Confessor William the first Hen. 1. Hen. 3. Edw. 2. Edw. 3. Rich. 2. Hen. 4. Hen. 5. Hen. 6. Edw. 4. Rich. 3. H. 7. H. 8. and also that in their several and respective Raigns the Popes claim to Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction here in England was declared null even by those of the Romish Communion and that the King was acknowledged to be the Vicar of the highest King compleat Monarch Head of the whole body of the Realm to govern and rule the Kingdom and People of the Land and above all things the Holy Church and defend the same to give Authority to his Clergy to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in this Realm according to Canons and Laws made for that purpose and that all Dignitaries of the Church derive their preferments from the King and no other exclusive of the Popes Authority in all Cases whatsoever Pap. How can you call that an absolute Certainty when there is at the same time a Possibility that the same may be false for there is a Possibility that all Historians may be mistaken and all Histories forged Phy. So is there as much Possibility that the Air may become an unproportionate Medium and disturb my Certainty of sight and so the Sense deluded so may I have a Delirium and my Intellectuals at some time disturbed in their Mathematical Activity and so confound all absolute Certainties But until there appear an absolute Certainty of such Interruptions of such means of absolute Certainties the three absolute Certainties remain such for it is not enough to suppose a Possibility to the contrary that makes them less certain but there must appear as high a Certainty to the contrary And while my Understanding is fully satisfied of such Certainties it is impossible to believe a Possibility to the contrary and in case of Historians reporting a matter of Fact diversly the greater and more valuable Testimony is to my understanding absolute the other not as if Mr. Cressey affirms in his Church-History that this Kingdom of England was for One thousand years absolutely subject to the Spiritual Jurisdiction of the Pope and all the Testimonies before mentioned which are Records kept and preserved inviolate and sacred in the Archives of the Kingdom with the care equal with the Evidences for the Crown and Concerns of the King and People say the contrary I take it this last Testimony is of absolute Certainty the other not Pap. But notwithstanding all these Records Popery was in all those Kings Raigns used in England Phy. It was so and Hen. 8. dyed one of your steady Roman-Church Catholicks but whatsoever powers the Pope had in any or all those Kings Raigns in England was meerly by the Concession of such Kings and not otherwise and at their will and pleasure only and which they might at any time resume at the like pleasure which other Kings have done since And I must tell you that although such Concessions have been yet they ought not to have been for the King cannot grant away any Inherent Flower of the Crown such as Jurisdiction is no more then he can grant away the Crown it self And whereas the timerous King John the very black Patch of the English Race laid down his Crown at the Infidel Embassadors feet and afterwards allowed it Tributary to your Italian Usurper It was more then he by the Law of this Realm could do and his Acts therein were wholly void but the King may appoint or alter a Discipline and Worship not contrary to Gods Holy Will and Appointment Pap. Well but what if the King should appoint a Liturgie and Form of Worship the same with that of the Catholick Countries Phy. If he should what then would that satisfie the true Catholicks of the Church of Rome and make them true English men Pap. I believe it might for while you have so good Authority against the Popes Jurisdiction here I cannot see at present what more they can have Phy. I vow I see such kind of arguings as these will soon bring these Controversies into a narrow Room and being pressed forward and home to an End Pap. Hold there for though I cannot at present answer your studied Arguments yet I may upon Deliberation however there are them who are able to do it whom I shall consult and then talk with you further Phy. There are them Very well who are them with a Mischief What blind leads the blind Credulity and Ignorance are the Pillars of your Church But come Sir let me give you some Advice The Service of God ought to be a reasonable Service that is Logical according to the word in the Original reasoning or your reason ought to be primarily concerned therein You are a person endued with rational Faculties and some stock of Improvements You are thereby distinguished from Brutâ— you are not to act in things of Religion out of Custom Precept or Example meerly but to be a wise Berean more noble than those of Thessalonica to search the Scriptures and try whether what is taught you be according thereto do not pin your Faith on other mens sleevs as the saying is admire not persons ignorantly nor things for persons sakes It was not a justifiable