in expectance of life he recanted and repented of in the sight of Death That hand that wrought it first felt was consumed in the flames which yet could not seize upon his heart which consented not to it Therefore being dead he yet spake God himself by that miracle which had sufficient attestation bearing witness to him and to the Faith wherein he dyed giving the Lie to all the reproaches wherewith Champny in this 11. Chap. and other Romanists upon all occasions load the memory of that learned humble sober and godly Bishop known so to be unto all that knew him living 9. Protestant Doctrine not condemned by a lawful Councel His second Argument drawn into form stands thus That Doctrine which was condemned as Heretical by due Autority and due form of judgment is Heretical but the Doctrine which Cranmer after his departure from Rome professed was so That it was so condemned by due Autority he thus endeavours to prove That which was condemned by the same Autority and judgment by which the Arrian and other Heresies were in the General Councels of the Church is condemned by due Autority But the Protestant Doctrine which Cranmer and the rest embraced was so condemned viz. by the Councell of Trent against which saith he nothing can be objected by the Protestants which might not as well been said against the Nicene Nothing be said by them for their doctrine condemned at Trent which might not as well by the Arrians for their Heresie condemned at Nice Thus he cap. 11. pag. 384 385. Answ to the Prosyllogisme If by due Autority and form of Judgment be meant not only lawful Autority but Autority also lawfully and duly used that is that in such Councels the judgment be passed or given by those that have Autority and do use it accordingly giving their Judgment according to the rule of Gods Word which is the Chief Autority in such Judgments then we grant that whatever is so condemned of Heresie to be Heretical but deny the Protestant Doctrine to be ever so condemned And therefore we say the Assumption or second proposition in the second Syllogisme is false For the Protestant Doctrine was not condemned at all in Trent Councel when Cranmer forsook the Romish error which was before any Councel held at Trent Nor yet so condemned there when that Councel was held as the Arrian Heresie was in the Nicene Councel 19. Councel of Trent not such as the Nicene What can we find alike in these two either for the Autority or due use of it Were they assembled at Trent by the same Autority Imperial as at Nice Had they which were assembled in both these Councels the same or like Autority Were all the Patriarchs or chief Bishops of the Catholic Church at Trent as they were at Nice Was the number of Bishops at Nice made up of Titulars and Popes Pensioners as at Trent Or did they proceed by the same Autority and due form of Judgment Did they set the Holy Scriptures in the midst before them to judg by at Trent as they did at Nice Did they not set up unwritten Traditions in equal Autority with Scriptures and are not most of their Decrees grounded only upon such Tradition Did they at Nice receive their Determinations from the Popes Consistory as at Trent by weekly Curriers Did they at Nice threaten and drive away any of their Bishops for speaking his judgment freely as they did at Trent This and much more we can say against that Councel wherefore it should not have the like Autority with that of Nice or any lawful General Councel but stand in the same rank with the second of Ephesus with that of Syrmium and the like factious Heretical Councels So that we may justly retort his argument thus That Doctrine which was condemned by no better Autority then was the Catholic Doctrine in the Syrmian Councel by the Arrians or in the second of Ephesus by the Eutychians cannot be therefore Heretical but the Protestant Doctrine was condemned by no better Autority in Trent for what can they object against those factious Councels but may as well against that of Trent Or what can they say for their Doctrine I mean the main points of direct Popery but those Hereticks might for theirs Saying that the Romish Doctrines are not so immediatly against the Foundation and may plead a longer continuance then the other could which yet is no prescription against Truth that was before them Lastly by Champnyes Argument so far as it applyed to the Church of Rome may be concluded that our Saviour and his Doctrine was as rightly condemned as Judas of Galile or any false Prophet that went before him for he was condemned by the same Autority of the great Councel or Consistory by which that Judas and other false Prophets were before condemned Let Champny or any other Romanist answer this which must be by requiring as above said not only the same Autority but also the lawful use of