his Successors may be added 3. Protestants reach unanimously that it is incumbent on Kings to find out receive embrace and promote the Truth of the Gospel and the Worship of God appointed therein confirming protecting and defending of it by their Regal Power and Authority as also that in their so doing they are to use the Liberty of their own judgements informed by the wayes that God hath appointed for that end independently on the dictates determinations and orders of any other Person or Persons in the world unto whose Authority they should be obnoxious Heathen Kings made Laws for God Dan. 3. chap. 6. Jona 3. And the great thing that we find any of the Good Kings of Judah commended for is that they commanded the worship of God to be observed and performed according unto his own appointment For this end were they then bound to write out a Copy of the Law with their own hands Deut. 14. 18. and to study in it continually To this purpose were they warned charged exhorted and excited by the Prophets that is that they should serve God as Kings And to this purpose are there innumerable Laws of the best Christian Kings and Emperours still extant in the world In these things consists that Supremacy or Headship of Kings which Protestants unanimously ascribe unto them especially those in England to his Royal Majesty And from hence you may see the frivolousness of sundry things you object unto them As first of the Scheme or Series of Ecclesiastical Power which you ascribe to Prelate Protestants and the Laws of the Land from which you say the Presbyterians dissent which you thus express By the Laws of our Land our Series of Government Ecclesiastical stands thus God Christ King Bishop Ministers People The Presbyterian Predicament is thus God Christ Minister People So that the Ministers head in the Presbyterian Predicament toucheth Christs feet immediately and nothing intervenes You Pretend indeed that hereby you do exalt Christ but this is a meer cheat as all men may see with their eyes For Christ is but where he was but the Minister indeed is exalted being now set in the Kings place one degree higher then the Bishops who by Law is under King and Bishops too If I mistake not in my guess you greatly pleased your self with your Scheme wherein you pretend to make forsooth an ocular Demonstration of what you undertook to prove whereas indeed it is as trivial a fancy as a man can ordinarily meet withal For 1. Neither the Law nor Prelates nor Presbyterians ascribe any place at all unto the Kings Majesty in the Series of Spiritual Order he is neither Bishop nor Minister nor Deacon or any way authorized by Christ to convey or communicate power meerly spiritual unto any others No such thing is claimed by our Kings or declared in Law or asserted by Protestants of any sort But in the series of exteriour Government both Prelate Protestants and Presbyterians assign a Supremacy over all Persons in his Dominions and that in all Causes that are inquirable and determinable by or in any Court exercising Jurisdiction and Authority unto his Majesty All sorts assign unto him the Supreme place under Christ in external Government and Jurisdiction None assign him any place in Spiritual Order and meerly Spiritual Power Secondly If you place Bishops on the Series of exterior Government as appointed by the King and confirmed by the Law of the Land there is yet no difference with respect unto them 3. The Question then is solely about the Series of Spiritual order and thereabout it is confessed there are various apprehensions of Protestants which is all you prove and so do magno conatu nugas agere who knows it not I wish there were any need to prove it But Sir this difference about the Superiority of Bishops to Presbyters or their equality or Identity was agitated in the Church many and many a hundred year before you or I were born and will be so probably when we are both dead and forgotten So that what it makes in this dispute is very hard for a sober man to conjecture 4. Who they are that pretend to exalt Christ by a meer asserting Ministers not to be by his institution subject to Bishops which you call a cheat I know not nor shall be their advocate they exalt Christ who love him and keep his Commandments and no other 2. You may also as easily discern the frivolousness of your exclamation against Protestants for not giving up their differences in Religion to the Vmpirage of Kings upon the assignment of that Supremacy unto them which hath been declared When we make the King such an Head of the Catholick Church as you make the Pope we shall seek unto him as the fountain of our faith as you pretend to do unto the Pope For the present we give that honour to none but Christ himself and for what we assign in profession unto the King we answer it wholly in our practical submission Protestants never thought nor said that any King was appointed by Christ to be supreme infallible Proposer of all things to be believed and done in the Worship of God no King ever assumed that power unto himself It is Jesus Christ alone who is the Supreme and absolute Lawgiver of his Church the Author and finisher of our Faith and it is the honour of Kings to serve him in the promotion of his Interest by the exercise of that Authority and duty which we have before declared What unto the dethroning and dishonour as much as in you lyeth of Christ himself and of Kings also you assign unto the Pope in making him the Supreme head and fountain of their faith hath been already considered This is the substance of what you except against Protestants either as to Opinion or Practice in this matter of deference unto Kingly Authority in things Ecclesiastical What is the sense of your Church which you prefer unto your sentiments herein I shall after I have a little examined your present pretensions manifest unto you seeing you will have it so from those who are full well able to inform us of it Fas mihi Pontificum sacrata resolvere jura atque omnia ferre sub auras â—Siqua tegunt tenear Romaenec ligebus ullis For your own part you have expressed you seâ—f in this matter so loosely generally and ambiguously that it is very hard for any man to collect from your words what it is that you assert or what you deny I shall endeavour to draw out your sense by a few enâ—quiries As 1. Do you think the King hath any An â—ority vested in him as King in Ecclesiastical affairs and over Ecclesiastical Persons You tell us That Catholicks observe the King in all things as well Eeclesiastick as Civil pag. 59. that in the line of Corporal power and Authority the King is immediately under God p. 61. with other words to the same purpose if they are to any purpose at all
I desire to know whither you grant in him an Authority derived immediately from God in and over Ecclesiastical affairs as to convene Synods or Councils to reform things amiss in the Church as to the outward administration of them or do you think that he hath such power and Authority to make constitute or appoint Laws with penal Sanctions in and about things Ecclesiastical And Secondly Do you think that in the work which he hath to do for the Church be it what it will be may use the liberty of his own judgement directed by the light of the Scripture or that he is precisely to follow the declarations and determinations of the Pope If he have not this Authority if he may not use this liberty the good words you speak of Catholicks and give unto him signifie indeed nothing at all If then he hath and may you openly rise up against the Bulls Briefs and Interdicts of your Popes themselves and the universal practice of your Church for many Ages And therefore I desire you to inform me Thirdly Whether you do not judge him absolutely to be subject and accountable to the Pope for what ever he doth in Ecclesiastical affairs in his own Kingdoms and Dominions if you answer suitably to the Principles Maximes and practise of your Church you must say he is and if so I must tell you that whatever you ascribe unto him in things Ecclesiastical he acts not about them as King but in some other capacity For to do a thing as a King and to be accountable for what he doth therein to the Pope implyes a Contradiction Fourthly Hath not the Pope a power over his Subjects many of them at least to convent censure judge and punish them and to exempt them in Criminal Cases from his Jurisdiction And is not this a fair Supremacy that it is meet he should be contented withal when you put it into the power of another to exempt as many of his Subjects as he pleaseth and are willing from his Regal Authority 5. When you say that in matters of faith Kings for their own ease remit their Subjects to their Papal Pastor pag. 57. Whether you do not collude with us or indeed do at all think as you speak Do you think that Kings have real power in and about those things wherein you depend on the Pope and only remit their Subjects to him for their own ease You cannot but know that this one Concession would ruine the whole Papacy as being expresly destructive of all the foundations on which it is built Nor did ever any Pope proceed on this ground in his interposures in the world about matters of faith that such things