any but as each Congregation Synod particular Doctor or Man of sound judgement interprets it and consequently what ever Doctrine any man of sound judgement Interprets it judges to be of Scripture is to be esteem'd the Doctrine of the Reformation and you may safely believe it if you like it and remain still as truly a Reformed Child as the proudest Protestant of England The Rule of Faith is Scripture as any particular Doctor of person of sound Judgement understands it Behold how convincingly first we have heard Luther quoted but now say We receive nothing but Scripture but so as that we must have some Authority to Interpret it Hear him again d In Colloq mensal fol. 118. The Governours and Pastors have Power to teach but the sheep must give their judgement f In Defens Art. Reliq Protest pag. 199. whether they propose the Voice of Christ or of strangers And again e To. Wittem fol. 374. Christ has taken from the Bishops Councils and Pastors the right of Doctrine and given it to all Christians in general and the Rule is Scripture as each one will think fit to interpret it And in consequent to this we have heard him say above I will be free and will not submit to Doctors Councils or Pastors but will teach whatever I think to be true Barlow The Apostles have given to each particular Man the right and power of Interpreting and judging by his inward spirit what is true it is needless that any Man or Angel Pope or Council should instruct you the spirit working in the Heart and Scripture are to each particular Person most assured Interpreters Bilson Bishop of Winchester says the same g In his true difier par 2. pag. 353. The people must be discerners and judges of what is taught Our Religion has no other rule of Faith says our French Reformation by the mouth of Du Moulin h Boucler de lay Foy. Drelincourt and the holy Synod of Charenton but the written Word of God as Interpreted by us It matters not so much for you to know what I approve or condemn but to know what the Doctrine of the Reformation is It is this That none can Teach Preach Administer Sacraments or Exercise Ecclesiastical Functions if he be not in Holy Orders Bishop Priest or Deacon for the Church of England teaches it and you may believe it if you please You may also deny it and say any Woman or Tradesmen has as much power to Preach and administer the Sacraments as the ablest Bishop in England This also is the Doctrine of the Reformation as well as the former because Quakers Presbyterians Brownists Anabaptists c. Believe and Teach this and they are men of as sound judgements and as good Reformers as the Protestants nay the most learned of our Reformaers allow Women a right to exercise Spiritual Functions and Administer the Sacraments Samaise Peter Martyr In lib ad Corin c. 11. in Explan Art. 17. To. 2. de minist Eccles instit fol. 369 lib. de Cap. Babil c. de Ordin lib. de abroganda Missa and Zuinlius expresly defend the Priesthood as well of Women as Men And Luther proves it strongly The first Office of a Priest says he is to Preach this is common to all even Women the second to Baptize which is also common to Women the third is to Consecrate Bread and Wine and this also is common to all as well as to Men and in the absence of a Priest a Woman may Absolve from Sins as well as the Pope because the words of Christ Whatever ye shall untye on Earth shall be untyed in Heaven were sad to all Christians And when so eminent Men had not said it Reason and Scripture convinces it Reason because that our Rule of Faith being Scripture as each Person of sound judgement understands it many Women undoubtedly are of sound judgement and why should not their Interpretation of Scripture pass for the Doctrine of the Reformation as well as that of our Bishops and Ministers Scripture because we read the Samariatan Woman was the first who preached the Messias to the City of Samaria and Christ commanded Mary Magdalen to go to Preach his Resurrection to his Disciples and we know by our Chronicles that our glorious Queen Elizabeth of blessed Memory did not only govern the state but was a great Apostoless in Church affairs To what purpose then have we Bishops and Ministers who enjoy so vast Revenues if any Man or Women can Preach and Administer the Sacraments as well as they You may believe Bishops and Ministers are very needful for the service of the Church for they being commonly learned witty Men and having Wives they come to instruct Wives so well that the good Women come in a short time to be as learned as their Husbands and as nimble and quick in the Ecclesiastical Ministery as if they were permitted to exercise it as some Authors of Credit relate unto us that a Gentleman of Constance writ to his friend in a Village about three Leagues distant from that City whose Inhabitants were for the most part of our Lutheran Reformation the good Pastor exhorted his Flock to prepare for Easter Communion that none should presume to come to the Holy Table but should first Confess and receive Absolution of his Sins Easter Holy days being come such a multitude flock'd to Confession that the Pastor could not satisfie the Devotion of so great a Croud he called his Wife to help him to hear Confessions and to give them Absolution in which Ministery the good Lady did Labour with great satisfaction of the Penitents but neither the Pastor nor his vertuous Consort being able to dispatch so great a multitude he called his Maid Servant who did work in the Holy Ministery with as much expedition as her Master For after all the Church of Scotland France and all England Protestants excepted will tell you that Bishops and Ministers are not needful nay that they are very prejudicial to the Reformation and State To the Reformation because this Hierarchy was the Bishops Court Surplices Corner Caps and other Trumperies puts the flock in mind of Popery whereof it 's a perfect Resemblance I remember a discourse started in the House of Lords not many years ago by his Grace the Duke of Buckingham he desired to know what it was to be a Protestant and wherein did Protestancy properly consist The Bishops who were present looked one upon another and whether they feared the difficulty of the Question or that for modesty's sake each expected to hear another speak first they stood silent for a while at last the Ice was broken by one others followed but hardly any two agreed and all that the Duke could gather out of their â—…al Answers was That our Rule of â—aith was Scripture as Interpreted by the Parliament and Church of England Whereupon he concluded We have been these hundred years very busie to settle Religion
Jesus Christ the Son of God who establisht the Church that this is the Doctrine of our Reformation is apparent for it is Scripture as Interpreted by Ochinius a Man of sound judgement whom all Italy could not match says Calvin In whose presence England was happy and unhappy in his absence says B. Bale Ochinus speaks thus a In Prefat Dialog Considering how the Church was establisht by Christ and washt with his Blood and considering again how it was utterly overthrown by the Papacy I concluded that he who establisht it could not be Christ the Son of God because he wanted providence and upon this reflection he renounced Christ and became a Jew And no man can say but that he acted and behaved himself like a true Child of the Reformation in so doing for he followed Scripture as he understood it and as he was a true Reformed Child in forsaking Popery because he understood by Scripture that the Reformation was better so since he understood by reading Scripture more that Judaism was better than the Reformation he acted like a good Reformer in chusing that which he understood by Scripture to be best this is the Reformers Rule of Faith. And if one chuse to believe that there is a Church establisht of Earth by Christ you must beware never to persuade your self we are bound to believe her Doctrine or live in her if you do not judge by Scripture that she teaches the Doctrine of Christ This is the most essential point of Popery an obligation of submitting our judgements to the Church and believing her Doctrine without any more examining and in this the Church of England is much like the Popish Church which by Acts of Parliaments and other severities would oblige all men to believe her Doctrine Rites and Ceremonies No God has given us Scripture for our Rule of Faith as we forsook the Popish Church because we discovered by Scripture her many errours in Doctrine so we are not bound to believe the Doctrine of any other Church but as we find by Scripture her Doctrine is true Do and speak as Luther to 1. Edit Jen. in result I will be free and will not submit to the Authority of Councils Popes Church or University to the contrary I will confidently teach whatever I judge to be true whether it be the Catholick Doctrin or Heretical condemned or approved Must I own and believe that the Doctrin of Jesus Christ delivered to his Apostles and the Church is true Doctrine The Reformation teaches it is and you may safely believe it You may as safely believe it is not after the principles of the Reformation because it teaches the Christ err'd in Doctrin and Manners Verè Pharisaei erant viri valdè boni says Luther b Serm de 50 Artic. in summa summarum Christus minimè debuit eos taxare and Calvin says c In Harm super Luc c. 8. it 's a folly to think he was not ignorant in many things lastly David George d Epitom Cent. 16. par 2. a man of God and of a holy life says Osiander writes If the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles had been true and perfect the Church which they planted had continued but now it is manifest that Antichrist hath subverted it as it is evident in the Papacy therefore it was false and imperfect See these words quoted in the History of David George Printed by the Divines of Basil at Antwerp Anno 1668. both Doctrines are Scripture as Interpreted by Men of sound judgement and so a Child of the Reformation may believe which he will Zninglius e Tom. 2. cont catabapt fol. 10. one of the greatest Oracles of our Church says It 's a great ignorance to believe any Infallinble Authority in the Gospels or Epistles of the Apostles Beza not inferiour to Zuinglius blotted out of St. John the History of the Woman Adultress judging it a Fable Clebitius affirms that Luke's relation of Christ's passion is not true because it does not agree with that of Matthew and Mark and more credit is to be given to two than to one g In cap. 2. ad Gal. Calvin says Peter consented to and added to the Schism of the Church to the overthrow of Christian liberty and Christ's Grace h de Eccles cont Bellarm cont 2. q. 4. Whitaker says f Victoria verit arg 5. It 's evident that after the Descent of the Holy Ghost the whole Church even the Apostles erred and Peter erred in Doctrin and Manners i To. 5. Wettem an 1554. in Epist ad Gal. c. 1. Luther says Peter liued and taught extra Verbum Dei and Brentius k In Apol Cof c. de Concil his Disciples say that Peter and Barnabas together with the Church of Jerusalem erred after receiving the Holy Ghost If our Rule of Faith be Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it undoubtedly this must be the Doctrin of the Reformation and may be believed by and any Reformed since it is Scripture interpreted by such renowned men As to the true Canonical Books of Scripture The Reformation teaches and you may believe with the Church of England that St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews those of James and Jude the 2 of St. Peter the 2. and 3 of St. John are true Canonical Scripture the Reformation also teaches they are not Canonical because Lutherans deny them believe which you like best But if you 'll live in peace and out of strife with Protestants Lutherans and others who dispute whether that of this or that Church be Canonical Scripture your readiest way will be to say there 's no true Canonical Scripture Scripture is no more to be regarded than other pious Books if you say this is not the Doctrine of the Reformation read de expresso Verbo Dei lib. de Har. where he relates this to be the Doctrine of the Swinckfeldians as good Reformers as the best of us they say that we are not to regard any Instruction from Man or Book but Gods immediate inspiration which speaks secretly to our hearts for which they alledge those comfortable words of the Prophet I will hear what my Lord my God will speak in me for say they the Book which we call Scripture is a Creature and we must not seek for light and instruction from any Creature but from God the Father of Lights This is Scripture as interpreted by men of sound judgement any Child of the Reformation may believe it It is the doctrine of the Reformation that you cannot because God has forbid it add to and take away from his Word It is also the doctrine of the Reformation and the practice of our best Reformers when the Text does not speak clear enough that to refute Popery and establish our doctrine we may add or diminish a word or two which is not to change the Word of God but to make it speak more expresly as when Luther had a mind
to preach justification by Faith alone finding the Text said but Man is justified by Faith he added the word Alone and made the Text very clear against Popery which formerly was somewhat obscure Zuinglius being to teach the figurative presence of Christ in the Sacrament found the Text This is my Body to be too pat against his doctrine and instead of Is put in This signifieth The Church of England being to preach up the Kings Spiritual Supremacy could not convince the obstinate Papists by the Original Text which said 1 Pet. 2. submit your selves anto every humane creature for the Lord's sake whether it be to the King as excelling or to c. But in King Edwards time they altered one word and made the Text thus submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man whether it be to the King as being the chief head and the following impressions of the Bible in the year 1557. and 79. say To the King as Supream And so the true Doctrine is clearly made out from Scripture as also the lawfulness of Priests Marriages for the Text before the Reformation said 1 Cor. 9. Have we not power to lead about a woman or a sister and now our Bibles say Have we not power to lead about a Wife being our Sister Hence it 's evident according to the Doctrine and practice of our Reformation that when you have a mind to establish a Doctrin which you judge to be true you may change the Text and make it speak your sense and meaning provided you judge your sense to be true Does Faith alone justify us It is the Doctrin of the Reformation that without Charity it cannot because St. Paul says 1 Cor. 13. If I have Faith so as to move Mountains and no Charity I am nothing It is also the Doctrine of the Reformation that it is impious and wicked to say Faith alone without Charity does not justify this is Scripture as interpreted by Luther a Man of a sound judgement l In cap. 2 ad Gal. serm Aug. pag. 204. Who say quoth Luther that Faith alone though perfect it be cannot justify without Charity say impiously and wicked because Faith alone without any good works doth justifie Believe which Doctrine you please both are of the Reformation As to St. Pauls Doctrine Luther answers m In Epist ad Gal. c. 1 2. Tom. 5. Wittemb an 1554. fol. 29. Be it says he that the Church Augustine or other Doctors also Peter and Paul nay and an Angel from Heaven should teach otherwise than I teach yet my doctrine is such that it sets forth Gods Glory I know I teach no humane but divine doctrine It is the doctrine of the Reformation that Faith alone without any good Works notwithstanding all sins you are guilty of doth justifie you This is Scripture as Interpreted by Luther who says nothing can damn you but Incredulity as nothing but Faith can save you so Whitaker Wotton Fulk and Beza whose Words I related which I believe you remember and I need not repeat It is also the doctrine of the Reformation that Good Works are meritorious of Grace and Glory n Lib. 5. de Eccl. Polit. sect 72. Hooker and Harmonia confess o pag. 495. 273 say it 's the doctrine of Scripture and what any person of sound judgement judges to be the doctrine of Scripture he may believe it for this is our Rule of Faith. It 's likewise the doctrine generally of all our Church that good Works are not at all meritorious Tindal called by Fox p Acts and Mon. pag. 514. a man of God and a constant Martyr judges this to be so true that in his Treatise de Mammona iniquitatis he says Christ himself did not by all his good works merit Glory And though the Scripture says expresly he did Calvin q Lib. 2. Inst c. 17. affirms that it is a foolish curiosity to examine and a rash proposition to say Christ did Merit It is the doctrine of the Reformation that though good Works be not meritorious nor have not the least influence in our Justification or Salvation yet they are absolutely needful for both in as much as true Faith cannot be without good Works because they are the marks and signs of a living Faith by which alone we are Saved this is the judgement of the Church of England expressed in the 11 and 12 Articles of the 39 and of Melancthon in locis Commun de Bonis operibus and you may believe it You may also believe and it is the doctrine of the Reformation that good works are so far from being needful that they are prejudicial and hurtful to our Salvation and the best way to be Saved is to do no good Works at all this is Scripture as Interpreted by Illyricus Amarsdortius quoted in Act. Colloq Aldeburg pag. 205. and 299. and Luther r In comment in cap. 2. ad Gal. was deeply perswaded of this truth though Christ said If thou will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven keep the Commandments Luther says It is an obstacle to our Salvation to keep them Where it is said quoth he that Faith in Christ doth indeed justify us but that it is necessary also to keep the Commandments there Christ is denied and Faith abolish'd because that which is proper to Faith alone is attributed to the Commandments And again f To 1 Proposit 3. says he If Faith be accompanied with good Works it is no true Faith that it may justifie it must be alone without any good Works This is Scripture as interpreted by such sound Men and consequently the Doctrine of the Reformation and who doubts but that any Doctrine of the Reformation may be believed For our Rule of Faith is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it and in believing those Tenets because they judge them to be the Doctrine of Scripture they stick fast to and follow our Rule of Faith Why is the Figurative Presence and the Kings Supremancy the Doctrine of the Reformation though denied by Papists Lutherans and Presbyterians but because the Protestants judge it's the Doctrine of Scripture If therefore those great Authors I quoted and any other with them judge those Tenets to be the Doctrine of Scripture they may be justly called the Doctrine of the Reformation Must Protestants be forced against their judgements to deny real Presence and Supremacy because Lutherans say it's wicked Doctrine And why must Luther Flaccius Illiricus and others be forced to deny those Tenets though Protestants or Papists judge them to be damnable Let each one believe what he thinks to be the Doctrine of Scripture and he will still be a true Reformed Child Does our Reformation teach that 't is possible to all Men assisted with Gods Grace to keep the Commandments This is the Doctrine of the Church of England and consequently of the Reformation It is also the Doctrine of the Reformation delivered out of Scripture as