it according to the Rule they are to judg by and he may have an answer to the like Argument proceeding in behalf of the Church of Romes Sentence and Judgment against Protestants and Protestant Doctrine 11. His third Argument runs thus He that forsakes or goes out of that Church in which he received Baptisme and knowingly opposes it is an Heretick unless he can shew that Church to have gone out of a more ancient Church for to go out of the Church is the Character set upon all Hereticks by S. John 1. Ep. 2.19 But Cranmer and the rest that followed him went out of the Church in which they were Baptized and cannot shew that Church to have gone out of a more antient one Answer Going out of a Church how makes Heretick Seeing the force of this Argument rests upon the truth or falsehood of that proposition which affirms us gone out of the Roman and not able to shew that Church to have gone out of a more antient We must note that the going out from a Church takes in the consideration of Jurisdiction which that Church hath over the other and of Doctrine or Faith which one Church professethin Cōmunion with another Now the Romanists phansying the Catholic Church as one society under the subjection of the Bishop of Rome and measuring the continuance and identity of that Church by local succession rather then the Doctrine of faith do accordingly judg of communion with it or opposition to it of going out from or staying in it and easily conclude but fallaciously of Heresie and Schism Whereas we conceiving of the Church as of one Society in subjection to Christ and not withall to any one pretended Vicat General and measuring the Union and Communion of it by that of Christian Faith and Doctrine rather then of Local succession and yeilding our subjection to the lawful Pastors of the Church succeeding one the other but with subordination to the Doctrine of Faith once delivered
the Prayers used challenges them to shew what they can except against it Vnless saith he it be because we reteined not your Oil Pall Staff c. which we account as humane inventions and not to belong to the substance or Essence of Ordination unless you can shew us them by the Word of God Champny answering the challenge first gives him a note in the Margent Scipsum jugulat He cuts his own throat and then tels us why because saith he Mason requires Scripture for these and all other things of us and yet cannot shew us their Forms in Scripture for where hath he in Scripture the words of their Ordering of Deacons Take thee power of executing the Office of a Deacon in the Church of God and so recites something of the Forms of the other two Orders p. 40â— c. Answ Our requiring of them Scripture for their whole Form doth not give us but them only the wound for they that make Order a Sacrament of the New Testament are bound to shew both the Matter and Form of their Sacrament in the writing of that Testament As for us it is enough to prove our Forms by Scripture to be answerable to the institution and purpose of the Order conferred either reteining the very Form of words delivered in Scripture as Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins ye remit or applying from thence what may fitly express the intention and purpose of the Office and the designation of the Person Ordeined to it as in the ordering of a Bishop after Accipe Spiritum Sanctum is added out of Saint Paul Remember to stir up the grace which is in thee by imposition c. 3. We grant VVhat was of the substance of Ordination is reteined there is a certain Ceremony to be used according to the constant practise of the Apostles Imposition of hands and that a certain Form is to be used not certain for Words and Syllables it being not necessary to have it in all places and all times so certainly the same but for substance and meaning that in the conferring of Orders such Words be used as do aptly express the Institution purpose and intention of the Office and the designation of the person to it and such prayers withall as do expresly concern that sacred action in the imploring of help and grace And thus we maintain our Forms of Ordination to be conformable to Scripture and the Antient Church Neither hath Champny shewed nor can it be shewn that any thing is said or done in the whole action of our Ordinations not allowable by Scripture and purer Antiquity All that he can except is that we cannot shew our Words and Forms wholly set down in Scripture or punctually so used by Antiquity which as we heard we are not bound to shew or that we have left off their Unction and other Ceremonies which what Antiquity soever some of them may pretend to we say belong not to the substance of Ordination and therefore we stand not bound to use them for making our Orders valid but are at liberty for other good reasons