saying of him who had rather be in an Error with Plato then in the truth with any other There was one Farrel an active Presbyterian in Geneva after whom the People flocked In so much as one became so bold as to say he gave greater honour to Farrel then to Paul and another said of Calvin that were Paul and Calvin to preach together he would leave Paul to hear Calvin So that many men profess this or that Sect of Religion not so much for Religion sake as for the sake of the Sect Leaders Imitate St. Austin who having a long time followed St. Cyprian an Orthodox Father of the Church in the interpretation of a place of Scripture afterwards met with Ticonius an Heretick interpreting that place which he closed with conceiving it best Pap. Truly Sir I deny not but your Advice is wholesom and perhaps seasonable I shall think of it But Sir what if the Roman Catholicks should declare that they believed and owned the Kings Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as well as Temporal in all his Dominions and disowned the Popes right to any Jurisdiction whatsoever here would not that be Security sufficient for the publick Peace and prevent severe Laws against us Phy. I think in such case our King might well say of such Papists as the Duke of Saxony said of the Lutherans viz. what they believe now I know but what they will believe next year I know not And you may deny the Popes Jurisdiction here as the Papists in France did the Popes power of Princes yet hold it so at Rome And you may own Allegiance and Supremacy to be in the King as Vauinus wrote for Providence yet denyed a deity But I do think that an Oath to that purpose well Pen'd and well taken would conduce somewhat to the
Pap. I apprehend what you mean by kernel and shell you may continue the Metaphor and tell me wherein our King contributes to the preservation of the Old kernel more then his Holyness Phy. Why then I 'le tell you this kernel and shell first grew in Palestine which was a land as fruitful as that mentioned Deut. 8. and more for fruit-trees especially Figs there never leave bearing the old Figs continuing till the new come which resolvs 14 Mark 13. But for shell fruit especially such as we talk of Dr. Heylin says little is there but what comes from Damascus And as to this shell fruit of ours some Indignities being offered thereto by untoward Neighbours viz the Essens Saducees Scribes Pharisees Herodians and Galileans It was thought fit to be transplanted And one St. Joseph an honourable Counsellor planted it in England where it continued and did thrive exceedingly the Kernel flourishing keeping its native Vigour Sap and Colour the Shell fine thin well favoured and as hard one would think as a Rock and so it continued near five hundred years afterwards by the Luxuriancy of the Soil and the over officious and too critical Appointments and Trials of some Supervisors and too lazy and superficial of others on this well coloured thin and hard shell a kind of false Rind grew and covered it quite over till you could not see the true shell this Rind was maintained as engendred by something forreign nothing from the Kernel It happened that a great Wind arose once upon a time about the time of Lent I think it was a westerly Wind and as easterly Winds bring in Autumn Ascarides to destroy Orchards and Garden Fruits so in Lent this westerly Wind brought an infinite number of Vermin of equivocal generation to be sure into our Land they were of several shapes and colours all of them but of two legs divellish beaks like birds of prey some were red some russet some black and some of all colours and Sir this sort of verminous Breedlings after that the gross putrid Air that was their Parent and Vehicle hither became somewhat rarified and so not so full of luscious support got into this scurvy Rind and there digg'd their Mansions and for many years lived on the adventitious juice which supplyed the Rind which strange Animals swarming to too great a number could not be preserved with fatness in the Rind but lay gnawing on the shell made holes therein and as I 'me credibly informed had almost endangered the kernel whereupon the Matter was inquired into and found out by skilful Workmen who quite pared off the Rind and so destroyed the Nests of those Caterpillars and have indeavoured to keep the shell well favoured thin and hard as it was at first yet it's strange though one sort of Vermin be scraped off another kind of Vermin like Mites will fall on if not warily looked after but for the whole Matter we keep it now pretty well only now and then washing it over with a little water and Salt Pap. Well Sir if you mean by the Kernel the Christian Religion by the Shell Discipline on Worship and by the Rind some Super additions thereupon in which or upon which the Romish Priests and Regulars lived and by the paring of the Rind the Reformation and by the Mites your own Sectaries and by Water and Salt paenal laws as I think you do What if all this be true which I deny yet how come your Kings to have any thing