cypr.  of obedience. Baron. hath confessed, that that Clause in the Council of Carthage beginning at Neque enim, etc. relates 
(a) Bar. An. 588, n. 24.  particularly to Stephen. But Firmilianus and 
(b) Ep. 45. Ed. Pam.  the Eastern Bishops handled Stephen more roughly, calling him a Schismatic, and one that had made himself an Apostate from the Communion of Ecclesiastical Union, and one who thought he might Excommunicate all, thereby indeed Excommunicating himself alone from all. St. Aug. 
(c) Ep. 162. Conc. Milev. c. 22. Codex Afric. c. 23.  in the case of Cecilianus and Donatus a nigris causis, severely rebuked Melchiades, or Meltiades Bishop of Rome, for that he with his Transmarine Colleague took upon them to discuss and reverse that Judgement which had been determined by a Council of Seventy Bishops in Africa. Anastasius with the concurrence of his Bishops of Rome Decreed, that the Donatists who had been preferred to Charges and Dignities, though they should return to the Unity of the Church, should not be continued, but the African Fathers in Council made a Counter-Decree, that the conforming and repenting Donatists should be received, and retain their Places and Dignities with a non obstante, Notwithstanding what had been decreed in the 
(d) About Ann. 401. Justel. in Cod. Conc. Eccl. Afric. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Balls. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. Ep. 50.  Transmarine (Roman) Synod. Julius' Bishop of Rome pressed the restitution of Athanasius, whereupon the Eastern Bishops met in Council, and signified to him, that it was a Pragmatical presumption in him to 
(e) Soz. l. 3. c. 7. to be ordered by him, Socr. l. 2. c. 11.  interpose in their affairs: he ought not to contradict them, neither would they endure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be ordered by him? this was not the resolution only of the Eusebian and Semi-Arrian Bishops (who yet were Conformists to the Orders of the Church) but 
(f) Soz. l. 3. c. 12. Epiph. haer. 68 Athan. or. 1. contr Arr.  of the Catholics also acting in the Council, who though they favoured Athanasius and his Cause, yet thought fit to check the Bishop of Rome's insolency. Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem moved the Council of Chalcedon, that his Bishopric might be promoted into a Patriarchate, which motion the Fathers assembled did entertain, and referred the ordering of the matter to himself, and Maximus the Patriarch of Antioch, who agreed that the Patriarch of Antioch should hold the two Phenicia's and Arabia, and the Bishop of Jerusalem the three Palestines, which Accord they represented to the Council, desiring them to confirm it, which they willingly 
(g) Conc. Chalc. act. 7. p. 105. Evagr. l. 2. c. 18. Niceph. l. 5. c. 30. with the consent of the Pope's Legates.  condescended to; and over and above procured the Judges to add the Royal assent for its full settlement. Baronius relates, the Pope resisted what was done thus in Council, and hindered the Execution thereof for a good while, which was till the fifth Synod assembled, where 
(h) Baron. Ann. 553. n. 245, 246.  the Pope gave his Placet, and then, and not till then was the Accord put in execution; but this is one of the great Annalists mistakes, for fifteen years before that fifth Synod under Mennas assembled, Peter Patriarch of Jerusalem did summon all the Bishops of the three Palestines, two whereof were the Metropolitans of Caesarea and Scythopolis to convene in Council, who accordingly without demur 
(i) Conc. Tom. 2. p. 472.  obeyed his summons. The Church and Bishops of Rome for a long time disallowed and rejected the second General Council, yet the Catholic Church always owned it, and as occasion offered, acted by it. That which moved the then Romanists to this dissatisfaction and averseness, was, that that Council had settled the See of Constantinople into a Patriarchate, (which Honour they repined at) giving to the Bishop thereof precedency to the Patriarches 
(k) Conc. 2.3.  of Alexandria and Antioch, and granting to him Power and Authority over the Churches in Asia minor, 
(l) In all 28 Roman Provinces, Brerewood's Inquiries, p. 125.  Thrace, and Pontus: and therefore soon after this Council determined, the 
(m) Resisted it, Baron. An. 553.  Bishop of Rome endeavoured to invalidate this Settlement, for, Statim post, etc. as soon as it was concluded, Damasus then Bishop of Rome indicted a Roman Synod, in which a Counter-Decree was enacted, which (as 
(n) Alias Turcelline, l. de 6, 7, & 8 Synodis p. 65.  Turrian relates) is extant in the Vatican: and it is very probable, for Pope Leo seventy years after 
(o) Conc. Chalc. Act. 16. p. 136, 137. Leo Ep. 53, 54. Car. p. 201.  by his Legates in the Council of Chalcedon opposed it, though to no purpose; for his resistance was not valued either by the Council or the Judges, who indeed contemned it. These two Popes than did withstand it, but Caran. adds, That the Church of Rome would not by any means receive it, though (welfare a little touch of Ingenuity!) for the peace of the Church (which it seems highly esteemed it), it was not contradicted; which in effect imports thus much, The Popes and Church of Rome were so cunning as to dissemble their spite against this Council, (and that Act especially,) but durst not show their teeth for fear of the Emperor. For the proof of this relation he refers to Innocent the third, and St. Gregory the great, whom he citys truly; for though in one Epistle he professeth to 
(p) Lib. 2. Ep. 24.  embrace that Council as one of the four Evangelists, and testifieth that the Church of 
(q) Ibid. Ep. 10.  Rome then owned it, yet in another Epistle he 
(r) Lib. 6. Ep. 31.  confesseth, that until his time, or age wherein he lived, that Council and the Acts and Canons thereof were not entertained by the Roman Church, so that for the space of two hundred years and upwards, (for that Council convened Ann. 381. and Gregory flourished Ann. 600.) it was opposed and rejected as far as in safe Policy it could be done by the Church of Rome: but notwithstanding this opposition, the Catholic Church still reputed it a lawful General Council, and all the Acts and Canons thereof to be obligatory, and occasionally practised according to them, which is next to be demonstrated. For by warranty of that Canon in this Council, which so perplexed the Roman Church, Anatolius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in the right of his Sec, did take place before, and above the Patriarches of Alexandria 
(s) In the Council of Chalc. Act. 1. Conc. Chalc. p. 8. Synod. Ann. 553. Coll. 1.  and Antioch, and so did Eutychius in the fifth Synod, Ann. 553. And when it was reported to the Fathers of Chalcedon that Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople in the reprobated Council of Ephesus neglected himself, sitting below the Patriarches of Antioch and Jerusalem, they were much offended, saying in great zeal, Why did not Flavianus sit in his proper place? that was next to the Bishop of Rome, or his Legates. By authority of this Canon, which so troubled the Popes. Patience, St. Chrysostom when he was Bishop of Constantinople 
(v) Conc. Chalc. Act. 11. in fine; Soz. l. 8. c. 6. saith 14. in Ann. 400. Pallad. in vit. Chrys.  deposed fifteen Bishops in Asia the lesser, and ordained and settled others in their Sees and Dignities; and in Ann. 400, the same St. Chrysostom celebrated a Council at Ephesus, to which he called all the Asian Bishops, who readily attended him. After this Justinian the Emperor commanded all the Canons of this Council, which the Popes would (if they durst) have publicly rejected, Dipticis inseri & praedicari, to be Recorded in the Eclesiastical Books, Rolls, or Registeries, and publicly to be read in all Churches, in token of their 
(w) Novel. c. 1, 2.  Universal Approbation. But albeit both Law and Usage (the best Interpreter of Law) concur for the proof of this Conclusion, yet the cry still goes, O the Mother, O the Mother Church of Rome, which is hotly pursued by the Bigots set on by the Boutefeu's of the Tribe. This hath made a great clutter and bustle in the world, which yet hath nothing in it but folly, and disingenuity, and impudence; for can any man in his right Wits, who is not tainted either in his Intellectuals or Morals, ever harken to such a Persuasion so contrary to all Records Divine and Human? The Scriptures make Jerusalem the Mother-Church, Gal. 4.16. But Jerusalem which is above (or the New Jerusalem as it is styled, Revel. 21.2. and the Holy Jerusalem, ver. 10, whose wall had twelve Foundations, and in them the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb) which is Mother of us all, Christians, Believers of the Gospel; where the Church of Christ was first planted by the Apostles, and St. Peter Preached his first Sermon, and begot many to the Faith, and from whence they all departed after to execute their Apostolical Commission. For this Jerusalem is not that which shall be, but that in which the House of God shall be built with a Glorious building, and all Nations shall turn, and fear the Lord God truly, and bury their Idols, so shall all Nations praise the Lord; and as old Tobit instructed his Son, Tobit 14▪ 5, 6, 7, as it is here allegorically expressed, for that City was a Type of the Christian Church, Psal. 48.2. and 122.3. Isa. 31.5. In the Old Testament it was foretold to be the Mother-Church of Christianity; Out of Zion shall go forth the Law, (of Faith, as it is universally Interpreted) and the Word of the Lord (the Gospel) from Jerusalem, Isa. 2.3. Mic. 4.2. And in the New Testament the Prophecy is accomplished and verified, where it is plainly declared, that Repentance and Remission of Sins should be Preached in Christ's Name among all Nations, beginning at Jerusalem, etc. Luke 24.47, 48, 49. Act. 1.8. and fully completed, Act. 2. per tot. So for Human evidences the first General Council at Constantinople is clear, which expressly owneth Jerusalem for the Mother of all Churches, to which Tert. 