to omit them as also many other things which being anciently well and conveniently used were after abused by Popish innovation And let them shew us if they can either that the Ceremonies they have clogged Baptism with were used by the Antient Church or that they now use all those which the Antient Church did Or let them say if they dare that either their Baptism is invalid because it hath not those Ceremonies the Antient Church used or that our Baptism is invalid because freed from many of the Romish Ceremonies Till then we may take leave to use the like freedom in refusing their Ceremonies in and about Ordination they being not of the essence and substance of it 4. Vncertainty of Romish Doctrine about Matter and Form of Sacraments and Ordination But Champny attempts to prove our Ordinations essentially deficient by wanting what is used in theirs and why because the whole Matter and Form of Ordination doth not saith he consist in the Imposition of hands and the Words Receive the Holy Ghost c. which is all that we use This is the Brief of his 13. Chap. But foreseeing that he must acknowledg their own Authors agree not among themselves about the Matter and Form wherein their Sacrament of Order doth consist essentially he therefore first seeks to clear his way by laying down two Propositions First That the determinate Matter and Form of the Sacraments is not fully expressed in Scripture So pag. 412. Which how false it is of Baptisme and the Eucharist who sees not yet he instances in both In Baptisme saith he the Form of the Western Church is I Baptize thee in the name but of the Eastern Church thus Let the Servant of the Lord be Baptized in the name how impertinently this is who sees not for that difference toucheth not that part of the Form which concerns the Essence of the Sacrament viz. Baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost which as it is fully expressed in Scripture so reteined in both Churches So saith he about the Form required in the Eucharist several questions have and may be moved What then if men will be either obstinatly perverse to question what is most plain in the Institution as the Romanists are in giving Bread only for the whole Matter of that Sacrament it makes not his proposition true Or what if some use several Words for the Form in delivering that Sacrament so they amount to no greater difference then the several expressions of it in the several Evangelists This is my blood of the New Testament Mat. 26. and This Cup is the New Testament in my blood Luk. 22. they touch not that which concerns the essence of the Sacrament 5. His second Proposition The Determinat Matter and Form of some Sacraments for example of Order is not so clearly delivered in Councels or the Monuments and Writings of the Fathers but that divers Opinions may arise about them and be defended with probability This whether true or false doth not greatly concern us But see we how he will make it concern us His Inference from it is this Therefore we must trust the Tradition of the Church he meanes the present Church of Rome for the whole Matter and Form and because we know not certainly in or by which Words or Actions the Sacrament is essentially perfected therefore we must not omit any of those words things or actions which the Church uses and in the whole comprehension of which their Authors all agree the whole Matter and Form of that Sacrament to consist pag. 413 414. But first This doth not prove that our Ordinations are certainly null and invalid as he pretended because we omit some things and Words which they use for they are not agreed whether it essentially consists in those we use or in those we omit but only concludes we cannot in their judgment be certain
that our Ordinations are ful and perfect For having acknowledged that Vasques with others hold the immediat Matter of Ordination to be Imposition of Hands and the Form to be in those Words Receive the Holy Ghost which is to confess the Substance or Essence and so the Validity of Ordination to consist in that which we retein and use he makes but a Scholastick dispute of it the issue whereof is that Vasques his opinion can but amount to a probability and therefore we are not certainly but probably ordained pag. 423. c. Let it be so in his opinion which yet comes short of a certainly Null it is enough for us that we certainly know that our way of Ordination is according to and warrantable by Scripture and can give reason as a little below why we omit many things that they use 6. Secondly Seeing the Inference he made and the resolution he gave concerning their compounded Ordinations comes but to a juncta juvant such as the advice of a friend to use all the ingredients of a Recipe not being able to tell which giveth force to the Medicine we may