THE COPPY OF A LETTER Sent from France by Mr. Walter Mountagu to his Father the Lord Privie Seale with his answere thereunto ⧠Also a second answere to the same Letter by the Lord Faukland Imprinted 1641. My Lord AFter much debate concerning the fittest expression of my duty to your Lordship whether I ought by silence seeke to suspend the beliefe of the declaration of my self I have made here or by a cleere profession of it assure you of what I may onely feare to present you with as apprehensive of a mis-interpreted affection I concluded what was most satisfactory to my first and immediate duty to God was most justifiable to my second and derivative to Nature therefore I resolved so soone to give you this ingenuous account of my selfe The greatest part of my life capable of distinction of Religions hath been employ'd in places and conversant with persons opposite to the faith I was bred in therefore it had been strange if naturall curiositie without any spirituall provocation had not invited mee to the desire of looking with mine own eyes upon the foundation I stood upon rather there holding fast blindfold by my education to agree to be carried away alwayes after it insensible of all shocks I met to unfasten me and besides I was solicited with the reproaches Protestants press upō Catholikes that they blindly believe al the impostures of the Church without any illumination of their judgements this me thought enjoyn'd the cleerest information of my self of the differences betweene us I could propose to my capacity So at my last journey into Italy I did employ all my leasure to a more justifiable settlement of my belief as I then imagined to a cōfirmation of my judgment in what had been introduced by my birth and education I began with this consideration that there were two sorts of questions betweene the Catholikes and Protestants the one of right or doctrine the other of fact or story as this whether Luther were the first erector of the Protestants Faith whether it had a visible appearance of Pastors and Teachers before his time I resolved to begin my enquiry with the matter of fact for these Reasons first because they were so few and so comprehensible by all capacities and the controversies of doctrine intricate and so many as they required much time and learning for their disquisition onely and I found my self unprovided of both those Requisitions for this undertaking and for the decision of the other I needed not much presumption to believe my selfe a competent Judge when it consisteth onely in a perusall of authentike testimonies Secondly I considered that there was no one part of controverted Doctrine whereon all the rest depended but that this one question of fact was such as the decision of it determined all the rest for if Luther could be proved to be the Innovator of the Protestants faith it was necessarily evicted of not being the true ancient and Apostolicall Religion therefore I began with this enquiry which Protestants are bound to make to answer this Objection to find out an existence of some Professors of the Reformed Doctrine before Luthers time for finding the Catholikes were not obliged to prove the Negative it was my part to prove to my selfe the Affirmative that our Religion was no Innovation by some Pre-existence before that but in the perusall of all the Stories or Records Ecclesiasticall or Civill as I could chuse I could finde no ancienter a dissention from the Roman Church then Waldo Wickliffe and Huffe whose cause had relation to the now-professed Protestancie so as I could find an intervall of about 800 yeers from the time that all Protestants confesse an unitie with the Church of Rome downe to those persons without any apparent profession of different faith to answer my selfe in this point I read many of our Protestant Authours who treated of it and I found most of them reply to this sence in which I cite here one of the most authentike Doctor Whitaker in his Controversie 2. 3. pag. 479. Where they aske of us where our Church was heretofore for so many ages Wee answer that it was in secret solitude that is to say it was concealed and lay hid from the sight of men and further the same Doctor Chap. 4. pag. 502. Our Church alwayes was but you say it was not visible doth that prove that it was not No for it lay in a solitary concealment To this direct sence all the answers were that ever I could meet with to this objection I repeat no more those places being so positive to our point this confession of Invisibility in our Church for so many ages did much perplex me it seemed even to offend naturall Reason such a derogation from Gods power or providence as the sufferance of so great an ecclipse of the light of this true Church and such a Church as this is describ'd to be seeming to mee repugnant to the mayne reason why God hath a Church upon earth to be a conserver of the doctrine of Christ and his precepts and to convey it from age to age untill the end of the World therefore I applyed my study to peruse such Arguments as the Catholikes brought for the proof of the necessity of a continuall visibility of the true Church down from the Apostles time in all ages and appearance of Doctors teaching and administring the Sacraments in proof of this I found they brought many provisoes of Scripture but this Text most litterall of the fourth of the Ephesians Christ hath placed in his Church Pastors and Doctors to the consummation of the Saints till we meet in the unitie of the faith and next the discourse upon which they inferre this necessary visible succession of the Church