say against Forreigners let them use what Religion their Superiours there injoyn them But against English men who in opposition to the Religion of State distinct from that of Faith which is ordered by the proper Legislative Power such as your Church of Rome Papist is for ought I can yet see If your Father Paul was such I think him either a fool or a Knave for if St. Peters Successor did behave himself well in that Council your Paul was a Knave to traduce him if contrary he was a fool to leave a well ordered Church to follow the Dictates of such a faulty Guide yet were he a Subject of Rome he was much too blame so openly to reproach his Prince and yet was religious to dye a steady Cathâ—lick of that Church while he was obliged to hear the Pharisee sitting in St. Peters Chair Pap. Well Sir say what you will I say I am a true Roman Catholick as to the other World and a true English man as to this Phy. Sir you offered a Distinction lately with a witness viz. Father Paul and now comes a Distinction with Paulo majore and as to this I say it 's a Distinction well becoming a Romish-Church-Catholick but not a true English man for it looks two waies for if Chequer Papist party per pale half true Papist half true English will not do then it is to be interpreted True English man for life and after true Roman Catholick and so it has something of Policy but more of Romish Guile In as much as it serves to secure Protection and Preservation here during life and after in the other world True Roman Catholick goes for it to St. Peter God a mercy good Distinguisher he dares as well be hang'd as tell the Pope this how he cheats the Pope all his life and cheats the King at his death this Distinction dares not appear at Rome no more then peaceable Mr. Walsh Mr. White or Mr. Serjeant who non-conform from the Church of Rome more then our Independent from the Church of England Pap. But Sir if the Distinguisher as you call him explains himself and sayes he owes Allegiance to the King actively as to Matters of State and passively as to Matters of Church and so differs from your Church in pure Judgment only and no more then Presbyterian or Independents there who are good Subjects nevertheless owe Allegiance and claim protection c. what say you then c Phy. First I say that Church and State were all one before Christian Emperours divided them and causes were all derived from the same Fountain the King but as some were put into the hands of Ecclesiasticks and were called Ecclesiastical or Spiritual so others delegated to Civil Magistrates were called Civil thence arose the two Jurisdictions which are naturally one as in our King and by Delegation only made two But I further say if you be in earnest it is the first time I ever heard Papists to fight with Presbyterian weapons and I mean by earnest real for sad Experience has shew'd that it is not the first time by thousands that the Militants of the Romish Church have used the unhallowed Artillery of the spurious English Natives to fight withal against us Yet not in earnest or real as such but in Masquerade and if your Distinguisher be so half witted to tender this peace-meal Obedience I say further It 's the proper Result of Romish Ignorance for such Notional Obedience is indeed none True Obedience ought to be intire and is due to the lawful Magistrates Commands by the Law of Nature antecedent to any Command by the Magistrate for the Lords sake who injoyns to obey not barely for the Commands-sake which injoyns to do And there is more Religion in such Obedience then in all your Worship But Sir I would willingly be resolv'd whether the Romish Church Catholick dissent from us in Church matters in pure Judgment or by reason of some Command from the Pope next whether there be not a great difference between Protestant and Popish Dissenters Inasmuch as the former whatever he thinks concerning the power of his Prince in Church matters and perhaps would have him mend his Discipline according to mistaken Rule of Scripture yet he takes it not from our Prince and lodges it in a forraign Prince or Prelate which last makes it Treason Let this be answered and I 'le promise you not to take such an uncouth Travail as at present gives occasion of our Discourse Pap. Pray Sir is there any harm if I prefer the Pope to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Phy. None at all as the former is a Temporal Prince and the latter but a Subject nay more the Arch-Bishop of Rome shall have my Vote to take Precedency of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at a general Council when it happens but not in England unless by Curtesy And if you prefer the Pope before the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury as to any power of Spiritual Jurisdiction in our