certus qui de hac re justo latentique judicio non omnes instruit sed neminem fallit PROSP. Resp 7. ad Cap. GALLORUM Ex REGENERATIS in CHRISTO IESU quosdam RELICTA FIDE pijs moribus APOSTATARE A DEO impiam vitant in suâ AVERSIONE finire multis quod dolendum est probatur exemplis But the greatest question will be concerning the Learnedst in the Church of England said to consent unto Antiquity in this case of falling away from grace Where first I will not deny but that Many in the Church of England reputed learned are of that opinion that Faith had cannot be lost But if it shall appeare that the contrary Tenet is the PUBLICK DOCTRINE of the CHURCH of England then I have not wronged private men in making this comparison between them and Those whom themselves will acknowledge to be their Superiours both in learning and authority Now to give them all due satisfaction which may thinke themselves wronged by my comparative speech I argue as followeth They were the learnedst in the Church of England that drew composed and agreed the ARTICLES in 52. and 62. that ratified them in 71. that confirmed them againe in 604. that justified and maintained them against the Puritans at Hampton Court that have read and subscribed them at their Induction unto Benefices and Consecration unto Bishopricks that penned the Homilies read in Churches But all these have and all such doe assent unto Antiquity in this Tenent and subscribe it truely or in hypocrisie Therefore I may justly avouch it The learnedst in the Church of England assent therein to Antiquitie The Major I suppose no man will question The Informers themselves are peradventure within that Pale The Minor I make good particularly and will prove it accordingly obsignatis tabulis In the forenamed XVI ARTICLE we reade and subscribe this After that we have received the HOLY GHOST wee may DEPART AWAY FROM GRACE and FALL into Sinne and by the Grace of GOD we may rise againe and amend our lives Now let me ask the question Have you subscribed this Article or have you not If you be Beneficed men you have read it and subscribed it professed your assent and consent thereto before GOD and his CHURCH or else by Act of Parliament you have forfeited your spirituall promotions and are deprived IPSO FACTO within two moneths If so then have you subscribed that Arminianisme which you impute as an Error unto me Haply you will be of his minde one of your Tribe who when he was told what hee had subscribed for poore ignorant man he understood it not protested he would teare his subscription if he could come by it and so would have lost his Benefice which few of you will doe if it be a Good one for conscience sake marry for a Poore one you will not stick Haply you will quarrell the Sense of the ARTICLES but then you must remember that the plaine words sound to the meaning for which I have produced them and that untill the CHURCH it selfe expound otherwise it is as free for me to take it according to the letter as for you to devise a figure The ARTICLE insisteth upon men Iustified speaketh of them after Grace received plainly avoucheth They may fall away depart from that state which once they had they may by Gods Grace rise againe and become new men Possible but not Certaine or Necessary But the meaning by you assigned cannot be good being allied unto the stocke you are for by your Tribe the true meaning of the ARTICLE and the Doctrine there Delivered and Published by Authority eyther originall or derived primary or secondary was upon this very point challenged as unsound because against the current of their Institutions And had Arminianisme then been a nickname the challenge without doubt had fastned there but challenged it was in this Sense as Vnsound at the Conference of Hampton Court by those that were Petitioners against the Doctrine and Discipline established in the Church of England And being so challenged before His sacred Majesty was then and there Defended maintained avowed averred for True ancient justifiable good and Catholick by the greatest Bishops and learnedst Divines then living in this Church against that absolute irrespective necessitating and fatall Decree of your new Predestination stiled by you The Doctrine of YOUR DIVINES commonly called CALVINISTS as indeed it is YOURS being never heard of in the world but of late but stiled then and there by the Lord Bishop of London Dr. BANCROFT in publick audience with much vehemencie without any check dislike distaste dissent for we reade of none a desperate doctrine of Predestination At what time also that Reverend Prelate and most accomplished Divine whose memorie shall ever be pretious with all good and learned men the late Bishop of Norwich then Deane of PAULS Dr. OVERALL upon some touch by occasion of mentioning the ARTICLES of LAMBETH did