ingenious Adversary conclude thence that it was the power of Truth not any sleight of tricks which thus baffled the Dr. If then my greatest faults be proved innocent my lesser ones will I conceive be held so likewise since it is presumable that no man will accuse another of a greater faul but upon a better ground Now the greatest vices of a Writer are falsifications for what credit can ever be rationally given to any Writer who is once convinc't to have bely'd the Author he cites to have falsify'd wilfully Faults of this sort he objects to me onely in two places as far as I observe In examining which I crave the Readers exactest diligence decline not his most rigorous censure nay if he can in reason iudge that I wilfully chang'd any thing that is gain'd or endeavored to gain the least possible advantage by my mistake which is the onely touchstone as it is the sole reason of falsifying then I give him free leave to brand me in his thoughts for infamous and shall in requitall pardon Dr. H. the long rowle of his wilfull or manifestly advantageous ones 〈◊〉 first of these pretended falfisications is found related in his Answ p. 201. and also put in the title to his 11th Section p. 195. To clear the Reader 's understanding the better and mine own credit totally I will put down first the substance of the point there handled the substance of my Answer given next the circumstances amongst which my wrong transcription is found by which means one may easily solidly iudge whether my oversight had any influence at all upon the point in hand and conclude that if evidently it had none then it was onely a materiall lapse in transcribing Dr. H's words equally incident to any man living not a formall fault In his book of Schism p. 124 parag 19. he attempts to prove that Kings have supreme power in Ecclesiasticall causes Amongst his other marginall notes ayming to conclude this in the following page we read these words So in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole third book is made up of iustinians 1. e. the Emperor's constitutions de Episcopis Clericis Sacris concerning Bishops Clergy men Sacred Offices This is the substance nay the totall of his objection The substance of my Answer â—ound Schism Disarm'd p. 167. is this that all the laws found there must not necessarily be Iustinians since the Keepers of laws use not onely to put in their law books those Constitutions themselves made but also those they are to see observed amongst which are the Canons laws of the Church made before by Ecclesiasticall power This is the main substance of my Answer to that objection in generall How weakly he reply's to this telling us onely Answ p. 202. that this cannot possibly be accommondated to the matter in hand because 't is certain cries the strong reasoning Dr. he made many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning Ecclesiasticall matters which the Authors name put to them and the persons to whom they were written I cannot totally omit to let the Reader see by the way how pittifull this Reply of his is how nothing to the point this being to say over again what we grant and leaving untouch't what we object since all this might have been done whether those Constitutions had been originally his own or no and will serve for an instance how weak this Dr. is in the following part of his book were he duly call'd to account But this concerns not my task at present which is onely this to put down substantially the question his proof my Reply that it may be thence iudged whether I could possibly be said to gain any advantage by the circumstances I faultred in The first of those circumstances is that whereas his words were Iustinians Constitutions de Episcopis Clericis Sacris I transcribed de Episcopis Clericis Laicis Now if he contend I transcribed one word wrong in answering his whole book I grant it and I conceive Dr. H will not presume himself exempt from the like faillings But if he pretend that I falsify'd or did it voluntarily plain sence will overthrow him quit me No man does a thing voluntarily but for some end and the end an insincere Writer can be imagin'd to have in falsifying is to gain some advantage to his cause If then it be most manifest that I neither did attempt nor could possibly gain thence the least advantage nor that he himself attempts to shew I gain'd any no man of reason but will acquit my sincerity accuse mine Adversary for a calumniator First then that I did not attempt any advantage thence is clear both in my words which never put either the least force in the word Laicis nor so much as mention'd it or any thing to that sence nor yet in the omission of Sacris Secondly it is yet more manifest in that mine Adversary never goes about to show that I made the least use of this mistake which yet solely imported in such an objection but rather on the contrary calls it a meannes saying that I am come to that meannes of changing his words and indeed it is a strange meannes to change them to no purpose and alledges onely as the cause of that meannes forsooth that I did it not to gain any help to defend my tenet by it but to get some advantage of carping at them But that even this is as falsly pretended as the other the Readers eye will inform him if he please to peruse my Answer Schism Disarm p. 167. where he will see that there is not a sillable which sounds like carping at his words but a serious Answer to the point Thirdly that I could reap no profit by such a mistake appears by the very point it self apply'd to my words for since he denies not but I transcrib'd right and grants that he made laws de Episcopis Clericis of Bishops and Clergy men to what end should I omit Sacris sacred Officies since he that could make laws concerning those who were over Sacred Officies could a fortiori make laws for the Sacred Offiâ—ies themselves as himself yeelds of Schism p. 125. l. 18. 