Kings Dominions you are unmannerly to the Arch-Bishop who is Apostolick and Patriarch here as Pope Vrban the second allowed and you are a Traytor to the King by and under whose undoubted inherent Right and Authority the Arch-bishop is Primate in this Patriarchate Pap. But do you think in your Conscience that the Pope has no Right to Spiritual Jurisdiction in England Phy. Aye I do in my Conscience verily believe that the Pope has no Right to any Jurisdiction whatsoever in our Kings Dominions Pap. Pray what Grounds have you for it Phy. The Grounds I have for it is from the certain Testimony of Records continued in Succession for many hundred years which are to be seen in the Tower and some of them are transcribed by the Lord Coke and cited in the Report of a Law Case called Cawdries Case and in Mr. Prins Collections whereby it plainly appears that in all ages wherein the Pope laid claim to Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in England and offered to put the same in Execution it was alwaies opposed by Parliaments and Councils as derogatory to the just Rights of this Crown Pap. But how are you certain of the truth of these Testimonies Phy. Sir as to the matter of Certainty I shall not use the notions so much contended about viz. Moral Certainty or sufficient Certainty so much as the Nature of the thing is capable of there being three absolute Certainties by which we come to the knowledg of things 1. A sensible Certainty 2. A Mathematical Certainty 3. An Historical Certainty and all these are in their kinds respectively absolute The Certainty of Sence makes me absolutely Certain of what I see hear c. The Certainty of Demonstration makes me absolutely Certain that one and one makes two and three and three makes six The Certainty of History continued uninterrupted and undoubted and by unanimous Consent of succession of Ages and Historians makes me absolutely certain that there were such Kings of England as Kenulphus King Edwin Edw. the
Pap. I apprehend what you mean by kernel and shell you may continue the Metaphor and tell me wherein our King contributes to the preservation of the Old kernel more then his Holyness Phy. Why then I 'le tell you this kernel and shell first grew in Palestine which was a land as fruitful as that mentioned Deut. 8. and more for fruit-trees especially Figs there never leave bearing the old Figs continuing till the new come which resolvs 14 Mark 13. But for shell fruit especially such as we talk of Dr. Heylin says little is there but what comes from Damascus And as to this shell fruit of ours some Indignities being offered thereto by untoward Neighbours viz the Essens Saducees Scribes Pharisees Herodians and Galileans It was thought fit to be transplanted And one St. Joseph an honourable Counsellor planted it in England where it continued and did thrive exceedingly the Kernel flourishing keeping its native Vigour Sap and Colour the Shell fine thin well favoured and as hard one would think as a Rock and so it continued near five hundred years afterwards by the Luxuriancy of the Soil and the over officious and too critical Appointments and Trials of some Supervisors and too lazy and superficial of others on this well coloured thin and hard shell a kind of false Rind grew and covered it quite over till you could not see the true shell this Rind was maintained as engendred by something forreign nothing from the Kernel It happened that a great Wind arose once upon a time about the time of Lent I think it was a westerly Wind and as easterly Winds bring in Autumn Ascarides to destroy Orchards and Garden Fruits so in Lent this westerly Wind brought an infinite number of Vermin of equivocal generation to be sure into our Land they were of several shapes and colours all of them but of two legs divellish beaks like birds of prey some were red some russet some black and some of all colours and Sir this sort of verminous Breedlings after that the gross putrid Air that was their Parent and Vehicle hither became somewhat rarified and so not so full of luscious support got into this scurvy Rind and there digg'd their Mansions and for many years lived on the adventitious juice which supplyed the Rind which strange Animals swarming to too great a number could not be preserved with fatness in the Rind but lay gnawing on the shell made holes therein and as I 'me credibly informed had almost endangered the kernel whereupon the Matter was inquired into and found out by skilful Workmen who quite pared off the Rind and so destroyed the Nests of those Caterpillars and have indeavoured to keep the shell well favoured thin and hard as it was at first yet it's strange though one sort of Vermin be scraped off another kind of Vermin like Mites will fall on if not warily looked