indeed belonged unto others and were only by them remitted unto him for their ease 6. Whether you do not include Kings themselves in youâ— general Assertion pag. 55. That they who after Papal decisions remain contâ—nacious forfeit their Christianity And if so whether you do not at once overthrow all your other Splendid Concessions and make Kings absolute Dependents on the Pope for all the Priviledges of their Christianity and whether you account not among them their very Regal Dignity it self Whereby it may easily appear how much Protestant Kings and Potentates are beholding unto you seeing it is manifest that they live and rule in a neglect of many Papal Decisions and Determinations 7. Whether you do not very fondly pretend to prove your Roman Catholicks acknowledgement of the power of Princes to make Laws in Cases Ecclesiastical from the Laws of Justinian p. 59. whereas they are instances of Regal Power in such Cases plainly destructive of your present Hildebrandine faith and Authority and whether you suppose such Laws to have any force or Authority of Law without the Papal Sanction and confirmation 8. Whither you think indeed that Confession unto Priests is such an effectual means of securing the peace and interest of Kings as you pretend p. 59. and whether Queen Elizabeth King James Henry the third and fourth of France had cause to believe it and whether you learned this notion from Parry Raviliac Mariana Clement Parsons Allen Garnet Gerard Oldcome with their Associates 9. Whether you forgot not your self when you place Aaron and Joshuah in government together p. 64. 10. Whether you really believe that the Pope hath Power only to perswade in matters of Religion as you pretend p. 65. and if so from what Topicks he takes the Whips Wires and Racks that he makes use of in his Inquisition And whether he hath not a right even to destroy Kings themselves who will not be his Executioners in destroying of others I wish you would come out of the clouds and speak your mind freely and plainly to some of these enquiries Your present ambiguous discourse in the face of it faiâ—ed unto your interest gives no satisfaction whilest these snakes lye in the grass of it Wherefore leaving you a little to your second thoughts I shall enquire of your Masters and Fathers themselves what is the true sense of your Church in this matter and we shall find them speaking it out plainly and roundly For they tell us 1. That the Government of the whole Catholick Church is Monarchical A State wherein all Power is derived from one fountain one and the same Person This is the first Principle that is laid down by all your Writers in treating of the Church and its power and that which your great Cardinal Baronius layes as the foundation on whirh he builds the huge Structure of his Ecclesiastical Annals 2. That the Pope is this Monarch of the Church the Person in whom alone the Soveraign Rule of it is originally vested so that it is absolutely impossible that any other Person should have enjoy or use any Ecclesiastical Authority but what is derived from him I believe you suppose this sufficiently proved by Bellarmine or others Your self own it nor can deny it without a disclaimure of your present Papacy And this one Principle perfectly discovers the vanity of your pretended attributions of Power in Ecclesiastical things to Kings and Princes For to suppose a Monarchical estate and not to suppose all Power and Authority in that state to be deâ—ived from the Monarch in it and of it alone is to suppose a perfect contraiction or a State Monarchical that is not Monarchical Protestants place the Monarchical State of the Catholick Church in its relation unto Christ alone and therefore it is incumbent on them to assert that no man hath or can have a power in the Church as such but what is derived from and communicated unto him by him And you placing it in reference unto the Pope must of necessity deny that any power can be exercised in it but what is derived from him so that whatever you pretend in this kind to grant unto kings you allow it unto them only by concession or delegation from the Pope They must hold it from him in cheif or he cannot be the chief
abode of Peter there never once mentions him in any of the Epistles which from thence he wrote unto the Churches and his fellow labourers though he doth remember very many others that were with him in the City 7. He asserts that in one of his Epistles from thence which as I think sufficiently proves that Peter was not then there for he saies plainly that in his triall he was forsaken by all men that no man stood by him which he mentions as their sin and prays for pardon for them Now no man can reasonably think that Peter was amongst the number of them whom he complained of 8. The Story is not consistent with what is expresly written of Peter by Luke in the Acts and Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians Paul was converted unto the faith about the 38 th year of Christ or 5 th after his Ascension After this he continued 3 years preaching the Gospel about Damascus and in Arabia In the 40 th or 41 st year of Christ he came to Jerusalem to conferr with Peter Gal. 1. which was the first of Claudius As yet therefore Peter was not removed out of Judaea 14 years after that is either after his first going up to Jerusalem or rather 14 years after his first Conversion he went up again to Jerusalem and found Peter still there which was in the 52 d year of Christ and the 13 th of laudius Or if you should take the date of the 14 years mentioned by him shorter by 5 or 6 years and reckon their beginning from the passion and Resurrection of Christ which is not improbable then this going up of Paul to Hierusalem will be found to be the same with his going up to the Councel from Antioch about the 6 th or rather 7 th year of Claudius Peter was then yet certainly at Hierusalem That is about the 46 th year of Christ some while after you would have the Church to be founded by him at Rome After this when Paul had taken a long progress through many Countreys wherein he must needs spend some years returning unto Antioch Act. 18. 22. he there again met with Peter Gal. 2. 11. Peter being yet still in the East to wards the end of the Raign of Claudius At Antioch where Paul found him if any of your Witnesses may be believed he abode 7 years Besides he was now very old and ready to lay down his mortality as our Lord had shewed him and in all probability after his remove from Antioch spent the residue of his dayes in the Eastern Dispersion of the Jews For 9 ly much of the Apostles work in Palestine among the Jews was now drawing to an end the elect being gathered in troubles were growing upon the Nation and Peter had as we observed before agreed with Paul to take the Care of the Circumcision of whom the greatest number by far excepting only Judaea its self was in Babylon and the Eastern Nations about it Now whether these and the like observations out of the Scripture concerning the Course of S t Peters life be not sufficient to out-ballance the Testimony of your disagreeing Witnesses impartial and unprejudiced men may judge For my part I do not intend to conclude peremptorily from them that Peter was never at Rome or never preached the Gospel there but that your Assertion of it is improbable and built upon very Questionable grounds that I suppose I may safely conclude And God forbid that we should once imagine the present faith of Christians or their Profession of Christian Religion to be built upon such uncertain Conjectures or to be concerned in them whether they be true or false Nothing can be spoken with more reproach unto it than to say that it stands in need of such supportment And yet if this one Supposition fail you all your building falls to the ground in a moment Never was so stupendous a fabrick raised on such imaginary foundations But that we may proceed Let us suppose this also that Peter was at Rome and preached the Gospel there What will thence follow unto your advantage what towards the settlement of any man in Religion or bringing us unto the Unity of faith the things enquired after He was at he preached the Gospel at Hierusalem Samaria Joppa Antioch Babylon and sundry other places and yet we find no such Consequences pleaded from thence as you urge from his Coming to Rome Wherefore you adde 1 V. That St Peter was Bishop of the Roman Church that he fixed his seat there and there he died In gathering up your Principles I follow the footsteps of Bellarmine Baronius and other great Champions of your Church so that you cannot except against the method of our proposals of them Now this Conclusion is built on these three Suppositions 1. That Peter had an Episcopal Office distinct from his Apostolical 2. That he was at Rome 3. That he fixed his Episcopal Sea there whereof the Second is very Questionable the First and Last are absolutely false So that the Conclusion its self must needs be a notable fundamentall Principle of Faith It is true and I shewed it before that the Apostles when they came into any Church did exercise all the Power of Bishops in and over that Church but not as Bishops but as Apostles As a King may in any