Communion so sinful and dangerous that no man with safety to his Soul can continue in it it will be high time to come out of it Qu. Whether he or Protestants at present do pretend to such Demonstration for those Tenets they hold contrary to the Roman Church the then onely visible Church in the West that no understanding to which it is sufficiently proposed can in the least doubt of it Ans We have such evidence for the Doctrines which we hold and teach in opposition to the Church of Rome as being sufficiently proposed no man can reasonably doubt of And as for those who will scruple without reason notwithstanding the clearest evidence that the nature of the thing will bear we can only pity and pray for them Qu. Or whether they do not rather say that being fallible they may err even in what they think a Demonstration and if they may err perhaps they have erred even in their Reformation Ans We do not pretend to infallibility nor do we think that the claim which the Bishop of Rome makes to it is any more than a groundless pretence only But à posse ad esse non valet consequentia from a bare possibility of erring to argue a certainty that we have erred in every thing we have done is an argument fitter to be offered to Children than Men. Qu. Whether therefore denying these Doctrines thus delivered by the Church in all Ages as Doctrines delivered by Christ and his Apostles upon no better grounds than these perhaps they may be true and perhaps not be not a putting ones self into the danger of erring even in fundamentals Ans We deny no Doctrines delivered by the Church in all Ages as Doctrines delivered by Christ and his Apostles nor do we own any Doctrine upon such weak grounds as perhaps they may be true and perhaps not But we say that the present Church of Rome doth teach such Doctrines as the Doctrines of Christ and his Apostles which were never taught by the Church in all Ages nor delivered by Christ and his Apostles And in these things we oppose our selves against them and think we have great reason so to do having the holy Scriptures and the Primitive Church on our side And whilst we are thus supported we have no fear of erring in fundamentals Queries of Religion or Liberty WHo this Enquirer is as I am at present ignorant so am I not much concern'd to know but I take him to be one who hath conceived a mighty opinion of himself and his performances He thinks that by these Queries he hath struck at the root of Protestancy as he and those of his Perswasion call it i. e. Reformed Christianity that he hath given it a fatal blow a mortal wound and left it groveling in the dust without the least hopes of recovery Like that overgrown uncircumcised Philistine he defieth the Armies of the Living God and calls for a Man to fight with him For in the close of his Queries he maketh this proud and confident challenge If any give answer As if he should have said if any be so bold and daring so over confident and fool-hardy as to undertake an Answer to these Queries It is desired to be Categorical and short without any discourses of things not demanded Now whether this man do not triumph before the Victory or whether those Queries be so unanswerable as he believes them to be is the thing under consideration And because he hath not only given the Challenge but appointed the Weapon I shall neither decline the one nor the other but according to his own method shall undertake his Queries in the same order as he hath propounded them Qu. 1. Whether the Flock and Church of Christ to whom was promised grace and eternal happiness be that company and society of People christened in his Name who by order of Government Rules and Decrees from him and his Apostles were united in Faith Worship Discipline and manner of Life called Religion Ans The Church of Christ is either Militant or Triumphant the one on Earth the other in Heaven of the former of which we are now to speak The Church Militant is either Universal or Particular the former comprehending all and every Member of Christ's Mystical Body wheresoever dispersed upon the face of the whole Earth the latter comprizing only a certain Number of Christians formed into a select Body or Society under certain Laws and Rules not differing from those of the Universal Church Such are all Provincial and National Churches and though none of them may arrogate to themselves the Title of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church yet none will deny but that they are true Members thereof This I have premised to prevent confusion and misunderstanding for the confounding of these two as it often happens in discourses of this kind hath been the occasion of great mistakes Those of the Romish Perswasion by the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church do usually understand the Church of Rome which though it be a manifest Contradiction being the same with a Particular Universal yet do they run away with it and by that specious and gorgeous Title think to bear down all before them aloud proclaiming that to be the Mother and Mistress of all other Churches This thus premised I shall now be as Categorical and short in my Answer to his Query as he can desire Viz. That the Flock and Church of Christ is a Company or Society of People Christned in his Name who by Order of Government rules and decrees from him and his Apostles are united in Faith Worship Discipline and Manner of Life called Religion Qu. 2. Whether by Separation or Excommunication from that Society and Unity are lost those promises Ans Separation and Excommunication are two things for though every one that is excommunicated be thereby separated from that