Catholike Church hath holden which was not institute by Councels but ever kept in the Church that is most rightly beleeved to be an Apostolicall tradition and he brings for instances those holy daies which your Covenant abjures which hath ever been retained in the Church from the Apostles daies And albeit we could not prove Episcopacy from Scripture as wee may very wel prove it and is proved by those who defend the same yet this unquestionable rule of Augustine will bee sufficient to prove it to be of Apostolicall institution for you say it is not of Divine institution and I say it is not instituted by Councels and yet all that are but little exercised in antiquitie shall find that Episcopacie was ever in the Church from the Apostles dayes till this present time that it is called in question And beside that rule of Augustine consider that it is the generall tradition of the Catholik Church that Episcopacie hath ever been in it as an Apostolicall institution And by this generall tradition of the Catholike Church we are as certain that it is of Apostolicall institution as we are certaine of the received number of the Canonicall books of Scripture for we receive and take that number upon the continued generall tradition of the Catholike Church of Christ from age to age We reject and detest particular traditions of any present particular Church such as are those of the Church of Rome if they cannot shew those traditions to have been generally received at all times in the Catholike Church But there is no Protestant that doth not receive generall traditions of the Catholike Church such as is this concerning the definite number of the bookes of the Canonical Scripture and if I would assume a schismaticall humor I might with as good warrants deny that there are so many bookes in the Canon as the Catholike Church sayes there be as you deny Episcopacie to be of Apostolicall institution Thus have I briefly showne you the passages betweene the Anticovenanter and Covenanter which I leave to your consideration and returne to my purpose From this sweet harmonie in the preceding points especially of your independent power in Church matters there followeth another parallel by way of consequence viz. that you may excommunicate your King if hee doe not obey the Acts and Constitutions of your Assemblies Thus you threatned King James and his Councell both with excommunication if he would not execute your Acts of your Assemblie and good reason seeing it is the supreme judicatory and the King is a sonne of your Church from whom he ought to take the meaning And if hee bee refractarie why may not the Assembly excommunicate him as Ambrose did Thâ—â—dosius And as I have said already from your Travers of your government Huic disciplinâ— omnes Principes c. There is a necessity that all Princes Monarchs should submit their Scepter and obey this Discipline It s your chief Commander in the Camproyall Thomas Cartwright being asked whether the King himself might be excommunicated answered That excommunication should not bee exercised upon Kings I utterly mislike and so do we also yea albeit they be not Heretickes themselves yet if they doe not punish such as their Pastors commands them they may be excommunicate Potest ac debet Pastor regibus jubere ut puniant Haereticos Bellar. contra Barklaiunâ— c nisi fecerint etiam cogere per excommunicationem The Pastor may and ought to command Kings to punish Hereticks if they do it not even to compell them with excommunication But especially si sit Haereticorum vel Schismaticorum fautor Aâ—or insâ— moral part 2. l. 10. cap. 9. receptor vel defensor if hee be a favourer receiver or defender of Hereticks and Schismaticks If your Bishops be such men is not this your Kings fault your fault is that you use but too much lenity in not ascending from the Myter to the Crown for this may stand very well with your Tenent and Ours though Protestant Divines disclaim it for your Buchanan teacheth you that not only it is lawfull to excommunicate Princes but that they should both depose him Buchan de â—ure reg apud Scot. pag. 70. and destroy him for hee sayes Ministers may excommunicate Princes and he being by excommunication cast into Hell is not worthy to enjoy any life upon earth But truly Knox Buchanan are more rigid then we are herein for howbeit we grant that it 's lawfull to excommunicate Kings yet wee hold it not necessary that upon excommunication either deposition or killing should follow Indeed by our common Tenent it will follow that excommunication is an antecedent to deprivation or killing but we do not hold that deprivation or killing of Princes is a necessary consequent or effect of excommunication For say we quando talis effectus adjungitur Suaâ—ez de censur disp 15. sect 6. non est effect us ipsius excommunicationis sed specialis poena simul cum excommunicatione imposita When such an effect is joyned to excommunication it s not the effect of it but a speciall punishment imposed with it But it s