19. And lastly this objection is convinced to be most senceles by this that my Answer given was equally pertinent strong apply'd to Sacris had it been there as it was to Episcopis Clericis when this was left out since it contended that law Keepers use to put in their law books the Constitutions Canons of the Church to make them more powerfully observed received which equally fit 's the pretence that they made Constitutioâ—s de Sacris as that they made them de Episcopis Clericis In a word I confess the infinit tediousnes of my dreaming Adversary made me write the whole book in some hast caused by my impatience to stand triffling after that manner and my particular hast here appears also by leaving
own their reason and bring it home to it self rather than suffer it to wander in a pathlesse wildernesse of words and think it an endeavour more worthy a rationall soul to weave well compacted Treatises by evident connexion of terms than fruitlesly to stand picking thrums-ends out of overworn garments when they have done scarce know what colour they are of or how to knit them handsomely together without the motley of non-sence Thus much to give account of my obligation not to favour Mr. H. while he impugnes that Faith which I esteem most certain and most concerning Now for his person as it comes to me under any other notion than of a writer against God's Church I profess with all sincerity to honour and love it in the measure which reason requires As a member of the civil commonwealth I live in I bear him a civil respect I hear he is much a Gentleman and very courteous in return to which if it be my good fortune to meet him I shall be as ready to serve him in what may not concern my cause and do him as much civility as I would to most Gentlemen in England According to the degree of scholarship I find in him I shall candidly allow him a proportionable honour and shall not envy it him though mine Adversary even in his absence amongst mine own Friends I value-him for his skill in Greek a language I much love my self and think it a great ornament to a scholar if he know how to use it seasonably and not wantonly shew it upon all or rather no occasion in which Mr. H. hath very mvch diminish't himself giving his Readers a fair title to suspect him either of too much vanity in that or emptiness in other knowledges I applaud his unwearied industry half of which employed in a rationall way by some strong brain might be the happy Mother of many rare productions His looking into such variety of Authours deserves also it's commendation since testimonies have their degree of probation allowed them by their Governesse Reason that is according to the degree of knowledge or Authority subsequent to it found in the Testifier and the clearnesse from ambiguity found in the words alledged nay rather I should esteem him more for this than all the rest were this way of testimonies in it self much estimable since his chief and almost onely talent lies in this which furnishes him with sufficient store of such declamatory proofs and enables him to bring some kind of testimony against any thing that can be opposed as the nature of such sleight quotation-argumenrs uses to be for indeed what so absurd but a testimony may be produc't even from the best Authours seeminly favouring it as we experience daily in Scripture Lastly and more especially I acknowledge I am much his for the sakes of some Friends common to him and me which as no man with more veneration honours that sâ—cred relation of minds than my self doth in a manner mediately ally me to him and makes me desirous to flatter my self that the agreeing in a third should make us not disagree amongst our selves All these motives give him no mean place in my thoughts and esteem yet all these temporall considerations vanish and he straight becomes again indifferent to me when a quarrell about Eternity of mankind's blisse or misery is to be controverted betwen us and my deemed certainty of my Cause which concludes him by consequence certainly pernicious obliges me in Conscience to confute nay even disgrace him as far as he shall be found the promoter of a pestilent and soul-ruining Tenet Although I must confesse withall I am sorty that by is own fault he occasion'd this conscientious engagement in me for had there been no infection spread there had needed no Antidote What I have said here was to satisfy some whom I found much mistaken in the manner how Controversies ought to be treated by a Catholick not considering that Courtesy is a vertue onely in fit circumstances otherwise but an impertinent flattery or affectation and in a serious controversy about faith whose both Concernment and Certainty justify zeal and make it necessary as improper as for souldiers who are to try the field about their Kings and Countreys interests to hold their sword in one-hand and hat in the other complement and kisse their hands to one another instead of striking or by any unnaturall mixture of both make a gallant show of a mock fight preferring the care of court esy before the losse of their Cause For the satisfaction of these I have Apologiz'd thus far not in relation to Mr. H. The proper way to answer his weak proofs out of Scripture here were to gather by the help of an honest Concordance all the harsh words in the Scriptures spoken by our Saviour or his Saints and apply them