relate unto his most SACRED MAIESTIE those concertations which himselfe had sometimes had in Cambridge with some Doctors there about this very point of Falling from Grace and that it was his Tenet and had beene That a justified man might FALL AWAY FROM GRACE and so ipso facto incur GODS wrath and was IN STATE OF VVRATH and DAMNATION untill he did recover againe and was renued after his fall At which time that Doctrine of the Church of England then quarrelled now stiled Arminianisme accused of Noveltie slandred as pernicious by these Informers and their Brethren was resolved of and avowed for True Catholick ancient and Orthodox by that Royall Reverend Honourable and learned SYNOD The Booke is extant published by warrant and re-published by command this present yeer of the Proceedings at that Conference which will averre all that I say for truth against you heer See the Book And for explication of that Authorized and Subscribed doctrine there is an Homilie in the Booke of Homilies first composed and published in King EDWARD'S time approved and justified in Parliament in Queene ELIZABETH'S daies and Authorized againe of late to be read in Churches entituled OF FALLING AWAY FROM GOD. Which very TITLE is sufficient warrant for the Doctrine or Error in this point imputed to M. MOUNTAGU But that which is Delivered in the Homily will justifie Him unto the full for the Homily doth throughly and wholly insist upon the Affirmation That FAITH once had may againe be LOST Out of the first part of that Homily you may take this my good Informers for your edification Whereas GOD hath shewed unto all them that TRULY do BELEEVE his Gospell his face of mercy in CHRIST IESUS which doth so enlighten their hearts that they be TRANSFORMED into his Image be made PARTAKERS of the heavenly light and of his HOLY SPIRIT be fashioned unto him in all goodnes requisite unto the CHILDE of GOD So if they doe afterward NEGLECT the same if they bee unthankfull unto him if they order not their
negare liberum voluntatis arbitrium qui confitentur omnem hominem quisquis credit in DEUM non nisi SUA LIBERA VOLUNTATE credere And PROSPER de vocatione gentium SED etiam voluntas hominis subjungitur ei Gratiae atque CONIUNGITUR Quae ad hoc praedictis est excitatae praesidijs ut divino in se cooperetur operi incipiat exercere ad meritum quod superno semine concepit ad studium de suâ habens mutabilitate si deficit de gratiae opitulatione si proficit And FULGENTIUS de Incarnat cap. XX. Quâ gratiâ humanum non aufertur sed sanatur non adimitur sed corrigitur non removetur sed illuminatur non evacuatur sed adjuvatur atque SERVATUR ARBITRIUM ut in quo infirmitatem homo habuit in eo habere incipiat sanitatem quo errabat eodem in viam redeat in quo caecus fuit in eo accipiat lumen ubi fuit iniquus serviens immunditiae iniquitati ad iniquitatem ibi gratiâ praeventus atque adjutus serviat justitiae in sanctificationem To this purpose the words are so evident in the ARTICLE there can be no tergiversation or eluding of them I could name you many that at least doe write so I content my selfe with one whom I dare say you will not reject The learned Bishop of Lichfield is the man I meane in his Appeale pag. XIII Yet have they also he speaketh it of the Centuriators of MEYDENBURG out of the cleere and sound testimony of the same Father S. GREGORY drawne a doctrine of Orthodoxall Truth in the doctrine of FREE-WILL holding that a man's will in respect of any spirituall good is not free in it selfe untill that it be freed by grace Then it is free in his opinion And this opinion he saith is an Orthodoxall Truth and his opinions in your opinion are neither Popish nor Arminian How can the same opinion be Popery in M. MOUNTAGU who goeth not any farther than that Bishop hath gone and hee had warrant from Antiquity COOPERATORES sumus gratiae DEI operantis in nobis Non enim DORMIENTIBUS provenit regnum coelorum saith LEO nee OTIO DESIDIAQUE TORPENTIBUS beatitudo aeternitatis ingeritur who yet denieth not that without GOD wee can doe nothing it is GOD that worketh the will and the deed All our works thou hast wrought in us and the like Quaeutique sine DEO nulla est nec proprietatem obtinet dignitatis the righteousnesse hee meaneth of a regenerate man nisi Spiritu sui vegetetur Authoris Dicente enim Discipulis suis Domino SINE ME NIHIL POTESTIS FACERE dubium non est hominem bona agentem à DEO habere effectum operis initium voluntatis LEO ser 8. Epiph. The freedome of will doth not exclude out GOD'S prerogative royall nor circumscribe it and GOD'S preeminence in the work of our salvation his chiefe hand in the businesse his grace preventing and concurring doth not take away mans Free-will in cases wherein Will is interessed Causes may be many and manifold unto severall acts and particular