Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	article_n	church_n	creed_n	2,425	5	10.1630	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67908	The history of the troubles and tryal of the Most Reverend Father in God and blessed martyr, William Laud, Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury. vol. 1 wrote by himself during his imprisonment in the Tower ; to which is prefixed the diary of his own life, faithfully and entirely published from the original copy ; and subjoined, a supplement to the preceding history, the Arch-Bishop's last will, his large answer to the Lord Say's speech concerning liturgies, his annual accounts of his province delivered to the king, and some other things relating to the history.	Laud, William, 1573-1645.; Wharton, Henry, 1664-1695.; Prynne, William, 1600-1669. Rome's masterpiece.	1695 (1695)	Wing L586; Wing H2188; ESTC R354	691,871	692

they do not differ from us in some Fundamental Points of Doctrine and saving Truth And then consequently whether it be not an Heretical as well as a Schismatical Separation which they make from the Church of England 1. And first there was a Creed Printed by John Turner in this present Year and the Parliament sitting This Turner is a Notorious Separatist or Brownist if you will In this Creed of his he leaves out the descent of Christ into Hell This is an Article of the Apostle's Creed And 't is an Article of the Church of England And so I presume a Fundamental Point of Doctrine Yet herein this Brownist and his Fellows differ from us And I have heard from some present that at a Committee of Lords appointed for Matters of Religion a young Lord should say openly and boldly enough that he did not believe the descent of Christ into Hell And that my Lord the Author of this Speech should second him 2. In the same Creed Turner professes he believes that Christ Instituted by his Apostles certain particular Churches here on Earth and no other So the Catholick Church the Mother of all particular both Men and Churches and out of which there can be no Salvation in the ordinary way is quite thrust out of this Brownist's Creed And this I hope is another Fundamental Point of Doctrine and saving Truth But in this I must do my Lord right and not charge him with this point Because a little before his Lordship tells of a two-fold Separation one whereof he says is from the Vniversal or Catholick Church So the Catholick Church is not yet thrust out of my Lord's Creed But then this appears that the Separatists are not yet agreed upon all the Articles of their Creed Nay some of them call the Apostle's Creed a patched Forgery And Barrow justifies it 3. Thirdly they differ from us in charging gross Corruptions upon the Church of England And these are known to my Lord for he acknowledges them and so gross that should they be true the Church of England must be faulty in Fundamental and Saving Truth As shall farther appear in my Answer to my Lord's next Passage Therefore if their Charge be true they must by my Lord 's own Confession differ from us in Fundamental and saving Truth And if their Charge be false why do they separate from us Besides all Anabaptists and Brownists agree in this that the Church of England is Antichristian And if it be so they must either differ in Fundamentals from the Church of England Or be Antichristian themselves in joyning with them Or grant that Christ and Antichrist have one and the same Foundation 4. Fourthly some of them yet living though they dare not speak it out in all Companies do cunningly insinuate That at Death Soul and Body are extinct together but shall rise again at the Resurrection first or last And that Christ shall come and live here upon the Earth again That the Martyrs shall then rise and live with him a Thousand Years And that Christ once come upon the Earth shall not for any thing they can learn out of Scripure ever depart from the Earth again 5. Fifthly one Brierly and his Independent Congregation are of this Belief That the Child of God in the Power of Grace doth perform every Duty so well that to ask Pardon for failing either in matter or manner is a Sin That it is unlawful to pray for Forgiveness of Sins after their Conversion With divers others some as bad some worse to the number of Fifty 6. Sixthly One Spisberrye yet living and of that Independent Fraternity maintains that God works all things in us and that we are but Organs Instruments and meer empty Trunks Which is to make God the Author of all the Sins which Men commit And therefore Brierly says expresly that if they do at any time fall they can by the power of Grace carry their Sin to the Lord and say here I had it and here I leave it Will not the Devil one day stop the Mouth of this Blasphemy 7. Seventhly Mr. Pryn himself who hath been a great stickler in these Troubles of the Church says expresly Let any true Saint of God be taken away in the very act of any known Sin before it is possible for him to Repent I make no doubt or Scruple of it but he shall as surely be saved as if he had