you where it is said what Law what Statute so resolves it that no Prelate or other person hath any power to visit Ecclesiasticall persons c. but he must have it immediatly from the King and confirmed by Letters patents under the great Seale of England None of the Acts of Parliament made by King Henry the eight King Edward the sixt or Queene Elizabeth speake one word that way The act of the Submission of the Clergie 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19. on which your fond conceipt is grounded if it hath any ground at all saith not as you would have it say the Clergie shall not put in ure c. any constitutions of what sort soever without the Kings royall assent and authority in that behalfe but that without the Kings royall assent and authority in that behalfe first had they should not enact or put in ure any new Canons by them made in their Convocations as they had done formerly This law observed still by the Clergy to this very day not meeting in their Convocation untill they are assembled by his Majesties writ directed to the Archbishop of either Province nor when assembled treating of or making any Canons without the Kings leave first obteined nor putting any of them in execution before they are confirmed by his sacred Majestie under the broad Seale of England Is there no difference gentle brother betweene enacting new Canons at their owne discretion and executing those which custome and long continuance of time have confirmed and ratified If you should bee so simple as so to thinke as I have no great confidence either in your law or wisedome you may be pleased to understand that by the very selfe same statute All Canons which be not contrariant nor repugnant to the Lawes statutes and customes of the Realme nor to the damage or hurt of the Kings prerogative Royall shall be now still executed and used as they were before the making of that act till the said Canons should be viewed by the 32. Commissioners in the same appointed which not being done as yet although the said Commission was revived by Parliament 3 4. to Edw. 6. c. 11. all the old Canons quallified as before is said are still in force So that for exercise of any Episcopall jurisdiction founded upon the said old Canons or any of the new which have beene since confirmed by the King or his predecessours there 's no necessity of speciall Letters Patents under the broad Seale of England as you faine would have it There was another Statute of King Henry the eight concerning the Kings highnesse to bee the supreame head of the Church of England and to have authority to reforme all errors heresies and abuses in the same But whatsoever power was therein declared as due and proper to the King is not now materiall the whole act being repealed A. 1. 2. Ph. and M. c. 8. and not restored in the reviver of Qu. Eliz. 1. Eliz. c. 1. in which you instance in your Margin Nor can you finde much comfort by that Statute 1. Eliz c. 1. wherein you instance if you consider it and the intention of the same as you ought to doe You may conjecture by the title of it what the meaning is For it 's intituled An act restoring to the Crowne the antient jurisdiction over the state Ecclesiasticall and spirituall and abolishing all forreine power repugnant to the same The preamble unto the act makes it yet more plaine Where it is sayd that in the time of King Henry the eight divers good Lawes and Statutes were made and established aswell for the utter extinguishment and putting away of all usurped and forreine powers and authorities out of this Realme c. as also for the restoring and uniting to the imperiall Crowne thereof the antient jurisdictions authorities superiorities and preheminences to the same of right belonging and apperteining by meanes whereof the subjects were disburdened of divers great and intollerable charges and exactions before that time unlawfully taken and exacted by such forreine power and authority as before that was usurped Which makes it manifest that there was no intent in the Queene or Parliament to alter any thing in the ordinary power Episcopall which was then and had long before beene here established but to extinguish that usurped and forreine power which had before beene chalenged by the See of Rome and was so burdensome unto the subject The body of the Act is most plaine of all For presently on the abolishment of all forreine power and jurisdiction spirituall and Ecclesiasticall heretofore used within this Realme there followeth a declaration of all such jurisdictions c. as by any spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power and authority hath heretofore or may lawfully be exercised or used for the visitation of the Ecclesiasticall state and persons and for reformation order and correction of the same and of all manner errours heresies schismes c. to bee for ever united and annexed to the imperiall crowne of this Realme Then in the next words followeth the establishment of the High Commission it being then and there enacted that the Queenes highnesse her heires and successours shall have full power and authority by vertue of the said act by letters Patents under the great Seale of England to assigne name and authorise c. such person or persons being naturall borne subjects to her highnesse her heires and successours as her Majestie shall thinke meete to exercise use occupie and execute under her highnesse her heires and successours all manner of Iurisdictions priviledges and preheminences within these her Realmes of England c. and to visit reforme order redresse correct