Interpreted by Luther Calvin Willet and several others that it 's impossible to any man assisted with what Grace soever to keep the Commandments None has ever yet says our great Calvin and God has decreed none shall ever keep the Commandments Again u Harm Evang. in Luc. c. 10. verse 26. the Law and Commandments were given us to no other end but that we should be damn'd by them t Lib. 2. Instit c. 7.5 inasmuch that it is impossible for Us to do what they Command The same Doctrine is taught by Luther in several places of his Works by Willet x In Synop. Papismi pag. 564. and by our Brethren the Gomarists of Holland and many of our French Synods Believe which you please both Doctrines are of the Reformation It is also the Doctrine of Luther and Calvin that God does not cast Men into Hell because their sins deserve it nor save Men because they merit it but meerly because he will have it so He crowns those who have not deserved it says Luther y Lib. de Servo Arbit cont Erasm 2. Lib. 3. Inst c. 21. sect 5. 7. c. 22. sect 11. cap. 13.1 and he punishes those who have not deserved it 't is Gods Wrath and Severity to damn the one 't is Gods Grace and Mercy to save the other Calvin also z Men are damn'd for no other cause but because God will have it so he is the cause and Author of their Damnation their Damnation is decreed by God when they are in their Mothers Womb because he will have it so this is also the belief of our Gomarists in Holland of many French Churches and of several learned Calvinists though the Church of England denies this Doctrine none will dare say it is not the Doctrine of the Reformation because it is Scripture as Interpreted by such eminent men of our Church The Church of England understands by Scripture that God is not the Author nor cause of sin that does not force us to sin who doubts but that this is therefore the Doctrine of the Reformation But Calvin Brentius Beza and several others understand by Scripture that God is the cause and Author which forces our Will to Sin That Man and the Devil are but Gods Instruments to commit it That Murthers Incests Blasphemies c. are the Works of God that he makes us commit them And who doubts but this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation being Scripture as Interpreted by such eminent and sound judgement God says Calvin a Lib. 2. Inst c. 4. sect 3. lib. 1. c. 18. sect 2. lib. c. 23. sect 4. Lo. 1. de deprovid c. 6. in Synops pag. 563. In manifest stratag Papist directs moves inclines and forces the Will of man to sin insomuch that the power and efficacy of Working is wholly in him Man nay and Satan when he impells us being only Gods Instruments which he uses to make us sin Zuinglius Willet Beza teach the same The Church of England has Scripture for her Rule of Faith and gives us the liberty to Interpret Understand and Believe some Text of it as each one thinks best and so permits Presbyterians to deny Episcopacy Lutherans to deny Figurative Presence c. and confesses they are all her Brethren of the Reformation but she will give no liberty at all to Interpret other Texts but all must understand them as she does or all must be Hereticks and damn'd Men No that Text My Father and I are one must be Interpreted to signifie the Unity and Nature of the Father and Son as the Church of England believes none must interpret it otherwise So that the difference betwixt the Popish Church and that of England is the first gives us no Liberty at all the second gives us some Liberty the first robs us of all the second but of one half The Rule of Faith in Popery is Scripture as Interpreted by the Pope and Councils the Rule of Faith in the Church of England as to some Articles is Scripture as Interpreted by the Church of England and as to other Articles Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it and thus Protestants are but half Papists and half Reformed Let any unbyass'd and impartial man judge if the Church of England proceeds justly in this For if our Rule of Faith be Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it and if as the whole Reformation believes we are not to be constrained to believe any Church Council or mans sense of Scripture if we do not judge by the Word of God it 's true by what Authority Rule or Reason can the Church of England give me Liberty to understand and believe some Texts as I please and deny me Liberty to understand and believe others as I judge by Scripture they ought to be understood I pray observe well this Discourse here are Luther Calvin Beza Zuinglius and our other first Reformers they Interpret some Texts against the Doctrine of the Church of England They are praised for the first and esteemed Apostolical Reformers because without any regard of what the Church of Rome said they freely taught and believed what they judged by Scripture to be true why must not they be praised and esteemed true Reformers also for not regarding what the Church of England or any other says but teach the impossibility of Gods Commandments the sufficiency of Faith alone and all those other Tenets which you much mislike since they judge by Scripture such to be true Doctrine Are they bound to submit their judgements to the Church of England more than to that of Rome The Veneration and use of the Sign of the Cross is flat Popery in the judgement of all our Congregations yet any Reformed Child may laudably and piously use it inasmuch as our Common Prayer in the Administration of Baptism Commands the Minister to use it saying We sign him with the sign of the Cross in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the Faith of Chrst Crucified and manfully to fight under his Banner against Sin the World and the Devil And in our Kalender printed since his Majesties Restauration it is called the Holy Cross Our Congregations generally believe it is Popery to keep Holy-days except the Sabbath-day and Saints-day to Fast Lent Vigils commanded Ember-days and Fridays and yet all this is recommended to us in our Common-Prayer-Book and the Minister is commanded in the Administration of the Lords Supper to publish the Holy-days of the Week and exhort us to Fast and surely he is not commanded to teach or exhort us to any thing but the Doctrine of the Reformation It is true the Students of our Colledges of Oxford and Cambridge are much troubled with scruples in this point these Pauperes de Lugduno are compelled to fast all Fridays throughout the year and it is not hunger that makes them complain but tenderness of Conscience because they fear
it is Popery It is a Popish Errour we say to believe that Pennance or other penal Works of Fasting Almsdeeds or corporal Austerities can avail and help for the Remission of our Sins and satisfying Gods Justice No we say Penal Works serve for nothing all is done by Repentance that 's to say by sorrow of Heart for having offended God. This is the Doctrine of Daneus Willet Junius and Calvin who say Francis Dominick Bernard Anthony and the rest of the Popish Monks and Fryars are in Hell for their Austerities and Penal Works for all that you may very well believe and it 's the Doctrine of the Reformation that Pennance and Penal Works do avail for the Remission of our sin and are very profitable to the Soul for our Common-Prayer-Book in the Commination against sinners says thus In the Primitive Church there was a Godly Discipline that at the beginning of Lent such as were notorious sinners were put to open Pennance and punish'd in this World that their Souls may be saved in the day of the Lord. And our Common-Prayer Books wishes that this Discipline were restored again and surely it does not wish that Popery were restored therefore it is no Popery to say that Pennance or Penal Works do satisfie for our sins in this World and avail to save us in the other I know many much mislike our Common-Prayer Book for these Popish-Tenets but what do you say of the grand Errours of Popery can a man be a true Child of the Reformation and yet believe the Popes Supremacy deny the Kings Supremacy believe Transubstantiation and Communion is one kind are these Tenets the Doctrine of the Reformation or consistent with its principles The Kings Supremacy is undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Reformation because it is judged by the Church of England to be of Scripture yet only the Quakers Presbyterians Anabaptists and other Congregations judge it is not of Scripture but as Erroneous a Tenet as that of the Popes Supremacy Calvin 6. Amos says They were unadvised people and Blasphemers who raised King Henry the VIII so far as to call him the head of the Church but also that no Civil Magistrate can be the head of any particular Church the Doctrine of the Centurists cent sept pag. 11. of Cartwright Viret Kemnitus and many others who doubts then but that in the principles and Doctrine of the Reformation you may deny the Kings Supremacy though the Church of England believes it The Popes Supremacy is the Doctrine of Popery who doubts it but it is also the Doctrine of the Reformation for many of our eminent Doctors have judged it to be the Doctrine of Scripture as Whitgift a In Defens c. pag. 373. 70. 395. who cites Calvin and Musculus for this opinion but it is needful we relate some of their express words I do not deny says Luther b In Respons tredecem but the Bishop of Rome is has been and ought to be first of all I believe he is above all other Bishops it is not lawful to deny his Supremacy premacy Melancthon c In Epist ad Card. Bellay Episc Parsiens says no less that the Bishop of Rome is above all the Church that it is his Office to govern Propos to judge in controversies to watch over the Priests to keep all Nations in conformity and unity of Doctrine Somaize d In Tract Euchar ad p. Sarmunm The Pope of Rome has been without controversie the first Metropolitan in Italy and not only in Italy nor only in the West but in all the World the other Metropolitans have been chief in their respective districts but the Pope of Rome has been Metropolitan and Primate not only of some particular Diocess but of all Grotius has expresly the same Doctrin and proves this Supremacy belongs to the Pope Jure Divino I pray consider if these Doctors be not Men of sound judgement and eminent learning and credit in our Reformation and if our Doctrine be Scripture as such men understand it As for Transubstantiation it contrins two difficulties first if the Body of Christ be really in the Sacrament e In Annot. super Novum Testam cap. 10. Matth. saepe alibi and this Real Presence the Lutherans defend to be the Doctrine of Scripture as well as the Papists why then should it be called Popish more than Reformed Doctrine The second is if the substance of Bread be in the Sacrament together with Christ's Body Lutherans say it is Papists say it is not but that there is a Transsubstantiation or change of the whole substance of Bread into the Body of Christ but hear what Luther f To Edit Jonah l. de cap. Babyl says of this that we call Popish Doctrine I give all Persons liberty to believe in this point what they please without hazard of their Salvation either that the Bread is in the Sacrament of the Altar or that it is not would Luther have given this Liberty if Transubstantiation had not been the Doctrine of Reformation as well as any other Communion in one kind is the Doctrine of the Reformation no less than Communion in both for besides that Luther says g Lib. de cap. Babyl c. de Euchar. They sin not against Christ who use one kind only seeing Christ has not commanded to use both and again h Epist ad Bahemos in declarat Euch. in serm de Euch. though it were an excellent thing to use both kinds in the Sacrament and Christ has commanded nothing in this as necessary yet it were better to follow peace and unity than to contest about the kinds but also Melancthon i in Concil Theol. ad March. Elect. de usu utriusque speciei pag. 141. who in the opinion of Luther surpasses all the Fathers of the Church expresly teaches the same Doctrine and the Church of England Statute 1. Edward VI. commands That the Sacrament be commonly administred in both kinds if necessity does not require otherwise mark he says but commonly and that for some necessity it may be received in one lastly the sufficiency of one kind in the Sacrament is plainly set down by our Reformed Church of France in her Ecclesiastical Discipline Printed at Saumur Chap. 12. Art. 7. The Minister must give the Bread in the Supper to them who cannot drink the Cup provided it be not for contempt And the reason is because there are many who cannot endure to tast the Wine wherefore it often happens among them that some persons do take the Bread alone Now you may admire the injustice of the Papists in condemning our Reformed Doctrine and Doctors as Hereticks whereas those Tenets are believed by many of us as well as them and the groundless severity of our Congregations in exclaming against that Doctrin it being the Doctrin of the Reformation whereas so many eminent men of our own judge it to be of Scripture For to know certainly if a