lived to have repented of it And he instances in David in case he had been taken away before he had repented of his Adultery and Murther So according to this Divinity the true Saints of God may commit horrible and carying Sins dye without Repentance and yet be sure of Salvation which teareth up the very Foundations of Religion induceth all manner of Profaneness into the World and is expresly contrary to the whole current of the Scripture 8. In the Eighth place almost all of them say That God from all Eternity Reprobates by far the greater part of Mankind to eternal Fire without any Eye at all to their Sin Which Opinion my very Soul abominates For it makes God the God of all Mercies to be the most fierce and unreasonable Tyrant in the World For the Question is not here what God may do by an absolute act of Power would he so use it upon the Creature which he made of nothing But what he hath done and what stands with his Wisdom Justice and Goodness to do 9. Ninthly One Lionel Lockier now or late of Cranbrooke in Kent among other his Errors rails against teaching Children the Lord's Prayer or other Forms of Catechising And if they differ from the Church of England in the whole Catechism I think the Lord must work a Miracle before he can make his Speech good That they differ from us in no Fundamental point 10. Lastly to omit all those base Opinions in which the Brownists agree with the Anabaptists this in which they differ from them will be sufficient to prove that they differ from us in that which is fundamental unless they will say that to believe the Trinity is not Fundamental For some of them and by name one Glover deny the Deity of the Holy Ghost Which stands condemned for a gross and Fundamental Heresie in the Second General Council held against Macedonius And for the Familists of which there is Store this Day in England they deny the Resurrection of the Flesh turning it as they do many other things into a Mystery or Allegorie Perhaps more particulars might be found upon a narrow search But if there be no more these are enough to make it evident to the World that these Separatists 〈◊〉 from us in some fundamental points of Doctrine or saving Truth And as these are in fault for their Separation so I doubt the Church is to blame for not proceeding against such of them as are altogether incorrigible But whether my Lord thinks these to be

those Learned Men and Able for Direction with whom you conversed Suppose that yet your self accounts me among your Friends And is it not many times as useful when Thoughts are distracted to make use of the Freedom and Openness of a Friend not altogether Ignorant as of those which are thought more Learned but not so Free nor perhaps so Indifferent But the Result you say that first-began to settle you was that you discern'd by this your diligent Conversation and studious Reading that there were great Mistakings on both Sides and that Passion and Affection to a Party transported too many of those that entred into the Lists in this Quarrel Suppose this also to be true I am heartily sorry and have been ever since I was of any Understanding in matters of Religion to hear of Sides in the Church And I make no doubt but 't will one Day fall heavy upon all that wilfully make or purposely continue Sidings in that Body But when Sides are made and continued remember you confess there are great Mistakings on both Sides And how then can you go from one Side to the other but you must go from one great Mistaking to another And if so then by changing the Side you do but change the Mistaking not quit your self from Mistakes And if you do quit your self from them by God's Goodness and your own Strength yet why might not that have been done without changing the Side since Mistakes are on both Sides As for the Passion and Transportation of many that enter the Lists in this Quarrel I am sure you mean not to make their Passion your Guide for that would make you mistake indeed And why then should their Passion work upon your Judgment especially since the Passion as well as the Mistakes are confest to be on both Sides After this follows the main part of your Letters and that which principally resolved you to enter again the Communion of the Church of Rome in which you had been Born and Bred against that semblance of good Reason which formerly had made you adhere to the Church of England And first you say you now perceive that you may preserve your self in that Church without having your Belief bound up in several particulars the dislike whereof had been a motive to you to free your self from the Jurisdiction which you conceived did impose them 'T is true all Churches leave some particulars free But doth that Church leave you free to believe or not believe any thing determined by it And did not your former Dislike arise from some things determined in and by that Church And if so what Freedom see you now that you saw not then And you cannot well say that your Dislike arose from any thing not determined for in those the Jurisdiction of that Church