seem'd to me to be a most rationall and convincing one which is to this effect Naturall reason not being able to proportion to a man a course that might certainly bring him to a state of supernaturall happinesse and that such a course being necessary to mankind which otherwise would totally faile of the end it was created for there remayned no other way but that it must be proposed unto us by one whose authoritie wee could not doubt of and that in so plain a manner as even the simplest might be capable of it as well as the Learned This work was performed by our Saviour from whose mouth all our faith is originally derived But this succeeding age not being able to receive it immediate from thence it was necessarie it should be conveyed unto them that lived in it by those that did receive it from Christs own mouth and so from age to age untill the end of the World and in what age soever this thread of doctrine should be broken it must needs be acknowledged for the reason above mentioned that the light which should convey mankind through the darknesse of this world was extinguisht and wee left without a guide to inevitable ruine which cannot stand with Gods
providence and goodnesse which Saint Augustine affirmes for his opinion directly in his Booke de vtil cred. cap. 16. saying if divine providence does preside over our humane affairs it is not to be doubted but that there is some authority constituted by the same God upon which going as upon certain steps we are carried to God Nor can it bee said hee meant the Scripture onely by these steps since experience shewes us by the continuall altercation about the right sense of severall of the most important places of it that what is contained there cannot be a competent rule to mankind which consisteth more of simple then learned men and besides the Scripture must have supposed to have beene kept in some hands whose authority must beget our acceptance of them which being no other then the Church of all ages we have no more reason to beleeve that it hath preserved the Scripture free from all corruption then that it hath maintained it selfe in a continuaâ—◠〈…〉 isibility which Saint Augustine concludeth to be a marke of the true Church in these words in his booke contra Cecill 104. The true Church hath this certain signe that it cannot bee hid therefore it must bee knowne to all Nations but that part of the Protestant Donatist is unknown to many therefore cannot bee the true No inference can be stronger then from hence that the concealment of a Church disproves the truth of it Lastly not to insist upon the allegation of the sense of all the Fathers of the Church in severall ages which seemed to mee most cleere that which in this cause weighed much with mee was the Confession and Testimony of the approved Doctors themselves of the Protestant Church as Hooker in his booke of Eccles. Pol. pag. 126. God always had and must have some visible Church upon earth And Doctor Field the first of Eccle. cap. 10. It cannot bee but those that are the true Church must be knowne by the Profession and further the same Doctor saies how should the Church bee in the World and no body professe openly the saving truth of God And Doctor White in his defence of the way cap. 4. pag. 790. The providence of God hath left monuments and stories for the confirmation of our Faith and I confesse truly that our Religion is false if a continuall descent of it cannot be demonstrated by these monuments downe from Christs time this appeareth unto mee a direct submission of themselves to produce those apparent testimonies of the publique profession of their faith as the Catholikes demand but this I could never read nor know of any that performed For D. White himself for want of proof of this is fain to say in another place in his way to the Church p. 520. The Doctors of our faith have had a coÌ„tinual succession though not visible to the world so that he flies from his undertaking of a conspicuous demonstration of the monuments of his faith to an invisible subterfuge or a beleefe without appearance for hee saith in the same Book in an other place pag. 4. All the externall government of the Church may faile so as a locall and personall succession of Pastors may be interrupted and pag. 40â— We doe not contest for an externall succession it suffiseth â—hat they succeed in the Doctrine of the Apostles and faithfull who in all ages did embrace the same truth so as here hee removeth absolutely all externall proofes of succession which before hee consented to be guided by I cannot say I have verbally cited these Authors because I have translated these places though the Originall be in English yet I am sure their sense is no way injured and I have chosen to alleadge Doctor Whites authority because he is an Orthodox professor of the Protestant Church the reflection of the state of this question wherein I found the Protestants defend themselves onely by flying out of sight by confessing a long invisibility in their Church in apparence of Pastors and Doctors left mee much loosened from the fastnesse of my professed Religion but had not yet transported me to the Catholike Church for I had an opinion that our Divines might yet fill up this vacuitie with some more substantiall matter then I could meet with so I came back into England with a purpose of seeking nothing so intentively as this satisfaction and to this purpose I did covertly under another mans name send this my scruple to one in whose learning sufficiencie I had much affiance in these termes Whether there was no visible succession to be