and if you intend to go on in this way then you shall hear farther from me Concerning the Sacraments which the Church of England appears I have told you my mind once already Sect. 14 Quer. Whether at this day there be no Pure and Apostolical Service of God in the World except that established by Law in England and Irealnd Whether it be lawful for the People of England to invent a Church to themselves divided from all the rest of the Christian World By what Authority do they censure the Sacraments and Rites of the Roman Church Answ For an Answer to the first part of the Query I send you back but to the last Query of all where you may find it As to the second I say 't is not lawful for the people of England or for any other People to invent a Church by which you mean I should think to invent a New Religion New Doctrins Worships and Governments But what came into your Head to ask this Question I am not able to imagin since our people have Invented no New Church but only retrieved the Old Whilst you all people have been the best at this Invention and by Inventing a New Creed and New Objects of Worship and New Sacraments and a New Head of the Catholick Church have effectually divided yourselves from all the rest of the Christian World that stick to the Old Religion and will have none of your Inventions 2. I must acquaint you that the two former Branches of this Query seem to me to make up a kind of Nonsence between them for in the first you suppose that we pretend to have a pure Apostolical Service amongst us and in the second that we must needs grant our Church to be one of our own Invention Now we might take it ill to have Questions put upon us as if we were such Ninnies as to pretend to an Apostolical Service and yet to grant that we our selves were the Inventors of it 3. Take all together and the most I can make is this that you lay great weight upon your Presumption that by our Service we stand divided from the rest of the Christian World which I have already told you is notoriously false But for your better Instructions I shall add that if indeed we only had a Pure and Apostolical Service and yet upon the account of our Service no other Christians would Communicate with us the rest of the Christian World ought to be ashamed of it but we not at all By the run of your Queries you seem to be ignorant of one of the plainest things in the World which therefore I do again commend to your Consideration viz. that Truth is the same and changes not whether they be many or few that profess it and that our Religion stands not in a multitude of Pretenders but in a Holy Doctrin and a Holy Practice which all ought to follow even when the most do not As for the third Branch of this Query By what Authority c it comes in as if you could never ask it often enough But if I have not given you a sufficient Answer pray do you try to give a better if you can to this By what Authority do you censure the Sacraments and Rites of the English Church Quer. Whether Cranmer was the first Arch-Bishop of the Church of England The reason of my doubt is this because Archbiships of Canterbury for nine preceeding Ages were all Roman Catholicks If he was the first he wanted Episcopal Succession because being the first of his Sect he succeeded to none Then how could he be a lawful Pastor who had neither Succession Mission nor Miracles to recommend his New Doctrin I say New and strange at that time and for many Ages before Sect. 15 Answ He that affirms there were Roman Catholick Archbishops of Canterbury for Nine Ages before Cranmer and yet makes a doubt whether Cranmer were the first Archbishop of Canterbury or not shall doubt on for me If indeed Cranmer was the first Archbishop of Canterbury then as you say he wanted Episcopal Succession in the See of Canterbury that is he had no Bishops that were his Predecessors in that See because he was the first and I am very glad that you don't doubt of that too And yet I think there is as much reason to doubt of that as of the other But then you are come to an end of the first doubt presently for now you do not doubt but Cranmer was the first Archbishop tho' there were Archbishops for Nine Ages before him and wanted Episcopal Succession I suppose you do not care to stand doubting long upon a Matter But in the name of sence how can this be Why Because being the first of his Sect he succeeded none Notably spoken and all is now as plain as can be Because Cranmer was the First of his Sect in the See of Canterbury Therefore he was also the First of his Order for if there were no Archbishop of his Sect before him without all doubt there were no Archbishops before him at all And yet there were too therefore I begin to doubt this will prove but a bad business at last However Sir I give you many thanks for your Argument such as it is for the distinction which it proceeds upon we have been tugging for this hundred and fifty years and you at last have very civilly yielded it to us For in plain English you would prove that Cranmer wanted Episcopal Succession because he wanted Doctrinal Succession he was say you the First of his Sect and therefore he succeeded to none And again How could he be a lawful Pastor who had neither Succession c. to recommend his New Doctrin Now tho' I can by no means grant that want of Doctrinal Succession implies the want of Episcopal Succession nor will you neither when you have taken something