to do in Reformation of the Church Phy. Our Kings have power to reform the Church of England c. by a Power inherent in them as Emperors within their Dominions Pap. How Emperors sure you 'l not make that out When were the Kings of England stiled Emperors Phy. Whether any of our Kings were actually stil'd Emperors is not the point But they were so ever since they wore an Imperial Crown and that is ever since there was first a King of England Pap. But how does that make him Governour of the Church Phy. That makes him not Governour of the Church but God made him such and That is Evidence that God made him such the Crown of England never being rightfully dependent as to any Jurisdiction on any forreign Emperour Prince Potentate or Patriarch and so is his Crown Imperial and his power absolute according to the most ancient Constitution and Laws of this Realm in all matters Civil and Ecclesiastical Our King is by our fundamental Laws a person sacred and mixed with the Priesthood and at his Coronation by a solemn Consecration and Unction he becomes a sacred and Ecclesiastical Person for as he hath put upon him the regal Crown as Embleme of his Kingship and Power in Temporals so hath he a Sacerdotal Vestment commonly called Dalmatick as a Levitical Ephod to signifie his Power in Spirituals and accordingly our Kings have always on occasion called a National Synod called here a Convocation consisting of the Clergy-Lords and Commons appoints a Primate to preside there and they consult together and prepare Canons for ordering such Church matters as the King appoints and no more which the King afterward Enacts and makes to be Laws by his Royal Assent What can your Pope say more for himself Pap. He can say much more for himself Phy. I believe he can say enough but he cannot prove half he sayes Pap. He can prove that his way of Worship has been used longer then yours Phy. More shame that it has been suffered so long but let it be what it will in other Countries still I say it ought not to be so here since the Laws of the Land command the contrary the Pope having no Right to any Jurisdiction here as before is said And I must tell you and can make it good That the King of England hath been styled Vicar of the highest God long before the Pope became a Prince or Pope Pap. These Methinks are odd things and contrary to the Law of God Phy. Pray Sir let me ask you a few Questions viz. first whether Peter had any thing to do here in England when Joseph of Arimathea was here Or when Paul was here Which was before he was at Rome and Joseph came hither with his twelve holy Complices after Stephens death The first Christian Church was built by Joseph at Glassenbury here was three Arch-bishops and twenty eight Bishops before Austin the Monk came hither who refused to keep Easter as it was kept at Rome to baptize by their Ceremonies or to joyn in preaching with the Anglo-Saxons I say pray in all this time which was some Hundreds of years next after our Saviour what Jurisdiction did St. Peter or his Romish Successors claim in England Pray where was Pope or Supremacy either before they were given to Boniface the third anno 606 by Phocas that Adulterous Assassine who slew his Master Mauritius the Emperor before that Pope was usual to other Bishops then Volumus and Jubemus came in the
power He can in a manner do all things that God can do which several Tenets are holden by true Roman Catholicks and others have affirmed that the Pope is above Law against Law without Law and can do all things and that in all Oaths the Popes Power is excepted And lastly if some of your Superiours should be true to their word or Oath such as it is and so commenced upon and explained as before what Assurance can be given That such Mushrom Papists as you shall be alwaies guided by them and not at sometime or other procreate or transmute into Hornets and Wasps Garnets or Venners or that under colour or pretence of meek Nothings who live by the Effects of supernatural Inactions of God Rapts and Extasies other Baronian wretches may not intrude using the same vizor for a while and when occasion and opportunity shall serve then cry aloud as some have done Our Lord God the Pope which hast all power in heaven and earth Then in earnest would be advanced the most illustrious name of British and Irish Catholicks that name of names and most glorious of Titles as indeed it is but venerated by that great Franciscan with that nick name Roman and especially Walshes Letter c. p. 5. against all which I hope Soveraign Notice and Caution will arm it self and that before it be too late for as Plantus Qui cavet ne decipiatur vix cavet cum etiam cavet quando enim cavisse ratuâ— est sape is Cautor captus est Pap. You talk of Mad-men I think you will show your self such I 'me glad I am near my journeys end I shall part with you here at Bow-bridge and go the back way I like not your company now and shall not trust my self with you in the City least you discover me Phy. Truly Sir I have made as much discovery of you as I