after but for the whole Matter we keep it now pretty well only now and then washing it over with a little water and Salt Pap. Well Sir if you mean by the Kernel the Christian Religion by the Shell Discipline on Worship and by the Rind some Super additions thereupon in which or upon which the Romish Priests and Regulars lived and by the paring of the Rind the Reformation and by the Mites your own Sectaries and by Water and Salt paenal laws as I think you do What if all this be true which I deny yet how come your Kings to have any thing to do in Reformation of the Church Phy. Our Kings have power to reform the Church of England c. by a Power inherent in them as Emperors within their Dominions Pap. How Emperors sure you 'l not make that out When were the Kings of England stiled Emperors Phy. Whether any of our Kings were actually stil'd Emperors is not the point But they were so ever since they wore an Imperial Crown and that is ever since there was first a King of England Pap. But how does that make him Governour of the Church Phy. That makes him not Governour of the Church but God made him such and That is Evidence that God made him such the Crown of England never being rightfully dependent as to any Jurisdiction on any forreign Emperour Prince Potentate or Patriarch and so is his Crown Imperial and his power absolute according to the most ancient Constitution and Laws of this Realm in all matters Civil and Ecclesiastical Our King is by our fundamental Laws a person sacred and mixed with the Priesthood and at his Coronation by a solemn Consecration and Unction he becomes a sacred and Ecclesiastical Person for as he hath put upon him the regal Crown as Embleme of his Kingship and Power in Temporals so hath he a Sacerdotal Vestment commonly called Dalmatick as a Levitical Ephod to signifie his Power in Spirituals and accordingly our Kings have always on occasion called a National Synod called here a Convocation consisting of the Clergy-Lords and Commons appoints a Primate to preside there and they consult together and prepare Canons for ordering such Church matters as the King appoints and no more which the King afterward Enacts and makes to be Laws by his Royal Assent What can your Pope say more for himself Pap. He can say much more for himself Phy. I believe he can say enough but he cannot prove half he sayes Pap. He can prove that his way of Worship has been used longer then yours Phy. More shame that it has been suffered so long but let it be what it will in other Countries still I say it ought not to be so here since the Laws of the Land command the contrary the Pope having no Right to any Jurisdiction here as before is said And I must tell you and can make it good That the King of England hath been styled Vicar of the highest God long before the Pope became a Prince or Pope Pap. These Methinks are odd things and contrary to the Law of God Phy. Pray Sir let me ask you a few Questions viz. first whether Peter had any thing to do here in England when Joseph of Arimathea was here Or when Paul was here Which was before he was at Rome and Joseph came hither with his twelve holy Complices after Stephens death The first Christian Church was built by Joseph at Glassenbury here was three Arch-bishops and twenty eight Bishops before Austin the Monk came hither who refused to keep Easter as it was kept at Rome to baptize by their Ceremonies or to joyn in preaching with the Anglo-Saxons I say pray in all this time which was some Hundreds of years next after our Saviour what Jurisdiction did St. Peter or his Romish Successors claim in England Pray where was Pope or Supremacy either before they were given to Boniface the third anno 606 by Phocas that Adulterous Assassine who slew his Master Mauritius the Emperor before that Pope was usual to other Bishops then Volumus and Jubemus came in the
within you viz. your own reason so informed which was placed there as was said to distinguish you from a Brute that can go stand do c. as he is taught or at least by a Church in whose Conduct you may have rational satisfaction in all the points of its profession So then if your Pope your Councils your Church do err as your true English Roman-Catholicks say they do in Doctrinals in matters of Faith How can you be assur'd that your Runigate Priests do not err in the matters they inculcate into your easy heads and in that unintelligible Faith which is against sence and reason and their own Judgments And how can you then be assured they err not in worship which is of less weight Pap. Constant Usage and Approbation are sufficient grounds for me in that However you may see that we Roman Catholicks of this perswasion submit our selves to the Laws of the Land are willing to give security for not disturbing the