body of which before he was a member yet a man may be in a state of Separation without being under the doom of Excommunication For Separation may be a voluntary Act whereas Excommunication is a formal and Judicial Sentence delivered by a lawful Judge authorized and appointed by the Church to pronounce the same by virtue whereof the sentenced person is divided from the Body separated from the Society and shut out of the Communion of God's Church The case thus stated my answer to this Query will be as followeth viz. 1. Whosoever upon any pretence whatsoever doth separate himself from the Society and Unity of the One Holy Catholick and Aposstolical Church doth in so doing cast himself out of the paternal care and protection of God For it is a certain and undoubted truth He that hath not the Church for his Mother cannot have God for his Father And consequently can have no pretence to the promises of grace here or eternal happiness hereafter 2. Whosoever without just cause doth separate himself from the Society and Unity of that particular Church of which he is a
member is guilty of a sinful and dangerous Schism and whilst he continues therein can have no roason to expect the blessing of those promises 3. That there may be sometimes a just cause of Separation as when a Church makes the conditions of her Communion such as a man cannot communicate with her without sin and danger But in this case particular members ought to be mighty wary and cautious for it is not every dissatisfaction of their own or every irregularity of that Church that will be a sufficient cause of Separation unless the terms of her Communion be manifestly and apparently sinful 4. That the great end and design of Excommunication is the repentance and amendment of the person excommunicated It doth not therefore make void the promises of God nor utterly deprive the sentenced person of the benefits thereof but onely by a temporary correction shews him his folly and danger and calls upon him by a timely repentance and amendment to recover himself out of the one and prevent the other But it must be acknowledged that if a man obstinately continue in that condition and live and die under that sentence his condition will be very dangerous These may serve as general Answers to this Query but if by the Separation or Excommunication here mentioned be meant as no question it is a Separation of Excommunication from the Society and Unity of the Church of Rome Then we have this further to say 1. That the present Church of Rome hath separated her self from the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church by setting up such Doctrines and practices as were never taught practised nor allowed either by Christ or his Apostles or their Successors in the Primitive Church 2. That the present Church of Rome hath made the conditions of her Communion such as none without sin and danger can Communicate with her and by that means hath justified a Separation from her 3. That the Church of Rome hath not nor ever had any lawful Power or Authority over the Church of England nor are we Subject to the Jurisdiction of that See whether we consider it as Episcopal or as Metropolitan or as Patriarchal and therefore we cannot be justly charged with a Separation therefrom It is true indeed that for some time she had Tyrannically usurped an unjust power over us and kept us in Bondage and Slavery to her but God be thanked we at last found an opportunity to shake off those Chains and deliver our selves from the servitude under which we had so long groaned And this we have done and are still ready to justifie to the whole world to be no sinful Separation 4. That an Excommunication thundered out by the Church of Rome against us of the Church of England is but only Brutum fulmen an insignicant Scare-Crow which upon mature consideration we have no cause to be afraid of for she having no power over us we are not accountable to her nor subject to any sentence pronounced by her And therefore notwithstanding that pretended Separation or Excommunication from the Society and Unity of that Church which they make so much noise with we are in no apprehension of losing the benefits of those promises which God hath made to his One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church of Grace here and Eternal Happiness hereafter Qu. 3. Doth Christian Religion consist in matters of Morality or Ceremony of indifferency to be accepted or rejected and altered at the Choice Judgment and well liking of private Persons Corporations or States Ans Religion in general may be considered either in its Essentials or as it is cloathed with Circumstantials The former of which are unalterable but the latter may be subject to change The Christian Religion in particular falls under the same consideration the Being whereof consists indeed in matters of Morality which being innituted and ordained by Christ are not alterable by Men. But the order and decency which are things necessary to the well being of that Religion consists in Ceremonies and things indifferent which are in their own nature alterable and being the institutions of Men may be altered by Men but not by any private Persons For whatsoever hath been established by the whole Body cannot be altered by any particular member or any number of Men who are members of that Body nor by any Authority less than that by which at first it was established And here the Church of Rome may do well to consider by what power and authority she hath made so bold with the very Essentials of the Christian Religion altering some and adding others making new Articles of Faith which were never taught