spare surely some of their Mixtures when we have better directions to tell us they are superfluous and noxious to the purpose they are used for But we would advise them to follow this resolution or advise in using the whole Matter of the undoubted Sacrament of the Eucharist Scrupulous in Ceremonials careles and presumptuous in substantials and not think it enough to consecrate it in Bread and Wine but also to distribute it which is the purpose of the Sacrament in both kinds to the Communicants Dare they say of this Sacrament it is not certain that our Saviour did appoint it in the determinate Matter of Bread and Wine If they durst yet were it wisdome according to Champny's former resolution and advise in point of Ordinations not to omit either part which our Saviour hath appointed and the Ancient Church constantly administred to the People 7. Of their Vnction in Ordination Now for our omission of their Vnction which is the main of those Ceremonies we use not we say they cannot prove it Apostolical or that it was used in Ordination by the Greek Church But admit it was used anciently in the Western Church we say it was but a tolerable or convenient Rite or Ceremony as were many other anciently used but not now seen in the Roman Church And reason there was wherefore we should not continue some ancient Ceremonies after the infection of Popish corruptions as in this particular They had made Order a Sacrament and annexed to this ceremony of Unction a Sacramental vertue We dare not be so bold and certainly the Church ought to be very wary and sparing in Ceremonies to be used in and about any Sacrament In Sacraments we are to look at that which is signified or conferred Of significant Ceremonies Grace which is the sole act of God is the thing conferred and also signified but there is and may be also a signification of the Duty of Man who receives the Sacrament Now Ceremonies added do either signifie the Duty of man receiving and these are the most innocent and to this sort may refer the signe of the Cross in Baptism which was used not to give any vertue any way but to signifie the duty of the baptized not to be ashamed of Christ crucified but manfully to fight under his banner and to mind him of it A second sort are such as signifie Gods act in the Sacrament his imparting of Grace and to this purpose it is like they that first used Chrism in Baptism and so in Ordination meant it to signifie not confer that Charisma Spiritus of which the Fathers often This sort comes very neer to intrenching upon Gods institution who appoints his Sacramental Symbols to signifie his grace as also to confer it Lastly therefore when Ceremonies are added by man not only to signifie but with a kind of Sacramental vertue to confer or derive the grace or work of God upon us it is high presumption And to this sort perteins the Romish Unction which makes the most of them so earnestly contend to have it the very Matter of their Sacrament of Order and made us in the Reformation of Popish abuses to leave it off and we reteined the sign of the Cross in Baptism though abused in some measure by Popish Superstition because the native importance of it is the innocent and useful signification as I said of duty in the party baptised the like whereof cannot be said of Vnction 8. No invalidity in our Ordination by omitting some of their Ceremonies And for the Validity of our Ordinations notwithstanding the omission of divers of their Ceremonies and Rites which burden rather then strengthen the work I would know of Champny whether our Baptism be not good and valid notwithstanding our omission of their Chrism there too There are but two things can be said either that our Baptism is not valid and good which I suppose he dare not say or that there is not the like reason of Baptism and Ordination which he cannot say as to this point For though he may put a difference between them in regard of validity that depends upon the Minister who in Ordination is precisely determined yet in regard of Validity by reason of Matter and Form which is the present consideration he must say that Baptism and Order are both alike for to him as One is a Sacrament so is the Other and from the One he sometimes argues to prove the like in the Other as from the Form of Baptism to the Form of Ordination as we saw above in his 10. chap. and may below in his 14. pag. 480. which because it makes for better clearing this business of the Form of Ordination we will here insert 9. There he thus argues Quemadmodum si aliâ formâ ritu c. Even as if Parker for there he disputes against his Ordination from the Form of it had been baptized after any other form or manner then Augustine delivered he had not received true Baptism so neither true Ordination being ordeined by another Form then Austin