desire and I discover besides your Religious impertinencies your Obedience to the Kings commands to be just as much as that of Mr. Ogilbies wheel viz. mearly to measure so much of the road as the driver pleases and no more I wish you again better informed and so farewell But Sir pray stop but a little while and I 'le tell you a significant piece of Religion of a Souldier of the Bishop of Rome Old Rome older then your Bishop of old Rome Caesar who seeing this Souldier fighting with most accurate valour beset with many Foes yet forced his way through them all and escaped through great mires waters and great difficulties with only the loss of his shield ran to the Souldier to imbrace him and to incourage and reward his incomparable prowess the true hearted Souldier out of Sence to his Duty and Obedience which by the Law written in his heart he owed to his Prince was so far from being transported with the glory of his Action or the value set thereon by Casar's Approbation that with Tears in his eyes he asked pardon of him that he had left his Target behind him And Sir before we part I have another thing come in my head and that is I have a desire to send you a memorable Record which I have in my Study it is the Opinion of the Judges Nobility and Clergy of England concerning the Kings Supreme Ecclesiastical Power with reference both to Papists and Puritans pray how may I direct it to you Pap. Sir I shall give it the perusal you may inclose it in a Paper directed to Mr. Justin Hide and leave it at the Book-sellers at Graies-Inn Gate Phy. I shall Sir and once more Farewel THE RECORD OF 2o. Febr. 2. JACOBI MEmorandum that by Command from the King all the Justices of England with diverse of the Nobility viz. the Lord Ellesmere Lord Chancellour the Earl of Dorset Lord Treasurer Viscount Cranborn Principal 2 Croke 37. Moore 755. Secretary the Earl of Nottingham Lord Admiral the Earls of Northumberland Worcester Devon and Northampton the Lord Zouch Burleigh and Knowles the Chancellour of the Dutchy the Arch-bishop of Canterbury the Bishop of London Popham chief Justice Bruce Master of the Rolls Anderson Gawdy Walmsley Femier Kingsmith Warberton Savel Daniel Yelverton and Snigg were assembled in the Star-Chamber where the Lord Chancellour after a long speech made by him concerning Justices of Peace and his Exhortation to the Justices of Assise and a Dâ—â—ouse concerning Papists and Puritans declaring how they both vvere Disturbers of the State and that the King intending to suppress them and to have the Laws put in Execution against them demanded of the Justices their Resolutions in three things First vvhether the Deprivation of Puritan Ministers by the high Commissioners for refusing to conform themselves to the Ceremonies appointed by the last Canons vvas lawful Whereto all the Justices answered That they had conferred thereof before and held it to be lawful because the King hath the Supreme Ecclesiastical Power vvhich he hath delegated to the Commissioners vvhereby they had the power of Deprivation by the Common Law of the Realm And the Statute of 1. Eliz. which appoints Commissioners to be made by the Queen doth not confer any new Power but explain and declare the ancient Power And therefore they held it clear That the King without Parliament might make Orders and Constitutions for the Government of the Clergy and might deprive them if they obeyed not And so the Commissioners might deprive them but they could not make any Constitutions vvithout the King and the divulging of such Ordinances by Proclamation is a most gratious Admonition and for as much as they have refused to obey they were lawfully deprived by the Commissioners ex Officio without Libel and â—re tenus convocati Secondly Whether a Prohibition be grantable against the Commissioners upon the Statute 2 H. 5. if they do not deliver a Copy of the Libel to the Party Whereto they all answered That the Statute is intended where the Ecclesiastical Judge proceeds ex Officio ore tenus Thirdly Whether it were an offence punishable and what punishment they deserved who framed Petitions and collected a Multitude of hands thereto to prefer to the King in a publick Cause as the Puritans had done vvith an Intimation to the King That if he denyed their Suit many thousands of his Subjects would be discontented Whereto all the Justices answered That it vvas an Offence finable at Discretion and very near to Treason and Felony in the Punishment for they tended to the raising of Sedition Rebellion and Discontent among the people To which resolution all the Lords agreed And then many of the Lords declared that some of the Puritans had raised a false rumour of the King how he intended to grant a Toleration to Papists which Offence the Justices conceived to be heinously finable by the rules of the Common-Law either in the Kings Bench or by the King and his Council or now since the Statute of 3 H. 7. in the Star Chamber And the Lords severally declared how the King vvas discontented vvith the said false Rumour and had made but the day before a protestation unto them that he never intended it And that he vvould spend the last drop of blooâ— in his Body before he vvould do it And prayed that before any of his Issue should maintain any other Religion then vvhâ— he truly professed and maintained that God vvould take them oâ— of the World FINIS