and amend all such errours heresies schismes abuses offences contempts enormities whatsoever which by any manner Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power authority or jurisdiction can or may be lawfully reformed c. Plainely in all this act there is nothing contrary to that ordinary jurisdiction which is and hath beene claimed and exercised by Episcopall authority in the Church of England nothing at all which doth concerne the purchasing or procuring of Letters Patents for their keeping Courts and Visitations as you seduced by your learned Counsaile beare the world in hand My reason is because whatever jurisdiction was here declared to be annexed unto the crowne is called a restoring of the antient jurisdiction unto the same and certainely the ordinary Episcopall power of ordination excommunication and such like Ecclesiasticall censures were never in the crowne in fact nor of right could be and therefore could not be restored And secondly because whatever power is here declared to be in the Queene her heires and uccessours shee is inabled to transferre upon such Commissioners as shee or they shall authorise under the great Seale of England for execution of the same Now we know well that there is no authority in the high Commission which is established on this clause derogating from the ordinary Episcopall power and therefore there was none supposed in
reach you may see in the first of Sam. and 8 chap. though in concreto a just Prince will not breake those lawes which he hath promised to observe Princes are debtors to their subjects as God to man non aliquid a nobis accipiendo sed omnia nobis promittendo as S. Austine hath it And we may say of them in S. Bernards words Promissum quidem ex misericordia sed ex justitia persolvendum that they have promised to observe the lawes was of speciall grace and its agreeable to their justice to observe their promise Otherwise we may say of kings as the Apostle of the just Iusto lex non est posita saith the Apostle and Principi lexnon est posita saith the law of nature Doe you expect more proofe than you use to give Plutarch affirmes it of some kings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they did not governe onely by the law but were above it The like saith Dion of Augustus Caesar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he was sure and had an absolute authoritie aswell upon his lawes as upon himselfe Besides in case the power of kings were restrained by law after the manner that you would have it yet should the king neglect those lawes whereby you apprehend that his power is limited how would you helpe your selfe by this limited power I hope you would not call a Consistorie and convent him there or arme the people to assert their pretended liberties though as before I said the Puritan tenet is that you may doe both Your learned Councell might have told you out of Bracton an ancient Lawyer of this kingdome omnem esse sub Rege ipsum sub nullo sed tantum sub Deo And Horace could have told you that kings are under none but God Reges in ipsos imperium est Iovis as he there hath it You may moreover please to know what Gregorie of Tours said once to a king of France Si quis e nobis O Rex justitiae tramites transcendere voluerit a te corripi potest si vero tu excesseris quis te corripiet c. If any of us O king offend against the rules of justice thou hast power to punish him but if thou breake those rules who hath power to doe it We tell you of it and when you list you please to heare us but when you will not who shall judge you but he that tels us of himselfe that he is justice This was you see the ancient doctrine touching the power and right of kings not onely amongst Iewes and Christians but in heathen states what ever new opinion of a limited power you have pleased to raise But you goe further yet and tell us of some things the king cannot do and that there is a power which the king hath not what is it say you that the king cannot doe Marry you say he cannot institute new rites and ceremonies with the advise of his Commissioners Ecclesiasticall or the Metropolitan according as some pleade from the Act of Parliament before the Communion booke pag. 65. Why so Because according to your law this clause of the Act is limited to Queene Elizabeth and not extended to her successours of the Crowne This you affirme indeede but you bring no proofe onely it seemes you heard so from your learned councell You are I see of Calvins minde who tels us in his Commentarie on the 7 of Amos what had beene sayd by Doctor Gardiner after Bishop of Winchester and then Ambassadour in Germany touching the headship or Supremacie of the king his master and closeth up the storie with this short note inconsiderati homines sunt qui faciunt eos nimis spirituales that it was unadvisedly done to give kings such authority in spirituall matters But sir I hope you may afford the king that power which you take your selves or which your brethren at the least have tooke before you who in Queene Elizabeths time had their Classicall meetings without leave or licence and therein did ordeine new rites new Canons and new formes of service This you may doe it seemes though the kings hands are bound that he may not doe it And there 's a power too as you tell us that the king neither hath nor may give to others Not give to others certainely if he have it not for nemo dat quod non habet as the saying is But what is this you first suppose and take for granted that the Bishops make foule havocke in the Church of God and persecute his faithfull