wonderfull to see the wide difference between this our Tenent and yours and that which Protestants hold for they make the power of the supreme Magistrate Architectonicke and subject unto it all power civill Ecclesiasticall So that as in civill affaires they use the counsell and help of Politicians and Jurisconsults for establishing of Lawes according to reason so in Ecclesiasticall businesse they use the help and advice of learned Divines for establishing religion according to Gods Word which ought never to depart from their hands And it s most boldly said by them in the words of Bishop Davenant Reges non it a astringuntur Episcoporum vel Theologorum suorum opinionibus Daven deter quast 19. quin si adversentur legi divina cujus oportet reges studiosissimos peritissimos esse teneantur ex officio regio veram religionem illis omnibus licet reclamantibus tueri subditis suis proponere Kings are not so tyed to the opinions of their Bishops and Theologues but if they bee contrary to the Law of God of the which Kings ought to be great studiers and very well skilled they are bound by their Kingly Office to defend the true religion and set it before their Subjects albeit all those Divines should cry out against it But those men are Court Parasites as your usuall word is or as Beeanus calls those that defend the Kings Supremacie regios adulatores King-flatterers And I admire that Tertullian being under Heathen Emperours should be guilty of those flatteries while hee sayes in a Court-like complement Reges in solius Deipotestate sunt Tersul ad Scap. Ã quo sunt secunds post quem primiâ—ante omnes super omnes deâ—s homines Kings are only in the power of God from whom they are second after whom they are first before all and above all
you who did refuse obedience to that which is judged by all your prime Doctors to be lawfull Thus those two famous Doctors of yours Gualter Bullinger did write in an Epistle sent to the Schismaticks in England who had opposed themselves as you do to the Service-book of England If in case say they any of the people be perswaded that those things savour of Poperie let them be taught the contrary and perfectly instructed therein and if so be through the importunate crying out hereupon before the people by some men many be disquieted let them beware that do so that they bring no greater yoke upon their own necks and provoke Queen Elizabeth her Majesty and bring many Ministers in such danger as they cannot rid themselves again I will shew you an example hereof which fell out in Germanie at Magdeburge and within the Territories of Marquesse Albertus The Prince required the Ministers to follow the whole book of Augustan's confession where is a Liturgie that hath all that is in yours which you have condemned but some mâ—e ceremonies and doth retain the name of the Masse-book Refusall thereof was made by the Nobility Gentry Ministers and Citizens even as some of all this ranke among you have done The Court hereon ran upon another deliberation proposing Articles which doe not alter the doctrine and Liturgie but thrust upon them mâ—e Ceremonies which yet howsoever may well enough be borne sayes Melancton whom you call the light of Germanie adding withall a threatning that they who will not follow this prescription should depart the Land Upon this some too forward Ministers affirmed It were good to affright the Court with some terrible writing with the scare of Sedition and with this Scar-crow to represse and hinder further alteration Illâ—ricus Flaccius was chiefe man the Demetrius in this upreare crying out as your Ministers did That rather desolation should be made of the Church and Princes are to be frighted with terror of Insurrection But for my part said Melancton I will be author of no such soure advice Whereupon the â—est of the Ministers did slander Melancton as Anticovenanteâ—s say you doe them as Popishly affecâ—ed Couâ—â—h Melan. part 2 pag. 90.91.100 and was upon the plot to reduce Poperie and wrote to Calvin to this effect But truly I am of Beza's opinion that they accused him without cause as afterward Calvin knew more truely For sayes Beza at the beginning it was not knowne with what intention that evill spirit â—â—â—a 〈…〉 1â—â—0 and whole Troup of the Flaccinians raised so many tumults and now at this time doth hinder the work of God against Papists Thus Beza And it is true indeed that the Flaccinians who thus did combine against their Prince did more advance our cause then Melancâ—on and the remanent of your Doctors whose judgement was that the Church should not be troubled by refusing the Service book and as Melanctons words are to wrangle about a Surplesse or the like matter where wise-men will exclaime against us that we withstand and disobey Authority and nourish contention with a foolish forwardnesse Now seeing it hath pleased your King to deale thus with you to lay no heavier burdens upon you who have complained of a light one but to grant you all that hitherto you have pâ—titioned see