proved in the Protestant Church since the Apostles time downe to Luther and what was to be answered to that objection Besides the confession of invisibilitie for so many ages to this I could get no other answer but that the point had been largely and learnedly handled by Doctor White and many others of our Church upon this I resolved to informe my selfe in some other points which seemed to mee unwarrantable and superstitious in the Ceremónies of the Church of Rome since I had such an inducement so little satisfaction in a point which seemed to mee so essentiall and in all these scruples I found mine owne mistake in the belief of the Tenets of the Roman Church gave me the onely occasion of scandall not the practice of their doctrine and to confirme mee in the satisfaction of all them I found the practice and authority of most of the ancient Fathers and in the Protestant Refutation of these Doctrines the Recusation of their Authorities as men that might erre so that the question seemed then to me whether I would rather hazard the erring with them then with the later Reformers which consequently might erre also in dissenting from them since then my resolution of reconciling my selfe to the Roman Church is not lyable to any suspition of too forward or precipitate resignation of my selfe my judgment may perchance be censured of seducement my affection cannot bee of corruption Upon these Reasons I did soone after my returne last into England reconcile my selfe to the Roman Catholike Church in the belief and convincement of it to be the true ancient and Apostolicall Church by her externall marks and her internall objects of faith and doctrine and in her I resolve to live and die as the best way to salvation when I was in England I did not studie dissimulation so dexterously as if my fortune had read it to me nor doe I now professe it so desperatly as if it were my fortunes Legacie for I doe not believe it so dangerous but it may recover for I know the Kings wisdome is rightly informed that the Catholike Faith doth not tend to the alienation of the subject it rather super-infuseth a reverence and obedience to Monarchie and strengtheneth the bands of our obedience to our naturall Prince and his grace and goodnesse shall never finde any other occasion of diversion of them from the naturall and usuall exercise of themselves upon
contend no longer But wee renounce all men alike as inventors of Religion or any part of it but hold only the Apostolicall doctrine of the ancient Primitive and Catholike Church presume not to coine any new Creed Yet we are not unwilling to grant that Luther was one but not the first of many that restored the purity of the doctrine which had been long smothered by the Papacie our faith if you take in the whole is no other but what is exiconized in the Apostles Creed included in the Scriptures If you take it in a lower and straighter way for so much of it as is opposed to the corruption of popery you must remember that these points are neither the whole nor greatest points of faith there are not any points of our faith but we are able to shew they had mayntainers few or many in all ages since the Apostles time and every of these ages those substructures of Popery opposed some by one man some by an other I wonder therefore to see you carried away with that common and triviall calumny that Luther was the inventor of our faith and why say you that for the intervall of 800 yeers before there was no apparent profession of faith different from Rome and this you collect by historicall search of all the stories and Records Ecclesiasticall and Civill It seems Italy affords you no coppies of our Writers else might you see in them a list which they carry out through all these spaces and shew you that most of our tenents have had the suffrage of the learn'dst of Romes side and how many men in the decursion of time from the ancientest of Fathers have declared themselves and some of them apparently yee earnestly contended for the truth of our doctrine And where you object that Waldo Wickliff Hus had scarce any relation to the professed Protestancie if you meane because we disclaim those horrid opiniōs wch are put upon them how true God knows therein you say truly Neither they to us nor we to them have any relation but in the main points of doctrine touching faith and opposition of the superstitions and usurpation of the papacie wee have a joynt consent of all the best Writers Historians and Divines of both sides that they and we consent in one It is strange therefore to say that these and wee had no relation to the Protestant profession who for substance of Religion held as we doe their errours only we own not and the consent of times doe all agree that the Waldenses flew out against their corruptions 400 yeeres before Luther was borne nay saith Renerus Quidam dicunt quòd secta illa duraverie à tempore Silvestri alii quod à tempore Apostolorum deriving their fundamentall doctrine from the time of the Apostles nor were they few sed multiplicati super arenas maris nor plebeians only sed principum favore armati As the Kings of Arragon the Earles of Tholouse and many moe So that there are witnesses more then sufficient that there were many who opposed themselvs to the Papacie in the Protestants tenents long before Luther This is the first supposition failing I will now let you see the mistakes in the subsequent passages and open to you my self hoping yet that I may draw you againe to me You as you conceive having shewed a defect of visibilitie in our Church till Luthers time labour to prove