to clear your Brain yet I do very thankfully acknowledge that to make a Good Pastor there ought not to be an Episcopal Succession only but a Doctrinal Succession also Now Cranmer we say received his Orders from the Bishops of his Age and his Episcopal Succession from his immediate Predecessor in the See of Canterbury and so upward Thus far now we are very well But then for his Doctrin for which you would make him the First of his Sect he took a far better course than as you would have had him to receive it for good and all from his immediate Predecessors for it was possible and upon trial he found it certainly true that his Predecessors had made a failure in Successon of Doctrin and innovated against the Antient Faith and Worship of the Christian Church He therefore went to the Records of the Primitive Church and to the Scriptures which are the most Antient of all and the only Infallible Rule of Faith by which he found and so may you if you have Grace to do it that some of those Bishops whom you speak of that went
before him had miserably failed of carrying on the Succession of True Doctrin Now I will be content in this Matter to make you the Judge that if they are not lawful Pastors who want succession of Doctrin whether the unlawful ones be those who broke the Succession of it at first or those that restored it afterwards And because I will not tye you too severely to your own words I will abate the word lawful and suffer you to put Good Pastors instead of it For I think that Orders and Regularity of Episcopal Succession will suffice to make them lawful Bishops who for corrupting the Doctrin of the Church shall not be allowed to be Good ones I have one word more to say and then you shall speak You have heard I perceive from some of your Friends that the Archbishops of Canterbury for Nine Ages before Cranmer were Roman Chtholicks Now their meaning was that all the Archbishops of Canterbury even from the time of Gregory the Great that sent Austin hither were just such believers as those whom you now call Roman Catholicks But tho' you know not these Matters and it may be not they neither yet I can assure you that very many of your Doctrins and Practices are not only different from but contrary to what was believed and done in Pope Gregories days which you shall find made out very clearly to your hands in the Vindication of the Answer to some late Paper p. 72. c. So that there has been sad tampering with Christianity since his time and when first the Archbishops of Canterbury became your Roman Catholicks they themselves interrupted the Succession of Primitive and Antient Doctrin Take good notice of the place I refer you to in that excellent Book now mentioned and if you improve by it as you ought I may direct you hereafter where to find that the Corrupt Doctrins of your Church were of a much later date than for you to talk as you do of Nine Ages before Cranmer Sect. 16 Quer. Whether that be a True Church that wants Lawful Pastors And whether Pastors not Lawful and True can be said to have true Sacraments If not then is it not better to Communicate under One Kind with Catholicks than under No Kind with Reformers Answ But if we have Lawful and True Pastors as for any thing that you have hitherto said nay that you or any of your Party can say we are sure that we have then this Query comes in too soon And therefore at present the Question stands thus Whether it is not better to Communicate under Both kinds with the Real Catholicks than under One Kind only with the Pretended Ones But if you think fit to Renew the Query I would advise you to Mend it a little against the next time and not by any means to question the Validity of our Sacraments so crudely as you do for you will find that your own Church does not presume to Baptize those over again which go from us to you And it were not amiss if you would tell us more distinctly what you mean by Lawful Pastors whether you oppose them only to such of the Validity of whose Orders we have no good assurance or who also came into their Cures by Simony or who are Schismatical Pastors and the like for these can hardly be said to be Lawful Pastors Make your Query plain and I have a plain Answer for you which perhaps you little think of Sect. 17 Quer. Whether the XXXIX Articles of the Church of England be Articles of Faith yea or no If not then no body is bound to believe them under pain of Damnation If they be then hath the Church of England invented New Articles of Faith besides those XII instituted by Christ and his Apostles Answ In Return to this Query I shall deal as plainly with you as you could wish Many of the Articles of the Church of England are Doctrins opposed to the Errors and Innovations which your Church holds for Articles of Faith. Now as to these Doctrins we do not Esteem them in the same rank with the Articles of Faith because they are not at all times necessary to be propounded to all in order to their Salvation but they are necessary to be taught the Faithful in these Parts of Christendom to secure them from the Contagion of those Errors you have brought into the Church For instance if you had not set up the Doctrine and Practice of Praying to the Saints there had been no need at all of a Determination of this Church against it nor had it been necessary to instruct our People that the Saints are not to be Prayed unto Had not Your Church invented the Article