(x) Cap. 20. which Pam. thus Gloseth, this is the first, from which the Church all the World over is disseminated, so Hier. Interprets that of Isa. 2. and this is the Mother Church from whence the Faith came to us, as the same Tert. lib. 4. adver. Marc. Rome is but one of the Sister Churches which yet are Mothers in their Precincts, Id. ib. de praec. c. 36.  may be added in his Book de Prescr. The Church was first founded at Jerusalem, as the Seminary of the Churches all the World over; and ex abundanti, even in St. Bernard's time, when the Church of Rome had exceeded her limits, yet had she not the reputation of Universal Mother, nor the Honour of Lady Mother, at least in his judgement; for thus he writ to 
(y) Lib. 4. de Consid. Tom. 2. p. 141. tit. L. Edit. Venet.  Pope Eugenius, Above all things consider, that the Holy Roman Church over which thou art placed by God is a Mother of Churches; (some, not all, and so every Apostolical Church is as well as Rome) not a Lady or Mistress, (of any) and thou thyself not a Lord of Bishops, but one of them. It is true St. Cyprian saith, Rome is the (or rather a) principal Church, from whence the unity of Priesthood first began; but this signifies nothing, if Polyidore Virgil's Caution (as in reason it ought) be 
(z) Lib. 4. de Invent. rerum.  admitted, Ne quis erret, etc. Lest any man hereby deceive himself, it cannot in any other way- be said that the Order of Priesthood grew first from Rome, unless we understand it within Italy only; for liquido liquet, it is clear, and beyond dispute, that Priesthood was orderly appointed at Jerusalem, long before ever St. Peter came to Rome. Polydore was in the right, for Rome's Principality cannot entitle her to be Universal Mother, because if we read the sentence thus, Rome is a Principal Church, this is as truly predicated of every Apostolical Church; if the Principal Church, neither will that enstate her in the challenged and claimed Motherhood, because it was only accidental. If a younger Sister for her external accomplishment be advanced to be a Lady of Honour, or married to an Earl or Lord, whereas her elder Sisters continue in their first State only, or be married to Gentlemen, or others of meaner condition, She by virtue of her Qualifications may take Place of them, but she cannot exercise the Authority of a Mother over them. If Rome a younger Sister of the Mother Churches upon a foreign and  account (which was merely contingent and arbitrary) became the Principal Church, the Principality might justly give her the precedency of Place, but not precedency of Rule over them; it made her the most Honourable of the Sisters, but could not create her Mother to any, or all of them, because this Honour was Adventitious and Precarious, which accrued not to her till long after her first Foundation, nor was derived to her by any Divine Institution. Neither will that subsequent Clause (from whence Unity of Priesthood first begun) be any relevant to her, if we consider, that this is only spoken in reference to her own Precincts, for then the whole Sentence would be verified of every Apostolical Church: to instance in Corinth; this is a or the principal Church of Achaia, from whence the Unity of Priesthood first began, viz. In the Regions adjacent and belonging thereto, and so of any other, which were founded before her, as many were; for these Churches being completely form, when she was not in being, she could not propagate the Faith to them, nor consequently be a Mother Church to them. The soon that is pretended St. Peter came to Rome was in the second of Claudius, but certain it is St. Mark Preached the Gospel at Alexandria, and over all Egypt, Lybia, Cyrene, Pentapolis, and the whole Region of Barbary, in the Reign of Tiberius. And St. Aug. affirms the Africans (the more Western) received the Faith not from Rome, but the East. The Southern Christians, as the Abyssines and Aethiopians, were Converted when St. Peter was still at Jerusalem; at least eight years before he came to Rome by the Romanists account. The Eastern Bishops told Julius (as was before related) Rome received the Faith from them; and in Britain the Christian Faith was professed five years at least before ever St. Peter set his Foot in Rome, and therefore Rome could not be Mother to those elder Sisters of Asia, Africa, Aethiopia, and Britain, unless an uncouth Hyster●sis be allowed, or some Noble Roman would undertake to prove that Claudius reigned before Tiberius, as a grave Burgess once did to prove that Henry the seventh was before Henry the sixth; and therefore these Churches could not from the beginning be under her Jurisdiction, and therefore also can justly claim the Cyprian Privilege, and plead it in the abatement of any Papal possession, or prescription. But to confirm this Title they make their Plea from Eusebius in his Chronicle (or else it is insisted upon very impertinently) who relates, That St. Peter sat at Antioch seven years, after which (therefore Antioch is her elder Sister, and Evodius' Bishop there before. St. Peter ordained any Bishop or Priest at Rome) he traveled to Rome, where he resided five and twenty years. It is very probable this Book of Eusebius hath fallen into the hands of Interpolators. Canus 
(a) Refert Rivet. l. 3.  their learned Bishop with much regret complains, It hath been corrupted in many places through the negligence, ignorance, or haste of the Transcribers or Translators: this place is probably one of them, for in the Greek Edition published by Jos. Scaliger, Printed Lugd. Bat. An. 1606. there is no mention of any determinate time of St. Peter's coming, or his abode and residence at Rome; all that is said there, is this, Peter the chief (as Aristotle is▪ Princeps Philosophorum) having first founded a Church at Antioch, went to Rome to Preach the Gospel there: and it is the more probable in that this Relation in the corrupted Chronicle is contradicted by Eusebius himself, Lib. 3. Eccl. hist. c. 1. Peter (saith he) having Preached the Gospel in Pontus, Galatia, Bythinia, Cappadocia, and Asia, to the Jews which were of the dispersion (which in all probability was before his residence at Antioch, for we find in Scripture he was at Jerusalem, Ann. 19 Tiber. and Ann. 2 Claudii, Act. 8. and 12.) at the last, or at the end, (near the approach of his death) being at Rome was put do death; which makes some conceive that St. Paul, whose first coming to Rome was in Ann. Dom. 58. Neron. secundo, had planted a Church at Rome ten years almost before St. Peter came there; and others think, that St. Peter continued in Judaea and in the adjacent Regions till Ann. 7 Claud. Ann. Dom. 49. and therefore this Story that he presided and resided at Rome for five and twenty years is hardly reconcileable with evidence of History in many particulars: to which may be added what Onuphrius notes in Plat. de vit. Pont. in Pet. Apost. placing his third and last return to Rome in the last year of Nero; and what Epiphanius 
(b) Haer. 3.  testifies, that St. Peter and St. Paul where they planted Churches ordained Bishops to preside over them, (as St. Paul did Titus in Crect, and St. Peter Evodius at Antioch) and after went to other Countries to Preach the Faith. All these Reasons and Authorities being premised, the Conclusions are irrefragable, and the Church of Rome as it is now managed, is found guilty of the Crimes articled against her, and stands condemned of them by the four first General Councils, which undoubtedly have so far convinced several ingenuous and judicious Romanists, that they have not sticked to declare with Protestants, that the present Church of Rome hath swerved in sincerity of Doctrine from the ancient Church whence it is derived; that the Pope hath advanced his Authority beyond the bounds 
(c) Cusan. Consult. Art. 7.  set by Christ and his Church, yea far beyond the bounds 
(d) Cusan. concor. l. 2. c. 12. & l. 3. c. 13.  of Ancient observation, and that he hath no Power over other Bishops either by God's Law or Man's, but such as was given him either absolutely or conditionally for a time by 
(e) Marsil. Petau. def. part. 2. c. 18.  the Nicene Council.  
But because N. N. stands so much upon his points of Prudence, it may be neither an imprudent, nor impertient digression to compare the Romish Principles and Practices with the Protestant, and by discussing one of them more largely to judge of the rest more clearly.  
It is universally acknowledged, that the Doctrine of all Apostolical Church's disseminated over the whole Christian World is Infallibly certain, because attested by Universal Tradition, which in itself is so; but it is generally confessed, that the Tradition of an Apostolical Church of one denomination, may prudently be traversed, because often found certainly False. Now Protestants rely upon Universal Tradition, truly such for Time, Place, and Persons, and the Authority of all Apostolical Churches. Papists content themselves, and sit down in security with the Tradition and Authority of the Roman Church, and which is worse, of the present Romish Church of this age. Protestants prescribe for Sixteen hundred years, there is no Law nor Custom to destroy or overrule a Prescription of so long standing. Papists plead (as N. N. doth) the acknowledgement of the sixteenth Century, over-leaping all the rest, and that but in our parts of the World. Protestants believe the Scripture to be the adequate Rule of Faith, as to the essentials thereof. Papists hold unwritten Traditions are to be received with the same reverence and respect. Protestants esteem those Books to be Canonical Scripture which the Catholic Church hath so adjudged. Papists singularly superadd others to the Canon. Protestants believe the Truths they profess to be Divine Revelation, because God by his Son Jesus Christ hath delivered and promulgated them to Mankind. Papists believe their supernumerary Articles, which they assume to themselves, because defined by an Infallible Pope with the advice and consent of a presumed General Council. Protestants assert the Pope is not Infallible, for Pope Honorius was a Convicted Heretic, as before hath been proved: The Catholic Church hath always resolved against his Infallibility, and the Doctors of that Church cannot agree about it, and some of them oppose it; neither was that Council General, say the Protestants, because no Southern nor Eastern Bishops was there, nor any Northern but one titular only, Olaus magnus the Goth, who for that time passed as an Archbishop of Sweethland; no English Bishops, nor Irish, save another blind Sir Robert the Scot, who for that time being was reputed the Primate of Ireland; only two French Bishops, six Spanish, the rest were Italians, who when they came to be arrayed were mustered but to Forty three in all. This was a Plot of the Pope to keep what his Predecessor Leo the tenth had got by the Lateran Assemblers, and after him others still maintained; but he was for all this contrivance possessed with fears and jealousies, the Council would be tampering with his Jurisdiction, as other Councils had done, and therefore was very careful to have fresh supplies in readiness for a reserve; and according as the Pope suspected, it happened, for the Council began to form Canons for the redress and reformation of several abuses, and to abridge the Pope's unlimited Power in granting Dispensations, of which design he received early intelligence from his Legates, and thereupon moved the Council to desist from any further progress therein for six weeks, which being accepted and condescended to, he dispatched his new recruits of Auxiliaries (forty Italian and Sicilian Bishops) who within the time limited arriving at Trent over-voted the reformers in the Council, and quite quashed their attempts, which made the Apulean Bishops cry out in open Council, O we are the Pope's Creatures, we are the Pope's 
(f) Carol. Malin. l. de ton. Frid. n. 21.  Slaves! Protestants rely only upon the Mercy of God and Merits of Christ for their Salvation. This Bellarm. saith, is the safest way, and therefore it is the most Prudential; Papists will join in their own Merits of Works done by Grace, which Bellarm. confesseth is a more uncertain way, and therefore less Prudential. Protestants ascribe all Religious Worship to God, and to God only; Papists give it to Images, and the Consecrated Host. Protestants know it is an indispensable duty to Pray to God for all things necessary both for Soul and Body, and direct their Prayers only to God the Father, through, and for the Merits and Mediation of Jesus Christ alone; Papists Pray to God by Jesus Christ, for which Duty Zanchee entertains a charitable opinion of them, but withal they invocate Angels and Saints departed, as Conductors, secondary and subordinate Mediators, for which Practice Protestants aver there is no warranty in Scripture, no Authority from Primitive Antiquity, nor any rule in Reason to approve it either a necessary, lawful, or an expedient Duty. But because some eminent Protestants have declared that Papists have more to say for this particular, than in any of their other eleven additional new forged Articles, if this Principle and Practice of theirs be cogently proved unscriptural, unpractical, and irrational, the same may be concluded of the rest.    

CHAP. VI  

SECT. I.  