of the Cities of his dominions where he comes exercise all the Authority of the Mayor or particular Governour of that place where he is which yet doth not make him become the Mayor of the place which would be a diminution of his royall Dignity No more did the Apostles become Local Bishops because of their exercising Episcopal Power in any particular Church by virtue of their Authority Apostolical wherein that other was included as hath been declared And Cui Bono to what purpose serves this fictitious Episcopacy All the Priviledges that you contend for the Assignation of unto Peter were beâ—â—owed upon him as an Apostle or as a believing disciple of Christ. As such he had those peculiar grants made unto him The Keys of the Kingdome of heaven were given unto him as an Apostle or according to S t Austin as a believer as such was he commanded to feed the sheep of Christ. It was unto him as an Apostle or a professing believer that Christ promised to build the Church on the faith that he had professed You reckon all these things among the priviledges of Peter the Apostle who as such is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first in order As an Apostle he had the Care of all Churches committed unto him As an Apostle he was divinely inspired and enabled infallibly to reveal the mind of Christ. All these things belonged unto him as an Apostle and what Priviledge he could have besides as a Bishop neither you nor I can tell no more than you can when how or by whom he was called and ordained unto any such office all which we know well enough concerning
secondly he actually did so Neither of these can you prove or produce any Testimony worth crediting in confirmation of it Did it necessarily follow from hence because that was the place where Peter died But this was accidentall a thing that Peter thought not of for you say that a few dayes before his death he was leaving that place Besides according to this insinuation why did not every Apostle leave a Successour behind him in the place where he dyed and that by vertue of his dying in that place or produce you any Patent granted to Peter in especiall that where he dyed there he should leave a Successour behind him But it seems the whole weight of your faith is layed upon a matter of fact accidentally falling out yea and that very incertain whether ever it fell out or no. Shew us any thing of the will and institution of Christ in this matter As that Peter should go to Rome that he should fix his seat there that he should dye there that he should have a Successour that the Bishop of Rome should be his Successour that unto this Successour I know not what nor how many Priviledges should be conveyed All these are arbitrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Inventions that men may multiply in infinitum at their pleasure For what should set bounds to the imaginations of men when once they cast off all Reverence of Christ and his Truth Once more Why did not Peter fix a Seat and leave a Successor at Antioâ—h and in other places where he abode and preached and exetcised Episcopal Power without all question Was it because he dyed at Rome This is to acknowledg that the whole Papacy is built as was said upon an accidentall matter of fact and that supposed not proved Further if he must be supposed to succeed Peter I desire to know what that succession is and wherein he doth succeed him Doth he succeed him in all that hee had and was in reference unto the Church of God Doth he succeed him in the manner of his Call to his Office Peter was called immediately by Christ in his own Person the Pope is chosen by the Conclave of Cardinals concerning whom their Office Priviledges Power Right to choose the Successour of Peter there is not one iota in the Scripture or any Monuments of the best Antiquity and how in their Election of Popes they have been influenced by the interest of powerfull Strumpets your own Baronius will inform you Doth he succeed him in the way and manner of his Personal Discharge of his Office and imployment Not in the least Peter in the pursuit of his Commission and in obedience unto the command of his Lord and Master travailed up and down the world preaching the Gospel planting and watering the Churches of Christ in patience self-deniall humility zeal temperance meekness The Pope raigns at Rome in case exalting himself above the Kings of the earth without taking the least pains in his own Person for the conversion of Sinners or edification of the Disciples of Christ Doth he succeed him in his Personal Qualifications which were of such extraordinary advantage unto the Church of God in his dayes his Faith Love Holiness Light and Knowledg you will not say so Many of your Popes by your own confession have been ignorant and stupid many of them flagitiously wicked to say no more Doth he succeed him in the way and manner of his exercising his Care and Authority towards the Churches of Christ as little as the rest Peter did it by his prayers for the Churches personal visitation and instruction of them writing by inspiration for their direction and guidance according to the will of God The Pope by Bulls and Consistorial Determinations executed by intricate Legal Processes and Officers unknown not only to Peter but all Antiquity whose ways practices orders terms S t Peter himself were he upon the earth again would very little understand Doth he succeed him in his Personal Infallibility agree among your selves if you can and give an answer unto this inquiry Doth he succeed him in his power of working Miracles you do not so much as pretend thereunto Doth he succeed him in the Doctrine that he taught it hath been proved unto you a thousand times that he doth not and wee are still ready to prove it again if you call us thereunto Wherein then doth this Succession consist that you talk of In his Power Authority Jurisdiction Supremacy Monarchy with the Secular Advantages of Riches Honour and pomp that attend them things sweet and desireable unto carnall mindes This is the Succession you pretend to plead for And are you not therein to be commended for your wisdome In the things that Peter really enjoyed and which were of singular Spiritual advantage unto the Church of God you disclaim any Succession unto him and fix it on things wherein he was no way concerned that make for your own Secular advantage and interest You have certainly layed your design very well if these things would hold good to Eternity For hence it is that you draw out the Monarchy of your Pope direct and absolute in Ecclesiasticall things over the whole Church indirect at least and in ordine ad Spiritualia over the whole world This the Diana in making of Shrines for whom your occupation consists and it brings no small gains unto you Hence you wire-draw his Cathedrall Infallibility Legislative Authority Freedom from the Judgment of any whereby you hope to secure him and your selves from all opposition endeavouring to terrifie them with this Medusa's head that approach unto you Hence are his Titles The Vicar of Christ Head and Spouse of his Church Vice-Deus Dius alter in Terris and the like where by you keep up popular venexation and preserve his Majestick distance from the poor Disciples of Christ. Hence you warrant his practices suited unto these pretensions and Titles in the deposing of Kings transposing of Titles unto Dominion and Rule giving away of Kingdoms stirring up and waging mighty warres causing and commanding them that dissent from him or refuse to yield obedience unto him to be destroyed with fire and sword And who can now question but that you have very wisely stated your Succession This is the way this the progress whereby you pretend to bring us unto the Vnity of faith If we will submit unto the Pope and acquiesce in his Determinations whereunto to induce us we have the Cogent Reasons now considered the work will be effected This is the way that God hath as you pretend appointed to bring us unto Settlement in Religion These things you have told us so often and with so much Confidence that you take it ill we should question the truth of any thing you averr in the whoe matter and look upon us as very ignorant or unreasonable for our so doing Yea he that believes it safer for him to trust the everlasting concernments of his soul unto the Goodness Grace and Faithfulness of