a necessity of visibilitie to every true Church if it were granted that it were simply necessary to the essentiating of a Church to be able to demonstrate in all times both the visible number of professors of the truth as also a visible succession of Pastors we are able to demonstrate both these for our defence to bee as unquestionable in our Church as in the Church of Rome they that are otherwise minded will account this a bold undertaking but it is no hard matter to do Wherefore the vanitie of that question to aske where our Church was before Luther becomes not any man that hath read any thing of our Church monuments But you would seeme to mee to prove it two wayes first by the testimonie of our owne Divines Secondly by argument By testimonies of our Divines you would have Doctor Field Doctor White and Master Hookes to confesse needfulnesse of visibilitie and yet for their own Church fly to latencie For the second you instance Doctor Whitaker and Doctor White one of them to confesse our Church for many ages to have beene in a secret solitude and the other to let goe his defence of visible succession by flying to an invisible subterfuge of non-apparency if you had better perused the truth of those Writers they would have given you full satisfaction but you mistake both the persons and the points These made a demonstration of those 3 points First that neither the Churches obscurity is repugnant to the visibilitie of it Secondly nor the visibility of it such as excludes all latencie Nor yet the latencie of Orthodox Christians in the swaying time of Popery such as had not requisite lineaments of an accomptable visibilitie But you must know that visibilitie doth not alwayes carrie the same height but admits of degrees so that wee cannot say that that wants visibilitie which hath it in a lower degree The Sun compared with it selfe is in a degree visible though in a mist yet not so cleerly visible as when it shines out so it is with the state of the Church because her splendour is not in termino but such as receives degrees by augmentation or diminution like as the Sun is as truly visible under a cloud as in his brightnesse though not so cleerly visible though not to admit the Church to be visible except shee be glorious is an errour for there 's a variation of the Churches visibilitie in respect of her object the want of which consideration I believe is one cause why so many deceive themselves in this point secondly there is another diversity which ariseth from the visible object some may see and will not there the fault is not in the object but in the beholders Philosophers say Visibilia non sunt minus visibilia cum non videntur quam quando videntur The objects of sight remain still discernable when they are not discerned so it is with the Church there are strictures of visibility discernable in her obscure condition but it is possibile non visum which fals out when men will not open their eyes or they shut them on purpose which hapned in the prevailing times of popery when this notwithstanding yet there were lights which appeared by the defence of the truth and the discovery of errour in every age of the intervall But sure our men labour in vain to demonstrate that visibilitie whilst they of the Papacie are so dis-affected as not to acknowledge it upon any terms otherwise this controversie had long since been ended if they had been as well disposed to see as we
others other out of which by comparing their doctrine with the Scripture men may draw a perfect body of Truths and though they delivered few other Truths yet in delivering Scripture wherein all necessary Truths is containd they deliver all and by that rule whosoever regulates his life and doctrine I am confident that though he may mistake errour for Truth in the way hee shall never mistake Hell for Heaven in the end Seventhly His next reason is their common Achilles the fourth of the Ephesians which he chuseth onely to employ like his Triarios his mayn battell leaving his Velites his light armed Souldiers some places too allegorical even in his own opinion to stand examinatiō The words are these He hath given some Prophets some Apostles some Evangelists some Pastors and some Doctors for the instauration of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edification of the body of Christ till wee all meet in the unity of Faith and the knowledge of the Sonne of God unto a perfect man and unto the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ That we may be no more children tost and carried away with every winde of doctrine c. Verse 11 12 13. Now out of this place I see not how a succession may be evinced rather I thinke it may that the Apostle meant none For first he saith not hee will give but he hath given and who could suppose that the Apostle could say that Christ had given then the present Pope and the Doctors who now adhere to him Secondly allow that by he hath given were meant he hath promis'd which would be a glosse not much unlike to that which one of the most witty and most eloquent of our modern Divines Doctor Dun notes of Statuimus i. Abrogamus yet since these severall Nowns are all governed by the same Verb and no distinction put it would prove as wel a necessity of a continual succession of Apostles Prophets and Evangelists as of Pastors and Doctors which is more then either they can shew or pretend they can so that it seemeth to me to follow that these were then given to do this till then and not a succession of them promised till then to doe this and so wee receiving and retaining the Scriptures wherein what