A JOURNEY INTO THE COUNTRY BEING A DIALOGUE Between an English PROTESTANT Physitian AND AN English PAPIST WHEREIN The proper State of the Popish Controversy is discoursed With Reference only to the Government of ENGLAND in Church and State In some Answer to Peter Walsh and pursuant to the Directions of a Person of Honor. Papa stupor Mundi non Deus non Homo sed utrumque Gloss in proem Clem. Moscan de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 11. LONDON Printed for Henry Brome at the Gun at the West-end of St. Pauls M DC LXXV THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER THIS ensuing Discourse seems to be wrote about the time when by Proclamation Papists were not to reside within ten Miles of London and 't is not yet out of Season nor will be till our Controversies with the Papists be throughly and truly stated after which it cannot be long ere they be ended I see not how English men have to do with the Romish Church or State their Laws Doctrines or Discipline therefore while they have been exercising us with Disputes about those things they had two Ends viz. Either to lead us into some Precipice or to Lap-wing us from the proper tendency of our Enquiries which in truth is our home Concerns and so a Controversy only between English Papists and English Catholicks called Protestants for Distinction with reference to their Prince who governeth by Laws diverse from all the Nations of the World and so is not to be argu'd out of his Right by any Parallel from other Kingdoms But as a Person of Honour hath lately begun so this Author has set forward the proper Contest still meaning between English Papists and English Protestants the latter of whom affirm as follows 1. That the King of England is Emperour and sole Monarch of England and established by a Law diverse from all other Nations 2. That the Church of England has all the Rights of a Patriarchal See from which lies no Appeal to any other Patriarch 3. That all Church Authorities and Jurisdictions with reference to this life and the ends of Government are rightfully derived from the King of England being naturally in him as a mixt Person and Custos utriusque tabulae according to Rom. 13. 4. That he is a Traytor that denyes this or affirms any forreign Prince Prelate or Potentate to have any Jurisdiction in England c. or diminishes the Kings Legal Style 5. There was naturally no difference between Church and State as to Jurisdictions until Christian Monarchs divided Jurisdictions and delegated Civil and Ecclesiastical Persons to take Conusance and judge of Causes separate and those Jurisdictions are called Civil and Ecclesiastical in respect of the Delegates only and not in respect of the Causes whereof they take Conusance and Judge 6. The King hath power naturally within his Dominions by such his delegates respectively to declare what are Articles of Faith according to Scripture and not otherwise and to make and interpret Laws for the Government of Church and State to appoint Forms of Worship and Discipline not against the word of God to add to such Laws Sanctions to punish Offenders against such Laws 7. These Rights and Powers of the King are Inherent in him as Essential Flowers of his Crown as antient as the Crown it self in which his Subjects are so interessed with reference to their Propriety in his personal Government by Original Constitutions as the King cannot by any rightfâ—l Act he can do grant them away to any Forreign Power Person or Potentate or to others but by way of delegation as to the declarative and executive Part. 8. What ever of these Rights and Powers any King of England has at any time allowed to the Pope has been so allowed against the Fundamental Law of the Land and so was utterly void and not obliging to any Successors Kings of England c. 9. That all Papists denying the Jurisdiction of the Pope here both in Civil and Ecclesiastical matters yet holding Communion with the Church of Rome in matters of worship against our established Laws are grievous Offenders 10. That passive Obedience is no Obedience In as much as true Obedience must be spontaneous intire active and with respect to the Law of Nature antecedent to the Kings Command which injoyns intire Obedience to the Kings lawful Command for the Lords sake not barely for the Command sake 11. That the King cannot dispense with or free the Subject from such natural Obedience but only from the penalty added by and annexed to his Command 12. That the King cannot tolerate here the Exercise of the Popish Worship the same being superstitious and idolatrous and against the Established Laws 13. That no English man whatsoever how far so ever they pretend to differ from or disown the Pope