by Christ nor his Apostles and imposing them as necessary to be believed by all those of her Communion Qu. 4. Or doth it consist in the Laws and Rules of Faith and life of Christians so important and binding as that by the contempt thereof one must lose Eternal Happiness Ans This Query is very little different from the former and hath I think received a sufficient answer in the solution of that For by matters of Morality there wherein I say the Being of the Christian Religion doth consist I mean Moral and unchangeable truths which are to be received and believed by all Christians and Moral actions which are to be done by them and for our belief and performance of these things we have such laws and rules delivered by Christ and his Apostles as are binding unto all the contempt wherof may very much endanger and without a serious and seasonable repentance and amendment will certainly forfeit eternal happiness And therefore it will highly concern the Church of Rome to consider whether she be not guilty of such contempt whether in some of her publick Orders and Decrees she have not apparently contradicted some of these important Laws and Rules Qu. 5. Whether those Laws and Rules taught by Christ and his Apostles bind as well the Christians of succeeding Ages who could not be present to see and hear them as they bound those who were present heard them taught and saw their Original Writings Ans That these Laws and Rules are as binding to me now as they were to any of the Disciples in our Saviour's or his Apostles time I willingly grant And if this concession will do this Enquirer any service much good may do him with it For if the seeing of the Original Writings of Christ and his Apostles or being present to hear them deliver those Laws and Rules were necessary to make them obligatory then ought we to have Christ and his Apostles come down from Heaven and write and preach the same things over again not only in every Age but in every year every day of that year and in all places of the world too But let us proceed and see what mighty use this Enquirer will make of this wire drawing this Query Qu. 6. Whether after the death of Christ and his Apostles and Disciples by his institution other persons successively
in all Ages were in order chosen and Authorized as Pastours and Church Magistrates to preserve teach and promulgate those binding Rules to all Nations Ans That the blessed Jesus out of his abundant care and goodness for the carrying on of that great work which he had begun for the promoting of that holy Religion which he had instituted and the well ordering of that Church which he had founded did appoint certain orders of Men and endow them with gifts which might qualifie them for their several employments we do verily believe For St. Paul tells us God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then gifts of healing helps governments diversities of tongues 1 Cor. 12.28 And in another place he saith He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and Teachers Eph. 4.11 But that he ever instituted any Officer in the Church by the name of a Church-Magistrate I never read Yet if by his Church-Magistrate he mean no more than St. Paul doth by Governments we shall not quarrel with him about the word And that it was the work of these Officers to preserve those Laws and Rules which he left and to teach and promulgate them to all Nations we readily grant But then what shall we think of those who either add thereto or diminish therefrom who either alter those binding Laws and Rules or make new ones of their own and impose them upon others as if they were of equal Force and Authority with those delivered by Christ and his Apostles I could easily give instances to shew that the Church of Rome is guilty both ways but I am not willing to transgress the method which the Enquirer hath propounded by entring upon discourses of things not demanded Qu. 7. Were they Clergymen or Laymen by whom immediately they were chosen and authorized in those high Functions Ans We do verily believe being well assured by the Holy Scriptures by the Doctrine and practice of the Apostles and primitive Christians and by the usage and custome of the Church of God in all Ages that it onely appertains to Clergymen by the solemn imposition of hands to set apart others to those Sacred Functions and that they have sufficient Power and Authority to authorize them to perform those Holy Offices I never heard this denied by any of the Reformed Religion and therefore this Enquirer might if he had so pleased have spared this Query Qu. 8. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe what those succeeding Pastours or Supreme Church-Magistrates taught them as binding Laws of Christ and his Apostles and that the Writings by them collected preserved and delivered in a different Language from the Original were the true Copies of Original Apostolick Writings and that the sentence interpretation and use thereof delivered by them in Supreme Councils for unity and peace and to prevent Schisms and Errours were Rules which all Christians were bound to follow Ans This Query is a Song of three parts to answer all which directly I shall be obliged to take it in pieces and consider the parts severally And though the Answers thereunto would very well admit and do almost necessarily require a long discourse yet I remember the Enquirer hath confined me to a Method which I have promised to observe and therefore in my answers thereunto I shall be as short as possible without entring upon discourses of things not demanded Qu. 1. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe what those succeeding Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates taught them as binding Laws of Christ and his Apostles Ans Whatever hath been taught as a binding Law of Christ and his Apostles by all the Pastors and Governours of the Church in all Ages at all times and in all places we have no reason to suspect For Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the World Matt. 28.20 And to build it upon a Rock so that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Matt. 16.18 And by his spirit of truth to guide it into all truth Joh. 16.13 The universal Church therefore being thus secured from errour we have no apprehensions of being deceived thereby But though we owe this deference to the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and the united Body of the Pastors and Governours thereof yet no particular Church nor any particular Pastor or Governour thereof nor any number of them less than the whole have any reason to claim the same for whilst Men are Men they are and will be fallible and being so they may and oftentimes do err and though the whole Body cannot yet any particular Member may be deceived and therefore we ought not greedily to swallow all that is taught by them but to examine well what they teach before we give our assent thereunto otherwise we may easily be imposed upon Qu. 2. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe that the writings collected by those succeeding Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates and by them preserved and delivered in a different Language from the Original were the true Copies of Original Apostolick Writings Ans That the Holy Scriptures were faithfully collected and preserved by the Church and that the Copies handed down to us though in a Language different from the Original are true Copies we do not at all doubt For we cannot imagine that the universal Church should conspire together to impose a falshood upon posterity But that these Scriptures are the Word of God we believe not onely upon the Authority of the Church but for several other reasons as this Gent. cannot but know if he have been conversant in our Writings which reasons might here fitly be produced if I were not confined by the Enquirer to a short Method and had promised to observe the same I shall therefore onely add that if by being bound to believe he means that it is a binding Law of Christ and his Apostles that for this reason we should believe those Copies to be true we deny it because we cannot find any such Law delivered by them But if by being bound to believe he onely mean that considering by whom they are handed to us we have no reason to doubt of them we readily comply with him Qu. 3. Were all Christians in succeeding Ages bound to believe that the sentence interpretations and use of those Writings delivered by those Pastors or Supreme Church-Magistrates in Supreme Councils for Unity and Peace and to prevent Schisms and Errours were Rules which all Christians were bound to follow Ans What this Enquirer meaneth by Supreme Church-Magistrates and Supreme Councils is somewhat hard to be understood for to constitute two Supremes in one and the same body will make it look a little monstrous If by the Council being Supreme he mean that is above the Supreme Church-Magistrate i. e. the Pope for I do not doubt but that he intends him all along by that
suspect my own than theirs yet whatsoever Testimonies and Decrees are propounded by the Church they are propounded to rational men and it must necessarily be supposed that men ought to exercise that reason which God hath endowed them withall in judging of the evidence upon which those Testimonies and Decrees are built which evidences if they do not prove convincing and satisfactory they cannot command their own belief much less can any Power or Authority do it For to act by an implicit faith in that case were to act more like Brutes than Men. And therefore though we willingly own that there is as much credit due to them as to Civil Magistrates in the like case yet can we not grant any more Or if their Testimonies and Decrees concern matters of Fact wherein our Obedience is required i. e. matters of Discipline which respect the order and decency of Religion we grant that obedience is due to them and as much obedience as is due to Civil Magistrates in the like case yet still a Judgment of discretion is to be allowed to the Subject how far he can with a safe Conscience actively obey and when and where he is to exercise his passive obedience But this caution ought to be observed by every private Christian that by an imprudent management of his different Sentiments he do not disturb the Peace nor break the Order and Unity of the Church Qu. 11. Or hath Christ left such liberty to all succeeding Christians that they need not believe credit or obey any the Testimonies Laws Interpretations or Sentences given by any supreme Legal Governours Civil or Ecclesiastical in their respective Councils further than every particular person in his private Judgment shall like chuse and accept of Ans This Query I take to be fully answered in the Answer to that immediately preceding wherein the case is plainly stated How far the Credit and Obedience of Inferiours is due to the Sentences and Determinations of their Superiours whether Civil or Ecclesiastical And therefore without saying the same things over again or enlarging thereupon I shall refer you thereunto Qu. 12. Whether a few particular persons or some few of the Magistrates Civil or Ecclesiastical for discontent or differing in Judgment from the united body of the rest may under pretence of Conscience or Reformation