peâ—ce and of our Allegiance to the King and so in Justice are intitled to the Kings protection and deserve not to be lyable to the penal Laws intended purely against the Papists of the Court of Rome Phy. Very well we are now come to the end of the Journey whence we began and so in our Discourse viz. to the Distinction of Church of Rome and Court of Rome Papists and I am still of opinion that neither ought to be suffered here For were it possible to believe that all the English Romish Catholicks were such Mungrel Papists as you pretend to be that is to obey the Pope in part and our King in part as has been said as is plain they are not as appears by the opposition of most of them to the formulary or remonstrance mentioned by Peter Walsh yet even they are not to be trusted here with safety to the King For what security can there be given that the Roman Catholick who is false to the Pope should be faithful to the King that one can serve two Masters pretending to Equality with equal faithfulness that one who is excommunicated by his own Church should keep faith with another Church that one who is notoriously perjured should be believed That one who is of the Church of Rome should be bound by that Oath which his Church condemns and frequently dispenses with and he owns that one who is so easie as to believe the ridiculous Fables of Old Rome may not as easily be drawn over to the rebellious faults of the New Rome and Peter Walsh's assurance for his party is just as valuable as his partner Cressy's for the Jesuits and what Credit can be given to one who brake his Oath to this Church and then did as much to the other and is now possessed with or by the Devil being delivered over to Satan Besides 't is obvious how dangerous it is to indulge that sort of people by the stir they have lately made in publick declaimings against the Religion of this Kingdom and the disturbance of this Churches peace which is an ill requital for the Kings gracious Clemency and has awakened those laws which otherwise might have slept still And how can that Papist be believed to be true and faithful to that King whom he takes to be an Heretick and will infallibly be damned How can a Popish Fanatick who believes all the Enthusiasmes allowed in the Romish Church viz. the Revelations of Mother Juliana the Preface to Sancta Sophia who thirsts after the lights which do expell all Images of Creatures and calm all manner of passions to the end that the Soul being in vacuity may be more capable of entertaining God in the pure fund of the Spirit who is in possession of the Deiform fund of the Soul which is the simple Essence of the Soul stamped with Divine Impress from whence ariseth a superessential life being a way of knowing without thoughts of seeing in darkness of understanding without reasonâ— of unknowing God by perceiving of being melted and brought to nothing first and then being lost and swallowed up in God by which means all created being is put off and that which is only Divine put on being changed into God as Iron heated into the nature of fire which is attained to by seeking God in the Obscurity of Faith with a more profound introversion of the Spirit which is the State of Nothingness or of Totality or the unica of Nothing with Nothing by which the Soul comes to a feeling of her not being and by consequence of the not being of Creatures I say how can such a one who must first be mad before he can know he is in his wits expect any better Entertainment in England then the three late York-shire Quakers had at Rome viz. as being dismissed as Mad-men They being in France shaved to cure that Frenzy which oft by shaving is occasioned and such as this are some of your Romish Church Catholicks nay even the Superiors as they have testified to the World in Print and why may not such a Romish Church Quaker who attains knowledge after a Mystical way by the Impulses of the Spirit only extravagate soon into civil affairs as well as Father White who never read Mathematicks as he sayes and without the Help of Humane Learning attain to the perfect knowledge of the Quadrature of the Circle And how are these Formulary men to be believed while they can to the Pope excuse their remonstrance of Allegiance to their King by saying that they only acknowledge but do not swear it that they do not Condemn the opinion contrary to the Oath nor do they declare that the Pope cannot dispense with the Oath or any part of it Let any one Judge now comparing their remonstrance to the King and their Declaration to the Pope what manner of Allegiance and Obedience the King may expect from them especially it being declared by the Council of Toledo in the time of Innocent the sixth That laws as to Ecclesiastical persons bind not ad culpam but ad poenam