can give reasonable security for the Preservation of the Peace of the Church or State by them unless they swear due Allegiance to the King and by Oath declare his Supremacy in the Church and by that Oath renounce all the Popes Authority whatsoever over them and his Power to dispense with that Oath and that they will be obedient to all the Kings Laws 14. That an English man in Priests Orders from the Church of Rome â—xcommunicated or censur'd by thaâ— Church and yet holding Communion with that Church iâ— not to be trusted here although he takes the Oaths above mentioned In as much as he is of no Church being wilfully divided from ours and by Censure divided from the other and so disobedient to all Governors a lawless and perjured Person and so in a present State of Damnation nor is any Romish Priest to be trusted here though he takes the said Oaths in as much as he hath taken a former Oath to the contrary not renounced 15. That since no English understanding Papist doth absent or at any time hath absented from our Communion and Worship out of pure Judgment and Reason But purely by reason of the old inhibition of the Pope in Q. Elizabeth's time for before that they joyn'd with us and were called Church Papists and at the same time they in opposition to our Kings Laws do so firmly yield to that Inhibition and disobey several other Commands of the Pope even in some matters of Faith It 's refer'd to the wisdom of the King with the advice of his said Delegates whether such co 〈…〉 ious Offenders be with any safety to be tolerated or even conâ—iv'd at here 16. That the Church and Court of Rome are so incorporated together that if Communion with that Church be admitted or tolerated here it must necessarily be introductory of that Courts Vsurpation 17. That there are now great differences of opinion among the English Papists themselves with reference to the Pope And if they were all of the mind with the most moderate Pretenders yet what Security can be given that they will alwayes be so or that they shall be succeeded by others of the same Judgment or is it
Peace of the Nation provided ye by the same Oath declared that the Pope could not dispense therewith And if the Pope himself would also declare so That would certainly conduce to make your true Roman Catholick a true English man and until both be so done I cannot promise security to the peace of the Nation But I pray why are you so in love with the Romish Liturgy and Worship that you vvould have it established here Pap. For these Reasons 1. For that it is for the Honour of the Christian Religion that the same way of Worship might be observed in all Christian Churches 2. For that the vvay of the Romish Worship has been used in all Christian Ages and in all Christian Kingdoms and Places till of late and is still used in some Kingdoms where the Popes Jurisdiction is not allowed Phy. Sir as to your first reason I agree it would be exceedingly for the Honour of the Christian Religion if such Harmony and Agreement could be used in religious Worship as that one God might be worshipped in one way but as that never was so I fear never will be till all things be no more As to your second reason I deny that the Romish Worship as now is used was in any Christian Age or Kingdom used for above five hundred years after Christianity came into the world nor do your true English Roman Catholicks as you call them now agree with any other Christian Kingdom Church or Place vvhatsoever if they belie not themselves Pap. Well it has been so long used and with so general a Consent and Approbation as may well Intitle it to a preference to this new upstart way of Worship which this Nation has had not above 100 Years Phy. As to the Argument of Antiquity and long Usage It may be good in cases of Politick and Civil rights and Interests and become determinative provided it be not against positive Laws natural Equity or reason And in these Exterior parts of Religion it can obtain no more For a way of worship repugnant to the positive Law declared in Scripture or repugnant to the positive Law of the supreme Magistrate ought not to be exercised by any Subject living under the protection of that Supream Magistrate without sin and breach of Allegiance And Sir I must tell you further that this Notion of Antiquity though of great veneration in it self yet has been often used to the disadvantage of truth and made a Stale to dangerous mistakes and corrupt purposes You know who was reproved for not walking after the Traditions of the Elders 7. Mat. 5. and who were so zealous for the Traditions of the Fathers 1. Gal. 14. Against whose Arguments of Antiquity it was only opposed search the Scriptures 5. John 39. and you may see 17 Acts 19. who scoff'd at the new Doctrine as you at this new upstart way of Worship though indeed elder to yours So the Antiquity barely as such is no Argument for one or against another or that the more ancient as such is to be preferred before the late but again I say search and try vvhich is the best and adhere