voluntarily against him as he has done against me at which if he repine then to ask why my interpretation should not be as valid as his And with good-reason too should I daing him onely a reply in this method for why should not an answer of any thing serve to a quodlibeticall objection Sect. 3. How unfortunate and weak Dr. H. is in quoting S. Hierome against the Disarmer for writing plainly His crafty and discourteous Calumny AFter the testimonies from Scripture blindly levell'd at S. W. followes in the sixt Paragraph that it was a deviation from art to treat him thus unkindly to which I have answered above and that S. Hierome notes it as a great errour in Helvidius that he took railing for eloquence Wherefore since Mr. H. chuses S. Hierome for his Patron against S. W. in this point of the manner of writing controversy let us stand to his ward and example and see how he treated Vigilantius Dr. Hs. and the Protestants Forefather in the point of denying veneration to Holy Reliques and wether he stood upon courtesy when he made account he had a just occasion to shew his zeal In his Epistle to Riparius the first he writ against Vigilantius he hath these words O praecidendam lingâ—am c. O tongue worthy to be cut out by Physicians or rather oh frantick head to be cured by them c. Ego vidi hoc aliquando portentum I once saw this prodigious monster Tacita me forsan cogitatione repre hendas c. Perhaps thou mayest reprehend me in thy silent thought why I inveigh against one absent I confesto thee my passion I cannot hear so great sacriledge with patience For I have read of the lance of Phinees the austere rigour of Elias the zeal of Simon of Cananee the severity of Peter killing Ananias and Sapphira the constancy of Paul who condemned to eternall blindnesse Elymas the Sorcerer resisting the wayes of our Lord. Piety in Gods behalf is not cruelty Nor by consequence is zeale in behalf of Faith railing if that Faith be held to have certain grounds which onely can justify zeal and make it discreet But
that he is sure the Protestants are not so persuaded nor ever had cōvincing Grounds represented to persuade them of it referring me to a book of his own called The View of Infallibility In answer I refer him to Rushworth's Dialogues and assure him that if he be not blinded with prejudice or interest he may see it there shown as perfectly as that two and three are five And as for his Book I find no such worthy stuffe in these as can invite me to think an hour well spent in perusing that Brother of theirs After this going about to vindicate the uncertainty on the Protestant's side he runs p. 21. 22. again to their full or verily-persuasion but never tells us whether this full persuasion of theirs sprung from the light of pure Reason that is Evidence or from passion interest and ignorance adding a parallel of beleeving that King Henry the eighth was King of this Nation the reasons whereof notwithstanding he accounts fallible because the testimonies of meer men Whereas I account it most evident and demonstrable and promise him to have acquitted himself better than ever Protestant did yet if he can show me the thousandth part of this Certainty which he puts here for a parallel of the Protestant's Vncertainty for any point in which they differ from us that is for any point which they have not received as handed down by Tradition or Attestation of Fore fathers For never let him expect to make a rational man beleeve that scruing or misunderstanding an odde line or two glean'd for the nonce out of Scripture or and old Authour can by any multiplication arrive to the clearness of the former ample undeniable uncontroulable Verdict of witnesses that King H. the eighth vas King of this Nation much lesse to that of our Rule of Faith being an attestion of things infinitely more importing which a multitude incomparably more numerous had seen visible in practice besides other assistant motives implanted by the Apostles the Holy Ghost especially cooperating in the hearts of the first faithful and still continued to this day which strengthen man's nature to the impossibility of erring in such an Attestation This vast advantage hath our Rule of Faith over this instance of K. H's reign here yet I doubt not to affirm that the testification of the latter renders it demonstrable which I thus show This undoubted and never yet-denyed persuasion that K. H. the eighth reigned here imprinted in the hearts of all in England not onely attested by all Fathers in that Nation but even by innumerable multitudes in other Countries his foul acts making him famous this persuasion I say is an Effect and consequently sprung from some Cause but no Cause can be imaginable in reason able either to breed this strong persuasion in such a world of knowing persons nor bribe so many attesters to a conspiracy of witnessing such a visible thing except the Being of King H. and of his Reign therefore he was or did reign here otherwise this persuasion and attestation had been effects without causes or which is all one without proportionable causes which being evidently impossible it is also evident and demonstrable that he did rule in England Now whoever should goe about to answer the major by putting some Cause as possible to be in it self proportionable and so able to produce this strange Effect besides the Existence of K. H. the eighth the very position would disgrace it self and the Authour when the proportions of it's efficacity came to be scann'd and apply'd to the Vniversal and strange Effect spoken of Again should a man consider this ample and uncontrolled attestation of it and all the other motives