IT is unscriptural. The Scripture teacheth us, and commands us to ask the Father in the name of his Son Jesus Christ; it prescribeth no rule to ask in any other name, but declareth against it, For it proposeth Christ to us as our only Mediator, and Intercessor; there is one God to whom we are to make our requests known by Prayer and Supplication, and there is one Mediator between God and Man, 1 Tim. 2.5, the God-man Jesus Christ, by whom we have boldness of access to the Throne of Grace. The Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is emphatical, importing thus much, as there is one God only, and no more, even so there is one Mediator betwixt God and Man in reference to our Prayers, Supplications, Intercessions, and Thanksgivings, ver. 2. one God, and no other besides him, even so one Mediator and none but he, who is our Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, 1 Joh. 2.1. who as he performed all Righteousness for us, so the virtue and value thereof, qualifies and capacitates him for the Office of being Advocate for us, viz. to recommend, open, and plead our Cause for us, and procure our Prayers to be granted; none can effectually Mediate for us, but he who did Redeem us; he only can be our Advocate who is the Propitiation for our Sins, which was Jesus only, who for the more effectual execution of his Office of Advocate after he had offered himself a Propitiatory Sacrifice for our Sins was advanced to sit on the right hand of God the Father, Rom. 8.34. where it may be observed, that it is the same Person that died for us; and therefore as Jesus alone died for our Sins, and rose again for our Justisication, so for the application of these Benefits, and Privileges to us, he only sits at God's Right-hand, and makes Intercession for us; this Office being as proper, and peculiar to him, as to be the firstborn of the Dead. For as the honour of sitting on the Right-hand of God followeth his Resurrection from the dead, so the Office of Intercession followeth the Honour of sitting on the Right-hand of God, and is inseparably united and annexed to it; and therefore none can assume or exercise that Office for us, but he who was honoured which is Jesus only) to sit on God's Right-hand; and none can be entitled or admitted to this Honour, but he who humbled himself to death, even the death of the Cross, and thereby merited this Exaltation, that at his name every knee should bow, and every, etc. Phil. 4.8, etc. for this Office of Intercession is the consequent effect, and ultimate end of his Exaltation, as the Apostle proveth, Heb. 7.25. Wherefore (because he is our eternal Highpriest) he is able to save them to the uttermost [to the full] that come to God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make Intercession for us. When it followeth, we are to come to God by his Son Jesus Christ our Highpriest, and for our encouragement that we may come with Confidence, and a full assurance, we have this strong Consolation, He is able to save us to the uttermost; and this he is able to do, for that He our Highpriest ever liveth to make Intercession for us, which the same Apostle hath repeated, and further expressed, Heb. 24. He hath entered into Heaven itself, now (viz. to this end, and on this errand) to appear in the presence of God for us, viz, as our Intercessor and Advocate, from all which premises we may be bold to argue in the Apostolical Form, used by the same Apostle upon another, but not unlike occasion, Heb. 1.19. To which of the Angels or Saints departed said God at any time, Sat thou on my Right-hand to make Intercession for man? or, Sat thou on my Right-hand to appear in my presence for him? or, be thou Advocate with the Father for him? Or, said God at any time, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in the name of Angels or Saints departed, it shall be given you? certainly God never employed any the most excellent Creature in any Office betwixt himself and man, but he first signed a Commission for it; but neither God nor his Son Jesus Christ did ever make any Grant, Substitution or Deputation of this Honour and Power to any, either Angel or Saint departed. It is true the Blessed Spirits are affirmed to stand about the Throne of God, and the Holy Angels to behold his face, but it is never said, they sit at God's Right-hand, or live for ever to make Intercession for us. The Holy Angels are God's Ministering Spirits, and the Spirits of just men departed are his Glorified Saints, but God hath made Jesus only to be Lord and Christ, to whom all things in heaven and earth must bow; and let all the Angels honour him, and all the Saints fall down before, and all men Honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, Joh. 5.23. because to set up any subservient subordinate Lords in this Office of Intercession, is such a piece of Heathenish Idolatry, that the Apostle St. Paul thought it fit to caution the Corinthians against it, and instruct them in the pure Worship and Service of God as becometh Christians, 1 Cor. 8.5. Though there be many that are called Gods (as there be Gods many and Lords many) but to us there is but one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ; in which words there is a direct opposition betwixt the Heathen Form of Application to their Supreme fictions Gods, and the Christians way of Supplication to the only true God. The Heathens address themselves to their Sovereign Gods by their under Gods or Godlings, which the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Demons, the Scriptures of the Old Testament baalim's, or Lords, who were reputed Agents, and Mediators betwixt their chief Gods and them: Their Sovereign Gods they styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lords in, of, or from Heaven betwixt whom and men they supposed there was no immediate intercourse; their mean Inferior Lords were accounted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Celsus phraseth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lords on, or from the Earth, whom they honoured with a relative subaltern Worship, as their Mediators and Advocates, thinking thereby they more highly honoured their Supreme Gods. But Christians know, and profess there is but one God the Maker of all things in Heaven and Earth, to whom they are to make their Prayers and Supplications, and they have but one Lord, Advocate and Mediator, by whom they present and offer their Petitions to the Almighty Father. For the opposition lies in the Heathenish plurality both of their Supreme Gods, and Subordinate Mediators, viz. Heathens have many Gods, and many Lords Mediators; and in the singularity of the Christians God, and Lord Mediator, viz. they have but one God, and one Lord Mediator, even Jesus whom God hath made both Lord and Christ, Act. 2.36. Thus Origen understood this Text, for to it sure he refers 
* Orig. Ceis. lib. 8.381. , when he tells Celsus, The Scripture indeed doth call God the God of Gods, and Lord of Lords, but withal saith, to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him; which the Apostle speaks of himself, and all other whose minds are raised up to him, do Worship him inseparably and indivisibly in his Son. Therefore there being many Gods and many Lords, we endeavour by all means, not only to carry our minds above those things on Earth, which are Worshipped by the Heathen for Gods, but above those whom the Scriptures call Gods, viz. Angels. For these reasons, and many more, deducible from Holy Writ, Protestants have often urged and pressed the Papists to produce one positive Precept, clear Example, or plain Promise from the Scripture for their Saint or Angel Mediatorship, but hitherto they have not been very forward to accept the challenge, only some of them who were resolved to say something for themselves, have pitched upon some places of Scripture for proof of their Principle and Practice, which yet others of them being more judicious and ingenious, have not conceived Argumentative and satisfactory; nor indeed that any thing can be evinced or deduced thence that is cogent and convincing, which will appear by these particulars.  
1. From the Testimony of their Grave and Learned Polemic Divines, who have acknowledged, they have no express Scripture for this Doctrine and usage, and if so, it was too much confidence to form the Doctrine into an Article of Faith, and to impose and exact the Practice as a profitable duty, yea so profitable, that the omission was Sin. Implications and remote deductions were never before thought sufficient Mediums for the superstructing of an Article of Faith, and an Essential to Salvation. Eckius 
(a) Enchir. de ven. Sanct. c. 15. sub. finem.  hath freely confessed, Explicite non est, etc. Invocation of Saints departed is not expressly delivered in Scripture, for which he assigns his Reasons, such as they are. Not in the Old Testament; because the Jews were inclined to Idolotry (therefore there is danger of Idolatry in the Practice) and the Fathers were in Limbo, not then in Heaven; Bellarm. 
(b) De Sanct. beatit. c. 19 Sect. Item, etc. 20. Sect. atque ex his.  herein is of his mind. Not in the New Testament, for two reasons; First, Lest the Gentiles should upon their Conversion think themselves (therefore the Practice may be justly suspected, and is scandalous, which the prudent and charitable Romanists should avoid) obliged to Worship the Inferior Godlings or Demons, as formerly they have done, or which is all out as bad, a new set of petty Vnder-Gods in exchange of the old ones: The second is, Because if the Apostles had delivered this Doctrine (or which is all one, had ordained and observed the Practice) they might be concluded ambitious, and vainglorious self-seekers, who designed, and after death expected the honour of Religious Invocation; This reason beside other inconveniences it is liable to, thwarts the Trent determination, that the Practice was Apostolical; for if in their time it was currant, than they did institute an observation and usage for their own Honour and Worship. Cope 
(c) Dial. 3. in Script. Nou. Test.  alias Harpsfield is of the same Opinion. But Bannes 
(d) Bannes' 22. qu. 1. ant. 10.  speaks the whole truth without mincing the matter, Invocation of Saints is neque express, nec involute, Neither clearly nor covertly declared in Scripture; which is also 
(e) Which is also affirmed to be unknown in the Old Testament. Pigh. contr. Ratisb. l. 13. Suar. m. 3. Th. q. 52. disp. 41, 42. Sect. 1. p. 514. Not in the New, Salmer. m. 1. Tim. 2. disp. 8. Sect. postremo. Not in the Gospel, Horantius loc. Cath. l. 3. c 1.31. Not used in the Apostles days, Peres. de Trad. p. & de cult. Sanctor S. Clara, expos. Paraphr. Divines of Collen, Censur. p. 250. & antid. p. 34.  affirmed by Pighius, Suarez. Peres. de Aiala, Sanct. Clara, and the Divines of Colen.  
2. From the Judgement of their Learned Interpreters who expound those Texts of Scripture (which the bolder sort presume not without the guilt of Perjury to wrest and corrupt to their own sense) as the ancient Doctors of the Church have done, and as Protestants do now; which will appear by viewing the most considerable produced by them. The first is fetched from Gen. 32.24, etc. but Bonfrer. confesseth many of the ancient Fathers understood this Text of Jacob's wrestling with God, and so did the ancient Rabbins, which is confirmed by the following words, and by Hosea 12.3, 4, 5, in the opinion of Vatab. and Ar. Mout. to this they add Gen. 48.16, insisting first on that clause, The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the Lads. But 
(f) Com. in Gen. 23. Piega, Com. in Apoc. 8. Sect. 2. p. 343.  Pererius acknowledgeth that many of the ancient Fathers interpreted this of Christ, though he thinks otherwise, and is resolved (without any respect to his Oath binding him to follow their Interpretations) to understand it of an Angel properly so called, because (saith he) Christ is never precisely styled an Angel, but always with an additament, as the Angel of the Covenant. But other Romish Interpreters conceive this to be a groundless conjecture; Viegathus censures it, Some (saith he) of our Writers affirm that Christ is never called an an Angel Absolutely and simply in the Scripture; but this is a mistake in them; it is sufficient, that it be collected and inferred from the consequents; and therefore he is confident the Angel mentioned Rev. 8.4, was Christ, and Pintus 
(g) Pintus Conc. in loc. Riber. come. in Hebr. 7. n. 81.  that the Angel spoken of Dan. 3.28, was Christ, and Ribera that the Angel spoken of Zech. 1.12, was Christ; hereby than it is manifest the Protestants follow the ancient Catholic Doctors in their Interpretation of this clause, and Perer. with the other R●manists who urge these words in defence of their practice of Angel Invocation desert and reject them, and most certainly side with the Arrian Heretics. But they go on to the next Period of the Verse, Let my name be named on them, and the name of my Fathers Abraham and Isaac. But Protestants expound these words by Vers. 5, 6, and so do Learned Romanists, Ar. 
(h) Aria's Mont. in loc. Riber. come. in Amos 9 n. 42. Cajet. etc. in loc.  Mont. Riber. Fonsec. Cajet. Lyra. Hucard. Pintus, Esthius. Then Luk. 15.7, and 10, is alleged in the Roman Catechism, Par. 3. Cap. 2. Sect. 5. p. 297. Ann. 1606. to prove the Practice, for thus it is argued, They [the Angels] rejoice at the conversion of a Sinner, therefore (Rogati) being supplicated, they can obtain pardon for our Sins, and procure God's grace for us; this is a strange inconsequence, for from hence it would follow, because Protestants rejoice at the Conversion of a Papist, therefore the Papists should Religiously Invocate them as coadjutors; and being thus Invocated can purchase those Benefits for them; but our late Apostates urge them to another purpose, viz. to prove thereby that Angels know the Secrets of men's Heart; this not way follows, because they know the Repentance of a Sinner by its Signs and Fruits, and so rejoice at his Conversion, therefore they have the intuitive knowledge of the Heart: But in the judgement of many ancient Fathers, this Rejoicing of theirs is not for the Conversion of a Particular Sinner, but for the Redemption of all mankind, which is the lost Sheep, for all that sinned in Adam, and so lost both their Innocency and Felicity; and they rejoiced, that God had discovered a means equivalent to Innocency, viz. Repentance in order to their recovery and future happiness, and with them concurs 
(i) Titus' Sostr. & Cajet. in loc.  Tit. Bostr. and Cajet. And lastly supposing it were to be understood of individual Sinners, yet is this Rejoicing not to be ascribed to Angels, but to God, who confessedly is the Shepherd looking for the stray Sheep, and the Woman seeking the lost Groat. Next they produce Matth. 22.30. Luk. 20.36. but first it was incumbent on them to prove the Angels are to be Invocated before they can conclude from hence, (viz. from the Saints departed equality with Angels) they are to be Invocated, and so the whole may be granted. and yet it appears not from the Text that they receive this equality with the Angels at their first admission to the Beatifical Vision, but only that they shall receive this similitude▪ of condition at the Resurrection of the just; and so their now Reigning in Heaven doth not qualify them for this Duty, nor will do till the day of Judgement: and even then they shall be equal to Angels not in every respect; for as they differ in nature and kind, so they shall have distinct natural qualities and operations; for then the Angels shall remain as they are, more Spiritual substances, the Saints departed shall have Bodies, though these also in some respect Spiritualised and incorruptible; but some only, and these specified and intimated in the Context, in that Spiritualised state they shall not need Matrimony for the propagation of their kind, nor Food for the preservation of their numerical persons, as Alphonsus 
(k) Alphonsus à Castro, l. 3. c. haer. Jansen. Harm. Evaug. c. 117.  a Castro and Jansen. understand the words, and so they shall be as the Angels, or equal to them in being the Children of God, for that they are Children of the Resurrection; which in effect amounts to this, they as the Angels shall be free from all the necessities of a temporal human life, and from all material and corporeal affections, and (which is more) shall be equal to the Angels in the participation of eternal bliss, and the immovable possession of that Inheritance which is incorruptible, undefiled, and fadeth not away, and reserved for them. Again they produce Rev. 5.8. four and twenty Elders fell, etc. but Viega, Lyra and Haimo will tell them, these four and twenty Elders are not the members of the Church Triumphant, Saints reigning in Heaven; but of the Church Militant, and principally the Pastors 
(l) Viega in Apoc. c. 4. Lyr. in 8. pl 1.  and Bishops thereof: And lastly they cite Rev. 8.4. but several of their learned Expositors will satisfy them that that Angel is Christ, Albert. Viega. Hug. Card. 