to that for the Improvement of your own not another mans Talent must enrich you Pap. This despising of things antient and entertaining of things Novel in Religion has not only made a lamentable breach in the Catholick Church but this Nation more particularly and dolefully has felt the direful Effects thereof in your Divisions and Subdivisions in the matters of Religion and the vvayes of religious Worship witness all your Sects and Dissentions that have lately over-run the Nation Phy. As this Objection is of some standing so it 's nere the better nor stronger for it for new Answers have fully confounded it as vvell to the reason of the thing as to a returning it vvith abundant additions on the Romish Church vvherein are many more Divisions Sects and Dissention then in ours as Doctor Stillingfleet has learnedly and faithfully made out in one Chapter of his Book against Idolatry c. Pap. Pray then tell me a reason why may not I or another so perswaded with good conscience use the Romish Way of Worship and Devotion and not the English Way of Worship if I allow the Kings Supremacy and disallow the Popes Phy. Laying aside the reasons urged against the irrationality foppish feigned Superstition Incredibility and Idolatry at large discoursed by Dr. Stillingfleet in his Book against their Idolatry and Fanaticism and it's Vindication a Book called Reflections on the Romish Devotions another the Triumphs of Rome over despised Protestancy two others viz. the Funeral of the Mass and the depth and mystery of the Mass vvhich I vvish you to read and others I 'le tell you another reason viz. because the King has commanded the contrary Pap. Why can the Kings Command bind me in my vvay of Worship is it not sufficient if I disown the Pope Phy. You disown the Pope only by half yet such disowning may be well done and if we could be assured it was well done might give some Security to the King against Forreign Civil Pretenders but still you give him no Security for perfect Obedience as a true English man and against breach of the peace of the Church if you conform not to his lawful Commands in his waies of Worship Pap. Pray how come the King to have power to impose a way of Worship according to his own Will Phy. The King has as much Power to impose a way of Worship here as the Pope has in his Dominions but neither has Power to impose a way of Worship absolutely according to his own VVill. Pap. What has the King Power to impose a Way of Worship and yet not according to his own Will pray according to whose Will does he so impose c. Phy. He imposes it according to the Will of God Pap. How can that be for the Protestants say that no Way of Worship is expresly appointed in Scripture and they allow no Revelations to holy men to be credited Phy. This is the rule they go by whatsoever in Religion is not of the essence of Christian Religion intituled by our Saviour himself or declared or advised to be practised by the Apostles is lawfully looked on as Religion of State in that it may be altered or improved or abolished by the Soveraign power for the better Advancement of those ends which are essential the same power may remove Errors Inconveniences Scandals and abuses therein and of that Nature is the way of Worship and so within the Power of the King The King has no Power over the kernel but over the shell he has and by his Soveraign power that is preserved inviolate Pap. Well but if he has such power why could he not keep the Old shell but make a New one Phy. Our King has not made a New shell to keep the Old kernel in but he has amended the Old shell for the better preservation of the Old kernel
room of I beseech ye Brethren Rom. 13. and which is remarkable Mahomet the Grand Impostor broke then out also when the Pope became a Temporal Prince by the Gift to him of the Kingdom of the Lombards by Pippin Son of Charles Martel Another Question is Sir whether our King is not as good a Successor to St. Joseph as a Lay Pope is to St. Peter Pope Constantine the fourth being opposed by the Council of Lateran as being a Lay person justified himself and shewed for President Sergius Bishop of Ravenna and Stephen Bishop of Naples and when the Pope said first Mass in the City of Constance King Sigismund in Deacons habit read the Gospel out of St. Luke 2. there went out a Decree from Caesar Augustus c. Pap. Well Sir let 's not talk too much of these matters for I may be drawn into a snare in seeming to lessen the Kings Authority from whom I expect protection and desire the Exercise of my Religion after my own Judgment Phy. Your own Judgment I like the words well and wish you guided by your own Judgment rightly improved by due Inquiries into things and not by the Judgment of others without a rational satisfaction why or wherefore but only you must do because you are bid to do so and until that you may expect and desire long enough before it be granted Pap. Why should you be so severe against us who promise all due Obedience to the King and not to disturb the peace of the Nation Phy. You