which infer it as King H's Wives Alliances abroad Warres Acts of Parliaments Embassadours in all parts Descent Apostatizing together with the infinite multitude of Conveyances Bonds Iudgments Foundations and innumerable such other things relating to such and such a year of his Reign and after all these fully considered should notwithstanding seriously express his doubt that he could not beleeve there was ever any such man would not all that heard him justly think him a mad man If so then surely he must have renounc't no less than rigorous Evidence and Demonstration the onely perfect light of Reason who can deserve justly such a censure It was therefore rigorously evident and demonstrable that King H. the eighth was Thirdly if it be not evident and demonstrable the contrary may possibly be such for one side must needs be true so all truths being connected in it'ts own nature demonstrable but it is evidently impossible the contrary should be demonstrable or the motives for it show'd not-concluding therefore they concluded demonstrably The minor is prov'd clearly for first it is not against any natural Science and consequently not possibly disprovable by natural reason nor yet by any Authority for in our case there is an Attestation for it uncontrolled by any either orally or by writing Wherefore there is left no means possible to goe about to confute it or evidence the contrary it self therefore is most perfectly and most strongly evident and demonstrable nay impossible to be deemed or pretended to be shown otherwise Bring not then Mr. H. this infallibly-and demonstrably-grounded instance for a parallel of your vertible and Wind-mill uncertainty till you can show you can produce the million'th part of that Evidence and certainty but rather be asham'd to pretend to make head against our Rule of Faith which is of an attesting Authority incomparably more numerous more clear and more strongly supported by all kind of imaginable assisting circumstances than was that now explicated with obscure or misinterpreted scraps of dead Authours cast into what mold you please by Id est's self-explications and voluntary deductions according to the easily-bending nature of words That is blush to have renounc't your Reason in renouncing Evidence of Authority to follow unreasonableness in assenting upon ambiguous probabilities After this to clear himself from denying Infallibility which denial was charged and hath been shown to take away all beleef and ground of Beleef he tells us pag. 23. It is evident that beleef is no more than consent to the truth of any thing and the grounds of beleef such arguments as are sufficient to exclude doubting to induce conviction and persuasion But sure Mr. H. forgets what he is about for to divine beleef which is commanded by God himself and so cannot be sinfull not every consent ought to serve but a rational one nor any conviction but such an one as is rational that is grounded upon Evidence of that Authorities veracity in that which she proposes to be beleeved which how it can stand with her fallibility in the same point is past Dr. H's skil to make good since if it be once known that she can erre in it it can never be shown thats he does not there being no certainer Authority than her self to testify certainly when she hits and when
prove that the Emperour did it without the Pope's signifying such their desires to them next that if they did it without this they did it lawfully and lastly that were both proved it was not necessarily consequent that the Pope had therefore no Authority over the Church since there might be other Acts of Vniversal Authority besides gathering of Councils For answer Dr. H. refers me to his Reply p. 38. where nothing at all is found to strengthen the two former weaknesses of his consequences nor yet indeed the latter since he does not undertake to show that there can be no other Acts of supreme Authority besides gathering of Councils which if there can then those Acts can denominate the Pope Head of the Church notwithstanding the defect in the nor performance of the other and by consequence his argument of not being Head of the Church from not gathering Councils is at an end Yet something he pretends here to make good this latter defect to wit that this Authority of Convoking Councils is inseparable from the supreme power is most characteristical of it c. Whereas indeed this Convoking of Councils is no ordinary Act of any standing Iurisdiction or Government but an extraordinary affair springing from some necessity or extremity and so the necessity pressing may be performed by him or them who can best provide for that extremity Which if other circumstances agree is most fitting to be ordered by the Pope whose universal superintendency qualifies him for both care and knowledge of the Churche's wants But if Mr. H. means it is inseparable so that it cannot be done without the Pope's express and actual orders or undertaken by any but the Pope himself he is in a great mistake For it is very well known that in divers cases it is otherwise As suppose the See be vacant or the Pope himself be unsound in Faith be distracted or kept in close prison or in case there be an Anti-pope which makes the title dubious c. In which cases the Cardinals have power to call a Council or the Bishops to assemble themselves And in general whensoever there is an extremity damageable to the publick nor possible to be remedied by him to whom that duty most fittingly and so rightfully belongs any one that hath sufficient power and skill let him be Patriarch Bishop Prince or private man not onely may but ought apply both