And by Aquinas Monks are only bound to profess not to keep the rules of St. Benedict just so are our True English Roman Catholicks bound to profess and owe as you call it Allegiance but how or when to keep or pay it who can he assured thereof And their stories tell us That the Devil appeared to Fryar Ruffin in form of Christ And what security is there by that Oath taken by them while the same persons taking that Oath can confidently assure the Pope That they do not condemn the opinion contrary to that Oath nor do they declare that the Pope cannot dispense with that Oath or any part of it which is as much as to say and believe that the Pope can dispense therewith which they may more easily believe then that the Pope can dispense with St. Pauls Epistles with the New Testament with the Old and New Testament with the whole law of God and to compleat the Popes
A JOURNEY INTO THE COUNTRY BEING A DIALOGUE Between an English PROTESTANT Physitian AND AN English PAPIST WHEREIN The proper State of the Popish Controversy is discoursed With Reference only to the Government of ENGLAND in Church and State In some Answer to Peter Walsh and pursuant to the Directions of a Person of Honor. Papa stupor Mundi non Deus non Homo sed utrumque Gloss in proem Clem. Moscan de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 11. LONDON Printed for Henry Brome at the Gun at the West-end of St. Pauls M DC LXXV THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER THIS ensuing Discourse seems to be wrote about the time when by Proclamation Papists were not to reside within ten Miles of London and 't is not yet out of Season nor will be till our Controversies with the Papists be throughly and truly stated after which it cannot be long ere they be ended I see not how English men have to do with the Romish Church or State their Laws Doctrines or Discipline therefore while they have been exercising us with Disputes about those things they had two Ends viz. Either to lead us into some Precipice or to Lap-wing us from the proper tendency of our Enquiries which in truth is our home Concerns and so a Controversy only between English Papists and English Catholicks called Protestants for Distinction with reference to their Prince who governeth by Laws diverse from all the Nations of the World and so is not to be argu'd out of his Right by any Parallel from other Kingdoms But as a Person of Honour hath lately begun so this Author has set forward the proper Contest still meaning between English Papists and English Protestants the latter of whom affirm as follows 1. That the King of England is Emperour and sole Monarch of England and established by a Law diverse from all other Nations 2. That the Church of England has all the Rights of a Patriarchal See from which lies no Appeal to any other Patriarch 3. That all Church Authorities and Jurisdictions with reference to this life and the ends of Government are rightfully derived from the King of England being naturally in him as a mixt Person and Custos utriusque tabulae according to Rom. 13. 4. That he is a Traytor that denyes this or affirms any forreign Prince Prelate or Potentate to have any Jurisdiction in England c. or diminishes the Kings Legal Style 5. There was naturally no difference between Church and State as to Jurisdictions until Christian Monarchs divided Jurisdictions and delegated Civil and Ecclesiastical Persons to take Conusance and judge of Causes separate and those Jurisdictions are called Civil and Ecclesiastical in respect of the Delegates only and not in respect of the Causes whereof they take Conusance and Judge 6. The King hath power naturally within his Dominions by such his delegates respectively to declare what are Articles of Faith according to Scripture and not otherwise and to make and interpret Laws for the Government of Church and State to appoint Forms of Worship and Discipline not against the word of God to add to such Laws Sanctions to punish Offenders against such Laws 7. These Rights and Powers of the King are Inherent in him as Essential Flowers of his Crown as antient as the Crown it self in which his Subjects are so interessed with reference to their Propriety in his personal Government by Original Constitutions as the King cannot by any rightfâ—l Act he can do grant them away to any Forreign Power Person or Potentate or to others but by way of delegation as to the declarative and executive Part. 8. What ever of these Rights and Powers any King of England has at any time allowed to the Pope has been so allowed against the Fundamental Law of the Land and so was utterly void and not obliging to any Successors Kings of England c. 9. That all Papists denying the Jurisdiction of the Pope here both in Civil and Ecclesiastical matters