they taught is contain'd as wee would any thing else that had as generall and ancient a tradition if there were any such need no more for if hee say that men are tost for all the Scriptures I answer so are they for all these Doctors nay if these keep any from being tost it is the Scripture which does it upon which their authority is by them founded upon their own interpretation and reason who yet will not give us leave to build any thing upon ours out of plainer places and though they tell us that wee cannot know the Scripture but from the Church they are yet fain as appeares to prove the Authoritie of the Church out of Scripture which makes mee aske them in the wordes of their owne Campian and with much more cause Nihilne pudet Labyrinthi Eigthly there follows an other reason to this sense that Reason not being able to shew away to eternall happinesse and without such an one man would fail of the end to which he was ordained it must be propos'd by an infallible authority in so plain a manner as even the simple might be capable of it which being performed by our Saviour it must be convai'd to succeeding ages by those who heard it from him and whensoever this thread failed mankind was left without a guide to inevitable ruine I answere that though all this be granted it proves not against us for we have the Scripture come downe to us relating Christs Doctrine and written by those that heard it and which the simple are capable of understanding I mean as much as is plaine and more is not necessary since other Questions may as well be suffered without harme as those betweene the Jesuites and Dominicans about Predetermination and betweene the Dominicans and almost all the rest about the Immacultate conception and those who are not neither are they capable out of Scripture to discerne the true Church Much lesse by any of these notes which require much understanding and large learning as conformity with the Ancients and such like Ninthly the same answere I give to this serves also to the following words of Saint Austin for whereas Master Mountague concludeth that he could not meane the Scriptures as a competent rule to mankind which consisteth most of simple persons because there hath been continuall altercations about the sense of important places I answere that I may as well conclude by the same Logick that neither is the Church a competent guide because in all ages there have also beene disputes not onely about her authority but even which was shee and to whatsoever reason he imputes this to the same may we the other as to negligence pride prejudication and the like and if he please to search I verily beleeve he will find that the Scriptures are both easier to bee knowne then the Church and that it is as easie to know what these teach as when that hath defin'd since they hold no Decrees binding de fide without a confirmation of the popes who can never bee knowne infallibly to be a Pope because a secret simony makes him none no not to be a Christian because want of due intention in the Baptizer makes him none whereof the latter is always possible and the first in some ages likely and in hard Questions a readinesse to yeeld to the Scriptures when they shall be explan'd me thinks should serve as well as a readinesse to assent to the decrees of the Church when those shall bee pronounced Tenthly Hee saith the Scripture must be kept safe in some hands whose authority must beget our acceptance of them which being no other then the Church of all ages we have no more reason to beleeve that it hath preserved that free from corruption then its selfe in a continuall visibility I answer that neither to giving authority to Scripture nor to the keeping of them is required a continuall visibility of a no ways erring body of Christians the writers of them give them their authority amongst Christians nor can the Church move any other and that they were the writers of them we receive from the generall Tradition and testimony of the first Christians not from any following Church who could know nothing of it but from them for for those parts which were then doubted of by such as were not condemned for it by the rest why may not wee remayn in the same suspence of them that they did for their being kept and convey'd this was not done onely by their Church but by the Greeks and there is no reason to say that to the keeping and transmitting of Records safely it is required to understand them perfectly since the old Testament was kept
transmitted by the Iews who yet were so capable of erring that out of it they lookt for a temporall King when it spake of a spiritual me thinks the testimonie is greater of a church that contradicts the Scripture then which doth not since no mans witnessing is so soon to be taken as when against himselfe and so their testimony is greater of a Church that contradicts the Scripture by which themselves are condemn'd Besides the generall reverence which ever hath bin given to the Books the continuall use of them together with severall parties having alwayes their eyes upon each other ready and desirous to have somewhat to accuse in their Adversaries gives us greater certainty that these are the same writings then we have that any other ancient Book is any other ancient Authors and we need not to have any other unerring company preserv'd to make us surer of it yet the Church of Rome as infallible a Depositarie as she is hath suffer'd some varieties to creepe into the Copies in some lesse materiall things nay and some whole Books as they themselves say to be lost and if they say how then