Doctrine be of the Reformation you must try it by our Test or Rule of Faith which is the written Word of God and whatever any man of sound judgement of a sincere and humble Heart judges to be contained in Scripture or an indubitable consequence out of it that Man may believe that Doctrine let all others judge of it as they list and by so believing will be a true Child of the Reformation wherefore since that the Church of France that of England in Edward the VI ' s. time Luther Melancthon Grotius and other Authors do judge Transubstantiation Popes Supremacy and Communion in one kind to be the Doctrine of Scripture we must call it the Doctrine of the Reformation and if you judge as they did you may believe the Doctrin and be still of the Reformation as well as they Can you shew me any other Tenet of Popery which you can call the Doctrine of the Reformation You can hardly shew me any Tenet of Popery but what is it's Doctrine what Doctrine more Popish than that of Confession and Absolution from Sins yet it is as truly the Doctrine of the Reformation as Figurative Presence for not only k In Disput Theol. pag. 301. Lobechius l In Cocilliat loc Scrip. loce 191. Altamerus m In locis Commun To. 1 de potest Eccl. Saecerius and n In Apol. Confes Aug. art 13. lib. pag. 234. Melancthen says it 's a Sacrament but the Church of England in our Common Prayer Book declares that Priests have not only the power of declaring their Sins to be forgiven to their Penitents but also the power of forgiving them and sets down the form of Absolution which the Minister is to use Our Lord Jesus Christ who left power to the Church to Absolve all Sinners which truly Repent of his Mercy forgive thee and thine offences and I by his Authority committed unto me do Abosolve thee from all thy Sins The Ministers of the Diocess of Lincoln in their Survey of the Book of Common Prayers checkt this Doctrine as Popery and petitioned to have it blotted out but could not prevail whereby we are given to understand it 's the Doctrine of the Reformation It is Popery we say to call extream Unction Confirmation and Holy Order of Priesthood Sacraments and who can justly deny all this to be the Doctrine of the Reformation for o In. p. 5. Epist Jac. v. 4. Calvin says I confess the Disciples of Christ did use Extream Unction as a Sacrament I am not says he of the opinion of those who judge it was only a Medicine for corporal diseases Calvin p Lib. 4. Inst. c. 14. Inst c. 14. sect 5. also and with him our Common Prayer Book and all our Divines say a Sacrament is nothing else but a Visible Sign of the invisible Grace we receive by it and they say with q In modest Examin Couel r In Eccl. Polit. c. 5. sect 66. Hooker and others that this definition fits exactly Confirmation wherefore the Ministers of the Diocess of Lincoln checkt the Common-Prayer Book for giving the Definition of a Sacrament to Confirmation Å¿ In locis Commun tit de Numero Sacram Melancthon t In perpet Regem pag. 109. Bilson u In Eccl polit lib. 5. sect 77. Hooker and x lib. 4. Inst c. 20. Calvin expresly teach that the Order of Priesthood is a Sacrament And when Men of so eminent Judgement of our Reformation teach this to be the Doctrine of Scripture who doubts but that it is of the Reformation By this you destroy the Doctrine of the Reformation of two Sacraments only Destroy it God forbid Because the Church of England says there are but two Sacraments I say it is the Doctrine of the Reformation there are but two and because so many eminent Men judge by Scripture there are more I say it is the Doctrine of the Reformation there are more that 's to say six Baptism Confirmation Euchrist Pennance Extream Vnction and Holy Order and very likely our Bishops and Ministers for their Wives sake will not stick to grant that Matrimony also is a Sacrament But can you say that Prayers to Saints and Images Prayer for the Dead and Purgatory are not meer Popery and in no wise the Doctrine of Reformation Without doubt these Tenets are Popery but all the World knows the Lutherans use Images in their Churches and pray before them and the holy Synod of Charenton has declared that the Lutherans have nothing of Superstition or Idolatry in their manner of Divine Worship this is also the Doctrine y Epit Colloq Montisbel of Jacobus Andreas z In Centaur Exercit. Theol pag. 270. Brachmanus a Kemnitiut Luther and Brentius quoted by Beza a Exampâ—… 4. b In responâ— ad acta Colloq Montisbel par 2. in Prefas c In locis Commun c. 18. 19. and why should not a Doctrine judged by such eminent Men to be of Scripture be called the Doctrine of the Reformation Prayers for the Dead and Purgatory is Popery confessedly but alas it is taught expresly by Vrbanius Regius d Inscrip Angl. pag. 450. Bucer c To. 1. in Eupian Art. 90. Art. 60. Zuinglius f In Apolog. Confess Aug. Melancthon g To. 1. Wittem in resol de Luther h Indul. concl 15. the common-Prayer Book in King Edward's time Printed 154.9 and many others of our Learned Doctors and what can you call more properly the Doctrine of the Reformation than what such Men teach to be the Doctrine of Scripture And though our Brethren Quakers Anabaptist Presbyterians and Protestants judge Prayers to Angels and Saints to be nothing else but Popery yet our Common Prayer Book has the same Collect or Prayer to Angels in St. Michael's day that the Popish Mass-Book has and desires that the Angels may succour and defend us on Earth and Prayers to and Intercession of Saints is taught by Luther i Epist ad Spalâ—t Bilney and Latimer quoted by Fox k Acts Mon. pag. 462 312. and consequently it is the Doctrine of the Reformation Listen to our Apostolical and Divine Luther l To. Germ. fol. 214. If a General Council says he did permit Priests to Marry it would be a a singular mark of Piety and sign of Godliness in that case to take Concubines rather than to Marry in conformity to the Decree of the Council I would in that case command Priests not to Marry under pain of Damnation And again he says m De formula Missa To. 3. Germ. If the Council decree Communion in both kinds in contempt of the Council I would take one only or none See these words of Luther quoted by our learned Hospinian n and Jewel o and see it is not only my Doctrine but of great Luther k In Histor Sa. part 2. fol. 13. that in case the Pope and Councils
deny all the Tenets they now believe l In replic ad Hardingum we may and it will be a pious Godly action to belive them and make as many Acts of Parliament for them as now we have against them This is an evident sequel out of that Principle and whereas there is not one Tenet of all those which I rehearsed whether they concern Doctrin or Manners but was judged by the Doctors which I cited for it to be the Doctrine of Scripture it follows unavoidably that there is not one Tenet of them but is the Doctrine of the Reformation Therefore you must be forced to either of these two either to say that our Rule of Faith by which such Doctrines are warranted is naught wicked and scandalous of all those I rehearsed you cannot deny but that it was taught by the Author I quoted for it and judged by him to be the Doctrin of Scripture And if no Doctor hitherto had believed you or I or some other person of sound judgement may judge it to be the Doctrine of Scripture either of both then you must be constrained to grant Or that the Doctrine of the Reformation is not what each person of sound judgement understands to be the doctrine and sense of Scripture which is as much as to say that our Rule of Faith must not be Scripture as we understand it but that we must believe against our Judgement and Conscience what others say is the doctrine and sense of Scripture Or you must grant that all and each of those Tenets I rehearsed is the doctrine of the Reformation though you or this or that Man may judge them to be blasphemies and scandals I confess our Rule of Faith in the Reformation is Scripture as each person understands it for all our Reformed Churches do gives us this Rule of Faith. And in case the Church of England France or Germany judge a doctrine to bo blasphemous and against Scripture and Luther or Calvin or I or another judge it is good doctrine and conformable to Scripture to which judgement must I stand Must I believe what I judge in my Conscience to be Scripture and not what others judge if they judge the contrary When Luther began the Reformation did not almost all Christians and the whole Church believe Purgatory and Prayers to Saints to be the doctrine of Scripture And did not he very commendably deny it against them all because he judged by Scripture it was not Will a Presbyterian believe Episcopacy because the Church of England says it is the doctrine of Scripture No but deny it because himself judges It is not For let a Man be ever so leared and Godly if he gives an Interptetation of Scripture which is denied by all the Church he must not be followed Since when is it commendable to constrain Mons Judgements to believe not what each one thinks best but what the Church thinks may be safely believed Was this Commenble in the beginning of our Reformation when our blessed Reformers began to teach their private Judgements against the Church then establish'd If it was then the Church of Rome is to be commended for persecuting and Excommunicating our first Reformers and if this was not nor is not commendable in the Church of Rome why is it commendable in the Church of England This is a piece of Popery whereof the Church of England is guilty and for which all our Congregations are jealous of her I confess other Congregations will admit no such Curb or Bridle on their Judgements but follow Scripture as they understood it but the Church of England has a reverent regard for the sense and Interpretation of it given by Primitive Ages Fathers and Councils and that we prefer before the private Interpretations of particular Persons The Sense and Interpretation of primitive Ages Church and Fathers must be preferred before the Interpretation of any private person or Congregation and what think you of our whole Reformation which allowes no other Rule of Faith but Scripture as each person of sound Judgement understands it What say you of Luther Calvin Beza and the rest of our Reformers who preferred their own private sense and Interpretation of Scripture before that of the whole Church What say you to the Presbyterians who prefer their own sense and Interpretation of the Bible before that of the Church of England I grant there ought to be a respect for the judgement and Interpretation of the Text given by the Primitive Church and Fathers but if a Doctor or a Man of sound Judgement replenisht with Gods Spirit read Scripture with an humble Heart and pure Intention and judges by it that Bigamy is lawful that there is no Mystery of three persons is one divine Nature or that Christ despaired on the Cross c. Tho these doctrines be quite against the Judgments of Fathers Church and Councils he may believe them and be still a true Reformed Child because he follows our Rule of Faith if he must deny these Articles because others decry them then he must go against his own Judgement and Conscience for to conform himself to them and his Rule of Faith must not be Scripture as each Man of sound judgement understands it but as the Primitive Ages Church and Councils understand it and this is Popery Is it not generally believed in our Reformation and most strongly proved of late by that incomparable Wit and Pen-man Doctor Stillingfleet that Popery has as much Idolatry as Paganism Our Land therefore had in Paganism as good a Religion as it received by Austin in Popery does not this our noble Champion and most of the Scribes of the Church of England teach That Popery is a saving Religion that we may be saved in the Church of Rome if Popery notwithstanding it be Idolatry as they say by a saving Religion how can they deny but that Paganism is also a saving Religion what need therefore had our Fore-fathers to abandon Paganism why was it not left in the Land If England had been as well informed of the merit of Paganism when first Christianity was Preached it had never exchanged the one Idolatry for the other Dr. Stillingfleet in his Charge against the Church of Rome pag. 40. and 41. says plainly That the Pagans are charged with more than they are guilty of pag 7. says that Jupiter adored by the Pagans was so far from being an Arch-devil in the opinion of St. Paul that he was the true God Blessed for evermore that the Pagans adored but one Supream and Omnipotent God which they called Jupiter and which they did believe to be neither a Devil nor a Man but a true and the first and chiefest of the Gods and that the rest of the Gods which they adored they looked upon them as Inferiour deities and gave them no other Adoration Dr. Stillingfleet and Dr. Burnet and other Reformed Writers prove convincingly as to their Sentiment that Paganism is no more Idolatry than Popery and
assured and persuade your selves that you have not sufficient Authority to make her Highness Supream Head of the Church of Christ here in this Realm The Second Point of Spiritual Government is gathered out of these words of our Saviour Christ spoken to St. Peter in the 20th Chapter of St. John's Gospel Pasce Pasce Pasce That is Feed my Lambs feed my Lambs feed my Sheep Now whether your Honours have Authority by this Court of Parliament to say unto our Sovereign Lady Pasce Pasce c. That is to say Feed you the flock of Christ you must shew your Warrant and Commission for it An further it is evident that Her Majesty being a Woman by Birth and Nature is not qualified by Gods word to feed the Flock of Christ appears most plainly by St. Paul in this wise Taceant Mulieres in Ecclesus sicut lex dicit Let Women be silent in the Church for it is not Lawful for them to speak but to be in subjection as the Law saith And it followeth in the same place Turpe est enim Mulieris loqui in Ecclesiâ that is for that it is not seemly for a Woman to speak in the Church And in his Second Epistle to Timothy Dominari in virum sed esse silentes that is to say I allow not that a Woman be a Teacher or to be above her Husband but to keep her self in silence Therefore it appears likewise as your Honours have not Authority to give her Highness this second Point of Spiritual Government to feed the Flock of Christ So by St. Pauls Doctrine her Higness may not intermeddle her self with the same And therefore She cannot be Supream Head of the Church here in England The Third chief Point of Spiritual Government is gathered out of those words of our Saviour Christ spoken to St. Peter in the 22th Chapter of St. Lukes Gospel Ego rogavi pro To ut non deficiat fides Tua Tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres Tuos That is I Prayed for Thee that thy Faith shall not fail and thou being converted Confirm thy Brethren and ratifie them in wholesome Doctrine and Administration of the Sacraments which are the Holy Instruments of God so Instituted and Ordained for our Sanctification that without them his Grace is not to be received But to Preach or to administer the Sacraments a Woman may not be admitted to do neither may she be Supream of Christ's Church The Fourth and Last chief point of Spiritual Government which I promised to Note unto you doth consist in Excommunication and Spiritual Punishment of all such as shall approve themselves not to be the Obedient Children of Christ's Church Of which Authority our Saviour Christ speaks in St. Matthew's Gospel in the 18th Chapter saying If your Brother offending will not hear your charitable admonition whether secretly at first or yet before one or two Witnesses then we must complain of him to the Church and If he will not hear the Church let him be taken as an Heathen or Publican So the Apostle did Excommunicate the notorious Fornicator that was amongst the Corinthians and by the Authority of his Apostleship unto which Apostles Christ Ascending into Heaven did leave the whole Spiritual Government of his Church as it appears by those plain words of St. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians Chap. 4th saying Ipse dedit Ecclesiae suae c. He hath given to his Church some to be Apostles some Evangelists some Pastors and Doctors for consummation of the Saints to the work of the Ministry for edifying of the Body of Christ But a Woman in the degrees of the Church is not called to be an Apostle nor Evangelist nor to be a Pastor as much to say a Shepheard nor a Doctor or a Preacher Therefore she cannot be Supream Head of Christ's Militant Church nor yet of any part thereof For this high Government God hath appointed only to the Bishops and Pastors of his People as St. Paul plainly witnesseth in these words in the 20th Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles saying Attendite vohis universo gregi c. And thus much I have here said right Honourable and my very good Lords against this Act of Supremacy for the discharge of my poor Conscience and for the Love and Fear and Dread that I chiefly owe unto God to my Sovereign Lord and Lady the Queens Majesties Highness and to your Honors All. Where otherwise without mature consideration of all these Premises your Honors shall never be able to shew your faces before your enemies in this matter being so strange a spectacle and example in Christ's Church as in this Realm is only to be found and in no other Christan Realm Thus humbly beseeching your Honors to take in good part this my rude and plain Speech which here I have used out of much Zeal and fervent good will And now I shall not trouble your Honors any longer Thus at to this Speech But notwithstanding this Speech or whatever else could be said against it the Act passed and this Supremacy was granted to the Queen A further Prosecution of the Settlement of this Change of Religion Established by Parliament and of the Opposition of the Catholick Clergy against this strange Innovation By which my dear Country-men may see as is prov'd by their own Histories how you are seduced into Erronious Religions endangering thereby no less than their Salvation Dr. Heylyn pag. 108. NOw for the better exercising and enjoying the Jurisdiction thus acknowledged in the Crown there was this Clause put into the Act That it should be Lawfull for the Queen to give Power to such as she thought fit to exercise all manner of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and to vist reform redress order correct and amend all kind of Errors Heresies Schisms c. With this Proviso notwithstanding that nothing should from henceforth be accounted Heresie but what was so adjudged the Holy Scripture or in one of the four four General Councils or in any other National or Provincial Council determining according to the word of God or finally which should be adjudg'd for the time to come by the Court of Parliament This was the first Foundation of the High-Commission Court And from hence issued that commission by which the Queens ministers proceeded in that visitation in the first year of her Reign for rectifying all such things as they found amiss There also pass'd another Act for recommending and imposing the Book of Common-Prayer and Administration of Sacraments according to such Alterations and Corrections as were made therein by those that were appointed to review it In performance of which service there was great care taken to expunge out of all such passages in it as might give an Scandal or Offence to the Papists or be urg'd by them in excuse for their not coming to Church In the Litany first made and published by King Henry the Eighth and afterwards continued in the two