servants and then suppose which yet you say is not to be supposed that they have procured a grant from the king to doe all those things which of late they have done tending to the utter overthrow of religion by law established And on these suppositions you doe thus proceede Yet whatsoever colour pretext or shew they make for this the king to speake with all humble reverence cannot give that power to others which hee hath not himselfe For the power that is in the king is given him by God and confirmed by the lawes of the kingdome Now neither God in his law nor the lawes of the land doe allow the king a power to alter the state of religion or to oppresse and suppresse the faithfull ministers of the Gospell against both law and conscience For kings are the ministers of God for the good of his people as wee shewed before p. 72.73 So you and it was bravely said like a valiant man The Brethren now may follow after their owne inventions with a full securitie for since you have proclaimed them to be faithfull ministers no king nor Keisar dares suppresse them or if he should the lawes of God and the law of the land to boote would rise in judgement to condemne him for usurpation of a power which they have not given him But take me with you brother Bâ—â— and I perhaps may tell you somewhat that is worth your knowledge And I will tell you sir if you please to hearken that whatsoever power is in the king is from God alone and founded on the law of nature The positive lawes of the land as they conferre none on him so they confirme none to him Rather the kings of England have parted with their native royalties for the peoples good which being by their owne consent established for a positive law are now become the greatest part of the subjects liberties So that the liberties possessions and estates of the kings leige people are if you will confirmed by the lawes of the land not the kings authoritie As for the power of kings which is given by God and founded on the law of nature how farre it may extend in the true latitude thereof we have said already Whether to alter the state of religion none but a most seditious spirit such as yours would put unto the question his majesties pietie and zeale being too well knowne to give occasion to such quaeres Onely I needes must
hath declaimed against them Regâ—um est cum bene feceris male audire And it is very well observed by our incomparable Hooker to be the lot of all that deale in publicke affaires whether of Church or Commonwealth that what men list to surmise of their doings be it good or ill they must before hand patiently arme their mindes to endure Besides being placed on high as a watch-tower they know full well how many an envious eie will be cast upon them especially amongst such men as brother B. to whom great eminences are farre more dreadfull then great vices and a good name as dangerous as a bad Sinistra erga eminentes interpretatio nec minus periculum ex magna fama quam ex mala And herein they may comfort and rejoyce their hearts that whatsoever sinister and malicious censures are now passed upon them yet there will one day come a time in which all hearts shall be open all desires made knowne and when no counsels shall be hid and then the Lord shall make it knowne who were indeed on his side and who against him In the meane time suspence of censure and exercise of charity were farre more sit and seemely for a Christian man then the pursuite of those uncharitable and most impious courses whereby you goe about to bring the Church of God and the Rulers of it into discredit and contempt I know assuredly how gloriously soever you conceive of your owne deere selfe that you are no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no searcher of the heart nor no discerner of the spirits And therefore I am bold to tell you what I have learned from Venerable Bede viz. ut ea facta quae dubium est quo animo fiant in meliorem partem interpretemur that all mens actions whereof we know not the intent should be interpreted to the better How much the rather should this rule be in use amongst us in points of counsell the hearts of Kings for he hath had his share in the declamation being unsearchable in themselves and unseene to us the resolutions of the Church grounded on just and weighty reasons being to be obeyed and not disputed much lesse rashly censured This counsell if it come too late to you may yet come soone enough to others and to them I leave it CHAP. V. An Answer to the quarrells of H. B. against the Bishops in reference to their Iurisdiction and Episcopall government H.B. endites the Bishops in a Premunire for exercising such a jurisdiction as is not warrantable by the Lawes The Bishops not in danger of any Statute made by King Henry the eight The true intention of the Statute 1. Eliz. c. 1. The Court of High-Commission in the same established The Statute 1. Ed. 6. c. 2. on what ground enacted repealed by Qu. Mary and so still continueth The use of excommunication taken away by that statute of King Edward A finall answer to the cavills about the exercise of Episcopall jurisdiction Why H. B. and the Brethren doe seeme to pleade so hard for the Kings supremacie the Bishops chalenged for oppressing the Kings leige people the Iudges for not sending out their Prohibitions to reteine them H. B. the onely Clergie man that stands for Prohibitions King Iames his order in that case The quality of their offence who are suspended by their ordinaries for not publishing the book for sports The Bishops charged with persecuting Gods