ends In this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and concatenation of causes there is a progresse ordinary from the first to the last and a reflection from the last unto the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Second causes and subordinate are reduced unto the originall prime and beginning cause of all and agunt in virtute prime If in no respect else yet in this regard It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of GOD that giveth the encrease To conclude then That man hath FREE-WILL is not by us gainsaid saith that worthy and learned Bishop of MEATH Freedome of will we know doth as essentially belong unto man as reason it selfe and he that spoileth him of that power doth in effect make him a very BEAST Quis nostrûm saith S. AUGUSTINE against the Pelagians dicit quod primi hominis peccato perierit arbitrium de humano genere Libertas quidem perijt per peccatum sed ILLA quae fuit in Paradiso habendi PLENAM cum immortalitate justitiam To deny Freewill at all is wilfull folly but to give unto it that power and sway as many doe is little lesse than Blasphemie Truth is ever in the midst betwixt two extreames and so is it heer most wisely tempered and qualified with moderation in the doctrine of the Church of England according to which I endevour to square my beleefe and opinions CHAP. XI The fourth and last point of ARMINIANISME touching the Synod of DORT The Synod of Dort not our Rule Private opinions no Rule The Informers imputations nothing at all INFORMERS HEe expresly maketh the Church of England to cast off the defence of sundry points which the Synod of DORT maintayned and determined MOUNTAGU IN ALL my writing to my remembrance I name that SYNOD but once onely and no more That at DORT and another Nationall Synod at GAPP in France and that respectively and in gentle nay honourable termes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the two last in the Church of Rome the one at FLORENCE the other at TRENT and pronounce not I hope in any disgrace unto the Synod of DORT that we may as well tender unto our Adversaries the Protestant conclusions and decisions of those TWO Synods as they presse us with the ANATHEMATISMES of Trent or Florence Beside this one time and occasion I never name DORT And for the particular points and passages of my Booke I protest that to my remembrance it came not so much as within the compasse of my thoughts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For what had I to doe with that Synod not once named by the Gagger I undertooke the defence of the publick doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND of which I am being not curious in alienâ republicâ with which I had nothing to do That fellow had as the use and custome of Papists is schismatically dividing himselfe from us cast upon the Church as of PUBLICK allowance many and some absurd propositions of PRIVATE Tenents particular fancies of some idle conceits I pleaded not guilty unto the Indictment and tooke off the CHURCH falsly charged from that issue wherein it may bee some other had joined against right and reason You or any Puritan or Papist make it plaine that any thing by me disclaimed for being the PUBLICKE ESTABLISHED doctrine of our Church is yet the doctrine of the Church and I am ready to recant If the Synode of DORT hath determined otherwise let their determinations stand for me I quarrell them not I meddle not with them Those that like the Decrees of that Synod or are bound to maintaine the Decrees of that Synode let them maintaine them if they like them Non equidem invideo I have no part nor portion in them I am not tied to uphold them farther than they consent unto that which I am bound to maintain the doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND And if
would be more pleasing unto GOD and commendable with men if your selves and such Halfers in opinions omnium horarum homines for your private ends would openly avow what covertly you conceale and publickly professe that in which animitùs being rotten at the Core you are dissentients indeed from the Church of England than to be and call your selves at least Conformitants for fashion sake in some few and indifferent points of Ceremony and to be opposites in Truth both from them and most points of Doctrine of the Church of England For the point in question what if I for my part professe so much you may for your part professe the contrary if you please so be it you trouble not the Church with it nor would pin my Faith unto your opinion One thing I promise you for my part I will not lightly talke of my opinion in Pulpits will you say as much for your opinion I thinke not I know nay For your opinions must bee all THE LORDS HOLY TRUTH I am not anie way offended with you for your opinion that The Pope