imposes not You add That your greatest Difficulties were solved when you could distinguish between the Opinions of some New Men raised upon wrested Inferences and the plain and solid Articles of Faith delivered at the first Why but I cannot but be confident you could distinguish these long since and long before you joined your self to the Church of England And that therefore your greatest Difficulties if these were they were as fully and fairly solved then as now they are or can be Besides if by these plain and solid Articles you mean none but the Creed and certainly no other were delivered at the first you seem to intimate by comparing this and the former Passage that so you believe these plain and first Articles you may preserve your self in that Church from having your Belief bound up to other Particulars which I think few will believe besides your self if you can believe it And the Opinions of New Men and the wrested Inferences upon these are some of those great Mistakes which you say are on both sides and therefore needed not to have caused your Change To these first Articles you say The Church in no succeeding Age hath power to add as such the least Tittle of New Doctrine Be it so and I believe it heartily not as such especially if you mean the Articles of the Creed But yet if that Church do maintain That all her Decisions in a General Council are Articles Fidei Catholicae and that all Christians are bound to believe all and every of them eâdem Fide quâ Fidei Articulos and that he is an Heretick which believes them not all Where is then your Freedom or your not being bound up in several Particulars And if you reply You dislike no Determination which that Church hath made then why did you formerly leave it to free your self from that Jurisdiction that you conceived imposed them For if the things which troubled you were Particulars not determin'd they were not imposed upon your Belief And if they were determin'd and so imposed how are you now set free more than then You say again You see now that to be a Catholick doth not deprive them of the fore-named Liberty who have Abilities to examin the things you formerly stuck at and drive them up to their first Principles But first then what shall become of their Liberty who are not able to examin shall they enthral their Consciences Next what shall secure them who think themselves and are perhaps thought by others able to examin yet indeed are not Thirdly what Assurance is there in Cases not demonstrable as few things in Religion are that they which are able to examin have either no Affection to blind their Judgment or may not mistake themselves and their way in driving a doubtful Point to its First Principles Lastly how much doth this differ from leaning upon a private Spirit so 〈◊〉 cried out against by that side when Men under pretence of their Ability shall examin the Tenets of the Church and assume a Liberty to themselves under a colour of not being bound But you say this is not the breaking of any Obligation that Church lays upon you but only an exact understanding of the just and utmost Obligations that Side ties Men to I must here question again For first what shall become of their Freedom that cannot reach to this exact understanding And next do not you make your self as a private Man Judge of the Church's Obligations upon you And is it not as great an Usurpation upon the Church's Power and Right to be Judge of her Obligations as of her Tenets For if the Points be left free there 's no Obligation Nor can you or need any other have any Scruple But if the Points be binding by the Predetermination of the Church can you any way be Judge of her Obligation but you must be Judge also of the Point to which she obliges Now I think that Church will hardly give liberty to any private Man to be so far her Judge since she scarce allows so much to any as Judicium Discretionis in things determin'd by her These utmost Obligations to which that Side ties Men

which I answered at both times First that the Statute of Ed. 6. spake of other Images and that Images in Glass-Windows were neither mentioned nor meant in that Law The Words of the Statute are Any Images of Stone Timber Alabaster or Earth Graven Carved or Painted taken out of any Church c. shall be Destroyed c. and not reserved to any Superstitious Use. So here 's not a Word of Glass-Windows nor the Images that are in them Secondly that the Contemporary Practice which is one of the best Expounders of the meaning of any Law did neither destroy all coloured Windows though Images were in them in the Queens time nor abstain from setting up of new both in her and King James his Time And as the Body of this Statute is utterly mistaken so is the Penalty too which for the First and Second Offence is but a small Fine and but Imprisonment at the King's Will for the Third A great way short of Punishment for Treason And I could not but wonder that Mr. Brown should be so earnest in this Point considering he is of Lincolns-Inn where Mr. Pryn's Zeal hath not yet beaten down