separate themselves from the United body and society and make new translations and interpretations of written Laws different from the former and by force and perswasion draw People from their old Society Unity and Obedience to new Congregations Institutions and Rules of their framing opposite and destructive to the former Ans This Query consists of several parts and therefore to give a direct and apposite Answer thereunto I shall endeavour to obviate the several parts thereof by these Propositions following Viz. 1. That no person or number of men whether they be private Persons or Magistrates Civil or Ecclesiastical ought to separate themselves on any pretence whatsoever from the body of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church 2. That discontent or differing in Judgment only are no sufficient grounds of separation from any particular Church whereof we are Members 3. That a bare pretence of Conscience and Reformation will not justifie a Schism nor excuse those who are guilty of a Schismatical separation either in Church or State For the peace of the whole Community is far more valuable than any private man's satisfaction and ought not to be laid open to the attempts of any Schismatical pretenders whatsoever 4. That the written and established Laws of God or his Vicegerents upon Earth are not reversible nor alterable by any man or number of men Because they cannot pretend to that Authority by which at first they were established and without that they cannot be altered For if we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed saith St. Paul Gal. 1.8 5. That it is not lawfull for any person or persons who are Members of an established Church either by force or perswasion to draw People from the Communion of that Church and so break the Unity and disturb the Peace thereof or by any Artifices whatsoever either to undermine or batter down the Ramparts i. e. the established Laws and Constitutions of that Church These Propositions put together may suffice as a general Answer to this Query but now to apply them to the matter in hand i. e. the difference between us and the Church of Rome for on that account was the Query propounded And this I shall now do in these following particulars 1. That the Church of Rome though she mightily pretend to it is not that One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church That she is a Member of the Catholick Church we grant though we can scarce allow her to be a sound Member thereof but that she should pretend to be the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church either diffusive or representative we cannot consent nor hath she ever yet or ever will be able to make goad her claim thereunto 2. That the present Church of Rome is guilty of a sinfull and schismatical Separation from the United Body of the One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church we affirm And that for these reasons 1. Because she usurps an higher place and power in the Body Ecclesiastical than of right is due unto her thereby breaking the Union and disturbing the Peace of the Church 2. Because she hath voluntarily divided the Catholick Church both in Faith Worship and Government by her innovations 3. By separating both by her Doctrines and Censures three parts of the Christian World from her Communion and as much as in her lyes from the Communion of Christ 4. By rebelling against general Councils and usurping an Authority over them 5. By breaking or taking away all the lines of Apostolical Succession except their own and appropriating all Original Jurisdiction to themselves 6. By challenging a temporal power over Princes either directly or indirectly which hath been a great occasion not only of Schism in the Church but of Sedition and Rebellion in the State All which instances have been charged upon and made good against the Church of Rome by our Writers and may be so again whenever we are called to it 3. It is not therefore we that have separated from them but they from us whilst we adhere to the united Body of the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church which they have forsaken 4. Nor is it we but they who have altered the written and established Laws of God and his Church by adding new Articles of Faith such as were never delivered by Christ or his Apostles nor taught by the primitive Church nor comprised in any of those Creeds received by the Church and making them necessary Conditions of their Communion As the Doctrines of Supremacy and Infallibility of Indulgences and Purgatory of Transubstantiation c. 5. It is they therefore and
not Ans When the universal Church by her proper Representatives is lawfully assembled in a Council truly General that Council without all dispute will be a very proper Judge of what is fundamental and what not but this is rather to be prayed than hoped for Qu. Whether an obstinate denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles though the delivery was not absolutely necessary to Salvation may not be called a fundamental errour seeing it brings the rest he delivered in question as also his veracity Ans The denial of any one truth delivered by Jesus Christ or his Apostles is a very great fault and if that denial be obstinately continued in after plain conviction that it is such a truth it is a very dangerous Errour Qu. Whether therefore the denial of any one truth delivered to us by an uninterrupted tradition as taught by Christ and his Apostles would not be a fundamental Errour Ans There is a great difference between a thing delivered as taught and plainly taught by Christ and his Apostles for we meet with many things