culled out of them Aid this year was sent to assist the Rebels in Scotland against their Lawful Queen The Presbyterians seeing Episcopal Government settled begin to play their Game The Bishops being thus settled begin the next year to make Laws and to compose Articles of Religion and to exact a Conformity to them Upon which they find great opposition from the Presbyterians In her fourth year she was solicited by Pope Pius to send her Orators to the Council of Trent which she refus'd to do The Emperour also writ to her to desist from these Alterations of Religion and to return to the Antient Catholick Faith of her Predecessors In her fifth year the Articles of Religion were agreed on in the Convocation In her sixth year she would have Married the Earl of Leicester to the Queen of Scots Calvin dies this year and Cartwright the great promoter of Presbytery retires out of England upon a discontent to Geneva In her seventh year the Calvinists began first to be called Puritans Dr. Heylyn In her eighth year the Government of the Church by Archbishops and Bishops was Confirm'd And for this we are beholding to Boner the late Bishop of London Who being call'd up to take the Oath of Supremacy by Horn of Winton refus'd to take the Oath upon this account because Horn's Consecration was not good and valid by the Laws of the Land. Which the insisted upon because the Ordinal Establish'd in the Reign of King Edward the VI. by which both Horn and all the rest of Queen Elizabeths Bishops received Consecration had been Repealed by Queen Mary and not restor'd by any Act of Parliament in the present Reign which being first declar'd by Parliament in the Eighth of this Queen to be Casus Omissus or rather that the Ordinal was look'd upon as a part of the Liturgy confirm'd in the First year of this Queen They next Enacted and Ordain'd That all such Bishops as were Consecrated by it in time to come should be reputed to be lawfully Consecrated Baker In her Eleventh year there arose a Sect openly condemning the receiv'd Discipline of the Church of England together with the Church Liturgy and the very Calling of Bishops This Sect so mightily encreas'd that in the Sixteenth year of her Reign the Queen and Kingdom was extreamly troubled with them In the same Sixteenth year were taken at Mass in their several Houses the Lord Morley's Lady and her Children the Lady Gilford and the Lady Brown Who being thereof Endicted and Convicted suffer'd the Penalties of the Laws In her Twentieth year the severe Laws against Roman Catholicks were Enacted In her Twenty third year a Proclamation was set forth That whosoever had any Children beyond Sea should by a certain day call them home and that no Person should harbour any Seminary Priest or Jesuit At this time also there arose up in Holland a certain Sect naming themselves The Family of Love. In a Parliament held the 26th year of her Reign the Puritan Party labour'd to have Laws made in order to the destroying of the Church of England and the setting up of their own Sect. In her Twenty eighth year the Queen gave a special Charge to Whitgift Archbishop of Canterbury to settle an Uniformity in the Ecclesiastical Discipline which lay now almost a gasping And at this time the Sect of Brownists deriv'd from one Robert Brown did much oppose the Church of England In her One and Thirtieth year the Puritan-Flames broke forth again In her Thirty sixth year the Severity of the Laws were Executed upon Henry Barrow and the Sectaries for condemning the Church of England as no Christian Church Thus Sir Rich. Baker Here is an End of this Work. Wherein I hope there is full satisfaction given concerning the Alterations of Religion which have been made by Publick Authority in the Reigns of these Kings and Queens With a sufficient discovery of the Actings of the Presbyterians in this Nation and the ground of multiplying other Sects Here ends of Historical Collections Gentlemen of the Reformation this following Discourse I assure you is not intended to make any Reflection upon your Tenets but meerly out of zeal to your good and desiring the Almighty to give you his Grace not to be deluded by the Principles of the first promoters of the Reformation For it may well be that every one of you does not know the Principles of those first Authors of the Reformation therefore out of Charity and zeal to you and the good of your Souls I declare them here The Preface to the Children of the Reformation BE not concern'd to know whose Hand it is which holds the Link but follow the Light it gives directing you to a view of the Principles upon which the Reformation supports it self asserting a Holy Liberty to each Person and to act as he pleases with a safe Conscience according to the Principles of our Reformation to grant any humane Power can oblige our Consciences against our Judgements in matters of Religion is but an imaginary Remedy for a real Evil. Our common Reformation is cemented and was first rais'd upon this Holy Liberty that every one should read Scripture Interpret it for himself and believe what he though was the true Sense of it without any compulsion or constraint and not to believe either Church State Vniversity or Doctors if he did not judge by Scripture his Doctrine was true Considering the Infancy of the Reformation our blessed Reformers taking to themselves and giving to others this Holy Liberty for to Teach and Believe whatever they judg'd to be the Doctrine and true Sense of Scripture though it should be against the received Opinion of the Councils Church Vniversities and Doctors Look into the Reign of Edward the VI. then did our Reformation flourish in England and was miraculously propogated by the Liberty of Martin Bucer Cranmer Ochinus Peter Martyr and others in teaching Calvinism Lutheranism Zuinglianism by Scripture as every one understood it Descend to the Reign of Queen Mary then the light of the Gospel was ecclipsed in the sense of the Reformers because the flock was again Popishly compell'd to believe not what every one judg'd by Scripture to be true but what the Church judg'd was such Come down a step lower to Queen Elizabeth's time then the flock recovering their holy Liberty to believe what each one though was the Doctrine of Scripture the Reformation gain'd ground and our Protestancy was establish'd the Religion of the Land which others were not totally suppress'd Step down a degree lower to King James his time the Reformation held its course because their Consciences were not oppress'd Look down a step lower to King Charles the I's Reign His Majesty carried with a Godly Zeal of restraining the diversity of Opinions would by new Laws and Ordinances force the flock to an Uniformity of Doctrine then those of the Reformation pleaded for the Evangelical Liberty to believe nothing nor use any Rites or Ceremonies but
as each one judg'd by Scripture to be convenient they Covenanted against Bishops Lastly look upon our Realm as it is at present the symptoms of dissatisfactions which you may read and hear in Coffee-Houses in publick and private Conversations the sparkles of Jealousies which appear in the Kingdom the Cabals against our Government the animosity of divided Parties the murmur and complaints of all what 's all this but the smoke of that hidden fire of Zeal wherewith Protestants would force Presbyterians by Penal Laws to profess their Tenets which each Opinion endeavour to oppress the other do but duly consider each Sect and they will all appear Tyrants over our Conscience For no one Sect among us but would root out all the rest none fearing that danger whereof St. Paul Gal. 5.15 warns us If we bite and devour one another let 's take heed we be not consumed one of another Giving us likewise a wholsom advice in the same place how to prevent this Evil c. When this Kingdom profess'd the Popish Religion to prevent this Evil of variety of Opinions their Rule of Faith was Interpreted by the Church and was kept from the hands of the flock No man permitted to give any other Interpretation or Sense of it but what the Church did approve Then the Reformers Luther Calvin Zuinghus Beza and others who freed from this slavery laid it down for their Rule of Faith That any man of sound Judgement may believe whatever he takes to be the sense of Scripture these are the Principles from which the Reformation proceeded No man is to be constrain'd to believe any Doctrine against his Judgement and Conscience and therefore it is quite contrary to the Spirit of the Reformation to force us by Acts of Parliament Decrees of Synods Invectives and Persecutions of Indiscreet Brethren to drive us to this or that Religion No every one ought to be Permitted to believe what he pleases as for instance If he thinks Bigamy or Self-Murder to be the Doctrine of Scripture to have freely liberty to profess and practice the same In the first place let my Reader consider that the Pure and Orthodox Dostrine of the Reformation I purpose in this Treatise to describe in its native Colours It 's the Doctrine of the Reformation that we may with a safe Conscience be to day Protestants to morrow Lutherans in France Hugonots in Hungary Trinitarians in Poland Socinarians and in London of any Religion but Popery they allow to be Lawful to change Religion as Time and Occasion require this is the practice of the first Reformers This Truth requires not much to justify it be pleas'd only to consider how you came to Change the Antient Religion profess'd in the Kingdom for 1500 years together It 's uncontestedly true that the Rule of Faith in common to the whole Reformation is Scripture as the humble of Heart assisted with the Spirit of the Lord understand it for Lutherans will never admit their Rule of Faith to be Scripture as Interpreted by the Church of England but as Interpreted by themselves nor will England admit Scripture to be the Rule of Faith as it is Interpreted by the Presbyterians but as Interpreted by the Church of England So that the Doctrine of each Congregation is but Scripture as interpreted by them and whereas all these Congregation joyntly compose the whole Body of the Reformation and each Congregation is truly a Member of the Reformation the Doctrine of the Reformation comes to be Scripture as each Congregation and Person of sound Judgement among them Interprets it This being an uncontrouled truth what Man of ever so sound Judgement but may read to day Scripture as Interpreted by the Lutheran Church and judging in his Conscience that Interpretation and Doctrine to be true consequently he may with a safe Conscience profess that Religion Soon after he may meet Calvin's Books and charm'd with the admirable strength of his reasons and glosses upon Scripture he may judge in his Conscience he is to be preferr'd before Luther and so may lawfully forsake Lutheranism for Calvinism then again he hits upon Scripture as Interpreted by the Church of England whose Doctrine ravishes him with that decency of Ceremonies that Majesty of her Liturgy that Harmony of her Hierarchy he is convinc'd it's better than Calvinism and embraces it Then again he reads the Works of Arrius and convinc'd by the energy of his Arguments and Texts of Scripture may alter his judgement and become an Arian Wherein can you say does this Man transgress the Doctrine or Principles of the Reformation Does he forsake the Reformation because he forsakes Lutheranism for Calvinism No sure for Calvinism is as much the Reformation as the other Is not Protestancy as much the Doctrine of the Reformation as Presbytery though he changes therefore one for the other he still holds the Doctrine of the Reformation Is not the Doctrine of the Reformation Scripture and that not as Protestants only or Presbyterians interpret it but as any Congregation or Man of sound judgement holds it It is therefore evident that according to the Doctrine and Principles of the Reformation he may with a safe Conscience change Religions and be to day of one to morrow of another until he run over All. Point me out any Congregation the obstinate Papists excepted that will dare say I cannot live with a safe Conscience in any other Congregation but in it self all other Congregations will laugh at it Why then may not I lawfully forsake any Congregation and pass to another and be in England a Protestant in Germany a Lutheran in Hungary a Trinitarian or Socinian It is against the grain of Mans reason that we can with a safe Conscience change Religion If you be a Protestant and you judge it to be the true Religion you are bound to stick to it and never to change it If I discourse with a Papist I would not wonder he should say it 's against the grain of Mans reason to believe it lawful but I admire that a Child of the Reformation be he of what Congregation he will should be so ignorant of his principles as to say a Man cannot change Religions when he pleases Nor do I undertake to prove against the Papist that this is lawful but I undertake to prove it lawful against any Reformed Child or force him to deny the Principles of the Reformation Is it against reason that a Man may read to day Scripture and the Lutherans Interpretation upon it and like it very well and that he should in this case embrace that Religion Is it against the grain of Mans reason that this same Man should next Year afterwards hit upon Calvin's works upon Scripture and after better consideration think his Doctrine to surpass that of Luther and could not he then being obliged to chuse the best forsake Lutheranism and stick to Calvinism And is it against Mans reason that he after this may meet other Books of Arians
Socinians c. and do the like Have not we many examples of this in our best and most renowned Reformers Did not Ochinus that great Light says B. Bale in whose presence England was happy reading Scripture judge the Reformation to be better than Popery and of a Capuchin Fryar became one of the Reformed after some Years reading Scripture he judged Judaism to be better than the Reformation and became a Jew Did not Martin Bucer one of our first Reformers of England reading Scripture judge Lutheranism to be better than Popery and of a Dominican Fryar became a Lutherian Soon after reading Scripture he judged Zuinglianism to be better than Lutheranism and become a Zuinglian not long after he became a Lutheran again as he Confesses Epist ad Noremb in Comment in 70.6 16. Mat. Theol. Calvin l. 2. fol. 70. and forsook Lutheranism the second time and returned again to Zuinglanism as Skluser says Did not Cranmer one of our sirst Reformers here in England and Composers of the 39 Articles a Wise and religious Man profess Popery in Henry the Vill's time and Compose a Book in defence of Real Presence then in Edward the VI's time upon better Consideration he professed Zuinglianism and writ a Book against the Real Presence then again in Queen Mary's Reign being Sentenc'd to Death he declared for Popery but seeing his Recantation would not preserve his Life he renounced Popery and died a Zuinglian I could tire your Patience in reading and Mind in relating the number of our Prime and most renowned as well first Reformers as Learned Doctors who without any scruple chang'd several times their Religions nor in the Principles of our Reformation ought they to be blam'd For whereas our Rule of Faith is Scripture as with the assistance of Gods Spirit we understand it who doubts but we may to day judge sincerely Luther's sense of it to be true to morrow we may read with more attention and judge Arius his sense to be true next day that of Calvin and so of the rest I do not think but that we have in England many Abbettors of this Doctrine Alas how many Bishops Deans and rich Parsons do we know and have we known who are zealous Presbyterians and declared Enemies of Protestancy in our Gracious Soveraign's Exile and no sooner was he restored and had Bishopricks and Ecclesiastical Dignities to be given but they become stiff Protestants Observe the difference betwixt the Papists and us if of a Papist you become of any other Congregation the Popish Church Excommunicate you thou art lookt upon as an Heretick and Apostate a stray'd Sheep they will not admit you to their Communion or Liturgy nay could they well avoid you they would never admit you to their Company and why because they are fondly persuaded their own is only true Rellgion and all others to be Synagogues of Satan and if any of us will become a Papist he must sirst abjure his former profession But if of a Protestant you should become a Presbyterian a Lutheran Quaker or of any other of our Societies you are never looked upon to be a jot the worse for it we are not a whit scandalized at such changes which we daily see and it is an unspeakable blessing with what Accord Unity and Charity you may see at our Liturgy and Communion the Protestant Presbyterian Anabaptist Socinian and Hugonot all praising the Lord in One Congregation in our Church none bid out of the Church none Excommunicated no previous abjuration required of their former Tenets and there 's nothing more frequent among us than to go to the Protestant Liturgy in the Morning in the Evening to the Presbyterian especially if our Interest or Convenience requires it Can there