the Images of the Apostles in the fair Windows of that Chappel which Windows also were set up new long since that Statute of Edward 6. And t is well known that I was once resolved to have returned this upon Mr. Brown in the House of Commons but changed my Mind lest thereby I might have set some furious Spirit on Work to destroy those harmless goodly Windows to the just dislike of that Worthy Society But to the Statute Mr. Brown added That the Destruction of all Images as well in Windows as elsewhere were Condemned by the Homilies of the Church of England and those Homilies confirmed in the Articles of Religion and the Articles by Act of Parliament This was also urged before and my Answer was First that though we Subscribed generally to the Doctrine of the Homilies as good Yet we did not express or mean thereby to justifie and maintain every particular Phrase or Sentence contained in them And Secondly that the very Words of the Article to which we subscribe are That the Homilies do contain a Godly and a wholesom Doctrine and necessary for those Times Godly and wholesom for all Times but necessary for those when People were newly Weaned from the Worship of Images Afterwards neither the Danger nor the Scandal alike Mr. Brown in his Reply said That since the Doctrine contained in the Homilies was wholesom and good it must needs be necessary also for all Times But this worthy Gentleman is herein much mistaken Strong Meat as well Spiritual as Bodily is good and wholesom but though it be so yet if it had been Necessary at all Times and for all Men the Apostle would never have fed the Corinthians with Milk and not with Meat The Meat always good in it self but not necessary for them which were not able to bear it 4 The Fourth thing which Dr. Featly Testifies is That there were Bowings at the coming into the Chappel and going up to the Commanion-Table This was usual in Queen Elizabeth's Time and of Old both among Jews as appears in the Story of Hezekiah 2 Chro. 29. 28. and among Christians as is evident in Rhenanus his Notes upon Tertullian And one of them which have written against the late Canons confesses it was usual in the Queens Time but then adds That that was a Time of Ignorance What a Time of such a Reformation and yet still a Time of Ignorance I pray God the Opposite be not a Time of Prophaneness and all is well Mr. Brown in the Summ of his Charge given me in the House of Commons instanced in this also I answered as before with this Addition Shall I Bow to Men in each House of Parliament and shall I not bow to God in his House whither I do or ought to come to Worship him Surely I must Worship God and Bow to him though neither Altar nor Communion-Table be in the Church 5 For Organs Candlesticks a Picture of a History at the back of the Altar and Copes at Communions and Consecrations All which Dr. Featly named First these things have been in use ever since the Reformation And Secondly Dr. Featly himself did twice acknowledge that it was in my Chappel as it was at White-Hall no difference And it is not to be thought that Queen Elizabeth and King James would have endured them all their Time in their own Chappel had they been introductions for Popery And for Copes they are allowed at Times of Communion by the Canons of the Church So that these all or any are very poor Motives from whence to argue an Alteration of Religion 2. The second Witness against my Chappel was Sir Nathaniel Brent But he says not so much as Dr. Featly And in what he doth say he agrees with him saving that he cannot say whether the Picture at the Back of the Communion-Table were not there before my time 3. The third Witness for this Charge was one Mr. Boreman who came into my Chappel at Prayers time when I had some new Plate to Consecrate for use at the Communion And I think it was brought to me for that end by Dr. Featly This Man says first he then saw me Bow and wear a Cope That 's answer'd Secondly That he saw me Consecrate some Plate That in that Consecration I used some part of Solomon's Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple And that in my Prayer I did desire God to accept those Vessels No fault in any of the Three For in all Ages of the Church especially since Constantine's Time that Religion hath had publick allowance There have been Consecrations of Sacred Vessels as well as of Churches themselves And these Inanimate things are Holy in that they are Deputed and Dedicated to the Service of God And we are said to Minister about Holy Things 1 Cor. 9. And the Altar is said to Sanctifie the Gift S. Matt. 23. which it could not do if it self were not Holy So then if there be no Dedication of these Things to God no separation of them from common use there 's neither Thing nor Place Holy And then no Sacriledge no difference between Churches and common Houses between Holy-Tables so the Injunction calls them and ordinary Tables But I would have no Man deceive himself Sacriledge is a grievous Sin and was severely Punished even among the Heathen And S. Paul's Question puts it home would we consider of it Thou which abhorrest Idols Committest thou Sacriledge Rom. 2. Thou which abhorrest Idols to the very defacing of Church Windows dost thou Thou of all other Commit Sacriledge which the very Worshippers of Idols punished And this being so I hope my use of a part of Solomon's Prayer or the Words of my own Prayer That God would be pleased to accept them shall not be reputed Faults But