of Transubstantiation Ours had not opposed a contrary Article to it Now as to the Doctrine of these and the like Articles of our Church we do not say that it is in itself Necessary but only Profitable But it is necessary for us to Teach it because as you have ordered Matters to be Ignorant thereof is very Dangerous the contrary Errors being Damnable For you are strangely mistaken if you think that no Error is damnable but the direct denial of some Truth which is always necessary to be propounded to all that is of an Article of Faith strictly and properly so called And I can assure you that the best Divines of your own Church are of another mind There is therefore no room left for your Second Supposition That if they be Articles of Faith then hath the Church of England invented New Articles of Faith c. But I wonder not a little at the boldness of your Inference while with no better colour for it you would draw us in to be suspected of that which yourselves are so notoriously guilty of i. e. of making New Articles of Faith. For had not you done so we should have had no occasion to Oppose your Inventions so vigorously as we have done nor you any colour to Insinuate as if we had added to the Creed I would fain know of you that if False Doctrins which do not directly contradict the Articles of the Creed should be thrust into the Creed by one part of the Church whether another should be afraid to contradict them for fear of being accused of adding the contrary Propositions to the Creed too though it be evident that they do it not but only take care to keep the Old Faith pure from New Doctrines and the Minds of the Faithful uncorrupted with False Doctrines If you should think fit to say so I must then ask you Whether Ten Thousand Foolish and False nay and Dangerous Opinions might not by some or others be tack'd to the Ancient Creeds and yet the rest of the Christian World should not dare to determine precisely against them And yet I must tell you That if you have not capacity enough to distinguish between rejecting Errors on the one side and adding to the Articles of the Creed on the other I
a great deal of Good but would be sure to do no Hurt at all either to the Church or to the World. Sect. 34 Quer. Why did so many Noble Men under Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth so readily Embrace the Reformation Was 't for Conscience sake or the Lucre Church-Lands Answ The Noblemen under those Princes were generally for Wisdom Fortitude and Manners a Glory to their Age and Nation But now they are dead and gone and it will be time enough to know the Secret into which you are inquisitive when the Day of Judgment comes and till then I can be contentedly Ignorant whether it be for Conscience sake or the Lucre of Church-Lands that you wrote these Queries Sect. 35 Quer. Why do Englishmen so desirous of Novelties hate Popery Perhaps because Popery is no Novelty Answ If you are an Englisman methinks 't is no good sign of the Religion you are of that it has inspir'd you with the scorn and hatred of your own Countrymen to that degree as to spend a reproach upon them which all the World sees there is not the least appearance of Cause for Friend you took no little care to hedge in this Abuse when you were fain to turn Answerer to your own Query to compass it to your mind But as your Anger had been less so your Wit had been more to have let alone both Question and Answer for there is that in them to clear us from your Reproach You say we hate Popery because 't is no Novelty And yet neither we nor our Fathers nor our Grandfathers have professed or practised Popery and therefore in spite of your heart Popery must be a Novelty to us who consequently if we may be Judged of by this Instance are not so desirous of Novelties But if you had given us leave to Answer your Question Why we are not in love with Popery I should have Answer'd to this purpose That it is not so far a Novelty neither but tho' we are Strangers to the Profession of it yet we have so true an Idea of the Doctrines and Practices of your Church that yourselves are not able to deceive us into another Sect. 36 Quer. The Church of England is either Fallible or Infallible it Fallible as is confest by all then is she not sounded upon a Rock because she may deceive and be deceived Answ After all the exquisite Discourses that have been published upon this Subject It is what shall I call it to think that such a pitiful Argument as this is worth a Thought Try if you please this knotty piece of work upon your own dear self for no other Answer you shall have from me You Sir are either Fallible or Infallible if Fallible as I humbly conceive you are then you are not founded upon a Rock because you may deceive and be deceived But this Argument thus turned upon yourself is now I look upon it again a monstrous dull one I confess and that for proving you not to be built upon a Rock because you may be deceived when 't is so notorious that thou art all over actually deceived as thy lamentable Papet shews thee to be There is indeed a little life in that other part of the Argument that you may deceive for perhaps that is not very much more than possible so that I think this little pains I have taken might have been spared for I dare say there are very few whom You and your Queries will be able to deceive Sect. 37 Quer. Whether Cardinal Wolsey did wisely by Demolishing Monasteries