was ordeined and did ordein by And pag. 483. he thus again argues against our Answering that we retein in our Form of Ordination what is essential and according to Scripture Si nihil aliud ad essentiam c. If nothing else pertein to the Essence of Baptism or Holy Order but what is expressed in Scripture then the Form both of Baptism and Ordination used in the Church of England is to be rejected because no where expressed in Scripture How false this no where expressed in Scripture is of the Form of Baptism I noted above under his first proposition and how the Form of Ordination is in Scripture either expresly conteined or deducible and approveable by it was also there declared But by both these reasonings it appeares that to him
of Direction which it supposes to be received from the Pastors of the Church not Secundary in consideration of Autority which commands them first to the work requires an account of it and confirms publicly what is evidenced by them to be according to Christs law 24. We should now see what he answers to Masons instances of Emperours and Kings dealing in Ecclesiastical matters but first examine we a reasoning of his in the latter part of his 16. Chapter which he falls upon by occasion of an objection that Mason had made to himself and improves so far in his own conceit that he challenges any Protestant to return him an answer which notwithstanding may well be answered out of that which hath been said already Out of the Objection which Mason had made Supremacie makes not the Princes will the Rule of our Faith he frames his first reasoning thus If Princes be Supreme in spirituall things then are their Subjects bound to obey their command in all matters of Faith and Religion for as S. Paul saith every soul must be subject to the higher or Supreme Powers and bound to obey in all things in which they are supreme who sees not the absurdity that would follow But it is easie to answer by distinguishing active and passive obedience for should we make them as supreme in Ecclesiastical things which we do not as they are and as Champny will acknowledg them to be in civil matters we could no more be bound to obey them in all their commands about matters of Religion then we are in all their commands in and about Civil things but in these if they should command a Subject to bear false witness that Subject is not bound to obey actively but to subject passively 25. Much to this purpose had Master Mason solved the like Objection and Champny goes on to improve his Reasoning and replyes So to answer is altogether impertinent because the Protestants cannot give any certain Rule whereby Subjects may know whether the Prince in rebus Controversis in controverted points of Religion command according to Truth or no. For example The King of England forbids the Mass c. The King of France commands it How shall the Subjects of either know whether of the two commands for the Truth and how could the Protestants know that Hen. 8. commanded against Truth when he enjoyned the Six Articles If they say as usually his Commands are according to Truth that are conformable to the holy Seriptures they stil stick in the same dirt as not able to give any certain Rule whereby to know which Commands are conformable to Scripture Answer Rule of our Faith◠All this proceeds upon the former mistake of that Supremacy which we attribute to the Sovereign Prince in matters of Faith and Religion as if we gave him what properly belongs to the Pastors of the Church Whereas in asserting his Supremacy we suppose it their office to evidence what is Truth and what is conformable to Scripture and that in Order both to our and his believing And the Means of it But more particularly We acknowledg a certain Rule more certain then the Papists can or will do and that is Scripture Now if still we be asked for a Rule whereby to know what is conformable to Scripture We say that having a certain Rule as before there remains no more to do but to have evidence of it and for that we have not so much a Rule as Means The same that the Church alwayes had the Doctrine of foregoing Ages and of our present Teachers The same that the Jews had the Teaching and direction of those that sat in Moses Chair S. Mat. 23. those whose Lips were to preserve knowledg and at whose Mouth they were to seek the Law Mal. c. 7. The same that our Saviour left in his Church for that purpose Pastors and Teachers that we should not be carried about with every wind of Doctrine Eph. 3.4 The same that Champny the Romanists pretend to contend for in this business These we say are not the Rule but the Means or Ministers by which we believe Cor. 3.9 according to the demonstration of Truth commending themselves to every mans Conscience 2 Cor. 4.2 26. Now seeing our Saviour bids them do