(m) Haimo. in loc. Aug. Hom. 4. in Apocal. Neither were these Supplications for Pardon and Grace, but for Thanksgivings for the redemption of the World, as appears by for 9, and 13. August. Hom. 6. in Apocal.  Haimo, the Glosses, and Diovys. Carthus. saith the Catholic Doctors understand it so.   

SECT. II.  
IT is unpractical. Indeed the Tridentine Assemblers affirm it is a good and profitable Practice to▪ Invocate Angels and Saints departed, and their great reason of this their affirmation is, that it is a Custom received from the Apostles, and perpetually hath been retained in the Church of God; and agreeable hereunto, it is so resolved in the Roman Catechism, Par. 2. c. 2. Sect. 5. p. 297. and yet it is most evident that St. Paul when he instructed the Christians of his time in the Duty of Prayer, not only for the Substance thereof, but descending to a consideration of its convenient circumstances, never hinted the expediency of this so supposed profitable Practice, which certainly he would not have omitted if he had entertained such a conceit of the profitableness of this Duty as the Romanists do. For he professeth that he kept nothing back that was profitable to the Asians during the time of his residence with them, but that publicly and privately (which is all one with in season and out of season) he taught them Repentance towards God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; now because it is impossible to make it appear by any one instance, that either he taught this Doctrine of Invocating the Blessed Spirits, or prescribed the Practice, or ever exemplified it to them by his own usage, it necessarily follows, he never deemed either the Doctrine or Practice to be any profitable Duty, or any part of Repentance towards God, or of Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. But as it was no Apostolical practice, so neither could it be the constant Custom of the Church in the Primitive succeeding Centuries. For the Doctrine and the present. Practise of the Church of Rome being grounded on this supposition, that the Saints departed do now Reign in Heaven, and enjoy the Beatifical Vision, whereby they are capacitated to have cognizance of the Devotions of their humble Petitioners, those Primitive Doctors who did peremptorily deny the supposition cannot be supposed to assert the Doctrine and Practice founded thereupon, because he that denies the supposition must consequently deny the Doctrine and Practice established upon it, unless he be presumed to be so inconsiderate and interested as to believe and act contrary to his received Principles; and it is hardly to be believed that those ingenious Romanists who profess great reverence to antiquity, will think so hardly of the ancient Fathers. Now Learned Romanists do confess that Eighteen Catholic Doctors and Fathers of the best note both of the Western and Eastern Church have constantly affirmed the Saints departed do not enjoy the Beatifical Vision, but after death are kept in certain hidden receptacles in Rest and Peace till the General Resurrection; and they were great names who are confessed to be of this opinion, viz. Clem. Rom. Just. Mart. Orig. Tert. Ambr. Lact. Hil. Chrysost. Prud. Theod. Theod. Theoph. Euih. Oecum. Ar. Caesar. and Bernard. Neither could those eminent Fathers who from the Catholic Practice of Invocating God by his Son Jesus Christ, and praying in the Holy Ghost be supposed to Invocate the Blessed Saints because they concluded from this Practice the Divinity of the Son, and the Holy Ghost, disputing against the Arrians and Macedonians, viz. Catholics did Pray unto them; the force of which argument depended upon a received rule among them, that God alone was to be Invocated; neither could those Ancients have justly condemned the Arrians of Idolatry for Invocating Christ, whom they conceived to be a Creature, but that they had resolved that no Creature was capable of the Divine honour of Invocation. But both Bellarm. and 
(n) Vide Infra.  Petavius confesseth, we must not say their Argument was weak and inconclusive (and it was so, if a distinction would have invalidated it) for then the Arrians would by such evasion have worsted the Catholics because they could have retorted upon them with great advantage. For if the Catholics had practised this invocation of the Blessed Spirits, the Arrians would have galled them with this return; You Catholics, or who would be reputed so, charge us with the guilt of Idolatry in that we Pray to Christ whom we judge a Creature, whereas you give the same honour to Blessed Spirits, the Angels and Saints departed; and therefore take the guilt home to yourselves, and object not that to us, wherein you yourselves are more criminal; if the Catholics had replied in excuse of this their Fact (as the Romanists now do) We indeed Invocate those Creatures with indirect, subaltern and relative Prayer, but direct, sovereign and final, we render to God only, and when we Pray to him, we have more high and hohourable Conceptions of his Divine Majesty, than we have to those Creatures when we Pray to them; The Arrians would have smartly rejoined, even so do we Invocate Christ, and in our inward thoughts we honour him above all other Creatures, and we have better reason to Invocate Christ than you have to Invocate Angels or Saints departed, because confessedly Christ is superior to them, and deserveth greater Honour than they can expect, or is due to them; if Doulia or Hyperdoulia belong to them, or any of them, much more is due to Christ, who if he be not God equal with the Father, yet is far above all Angels, Principalities and Powers, and every name which is named in Heaven and Earth; besides we have clear Text that we should Honour the Son even as we do Honour the Father, and not the least intimation in Scripture we should so Honour the Angels, but on the contrary that all Angels should Worship him, in that he by Inheritance hath obtained a more excellent name than they. It is altogether unnecessary to multiply Quotations from the Ancients, or to cite those numerous places which are to be found in the Writings of the Fathers of the Catholic Church, to prove what the Doctrine and Practice of the Catholic Primitive Church hath been in this instance; it is sufficient for the satisfaction of any considerate disinterested person to let him know that the Testimonies which the Protestants have produced from them are so forcible, that the great Cardinal 
(o) Never any Author before him had invenred those Authors. Ep. ad Bell. See Bellarmin's life l. 2. c. 7. R. 3.  Perron hath confessed, he was forced to strain his Invention and great Parts to frame Answers to them, and when he had racked them to the height, all that he could Apologetically feign in excuse of the present Practice of the Romish Church, was, to accuse and impeach the Fathers of deep dissimulation and Imposture; For first 
(p) Upon the Head of Invocation of Saints, p. 1044, 1045.  he saith, The Fathers in their Writings against the Gentiles said those things, not which they did believe, but dissembling and disguising their Practice▪ said those things which served their cause to refute the Gentiles Objections. This Scandalous Imputation is enough to crack their Credits for ever in the judgement of honest minds; for who will ever believe them who for a colour to their cause are so wicked as to speak Lies in hypocrisy? or ever esteem them as the chiefest Apologists and choicest Advocates of Christianity, who were egregious Prevaricators, and mean contemprible Proctors in their own and the Churches concern? Or, who will ever rely upon their Testimony who were so weak and sottish, as to attempt the dissembling of that which could not be concealed, and the disguising of that which could not be denied or evaded; For the Gentiles as they were Artists enough to find out any Sophistical shufflings in their discourses and disputes against them, so they were malicious and active Adversaries, having their Spies and Trapanners abroad to give them intelligence of the Christians Practise both in their Civil and Religious Conversation; and if these failed, there were too many lapsed Christians who would inform them to the full, and too many false Brethren who industriously pretended to Christianity, that thereby when occasion served they might accuse them to the Higher Powers; such as those of the Circumcision were in the Apostles time, who were unawares brought in, and came in privily as Spies, Gal. 2. and after Ages have been all out as bad, if not worse, after Nero's Reign. In the second place the Cardinal tells us, The Fathers in their Writings against the Heathens declined to speak of the Church's Prayers, lest the Gentiles might think there were some appearance of conformity, (though but false and fallacious,) betwixt the Churches Practise herein, and that of the Heathen, and thereby take an occasion (though upon no just ground) to retort upon their Practice. This insimulation is somewhat more modest or less irreverent than the former, but as false and fallacious. For,   

SECT. III.  
[1] THE Fathers in their Writings to the Heathens did not decline, but declare what the Church's Prayers were both for matter and form: witness Just. 
(q) Apol. 2. Clem. Alex. l. 7. Strom. p. 717. Tert. Apol. c. 30. p. 27. & de O●at. Domini, c. 1, & 12.  Mart. Clem. Alex. and Tert. and it appears from Flinies' Epistle to the Emperor Trajane, The Heathens were well acquainted with the Christians Practices in their Assemblies: in this therefore the Cardinal dissembleth, and in the next Period of his Sentence, he disguiseth and glosseth the matter. For,  
[2] The Churches Prayers than were not the same with those now in use in the Romish Church, as he fallaciously suggesteth, but perfectly Protestant, as the Prayers of the Holy Martyr Policarp recited in Eusebius lib. 4. c. 15. to which may be added, that when the People of Smyrna desired to have the Body of their Martyred Bishop for its Burial, the Jews persuaded the Governor not to grant their Request upon this unworthy pretence, the Christians would Worship it; to which false suggestion the Christians replied, We can never be induced 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Worship any other with Religious Adoration but Christ, him we adore, others we worthily love and respect. This Protestation was thus rendered in the 
(r) Ex passionario, M. S. 7 Cal. Febr. in Bibl. Eccl. Sarisb. & Dom. Rober. Cottoni.  Latin Edition, Nunquam Christum, etc. We Christians can never forsake Christ, who did vouchsafe to suffer so great things for our Sins, nor impart precem Orationis, the Devotion, Religion, or Supplication of Prayer to any other; and accordingly as it was thus Translated it was publicly read in all the Churches of the West.  