be a more convincing Proof that we esteem it all alike what Religion and Tenets we profess Let a Lutheran go to France Alas he will never stick to go to the Hugonots meeting and Service let a Protestant go to Germany he will go as cheerfully to the Lutheran Church as in England to the Protestant Let a Hugonot or Presbyterian go to Hungary or Poland he is welcome to the Trinitarians and Socinians and when any of them returns home he will be as before Is this Doctrine by the Testimony of any of our Synods Did any teach that we may with a safe Conscience change our Religion Yes I can produce one The Synod of Charent on in France held about the Year 1634. expresly says That for our Salvation it 's all alike whether you be a Calvinist Lutheran or of any other Congregation of the Reformed because says this venerable Synod they all agree in Fundamental Points and the Lutherans have nothing of Superstition or Idolatry in their manner of Divine Worship Change then as often as you list be a Lutheran be a Presbyterian be an Anabaptist by the mouth of this Synod you are assur'd you 'l never miss to hitright And I pray can any Synod of our times have more Authority in point of Doctrine then Luther our first Reformer a man extraordinarily raised by God says the Synod of Charrenton and replenisht with his spirit to repair the ruins of his Church In parva Confes Germ. fol 55. in Col. log fol 100 He Teaches the Elevation of the Sacrament is Idolatry that he did practice it and commanded it should be practised in the Church of Wittemberg to spite the Devil Carolostadius Giving you to understand that for just reasons you may teach now our Religion then another Zuinglius also whose vertue and learning is known to the World says To. 2. fol. 202. That God inspired him to Preach what Doctrine was suitable to the times which as it often changes you may often change your Doctrine And consider you if it be not therefore that Christ our Lord says his Yoke is easie and his burden light that is Religion because we can withdraw our Necks from it as time and just reason requires What greater Authority has a Synod of England to prove a Doctrine to be of the Reformation than a Synod of France which I have produced or than Luther and Zuinlius our first Reformers inspired by God to teach us the purity of the Gospel Was it not from Luther and Zuinglius that England received the Reformation and if England can be so bold as to say they reed in this what assurance can we have that they erred not in the rest But since nothing will please you but a Synod of England you shall have not one but many Can there be any Synod of England of so great Authority as our wise and prudent Parliament Read our Chronicles and you 'l sind that in a few years time they changed and established different Religions by publick Acts of Parliament In Henry the VIIIs Reign they Voted for Popery and made Acts and Statutes against the Reformation in Edward the VI's time they banisht Popery and voted for Zuinglianism in Queen
Mary's they pull'd down this and set up Popery again in Queen Elizabeth's they decried this and set up not Zuinglianism but Protestancy in the midst of her Reign they polisht this and added some new perfections to it In King James and suceeding Kings times Protestancy was of a different stamp from that of Queen Elizabeth's Hear Dove in his Exhort to the English Recusants An. 1603. Page 31 Edward the VI. had his Liturgy which was very good but condemned it and brought in another Composed by Peter Martyr In Elizabeth ' s time that was condemned and another approved and in the middle of her Reign her Liturgy was also misliked and a new one introduced we are so wanton that nothing will content us but Novelties Dove does not commend this Doctrine for he calls that frequent exchange of Religion Wantonness and Love of Novelties It 's no great matter what he says of it my drift is but to convince you that this is the Doctrine and practice of the best Member of our Reformation even of England and if you be convinc'd it 's the Doctrine of Reformation you cannot deny but that it is good Doctrine through Dove calls it Wantonness Some of the Reformed says We are bound to have Faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God and the Saviour of the World. This is the substance of Christian Religion be an Arian be a Presbyterian a Socinian or what you please be also plung'd up to the ears in wickedness of Life and Manners so you have Faith in Jesus Christ Son of God and Redeemer of the World and live in Charity you will be a Member of the true Church and be saved Do not imagine this is any new Doctrine invented by me search the vulgar sort of our Reformed Brethren you shall get thousands of this Opinion in our Realm search the Books of our Learned Doctors you shall find it in them also Doctor Morton in his much applauded Book Dedicated to Queen Elizabeth for which he deserved a Bishoprick says The Arian Church is to be esteemed a true Church The Kindom of Esra pag. 9. because they hold the true substance of Chiristian Religion which is Faith in Jesus Christ Son of God and Redeemer of the World And again in the same place Sect. 4. whose Title is Hereticks are Members of the Church Therefore John Fox Dr. Field and Illiricus Acts mon. pag. 36. lib. 3. c. 5. g. Catal. testium p. 976. 978. say the Greek Church notwithstanding their error in denying the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son are holy Members of the true Church because they have Faith in Jesus Christ For what is the Doctrine of the Reformation but as we have said in our Principles Scripture as Interpreted by any Man of sound judgement in the Church and were not Doctor Morton Fox Field and Illiricus Men of sound judgement eminent for Learning and Godliness If therefore this be Scripture as Interpreted by them how can you deny it to be the Doctrine of the Reformation And what Jesus Christ are we obliged to believe in For Jesus Christ as believed by the Arrians Socinians Luther and Calvin is far different from Jesus Christ as commonly believed by the Protestants and Popish Church we believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God of one and the same substance and nature with the Father they believe in a Jesus Christ Son of God but of a distinct and different nature Pish That 's but a Nicety believe what you please and what you understand by Scripture to be true and have Charity Let us ask the Reformers what Rule of Faith we must observe Protestants will say that Scripture and Apostolical Tradition but Protestants say of Papists and Presbyterians and Anabaptists say of Protestants that many humane Inventions are obtruded upon us as Apostolical Traditions that we have no way to discern the one from the other and consequently Tradition as being an unknown thing unto us cannot be our Rule others will say that Scripture and the indubitable consequence of it is our Rule all will grant this but then enters the controversy if the consequences of Lutherans be such and if the consequences of Presbyterans be indubitable consequences out of Scripture and each Congregation will say that their peculiar Tenets are indubitable consequences out of Scripture and the rest must allow it to be of the Reformation Others will say that Scripture and the four first Councils with the Apostles and Athanasius's Creed are our Rule of Faith but most of the Assembly will no more admit the four first than the subsequent Councils nor Athanasius's Creed more than that of Trent nor will the Quakers Socinians and others value the Apostles Creed But there is none of all the Assembly who will not admit Scripture to be a sacred and full Rule of Faith because it 's replenished with divine Light and all Heavenly instruction necessary for our salvation And such as add as a part of our Rule of Faith the Apostles or Athanasius Creed or the four first general Councils will confess that all they contain is expressed in Gods written Word and are but a plainer or more distinct expression or declaration of the Contents of Scripture I have been often present at several discourses of Protestants with Papists and never could I hear a Protestant make Councils Tradition or any thing else the Test of their discourse but only Scripture not but that I could hear them say and pretend in their discourses that Apostolical Tradition and the four first Councils were for them against Popery but still their main strength and ultimate refuge was Scripture for whenever they harp upon that string of Tradition and Councils the Papists are visibly to hard for them and then they run to Scripture than which there is no plus ultra I have been also often at several discourses betwixt Protestants Presbyterians and our Brethren of other Congregations I have observed that the Protestant for to defend his Liturgy Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England and her Episcopacy against the others could never defend himself by Scripture alone but plac'd his main strength in Tradition Primitive Councils and ancient Fathers all which the other rejected and reproached the Protestants with Popery For it 's certain Lutherans will not admit Scripture as Interpreted by Protestants but as Interpreted by themselves and so of each other Congregation Nor was it only Luther and Calvin spoke thus but all our blessed Reformers and why because our Rule of Faith is Scripture not as interpreted by the Church of England France will not admit it nor as Interpreted by the Quaker the Anabaptists and Independents will not hear it nor as interpreted by Luther Calvin rejects it nor as interpreted by Calvin Thorndike and Bramhall will not yield to it nor will Stillingfleet stand to their Interpretation nor others to that of Stillingfleet Finally our Rule of Faith is Scripture not as interpreted by
as he was man q In Ps 16 not as he was God. r In Confes majori de Coena Dni And this is not only the Doctrine of Calvin but of Brentius m In March. c. 16. Marlot n Recogn pag. 376. Jacobus Minister quoted by Bilson and of Beza Will you say this is the Doctrine of the Reformation or that we cannot without scruple believe it Also Calvin says o Lib 2. Infr. c. 16. fact 10. and seq That Christ's corporal Death was not sufficient for to redeem us but that after having despared on the Cross he suffered the death of his Soul that 's to say that his Soul after his corporal death suffered the pains of the damned in Hell. m in March. c. 16. And says he in the same place n Recogn pag. 376. they are but ignorant o Lib 2. Instit c. 16. fact 10. and seq doltish brutish men who will deny it Luther also teaches the same Doctrine r In Confes majori de Coena Dni p To. 3. Wettemp in sp 16. As he suffered afterward the death of the Soul in Hell Epinus q In Ps 16 a learned Lutheran says Christ Descended into Hell for thee t In Hastor Sacram. par 2. fol. 75. and suffered not only corporal Death but the death and fire of Hell. Mr. Fulk and Perkins avow this is also is the express Doctrine of Illirious Latimer and Lossius Also Luther most impiously affirms that not the humane Nature of Christ died for us but also his Divine Nature see Luther's words quoted at large by Zuinglius Å¿ To. 2. in respons ad Confes Luth. fol. 458. and Hospitian It is evident that all those Tenets are undeniably the Doctrine of the Reformation He who denies them cannot in charity check them who believes them nor can they who believe them check those who deny them whereas each follow the Rule of Faith and believe what they judge by Scripture to be true And if you or your Church of England cry out Blasphemy Blasphemy against all that you judge to be false why do not you cry Blasphemy against Presbyterians Lutherans and other Congregations from whom you dissent And what difference betwixt you and the Church of Rome The folly of this is to call Heresie and Blasphemy all that is not her own Doctrine And all that your Church of England mislikes must be Fanaticism Blasphemy and Impiety Must our Rule of Faith be Scripture as the Church of England understands it and not otherwise Presbyterians and Lutherans will never allow it If therefore our Rule of Faith be Scripture as each Person understands it any Person of sound judgement in the Reformation may without scruple believe what he understands to be the Doctrine of Scripture Can you deny but this was the Rule of Faith and principle of our first blessed Reformers If therefore they judged and if any other judges by that Rule and Principle that those Tenets which you call Impious and Blasphemous be true Doctrine they cannot be blamed for believing them Of the Reformed was as Holy Innocent Blameless and Pure as yours is now And that you may be convinc'd of this Truth know Calvin expresly teaches a Lib 3. Inst c. 4. Sect. 28. We believe the sins of the Faithful he means of the Reformation are but venial Sins not but that they desire Death but because there is no damnation for the Children of Grace in asmuch as their sins are not imputed to them And again he says We can b Lib. 4. c. 7. Sect. 2. assure our selves we can no more be damn'd for any Sins then Jesus Christ himself c In locis commun classe 5. 27. Luther is of the Opinion As nothing but Faith does justifie us so nothing but Incredulity is a Sin. Again d To. 2. Wittem de capr Babyl fol. 74. No sin is so great that it can damn a man such as are damn'd are damn'd only for their Incredulity Whitaker e De Eccl. contr Bellarm. conf 2. quaest 5. No Sin can hurt a man who has Faith. The same is taught by Wotton Fulk Tindal and Beza It is therefore the Doctrine of Scripture as Interpreted by these persons of great and sound judgement that Incests Murders Intemperance or whatever else you call a sin incredulity excepted either is no Sin at all or Venial Sins which do no harm nor cannot damn the Children of the Reformation if therefore our Brethren who lived in the beginning of the Reformation lived according to Scripture as Interpreted by men of sound judgement which is the Rule of Faith and Manners they did not ill but very well in following it And it is not pardonable in any Reformed Child to say such Oracles Extraordinarily raised by God to teach the purity of the Gospel should have taught their errors in Doctrine or dissolution of manners They teach what in their Consciences they understood by Scripture to be true if you will not be so irreverent as to say that they were Knaves who spoke and taught against their Consciences and knowledge Therefore they taught the Doctrine of the Reformation purely and truly The consequence is evident For what is the Doctrine of the Reformation but what wise learned men of sound judgement think and understand by Scripture to be true Why is figurative Presence the Doctrine of the Reformation though denied by Lutherans who are Reformed also but because Wise Learned men judge by Scripture as they understand it it is the true Doctrine or can you give me any other Rule of Faith by which we may know what Doctrine is of the Reformation and what not but Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it Or what Rule can you give for to know what is good or evil to be done but Scripture as understood by such persons If therefore Luther Calvin and the other Doctors I quoted judge by Scripture that Doctrine and manner of Life to be true and good why may not we say it 's the Doctrine of England or Scotland judge that Doctrine to be false and that manner of Life to be a dissolution and corruption of manners Why you are men of sound judgement you understand Sripture so that will be the Doctrine also of the Reformation you may believe it But you must not deny that Luther and Calvin's Doctrine is also of the Reformation because they were men of as sound judgement as you Our Rule of Faith is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it and this is the same Rule which Luther and the Reformation in its first beginning had This Holy Liberty is the best Jewel the greatest Perfection and most glorious Prerogative the Reformation has If therefore now at present any man judges by Scripture that he can Marry ten Wives at a time that he can kill his own Son as Abraham intended that he may commit Incest with his own