what those which sate in Moses Chair said unto them S. Mat. 23. and it is certain they did not teach infallibly or truly in all things for which Stella and Maldonate on the Gospel and Espensaeus once a Docter of the Sorbon on Mal. 2.7 give us this limitation Eatenuus audiendi quatenus legem Mosis docent They were so far to be heard and obeyed as they taught what indeed was the Law of Moses I would ask of Champny what Rule then had men to know whether the Scribes and Pharisees taught that or their own Traditions but the evidence they made of the thing taught out of the Law He must answer according to the Romish way The Doctrine of the Church was their Rule But then the forementioned Authors should have said quatenus docent secundùm doctrinam Ecclesiae so far forth as they teach according to the Doctrine of the Church and not have limited the matter as we Protestants do quatenus legem Mosis docent so far forth as they teach according to the Law of Moses Also those teachers Scribes Pharisees could say they taught according to the Doctrine then obteining in the Church yea and could say Dictum Antiquis it was so said by them of old S. Mat. 5. as well as any Romanist can yet our Saviour did not admit that Rule but refuted their corrupt Doctrines by Evidencing the true meaning of the Law S. Mat. 5. 27. VVhat certain Rule the Romanists can pretend to Again Champny tells us not what certain Rule they have but it must be such as I insinuated the Judgment or Doctrine of their Church Now seeing their Church must speak her Judgment by her Pastors and supremely by Pope or Councel We ask in which they place this certain Rule He and his fellow Sorbonists are for a general Councel which they set above the Pope with power to judg and depose him we leave them to answer this to the Jesuites and other more devoted Creatures of the Pope but let him answer us how he and his Sorbonists can attribute that to a Councel and yet with the Jesuites make the Pope Supreme Head of the Church as he often insinuates in this discourse which should imply the Supreme judgment in him according to Champney's arguing against that Title here attributed to the Kings of this Realm Let them place their supposed certain Rule where they please we finde those of the Romish Communion following the evidence they had of Truth against the Popes judgment or any pretended Hildebrandine Doctrine or determination of their Church The Venetians stood out resolutely against the Interdict of Pope Paul 5. maintaining their right in that cause though Ecclesiastical which was a branch
really offered but by the Hanc Hostiam this Sacrifice meant as the ancient Fathers did as shewn above Furthermore it is considerable that to maintain this presumptuously assumed power the Romanists have nothing but words and Figurative speeches used by the Fathers in this mystery which as was noted above N. 7. cannot bear the real and proper Sacrificing asserted by the Church of Rome Lastly it is considerable when they are pressed to the point to shew how this offering in the Eucharist and on the Cross can consist how his daily Offering up in their Mass which they make propitiatory can stand without derogation to his propitiatory Sacrifice on the Cross they are fain to make the one absolute the other but relative and depending wholly on the other and to acknowledg this their real and propitiatory Sacrifice to be but a means of applying the benefit and that Sacrifice on the Cross And this comes home to that we say of the Sacrament for God hath appointed the Sacraments to that purpose of the applying the benefit of Christs passion and Sacrifice and to that purpose we use them as is noted above N. 4.5 All this considered We see how needless unwarrantable presumptuous a thing this their Sacrifice of the Mass and that such also is the power of Sacrificing given to their Priests how vainly they reproach us for not assuming as vainly question the lawful calling of our Bishops THE END A CATALOGUE of some Books Printed for Richard Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane LONDON A Collection of all the severall Tracts and Sermons formerly published by Henry Ferne D. D. 1. THe Resolving of the Conscience c. 2. Conscience satisfied c. 3. A Reply to severall Treatises c. 4. Of the Division between the English and Romish Church upon the Reformation 5 Episcopacy and Presbytery considered c. 6. A Sermon preached at the publique Fast the 12. day of Aprill at St. Maries Oxford c. 7. A Sermon preached before his Majesty at Newport in the Isle of Wight c. 1. A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the books of the New Testament briefly explaining all difficult places thereof by Hâ—ury Hammond D. D. in fol. 2. The Practical Catechisme with all other English Treatises of H. Hammond D. D in two volumes in 4o. 3. Dissertiones quatuor quibus Episcopacus Jura ex S. Scripturis primaevâ Antiquitate adstruuntur contra sententiam D. Blondelli altorum Authore Henrico Ham nond in 4o. 4. A Letter of Resolution of fix Quaere's in 12o. By Jer Taylor D. D. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Course of Sermons for all the Sundays in the Year Fitted to the great Necessities and for the supplying the wants of Preaching in many parts of this Nation Together with a Discourse of the Divine Institution Necessity Sacrednesse and Separation of the Office Ministerial in fol. 2. Episcopacy asserted in 4o. 3. The History of the Life and Death of the Ever-blessed Jesus Christ 2d Edit in fol. 4. The Liberty of Prophesying in 4o. 5. An Apologie for authorized and Set-forms of Liturgie in 4o. 6. A Discourse of Baptisme its institution and efficacy upon all Believers in 4o. 7. The Rule and Exercises of holy living in 12o. 8. The Rule and Exercises of holy dying in 12o. 9. A short Catechism for institution of young persons in the Christian Religion in 12o. Certamen Religiosum or a Conference between the late King of England and the Lord Marquis of Worcester concerning Religion at Ragland Castle Together with a Vindication of the Protestant Cause by Christopher Cartwright in 4o. The Psalter of David with Titles and Collects according to the matter of each Psalm by the Right honourable Christopher Hatton in 12o. Boanerges and Barnabas or Judgment and Mercy for wounded and afflicted soules in severall Soliloquies by Francis Quarles in 12o. The Life of Faith in Dead Times by Chr Hudson in 12o. Motives for prayer upon the seven dayes of the Week by Sir Richard Baker Knight in 12o. The Guide unto true blessednesse or a body of the Doctrine of the Scriptures directing man to the saving knowledg of God by Sam. Crook in 12o. Six excellent Sermons upon severall occasions preached by Edward Willan Vicar of Hoxne in 4o. The Dipper dipt or the Anabaptists duck'd and plung'd over head and ears by Daniel Featly D. D. in 4o. Hermes Theologus or a Divine Mercury new descants upon old Records by Theoph. Wodnote in 12o. Philosophicall Elements concerning Government and Civill society by Tho Hobbs of Malmesbury in 12o. A Discourse of Holy Love by Sir George Strode Knight in 12o. The Saints Hony-Combe full of Divine Truths by Richard Gove Preacher of Henton Saint George in Somersetshire in 8o. Directions for the profitable reading of Scriptures by John White M. A. in 8o. The Exemplary Lives and Memorable Acts of 9. the most worthy women of the world 3. Jews 3. Gentiles 3. Christians by Thomas Haywood in 4o. The Saints Legacies or a Collection of Promises out of the Word of God in 12o. Judicium Universitatis Oxoniensis de Solenni LigaÌ„ Foedere Juramente Negative c. in 8o. Certain Sermons and Letters of Defence and Resolution to some of the late Controversaries of our times by Iasper Mayne D. D. in 4o. Ianua Linguarum Reserata five omnium Scientiarum Linguarum seminarum Auctore Cl. Viro I. A. Comenio in 8o. A Treatise concerning Divine Providence very seasonable for all Ages by Thomas Morton Bishop of Duresme in 8o. Animadversions upon M. Hobbs his Leviathan with some Observations upon Sir Walter I. â—leighs History of the World by Alexander Rosse in 12o. Fifty Sermons preached by that learned and reverend Divine Iohn Donne in fol. Wits Common-wealth in 12o. The Banquet of Jests new and old in 12o. Balzal's Letters the 4th part in 8o. Quarles Virgin Widow a Play in 4o. Solomons Recantation in 4o. Amesii Antisynodalia in 12o. Christ's Commination against Scandalizers by John Tombes in 12o. Dr. Stuart's Answer to Fountaine's Letter in 4. A Tract of Fortifications with 22 brasse cuts in 8. Dr. Griffith's Sermon Preached at S. Paul's in 4. Blessed birth-day printed at Oxford in 8o. A Discourse of the state Ecclesiastical in 4. An Account of the Church Catholick where it was before the Reformation by Edw Boughen D D in 4. An Advertisement to the Jury-men of England touching Witches written by the Author of the Observations upon Mr. Hobbs Leviathan in 4. The Commoners Liberty or the English mans Birth-right in 4. An Expedient for coÌ„posing differences in Religion in 4. The holy life and death of the late Vi countesse Falkland in 12. Englands faithfull Reprover and Monitour Directed 1. To the Church of England 2. To the inferiour Ministers of the Gospell 3. To the Nobility and Gentry 4. To the expulsed Members of the University and to those now abiding therein 5. To the Judges Lawyers c. 6. To the City of London 7. To the seduced of this Nation and to as many as have seperated themselves from the Communion of our Church 8. To the whole body of this Nation 9. A Post script to the Reader The Author a Sequestred Divine FINIS