[3.] If they did forbear to speak of the Church's Prayers, lest the Gentiles should retort it upon them, then because the Gentiles had good intelligence of their Practice, as hath been proved, but never did retort it upon them, it may safely be concluded, their Practice was not the same with that of the present Romish Church; and that Reason assigned by some Pontificians, why in the Apostles time they and their Disciples abstained from this Practice cannot hold, unless we take in the Three hundred years succeeding; for so long time did the Christians and Heathens live promiscuously, as Fellow▪ Subjects to the same Higher Powers, and the Heathens knew what the Christians practised; during which space of time, if that had been the Church's Practice, which is surmised by the Romanists, the Heathen would have looked upon it with jealousy, as a politic trick cunningly contrived by the Christians to set up a new modelled Court of Requests, and take just occasion thereby to retort upon their Practice, which because they did not, therefore so long time there was no such practice in the Church. But if their, and the Cardinal's reason be good, it will render the Romanists very imprudent, or uncharitable, or both, in that when they endeavour the Conversion of the Heathen to their Church, they do not conceal, and forbear this so suspicious and offensive Practice to them.  
[4.] The Cardinal▪ dissembleth, in that he pretends, there is but some appearance of Conformity betwixt the Practice of the Romish Church and their Heathen Ancestors. For if we may believe the reports and complaints of some learned Romanists, the Practice of the common People in that Communion (either approved, or connived at in their Church, and cheated thereto by lying Miracles and Impostures, purposely invented to countenance the Practice) hath been an exact conformity with that of their Heathen Predecessors. Espenceus 
(s) In 1 Tim. 2. digr. 17. p. 118. Cassand. Consul. art. 31. p. 1541.  and Cassander witness for their times, that the vulgar did put more confidence in the Merits and Intercession of St. Patrons, than in the Mercy of God, and Merits of Christ; so far that the only Office of Christ's Intercession was obscured; and Ludovicus 
(t) In Aug. l. 8. de Civ. Dei, c. 17. p. 494.  Vives thought so too, for he avoucheth, Divos Divasque, etc. they Worship Saints both Men and Women in the same manner they worship God, and I cannot see (said he) that there is any difference between the Opinion they have of the Saints, and that which the Gentiles had of their Gods. Here was no dissembling nor disguising, but plain dealing, and therefore the Inquisition must pass on this Sentence, and accordingly by the Order of the Divines of Louvain it was left out, in the Paris Edition of St. August. Ann. 1613. A plain matter of Fact makes this notorious; Thomas Becket was Canonised a Saint by the Pope 
(v) Alexand. III. Baron. Ann. 1073. n. 1. , and albeit the Nobles and Peers 
(w) Gerald. Cambrensis Hibern. expugn. l. 2. c. 33.  of this Realm gave in charge in Henry the second's time, that no man upon pain of Death should be so hardy as to call Becket a Martyr, yet did Popular Fury and Folly so far prevail by the insinuations of Popishly affected Bigots, that a Shrine was erected to him in the Cathedral of Canterbury, whereto oblations of so great value were brought, that Pope 
(x) Radul. de Diceto Ymag. Hist. p. 631.  Vrban ordered a distribution to be made thereof, which he might very well do. For as the account stands upon Record the Oblation at his Altar one Year with another amounted to eight hundred, or a Thousand Pounds per Annum, (which in those days was a vast Sum); but at the Virgin's Altar there, the Oblations came but to Two hundred Pounds, and at Christ's Altar there, some years to Twelve Pounds, others to Five Marks, and one year to just nothing. This was the Devotion of those times, it went less to Christ than to the Virgin, and less to her than to this new dubbed titular Saint. Saunders 
(y) De Schis. Angl. l. 1. p. 167, 168.  relateth, that in Henry the eighth's time Six and twenty great Wain-loads of Gold, Silver, Jewels, Ornaments and Utensils were taken from this Monument and carried away. But this is not only the Practice of the Vulgar, but of all members of the Romish Church, Witness their Missals and Breviaries in common use amongst them, the Lady's Psalter, and in horis Beatae Mariae secundum usum Sarum; This they cannot deny, and therefore to colour the matter, they have devised fine quirks, which are far beyond the vulgar apprehensions, and it may be believed, that as the conceit never entered into their heads; so neither into the heads of their Apologists, but when they are in the jollity of their disputing and demonstrating humour; and this subterfuge is, They have higher conceptions and intentions of honour to God in the exercise of their Offices than to any Angel or Saint departed; and if this relieve them not, the guilt of Idolatry sticks to them; but it mends not the matter, for in effect it is, as if they had said, we give the same Honour to both, only we have not the same apprehensions of both; we think the one more worthy of Honour than the other, and this is all one as if they said, We Honour both St. Martin, and St. Katherine, but we count St. Martin more worthy of Honour; for we have learned in our Accidence that the Masculine is more worthy than the Feminine. This is no fair excuse, but a certain aggravation; for set the mind be what it will, the Prayer itself is Divine Worship, and all Religious Invocation of any Creature, in what opinion or apprehension soever, is Divine Adoration, neither can the meaning and intention of the Supplicant in the limitation of his Words and reservation of his Thoughts, dispense with the Commandment which ties him to God alone, Tert. de Orat. c. 12. If good meaning will serve their turn, the Heathen are excusable, for they did not think their Idols were God, but resemblances of the true God, nor their Daemons to be the Supreme Power, but Advocates and Mediators to God, Act. 17.23. Athenag. Legat. p. 20. Diu. Chys. p. 145. Alcin. de Doctr. Platon. c. 15. p. 79. Apuleius part. 2. p. 209. & inde, Porphyr. de abstin. animal. p. 40. For,  
1. All Mankind of all Nations, Judgements and Persuasions, have still taken outward Services to be the indicatious and declarations of the inward Devotion to that Object to which those Services are directed, so that they concluded the inward apprehensions and intentions always to go along with the outward expressions thereof; for all solemn public Offices, having their use, purport and real effect, either from Institution or Custom, and the Institution or Custom thereof being designed and settled for this end and purpose to express and evidence the inward Veneration and Reverence of the Soul, therefore they who perform those outward acts of Religious Worship to any Object were concluded thereby to exhibit the conceptions of the Mind and intentions of the Heart to it, and acknowledge thereby their subjection and obedience to it; but to acknowledge subjection and obedience to any Creature, and to resign and surrender the Devotions of the Heart and Soul to it, is confessedly Idolatry; for as the outward acts by the tenor of the Institution and reason of the Custom demonstrates the surrender of the Soul, so this surrender of the Soul to any Creature is in itself an act of Idolatry. To clear this by some Instances. Those brutish Israelites who observed the Offices (whatsoever in particular they are conceived to be) used at Sacrifical Idol-Feasts are adjudged by the Apostle Idolaters, 1 Cor. 10.7. though it cannot be conceived that they so far forgot God, that they did not believe him to be the first beginning, last end, and chiefest good; and halting Israelites, who in part followed Baal were taken to be Idolaters for bowing the Knee to Baal and kissing his Mouth, 1 King. 19.18. because thereby they were presumed to expose their inward Reverence, Subjection and Obedience to Baal, though for any thing appears to the contrary, they had higher apprehensions of God than Baal; and the same may be affirmed of those who feared God, and served their Graven Images, 2 King. 17.41. And the Apostle St. Paul declares, those (whether Gentiles or Gnostics) who worshipped the Creator, but besides him the Creature, God but not God only, turned the truth of God (of whom they had true notions) into a lie, viz. into an Idol, Rom. 1.25. and that they who conceived an Idol was nothing, 1 Cor. 8.4, had nothing of Divinity, or Divine Power to relieve its supplicants, yet presumed upon this persuasion to communicate in the Idol-Feasts, did thereby communicate (though with no such intention) in that Idolatry for which those Feasts were instituted, for all they did was in Civility and Compliment, they placed no Religion in the compliance. So those Libellatici, who neither by promises, nor threaten could be moved Religiously to Worship any but Christ; yet because they procured some Heathen Friends or their Servants to offer Sacrifice for them at the Emperor's Command, lest they should suffer Persecution for the Testimony of Jesus, are charged by St. Cyprian as guilty of implicit Idolatry; and those in Sozomen who were trappanned by Julian to offer Sacrifice, as soon as they discovered the cheat, bewailed the Fact as an Idolatrous abrenunciation of Christ. These are sufficient to show that outward acts instituted and customarily observed for Religious Worship, and by the Institution and Custom intended for it, if performed to any besides God, though with a mental reservation to keep the Heart to God, are an Idolatrous Practice; because the intentions of the Heart ought to be notified, and are universally interpreted by the outward offices. Men may be Idolaters who do not conceive they are, nor intent so to be, external acts prove Idolatry as well as overt acts be evidences of Treason; we have heard of some, who did acknowledge the King their Sovereign Liege Lord, declared themselves his Faithful and Loyal Subjects, protested they intended to make him a Glorious King, and Covenanted for the preservation of his Life, Honour and Dignity, yet these Acknowledgements, Declarations, Protestations, and Subscriptions will not clear them from the Sin of Rebellion and Treason. So neither can some men's Acknowledgements that they own God as the Sovereign Supreme-being, free them from the guilt of Idolatry, so long as they do acts contrary to his Sovereignty.  
2. Supposing the inward apprehensions and intentions may excuse or abate the Crime of Idolatry; yet they cannot clear and absolve it from the appearance of evil, which by all Christians is carefully to be avoided; nor from the Sin of Scandal; which the Apostle dehorts from, 1 Cor 10.31. Give none offence neither to Jew, nor Gentile, nor yet to the Church of God; but the Popish Practice is offensive both to the Jews and Gentiles, and to the Church of God. For 1. It is offensive to the Jews, which is granted by Salmeron 
* Vbi prius.  a Jesuit, and one of the Tridentine Assemblers, who assigns this as his first reason why the Practice is not prescribed in the New Testament, because Judaeis durum esset, It had been too rigorous and harsh to impose this yoke upon the Necks of the Jews, which neither they nor their Forefathers would endure. For albeit they were well acquainted with the Ministry and frequent visits of Angels, yet they knew nothing of this Duty of Invocating them; as Origen truly observes, None that observed the Law of Moses did Worship Angels, for so to do is not a Custom of the Jews, but a transgression of their Custom; and although they had great respect to Moses their Prophet, and highly reverenced their Forefathers the Patriarches, yet did they never Pray unto them, to Pray for them. Jacob and David requested deliverance of none but God, saith Ath. and we never find any of them say, Sancte Abraham Ora pro me, saith Bell. Then 2. It would have been offensive to the Gentiles, in the judgement of the same Salmeron, who makes this his second reason, for it is non expressum in the New Testament, because, Gentibus, esset periculosum, which if it signify any thing amounts to this, that the Gentiles would be so scandalised thereby that it would either obstruct their Conversion to the Christian Faith, or being almost most persuaded to be Christians, would induce them to revolt or stand; for if this Practice had been pressed upon them, they would thereby have taken occasion to retort upon the Christians, that Christianity was only a cunning contrivance to pull down their old Officers and Lords Advocates, but to keep up the Office and Duty in the substitution of their new ones, for their own ends and interests. And 3. It is offensive to the Church of God, which as it was always zealous for the Worship of God, so it was still jealous lest it should be impaired by being imparted to any the most excellent Creatures, which the Papists do; for they build Altars to Creatures, Sacrifice to them, Pray to them, and it is notoriously known that the matter, gesture, and devotion of Prayer is all one in their Creature-Invocation, and that to God and Christ Jesus. For they perform this Duty to them in the House of God, in the time of the public Worship of God, with set solemn Services, Offices, and Postures of Adoration; they kneel, uncover their Heads, elevate their Eyes to Heaven, prostrate their Souls and Bodies, and with sighs and tears cry unto them for Pardon, Grace, and Salvation; offering up their Merits to God in the same form of words which they present the Merits of Christ, yea and sometimes they offer Incense to them, frequently make vows to them, which some of them say, may and aught to be 
(a) Bell. de tu Sanct. l. 3. c. 9  terminated in them, and constantly Swear by them, and Confess their sins to them. If notwithstanding all this they do protest, as usually they do, (especially to the Vulgar, and those whom they study to pervert,) they intent nothing derogatory to the Honour of God, and the Office of Christ's Intercession; yet those overt acts make it evident, that this is Protestatio actui contraria, a Protestation contrary to the evidence of plain matter of Fact, which must not be admitted. For,  
3. All Religious Worship, such as confessedly their Creature-Invocation is, doth comprehend in it some Act or Acts, whereby we profess the devout subjection of our Soul, Will, and Affections towards the Object that is thus Worshipped, but to subject our Souls to any Creature is to make it our God; for this kind of subjection is the best and most we can exhibit to God, and this and no other fundamentally we must or can exhibit to God, and therefore to render to any other besides him, is to give it that which is God's due and peculiar.  