faith of men is formally and ultimately resolved into so that what ever Propositions that are made unto them they may reject unless they do it with a non obstante for its supposed Revelation the whole Revelation abides unshaken and their saith founded thereon But as to the Persons who first bring unto any the tidings of the Gospel seeing the faith of them that receive it is not resolved into their Authority or Infallibility they may they ought to examine their proposals by that unerring word which they ultimately rest upon as did the Beraeans and receive or reject them at first or afterwards as they see cause and this without the least impeachment of the truth or Authority of the Gospel its self which under this formal consideration as revealed of God they absolutely believe Let us now see what you except hereunto First you ask What love of Christs dictates what commission of Christ allows you to choose and reject at your own pleasure Ans. None nor was that at all in question nor do you speak like a man that durst look upon the true state of the Controversie between us You proclaim your cause desperate by this perpetual tergiversation The Question is whither when men preach the Gospel unto others as a Revelation from God and bring along the Scripture with them wherein they say that Revelation is comprized when that is received as such and hath its authority confirmed in the minds of them that receive it whither are they not bound to try all the teaching in particular of them that first bring it unto them or afterwards continue the preaching of it whither it be consonant to that Rule or Word wherein they believe the whole Revelation of the will of God relating to the Gospel declared unto them to be contained and to embrace what is suitable thereunto and to reject any thing that in particular may be by the mistakes of the teachers imposed upon them Instead of believing what the Scripture teacheth and rejecting what it condemns you substitute choosing or rejecting at your own pleasure a thing wherein our discourse is not at all concerned You adde What Heretick was ever so much a fool as not to pretend the Love of Christ and Commission of Christ for what he did What then I pray may not others do a thing really upon such grounds as some pretend to do them on falsly may not a Judge have his Commission from the King because some have counterfeited the great Seal May not you sincerely seek the good and peace of your Country upon the Principles of your Religion though some pretending the same Principles have sought its disturbance and ruine If there be any force in this exception it overthrows the Authority and Efficacy of every thing that any man may falsly pretend unto which is to shut out all order Rule Government and vertue out of the world You proceed How shall any one know you do it out of any such Love or Commission sith those who delivered the Articles of saith now rejected pretended equal love to Christ and Commission of Christ for the delivery of them as any other I wonder you should proceed with such impertinent enquiries How can any man manifest that he doth any thing by the Commission of another but by his producing and manifesting his Commission to be his and how can be prove that the doth it out of Love to him but by his diligence care and conscience in the discharge of his Duty as our Saviour tells us saying if you love me keep my Commandments which is the proper effect of love unto him and open evidence or manifestation of it Now how should a man prove that he doth any thing by the Commission of Christ but by producing that Commission that is in the things about whâ—ch we treat by declaring and evidencing that the things he proposeth to be believed are revealed by his spirit in his word and that things which he rejects are contrary thereunto And what ever men may pretend Christ gives out no adverse Commissions his word is every way and everywhere the same at perfect harmony and consistency with its self so that if it come to that that several Persons do teach contrary doctrines either before or after one another or together under the same pretence of receiving them from Christ as was the case between the Pharises of old that believed and the Apostles they that attend unto them have a perfect guide to direct them in their choice a perfect Rule to judge of the things proposed As in the Church of the Jews the Pharises had taught the people many things as from God for their Traditions or Oral Law they pretended to be from God Our Saviour comes really a teacher from God and he disproves their false Doctrines which they had prepossessed the people withall and all this he doth by the Scripture the Word of Truth which they had before received And this Example hath he left unto his Church unto the end of the world But you yet proceed Why may we not at length reject all the rest for love of something else when this Love of Christ which is now crept into the very out side of our lips is slipt off from thence Do you think men cannot find a cavil against him as well as his Law delivered unto us with the first news of him and as easily dig up the root as cut up the branches You are the pleasantest man at a disputation that ever I met withal haud ulli veterum virtute secundus you outgo your masters in palpable Sophistry If we may and ought for the Love of Christ reject errours and untruths taught by fallible men then we may reject him also for the love of other things Who doubts it but men may if they will if they have a mind to do so they may do so Physically but may they do so Morally may they do so upon the same or as good grounds and reasons as they reject errours and false worship for the sake of Christ With such kind of arguing is the Roman Cause supported Again you suppose the Law of Christ to be rejected and therefore say that his Person may be so also But this contains an application of the general Thesis unto your particular case and thereupon the begging of the thing in Question Our enquiry was general Whither things at first delivered by any Persons that preach the Gospel may not be rejected without any impeachment of the Authority of the Gospel it self Here that you may insinuate that to be the case between you and us you suppose the things rejected to be the Law of Christ when indeed they are things rejected because they are contrary to the Law of Christ and so affirmed in the Assertion which you seek to oppose For nothing may be rejected by the Commission of Christ but what is contrary to his Law The truth is he that rejects the Law of Christ as it is his
Principles whereby you attempt the confirmation of that absurd position are of that nature that they exclude the Headship of Christ and inâ—er no less change or alteration in the Church then that which must needs ensue thereon and the substitution of another in his room which destroyes the very essence and being of it Let us now consider what you further reply unto that which was offered in the Animadversions unto the purpose now discoursed of Your ensuing words are And here by the way we may take notice what a fierce English Protestant you are who labour so stoutly to evacuate my argument for Episcopacy and leave none of your own behind you nor acquaint the world with any though you know far better but would make us believe notwith tanding those far better reasons for Prelacy that Christ himself as he is the immediate Head of invisible influence so is he likewise the only and immediate Head of visible direction and government amongst us without the interposition of any Person delegate in his stead to oversee and rule under him in his Church on earth which is against the tenor both of sacred Gospel and St. Pauls Epistles and all Antiquity and the present Ecclesiastical Polity of England and is the Doctrine not of any English Protestant but of the Presbyterian Independent and Quaker How little cause you have to attempt an impeachment of my Protestancy I hope I have in some measure evidenced unto you and shall yet farther make it manifest as you give me occasion so to do In the mean time as I told you before that I would not plead the particular concernment of any party amongst Protestants no more then you do that of any party among your selves so I am sure enough that I have delivered nothing prejudicial unto any of them because I have kept my self unto the defence of their Protestancy wherein they all agree Nor have I given you an answer unto any Argument that tends in the least to the confirmation of such a Prelacy as by any sort of Protestants is admitted but only shewed the emptiness and pernicious Consequences of your Sophism wherewith you plead in pretence for Prelacy indeed for a Papal Supremacy and that on such Principles as are absolutely destructive of that Protestant Prelacy which you would be thought to give countenance unto And your ensuing Discourse wherein you labour to justifie your reflection on me is a pittiful piece of falsehood and Sophistry For first this double Head of the Catholick Church one of influence the other of direction and government which you fancy some Protestants to admit of is a thing that they declare against as injurious to the Lord Christ and that which would render the Church biceps monstrum horrid and deformed It is Christ himself who as by his Spirit he exercises the office of an head by invisible influence so by his Word that of visible direction and rule He is I say the only Head of visible direction to his Church though he be not a visible Head to that purpose which that he should be is to no purpose at all 2. If by the interposition of any person under Christ delegate in his stead you understand any one single Person delegated in his stead to oversee and rule the whole Catholick Church such an one as you now plead for in your Epistle it is intolerable arrogancy to intimate that he is designed either in the Gospel or St. Pauls Epistles or Antiquity whereas you are not able to assign any place or text or word in them directly or by fair Consequence to justifie