can that be the rule whereof part is lost I answer that wee are excus'd if we walk by all the rule that we have and this makes much against Traditions being the rule since the Church hath not lookt better to Gods unwritten word then to his written and if she pretend she hath let her tell us the cause why Antichrists comming was deferr'd which was a Tradition of St. Paul to the Thessalonians and which without impudence she cannot pretend not to have lost and if againe they say God hath preserv'd all necessary Traditions I reply so hath hee all necessary Scripture for by not being preserv'd it became to us not necessary since wee cannot be bound to beleeve and follow what we cannot finde But besides I beleeve that all which was ever necessary is contain'd in what remaines for Pappias sayes of S. Mark that he writ all that S. Peter preach'd as Iraeneus doth that Luke writ all that S. Paul preach'd nay Vincentius Lirinensis though hee would have the Scripture expounded by ancient Tradition yet confesseth that all is there that is necessary and yet then there was no more Scripture then we now have as indeed by such a Tradition as he speaks of no more can be prov'd then is plainly there and almost all Christians confent in and truly I wonder that they should bragge so much of that Author since both in this and other things he makes much against them especially in not sending men to the present Roman Church a much readier way if he had knowne it then such a long and doubtfull one as hee prescribes which indeed it is impossible that almost any question should be ended by Eleventhly He brings S. Austines authority to prove that the true Church must be alwayes visible but if he understood Church in Master Mountagu's sence I think he was deceiv'd Neither is this impudence for me to say since I have cause to think it but his particular opinion by his saying which Card. Perr quotes that before the Donatists the question of the Church had never beene exactly disputed of and by this being one of his maine grounds against them and yet claiming no Tradition but onely places of Scripture most of them allegoricall and if it were no more then I may better dissent from it then he from all the first Fathers for Dionisius Areopagita was not as yet hatcht in the point of the Chiliasts though some of them Pappias and Iraeneus claim'd a direct Tradition and Christs owne words Secondly as hee useth this kind of liberty so he professeth it in his 19 Epistle where he saith that to Canonicall Scriptures he had onely learnt to give that reverence as not to doubt of what they said because they said it and from all others hee expected proofe from Scriptures or reason Thirdly the Church of Rome condemnes severall opinions of him and therefore she ought not to finde fault with them who imitate her examples Twelfthly He adds two reasons more the consent of the Fathers of all ages and the confession of Protestants To the first I answer that I know not of any such and am the more unapt to beleeve it because M. Mountague vouchsafes not to insist upon it nor to quote any which I guesse he would have done but that hee misdoubted their strength Secondly suppose that all the Fathers which speak of this did say so yet if they say it as private Doctors and claime no Tradition for it I know not why they should weigh more then so many of the now-learned who having more help from Art and no fewer from Nature are not worse searchers into what is truth though lesse capable of being witnesses to what was tradition Thirdly they themselves often professe they expect not to be read as Judges but as to be judg'd by their and our rule the Canonicall Scriptures Fourthly Let him please to read about the imaculate conception Posa Salmeron Wadding and he will finde me as submissive to antiquity even whilest I reject it as those of his owne Party for they to preferre new opinions before old are faine to preferre new Doctors before old and to confesse the latter more perspicacious and to differ from those of former times with as little scruple as hee would from Calvin whom Maldonat on purpose to oppose confesseth he chuseth a new Interpretation before that of all the Ancients which no witnesse but my eyes could have made mee beleeve nay and produce other points wherein their Church hath decreed against the Fathers to perswade her to doe so againe although Campian with an eloquent brag would perswade us that they are all as much for him as Greg. the 13 who was then Pope To the second I answer that infallibility is not by us deni'd to the Church of Rome with an intention of allowing it to particular Protestants how wise and learned soever Thirteenthly Hee says next that hee after inform'd himself in other points which seem'd to him unwarrantable and superstitious and found onely his own mistakes gave him occasion of scandall to this I answer that I cannot well answer any thing unlesse he had specified the points but I can say that there are many as picturing God the Father which is generally thought lawfull and as generally practised their offerings to the Virgin Mary which onely differs frō the heresy of the Colliridians in that a candle is not a cake their praying to Saints and beleeving de fide that they heare us though no-way made certaine that they doe so and many more which without any mistake of his might have given him occasion to be still scandalized for whereas he saith that these points were grounded upon the authority of the ancient Fathers which was refused as insufficient by Protestants I answere that none of these I name have any ground