4. In the opinion of Schoolmen, the Worship of God is the object of Religion, which is thus defined by them, Religion is a moral virtue which exhibits due Worship to God as the principle of all things; which excludes all Creatures from having any share in Religious Worship; so that Religiously to Worship the Creature with a secondary respect (which is all the Romanists can pretend to in this case) is secondarily to ascribe to the Creature that Worship which is due to God, which at the least is secondary Idolatry. For Idolatry consists in giving Religious Worship, due to God, to that which is not God: and a primary and secondary respect cannot relieve them, because these are Duties of the same kind; the higher or lower conceptions of the Object toward which the Religious Office is exercised, cannot alter the kind or species; and it is impossible to assign any real difference betwixt them; Bellar. could find none either in respect of the internal Act of the Will, or the external Offices (excepting that figment of a sensible Sacrifice) but only in operatione intellectus, in the apprehension of the understanding, which renders the difference only rational, nor real.  
5. Press the Papists with that Text with which our Saviour Christ confuted the Devil; Matth. 4.10. Thou shalt Worship the. Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve; they will return, this is meant of Latria, not of Doulia; but if this exclusive Particle [only] bar Latria only, than the Devil could have replied, the Answer is not sufficient; confessedly there is none good but God, and then if he had been as subtle a Sophister as a Jesuit or an Apostate, he would have added, it is not Latria, or Primary, Sovereign, and Terminative Worship that I expect or demand, for I acknowledge the Sovereign Almighty Power of God, vers. 3. and 6. and him to be the Author and donor of this Power which I challenge over the Kingdoms of the earth to give them; all I have, or can dispose of, were first given me, for they are delivered to me, v. 4.6. and this therefore thou answerest is a mistake, keep thine heart, thine elevated conceptions to God, Doulia and the outward acts are sufficient for me, if thou wilt fall down and Worship me, that is, by falling down Worship me, for the Text reacheth not that, and indeed that is all I desire; but surely this were to corrupt the Text, which must be understood of the exhibition of the outward acts agreably to other places of Scripture, in which the Worship and outward acts are used as Synonyma's; for the Leper, who came to Christ and Worshipped him, Matth. 8.2. is said to beseech him, and kneeling down to him, Mar. 1.40. and to fall on his face, Luk. 5.12. and so the plain meaning of the sentence is, Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve, not only with Latria, but with Doulia, be it by Incurvation, Genuflexion, Prostration, or any other external act expressive of inward Devotion or Subjection.  
Part 3. 3. It is Irrational. For,  
1. To determine that a necessary or profitable Office of Religion, and Practise it as such, which is neither founded on the Law of Nature, nor prescribed by any positive constitution, is Irrational, because all perpetually and universally obliging Duties of Religion, are either Natural, which by the tenure of our Creation we are to perform in gratitude to, and for the Honour of our Creator; or instituted, such as we are bound to observe, because commanded so to do by our Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath Power to order perpetually and universally obliging observations to all Christians; Now forasmuch as there is nothing in the Law of Nature to enforce this supposed profitable Duty (for then both Jews, Gentiles, and Christians did sin in the omission of it, if it were by the the Law required) nor is there in the Discipline of Christ, either any Precept or Promise to authorise and legitimate, either as a necessary or profitable Duty, therefore both the imposition of the Duty, and the practice must be Irrational.  
2. Invocation of the Supreme God, the Almighty Maker of Heaven and Earth, is an act of Justice as well as Religion, we wrong God if we pay not this tribute and Homage to him; and we wrong him too, if we offer or determine it to any other besides him: For Invocation is of common right antecedently to any positive order due from man to God, and therefore no man, nor Society of man can on their own heads without his allowance or consent dispose thereof without Sacrilege. Indeed if God had permitted this Honour to be given to any besides himself, it would not be an injury to him to pass it to them he should grant it to. But in that there is no such assignment extant or producible by any Letters Parents or Settlment from Heaven, it is an high Injustice to determine, or invade his Original right by an arbitary presumption: But admitting (which is the most that is by some, or can by any be pretended) that God had granted to Angels or Saints departed, Reigning in Heaven, a privilege to solicit for us at the Throne of Grace, and make motions for us in his Court of Requests, yet did he never give them leave to pass an Act of Indemnity and Grace for our security and preferment; This is a Prerogative which he hath reserved to himself, and therefore it is repugnant to right reason to sue for Pardon and Grace from them who have no Power to grant the one or give the other, or make good either of them. It often proves a profitable good policy for one who seeks a Pardon for a capital offence, or affects places of trust and honour in the State, to oblige and employ some Favourite Courtier to mediate in his behalf to the King; but it would be extremely ridiculous and absurd in the Petitioner to fall down on his knees to that Courtier, and beseech him to command a Pardon under the Broad Seal to be assigned for him, or to beg an Act of Grace, as to make him an Earl or a Baron of the Realm, because these Powers, and Preeminencies in right belonging to the King's Prerogative, are inherent to the Crown, and inseparably annexed to it.  
3. The ascribing this Duty to any the most excellent Creatures, cannot be profitable to living men, because upon several other accounts it is injurious to God; for it entitles Creatures in those incommunicable attributes of his, upon which also the Duty is founded, his Omniscience, in fixing a Power in them to hear the mental 
(b) As it is approved by the Council of Trent, Sess. c. 1. and exemplified in rheir L●turgy in this form, with the desires of our heart we pray unto you, receive the ready service of our minds.  Prayers of living men, and his Omnipresence in supposing and asserting they understand the vocal Prayers of Petitioners at the greatest distance removed one from another, though it be most certain, that the life and virtue of these Prayers lieth not in the outward expressions and postures of Devotion, but the inward Veneration and affection of the heart, which by the way obviates that vain pretention, that by Praying to those Creatures in Heaven, they do no more nor otherwise, than in begging the assistance of the Prayers of Holy men upon Earth; for it was never heard, nor can it be conceived that any living man in his right Wits would vocally beg of another at a Thousand mile's distance, that he would pray for him, because he knows it is impossible he should hear him; nor can it be supposed, that any man though standing by, can know the Heart of men when they utter nothing with their Tongue to interpret it. In sum, no man ever directed his mental Prayers to another, nor his vocal to another as far distant from him as London is from Rome. But to return then, to acknowledge such an excellency in the Celestial Creatures as to apprehend the mental Prayers of mortal men, or the sincerity of their vocal, either by their original Power, or by any derivative, as it is an Irrational conceit in itself (there being no reason to warrant it, nor ground of reason to countenance it) so it is injurious to God.  
1. It is Injurious to God in respect of his Omniscience; for he even he only knoweth all the hearts of the Children of men, 1 Reg. 3.39. and this both collectively, and distributively, and this also with reference to their Prayers and Supplications, v. 38. both their public and private Prayers, both mental, the cries of the Heart, and vocal, expressed in Words, to which the truth of the Heart (for God requireth truth in the inward Parts, and will be Worshipped in Spirit and truth, with activity and sincerity) must be adjoined, to make it an holy acceptable, reasonable service of God; and then both kinds are only to be presented to him, because he only knoweth the Heart when the mind is secretly elevated to God, and the truth of the Heart when it is notified by Words; because he only knoweth whether there be an Act of Conformity betwixt the Words and the Heart; I the Lord search the Heart, I try the Reins, Jer. 17.10. challenging thereby this privilege as a peculiar to himself: neither will their futerfuge any way clear them, viz. that God only naturally knoweth the Heart of the Petitioner, but Angels and Saints departed by a derivative Power, having it communicated to them, either by way of Revelation from God, looking upon him as a voluntary Glass, who makes the Prayers of Supplicants known to them when he pleaseth; or by the Vision of God, looking upon him as a Natural Glass, that reveals all that God knows without any choice or act of his Will: for these are frivolous suggestions, having neither Reason, nor Revelation to support them; for it without all ground limits a proposition which in the Scripture is delivered in universal terms, and to admit such limitations of universal propositions, without great evidence that the nature of the subject requires them, or that such from other places of the Scripture may be deduced and inferred, is Irrational, because the proposition would not be absolutely true, but true only with a restriction; but the vanity of these speculations will further appear by these Considerations.  
1. The Romanists themselves cannot agree which of these ways they propose are to be taken, and dispute them by multiplicity of Questions, as whether God immediately by himself give the Blessed Spirits the knowledge of our Prayers, or by the Ministry of others? if by others, then whether by the Angels that attend us, or the Spirits of just men, that go from hence, and inform the Saints in Heaven, what our Prayers are? if immediately by himself, then whether directly and formally, seeing in him what is in the Creature? and if so, then whether instantly upon their Glorification and admission into Heaven, or successively, seeing by virtue of his Vision one thing after another in the Creature? or only accidentally, that is, God lets them know our Prayers, so far forth as it pleaseth him by his peculiar will to notify unto them? because God is a free Agent, respectu omnis actionis ad extra, In respect of every external action. And further, they which pitch upon any of these ways, take them only for the more probable, and it is somewhat odd, to found an Article of Faith, and a Catholic profitable Duty, upon such unprovable speculations; and it is very hard to believe, that the seeming Opinions of men brought in with Ifs and Ands, and Metaphysical niceties, can be of sufficient strength to support an Article of Faith, or commend a Catholic profitable Practice.  
2. This is certain, the one way destroys the other; If by Vision, than not by Revelation; if By Revelation, than not by Vision; if the Natural Glass will serve, the Voluntary is needless; if the Voluntary be required, than the Natural doth not do the work; for God in their opinion doth not multiply forms without necessity, nor doth any thing frustraneously; but God doth not impart the knowledge of our Prayers either the one great way, or the other.  
1. Not by Revelation, for confessedly there is no Revelation (unless a Legendary will pass currant, or some ostensions, as they call them, may be allowed) for this conceit, that the Blessed Spirits know our Prayers and Hearts by Revelation.  
2. The poor Petitioner must be at a loss and stand if this way be supposed, because he cannot be assured, that God is pleased to reveal his Prayers to them, and he is sure if God do not, they can take no notice or cognisance of them, and so their Prayers become fruitless and unprofitable, because he knoweth not whether God will reveal his Prayers, and if he do, how far.  
3. How can they be proper Mediators for men, who cannot know what men desire of them, without the Mediation and interposition of another, viz. God? and why should we be persuaded to go thus about, when we may go straight forward to God and his Son Jesus, who needs no Mediator to inform him?  