to Found Colleges The reason of this doubt is because the Tree of Knowledge was not the Tree of Life Answ So so Monasteries were the Tree of Life and Colleges are the Tree of Knowledge Very neat and witty I promise you Hence forward we shall not want a Text to prove that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion If Erasmus had not happened upon something like this in his Emcomium Moriae by my consent it should have been written upon your Tomb-stone Here lies the Author of this Query Whether Cardinal Wolsey c. But what have we to do with Cardinal Wolsey Or rather What have you to do to say any thing against him Was it a small matter for you to trample upon the Ashes of Cranmer that nothing will now serve you but to pirk over Wolsey's too I have taken your size Sir and must needs put you in mind that in you 't is want of Manners almost to Talk of Archbishops and Cardinals when you but Think of such Great Men as Wolsey and Cranmer the one a Cadinal of the Roman Church the other an Archbishop of Canterbury Men indeed of different Religions but both of extraordinary Abilities as well as high Station I say when you but hear them or such as they mentioned you should presently reflect upon your own little self and not dare to open your Mouth till Persons of much meaner Rank come into Discourse Sect. 39 Quer. Is there not wanting in the Church of England a more Correct Translation of the Bible Answ I warrant you expect that I should say I or No to this Query presently But in such a case a wise and honest Man must have the putting of the Question In few words I do by no means deny that the English Translation can be more Correct than it is After the exactest care 't is likely there will be some defect in so great a Work. But this we say that we need not a better Translation than it is and in particular that for the Skill and Fidelity that is shewn in it we will compare at any time with the Vulgar Latin. And therefore whereas you add Sect. 39 Quer. That many material Errors are found in our present English Bible tending to Schism and Liberty of the Flesh Answ I Answer That you are very much mistaken to say so which I will first shew against your Instances and then leave the Reader to say what other Name your importunity in this place deserves The First Instance you refer to is Gal. 5.17 For the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the Flesh and these are contrary one to the other so that ye cannot do the things that ye would Now I suppose the material Error in this Translation lies in these words so that ye cannot do which you would say ought to have been so that ye do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this I Answer That the words †will bear both Versions tho' I confess the latter seems to me to be more Grammatical The Reason I conceive why our Translators chose the former was that the following Verse seems to imply that in this Verse the Apostle speaks of those that are led by the Flesh who in that state cannot do the things which their Conscience prompts them to Now this I say is so far from being a material Error tending to Liberty of the Flesh that 't is no Error at all
the Character of a good Man whether they had the same Spirit of Sincerity and Piety and Charity and the like then according to this Notion I Answer That I verily believe they bad both the same Spirit notwithstanding that difference and consequently that the Spirit of the one as well as of the other was of God. Thirdly and Lastly This word Spirit is sometimes used to signifie a Persuasion concerning some Doctrin proceeding from the immediate Inspiration whether of the Good or the Evil Spirit And if the Question goes upon this meaning 't is an Impertinent Question for Luther and Calvin did not pretend to teach Doctrine from Immediate Imspiration but to Prove their Doctrine by the Scriptures But if you only meant to make some advantage to yourself from these two Mens disagreeing in a Matter which we must confess to be of Moment I only desire you to turn the Tables and to Answer these Queries Whether the Spirit of the Jesuites who say that the Pope is above a General Council and the Spirit of the Sorbon utterly denying it be the same Spirit Whether the Spirit of Thomas Aquinas affirming that the same Honour is to be given to the Image that is due to the Person represented by it or the Spirit of the Bishop of Meaux denying it be the same Spirit And not to be tedious Whether the Spirit of Innocent III. and his Lateran Council and of I know not how many more Popes and of Cardinal Perron and many more Cardinals affirming that Heretical Kings may and ought to be Deposed and the Spirit of our English Representer and those for whom he undertakes who all deny it be the same Spirit If not then both cannot be of God. Sect. 22 Quer. Was not John Calvin a most impudent Creature in assuming to himself the Office of Reforming the World being but a Young Man of Twenty five or Twenty six years of Age and without all pretence of Miracles a thing which Christ himself undertook not under Thirty years of Age Answ I think indeed Geneva may pass for the World by the same Figure that the Church of Rome goes for the Catholick Church When the World groans for a Reformation I do not see where lies the Impudence of trying by good Doctrine and Example to Reform that Part of it where one lives unless it lies in being Impudently and