as much as in him lies to prevent the harme of the publick 'T is evident then that the notion of the actual power to gather General Councils is not the very notion of the Pope's Authority nor as Mr. H. expresses it Characteristical of it or inseparable from it since it has been shown that the one can be without the other To this proof from gathering Councils he proceeds to alledge some Testimonies Reply p. 39 that there was not anciently besides the Prince or Emperour any Supreme or as the Doctor strangely expresses it any summum genus and that the Bishop of Rome was not this summum genus It is a pleasant thing when those men will be nibbling at wit who never knew how to manage the knack Would not Supreme Bishop or Governour have served without being thus unfortunately witty in calling it a Summum genus and then to tell us that a particular man is not a Summum genus When we learn'd Logick we were told that a Summum genus was perfectly and actually included in every Individual conteined under it I hope the Pope's power is not found on this fashion in every Priest But let us take a view of his testimonies which are reduced to two heads to wit those which would prove the Pope no Summum genus from the denial of Appeals to him and those which would conclude him no Summum genus from titles and names deny'd him Those concerning Appeales which must manifest the individual person of the Pope to be no Summum genus are First from the Milevitan Council Repl. p. 39. 40. forbidding that Priests should appeale to any forrein power but onely to the African Councils or their own Primates Secondly from the Nicen Can. 5. ordaining that they who were excommunicated by some should not be received by others The third from the Synodical Epistle of the African Council to Pope Caelestine in these words We intreat you that for the future you will not easily admit those who are Excommunicated by us c. To these he addes a fourth from the 34. Apostolick Canon that the Bishops of every Nation must know him that is first among them and account him their Head I answer that as for the three first in general they only forbid the Appeals of Priests from their Bishops c. but leave it indifferent whether the Bishops Arch-Bishops nay Primates themselves may appeale to the Pope which we make account is a far greater honour to the Pope than the deciding the inferiour Controversies concerning Priests So that these testimonies argues no more against the Pope's Authority than it would against the Supreme power of any Prince or secular Magistrate if the Laws of the Land should forbid Theeves Robbers and such inferiours Delinquents after their condemnation by the Iudges and other inferiour Officers to appeal to him Who sees not that there could never be any Government or Iustice done if every Priest though found never so guilty at home by his own immediate Governours should have liberty granted him to appeal to the Supreme living perhaps in another Country far distant not skilled in the immediate circumstances which give the best light to judge of a cause but receiving his information from letters perhaps partial or from heare-say ever uncertain Again who sees not that such an easy admittance of every ordinary Delinquent's Appeal is both most cumbersom nay impossible to be perform'd by the Supreme and very derogatory to the esteem and Authority of Inferiour Officers without the Conservation of which all Government and Common-good goes to wrack Iustly then did the Church in the Nicen Council and elsewhere for these and many other reasons ordain that Priests should make no farther Appeal than to domestick Iudges the Pope himself being present and consenting to it yet without detriment to his Authority since this eases him of cumber not discredits his power for it denies not the Appeals even of Arch-Bishops and Patriarchs to him unless Mr. H. will say that every consenting upon rational Grounds not to execute Authory is to disannul and abolish quite that whole Authority for he ayms at no less in this worthy Discourse of his upon the said Citations And this may suffize in answer to his three first Testimonies as also to the first of these three in particular to wit that they forbid him not to execute an higher strain of power in receiving Appeals of Bishops and as for the making it unlawful for inferiour Delinquents to appeal to him it can onely infer necessarily the unfitness that the Pope should execute
nor was pretended by mee as such but as a consideration which much aggravates the charge and obliges in all reason the renouncers of this Authority to look very charily to the sufficiency of the causes of thâ—t their division For since it follows out of the terms that ere they renounced it and by thus renouncing it left to bee Catholikes they immediately before held it as Catholikes do that is held it as a point of faith and of Christ's Institution and since it is evident that none ought to change his faith which hee and his Ancestours immemorially embrac'd but upon evident Grounds again since it is evident likewise and confest that temporall motives ought not to make us break Christ's commands which is done by rejecting a Government which hee instituted Two things are consequent hence to their disadvantage one that their motives ought to bee rigoro sly evident and demonstrative for their renouncing it since dâ—nger of damnation ensves upon their miscarriage and this even in their own thoughts as they were lay'd in their minds when they first began to meditate a breach The other that the pretended causes especially temporall inconveniences for the abolishing this Authority can