if you can obtaine of him a change of the government But I pray you doe it with great prudence and circumspection laying such grounds as you may firmely build upon them For if at the first you declare your selfe and say plainely Sir wee desire your government changed he will resile and not grant it and to proceed suddenly from one extremitie to another is difficult Therefore first of all by such faire wayes as you can bee instant to take from him his negative voyce in Synods and Parliaments which is a thing so essentiall to Soveraigntie that it standâ—th anâ—â—alleth with it For he being destitute of this Pâ—llar if in Parliaments by pluralitiâ— of voyces it be carried that you will not have this man to raign over you of necessitie he muâ—â— be gone Secondly see if you can take from him the power of making Laws and let the Parliament and Synods bee the Law makers You have taken this de facto already in your large proâ—eâ—ation in Septemb. 1638. where you say in expresse terms that the Parliament and Syned are the Law-makers and the Law-interpreters As you have it de facto see if you can get it de jure established by Law which if you obtaine you may thinke you have attained your end for if not the King but Parliament and Synods be the Legislators hee must he subject to such Laws as it shall please them to make who are the two Supreme judicatories to which in your protestation you appeale from the King and his Councell thus subjecting your King to Parliament and Synod which is a thing that â—ee can hardly suffer But to please him withall appoint him to be the Executioner of the Laws and so let him have the name of a King But it may be â—hat if he have no more but the execution of your Lawes that he shall rid himselfe of that too if you grant him no more power because men will say He is not your King but your Officer or H c. Thirdly if so bee that he shall be content with what portion of authoritie you judge sufficient take heed that hee fall not upon you who have thus curbed him and execute the laws against you and therefore to make all cocke sure because he cannot doe all by himselfe but must have Officers under him let this bee granted to you also to be Chusers of his Officers and let those be such as you know most expedient for you and so they shall be rather your men then His. I heard that all this was motioned by you but you have not showne me what successe it hath taken I have dwelt long upon this necessary point of the change of Government and therefore I proceede to a second head where into wee fully conspire and it is a very fit preparative to this intended change Covenâ—â—teâ— inâ—â—â—m fâ—r dâ—seâ—siâ—e aâ—g 3. And I cannot but applaud you for rejecting that former errour to defend that Kings are of Divine Institution and doe now hold with us that they are of humane Institution by positive Lawes Inregnis hominum potestas regis est à popule Bell de Concilâ—lâ—â— 2. cap. 19. quia populus facit regem In the Kingdome of men the power of the King is from the people sayes Bellarmine and commends Navarre Qui non dubitat affirmare nunquam populum ita potestatem suam in regem transferre quin illam sibi in habitu retineat ut in certis quibusdam casibus etiam * Alâ—â— astu actu recipere potest Who doth not doubt to say that the people did never so transferre their power to the King but they did retaine it habitually
condemned with blind obedience before they did see or read it It might be sufficient for me to deny what you peremptorily affirme against it and it s your part to prove the Affirmative and your best Prâ—bation is your naked assertion seconded with railing against all that will not beleeve you But I pray you heare the Book speak for it selfe and it shall â—urge iâ—â—elfe of such calumnies in the judgement of all indifferent men and it will tell you that you are like Davids enemies casâ—ing iniquitie upon it where you find none and laying to its charge the thing it never knew and so doe haâ—e it without a cause Fâ—ist then here it purgeth it selfe of all Superstition at the â—ust entrie of the booke where it sheweth the reasons why some ceremonies are abolished and some retained in plaine words saying The multitude of ceremonies are rejected because of their multitude and superstition And in the celebration of the Holy Communion it recommends the use of common bread But wherefore for the avoyding of Superstition sayes the booke so that at the very entry the booke is most carefull to satisfie all scrupulous people thus telling them that it hates superstitiâ—n as well as they Again if there were any thing superstitions in this booke it must be enjoyned as a thing necessary in it selfe as unchangeable the not observing of it would be damnable as the breach of Gods Law To all this the Book answers in the same place that it enjoyneth nothing in that manner but what the Word of God commands And as for the ceremonies contained in it it is so farre from esteeming them things necessarie that it placeth them