Daughter as Lot did that there is no Sin but Incredulity as Luther believed nor any Mystery of the Trinity of Persons in One Nature as Calvin believed with what justice can the Church of England say such a man does not believe and live as becometh a Reformed Child or that his Doctrine and Life is scandalous whereas he lives and believes as he understands by Scripture which is the Rule of Faith in common to the Reformation The Church of England says the Lutheran Doctrine of the Real Presence is not the Doctrine of Scripture that the Presbyterian Doctrine against Infant-Baptism is not of Scripture Because they follow Scripture as they understand it and this is our Rule of Faith And why will not you say the Belief and Life of that other man is also of the Reformation though it may seem absurd to you since he believes and lives as he judges by Scripture he may It follows therefore plainly that this is the Doctrine of the Reformation The Rule of Faith is Scriputre as each person of sound judgement understands it f Epist 2. 2. 25. Beza teaches and says it 's also the Doctrine of Calvin Somaize and Geneva that the Lords Supper may be lawfully administered in any kind of victuals as well as in Bread and Wine in Eggs Flesh Fish c. Where there is no Bread and Wine says he we may duly celebrate if instead of them we use what we may usually eat and drink And again in the same place If there be no water at hand and that Baptism cannot be with Edification deferred I would baptize in any other liquor g To. 5. Wittem serm de Matrim in 1. ad Corin. 7. Luther h Consil Theol. par 1. pag. 648. 134. In Melanothon i Epist. Paul ad Phil. in 2. ad Tim. 3 Musoulus k lib. 2. Dial. 21 Ochinus l Lib. de Repud Divort. p. 223. Beza and others teach the lawfulness of Bigamy or Multiplicity of Wives and prove it from the example of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and Ochinius expounding the Text of Saint Paul It behoveth a Bishop to be a Man of one Wife The prohibition says he is not to be understood so that a Bishop should have but one Wife at a time for certainly he may have many but St. Pauls meaning is that he ought not to have too many Wives at a time that 's to say ten or twenty The Synod of Geneva m Canon Generales Geneven 1560. and the n Chap. 13. art 31. Ecclesiastical Discipline of France Printed at Saumure has decreed that a Wife whose Husband is a long time absent may have him called by the publick Cryer o To. 5 Wittem serm de Matrim and if within a competent time he does not appear without any further Enquiry the Ministers may License her to marry any other or marry her himself I say all Women may practice this Doctrine without scruple or shame whereas it is Scripture as interpreted by that thrice holy Synod Luther p teaches it is lawful to a Wife if her Husband does not please her to call her Man-servant or her Neighbour and he gives the like Liberty to the Husbands if their Wives be pettish or humoursom If the Husband says he cannot correct the humoursomness of his Wife he may imagine she is dead and may marry another because it 's not in the power of a man to live without a Woman nor in hers to live without a man. This is Scripture as Interpreted by Luther and consequently must not be denied to be the Doctrine of the Reformation nor can any of our Reformation be justly punish'd or blam'd for practising it if he judges by Scripture as Luther did for this is our Rule of Faith. But Luther never gave this Liberty but upon condition that the Husband or Wife should first make their complaint before a Magistrate to have a redress of their Injury and discontent Not only Luther but q To. 5. Wittemb serm de Matrim Bucer r In Scriptis Anglic de Reg. Chr. l. 2. c. 26. in Matth. c. 19. Melanothon Å¿ In Consil Theol. par 1 pag. 648. s 134. Ochinus t Dial. 200. 204. in Epist. S. Paul. ad Tim. 3. Musculus and u l. 4. Inst c. 19. sect 37. Discip Eccl. c. 13. u Serm. de Matrim Calvin do teach that a Man who finds his Wife in Adultery may cast her off by Divorce and Marry another and our French Synods have ordered this Doctrine to be put in their Ecclesiastical Discipline so that it is the Doctrine of Scripture as interpreted by these persons of sound judgement and consequently of the Reformation you may therefore believe and practice it our Sisters particularly and our Ministers Wives were much alarm'd at this Doctrine and say it is a damnable Heresie Luther says it is impossible a u young man of 20 Years can live without a Woman or a young maid of 18 years without a man. It is the Reformed Doctrine Scripture as interpreted by a sounnd judgement If a Popish Priest or a Fryar did become of our Reformed Church can he lawfully marry whereas he made a Vow of Chastity It 's the Doctrine of the Reformation declared by many French Synods and recorded in their Ecclesiastical Discipline that he must be Christen'd again because the first Baptism is sufficient and valid believe which you please It is also the Doctrine of the Reformation that Infant Baptism is not at all needful nay nor Lawful say the Anabaptists so says Calvin x Lib. 4â— Inst c. 15. sect 20. 21. Zuinglius Beza and many others it is likewise the Doctrine of our 39 Articles y Act. 27. and our holy Synod of London z can 21. that Infant-Baptism is Lawful and needful Believe which you like best both are of the Reformation We know our great Zuinglius himself would not at all preach the Gospel unto the Switzers until that he Presented a Petition for himself and his COmpanions all Priests and Fryars extant yet in his 1 Tom. pag. 110. and obtained the COntents of it which was to have Wives Nor can we doubt this to be the best Doctrine whereas Luther Beza and almost all our Reformers were Priests and Fryars and the first step they gave to the Reformation was to marry At Luther's marriage Erasmus his Rallery upon it is much solemnized Luther yesterday a Monk to day a Husband and next day a Father because that honest Kate Bore his virtuous Bride was happily delivered of a lovely Boy eight days after he Married her But the Servant of God did not regret the action which proves that he judged by Scripture it was very lawful It is the Doctrine of the Reformation that it was Jesus Christ the Son of God who establisht the Church you may believe it therefore It 's also the Doctrine of the Reformation that it was not
THE SPEECH OF Nicholas Heath Lord Chancellor of England Lord President of Wales Bishop of Worcestor And afterward Archbishop of YORK and Ambassadour into Germany delivered in the Upper House of Parliament in the Year 1555. On occasion of the Supremacy Proofs from Scripture That Christ left a True Church and that there is no Salvation but in the Catholick and Apostolick Church Proofs from the Fathers That there is no Salvation to be expected out of the True Catholick and Apostolick Church Certain Principles of the first Authors of the Reformation not so well known to many of their followers The Principles of the Catholick Apostolick Church Testimony of the Fathers touching the Real Presence LONDON Printed for the Author 1688. TO THE READER I Cannot but admire to see most Protestants so negligenn in their search of Truth so seemingly secure and so indifferent in the buying and reading Controversial Books which abound now a days more than ever when yet in their Hearts they know they may be in Errour for even by their own Principles they dare not so much as affirm they are Certainly in the right The swarms of Books about Religion that have these two last years fill'd the Press render it impossile to say any thing New on this Occasion and therefore farther indeavours to write Controversy may seem vain and unnecessary and indeed if all the Catholick Books that have been lately Publish'd were read by the Protestants with the same Spirit of Humility with which they were wrote all prejudice passion and interest laid aside there would be abundantly enough to open the eyes of the people and satisfie all discerning Men that Popery is not that Antichristian Monster which it has for so many years been painted in England but that it is indeed the true Antient Catholick and Apostolick Faith which our Saviour deliver'd and taught his Apostles and which has continued since and been believed in the Church in all succeeding Ages But since we find too many stop their ears against all the charms of Truth since we find still such mighty numbers of Men continue in entertaining their old barbarous conceits of the Catholick Religion and either through malice or negligence very slow in Reading what might Inform their judgements and settle their Consciences it cannot be esteemed improper for every honest Man to contribute his Mite and endeavour what he may to rouse up some by a third or fourth call who have refused the first and second and for as much as many are discouraged by the length and some by the dearness of the Book I have resolved to remove these two Impediments an hours reading with the expence of two pence is all the time and the charge that needs be spent upon this Pamphlet It must not be expected I should launch out into those prolix Disputes that have almost at this day tir'd the Pens of Schoolmen I intend only to establish two or three most important Truths on which the Catholick Faith does more immediately depend What I may beside insist on shall only be in general so as to give the Reader an occasion of seeking elsewhere more particular Information and that with as much brevity as Y can or the nature of the thing will admit I shall take the liberty to suppose in as much as many Protestants own as much that there has been in all Ages since our Saviour Christ planted the Gospel a true Church on Earth or to express my self more in the Protestant Phrase that there has been in every Age since Christ a company of Men who have retained that Orthodox Faith deliver'd in the Gospel I dare not think there is a Protestant living will deny this because he would by so doing first maintain there was an Age since Christ where in all the Articles of the Creed were not true viz. that there was no Holy Catholick Church seconly he would make Christ a false Prophet who has declared he would never depart from his Church but that he would be with her even unto the end of the World and that the Gates of Hell should not prevail against her Matt. 16.18 I will in the second place make bold to suppose that his true Church or this company of Orthodox Men has been visible in all Ages If there be a Protestant in the World so weak as to imagine the true Church was not visible in all Ages I desire him to consider that so much is implyed in the very nature and essence of a Church as to Preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments which even in his own notion are Visible Signs without which a Church can no more subsist than a Man without a Head or a House without a Foundatian And Secondly seeing Preaching the Gospel and Administring the Sacraments are Actiors Visible and Conspicuous the Church that does these things must by necessary consequence be Visible and Conspicuous likewise there is no Sophistry in this but what any one that pleases may reduce to a plain and easy Syllogism And indeed is there any thing in Nature more absurd and contradictory than to affirm the true Church was at all times and yet not at all times Visible What the Church daily does and what she must of necessity do to deserve that name are things as manifest and evident to humane sense as teaching a School or the Rule of a Commonwealth and will any man affirm that a School can be Taught or a State Governed in an invisible Manner Surely no neither then may any Protestant be so absurd as to believe the Church of Christ was at any time Invisible and not rather Visibly Apparent in her Rites and Sacraments as well as in her Assemblies on those occasions Taking it then for granted that there has been a true Church at all times since Christ and that this Church has been at all times visible it follows by an easie Consequence which every body can infer that what ever Church is not able to prove her Being since Christ and her being visible all that time cannot be the True Church But neither the Church of England nor that of Luther or Calvin nor any Protestant Reformed Church have been Visible in all Ages since Christ therefore neither the Church of England nor any other Protestant Church is the True Church I would fain see to this a plain and possitive answer given 't is what has not yet been given by any defender of the Protestant Cause nor I suppose will ever be to the end of the World. How ridiculous is it and how unbecoming any reasonable Creature what Protestants urge in this matter that their Principles were taught and believed in the Primitive Church till she fell into Idolatry and Superstition where she lay buried for above 1000 years till God rais'd up Luther and Calvin and the other Reformers to remove the Errors and raise up a new Glorious Orthodox Church I have often admir'd how such palpable Nonsence and such gross Contradictions came to
be proposed but much more how they ever came to be received in the World For what can be more ignorantly Blasphemous than to say God raised up Men to restore his Church who yet could by no means Agree among themselves in matters of Faith as hereafter will appear and whose Followers do at this day pursue each other with Excommunications and Anathema's If Calvin was the Messenger of God then was Luther a Sacrilegious Impostor if the Church of England be Orthodox then were Luther and Calvin both Impostors and if any other of the Reformers were in the right the Church of England is in the wrong Which then of the Dissenting Protestants Doctrin shall we say was the belief of the Primitive Church Were all these at once the Primitive Faith. or was some one Denomination of Protestants the primitive Believers and those of all other Denominations in the wrong It being impossible as I have proved that the True Faith should ever be Invisble at any time if therefore Protestancy had ever been professed it could never have been totally extinguish'd Though most certain it is that no footsteeps of any of the Reformers Principles were known for almost 1500 years in the Christian World except in some Heresies condemned in several Ages of the Church which do indeed much resemble the Innovations of our Modern Reformers as their Doctrine of the Sacrament in the Heresie of Berengarius of Invocation of Saints in the Heresie of Vigilantius of Prayer for the Dead in Aerius of Images in Xenias and the Iconaclasts of Confession in the Novatianus their practice of no mingled Chalice in the Heresie of the Armenians and of Priests Marriages in Jovinian as Luthers Marrying a Nun borrowed from Marcions corrupting a Virgin and to add no more their Famous Naggshead Consecration copied from Novatus that was made a Bishop in a Tavern and deposed by Cornelius And now for the Church of England she must ever stand or fall on her own Bottom having so notoriously condemned all other parts of the Reformation That the Lutherans are condemn'd by the Church of England every body knows and that the Calvinists are so too I will in one word plainly shew A Protestant Parson that comes from France from Holland or Geneva to be Beneficed in England cannot be admitted to Preach nor Administer the Sacraments after the Rites of the English Church till he has renounced that Mission he had before and taken new Orders according to the form of the Church of England which to all Men of sense implies that the Church of England does assuredly believe the Calvinist Teachers are false Imposters that they have no Mission no Authority no Ordination and by consequence no Sacraments being in their conceits purely Lay-men From hence I take the liberty to ask the Doctors of the English Church how they can in honour and conscience call them their Brethren as they do of the Reformation from whom they have seperated at so great a distance as to reject all their Ordinations at once as null and void and how they can suffer the French and Dutch Hugonots to have Churches and free exercise of their Religion here and some of them also the Church of Englands Liturgy at the same time as they believe them neither to have Priesthood nor Sacraments and by consequence no such thing as a Church at all Seeing then the Church of England look on themselves as the only Church of the Refonmation it follows that she must accordingly prove her self the true Church and shew how that Sum of Christian Doctrin which she now holds has been constantly held in all past Ages of the Church which I am sure all the English Doctors in the World will not make out nay I think they do not so much as pretend to For to end all Controversies let them shew but one Service-Book in all the 1500 years before Luther in any one vulgar Tongue which agreeth with their Service Book and for that one Book sake we will submit the cause no they say contrariwise that for about 1000 years Popish Superstition was the only Religion known in the World Which Superstition as they call it I shall now endeavour to prove to be that true Religion which has been from our Saviours time and which must Infallibly last to the end of the World. The Arguments by which I have briefly and I hope evidently shewn that the Protestant Church neither single nor aggregate can be the true Church do at the same time as evidently prove the Church of Rome to be so For as the Protestant Churches want of Antiquity their not having been from the beginning of Christianity nor Visible till within 200 years proves them not to be the Catholick Church so the Antiquity of the Church of Rome her having been from the beginning and continuing still Visible by propagating the Gospel and Administring the Sacraments in all Ages since Christ does as plainly evince her to be the only true Church the spouse of Christ and Pillar of Truth I demand has not this Church in all Ages had a visible Succession of Bishops a settled Government with a visible Head from St. Peter to this very day Has not this been the only Church that has duly planted the Faith and as duly suppressed Heresie and Schism Is not this the Church that has held all General Councils and has not the Bishop of Rome Presided in the four First seemingly allowed of by the Church of England Is not this the only Church that has sent Apostles and Missionaries out to plant the Gospel in all the Infidel corners of the Earth and from whence England first received the Christian Faith Is there any other Church that can pretend to have been assisted by God Almighty in the working of Miracles and in the Conversion of Nations What other Church can shew an Army of Martyrs and Confessors a number of Men that lead most Holy and Austere Lives forsaking the World to follow Christ What other Church in the World can pretend either to Unity or Universality to be every where the same and to have all her Children at perfect Agreement in matters of Faith and Doctrine for the disputes of Catholicks are about matters not defin'd and so controvertable but never about a Doctrine that has been once determined in a General Council These are the Marks and essential ones of the true Church but these agree to no other Church but that of Rome the Church of Rome is therefore the only Church Whatever the Grecian or the Abyssine Churches have to say in answer to this which does not much concern us sure I am the Church of England has nothing plausible to excuse her Schism and Rebellion against her Mother Church and under whose subjection she has been bred and maintained for many Ages in the World. Every one knows and no Church of England Man can deny that this National Church was in all Ages subject to and a part of the Western