yet holding Communion with the Church of Rome in matters of worship against our established Laws are grievous Offenders 10. That passive Obedience is no Obedience In as much as true Obedience must be spontaneous intire active and with respect to the Law of Nature antecedent to the Kings Command which injoyns intire Obedience to the Kings lawful Command for the Lords sake not barely for the Command sake 11. That the King cannot dispense with or free the Subject from such natural Obedience but only from the penalty added by and annexed to his Command 12. That the King cannot tolerate here the Exercise of the Popish Worship the same being superstitious and idolatrous and against the Established Laws 13. That no English man whatsoever how far so ever they pretend to differ from or disown the Pope can give reasonable security for the Preservation of the Peace of the Church or State by them unless they swear due Allegiance to the King and by Oath declare his Supremacy in the Church and by that Oath renounce all the Popes Authority whatsoever over them and his Power to dispense with that Oath and that they will be obedient to all the Kings Laws 14. That an English man in Priests Orders from the Church of Rome â—xcommunicated or censur'd by thaâ— Church and yet holding Communion with that Church iâ— not to be trusted here although he takes the Oaths above mentioned In as much as he is of no Church being wilfully divided from ours and by Censure divided from the other and so disobedient to all Governors a lawless and perjured Person and so in a present State of Damnation nor is any Romish Priest to be trusted here though he takes the said Oaths in as much as he hath taken a former Oath to the contrary not renounced 15. That since no English understanding Papist doth absent or at any time hath absented from our Communion and Worship out of pure Judgment and Reason But purely by reason of the old inhibition of the Pope in Q. Elizabeth's time for before that they joyn'd with us and were called Church Papists and at the same time they in opposition to our Kings Laws do so firmly yield to that Inhibition and disobey several other Commands of the Pope even in some matters of Faith It 's refer'd to the wisdom of the King with the advice of his said Delegates whether such co 〈…〉 ious Offenders be with any safety to be tolerated or even conâ—iv'd at here 16. That the Church and Court of Rome are so incorporated together that if Communion with that Church be admitted or tolerated here it must necessarily be introductory of that Courts Vsurpation 17. That there are now great differences of opinion among the English Papists themselves with reference to the Pope And if they were all of the mind with the most moderate Pretenders yet what Security can be given that they will alwayes be so or that they shall be succeeded by others of the same Judgment or is it
degrees might use a kind of a pious fraud in altering the then Worship from those Objects and substituting in their room the Images of the Trinity Angels Saints and holy Christians So came the vain repetitions of Prayers as the Heathens use 6 Mat. 7. And perhaps Dominus Deus Papae so succeeded Deus Antoninus and Dominus Deus Domitianus and because Dea Pecunia had a Temple in Rome Money has been since as much worshipped there as Juno Moneta and the votivae tabulae hung up in your Churches to the Virgin Mary and Saints c. after Diseases cured were the same as was done among the Pagans viz to Isis in Aegypt and so in Rome like our late Mountebanks Catalogues of Cures which might take by the semblance of their Worship and so by degrees draw them quite off to the true Christian Worship Which design not only took effect but the succeeding Ages proving sottish and unlearned contented themselves with what an Infant Christian Age had done and continued that worship part Heathen part Christian and grew into a belief that the fabulous Mousetraps made to catch Pagans and bring them into the Church were the true Gospel Engines to bring Christians to Heaven So the Inquisition was first invented as a Trap against Moors after a snare for sheep which senseless Dotage has ever since bewitcâ—ed the foolish Romans and has the face to confront this inquisitive Age just like the man that by frequently telling of a Lye came at last to believe it Phy. Truly Sir your conceit may have something of Truth in it as to the conversion of the Heathens into the Christian Religion by the Catholick Church of Old Rome But that the way of Worship and Devotion continued by them for so many hundred years should deserve your harsh and profane language I understand not for the primitive Church was doubtless as wise as the Church at any time since Phy. That the primitive Catholick Church was