no waies iustify the first breakers who held it formerly a point of faith since no iust causes can bee given to renounce an Authority held to bee instituted by Christ As then it had been rationall to Reply to King H. the 8th remaining yet a Catholike and beginning to have thoughts to abolish this Authority upon such and such temporall inconveniences that his maiesty and his Ancestours had held it of divine Institution and that therefore there could bee no iust cause to abolish it so it is equally seasonable to Reply to my Lord of Derry who undertakes here to vindicate him by alledging the same thing that these causes nor any else were sufficient to make them begin to break because ere they begun the breach they held this Authority to bee of Christ's Institution and therefore it is a folly for him to think to iustify them by huddling together causes and motives and crying them up for sufficient till hee can show they had Evidence of the Truth of the opposite point greater than the pretended Evidence of Authority universall Tradition which they actually had for their former tenet If a cause bee sufficient to produce an effect and equally apply'd 'tis manifest the same effect will follow Hence as an argument of the insufficiency of their motives of Division I alledged that all other Catholike countries had the same exceptions yet neither broke formerly nor follow your Example Hee answers first Few or none have sustain'd so great oppression which signifies I know not well whether any have or no or for any thing I know some have Nor does hee prove the contrary otherwise than by a pleasant saying of a certain Pope Any thing will serve him Next hee tells us all other countries have not right to the Cyprian priviledges as Brittain hath And how proves hee that this country had any by that Council Is England named in the Council of Ephesus which exempted Cyprus from the Patriarch of Antioch No. Is Brittain at least No. How come wee then to bee particularly priviledg'd by that Council Why the Bp. of Derry thinks so His Grounds Because that Council ordains that no Bp. should occupy a Province which was not from the beginning under his Predecessours And how proves hee the application that England was never anciently under the Pope as Head of the Church from Sr Henry Spelman's old-new manuscript and two or three raggs of History or misunderstood Testimonies Are they demonstrative or rigorous Evidences Here my Ld is wisely silent Will less serve than such proofs to iustify such a separation Hee is silent again Were they a thousand times as many are they of a weight comparable to a world of witnesses proceeding upon the Grounds of immediate dâ—livery from hand to hand which recommended and ascertain'd the contrary Alas hee never thinks of nor considers that at all but very wisely puts his light grains in one end of the scales negl â—cting to put our pounds in the other and then brags that his thin grains are overweight The third particularizing motive is his own unprou'd saying and is concluded with a boast that hee is not the onely schismatick in the world but hath Brothers Is this the way to argue against us To call all those Christians which profess the name of Christ and communicate with himself in the same guilt and then say hee hath fellows in his schism Hee knows wee grant them not to bee truly-call'd Christians but in the name onely and equivocally as a painted man is styld ' a man If hee will show that any Congregation of truly-call'd Christians partakes with him in the separation from Rome let him show that these pretended Christians for those points in which they differ from us did not renounce the onely certain Rule of faith Tradition or delivery of immediate forefathers or that there is any certain and infallible Rule but that Otherwise they are cut of from the Rule and Root of faith and by consequence not in a true appellation to bee call'd faithfull or Christians otherwise they heard not the immediately foregoing Church for those points which they innovated and so are to us no properly call'd Christians but according to our saviours counsell as Heathens and publicans I mean those who knowingly wilfully separated Talking voluntarily my Ld according to the dictates of your own fancy will not serve in a rigorous Controversy First show that those you call Christians have any infallible or certain Rule of faith and so any faith and that they have not onely a probable and fallible GrouÌ„d that is opinion onely for their faith and then you shall contradict your own best and more candid writers who confess it in terms and do such a miracle as your Ancestours never attain'd to nor any of wit and ingenuity attempted seeing it impossible to bee done rationally I alledged in the next place to show more their inexcusablenes and the infussiciency of their pretended motives for breaking the example of our own country and forefathers who had the same cause to cast the Pope's Supremacy of the Land yet rather proferr'd to continue in the peace of the Church than to attâ—mpt so destructive an innovation The Bp. replies first that wee should not mistake them aâ—d that they still desire to live in the Communion of the Catholike Church c. No my Ld I doe not mistake you but know very well you would bee willing and glad too the former Church should own you for hers I doubt not but you are apprehensive enough of what honour would accrue to you if wee would account you true Catholikes and what disgrace you get by being accounted Hereticks and Schismaticks by us But yet your desire of staying in the Church is conditionall that you may bee permitted to remain