from God and from Christ contrary to an Act of Parliament which says Bishops derive their Jurisdiction from the King This is Witnessed by all three and that Dr. Bastwick read the Statute That Statute speaks plainly of Jurisdiction in foro Contentioso and places of Judicature and no other And all this forinsecal Jurisdiction I and all Bishops in England derive from the Crown But my Order my Calling my Jurisdiction in foro Conscientiae that is from God and from Christ and by Divine and Apostolical Right And of this Jurisdiction it was that I then spake if I named Jurisdiction at all and not my Calling in general For I then sate in the High-Commission and did Exercise the former Jurisdiction under the Broad Seal and could not be so simple to deny the Power by which I then sate Beside the Canons of the Church of England to which I have Subscribed are plain for it Nay farther The Use and Exercise of my Jurisdiction in foro Conscientiae may not be but by the Leave and Power of the King within his Dominions And if Bishops and Presbyters be all one Order as these Men contend for then Bishops must be Jure Divino for so they maintain that Presbyters are This part of the Charge Mr. Browne pressed in his Report to the House of Commons And when I gave this same Answer he in his Reply said nothing but the same over and over again save that he said I fled to he knew not what inward Calling and Jurisdiction which point as I expressed it if he understood not he should not have undertaken to Judge me CAP. XXXII THE 16th of May I had an Order from the Lords for free access of four of my Servants to me On Friday May 17. I received a Note from the Committee that they intended to proceed upon part of the Sixth Original Article remaining and upon the Seventh which Seventh Article follows in haec Verba That he hath Trayterously indeavoured to alter and subvert God's True Religion by Law Established in this Realm and instead thereof to set up Popish Superstition and Idolatry And to that end hath Declared and Maintained in Speeches and Printed Books divers Popish Doctrins and Opinions contrary to the Articles of Religion Established He hath urged and injoyned divers Popish and Superstitious Ceremonies without any Warrant of Law and hath cruelly persecuted those who have opposed the same by Corporal Punishment and Imprisonment and most unjustly vexed others who refused to Conform thereunto by Ecclesiastical Censures of Excommunication Suspension Deprivation and Degradation contrary to the Law of this Kingdom The Tenth Day of my Hearing This day May 20. Mr. Serjeant Wild undertook the Business against me And at his Entrance he made a Speech being now to charge me with Matter of Religion In this Speech he spake of a Tide which came not in all at once And so he said it was in the intended alteration of Religion First a Connivence then a Toleration then a Subversion Nor this nor that But a Tide it seems he will have of Religion And I pray God his Truth the True Protestant Religion here Established sink not to so low an Ebb that Men may with ease wade over to that side which this Gentleman seems most to hate He fears both Ceremonies and Doctrine But in both he fears where no fear is which I hope shall appear He was pleased to begin with Ceremonies In this he Charged first my Chappel at Lambeth and Innovation in Ceremonies there 1. The First Witness for this was Dr. Featly he says there were Alterations since my Predecessor's time And I say so too or else my Chappel must lye more undecently than is fit to express He says I turned the Table North and South The Injunction says it shall be so And then the Innovation was theirs in going from not mine in returning to that way of placing it Here Mr. Browne in his last Reply in the House of Commons said that I cut the Injunction short because in the Words immediately following 't is Ordered That this Place of standing shall be altered when the Communion is Administred But first the Charge against me is only about the Place of it Of which that Injunction is so careful that it Commands That when the Communion is done it be placed where it stood before Secondly it was never Charged against me that I did not remove it at the Time of Communion nor doth the Reason expressed in the Injunction require it which is when the Number of Communicants is great and that the Minister may be the better heard of them Neither of which was necessary in my Chappel where my Number was not great and all might easily Hear 2 The second thing which Dr. Featly said was in down-right Terms That the Chappel lay nastily all the time he served in that House Was it one