is Antichrist yet much rather might I because you presume to determine so peremptorily of future Contingents which being ever uncertaine quoad nos those things cannot but rashly be defined or absolutely taught as true the event whereof may hap afterwards to prove otherwise Why should you be angry with mee in such points of no assurance because I doe not subscribe unto you I am not tyed unto you more than you to me Who concluded it but your selves to be flat Popery not to Beleeve or Preach that the Pope is that Antichrist or to professe the contrary that he is not that Antichrist Who can finde it to be the doctrine of the Church of England What Synod resolved it Convocation assented to it What Parliament Law Proclamation or Edict did ever command it to be professed or have imposed penaltie upon repugnants or non-consentients unto it Some Protestant Divines at home and abroad I grant have thought so wrote so disputed so in good zeale no doubt against that insolent and insufferable and outrageous Tyrannie and Pride of the Bishops of Rome and their infinite enormities in the Church and out of that affection have been too violently forward out of conjectures and probabilities to pronounce The POPE is that MAN OF SINNE and SONNE OF PERDITION The Synod of GAPP in France made it a point of their Beleefe and concluded it peremptorily to be so And let them and you beleeve it so if you will Their inducements doe not convince or perswade me I never yet saw proofe or argument brought that was perswasive much lesse that was demonstrative in the case I never yet met with argument or reason to the point but at least to my owne satisfaction I was able to answer it If you can give better I am like to yeeld Till then there being no conviction nor compulsion in foro externo or interiori I would gladly know why it should not be as lawfull for mee to opine The Pope is NOT that Antichrist as for others to write to preach to publish to tender unto Proceeders this Proposition The Pope Is Antichrist They thinke one way I am of another minde and so are infinite others with me Why may not I sedatè and tranquillè as well deliver my Negative as M. GABRIEL POWELL publish and print as if the Church of England were of his minde out of violent and transported passion no doubt thus I am as well assured and as throughly perswaded that the POPE is THAT ANTICHRIST as I am resolved IESUS CHRIST was the Sonne of GOD or to that purpose for I have not now the booke by mee Surely this man made it an Article of his faith so will not I. And yet I will not deny but the Pope is an Antichrist I doe not deny it I doe beleeve it These honest Informers should not so have dealt with mee as by a knack of concealement to have done me so palpable a wrong as if my meaning were the Pope was no Antichrist at all So I might have walked not onely upon the Brinks but have come much within the Verge of flat Popery and not injuriously as now have been slandered for and stiled a Papist For that imputation might more than grate upon an universall approoving of the totall doctrine of the Church of Rome in as much as there were of old are now and alway will bee many Antichrists and hee that any way opposeth CHRIST in his Kingdom his Word his Church is an Antichrist which as ingenuously as the former I professe the Pope and the Church of Rome doth And therefore when out of my private opinion onely for which I will not trouble the peace of the Church I denied that the Pope was THAT Antichrist then yet and there I added withall AN Antichrist notwithstanding I hold him or them carrying themselves in the Church as they doe Which Passage and Proposition had bin sufficient with men not partially addicted unto a Side and maliciously bent to calumniate an Opposite as it is too manifest my Informers bee to have discharged mee from guilt or tincture of Popery For will or can any Papist living say that the Bishop of Rome now is an Antichrist But so have I said and written and professed so if these honest Informers had been pleased to have reported it so But it stood not with their prime purpose of calumniating directly it gave check unto their detraction in chief and so they passed it slightly over But as concerning the maine the question on foot Whether the Pope of Rome or the Popes of Rome either are or may be accounted or is THAT Antichrist or Antichrists my irresolution grew as I have remembred from the much insufficiency of their proofes that tender it stoutly strongly affectiouately and tantum non as a point of faith Not any one of their arguments is not all their arguments together are convincing Secondly because it is in Scripture every where tendred as a Prophecy and therefore a Mystery sealed up obscure not manifested nor to bee understood but by evident and plaine event without