4. What a strange circular motion must be observed in following this way; first the Petitioner must make his suit to Angels and Saints, than God must reveal them and their contents to the Angels or Saints, if he please, or else they are for ever ignorant of them; then the Angels and Saints must back again and present them to God, but if the Petitioner mistake his Angel Guardian or Tutelar Saint, as very likely he may, than it is to be doubted whether the Angel or Saint will own the Client, though God should reveal his Prayer.  
2. Not by virtue of the Beatifical-Vision, the other supposed way. For,  
1. The Scripture saith No man knoweth the things of God, [the purposes and thoughts] but the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2.11. which the Apostle inferreth from this reason and ground, the secrets of the Heart of man no man knows, but the Spirit of of man which is in him; upon which he concludes, therefore none knows the things of God, but the Spirit of God, and therefore neither Angels nor Saints, though they enjoy the Beatifical Vision, which doth not confer on them the knowledge of the things of God, for this we know, that the Angels did not know the Mysteries of the Gospel, those great things of God, till made known to them by the Church, Eph. 2.10. 1 Pet. 1.12.  
2. The Angels and Saints departed, by enjoyment of the Beatifical Vision, look not upon God as Omniscient or Omnipresent, but as the chiefest good; their happiness is from his infinite Goodness, not from his infinite Wisdom or Immensity.  
3. If upon their admission to their state of Glory, they by virtue of the Beatifical Vision know all things which God knoweth, than they should know future Contingents (which the Romanists will not grant) for the Beatifical Vision can capacitate them for this knowledge, as well as the knowledge of the Heart, and no reason can be assigned to the contrary, but that it is the Will of God, for which there is no attempt of Proof.  
4. It is not necessary, nor essential to the Beatifical Vision, that the participants should know our Prayers, for without knowing them they have all the privileges of the Sons of God, and Children of the Resurrection, agreeable to their state, the Vision makes them eternally happy, not Omniscient.  
5. Those Ancients who denied this supposition, knew nothing of this speculation, and those of them who proved the Divinity of the Son and the Holy Ghost from their Omniscience, might easily have been baffled, if this excellency were communicable to any other besides God; for if the knowledge of the Heart were not so proper to God, that it could not be communicated to the most excellent Creature, their argument from thence, even in 
(c) Theol. dogm. Tom. 3. l. 1. c. 7. Sect. 3. p. 39  the judgement of Petavius, Omnino nullum esset, Was none at all.  
2. It is Injurious to God in respect of his Omnipresence. For Bellarm. disputing against those of his own side, who imagined that the Blessed Spirits were Quodammodo, after a certain (unintelligible) way, every where by the wonderful swiftness of their nature, resolveth the contrary, and asserts, that Celerity is not sufficient to capacitate them to hear the Petitions of far reremoved Supplicants, who direct their Prayers to them at one and the same time from several distant places; and that true 
(d) Bell. de Sanct. Beat. lib ... c. 20.  ubiquity is required, which they having not by nature, as is generally concluded by all Pontificians, they must have it by communicated Grace, or be without it; But the same Bellar. will not allow this, for he disputing against the Vbiquitarians assures us, that their Salvo (viz. that Christ in his human nature is every where by accident, viz. by a real communication of that property) is naught, for then (saith he) the argument of the Fathers for the Godhead of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost grounded upon their Ubiquity, plaè concidit, is quite abated, and falls to nothing: from which premises laid to our hands by this great Name, the conclusion is irrefragable, the Blessed Spirits cannot hear our Prayers; and then the Practice is Irrational, because by the concession of the chiefest Advocates and Proctors of the Cause, to Pray to them who cannot hear or understand our Prayers, is an Act Superfluous, if not Superstitious; and so some of them assign as a reason why they do not pray to the Inhabitants of Purgatory, because they cannot hear them; though it be most certain, that God if he pleased, can as easily reveal the Prayers of Mortal men to them, as to the Saints in Heaven; for his assertion affords us this argument, True ubiquity is required to hear the Prayers of numerous distant Orators; but the Blessed Spirits have not true ubiquity, for this is so proper to God, that it cannot be affirmed of, or attributed to the most excellent Creature by communicated Grace, therefore the Blessed Spirits cannot hear the vocal Prayers of their numerous distant Orators.  
4. If the end for which this Practice is pretended behooful and expedient, may be attained by a more clear and undoubted way than that purposed, right Reason will direct us to leave the indirect and crooked way, and follow the direct straight forward road; for every prudent man will take and pursue that course which is most effectual for the accomplishments of his intentions and desires, and for which he hath so great assurance that greater cannot be had for the event and success. Now we have such assurance to come to God by his Son Jesus Christ, that will not fail, nor disappoint us, for we have the sure word of Promise, Joh. 16.23. that whatsoever we ask of the Father in the name of his Son, it shall be given us; and by him we have boldness of access to the Throne of Grace; but we have no word nor warranty for the impetration of our requests by the Mediation of Secondary under-Solicitors for us; and who will seek that at the second hand which he may have upon easier terms at the first? or look for that in Cisterns, and in danger to be broken Cisterns, which is ready and prepared for him in the Fountain which never faileth. None but phantastics and Vainglorious Prodigals will compliment or Fee a Courtier for admittance into the King's presence, when by his Proclamation he is aforehand ascertained, upon his approach he shall have entrance, present. Audience, and his Petition (if drawn according to Law) shall be signed and granted.  
5. But suppose it were both lawful and behoosefull to Invocate undoubted Saints, now reigning in Heaven, as the blessed Virgin, and the holy Apostles; yet a Prudent Man will be shy and unwilling to exhibit that honour to all whom the Pope hath Canonised, or shall Canonize for Saints. For some great Romanists have not sticked to Affirm, that 
(e) These were a Knack of late invention, contrived by the Pope 800 years after Christ, Bellarm. de Sanct. beat. lib. 1. c. 7, 8. Sect. dices & Barth-fumus in his Armilla aurea tit. Canonizatio, tells us, that it is not lawful to Worship any Saint publicly without the Pope's Licence, (so that before Bellarmin's Period of time it was not lawful publicly to Worship any, because till that time none were Canonised) yet what he adds is somewhat odds, if one believe his departed Friend is in Heaven, he may Pray to him secretly, etc.  the Pope's Canonisations are doubtful, and 
(f) Summa Rosell. Verb. Canonizatio, Can. loc. lib. 5. c. 5. c. 5. qu. 5.  subject to Error. Thomas Becket was solemnly Canonised by Alexander the Third, who thereupon passed for a good while as a precious Saint (as before hath been related); but about 40 years after his Saintship 
(g) Caesarine a Monk, Dial. l. 8. c. 69. Acts and Monuments.  was questioned, for in Ann. 1220. an hot Dispute concerning it, was held at Paris be-between Roger a Norman, and Peter a Parisian; Peter took the more Moderate part of the question, and affirmed he was saved because Canonised; but Roger was for the more uncharitable part, that he was Damned, because he was a Rebel to his King. This indeed was too high a question, altogether unfit to be discussed; and therefore our Prelates, though stiff Romanists, declined it in Henry the Eights time; but withal publicly declared, he had been a Rebel and a Traitor; and therefore deserved not the Honour of Martyrdom: whereupon they procured the King's Injunction to blot out his name out of all Public Prayers, Hours and Missals; to demolish his Shrine and Picture Erected at Canterbury; and strictly forbade any to call him 
(h) Hist. Conc. Trent. fol. 87.  Saint and Martyr. Other Pontificians there be, who although they resolve the Pope may err in matters of Fact, yet will not endure to hear that he can err in his Canonisations, which is very strange, because the inerrability of his Canonisations depends wholly or chief on matters of Fact; but their Reason is remarkable, which is this, for 
(i) Particularly Catherinus advers. nova dogm. Cajet. p. 125.  (say they) if any one Saint Canonised by the Pope, may be called in question, than all the Saints which have been, or shall be Canonised by the Pope may be doubted of, and then no man can invocate or worship them without peril of Idolatry. Then let Cajetan and Canus be taken at their words, that the Pope's Canonization is subject to Error, and thank we Catherinus and Bell: for their inference; and conclude from both laid together, that because many Canonised by the Pope have been doubted of, as Tho. Becket, St. Francis, St. Dominick, St. Ignatius Loiola, and Father Henry Garnet, etc. therefore all the Pope hath Canonised may be doubted of, and therefore none of them can be Invocated without peril of Idolatry. But then how comes the Invocation of a doubted Saint to be Idolatry? this cannot be, unless the Invocation of all Saints be Latria; for Doulia (as it is by the Romanists contradistinguished to Latria) is not contradictorily opposed to Idolatry, Latria is; for as Latria imports the Honour proper to God only, so Idolatry consists in the exhibition of that Honour to that which is not God; but Doulia according to them is not part of Religious Worship due only to God, and therefore the erroneous Supplicant, who pays this Homage of Doulia to a doubted Saint instead of an undoubted one (which doubted Saint he believes a real one) may fall under the censure of Folly, Rashness, or Error; but the well meaning Petitioner in this case, who makes his addresses to a mistaken Advocate, and with relative Worship only according to their Principles, cannot lie under the guilt of Idolatry, because in their account the conception and intention abates it, and to attribute Doulia or Relative Worship is not Idolatry, if it be, the Sin lies at their doors who confessedly Practice it.  
To Conclude, It is therefore the most prudent and profitable course to follow the advice which the Holy Martyr St. 
(k) Ep. ad Philadelph.  Ignatius gave to the Virgins of his time, and by consequence to all who profess the name of Christ, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, O ye Virgins have Christ alone in your eyes, and his Father in your Prayers, being enlightened by the Spirit; which in effect is an exhortation to all who are Baptised according to the form of the Institution; for being enlightened and being Baptised, are still Synonyma's both in Scripture and Primitive Antiquity, and therefore the advice concerns all Christians as well as those Virgins, and so Epiph. 79 Haeres. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Therefore,  
Glory be to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, three Persons, one God. For thine is the Kingdom, and the Power, and the Glory for ever and ever. AMEN.  Lact. lib. 4. de Vir. Sap. c. 22. 
Quanquam apud bonos Judices satis habeant firmitatis, vel Testimonia sine Argumentis, vel Argumenta sine Testimoniis, nos tamen non contenti alterutro sumus, cum suppeditet nobis utrumque, nè cui perversè ingenioso aut non intelligendi aut contra disserendi, locum relinquamus.  Aug. de Trin. l. 4. c. 6 
Contra rationem nemo sobrius, contra Scripturas nemo Christianus, contra Ecclesiam nemo pacificus senserit.     

THE JESUITS LETTER.  
Hon. etc.  
THere have been many Discourses betwixt us for matter of Religion, wherein little profit did accrue, in regard of my inabilities, having to deal with a person of your Knowledge and Parts, so fully accomplished and fraught with Arguments: But seeing the true Religion is the sole mark we ought to aim at, the disquisition thereof cannot be too much searched; and I am confident you wish and desire my eternal good, and in the integrity of my heart I wish the same to you; wherefore I shall only desire to receive solution to two Questions, and I shall totally decline to scruple all others; the Questions are these:  

1. To nominate the Professors of the Protestant Faith successively since the Apostles.  
2. To evidence, that the English Clergy hath a lawful Mission; for it is said, No man taketh this Honour upon him, but he that was called, and Faith cometh by hearing. The holy Scripture doth fully express, that upon the Walls of Jerusalem Watchmen should be day and night for ever; that the Word should not departed out of the mouth of his Seed for ever; our Blessed Saviour saith, Go tell the Church, and that he would be with them to the end of the World, which is not verified, unless there were such persons in the World.   