of my Faults too to cleanse it 3 Thirdly he says The Windows were not made up with Coloured Glass till my time The Truth is they were all shameful to look on all diversly patched like a Poor Beggars Coat Had they had all white Glass I had not stirred them And for the Crucifix he confesses it was standing in my Predecessors time though a little broken So I did but mend it I did not set it up as was urged against me And it was utterly mistaken by Mr. Brown that I did repair the Story of those Windows by their like in the Mass-Book No but I and my Secretary made out the Story as well as we could by the Remains that were unbroken Nor was any Proof at all offered that I did it by the Pictures in the Mass-Book but only Mr. Pryn Testified that such Pictures were there whereas this Argument is of no consequence There are such Pictures in the Missal therefore I repaired my Windows by them The Windows contain the whole Story from the Creation to the Day of Judgment Three Lights in a Window The two Side-Lights contain the Types in the Old Testament and the middle Light the Antitype and Verity of Christ in the New And I believe the Types are not in the Pictures in the Missal In the mean time I know no Crime or Superstition in this History And though Calvin do not approve Images in Churches yet he doth approve very well of them which contain a History and says plainly that these have their use in Docendo Admonendo in Teaching and Admonishing the People And if they have that use why they may not instruct in the Church as well as out I know not Nor do the Homilies in this particular differ much from Calvin But here the Statute of Ed. 6. was charged against me which requires the Destruction of all Images as well in Glass-Windows as elsewhere And this was also earnestly pressed by Mr. Brown when he repeated the Summ of the Charge against me in the House of Commons To

which we differ from them And Mr. Wakerly confesses that the Words as alter'd are That they are Persecuted for their Religion and their Religion is the Protestant Religion and so is ours And therefore I could have no intention to make the Religions different but the Opinions under the same Religion For Mr Wakerly he is a Dutchman born and how far the Testimony of an Alien may be of force by the Law I know not And a bitter Enemy to me he hath ever shewed himself since I complained to the King and the Lords that a Stranger born and bred should be so near a Secretary of State and all his Papers and Cyphers as he was known to be to Mr. Secretary Coke A thing which few States would indure And how far the Testimony of such a Canker'd Enemy should be admitted let the World judge Admitted he was 2. The Second Witness was Mr 〈◊〉 He acknowledges my improvement of the Collection and my great readiness therein which doubtless I should not have shewed had I accounted them of another Religion He says there was no Alteration but in that Clause and that implies a manifest difference But that is but in his Judgment in which I have already shewed that Wakerly is mistaken and so is he Beside he comes here as a Witness of the Fact not as a Judge of my Intentions or Thoughts He adds That if he remember well the Alteration was drawn by me But if he do not remember well what then Surely here 's no Evidence to be grounded upon Ifs. Here upon the point of Antichrist Mr. Nicolas stiled me as before and was furious till he foamed again but I saw a necessity of Patience Mr. Brown also in his Summary Ch followed this Business close But I gave it the same Answer The Fifth Charge and the last under this Article was the calling in of a Book An. 1637. shewing the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church in the Palatinat but called in only because against Arminianism The single Witness Michael Sparks He says this Book was called in but he knows not by whom nor mentions he for what But he says The Pursevants which searched for it were mine He means such as belonged to the High-Commission for other than such I had none And there was cause enough for calling in the Book without thinking of Arminianism But what is the Reason why here 's nothing urged against me about Abrogating the Immunities and Priviledges of the French and Dutch Churches which fill the Body of this Article Why I conceive there may be two Reasons of it One because there was taken by Mr. Pryn among other Papers for my Defence a Letter under Queen Elizabeth's own Hand to the Lord Pawlet Marquess of Winchester then Lord Treasurer in which she expresses her willingness that those Strangers distressed in and for point of Conscience should have Succour and free Entertainment but should conform themselves to the English Liturgy and have that Translated into their own Language And they knew I would call to have this Letter produced proved and read And had this Letter been stood unto they had never been able to do the Church of England half the harm they have since done The other was because they found by their own search against me that all which I did concerning