divine revelation How then these are the very words of Bishop MORTON in excuse of the Fathers concerning their erring in this verie case of ANTICHRIST can ignorance of those things which cannot possibly be understood before the time of their accomplishment in the last daies be held prejudiciall unto the wisedome of the Fathers of former times I may adde thereunto Or the cautelousnes of suspenders and not forward concluders in these times And yet farther because Protestants are divided in the question For all doe not determine or resolve that the Pope is THAT Antichrist remembred in the Scripture and yet none of them have hitherto at any time beene stiled or reputed Papists no not by Puritanicall Opposites The Scriptures as is apparent doe in this question propose us two persons AN Antichrist one with many THE
Antichrist one eminent above all All and every one that oppugneth or opposeth CHRIST and his Kingdome his Word and Doctrine is an Antichrist So was SIMON MAGUS ELYMAS MENANDER the NICOLAITANS and other Heretickes abroad and risen up in the very Apostles times of whom S. IOHN himselfe said And now are many Antichrists These are all more or lesse Antichrists as their opposition is more or lesse unto CHRIST and his Kingdome in points of higher nature or of lower Tenure But beside all these more particularly and especially there is designed out in Scripture an egregious eminent and transcendent ANTICHRIST called there THE MAN OF SINNE THE SONNE OF PERDITION Concerning him not them there is diversity of judgements discrepancie of opinion among Divines both old and new First some of the antient Fathers and most of the Writers in the present Church of Rome understand the propheticall prediction of and apply it unto one singular individuall man onely and no otherwise and him to bee an Hereticke in opinion extreamly and with all vehemency opposing the saving truth of GOD prodigiously impious and beyond measure who shall by all signes and wonders with maine force and opposition set himself against CHRIST IESUS and his Kingdome towards the later end of the world not long before the day of Doome Other Divines as namely the major part of Protestant Writers not all understand the prophecy and prediction not of any one man or singular person so much as of any hereticall wicked tyrannicall State and Polity directly opposing the Kingdome State and Doctrine of CHRIST IESUS But heer is some difference among them For there are that by Antichrist doe understand MAOMET or the Turkish State and Tyranny erected against CHRIST and Christians directly and the Pope and Papacie opposing the same indirectly and in oblique sort both combined in one confederacy and combination that both these though opposite ad invicem in Temporalibus may and doe make one conjoyned opposition unto IESUS CHRIST and his truth in Spiritualibus And although that externally and in regard of Civill Policy they differ and doe deadly hate each other and mainly one oppose against the other yet nihil impedit but they may as indeed they do conspire in opposing CHRIST and his Gospell his Kingdome differently Other more precise Protestant Divines do not nor yet will in any hand extend Antichristianisme beyond the Papacy nor yet will admit or hear of any other great Antichrist past or to come but onely the Bishop of Rome which is it seemeth the opinion or rather faith and beliefe of these Informers together with M. POWELL and the Synod of GAPP as it is of most but not of all the Divines whom these men think it an honor to call CALVINISTS I say not of all for ZANCHIUS ZEGEDINUS GRYNAEUS and FAIUS of Geneva himselfe are not so yet perswaded For my owne private opinion I said and so I say still Though I cannot nor yet will sweare unto either being but probable and conjecturall yet I rather incline unto the more moderate and temperate Tenent and rather of the two embrace that The Turkish and Popish State not severall but conjoyned and opposite unto CHRIST though severall waies doe much rather and may so constitute THAT Antichrist than any one man or private person whatsoever than either of the two States disjoynedly and of the two States rather the Turke by much than the Pope rather the MAOMETAN iniquity than the HILDEBRANDINAN impiety at least wise as much every way because the Signes and Tokens and Marks and Cognisances of that eminent and great Antichrist foretold extant and designed in Scripture do all as much accrue unto and fit the Turk or rather and indeed more Him and Them than they doe the Popes in their State and Government ad oppositum First in Apostasie they are both interessed both are departed away but rather the Turk than the Pope is enteressed For whether we take that Apostasie to bee a departing away from CHRIST and his Kingdome and his Doctrine MAOMET