as wise as the Church has at any time since been I agree and so was the Primitive Romish Church when St. Paul and St. Peter were there but I know when it failed in its Wisdom and Worship and you your self admit it 's not so wise now by your distinction of Old Rome and New Rome Pray unfold that a little Pap. The Catholick Bishop of Old Rome never pretended to an Universal Monarchy both in Spirituals and Temporals over the whole Earth as the Bishop of New Rome doth and to be Superior to other Sov'raign Princes in civil matters and as to that point I call this New Rome from this New Doctrine which I oppose as strongly as any Protestant Phy. Sir I should have thought that the difference you make between Old Rome and New Rome had been with reference to Physick for that Old Rome was contented with the renowned Aescalapius who cured diseases after the method we now use and New Rome it seems fancies curing after the Hermitical way as you say But pray Sir did your Priest adopt you into the Communion of Old Romes or New Romes Church Or did he tell you the difference between the Doctrines and Worship of one or the other I doubt not Yet you say true in saying it's a Doctrine and a New Doctrine for it was made such by the Council of Lateran and the Council of Lyons and not before So it is that the Pope may dispence with Oathes and in execution of that Article in Queen Elizabeths time such dispensations were intercepted in their journy to the Steady Roman Church Catholicks in Scotland pretending as your Superiors do and by those dispensations the Roman-Catholicks in general were allowed to promise Swear Subscribe and do what else should be required of them so as in mind they continued firm and did use their diligence to advance in secret the Roman Faith The remembrance of which occasion'd King James to provide as he did against Aequivocal professions and pretences of Allegiance Now then how can one be of the Communion of that Church who differs from that Church in point of faith if the Pope or his Councels may be believed to determine Articles of faith if Mr. Cressâ—y faies true in his Book in which he gives account of his conversion to the Romish Communion viz. That it 's impossible that Catholicks should differ in point of Faith or that Schism should be in their Church which is grounded on singular reason for if he differs in Faith he ceases to be a Catholick and when one is Schismatick he ceases to be of that Church Pap. Well True Roman-Catholicks do hold so and that makes all of your Church Hereticks and Schismaticks and out of our Communion Phy. In good time good Fellow Travailer does it so Why then that very thing if so makes your True English Roman Church Catholicks Hereticks Schismaticks and not of the Communion of the Romish Church to which they have so generally and undistinguishingly profelyted you and indeavour to inveigle others Judge ye now therefore whether these Phanatick Papists mean good faith to you or to their Natural Prince when they pretend Allegiance to their Liege Lord and do deny Supremacy to the Pope in Civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction here and accuse their Church to Err in such pretences and in some matters of Faith to their utter severance from that Church-Communion and Protection and yet at the same time with all Subtilty and wilely Arts are Discipling English Men in the Faith and Communion of the Church of Rome generally without any Restriction or Limitation Pap. It is enough for us of the Laity to believe as the Church believes in matters which concern us as Practise and Worship c. And for the difficult points of Faith and Disputation let out Superiors whose duty it is look to them for we shall answer for no more then we know or are Taught Phy. Know or are taught Will ye suffer your Ears to be stopped and excuse your not hearing not knowing and not being taught and lay all on him who stopped your Ears with your own consent Come Sir consider whether it will add any pleasure to your Travail to go to Hell on another mans back Or if you say to the Devil he brought me hither pray let me go back to whence I came and keep him will Old Nick release you No Therefore get out of your Fetters and duress break forth from your Ignorant Shackles search and try whether your Pope in Church and Pope in Court agree then whether your Confessor agrees with Pope or Court or Church or with the Communion of any one Country Catholick or other and you 'l easily find him to be so far only like unto the Pope as an Heteroclite in Religion either deficient or redundant and not to be brought under any rule Then consider further use due and utmost searches according to your circumstances with the aid of Divine Assistance whether it be not better to be guided by the Pope