faithfull Ministers and how deservedly HAving made knowne your good affections unto the calling and the persons we must now see what you have to say against the proceedings of the Bishops in their place and calling For sure you would not have it thought that you have lifted up your voyce so like a Trumpet to startle and awaken the drowzie world and that there was no cause to provoke you to it No there was cause enough you say such as no pure and pious soule could endure with patience their whole behaviour both in the consistory and the Church being so unwarrantable For in their consistory they usurpe a power peculiar to the supreme majestie and grievously oppresse the subject against law and conscience and â—n the Church they have indeavoured to erect a throne for Antichrist obtruded on it many a dangerous innovation and furiously persecuted the Lords faithfull servants for not submitting thereunâ—o Therefore no wonder to be made if being called forth by Christ who hath found you faithfull to stand in his cause and witnesse it unto the world you persecute the Prelacie with fire and halter and charge them with those usurpations oppressions innovations and persecutions which you have brought in readinesse to make good against them hoping in very little time to see their honour in the dust and the whole government of the Church committed to the holy Elders whereof you are chiefe In case you cannot prove what you undertake you are contented to submit to the old Law amongst the Locrians let the Executioner do his office I take you at your word and expect your evidence first that the Prelates have usurped a power peculiar to his sacred Majestie which is the first part of your charge How prove you that Marry say you because of sundry statutes as in King Henry the eight King Edward the sixt and Queene Elizabeths time which doe annex all Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction unto the Crowne of England so as no Prelate or other person hath any power to visit Ecclesiasticall persons c. but he must have it immediatly from the King and confirmed by Letters Patents under the great Seale of England pag. 68. So farre the tenor of the Law if you tell us true or rather if your learned Counsell rightly informed Dr. Bastwicke in it from whose mouth you tooke it Now for the practise of our Prelates you tell us that they neither have at any time nor never sought to have any the Kings Letters patents under the great Seale of England for their keeping Courts and Visitations But doe all in their owne names and under their owne Seales contrary to the Law in that behalfe pag. 69. There be your Major and your Minor The conclusion followes So as being a power not derived from the King as the immediate fountaine of it it proves to bee at least a branch of that forreine power altogether excluded in the Statute 1. Eliz. c. 1. And it is flatly against the oath of supremacie in the same statute which all Prelates take wherein they professe and promise faith and true allegiance to the Queenes highnesse her heires and lawfull successors and to their power to defend all jurisdictions priviledges c. granted to the Queenes highnesse her heires c. p. 70.71 In fine you bring them all in a premunire leave them to the learned in the law of which if you were one or that your learned Counsell might sit Iudge to decide the controversie Lord have mercy upon them For answer hereunto wee would faine know of
the Primitive Church As for Franciscus a S. clara being the book is writ in latine and printed in the parts beyond sea how can you charge the Bishops with it for that it hath beene printed in London and presented to the King by a Prelate you dare not certainely affirme but speake it onely upon heere-say p. 117. Or were it so yet being written in the latine it is meete for Schollers and such as understand that language not as your pamphlets are proposed unto the common people either to misinforme them or to inflame them As for the booke intituled the Female glorie you finde not in it that I see by your collections any thing positively or dogmatically delivered contrarie unto any point of doctrine established and received in the Church of England Some swelling language there is in it and some Apostrophes I perceive by you to the virgin Marie which if you take for Invocations you mistake his meaning who tells us plainly as you cite him p. 125. that the more wee ascribe unto her setting Invocation apart the more gracious wee appeare in our Saviours sight No Innovation hitherto in point of Doctrine From bookes set out by private men proceed we to the opinions of some certaine Quidams which you are displeased with and were it so as you report it yet the opinions of some private men prove not in my poore Logick an Innovation in the Doctrine by the Church delivered though contrary unto the Doctrine so delivered To make an Innovation in point of Doctrine there must be an unanimous and general concurrence of minds and men to set on foote the new and desert the old not the particular fancie of one private man And yet I think you will not find me out that particular man that hath defended any thing contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and passed uncensured Yes that you can you say for certaine For a great Prelate in the High Commission Court said openly at the censure of Dr. Bastwick that wee and the Church of Rome differ not in fundamentalibus but circa fundamentalia as also that the same had beene affirmed by one Choune p. 122. Suppose this true and how comes this to be an Innovation