Answer to the first Question.  
1. IS it not sufficient, Protestants prove their Faith Apostolical from the Monuments and Records of the Apostles? were not the Apostles assisted by the HOLY SPIRIT in an higher manner and measure than any of their Successors can pretend to? did not they deliver the whole will of GOD by their Preaching while they lived, and by their Writings for ever? and are not their Writings as clear and comprehensive, and more authentical than any of those of the following Pastors and Doctors? are not the Decrees of Councils, and Works of the Fathers, as liable (if not more) to fraud and forgery, to misinterpretations and wrest, as the holy Scriptures? Is there any Record or Writing extant which can equally pretend to Apostolical and Original Tradition, or hath such an universal and constant attestation as the HOLY BIBLE? I conceive, the Apostolical Writings are the best evidences of Apostolical Doctrine; and in causes of Religion judge them Criminals, who decline a Trial by them; but since this way of Probation will not please you, (a shrewd suspicion all is not right with you) I add further,  
2. Supposing, not granting, Protestants were not able to nominate the successive Professors of their Faith since the Apostles, would this conclude them Heretics, and their Faith not Apostolical? no sure; for suppose we, one Philosopher to hold all the opinions of Plato, another those of Aristotle, would you determine the one not to be a Platonist, the other not an Aristotelian, because neither of them could present you with a list and line of successive Academics and Peripatetics? this among Philosophers would be adjudged irrational. But where hath Christ or his Apostles tied us to this nice scrupulous disquisition? or commanded us to be Annalists and Historians? though Christ hath promised there shall be a perpetual visible Church, (which yet in your sense of visibility you will never be able to prove,) yet did he never assure us there should be Histories and Records of Professors in all Ages, neither did he ever command us to search and read them, (he hath commanded both you and us to search and read the Scriptures,) that we may be able to bring them in evidence. You might, if your leisure or somewhat else had permitted, have remembered what hath been returned to this demand long before you proposed it. It is your usual rant, it is unanswerable; you may know the contrary, if not, I shall inform you after I have premised some Considerations to clear the procedure.  
1. What do you mean by [Protestant]? if you intent to hook in all who challenge that Appellative, the return is short, all that call themselves Catholics and Saints, are not such.  
2. What by [Faith]? if every Doctrine which hath been maintained by some Protestants, as a probable Opinion, or as a pious profitable Truth, than you trifle and sophisticate; but if by Faith, you understand the object of Faith, or things necessary to be believed by all, that they may be saved, as it is usually taken in Scriptures, Fathers, and Counsels, than the Protestants assert, their Faith is the Faith of all good Christians who lived before them, who all professed to believe, as they believe, which they thus evidence.  
3. Protestants earnestly contend for the Faith which was once, or at once delivered to the Saints, Judas 3. Which you by the addition of your new super-numerary Essentials had corrupted, and changed; as Anthony of Valtelina a Dominican Friar affirmed in the Council of Trent, and was seconded by the Bishops of five Churches therein; Hist. of Council of Trent, ad An. 1562. Fol. 548, 549. Their Reformation was not to compose a new, but to retrieve the old Faith which you had so confounded and changed; not to form a new Church, but to free the old Church from your new Essentials. The corruptible and incorruptible body are one in substance, differing only in perfections and purities; their Faith is the same in substance with the Faith of the whole Christian World, differing from some part thereof in quality and goodness. The end of the Reformation was to separate the precious from the vile, the chaff from the wheat, to refine the Gold mixed with dross, to dress the Garden overgrown with weeds, to cure the body which was diseased, to regain and recover that Faith which the Christian World had reputed and received for true and saving Faith, even the same that hath the attestation of the universal Church in all Ages, which is dispersed in the Scriptures, but contracted and summed up in the Apostles Creed, which was designed by them (witness your own authorized Catechism) to preserve Believers in the unity of Faith, to be a badge and cognizance to distinguish Believers from unbelievers and Misbelievers. This, and nothing but this hath been professed always, , by all persons, ubique semper, ab omnibus in Vinc. Lyr. Golden Rule of Catholicism. This is evinced by Practice; the Profession of this Faith, and of this only, was, and is required of every person, either by himself, or Sureties, before he be admitted into the Church by holy Baptism. That Question and Answer (dost thou believe? I do believe) had always respect to this, and no other; into this, and this alone, both you and we are Baptised; by this, and this alone, you and we are made Christians; by this, with the advantage of an holy Life, according to the Precepts of Christ, the Christians of all Ages have gone to Heaven for 1400 years, without the knowledge or belief of your 12 new coined Articles. For this, they have the sentence and determination of the Ephesine Council, which your Popes have been solemnly sworn to observe; the judgement of the Ancient Fathers, the concurrent suffrage of many of your Learned Divines and Schoolmen, and (which will weigh most with you) the Remonstrance of your Trusty and Wellbeloved Tridentine Assemblers, who once in their good mood thought fit thus to express themselves; The Apostles Creed is the shield of Faith by, etc. the firm and only Foundation, against which the Gates of Hell shall never prevail. This Protestants profess, with the whole Christian World, in its several Successions and Centuries; this they believe too, as it is sensed by the four first General Counsels, and the traditious interpretation of the universal Church. And for us of the Church of England, as we admit no new Creed, so we reject all new senses of the Old, which thus sensed, they own for the true Catholic Apostolic Faith. Indeed other Articles we have, but they are Articles of Peace, not of Faith, not all of them to be respected as Essentials of saving Faith, but as pious Truths, which none of the Pastors of the Church are to contradict or oppose.  
4. To retort your Question; the Protestants offer these Proposals to you; to nominate successive Professors since the Apostles of the whole Faith of the present Roman Church, or a succession of Professors, who since the Apostles have received these 12 new distinct Articles (which Pius the 4th added at the foot of the 12 old ones) as Essentials of Faith, absolutely necessary to be believed by all, necessitate medii, without which they could not be saved. We are sure they were never reputed for such for 1400 years. Prove those your late forged Articles at Trent to have any relation to, or analogy with those of the Apostles, that they are evidently concluded from them, or virtually contained in them, as conclusions in their premises.  
Lastly, that the Apostles did deliver, or teach by Word or Writing your newfound Faith, or passage to Heaven. Till these be satisfactorily performed by you, we desire you to be wise unto sobriety, and to consider whence you are fallen.   

Answer to the second Question.  
1. WHat mean you by Mission? if Ordination to the respective Functions. of Bishops and Priests, etc. then such a Mission our Bishops and Priests have, if you have any.  
2. What by Lawful? what you fancy, or the Pope resolves to be so, you know we neither value your conceits, nor the Pope's by-Laws: the English have received and rejected them at their pleasure, take and leave as they like, with us those things pass for lawful, which are so by the Law of Christ, which gives them validity; or by the Laws and Constitutions of the Church, which makes them Canonical; or by the Laws of the Kingdom, whereby they become Legal; accordingly as we aver.  
1. The English Clergy hath a lawful, (that is) a valid Ordination by the Institution of Christ; for the English Church in conferring Holy Orders, observeth all the Essentials of Ordination by Authority of Holy Scripture, Matter and Form, (as some of your own fast Friends have confessed,) Imposition of Hands, and the solemn words of Investiture, [Receive ye the Holy Ghost.] The Scripture knows no other Essentials but these, (which is also acknowledged by some of your Learned Partisans,) and these are constantly used by our Bishops, who received their Ordinations from their Predecessors by an uninterrupted line of succession, whether from British, or French, or Roman Bishops, is not material, because each of these had their Mission (in your expression) by a continued succession from the Apostles who planted the Faith, and laid hands on their first Successors of these Nations. Cardinal Pole the Papal Legate by his Dispensation, and Pope Paul the 4th by his Ratification, settled the Ordinations in King Edw. the 6th his Reign, with this only Proviso, that those then so Ordained would return to the Unity of the Church, (that's sure in their and your sense) to adhere to the Pope, and acknowledge his begged Sovereign Monarchical Power. This they could not have granted, neither would they, if they had suspected any defect in the Essentials of their Ordination. It is not in the power of the Pope or Cardinals to ratify their Orders who had none, or dispense with them to execute any Function in the Church, who had no Authority from Christ or his Apostles for it; if they did, your Church hath concluded the Act sacrilegious and null, if we may believe some of your Controvertists.  
2. By the Constitutions of the Church, what hath been universally observed, and was decreed by the Council of Carthage in St. Aug. time, hath been, and is still retained in the Church of England.  
3. By the Laws of the Kingdom, both this and the others will appear by the Records; upon both these accounts Bishop Jewel defended this Church against Mr. Harding, Fol. 129. I am a Priest by the same Order, &c, you were, and after, our Bishops succeed the Bishops before our days, being Elected, Confirmed, Consecrated and admitted as they were. Mr. Mason hath proved this beyond all cavil, your own Associates, Mr. Higgins, Mr. Hart, Father Garnet, and Father Oldcorn, took the pains to search the Registers, and after that Archbishop Abbot caused them to be showed to four more, who after they had perused, did acknowledge them Authentical and undeniable. Ex abundanti; Cudsemius the Jesuit, Lib. 11. de Desp. Cal. causa, hath freely confessed; the English Nation are not Heretics because they remain in a perpetual succession of Bishops. Monsieur Militiere in his Letter to his Majesty Charles the Second hath declared the same.  
Lastly, look to your own Succession, in which by your own Laws there be several Nullities, by Vacancies, Schisms, and Simonies, which if they were fully charged upon you, would puzzle you to clear.  
Having dispatched your Questions; the Texts of Scripture are to be considered. No man taketh this Honour, etc. True, but this Honour is to be had in any Apostolical Church as well as yours, which hath Elder Sisters, particularly the British here in England, confitente Baronio. Faith cometh, etc. Very good! But the Object of Hearing is not the Pope's decrees, or Trent definitions, but the word of Faith, as before, Gal. 118.  
The rest were true before there was a Church at Rome, were true, when she became an holy Church; are true, now it is an unsound rotten member of the Church, would be eternally true, if there were no Church at Rome, nor Roman Bishop.  
The Church shall not fail, but Christ never settled this privilege on the Roman, or any Church of one denomination. Christ's Church never faileth so long as there are Confessors through the World, who contend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints.  
BEWARE OF FALSE PROPHETS.  
FINIS.    

Some Books Printed for Henry Brome, in Defence of the Church of England, since the Year 1666.  
A Companion to the Temple, or an Help to Devotion; being an Exposition on the Common-Prayer, in two Voll. By Tho. Comber, A. M.  
Lex Tallionis, or an Answer to Naked Truth.  
The Popish Apology reprinted, and Answered.  
A Seasonable Discourse against Popery, and the Defence on't.  
The Difference betwixt the Church and Court of Rome considered.  
Considerations touching the true way to suppress Popery; to which is added, an Historical Account of the Reformation in England.  
Friendly Advice to the Roman Cath. of England, enlarged.  
Dr. Du Moulin's Answer to the Lord Castlemain his Papal Tyranny in England. With two Sermons on Novemb. 5th.  
Fourteen Controversial Lords for and against Popery, in quarto.  
Beware of two Extremes, Popery and Presbytery, octav.  
The Reformed Monastery, or the Love of Jesus, or a Sure Way to Heaven.  
A Guide to Eternity; by John Bona. Extracted out of the Writings of the Holy Fathers, and Ancient Philosophers.