Church and that the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West is acknowledged by King James and T. Bishop of Winchester Now for a part to set up against the whole for a few Bishops of one National Church to Reform the Church of all Nations and for a National Synod to condemn all the General Councils at once is what all the Learning in the World can not justifie I would fain know why bâ— the same reason might not the Metropolitan of York Reform the National Church of England if he should pretend gross intollerable errours or the Diocesan of Carlile Reform the Metropolitan of York on the same score and any single Presbyteâ— again his Diocesan of Carlisles which indeed happen'd in the fundamental Reformation when Luther first Revolved and though but a single Presbyter yet took up on him boldly to Reform not only his own Superiour or Diocesan but even no less than the five Proto-Patriarchs at once The Church of Christ is surely an Established Government with power sufficient to chastise her Rebellious Subjects and certainly our Saviour never meant that every Presbyter should be Independent or that ever Bishop should be so or that every Province should be so nor that any Rational Church should be independent of the Whole For our Saviour expresses himself clearly that all his Sheep should be fed by one visible Head that all the Christians in the whole world should be subject to one Law and he gave sufficient Authority for the putting of it in execution If any private Gentleman here in England should declare he found gross intolerable Errours in the Government that he absolutely disliked Monarchy and should stir up a Party in the Nation to a Rebellion against the King. Suppose a Peer should do so or suppose a Province as for Instance that of Kent should pretend to discover these Errours and Revoult from their Sovereign what think you would not that Gentleman that Peer or that Province deservedly fall under the punishment of the Law and be thought by all the World guilty of Treason The Aplication is obvious and I defie any Man living to shew the disparity for the National Church of England was at least as much and as unavoidably subject to the Western Patriach Church as any one Province of England to the Laws of the whole Kingdom I never yet saw this objection answer'd nor any plausible reason given for the Grounds and Motives of the English Reformation And indeed the Schism is so obvious the Defection so apparently inexcusable and the Motives that induc'd Henry the VIII and those that prevailed with Edward thee VI. and Q. Eliz. so notoriously scandalous as Blood Divorce Perjury Sacriledge the maintainance of an Usurped Title that it seemeth to me little less than a Miracle how considering Men who have regard to their Eternal wellfare should be able to persuade themselves into a Belief that they may safely venture in the Communion of a Church sprung out of the Ruins of Churches and Religious Houses begun with the Divorce of Queen Catherine reveled with the Blood of Mary Queen of Scots made an Engine of state to support the Precatious Title of an Usurper and which has continued ever since in force by vertue of Sanguinary Penal Laws This subject has given occasion and vent to many Volumes and I might easily have extended it to a far greater length but I hope the Brevity will recommend it to the Perusal of all those who will not lose themselves and the Question in reading prolix Discourses I hope the old way of Answering will be no more taken up by Protestants to confute this or any Paper of the same Nature For when they can find no Reasons nor Arguments that may pass with Discerning Men to justifie the defection of the English Church or satisfie the people that the Roman is not the Catholick Church they still fly from the point in hand into Harangues and Rhetorical Digressions falling foul on some Doctrine of the Romish Church which they endeavour with Tropes and figures to paint out in the colours of Idolatry and Superstition Thus when hard pressed with the Sin of Schism and not able to justifie their Seperation they fall a railing at Transubstantiation Purgatory c. I would caution every Man that searches after Truth not to be put of with this Sophistry If the English Church can not shew Persuasive Arguments for her deserting her Mother the Church of Rome she fails in what is expected from her 'T is enough to fall foul on particular Doctrines she ought to shew that no subjection was due from her to the Western Patriarchal Church In treating of particular Controversies as Purgatory c. the Roman Church is very well able to satisfie all reasonable and impartial Men but she knows 't is the trick of Protestant Writers to wheedle Men into the Labyrinth of Controversial points and then dezle their eyes with fine words and elaborate Expressions I will Insert a Speech made in Parliament against Supreme Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Authority granted to Queen Elizabeth The Person that spake it was Nicholas Heath who was first Bishop of Worcester and Lord President of Wales Afterwards Arch-bishop of York and Embassador into Germany And made Lord Chancellor of England by Queen Mary in the year of our Lord 1555 and continued until he did surrender it up in Queen Elizabeth's time to Sir Nicholas Bacon The Person from whom I had this Speech is yet living who told me That he found it in Manuscript amongst Papers and Notes of his great Grandfather George Parrey who had been High Sheriff of Hereford-shire in the second year of the said Queen A Speech Made in the Vpper House of Parliament against the Supemacy to be in Her Majesty by Nicholas Heath Lord Chancellour of England in the first year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth above an 100 years fince In the Original Copy it is stiled A Tale told in Parliament For Oaths the Land shall be Cloathed in Mourning My LORDS WIth all humble submission of my whole Discourse to your Wisdoms I purpose to speak to the Body of this Act touching the Supremacy that so what this Honourable Assembly is now adoing concerning the passing of this Act may thereby be better weighed and considered by your Wisdoms First When by the Virtue of this Act of Supremacy we must forsake and fly from the See of Rome it would be considered what matter lies therein and what matter of danger or inconvenience or else whether there be none at all Secondly If the intent of this Act be to grant or settle upon the Queens Majesty a Supremacy it would be considered of your Wisdoms what this Supremacy is and whether it doth consist in Spiritual Government or Temporal If in Temporal what further Authority can this House give Her more than what She already hath by right of Inheritance And not by your Gift but by the Appointment of God Being our Sovereign Lord and
Lady our King and Queen our Empress and Emperour And if further than this we acknowledge Her to be Head of the Church of England we ought also to grant that the Emperour or any other Prince being Catholick and their Subjects Protestants are to be Heads of their Church Whereby we shall do an Act as disagreeble to the Protestants as this seems to Catholicks If you say The Supremacy consists in Spiritual concernments Then it would be considered what the Spiritual Government is and in what points it doth chiefly consist Which being first agreed upon it would be further considered of your Wisdoms whether this House may grant it to her Highness or not And whether her Highness be an apt Person to receive the same So by through Examination of these parts your Honours shall proceed in this matter groundedly upon such sure knowledge as not to be deceived by ignorance Now to the First Point wherein I promised to examine what matter of weight danger or inconvenience might be incurred by this our forsaking and flying from the Church of Rome if there were no further matter therein than the with drawing our Obedience from the Popes Person supposing that he had declar'd himself to be a very Austere and Severe Father to us then the business were not of so great importance as indeed it is as will immediately here appear For by relinquishing and forsaking the Church or See of Rome we must forsake and fly from all General Councils Secondly from all Canonical and Ecclesiastical Laws of the Church of Christ Thirdly From the Judgement of all other Christian Princes Fourthly and Lastly we must forsake and fly from the Holy Unity of Christ's Church and so by leaping out of Peter's Ship we hazard our selves to be overwhelmed in the waves of Schism of Sects and Divisions First Touching the General Councils I shall name unto you these Four The Nicene Council the Constantinopolitan Council the Ephesine and the Chalcedon All which are approved by all Men. Of these same Councils Saint Gregory writes in this wise Sicut enim Sancti Evangelii quatuor Libros sic haec quatuor Concilia Nicenum Constantinopolitanum Ephesium Chalcedonense suscipire ac venerari me fateor That is to say in English I confess I do receive and reverence those Four General Councils of Nice Constantinople c. even as I do the Four Holy Evangelists At the Nicene Council the first of the Four the Bishops which were there Assembled did write there Epistles to Sylvester then Bishop of Rome That their decrees then made might be confirmed by his Authority At the Council kept at Constantinople all the Bishops there were obedient to Damasus then Bishop of Rome He as cheif in the Council gave Sentence against the Hereticks Macedoneus Sabillius and Eunomius Which Eunomius was both an Arrian and the first Author of that Heresie That only Faith doth juctifie And here by the way it is much to be lamented that we the Inhabitants of this Realm are much more inclined to raise up the Errors and Sects of Ancient condemned Hereticks than to follow the True Approved Doctrine of the most Catholick and Learned Fathers of Christ's-Church At the Ephesine Council Nestorius the Heretick was condemned by Celestine the Bishop of Rome he being chief Judge there At the Chalcedon Council all the Bishops there Assembled did write their humble Submission unto Leo then Bishop of Rome wherein they did acknowledge him there to be their Chief Head Six Hundred and Thirty Bishops of them Therefore to deny the See Apostolick and its Authority were to contemn and set at nought the Authority and Decrees of those noble Councils Secondly We must forsake and fly from all Canonical and Ecclesiastical Laws of Christ his Church whereunto we have already professed our Obedience at the Font saying Credo Sanctum Ecclesiam Catholicam that is I believe in the Holy Catholick Church Which Article contains That we must receive the Doctrine and Sacraments of the same Church obey her Laws and live according to the same Which Laws do depend wholly upon the Authority of the See Apostolick And like as it is there openly professed by the Judges of the Realm that the Laws agreed upon in the Higher and Lower Houses of this Honourable Parliament be of small or none effect before the Royal Assent of the King or Prince be given thereunto Even so Ecclesiastical Laws made cannot bind the Universal Church of Christ without the Royal Assent and Confirmation of the See Apostolick Thirdly We must forsake and fly from the Judgement of all other Christian Princes whether they be Protestant or Catholick Christians when none of them do agree with these our doings King Henry the VIII being the first that ever took upon him the Title of Supremacy And whereas it was of late here in this House said by a Nobleman That the Title of Supremacy is of right due to a King for that he is a King then would it follow That Herod being a King should be Supream Head of the Church at Jerusalem And Nero the Emperour Supream Head of the Church of Christ at Rome they being both Infidels and therefore no members of Christ's Church And if our Saviour Christ at his departure from this World should have left the Spiritual Government of his Church in the hands of Emperours and Kings and not to have committed the same to his Apostles how negligently then should he have left his Church It shall appear right-well by calling to mind That the Emperour Constantinus Magnus was the First Christian Emperour and was Baptized by Sylvester Bishop of Rome about Three hundred years after the Ascension of Christ Jesus If by your Proposition Constantine the first Christian Emperor was the First Head and Spiritual Governor of Christs-Church throughout his Empire then it follows That our Saviour Christ for the space of Three Hundred years unto the coming of this Constantine left his Church which he had so dearly bought by effusion of his most precious Blood without any Head at all But how untrue the saying of this Nobleman was it shall further appear by the Example of Ozia and also of King David For King Ozia did take the Censor to do Incense to the Altar of God. The Priest Azarius did resist him and expelled him out of the Temple and said unto him Non est Officii tui Ozia ut adoleas Incensum Domino sed est Sacerdotam Filiorum Aaron Ad hujusmodi enim Officium consecrati That is to say It is not thy Office Ozia to offer Incense to the Altar of God. But it is the Priests Office and the Sons of Aaron for they are Consecrated and Anointed to that Office. Now I shall most humbly demand this question When the Priest Azarius said to the King Non est Officii tui whether he said Truth or not If you answer that he spake the Truth then the King was not Supream Head of the Church of the Jews
If you shall say No Why did God plague the King with Leprosie and not the Priest The Priest Azarias in resisting the King and thrusting him out of the Temple in so doing did the Priest play the faithful part of a Subject or no if you answer No why then did God spare the Priest and not spare the King If you answer Yea then it is most manifest Ozia in that he was a King could not be Supream Head of the Church And therefore King David did go before the Ark of God with his Harp making Melody and placed himself amongst the Minstrels and humbly did abase himself being a King as to dance and leap before the Ark of God like as his other Subjects did Insomuch as his Queen Michol King Saul's Daughter beholding and seeing this great Humility of King David did disdain thereat Whereunto King David making answer said Ludam vilior siam plùs quà m factus sûm c. That is I will dance and abase my self more than yet I have done and abjecting my self in mine own eyes I shall appear more glorious with those Handmaids that you talk of I will play here before my Lord which hath chosen me rather than thy Fathers House And whereas Queen Michol was therefore plagued at God's hand with perpetual Sterility and Barrenness King David received a great praise for his Humility Now may it please your Honours to consider which of both these Kings Examples shall be most convenient for your Wisdoms to make the Queens Majesty to follow whether the Example of Proud Ozia moving Her by your perswasions and Councils to take upon her spiritual Government and thereby exposing her Soul to be plagued at the hand of God as King Ozia was or else to follow the Example of the good King David which in refusal of all Spiritual Government about the Ark of God did humble himself as I have declared unto you Whereunto our Sovereign Lady the Queens Highness of Her own nature being well inclined we may assure ourselves to have of Her as Humble as Virtuous and as Godly a Mistress to Reign over us as ever had English People here in this Realm if that her Highness be not by your Flattery and Dissimulation seduced and beguiled Fourthly and Lastly We must forsake and fly from the Holy Unity of Christ's-Church Seeing that St. Cyprian that Holy Martyr and great Clerk doth say that the Unity of the Church of Christ doth depend upon Peter's Authority and his Successors Therefore by leaping out of Peter's Ship we must be overwhelmed with the Waves of Schisms of Sects and Divisions Because the same Holy Martyr in his Third Epistle to Cornelius testifies That all Heresies Sects and Schisms do spring only from hence that Men will not be obedient to the Head Bishop of God. And how true this saying of St. Cyprian is we may see it most