what you assert And for the present Ecclesiastical policy of the Church of England if you yet know it not let me inform you that the very foundations of it are laid in a direct contrary supposition namely that there is no such single Person delegated under Christ for the Rule of the whole Catholick Church which gives us a new evidence of your Conscientious â—are in what you say and write 3. If you intend that which is not at all to your purpose Persons to rule under Christ in the Church presiding according to his direction and institution in and over the Particular Churches whereunto they do relate governing them in his name by his Authority and according to his Word I desire you to inform me wherein I have said or written or intimated any thing that may give you the least countenance in your affirming that by me it is denied or where it was ever denied by any Protestant whatever Prelatical Presbyterian or Independent neither doth this concession of theirs in the least impeach the sole Soveraign Monarchy of Christ and single Headship over his Church to all ends and purposes A Monarch may be and is the sole supream Governour and Political Head of his Kingdom though he appoint others to execute his Laws by virtue of Authority derived from him in the several Provinces Shires and Parishes of it And Christ is the only head of his Church though he have appointed others to preside and rule in his name in those distributions of his Disciples whereinto they are cast by his appoinment But you proceed Christ in their way is immediatâ— head not only of subministration and influence but of exterior derivation also and government to his Church Ans. He is so the supream and only Head of the Church Catholick in the one way and other though the means of conveying influences of Grace and of exterior Rule be various Then say you is he such an Head to all Belivers or no to all the whole body in general and every individual member thereof in particular if he be so to all you say then no man is to be governed in Affairs of Religion by any other man But why so I pray can no man govern in any sense or place but he must be a supream Head The King is immediate Head unto all his subjects he is King not only to the whole Kingdom but to every individual person in his Kingdom doth it thence follow that they may not be governed by officers subordinate delegated under him to rule them by his Authority according to his Laws or that if they may be so that he is not the only immediate King and supream Head unto them all The Apostle tells us expresly that the Head of every man is Christ 1 Cor. 11. 3. And that an head of Rule as the husband is the head of the wife Ephes. 5. 23. as well as he is an head of influence unto the whole body and every member of it in particular 1 Cor. 12. 12. Col. 2. 19. And it is a senseless thing to imagine that this should in the least impeach his appointment of men to rule under him in his Church according to his Law who are thereupon not heads but in respect of him servants and in respect to the particular Churches wherein they serve him Rulers or guides yea their servants for his sake not Lords
your selves to wave I should have wholly passed by this discourse unto which no occasion was administred in the Animadversions but now as you have hanâ—dled the matter unless I would have it taken for granted that the Principles of the Roman Church are more suited unto the establishment and promotion of the interest and Soveraignty of Kings and other supream Magistrates and in particular the Kings of these Nations then those of Protestants which in Truth I do not believe I must of necessity make a little further enquiry into your Discourse And I desire your pardon if in my so doing any thing be spoken that suits not so well your interest and designs neither expecting nor desiring any if ought be delivered by me not according to Truth To make our way the more clear some of the ambiguous expressions which you make use of to cloud and hide your intention in your enquiry after the Head of the Church must be explained 1. By the Church you understand not this or that particular Church not the Church of this of that Nation Kingdom or Countrey but the whole Catholick Church throughout the world And when you have explained your self to this purpose you endeavour by six Arguments no less p. 67 68. to prove that no King ever was or can be Head of it He said well of old In causa facili quemvis licet esse disertum I wonder you contented your self to give us six Reasons only and that you proceeded not at least unto the high hills of eighteenthly and nineteenthly that you talk of in your Fiat Lux where you scoff at the preaching of Presbyterians it may be you will scarely ever obtain such another opportunity of shewing the fertility of your invention So did he florish who thought himself secure from adversaries Caâ—ut altum in praelia tollit Ostenditque humeros latos alternaque jactat Brachia protendens verberat ictibus auras But you do like him you only beat the ayre Do you think any man was ever so distempered as to dream that any King whatever could be the absolute Head of the whole Catholick Church of Christ we no more think any King in any sence to be the Head of the Catholick Church then we think the Pope so to be The Roman Empire was at its hight and glory when first Christianity set forth in the world and had extended its bounds beyond those of any Kingdom that arose before it or that hath since succeeded unto it And yet within a very few years after the Resurrection of Christ the Gospel had diffused it self beyond the limits of that Empire among the Parthians and Indians and unto Britannorum Romanis inaccessa loca as Tertullian calls them Now none ever supposed that any King had power or Authority of any sort in reference unto the Church or any members of it without or beyond the precise limits of his own Dominions The Enquiry we have under Consideration about the Power of Kings and the obedience due unto them in Ecclesiastical things is limited absolutely unto their own Kingdoms and unto those of their subjects which are Christians in them And this Hi motus animorum atque haec certamina tanta Pulveris exigui jactu concussa quiescunt A little observation of this one known and granted Principle renders not only your six Reasons altogether useless but surpersedes also a great part of your Rhetorick which under the ambiguity of that expression you display in your whole Discourse Secondly You pleasantly lead about your unwary Reader with the ambiguity of the other term the Head Hence p. 58. you fall into a great exclamation against Protestants that acknowledging the King to be the Head of the Church they do not supplicate unto him and acquiesce in his judgement in Religious affairs as if ever any Protestant acknowledged any King or any mortal man to be such an Head of the Church as you fancy to your selves in whose determinations in Religion all men are bound spiritually and as to their eternal concernments to acquiesce and that not because they are true according to the Scripture but because they are his Such an Head you make the Pope such an one on earth all Procestants deny which evacuates your whole Discourse to that purpose p. 58 59. It is true in opposition unto your Papal claim of Authority and Jurisdiction over the subjects of this Kingdom Protestants do assert the King to be so Head of the Church within his own Realms and Dommions as that he is by Gods appointment the sole fountain and spring amongst men of all Authority and Power to be exercised over the Persons of his subjects in matters of external cognizance and order being no way obnoxious to the direction supervisorship and superintendency of any other in particular not of the Pope He is not only the only striker as you phrase it in his Kingdoms but the only Protector under God of all his subjects and the only Distributor of Justice in rewards and punishments unto them not depending in the administration of the one or other on the determinations or orders of your Pope or Church Not that any of them do use absolutely that expression of Head of the Church but that they ascribe unto him all Authority that ought or can be exercised in his Dominions over any of his Subjects whither in things Civil or Ecclesiastical that are not meerly Spiritual and to be ministerially ordered in obedience unto Christ Jesus And that you may the better see what it is that Protestants ascribe unto the King and to every King that is Absolutely supream as his Majesty is in his own Dominions and withall how exceeding vain your unreasonable reproach is which you cast upon them for not giving themselves up unto an absolute acquiescency in humane determinations as meerly such on pretence that they proceed from the Head of the Church I shall give you a brief account of their thoughts in this whole matter First They say that the King is the supream Governor over all Persons whatever within his Realms and Dominions none being exempted on any account from subjection unto his Regal Authority How well you approve of this Proposition in the great astignations you pretend unto Kingly power we shall afterwards enquire Protestants found their perswasion in this matter on the Authority of the Scripture both Old Testament and New and the very Principles constituting Soveraign Power amongst men You speak fair to Kings but at first dash exempt a considerable number of their born subjects owing them indispensible natural Allegiance from their jurisdiction Or this sort are the Clergy But the Kings of Judah of old were not of your mind Solomon certainly thought Abiathar though High Priest subject to his Royal Authority when he denounced against him a sentence of death and actually deposed him from the Priest hood The like course did his successors proceed in For neither had God in the first provision he made for a