in the Doctrine of the Church of England Hath the Church any where determined that wee and those of Rome doe differ in the Fundamentalls if not why doe you make this saying an Innovation in the Churches Doctrine The Church indeed hath told us in the Nineteenth Article that the Church of Rome hath erred not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith it hath not told us that that Church hath erred in Fundamentalls The learned Junius could have told you that the Church of Rome is a true Church quoad essentiam according to the essence of a Church lib. de Eccl. cap. 7. and Dr. Whitakers that there were many things in the Church of Rome Baptisme the Ministery and the Scriptures quae ad veram ecclesiam pertinent which properly appertaine to a true Church An argument that neither of them thought that Church had erred in Fundamentalls And certainly if that confession of Saint Peter Thou art Christ the Sonne of the living God Matth. 16. be that Rocke on which the Church of Christ is founded as all our Protestant Divines affirme it is the Church of Rome doth hold as fast on that foundation as you or any Zealot of your acquaintance and hath done more against the Hereticks of this Age in maintenance of the Divinitie of our Lord and Saviour then you or any one of your Divines be hee who he will But for the Church of Rome that it is a true Church and that wee doe not differ from them in fundamentalls you may see further in a little booke called the Reconciler doe not you remember it and the occasion of it too writ by the Bishop of Exeter now being and therein the opinion of some Bishops to the selfe same purpose and of some others also learned men whose judgement you preferre in other things more then any Bishops Had you but throughly studied the Reconciler as you should have done you had not made this quarrell perhaps none at all As for the other opinions of more private men that have offended you you goe on and say that Justifiâ—ation by works was maintained in Cambridge at the Commencement not long agoe and that Shelfords booke will prove Justification by Charitie as also that the said Shelford in that book maintaineth that the Pope is not Antichrist contrary as you say to the resolved Doctrines of our Church in our Homilies and else-where p. 122. and 123. In answere to the first of which I hope you doe not think in earnest that whatsoever point is ventilated and discussed in the Publike Schooles is presently conceived to be a Doctrine of the Church or that there hath beene nothing handled in those disputations but what is agreeable thereto Many things there both are and may be handled and propounded problematically and argued Pro and Con as the custom is as well for the discovery of the trueth as the true issue of the question betweene the parties And if you please to cast your eye upon those questions which have beene heretofore disputed at those solemne times how many will you find amongst them and those of your owne speciall friends in which the Church hath not determined or not determined so as they have then and there been stated and yet no clamour raised about it Nor doe you truely relate the businesse neither Thesis not being so proposed as you informe us Viz. That wee are Justified by Workes but onely that good Workes are effectually necessary to Salvation so that the principall part of our justification was by the Doctor then and there ascribed to faith workes only comming in as effectuall meanes to our salvation For Shelfords Booke what ever is in that maintained should as little trouble you if he ascribe a speciall eminencie unto Charitie in some certaine things it is no more then what was taught him by Saint Paul who doth preferre it as you cannot chuse but know before Faith and Hope Nor doth hee attribute our justification thereunto in any other sense then what was taught him by Saint James And here I purposed to have left you with these opinions of particular and private men but that you tell us by the way that by the Doctrine of our Church in the Homilies and elsewhere it is resolved that the Pope is Antichrist Your else-where I am sure is no where and that which you alledge from the booke of Homilies is as good as nothing The Second Homilie for Whitsunday concludeth with a Prayer that by the mighty power of the holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truely preached truely received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of sinne death the Pope the Devill and all the Kingdom of Antichrist Can you
conclude from hence that by the Doctrin of the Church the Pope is Antichrist the Devill assone For they are put there as distinct things the Pope the Devill and the kingdome of Antichrist and being put downe as distinct you have no reason to conclude that it is resolved by that Homilie that the Pope is Antichrist Nor doth the 6 Homilie of Rebellion say the Pope is Antichrist Though it saith somewhat of the Babylonicall beast of Rome The whole clause is this In King Johns time the Bishop of Rome understanding the bruite blindnesse ignorance of Gods word and superstition of Englishmen and how much they were inclined to worship the Babylonicall beast of Rome and to feare all his threatnings and causelesse curses hee abused them thus c. Where certainely the Babylonicall beast of Rome is not the same with the Bishop or Pope of Rome but rather the abused power of that then prevalent and predominant See Or were it that the Pope is meant yet not being spoken positively and dogmatically that the Pope is and is to be beleeved to be