Bravely Good which is sometimes necessary to give a check to Impudence in that which is Bad. If he be a Young Man that takes this upon himself he is the more to be commended And if he can fairly carry the Reformation beyond his own Countrey this is still more commendable and if he could Reform the whole World then I say for that which you call Impudence Generations to come ought to rise up to his Name and call it Blessed You ought not I tell you to despise John Calvin's Youth as one of your Great Ones did Luther's Meanness who hearing the Auspurg Confession read said to his Confident That these things indeed were True but it was not to be endured that a pitiful Monk should Reform the World. But if nothing else will satisfie you but it must be Impudence in a Young Man to think of Reforming the place where he lives yet at least do not represent him as a most impudent Creature for as I take it there are a long row of Popes from Formosus downwards who if your own Historians are to be credited shall compare with John Calvin in this point not of Reforming the World but the other and shall get the better of him by much And amongst these there is one John XI Son to Sergius III. one of his Predecessors who was something less modest than John Calvin in as much as being yet but a Boy he took upon himself to be Head of the Catholick Church which our John I dare say would never have accepted any time of his life Indeed the young Pope was thus far to be excused that he was put into the Chair by Merocia who though she was not Sergius's Wife was yet John's Mother For Donna Olympia was not the first of her Quality that swayed all at Rome Sect. 23 Quer. Whether from the Womb of the Reformation have not issued all those Slaughters Rapines Tumults Plundering of Churches Schisms and Civil Wars which broke out in the year 1641. Answ No truly for since the Reformation the Church of England hath lent neither Principles nor Examples nor Counsels nor Arms nor Men nor Money to carry on Rebellions or Rapines The World saw that she stuck by her Royal Master to to the last And if you say that it was her Interest to do so then I hope you will grant that she has at other times given Proof of a higher Principle Nor can you without rubbing your Forehead question the strictness of her Loyalty who begin some of you to laugh at her for it I hope you will not say that the Irish Rebellion which broke the ice for all those Slaughters Rapines c. which you mention to come after it that that issued too from the womb of the Reformation I think this Query had better rest least when the Mother of that Off-spring is agreed upon we should be tempted to inquire who was the Father of it Sect. 24 Quer. Whether Africa produces more variety of Monsters than Britain does Fanaticks where every Man may read and interpret the Scriptures according to his own Judgment of Discretion Answ I know pretty well what Fanaticks Britain has produced but what variety of Monsters Africa produces I cannot well say the surest way to be satisfied is to go thither your self for Authors are not agreed But if by Fanaticks you mean False pretenders to Inspiration you may take your comparison nearer home where 't is as much as a Mans or Womans life is worth to have the Scriptures to read In short Britain has Fanaticks but the British Church does what she can to reclaim them which she thinks ought nor to be tried by setting up an Inquisition for some of 'em and cannot be done by making Saints of others of ' em You understand I suppose and therefore go on Sect. 25 Quer. Whether Queen Elizabeth born of Ann Bolen Queen Catharine yet living can be thought Legitimate Answ Without all Question she can be thought Legitimate for I find that I think so and I know many who say so that do not use to say one thing and think another Sect. 26 Quer. How admirable was the Wisdom of Henry the Eighth by expelling one Pope of Rome to raise up infinite Popes of his own Subjects Answ Not very admirable I confess if it were so for we had even too much of One Pope of Rome before as the Complaints and the Laws of our Ancestors can well witness But how did he raise up infinite Popes of his own Subjects Were there so many Heads of the Catholick Church raised by him in his own Dominions Or did every
Body think himself Infallible when once they depended upon his Holiness no longer When you design a witty Query take care whilst you live that there be some Sence and a little Truth at the bottom and in one Word that it be not like this which is a meer Bubble and turns to nothing Sect. 27 Quer. By whose Authority did he Divorce his Virtuous Wife Queen Catharine His own or a Foreign If by his own why may not other Kings also put away their Wives at their pleasure If Mary his Daughter by Queen Catharine was Legimate Heiress of the Kingdom then Elizabeth was not because it was not lawful for King Henry to have two Wives at once Answ I doubt not but Queen Catharine was a Vertuous Wife but under favour since you will needs be medling with these Matters you should have put your Question either with more honesty or with more skill and instead of asking By whose Authority he divorced his Virtuous Wife you should have asked by what Authority he divorced his Brothers Wife For there lay the point and here I must tell you that after that Question whether the Pope had Power to dispense with that Marriage had been debated and determined