King amongst his people Deut. 18. nor in that prescription of the manner of the Kingdom which he gave them by Samuel once intimated an exemption of any persons Priests or others from the Rule or Authority of the Prince which he would set over them In the New Testament we have the Rule as the practice in the Old Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers the power that bears the sword the striker And we think that your Clergy men have souls at least pro sale and so come within the circumference of this Command and Rule Chrysostome in his Comment on that place is of our mind and prevents your pretence of an exception from the Rule by special Priviledge giving us a distribution of the universality of the Persons here intended into their several kinds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He sheweth that these things are commanded unto all unto Priests and Monks and not to secular persons only which he declareth in the very entrance of his Discourse saying Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers whither thou be an Apostle or an Evangelist or a Prophet or whatever thou be For subjection overthrows not Piety And he saith not simply Let him obey but let him be subject The very same instances are given by Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophilact Bernard Epist. 42. ad Archiepisc. Senonens meets with your exception which in his dayes began to be broached in the world and tells you expresly that it is a delusion In conformity unto this Rule of St. Paul Peter exhorts all Christians none excepted to submit themselves unto the King as Supreme 1 Epist. ch 2. 13. And what ever we conclude from these words in reference unto the King I fear that if instead of the King he had said the Pope you would have thought us very impudent if we had persisted in the denyal of your monstrous imaginary Headship But in this Principle on these and the like grounds do all Protestants concur And indeed to fancy a â—â—veraign Monarch with so great a number of men as yonr Clergy consists of in many Kingdome exempted from his regal Authority is to lay such an ax unto the root of his Government as whereby with one stroke you may hew it down at your pleasure 2. Protestants affirm that Rex in regno suo every King in his own Kingdom is the Supreme dispenser of Justice and Judgement unto all Persons in all Causes that belong unto or are determinable in foro exteriori in any Court of Judicature whither the matter which they concern be Civil or Ecclesiastical No Cause no difference determinable by any Law of man and to be determined by Coercive Vmpirage or Authority is exempted from his cognizance Neither can any man on any pretence claim any Jurisdiction over any of his Subjects not directly and immediately derived from him Neither can any King who is a Soveraign Monarch like the Kings of this Land yield or grant a power in any other to judge of any Ecclesiastical Causes among his Subjects as arising from any other Spring or growing on any other root but that of his own Authority without an impeachment and irreparable prejudice to his Crown and Dignity neither doth any such Concession grant or supposition make it indeed so to be but is a meer fiction and mistake all that is done upon it being ipso facto null and of none effect Neither if a King should make a pretended legal grant of such power unto any would any right accrew unto them thereby the making of such a Grant being a matter absolutely out of his power as are all things whereby his regal Authority wherein the Majesty of his Kingdom is enwrapped may be diminished For that King who hath a power to diminish his Kingly Authority never was intrusted with absolute Kingly Power Neither is this Power granted unto our Kings by the Acts of Parliament which you mention made in the beginning of the Reformation but was alwayes inherent in them and exercised in innumerable instances and often vindicated with an high hand from Papal encroachments even during the hour and power of your darkness as hath been sufficiently proved by many both Divines and Lawyers Things of meer spiritual order as preaching the word Administration of the Sacraments and the like we ascribe not unto Kings nor the communicating of power unto any for their performance The Soveraign Power of these things is vested in Christ alone and by him committed unto his Ministers But Religion hath many concernments that attend it which must be desposed of by forensical juridical process and and determinations All these with the Persons of them that are interested in them are subject immediately to the power and Authority of the King and none other and to exempt them or any of them or any of the like nature which may emerge amongst men in things relating unto Conscience and Religion whose Catalogue may be endlesly extended from Royal Cognizance is to make meer properties of Kings in things which in a very special manner concern the peace and wellfare of their subjects and the distribution of rewards and punishments among them Of this sort are all things that concern the authoritative publick Conventions of Church Officers and differences amongst them about their interests practices and publick profession of Doctrines Collations of Legal Dignities and Benefices by and with investitures legal and valid all Ecclesiastical revenews with their incidencies the Courts and Jurisdictions of Ecclesiastical Persons for the reigâ—ement of the outward man by Censures and Sentences of Law with the like And as this whole matter is sufficiently confirmed by what was spoken before of the Power of Kings over the Persons or all their Subjects and for to what end should they have such a power if in respect of many of them and that in the chief concernments of their rule and Government it may never be exerted so I should tire your patience if I should report one half of the Laws Instances and Pleas made given and used by the Antient Christian Kings and Emperours in the persuit and for the Confirmation of this their just power The Decrees and Edicts of Constantine the Great commanding ruling and disposing of Bishops in Cases Ecclesiastical the Laws of Justinian Charls the Great Ludovicus his Son and Lotharius his Successor with more innumerable to the same purpose are extant and known unto all So also are the Pleas Protestations and Vindications of most of the Kingdoms of Europe affer once the pretensions of Papacy began to be broached to their prejudice And in particular notable instances you might have of the exercise of this royal power in the first Christian Magistrate invested with supreme Authority both in the case of Athanasius Socrat. Lib. 1. cap. 28. cap. 34. Athan. Apol. 2. as also of the Donatists Euseb. lib. 10. cap. 5. August Epist. 162 166. and advers Crescon lib. 3. c. 17. whereunto innumerable instances in
only and absolute head and Monarch of the Catholick Church which you would perswade us to believe that he is Kings then may even in Church affairs be strikers under him be the servants and executioners of his will and pleasure but Authority from God immediately in and about them they have none nor can have any whilest your Imaginary Monarchy takes place This one fundamental Principle of your Religion sufficiently discovers the insignificancy of your florish about Kingly Authority in Ecclesiastical things seeing upon a supposition of it they can have none at all But you stay not here for 3. You ascribe unto your Popes an universal Dominion even in Civil things over all Christian Kings and their subjects In the explanation of this Dominion I confess you somewhat vary among your selves but the thing it self is generally asserted by you and made a foundation of practice Some of you maintain that the Pope by Divine right and Constitution hath an absolute supream Dominion over the whole world This opinion Bellarmine Lib. 5. de Pont. cap. 1. confesseth to be maintained by Augustinus Triumphus Alvarus Pelagius Hostiensis and Panoruitanus And himself in the next words condemns the opinion of them who deny the Pope to have any such temporal power as that he may command secular Princes and deprive them of the Kingdoms and Principalities not only as false but as down right Heresie And why doth he name the first opinion as that of four or five Doctors when it is the Common opinion of your Church as Baronius sufficiently manifests in the life of Gregory the seventh That great preserver of your Pontificial omnipotency in his Bull against Henry