may promise due Obedience but then you tell not what that due Obedience is Also men of your perswasion have alwaies promised fair but no Age can testifie their suitable performances if fit occasion be offered to the contrary Pap. Why then will you condemn all for some Phy. How shall we distinguish ye Will ye Rendevouz on black Heath and divide into parties Pap. I gave you a Distinction before of the Church of Rome and Court of Rome Papists the latter only are proper to be called Papists the former true Roman Catholicks Phy. Why Then I am no Protestant but a true English Catholick Pap. Yes though you be not a Lutheran Protestant nor a Calvinian Protestant yet you protest against the Church of Rome Phy. So though you be not a Jesuit Papist a de fide Papist yet you are a Papist owning the Popes Authority against the Church of England Pap. Well then you acknowledge us not to be so dangerous as some other Papists are Phy. Truth I cannot acknowledg ye so for for ought I know or perhaps your selves you may be as ill as the worst And whilst you make a Party disclaimer of the Popes Authority here that may be but a pretence and you may have the Popes Authority for so doing It 's not a new thing that Dispensations have been given by the Pope and frequently they are not only to Church with us at large but to communicate with us also and some have had Indulgences to worship Idols in proper Countries And this is your holy Stratagem like that of Cromwell who banished some hence to betray the King beyond Sea And it is to be remembred That Watson of whom your Peter Walsh speaks so well and called himself Puritan Papist and was of the same opinion with him in all your Distinctions and professions of Allegiance and Obedience to our King proved in conclusion a most notorious open Traytor Pap. I cannot tell but I protest if the Pope should invade ENGLAND to disturb the Peace thereof I would draw my sword as soon against him as I did against Cromwell Phy. So I have heard others greater then you to have said but pray deal fairly and candidly with me what is it that you would have Pap. That 's a Strange Question at this time of day Phy. It 's not strange while I judge by your uncertain Discourses you know not well what to have Pap. Why I would have Liberty to exercise Religion according to the Church of Rome Phy. That 's diverse from what you ask'd before for the Religion of the Church of Rome is that the Pope has power over our King and how consists that with your Protestation to fight against him if he Exercises that power equally as against Cromwell this is one of your Romish Equivocations and it may be you did not draw your Sword against Cromwell or that you intend the Popes personal Invasion of ENGLAND which is likely for the Pope by his Authority given to his Emissaries invades ENGLAND and disturbs its peace every day Pap. I intend it as fully as can be intended of any sort of Invasion or disturbance of peace by himself or others for it suffices me to Exercise the Roman Catholick Religion after the manner used by the true-English-Roman-Catholicks Phy. Would you Exercise a Religion after such a manner as is not used or exercised in any one Country whatsoever Pray Sir give me leave to ask you another Strange Question as you call it viz. Do you think it necessary to be of the Communion of some Church or no Pap. 'T is strange indeed Yes I do think it absolutely necessary to be of the Communion of the Church of ROME and I am so Phy. Very well Why are you so Pap. Because my Superior is so Phy. Who is your Superior Pap. Your pardon for that Sir Phy. Is he an ENGLISH Roman-Catholick Priest now residing in ENGLAND Pap. He is and what then I hope you intend not to inveigle me into a Discovery of him to his harm Phy. No indeed I wish them all well well informed or well out of harms way but my aim was by that to tell you what I think viz. That that very Superior of yours is not now nor has he been for many years last past himself a Member of that Church or of that Communion or if he be he 's but a lame Member Pap. Sir you think strangely and I must tell you that he is Professor of Divinity and a Priest of the Order of St. Francis Phy. Let him be what he will or can I say still as I did before and will Justifie it that 's more but Wee 'l let that alone till anon and I 'le be hold to ask you another question which may not seem so Strange as the former and that is how near does your Church of Rome agree with our Church of England in the business of Excommunications Pap. What your Church of England intends by Excommunication you know best but our Church of Rome holds That when a Man is Excommunicated by our Church he is quite cut off from the Church and its Communion and delivered over to Satan until penance be done and absolution given to him and for it's power I 'le tell you the Abby of Fusuiack was infested with Flies the Abbot Clareval said Excommunico eas and they were all dead immediately A white loaf by Excommunication turns as black as a Coal and being absolv'd turns