those Churches was with this Moderation that all those of their several Congregations in London Canterbury Sandwich Norwich or elsewhere which were of the second Descent and born in England should repair to their several Parish Churches and Conform themselves to the Doctrine Discipline and Liturgy of the Church of England and not live continually in an open Separation as if they were an Israel in AEgypt to the great distraction of the Natives of this Kingdom and the assisting of that Schism which is now broke forth And as this was with great Moderation so was it with the joint Approbation of his Majesty and the Lords of his Council upon the Reasons openly given and debated And all this before I proceeded to do any thing As appears apud Acta Then they went to the Thirteenth Original Article which here follows He hath Trayterously and Wickedly endeavoured to reconcile the Church of England with the Church of Rome and for the effecting thereof hath Consorted and Confederated with divers Popish Priests and Jesuits and hath kept secret Intelligence with the Pope of Rome and by himself his Agents or Instruments Treated with such as have from thence received Authority and Instruction He hath permitted and countenanced a Popish Hierarchy or Ecclesiastical Government to be Established in this Kingdom By all which Trayterous and Malicious Practices this Church and Kingdom have been exceedingly indangered and like to fall under the Tyranny of the Roman See The Seventh Additional Article That the said Arch-Bishop at several times within these Ten Years last past at Westminster and elsewhere within this Realm contrary to the known Laws of this Land hath endeavoured to advance Popery and Superstition within the Realm And for that End and Purpose hath wittingly and willingly received harboured and relieved divers Popish Priests and Jesuits namely one called Sancta Clara alias Damport a dangerous Person and Franciscan Friar who having written a Popish and Seditious Book Intituled Deus Natura Gratia wherein the Thirty nine Articles of the Church of England established by Act of Parliament were much Traduced and Scandalized the said Arch-Bishop had divers Conferences with him while he was in writing the said Book and did also provide Maintenance and Entertainment for one Monsieur S. Giles a Popish Priest at Oxford knowing him to be a Popish Priest The First Charge they say was to be laid as a Foundation and it was That I was generally reputed a Papist in Heart both in Oxford and since I came thence 1. The first Witness for this was Dr. Featly He says There was such an Opinion of me Thirty Years since there But he says he never heard any Popish Opinion maintained by me So here 's nothing of Knowledge And if I should say that above Thirty Years ago there was an Opinion that Dr. Featly then in Oxford was a Puritan this could make no Proof against him nor can his saying that I was reputed a Papist make any Proof against me He says farther That one Mr. Russel who had been bred in S. John's College told him in Paris That I maintained some Catholick Opinions First Mr. Nicolas would have it that this Mr. Russel was my Scholar But that the whole College can witness it is not so nor had he ever any relation to me in the least Degree After his Father's Death he left the College and went beyond Sea where the Weak Man for such he was lost his Religion Secondly Dr. Featly says expresly that Mr. Russel said I was no Papist which for the Countenance of his own Change he would never have said had he thought me one Thirdly if he did say

which it is in truth of Substance But this Word Right is not so used but it is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this Sense every thing that hath a true and real Being is not by and by Right in the Conditions of it A Man that is most Dishonest and Unworthy the Name a very Thief if you will is a True Man in the Verity of his Essence as he is a Creature Endued with Reason for this none can steal from him nor he from himself but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an Upright Man And a Church that is exceeding Corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a Dishonour to the Name is yet a True Church in the verity of Essence as a Church is a Company of Men which profess the Faith of Christ and are Baptized into his Name but yet it is not therefore a Right Church either in Doctrine or Manners It may be you meant cunningly to slip in this Word Right that I might at unawares grant it Orthodox But I was not so to be caught For I know well that Orthodox Christians are Keepers of Integrity so St. Augustin and Followers of right Things of which the Church of Rome at this Day is neither In this Sense then no Right that is no Orthodox Church at Rome IX Epist. Dedicat. circa med For to my remembrance I have not given him or his so much as Course Language But on the other side God forbid too that your Majesty should let both Laws and Discipline sleep for fear of the Name of Persecution and in the mean time let Mr. Fisher and his