the Babylonicall beast of Rome it is no more to bee accounted for a doctrine of the Church of England then that it was plaine Simony in the Prelates then to pay unto the Bishop of Rome great summes of mony for their Bulls and conformations as is there affirmed I have yet one thing more to say unto you in this point Saint John hath given it for a rule that every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God but is that Spirit of Antichrist whereof you have heard c. So that unlesse you can make good as I thinke you cannot that the Pope of Rome confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh you have no reason to conclude that hee is that Antichrist Hitherto we have followed you to finde an innovation in point of doctrine and are yet to seeke and if wee finde it not in the next two instances both wee and you have lost our labour There you say somewhat doubtlesse and charge the Bishop with two dangerous innovations one in the doctrine of obedience to superiors the other in the doctrine of the Sabbath or Lords-day These wee have met withall alreadie and therefore shall say little here Onely I would faine learne for I know not yet where that conditionall obedience which you onely like of is delivered to us by the Church where there is any thing layed downe for a publick doctrine against that absolute obedience which you so dislike and reckon the inforcing of it amongst the Innovations made in point of doctrine your brethren in the Conference at Hampton Court put in a scruple how farre an ordinance of the Church was to binde them without impeaching of their Christian libertie where at the King being much moved answered that it smelled very ranckely of Anabaptisme adding I charge you never to speak more to that point how farre you are bound to obey when the Church hath ordained it What think you Sir Heere is an absolute obedience preached to the Churches Ordinances I hope you cannot tender lesse unto the Orders of the King As for that other Innovation which you tell us of about the doctrine of the Sabbath there is indeed a mighty alteration in it I could wish there were not but it was made by you and yours who litle more then 40. yeeres agone first broached these Sabbath-speculations in the Church of England which now you presse uppon her for her antient doctrine This hath beene shewne at large elsewhere and therefore I will say nothing now But where you say that for the maintenance of that change which you lay upon them their novell Doctors have strained the veines of their conscience no lesse then of their braines p. 126. I am bold to tell you that at the best you are a most uncharitable man to judge the hearts of those whose face you know not For my part I can speake for one and take almighty God to witnesse that in the part committed to mee I have dealt with all ingenuitie and sinceritie and make this protestation before God and man that if in all the scriptures Fathers Councells moderne writers or whatsoever monument of the Church I met within so long a search I had found any thing in favour of that doctrine which you so approve I would not have concealed it to the suppression of a truth for all the world How ever you accuse me yet my conscience doth not Delectat tamen conscientia quod estanimae pabulum incredibili jucunditate perfusum in Lactantius language Your Innovations in the points of Doctrin being blowne to nothing let us see next what is it that you have to say for the change of discipline the second Innovation which you charge upon my Lords the Bishops And here you say that where of old the censures of the Church were to be inflicted upon disordered and vicious persons as drunkards adulterers heretickes Apostata's false-teachers and the like now the sharpe edge thereof is turned mainely against Gods people and Ministers even for their vertue and pietie and because they will not conforme to their impious orders p. 127. That Bishops sometimes turne the edge of their authoritie on those who you entitle Gods ministers and people is as true as necessarie but that they turne it on them even for their pietie and vertue is both false and scandalous Iust so a Brother of yours whom I spare to name preached once at Oxford that good and honest men were purposely excluded from preferments there ob hoc ipsum quod pij quod boni onely because they were inclined to pietie and vertue But Sir those godly folke you speake of are Godly onely in your eye and in such as yours and if the edge of authoritie be turned upon them it is because they have too much of your spirit in them The censures of the Church proceed no otherwise now then of old they did Looke in the antient Canons and you shall see with what severitie the Church of old did punish Schismaticks and Separatists and tell mee if the Church now doth not deale more mercifully with you then of old it did And where you seeme to intimate that now the censures of the Church are not inflicted as of old upon disordered and vicious persons that 's but your wonted art to traduce the Bishops and make them odious to your followers For looke unto the Articles for the Metropolitan visitation of my Lord of Canterbury Anno 1635. and for the visitation of my Lord of Norwich Anno 1636. both which I am sure you have perused or any of the rest which you meete next with Looke on them well and tell mee truely if you can whether there bee not speciall order for the presenting of all those vicious and disordered persons of the kindes you mention you could not choose but knowe this having seene the Articles and therefore