in the ranke of indifferent things The keeping or omitting whereof is but a small thing sayes the booke It sayes further that those ceremonies are taken away which were most abused and did burthen mâ—ns consciences without cause and that those which remain are retained for disciplinâ— and order It tells that they are also changeable and not to bee compared to Gods Law whilest it sayes of them thus Upon just causes they may be altâ—red and changed and therefore are not to bee esteemed equall with Gods Law What can any man say more against superstition then is said by the book it self Therefore it s very likely that they have not read the book as I am sure the most part have never done or at least have read it with an evilleye who condemne it of Superstition whereof it is most free As for the second that it doth containe the essentiall parts of the Masse read and see the contrary in the book it selfe which doth keepe Christs institution it selfe and Pauls repetition of it in such sort that I thinke no Church can celebrate the Sacrament with more puritie sinceritie gravitie and none with more Majestie then by this booke But let me speak a little for it I pray you Why are you so sparing you may say as well that it containes the whole Masse as the maine essentiall parts of the Masse for if you have any Logicke or naturall reason you may so conclude for where that is which is essentiall to a thing there the thing it selfe must be But in this booke say you are the essentiall parts of the Masse what doth hinder then but that it hath the Masse it selfe in it for if it have the maine essentiall parts of the Masse what doth it lack or want not the proper accidents for these do flow from the essentiall parts and are inseparable from it It can want nothing then of the Masse unlesse it be some common accidents which may be either present or absent without any hurt of the subject What boldnesse is this then to speak such a maine essentiall lye Let me either see that the book maintaineth that sub speciebus panis vini the body and bloud of Jesus Christ is bodily offered up by the Priest to God the Father a propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead or else lay your hand on your mouth speak no more Finally since it hath neither Superstition not the essentials of the Masse how can it open a doore to Popery certainly it is purged from all such stuffe and restored to the antient integritie the least thing that might tend to superstition being thrust out of doore as Ammon did Tamar without hope of return and if any superstition would dare to enter as the Sodomits at Lots doore the doore is so fast shut by that which I have told you from the mouth of the book it selfe in the beginning of the right use and abuse of Ceremonies that they must despaire of any entrie What needs all such uproare then without cause such fearfull Schismes such Dictatorial censures and uncharitable verdicts that they are all Papists or Popishly affected that â—un not with you to mischiefe Shew me but one masculine reason and lay aside wives tales and I shall take it in place of many â—runt ultimi primi I shall redeeme my time with redoubling my course and shall be so far from approving the least point which you shall shew to be Poperie that for that one points sake it shall get no more pitie then Samuel gave to Agag I shall rent it in pieces Reade over that which you have condemned with judgement and not with prejudice and I shall oblige my selfe to make good those particulars First that you shall never be able to find any thing in it contrary to the word of God 2. That it containeth nothing contrary to the practise of the Primitive Church but which is most agreeable thereto 3. That all the points which you condemne are not controverted betweene our classicall Divines and Papists but agreed upon on both sides as things not controverted 4. That there is nothing in it contrary to our Confession of Faith in Scotland Yea which is much you shall not show me one Protestant Divine of any note or eminencie even among the Reformers of Religion who ever did condemne this booke of the least point of Popery But on the contrary did commend it and defend it against all pettie preachers who refused it as you do Learned Bucer thus affirmeth Bucer Script Anglâ—â— in con pag. 456. In the Ceremonies of the English Lâ—turgie I have found nothing which is not taken out of the Word of God or at least which is repugnant to it so it be favourably understood Calvin himselfe perusing the Lyturgie Calâ— in epist 200. fol. 336. declared that he found no fault in it at all and wrote to the English Exiles at Frankford who had made a rent and schisme in the Church to be moderate and returne to the Church Vos ultra modum rigidos esse nolim I would not have you stiffe above measure and bids them returne to Conformitie and proponeth his owne opinion in Anglorum controversia moderationem semper tenni cujus me non poenitet In the controversie of England I have ever kept a