the German Emperour affirms that he hath power to take away Empires Kingdoms and Principalities or what â—ver a mortal man may have as Platina records it in his life As also Pope Nicholas the second in his Epistle ad Mediolanens asserts that the rights both of the heavenly and earthly Empires are committed unto him And he that hath but looked on the Dictates of the forenamed Gregory confirmed in a Council at Rome and defended by Baronius or into their Decretals knows that you give both swords to the Pope and that over and over Whence Carerius Lib. 1. c. 9. affirms that it is the Common opinion of the School Divines that the Pope hath plenissimam Potestatem plenary power over the whole world both in Ecclesiastical and Temporal matters and you know the old comparison made by the Canonists cap. de Major Obed. between the Pope and the Emperour namely that he is as the Sun the Emperour as the Moon which borrows all its light from the other Bellarmine and those few whom he follows or that follow him maintain that the Pope hath this Power only indirectly and in order unto spiritual things the meaning of which assertion as he explains himself is that besides that direct power which he hath over those Countreys and Kingdoms which on one pretence or other he claims to be Feaudatory to the Roman See which are no small number of the chiefest Kingdoms of Europe he hath a Power over them all to dispose of them their Kings and Rulers according as he judgeth it to conduce to the good and interest of the Church which as it really differs very little from the â—ormer opinion so Barclay tells us that Pope Sixtus was very little pleased with that seeming depression of the Papal Power which his words intimate But the stated Doctrine of your Church in this matter is so declared by Bozius Augustinus Triumphus Carerius Schioppius Marta and others all approved by her Authority that there can be no question of it Moreover to make way for the putting of this indirect Power into direct Execution you declare 4. That the Pope is the supream Judge of faith and his Declarations and Determinations so far the Rule of it as that they are to be received and finally submitted unto not to do so is that which you express Heresie or Schism or Apostacy About this Principle also of your Profession there have been as about most other things amongst you great Disputes and wranglings between the Doctors and props of your Church Much debate there hath been whither this power be to be attributed unto the Pope without a Council or above a Council or against one About these Chimaera's are whole volumes filled with keen and subtil argumentations But the Popes Personal or at least Cathedral Determination hath at length prevailed For whatever some few of you may whisper unto your own trouble and disadvantage to the impeachment of his Personal Infallibility you are easily decryed by the general voice of your Doctors and besides those very persons themselves wherever they would place the Infallibility of the Church that they fancy are forâ—ed to put it so far into the Popes hand and management as that whatever he determines with the necessary solemnities in matters of faith is ultimately at least to be acquiesced in So your self assure us averring that he who doth not so forfeits his Christianity and consequently all the Priviledges which thereby he enjoyes and we have reason sufficient from former experience to believe that the Pope have he ability unto his will is ready enough to take the forfeiture Whither upon a Princes falling into Heresie in not acquiescing in your Papal determinations his subjects are discharged ipso facto from all obedience unto him as Dominicus Bannes and others maintain or whither there needs the Denunciation of a sentence against him by the Pope for their absolution you are not agreed But yet 5. You affirm that in Case of such Disobedience unto the Pope he is armed with Power to depose Kings and Princes and to give away and bestow their Kingdoms and Dominions on others Innumerable are the instances whereby the Popes themselves have justified their claim of this Power in the face of the world and it were endless to recount the Emperours Kings and free Princes that they have attempted to ruine and destroy in the persuit of some wherof they actually succeeded with the desolations of Nations that have ensued thereon I shall mention but one and that given us in the dayes of our Fathers and it may be in the memory of some yet alive Pope Pius V takes upon him contrary to the advice and entreaties of the Emperour of Germany and others to depose Queen Elizabeth and to devote her to destruction To this end he absolved all her Subjects from their Allegiance and gave away her Kingdoms and Dominions to the Spaniard assisting him to his utmost in his attempt to take possession of his grant and all for refusing obedience to the See of Rome You cannot I presume be offended with my mention of that which is known unto all for these things were not done in a corner And is it not hence evident that all the power which you grant unto Kings is meerly precarious which they hold of your Pope
your out-cry at its entrance First You observe that I say Joseph of Arimathea was in England but that he taught the same religion that is now in England Unto which you reply But what is that Religion and this enquiry I have observed you elsewhere to insist upon But I told you before that I intend the Protestant Religion and that as confirmed and established by Law in this Kingdom and the advantage you endeavour from some differences that are amongst us is little to your purposes and less to the commendation of your ingenuity For besides that there are differences of as high a nature and considering the Principles you proceed upon of greater importance among your selves and those agitated with as great animosities and subtilties as those amongst any sort of men at variance about Religion in the world you that so earnestly seek and press after a forbearance for your profession besides and against the established law should not me thinks at the same time be so forward in reproaching us that there are dissenters in the Kingdom from some things established by Law especially considering how utterly inconsiderable for the most part they are in comparison of the things wherein you differ from us all This I fear is the reward that they have cause to expect from many of you who are enclined to desire that you amongst others might be partakers of indulgence from the extremity of the Law though from others of you for whose sakes they are enclined unto those desires I hope they may look for better things and such as accompany charity moderation and peace so that your first exception gives a greater impeachment unto your own Candor and ingenuity then unto the Truth or Sobriety of my story You proceed and say that I tell you that the story of Fugatius and Damianus Missioners of Pope Eleutherius is suspected by me for many reasons and reply because you assign none I am therefore moved to think they may be all reduced unto one which is that you will not acknowledge any good thing ever to have come from Rome But see what it is for a man to give himself up unto vain surmizes You know full well that I plead that you are no way concerned in what was done at Rome in the dayes of Eleutherius who was neither Pope nor Papist nor knew any thing of that which we reject as Popery so that I had no reason to disclaim or deny any good thing that was then done at Rome or by any from thence Besides I can assure you that to this day I would willingly own embrace and rejoyce in any good that is or may be done there may I be truly and impartially informed of it and should be glad to hear of more then unprejudiced men have been able of late Ages to inform us of I am far from making an enclosure of all goodness unto any party of men in the world and far from judging or condemning all of any party or supposing that no good thing can be done by them or proceed from them Such conceits are apt to flow from the high towring thoughts of Infallibility and supremacy and the confining of Christianity to some certain company of men in some parts of the world which I am a stranger unto I know no party among Christians that is in all things to be admired nor any that is in all things to be condemned and can perfectly free you if you are capable of satisfaction from all fears of my dislike of any thing because it came or comes from Rome For to me it is all one from whence Truth and Virtue come They shall be welcome for their own sakes But you seem to be guided in these and the like surmizes by your own humour Principles and way of managing things in Religion a Lesbian Rule which will suffer you to depart from the Paths of Truth and Charity no oftener then you have a mind so to do To deliver you from your mistake in this particular I shall now give you some of those reasons which beget in me a suspicion concerning the Truth of that story about Fagatius and Damianus as it is commonly told only intimating the heads of them with all possible brevity First then I suppose the whole story is built on the Authority of the Epistle of Elutherius unto