Fellows Angle in all parts of your Dominions for your Subjects If in your Grace and Goodness you will spare their Persons yet I humbly beseech you see to it That they be not suffered to lay either their Weels or Bait their Hooks or cast their Nets in every Stream lest that Tentation grow both too general and too strong I know they have many Devices to work their Ends but if they will needs be Fishing let them use none but Lawful Nets Let 's have no dissolving of Oaths of Allegiance no Deposing no Killing of Kings no blowing up of States to settle Quod Volumus That which fain they would have in the Church with many other Nets as dangerous as these For if their Profession of Religion were as good as they pretend it is if they cannot compass it by good means I am sure they ought not to attempt it by bad For if they will do evil that good may come thereof the Apostle tells me Their Damnation's just Rom. 3. 8. Now as I would humbly beseech your Majesty to keep a serious Watch upon these Fishermen which pretend S. Peter but Fish not with his Net So c. X. A Passage out of the Conference at Hampton-Court referred to in the preceding History Pag. 28. Upon the first Motion concerning falling from Grace the Bishop of London took occasion to signifie to his Majesty how very many in these days neglecting Holiness of Life presumed too much of persisting of Grace laying all their Religion upon Predestination if I shall Saved I shall be Saved which he termed a desperate Doctrine shewing it to be contrary to good Divinity and the True Doctrine of Predestination wherein we should Reason rather ascendendo than descendendo thus I Live in Obedience to God in Love with my Neighbour I follow my Vocation c. therefore I trust that God hath Elected me and Predestinated me to Salvation Not thus which is the usual course of Argument God hath Predestinated and chosen me to Life therefore though I sin never so grievously yet I shall not be damned For whom he once loveth he loveth to the End Whereupon he shewed his Majesty out of the next Article what was the Doctrine of the Church of England touching Predestination in the very last Paragraph Scil. We must receive God's Promises in such wise as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture and in our doings that the Will of God is to be followed which we have expresly declared unto us in the Word of God Which part of the Article his Majesty very well approved And after he had after his manner very singularly discoursed on that place of Paul Work out your Salvation with fear and trembling he left it to be considered whether any thing were meet to be added for the clearing of the Doctor his doubt by putting in the Word often or the like as thus We may often depart from Grace But in the mean time wished that the Doctrine of Predestination might be very tenderly handled and with great discretion lest on the one side God's Omnipotency might be called in question by impeaching the Doctrine of his eternal Predestination or on the other side a desperate Presumption might be arreared by inferring the necessary certainty of standing and persisting in Grace XI A Passage out of the Arch-Bishop's Speech in Star-Chamber at the Censure of Pryn Burton and Bastwick referred to in the Preceding History Pag. 36. The Learned make but Three Religions to have been of old in the World Paganism Judaism and Christianity and now they have added a Fourth which is Turcism and is an absurd mixture of the other three Now if this ground of theirs be true as 't is generally received perhaps it will be of dangerous consequence sadly to avow that the Popish Religion is Rebellion That some Opinions of theirs teach Rebellion that 's apparently True the other would be thought on to say no more XII A Passage out of the New Statutes of the Cathedral and Metropolitical Church of Christ in Canterbury drawn by the Arch-Bishop and prescribed to that Church by the King 1636. Cap. 34. de Celebratione Divinorum Statuimus etiam ut nullus Canonicorum aliorum in Choro Ministrantium Divinorum Officiorum tempore absque Insignibus Choro Gradui convenientibus Chorum ingrediatur Singuli verò cujuscunque fuerint Gradûs aut Ordinis in ingressu Chori Divinam Majestatem devotâ mente adorantes humiliter se inclinabunt versùs Altare prout antiquis quarundam Ecclesiarum Statutis cautum novimus dein conversi Decano quoque debitam Reverentiam exhibebunt Quòd si contigerit aliquem ex quacunque causâ de loco in locum transire in Choro Reverentiam similiter in medio Chori tam versùs Altare quàm versùs stallum Decani si praesens fuerit exhibebit tum in eundo tum in redeundo toties quoties XIII A Passage out of Arch-Bishop Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae concerning Prohibitions referred to in the preceding History Pag. 326 327. edit Londin Jamque Juris Regni periti ut sui commodi Causâ Regia for a multitudine litium Infinitate replerent plerasque Causas Controversias ab Archiepiscopali Episcopali Audientiâ ad sua Judicia vocabant Ecclesiasticam Jurisdictionem decimarum