delivered as taught by them and tradition pretended for them which really and in truth were never taught by them or either of them aed to deny such is so far from being a fundamental Errour that it is no Errour at all There is also a great difference between traditions If by tradition he mean the holy Scriptures we grant that to deny any thing that is plainly and clearly taught therein is a very great Errour But if by tradition he mean such as is meerly humane and not clearly warranted by the Word of God we think we ought to reject such how uninterrupted soever they be for if an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel than hath been preached let him he accursed saith St. Paul Qu. And on the other side whether the teaching of any Doctrine onely piously believed but sufficiently known not to have been expresly or by a natural consequence delivered by Christ and his Apostles and which may upon that account be false not having Divine Revelation which alone is infallible for its ground whether I say the teaching such a Doctrine so known as one that was delivered by Christ when they know it was not would not be a fundamental Errour Ans Whosoever teacheth such Doctrines as are mentioned in this Query and in that manner is highly guilty and when the Enquirer shall think fit to be more particular and produce his instances he may expect a more particular answer and perhaps be told at whose door this charge will lie In the mean time this general answer may suffice Qu. Whether Christ having taken care as some grant that his Church should not err in fundamentals hath not consequently taken care that she should not teach any one Doctrine as delivered by Christ and consequently of Faith which was not taught by him and consequently might be an Errour Ans Christ hath taken all care possible to secure his Church from Errour and hath given her his gracious promise to be with her to the end of the World But the Church being composed of men and such as are fallible the security is not promised to particulars Particular persons and particular Churches too we know not only may but have grosly erred The security therefore is only promised to the Universal Church and when he tells us what he means by that he may expect a more direct answer to his Query Qu. Whether those Doctrines or most of them controverted now by Protestants have not been taught and believed in the Church as Doctrines delivered by Christ long before Luther yea and delivered in the most General Councils those Ages would permit and accepted of by the Church diffusive none that we know of dissenting but those condemned in those Councils for Hereticks and whose Heresies expired almost with themselves Ans It is now plain that this Enquirer by the Church and universal Church so often mentioned by him doth all along mean the Church of Rome which we are so far from complying with him in that though we own that Church to be a Member yet we cannot allow it to be a sound Member of the Catholick Church And if by the Decisions and Declarations of the Church he mean the determinations of that Church they are no further obligatory than to her own Members nor many of them to them neither if strictly enquired into As for Luther we do not receive our Religion from him but from Jesus Christ and for any Doctrines now controverted we are content to have the same determined by the Holy Scriptures and the four first General Councils As for the Councils our Enquirer hints at we deny that they were truly General or that all their decisions were ever accepted of by the Church diffusive And he cannot but know that there were many more not only Persons but whole Churches which did dissent from them Qu. Whether there was from the first 400 years till the time of Luther any known body of Pastors and Teachers declaring a dissent in any Age from those Doctrines and opposing those Councils and whether the Greek Churches did not and do to this very day consent with this Western Church in most points now controverted by Protestants Ans This Query is preposterously put for how should any body of Pastors and Teachers in the first 400 years oppose themselves to those Councils which were not then in being nor heard of till many hundred years afterwards But that the Fathers in those first Ages did teach the same Doctrines we now do we appeal to the Records of those times And that those after-Councils by him mentioned were dissenters from those of the first Ages we are contented to be tried by comparing the Acts of both together And that the Greek Church did or now doth agree with the Church of Rome in all or most of those points now in difference between her and us we utterly deny and challenge him to the proof of it Qu. Whether Luther the first Author of Protestancy did not separate himself from the whole visible Church at that time spread over the West contradicting all the Prelates and Pastors then living in the universal practice of that Church and the General Councils received as such by the foregoing Ages Ans As for the names of Protestant and Papist I look upon them as names of distinction not of Religion The Religion we both own is Christian This we do not receive from Luther nor they from Ignatius Loyala St. Francis or any such but both of us from Jesus Christ The only question is Whether they or we hold that Religion in greatest purity 'T is true that Luther in his time did more narrowly look into the corruptions of the Church of Rome declared against them and on that account separated from her Communion and for any thing yet appears may be very well justified in so doing For if any Church shall make terms of her