himselfe apostated drew away his Followers and Sectaries sometime CHRISTIANS and so they continue yet unto this day Reprobates Renegadoes Apostataes Deniers of that faith which sometime they did professe The Churches of Asia those seven unto which S. IOHN sometime wrote those which S. PAUL planted and which APOLLOS watered where S. PETER S. ANDREW and the rest preached those manie famous Churches of Africa and others are fallen from GOD his Kingdom his CHRIST the SPIRIT of his Grace profession of his Name and received the marke and stampe of the Beast Or whether we understand Apostasie and defection from the Romane Empire the Turke is enteressed as much or more than the Pope both are growne great through the ruines thereof but rather the Turke than the Pope Indeed both from the Scepter of CHRIST and the Romane Empire is this Apostasie and so the signes marks and tokens hold on either side but upon due examination rather upon the Turke than the Pope as yet Then for Deceiving signes and wonders howsoever that cognizance holdeth in the Papacy and Sea of Rome we are assured out of Story that MAOMET tooke that course to beguile the simple to insinuate into the fancies of his deceived Proselites and to make himselfe esteemed a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being a false Prophet a Deceiver a teacher of lyes in regard of GOD and CHRIST Such he pretended he desired to be accounted so he was estemed and held in his time during life and so is he reckoned of by his followers at this day which hitherto secundum literam and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was never verified in Pope or Bishop of Rome personally nor in succession of Popes collectively Again the number of the name of the Beast doth agree unto one as much or more than unto the other whether wee take DCLXVI for the Number of the Name of a man or for the Number of the Time assigned when he should rise The time of MAOMETS rising in the East against CHRIST and the Romane Empire was in the sixt Centurie and Ierusalem was taken in by HOMAR successor unto MAOMET neere about the yeare DCLXVI The name of MAOMET written in the Greek that tongue in which S. IOHN wrote and to which he had reference doth make up that Number unto an haire as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so much insisted upon thus 40 I 70 40 5 300 10 200 μ α ο μ ε τ ι σ in all DCLXVI Fourthly as the Learned have made observation the word TURCA the name of the chiefe Prince of Gog and Magog doth signifie the same that doth Apollyon and Abaddon which is a Name ascribed and fastned unto that man of Sinne in holy writ Fiftly the Turkish MAOMETANS of these dayes and so the SARASINS of old are the grand professed enemies of CHRISTIANS Christianity CHRIST quà tales for that Name that Profession that Religion make warre against hate detest persecute Christians with
whether they stand not therefore excommunicate not to bee restored untill they repent and publickly revoke such their wicked rerors the Censure of the Canon But I proceed from Ordination to Execution of Priesthood from the Originall denied unto the Ministeriall part rejected also by them and so I shall have done with them CHAP. XXXV Touching power of Priesthood to forgive Sinnes Priests have power to forgive sins not originally but ministerially The Doctrine of the Ordination and Communion Book for publick and private Absolution The Informers to lose the profits of their livings and to be imprisoned without baile for declaring against it INFORMERS THis is the Doctrine saith hee of our Communion-Booke and the practice of our Church accordingly that Priests have power not only to pronounce but to give Remission of sinnes CHAP. XI Pag. 78. 79. MOUNTAGU FIRST be pleased whosoever shalt view or reade this Apologie to take the true state and Tenent in the point informed against by these Promoters It was imposed by the Gagger as a doctrine authorised in our Church None but GOD can forgive sinnes or retaine them It was answered by me that in some sense it was true None else can doe it viz. by authority and right originall because all sinne is properly committed against GOD Tibi soli peccavi and that in some sense also it was not true For by delegation others also might doe it ministerially GOD doth forgive them by the ministery of men The Priest to doe this hath power conferred upon him by GOD in as ample sort as he or any man can receive it And that this was indeed the doctrine of our Church I proved by the witnesse of an enemy and therefore the stronger producing the verdict of a Papist who confesseth that Protestants hold that Priests have power not only to pronounce but to give remission of sinnes Which seemeth to bee the doctrine of the COMMUNION BOOKE in the visitation of the fick where the PRIEST saith