Lucius which is yet extant other foundations of it that I know of is neither pleaded nor pretended Now there want not Reasons to prove that Epistle as the most of those fathered on the old Bishops of Rome to be supposititious For 1. The Author of that Epistle condemneth the Imperial Laws and rejecteth them as unmeet to be used in the Civil Government of this Nation which Eleutherius neither ought to have done nor could safely do 2. It supposeth Lucius to have sent unto Eleutherius to have the Roman Law sent unto him which had been long before exercised in this Nation and was well known in the whole Province as he witnesseth of dayes before these Gallia causidicos docuit facunda Brittannos 2. The first Reporters of this Story agree not in the time wherein the matter mentioned in it should fall out Beda lib. 1. cap. 4. assigns it unto the year 156. which was twenty two years before Eleutherius was Bishop as Baronius manifests Henricus de Erfordia ascribes it unto the nineteenth year of the reign of Verus the Emperour who reigned not so many years at all Ado refers it unto the time of Commodus with some part of whose reign the Episcopacy of Eleutherius did indeed contemporate 2. Geoffrey of Monmouth the chief promoter of this report joyneth it with so many lyes and open fictions as may well draw the Truth of the whole story into Question So that divers would have us believe that some such thing was done at one time or other but when they cannot tell 3. Both the Epistle of Eleutherius and the reporters of it do suppose that Lucius to whom he wrote was an Absolute Monarch in England King over the whole Kingdom with Supreme Authority and Power ruling his Subjects by the Advice of his Nobles without being obnoxious unto or dependent in his Government on any others But this Supposition is so openly repugnant to the whole story of the State of things in the Province of England in those dayes so that it is beyond the wit of man to make any reconciliation between them For besides that Caesar and Tacitus do both plainly affirm that in the dayes of the Romans â—â—ance upon this Island there was no such King or Monarch among the Brittans but that they were all divided into several Toparchies and 〈◊〉 â—ortal feuds and variance among themselves 〈…〉 de for the conquest of them all it was now become a Presidiary Province of the Roman Empire and had been so from the dayes of Claudius as Suetonius Tacitus and Dio inform us Especially was it reduced into and settled in that form by Pub.
as Tenants at will and should they not appear to do so were his force wit and courage answerable to his will and pretence of Authority But be it that because you cannot help it you suffer them to live at peace and quietness in the main of their Rule yet you still curb them in their own Dominions for 6. You exempt all the Clergy from under their Rule and Power See your Bellarmine sweating to prove that they are not bound to their Laws so as to be judged by them without their leave if they transgress or to pay any tribute De Cleric Lib. 1. Cap. 28. They are all reserved to the Power and Jurisdiction of the Pope And he that shall consider into what a vast and boundless multitude by reason of the several disorderly orders of your City Monks and Friars your Clergy is swelled into in most places of Europe will easily perceive what your interest is in every Kingdom of it I am perswaded there is scarce a Considerable Nation wherein the Profession of your Religion is enthroned in which the Pope hath not an 100000. able fighting men that are his peculiar subjects exempted from the Power and jurisdiction of Kings themselves which you must needs conceive to be a blessed interpretation of that of the Apostle Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers And 7. You extend the Papal Power to Things as well as Persons in the Dominions of all Kings and Commonwealths For the Lands and Possessions that are given unto any of the Popes especial Subjects you will have to be exempted from Tributes and publick burdens of the state And you farther contend that it is not in the power of any Kings or Rulers to hinder such alienations of Lands and Possessions from their Dominions By this means no small part of the Territories of many Princes is subduced from under their power The dreadful consequences of which Principles so startled the wise state of Venice that you know they disputed it to the utmost with your Vice-god Paul the V. In dealing with them as I remember their attempt was successless for notwithstanding the defence made of the Papal process against them by Baronius Bellarmine and others yet the actings of that sober state in forbidding such alienation of Lands and Fees from their Rule and power without their consent with their plea for the subjection of Ecclesiasticks unto them in their own Dominions was so vindicated by Doctor Paul Suave Marsilius of Padua and others that the horns of the Bull which had been thrust forth against them into so great a length were pulled in again I told you in the entrance of this Discourse how unwilling I should have been to have given you the least disquietment in your way had you only attempted to set off your own respects unto Royal Power unto the best advantage you could but your setting up your Principles and Practices in competition with those of Protestants of any sort whatever and preferring them before and above them as unto your deference unto Kings and that in matters Ecclesiastical hath made these few instances expressive of the real sense of your Church in this matter as I suppose necessary and equal CHAP. 17. Scripture Story of the Progress and declension of Religion vindicated Papal Artifices for the promotion of their Power and Interest Advantages made by them on the Western Empire YOu proceed pag. 70. unto the Animadvèrsions on your 13. Paragraph entituled Scripture wherein how greatly and causelesly it is by you undervalued is fully declared But whatever is offered in it for the discovery of your miscarriage and your own conviction you wisely pass over without taking notice of it at all and only repeat again your Case to the same purpose and almost in the very same words you had done before Now this I have already considered and removed out of our way so that it is altogether needless to divert again to the discussion of it That which we have to do for the answering of all your Cavils and objections in and about the case you frame and propose is to declare and manifest the Scriptures sufficiency for the Revelation of all necessary Truths therein affording us a stable Rule of faith every way suited to the decision of all differences in and about Religion and to keep Christians in perfect peace as it did of old And this we have already done Why this proper work of the Scripture is not in all places and at all times effected proceeds from the Lusts and prejudices of men which when by the Grace of God they shall be removed it will no longer be obstructed Your next attempt p. 72. is upon my story of the progress and Corruption of Christian Religion in the world with respect unto that of your own Yours you tell us is serious temperate and sober every way as excellent as Suffenus thought his verses Mine you say is wrought with defamation and wrath against all Ages and People very good I doubt not but you thought it was fit you should say so though you knew no reason why nor could fix on any thing in it for your warrant in these intemperate reproaches Do I say any thing but what the stories of all Ages and the Experience of Christendome do proclaim Is it now a defamation to report what the learned men of those dayes have recorded what good men bewayled and the sad effects whereof the world long groaned under and was at length ruined by What wrath is in all this may not men be warned to take heed of falling into the like evils by the miscarriages of them that went before them without wrath and defamation Are the books of the Kings Chronicles and Prophets fraught with wrath and defamation because they report complain of and reprove the sad Apostasies of the Church in those dayes with the wickedness of the Kings Priests and People that it was composed of and declare the abomination of those wayes of false worship licenciousness of life violence and oppression whereby they provoked God against them to their ruine If my story be not true why do you not disprove it if it be why do you exclaim against it Do I not direct you unto Authors of unquestionable credit complaining of the things which I report from them And if you know not that many others may be added unto these by me named testifying the same things you know very little of the matter you undertake to treat about But we need go no further then your self to discover how devoid of all pretence your reproaches are and that by considering the exceptions which you put in to my story which may rationally be supposed to be the most plausible you could invent and directed against those parts of it which you imagined were most obnoxious to your charge I shall therefore consider them in the order wherein they are proposed and discover whether the keeness of your assault answer the noise of