in the Negative by the most famous Universities of Europe for you an unskilful Querist to ask by what Authority the King did as he did shews that you have spent your time to little purpose and are to be admonished to bestow it better for the future As for your other difficulty how Mary and Elizabeth could be both Legitimate I Answer that the Legitimacy of Elizabeth is plain supposing the Marriage of Queen Catharine to King Henry to be void but yet Mary the Child of that Marriage was not Illegitimate because the Marriage was made without Fraud But if one or other of them must necessarily be Illegitimate pray look you to the consequence who I suppose apprehend some great Matter to depend upon this Dispute For my own part these kind of Queries seem to be very impertinent for if Queen Mary was Illegitimate our Religion is not one jot the truer for it and if she was Legitimate neither is it the worse But there is a time to answer Questions that are none of the wisest Sect. 28 Quer. If that Religion be Sacred that is established by Law why did Queen Elizabeth destroy the Catholick Religion Established by so many Acts of Parliament Answ It seems then that what you call the Catholick Religion may be destroyed And yet these Queries are publish'd with Allowance Your Superiors surely can instruct you that to destroy the Legal Establishment of a Religion is one thing and to destroy the Religion is another But they saw that if you had expressed the former the Query had looked so ridiculously that it had been a shame to let it go For all the Sacredness that Human Law can give to a Religion is a legal Sacredness and no more or if you please a legal Establishment And so this is the English of your Quaere If that Religion has a legal Establishment that 's established by Law why did the Queen destroy the legal Establishment of the Catholick Religion which was of estalibshed by so many Laws In my opinion it had been much better to Query thus like a plain man If the Catholick Religion was established by so many Laws why did Queen Elizabeth unestablish it by Law again And now having brought your Query to this Form I Answer that yours is not the Catholick Religion and it was pity that it should have that Sacredness which the Law gave it because it had no Sacredness of its own to deserve it and therefore it was a very good Law that took away the other Sacredness from it If you think this Answer not to be full enough you may pick out somerhing more in Answ to Sect. 20. whither I refer you Sect. 29 Quer. Queen Elizabeth expelled fourteen Catholick Bishops from their Sees for refusing the Oath of Supremacy But how could they swear her to be Head or Supreme Governor of the Church when they could not swear she was Head of this Kingdom Answ I think truly Fourteen Bishops were deprived in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign and that for not taking the Oath of Supremacy But take this along with you too that most of these Bishops if not All had taken the very same Oath before and some of 'em assisted at the framing of it So that one would think that their refusing to take the same Oath under Elizabeth was as much as to deny her to be Head of the Kingdom as you say which all modest Men must grant to have been a sufficient cause for their Deprivation But yet as tender as Princes are of their Titles it is to be remembred to her immortal Credit that she did not serve them as her Predecessor did Cranmer Latimer Ridley and Hooper but used them in all other respects with great gentleness What their true reasons were for refusing the Oath of Supremacy I shall not go about to Divine But as for you who will needs have it to be this in part at least that they could not swear she was Head of the Kingdom Thus far you are to be commended that you have chosen a more modest expression of your Malice than that impudent Writer did who told us the other day that she was a known Bastard But in the Calumny I perceive you are both agreed And heark ye Gentlemen I do in behalf of the dead Queen and of that Age which universally acknowledge her Title defie you both to make good your teproach and fix the Title of Calumniators upon you both if you neither can justifie it nor will publickly retract it Sect. 30 Quer. Did not Cranmer and his Reforming Associates steal their Liturgy out of the Roman Missal Ritual and Breviary Answ Or rather did not you steal this Query from the Dissenters Sure I am that hitherto it has been theirs saving only the rudeness of the expression which you have added to it Go to them and they can furnish you with an abundant Answer to this terrible Objection But if something must be said here our Liturgy if it must be stolen looks as if it were stolen not out of your Roman but the Old Gallican Missal which once was ours and therefore it was not stolen but now every Body has his own again But if we had taken your Roman Missal Ritual and Breviary only and compiled our Liturgy out of them yet we took nothing of your peculiar Goods from them but only what every part of the Catholick Church has as much right to as your selves and as for that which is peculiarly and properly your own there we have left it entirely to you and much good may it do you Sect. 31 Quer. Are not Protestants bound by their Dath de Supremacy to obey the King as Supreme Governor as well in all spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as Temporal