AND BY HIS AUTHORITY COMMITTED UNTO MEE I ABSOLVE THEE FROM ALL THY SINNES This is my relation hitherto of what I finde So that heer is committed crimen falsi by these Informers I relate what one of that Side saith I say it not my selfe but only recognize the truth of his relation which I could not deny For in the visitation of the sick in the Communion-Booke the doctrine and practice is as hee relateth it So that were it not justifiable which is heere reported these honest faithfull Brethren had put a trick upon mee namely an Assertion for a bare Relation as if I had justified what I doe but report But it is justifiable it is the doctrine and practice of the Church of England The Bishop of Meath was of that opinion Pag. 109. against a Iesuites challenge HE hath done us open wrong in charging us to deny that PRIESTS HAVE POWER TO FORGIVE SINS And hee giveth a reason irrefragable Whereas the very formall words which our Church requireth to be used in the Ordination of a Minister are these WHOSE SINNES THOU DOST FORGIVE THEY ARE FORGIVEN AND WHOSE SINNES THOU DOST RETAINE THEY ARE RETAINED The execution of which authority accordingly is put in practice in the Visitation of the sick And no man can say more or come more fully home unto Popery in this point than Bishop MORTON in his Appeale Pag. 270. And indeed the POWER OF ABSOLUTION whether it be GENERALL or PARTICULAR whether in PUBLIKE or in PRIVATE it is professed in OUR CHURCH where both in our PUBLIKE SERVICE is proclaimed pardon and Absolution upon all penitents and a PRIVATE applying of PARTICULAR ABSOLUTION unto Penitents by the office of the MINISTER And greater power than this no man hath received from GOD. In as much then as these Informers declare and speake against some part of the Communion-Booke in the Visitation of the sick for Absolution in remission of sinnes and that they stand convicted thereof per evidentiam facti by statute of 1. of Elizab they are to lose the profits of all their spirituall promotions and benefices for one yeare unto the KING and without baile or maineprise to suffer imprisonment for halfe a yeare If they are not beneficed their indurance is the longer the punishment alotted is one whole yeares imprisonment which it were not amisse that Authority would deservedly inflict upon them to teach them better manners heereafter than to call that a point of Popery which is apparant and confessed to be the expresse and avowed doctrine and discipline of the Church confirmed for performance by Act of Parliament I leave the censure of their deserts unto Authoritie whom it toucheth and proceede to the next Information upon the same point though with some addition CHAP. XXXVI Priests onely and none other have commission from CHRIST to forgive sinnes The extravagancies of Puritans and Papists both in this point INFORMERS ANd a little after It is consessed that all Priests and none but Priests have power to forgive Sinnes CHAP. XII Pag. 83. MOUNTAGU ANd is it not so confessed when by publick warrant in Ordination that power is given unto all Priests to do so in those solemne words of Ordination WHOSE SINS YOU FORGIVE THEY ARE FORGIVEN and unto none but Priests because none have else such Ordination If this bee not confessed I will put my selfe to you to school to learne and to know what is confessed The fact is apparant you cannot say nay haply you will nay certainly you do question Quo jure quà m rectè it is confessed The truth is you cannot deny the thing But with you Puritans this doctrine and practice of the Church is held to be Popery And heer you inferre necessarily that Priests have no more power to doe this than Lay-men have For what else can you mean by And none but Priests but eyther that neyther one nor other have that power or else that one as much and as great as other To which you incline I cannot say assuredly No great difference for both are exact Puritanisine you cast Confession upon both one and other Any Lay-man may heare it as well as a Priest and therefore it is probable you will not be very precise for Absolution to conferre it on a Lay-man as well as on a Priest So the power of the keyes are to both alike in equall assise But Sirs Absolution is a part of that Priestly power which could not be given by Men or Angels but onely and immediately by Almighty GOD himself a part of that paramount power which the GOD of glory hath invested mortall men withall In which respect and not otherwise as some claime it hath beene said The head of the EMPEROR hath been subjected unto the PRIEST'S hands In which regard no earthly power is of equall value and assise unto it as not onely the ANCIENTS you shall have a Catalogue of them if you desire it but Bishop MORTON confesseth None can arrogate this power and authority unto himself none