apparent to all Men that list to see both by the Example of the Germans and by us the Inhabitants of this Realm of England And by this our forsaking and flying from the Unity of the Church of Rome this inconveniency amongst many we must grant the Church of Rome to be the True Church of God where Jesus Christ is truly taught and his Sacraments rightly Administred how can we disburthen our selves of our forsaking and flying from that Church which we do confess and acknowledge to be of God we ought to be One and not to admit of any Separation If you Answer the Church of Rome is not of God but a Malignant Church then it will follow that we the Inhabitants of this Realm have not as yet received any Benefit of Christ seeing we have received no Gospel or other Doctrine nor no other Sacrament but that which was sent unto us from he Church of Rome First in King Lucius his days at whose humble Epistle the Holy Martyr Elutherius then Bishop of Rome did send into this Realm two Holy Monks Fugatius and Damianus by whose Doctrine and Preaching we were first brought to the knowledge of the Faith of Jesus Christ of his Holy Gospel and his most Holy Sacraments Then Secondly Holy St. Gregory being Bishop of Rome did send into this Realm two other Holy Monks St. Austin called the Apostle of England and Milletus to receive the very self same Faith that had been before planted here in this Realm in the days of King Lucius Thirdly and Last of all Paulus Tertius being Bishop of Rome did send hither the Lord Cardinal Pool his Grace by Birth a Nobleman of this Land his Legate to restore us unto the same Faith which the Martyr St. Elutherius and St. Gregory had Planted here many years before If therefore the Church of Rome be not of God but a false and Malignant Church then have we been deceived all this while seeing the Gospel the Doctrine Faith and Sacraments must be of the same nature as that Church is from whence it and they came and therefore in relinquishing and forsaking that Church the Inhabitants of this Realm shall be forced to seek further for another Gospel of Christ other Doctrine other Faith and Sacraments than we have hitherto received Which will breed such a Schism and Error in Faith as was never in any Christian Realm And therefore of your Wisdoms worthy of Consideration and maturely to be ponder'd and be provided for before you pass this Act of Supremacy Thus much touching the First chief Point Now to the Second Deliberation wherein I promised to move your Honours to consider What this Supremacy is which we go about by vertue of this Act to give unto the Queen and wherein it doth consist whether in Spiritual Government or Temporal But if Spiritual as these words in the Act do import Supream Head of the Church of England immediately and next unto God Then it would be considered in what Points this Spiritual Government doth consist and the Points being well known it would be considered Whether this House hath Authority to grant them and her Highness Ability to receive them And as concerning the Points wherein Spiritual Government doth consist I have in reading the Gospel and the whole course of Divinity thereupon as to my Vocation belongeth observed these Four as chief among many others whereof the first is The power to loose and bind sins When our Saviour in ordaining Peter to be Chief and Head-Governour of his Church said unto him Tibi dabo Claves Regni Coelorum c. That is To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven c. Now it would be considered by your Wisdoms whether you have sufficient Authority to grant unto her Majesty this first Point of Spiritual Government and to say unto Her Tibi dabimus c. To Thee will we give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven If you say Yea then do we require the sight of Warrant and Commission by the Virtue of God's Word And if you say No then you may be well
Liturgies of King Edward the sixth there was a Prayer to the deliver'd from the Tyranny and all the detestable enormities of the Bishop of Rome which was thought fit to be left out as giving matter of Scandal and dissatisfaction to all that Party In the first Liturgy of King Edward the Sacrament of our Lord's Body was deliver'd with this Benediction that is to say The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for the Preservation of thy Body and Soul to Life Everlasting The Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ c. Which being thought by Calvin and his Disciples to give some countenance to the Carnal presence of Christ in the Sacrament which pass'd by the name of Transubstantiation in the Schools of Rome was altered into this Form into the second Liturgy that is to say Take and Eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee and feed on him in thy Heart by Faith with Thanksgiving take and drink this c. But the Revisors of the Book joyn'd both Forms together lest under colour of rejecting a Carnal they might be though also to deny a real presence as was defended in the Writings of the Antient Fathers Upon which ground they expunged also a whole Rubrick at the end of the Communion Service By which it was declar'd That kneeling at the Communion was required for to other reason than for a signification of the humble and grateful acknowledgment of the Benefits of Christ given therein unto the worthy Receiver and to avoid that Prophanation and Disorder which otherwise might have ensued And not for giving any Adoration to the Sacramental Bread and Wine there bodily receiv'd or in regard of any Real or Essential Presence of Christ's Body and Blood. This Rubrick is again lately inserted And to come up closer to those of the Church of Rome it was order'd by the Queens Injunctions That the Sacramental Bread which the Book requir'd only to be made or the sinest Flower should be made round in the fashion of the Waters used in tâ—e time of Queen Mary She also Order'd that the Lord's Table should be placed where the Altar stood and that the accustom'd Reverence should be made at the Name of Jesus Musick retain'd in the Church and all the other Festivals observ'd with their several Eves By which compliances and the expunging of the passages before mentioned the Book was made more plausible And that it might pass the better in both Houses when it came to the Vote it was thought requisite That a Disputation should be held about some Points which were most likely to be keked at Two speeches were made against this Book in the House of Peers by Scot and Feckenham and one against the Queens Supremacy by the Archbishop of York But they prevail'd little in both Points by the Power of their Eloquence In the Convocation which accompained this present Parliament there was little done because they despaired of doing any good to Themselves or their Cause The chief thing they did was a Declaration of their Judgments in some certain Points Which at that time were conceiv'd fit to be commended to the sight of the Parliament that is to say First That the Sacrament of the Altar by vertue of Christ's Assistance after the words of Consecration are duly pronounced by the Priest the Natural Body of Christ conceiv'd of the Virgin Mary is really present under the species of Bread and Wine As also his Natural Blood. Secondly That after the Consecration there remains not the Substance of Bread and Wine nor any Substance but the Substance of God and Man. Thirdly That the true Body of Christ and his Blood is offer'd for a Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Quick and Dead Fourthly That the Supream Power of Feeding and Governing the Militant Church of Christ and of Confirming their Brethren is given to Peter the Apostle and to his lawful Successors in the See Apostolick as unto the Vicar of Christ Fifthly That the Authority to handle and define such things as belong to Faith the Sacraments and Ecclesiastical Discipline hath hitherto ever belonged and only ought to belong unto the Pastors of the Church whom the Holy Spirit hath placed in the Church and not unto Lay-men These Articles they caused to be Engrossed and so commended them to the Care and Consideration of the Higher House presented by Boner to the Hands of the Lord Keeper Bacon by whom they were candidly receiv'd But they prevail'd no further with the Queen or House of Peers when imparted to them than that possibly they might help forwards the afore-mention'd Disputation It was on the four and twentieth of June that the Publick Liturgy was to be officiated in all the Churches of the Kingdom In the performance of which service the Bishops giving no encouragement and many of the Clergy being backward in it it was thought fit to put them to a Final Jest and either to bring them to Conformity or to bestow their Places and Preferments on more tractable Persons The Bishops at that time were reduced into a narrow number than at any other time before there being no more than fifteen of that sacred Order left These being call'd by certain of the Lords of the Council were requir'd to take the Oath of Supremacy Kitchen of Landaff only takes it Who having formerly submitted to every Change resolv'd to shew himself no Changling in not conforming to the pleasures of the Higher Powers By all the rest it was refus'd Whereupon they were depriv'd of their Bishopricks The Bishops being thus put out the Oath is tendred next to the Deans and Chapters and lastly to the rural Clergy Thus Dr. Heylyn It is here to be noted That during the fore-mentioned Convocation there came from both the Universities a Writing sign'd by a publick Notary by which they both signified their concurrence to the aforesaid Articles only with a little alteration of the last But these Declarations and Protestations of the whole Representative Clergy and Universities were not like to signifie much since a Change of Religion was absolutely resolv'd on An account of the Years in which these Changes in Religion were made IN her First year she being resolv'd upon an Alteration of Religion as knowing well that her Legitimation and the Pope's Supremacy could not stand together called a Parliament which totally complied with her Designs in order to such a Change. But the Convocation of the Clergy which accompanied this Parliament totally oppos'd it And thereupon were depriv'd of their Ecclesiastical Benefices a company of Ignorant and Illiterate Men being Substituted in their places Which gave occasion to the Calvinists or Presbyterians to obtain great Ecclesiastical Preferments here By which they have continually laboured to supplant and undermine the Church of England It was the Second year of her Reign before any Protestant Bishops were elected The main cause for keeping the Episcopal Sees so long vacant was that in the mean time the best Flowers might be
and for ought I perceive we are as unsettled now as at the Beginning And truly he had great reason if Religion and Faith be nothing else but that sense of Scriptuure which each person of sound judgement understands for as it is impossible we should jump and agree in one sense and meaning of the Text so it is impossible we shall ever be settled and agree in Religion Episcopacy is against the Presbyterians some Canonical Books against the Lutherans Supermacy against the Quakers and Infant-Baptism against the Anabaptists and yet you own them as your Brethren and Godly Congregations of the Reformation or if you will deny them they will also scorn you and say they are more of the Reformation than you are and will you not own the Arians c. for your Brethren though you believe the Trinity against them You say they are old condemned Hereticks and does this Language become a Child of the Reformed Church By whom where they Condemned Was it not by the Popish Church That also condemns us and says we are as much Hereticks as they and as we ought not to be so called and judge the Pope and Councils Sentence against us to be bold uncharitable and unjust so we must say of the Arians Pelagians and others condemn'd by them You say Protestants will never own them to be their Brethren God forbid the Protestant Church should be so uncharitable to her fellow Christians and so unjust to themselves B. Morton as learned a Man as the Church of England bred says the Arian Church is a true Church and will say no less of the others But what need we the Testimony of any for what Reason so convicingly proves They who talk by one and the same Rule of Faith are of one and the same Religion therefore Lutherans Protestants Presbyterians and Independants do esteem themselves to be of the same Faith and Religion because they all have the same Rule which is Scripture as each Congregation understands it Also notwithstanding the difference and variety of Congregations in Popery they hold all but one Faith as they say because they have but one Rule of their Belief which is their Infallible Pope and Church But it is evident that those which you call Antient condemn'd Hereticks have one and the same Rule of Faith with our Reformation for ours is Scripture as each person of sound judgement understands it without any obligation of holding the sense of it delivered by Pope Church Councils or any other therefore our first blessed Reformers did not care what sense of it the Church or Pope did hold when they began to Preach the purity of the Gospel but each of them Interpreted it as he thought fit in the Lord and so purged the Church of many Errours This is the very self-same Rule of Faith which Arians Pelagians Nestorians and others premptorily condemned by Rome as Hereticks did follow and walk by Each of them Read and Interpreted Scripture Preached and Believed what sense of it they thought to be true though they knew it was against the Doctrine of the Church looking on Scripture alone as their Rule of Faith without any regard of the Pope Church Councils or Fathers Again he says Epist 2 ad Polon in Tract Theol. pag. 796 That Prayer Holy Trinity one God have mercy of us is Barbarous and does not please me And adds f In Act. Sieueti pag. 87. 1. The Son has his own Substance distinct from the Father His Disciple g con Cenebrard Danaeus says it is foolish insipid Prayer And our great Apostle Luther who as Fox witnesseth was the Chariot and Conductor of Israel and a Man extraordinarily raised and replenish'd with Gods spirit to teach the purity of the Gospel caused that Prayer to be blotted out of the Litanies h In Postil Major in enarat Evang. Domin Trinit That word Trinity says he sounds coldly my Soul hates that word Homoousios and the Arrian did well in not admitting at Lastly Ochinus that great Oracle of England impugns this Mystery with a strong discourse i Lib. 2. Dial. 2. We are not obliged to believe says he more than the Saints of the Ancient Testament otherwise our condition would be worse than theirs but they were not obliged to believe this Mystery therefore we are not obliged Examine I pray the works of these eminent Doctors where I quote them consider if they be not only Men of sound judgement but Men extraordinarly raised by God says the Synod of Charenton the Chariots and Conductors of Israel says Fox Men to be reverenc'd after Christ says our Doctor Powel and Apostolical Oracles sent to teach us the purity of the Gospel and conclude it is an undeniable Verity that this is the Doctrine of the Reformation whereas it's Scripture as Interpreted by such Men Oh! But England France and Scotland believe this Mystery Well! and what then That proves that the Mystery is also the Doctrine of the Reformation because whatever any man of sound judgement thinks to be Scripture it is the Doctrine But is England or France alone the whole Reformation Are not Luther Calvin Danaeus Ochinus as well of the Reformation and men of as sound judgement as they Since therefore they understand by Scripture there is no Trinity it is the Doctrine of the Reformation also that there 's none Believer it or deny it which you like best and you 'll be still of the Reformed Church Scripture as each person of sound judgement interprets it is our Rule of Faith judge you if that be not a good Principle in our Reformed Church whereas this is the Rule of Faith given us by all our Doctors as I proved before this being our Rule of Faith and Reformed Doctrin it is evident that whatever Doctrine is judged by any person of sound Judgement to be contained in Scripture is the Doctrine of our Reformation others say only Figurative Presence is taught in Scripture this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation some understand by Scripture there is Mystery of the Blessed Trinity this therefore is the Doctrine of the Reformation others understand there is no such Mystery this also is the Doctrine of the Reformation so that whether you believe or deny this or any other Tenet controverted you 'll still hold the Doctrine of the Reformation Calvin k Harm in Evang. Mat. c. 26. vers 39. and c. 27. vers 46 lib. 2. Infrit c. 16. sect 10. 11. says Christ pray'd unadvisedly the Eve of his Passion that he uttered Words whereof he was afterward sorry that in his passion he was so troubled of all sides that overwhelmed with desparation he defisted from invoking God which was to renounce all hopes of Salvation And says he l In Luk. par 2 hom 65. and in John hom 54. if you object it is absurd and scandalous to affirm Christ despaired I answer p To. 3. Wettemp in sp 16. This Desparation proceeded from him