this could be done and would not have us to pretend to derive Authority from the Church of Rome when she was in her purity and perfection Now this is wonderfully wise to inquire by what Authority we presume to obey God to amend our ways to throw off Errours to follow Truth Let him be assured that we shall not pretend to have derived Authority from Rome neither in her corruption nor in her purity to doe this And our Authour in the next Paragraph owns that we need not in case the one be an Errour and the other be a Truth But he adds we are now seeking for that Authority which shall declare this Truth and set forth this Errour Now this is honestly said that he is seeking for that Authority I am sure he has made no discovery of it as yet He undertook pag. 21 22. to shew that and the Infallibility of the Church of Rome and has talkt out eight Pages and has not given us the least Argument for either of them now he says he is seeking for it and he may seek all his days at this rate for he seeks just as one did for the Hare in the top of the Steeple If there were any such Authority and Infallibility as he pretends it must be as apparent and as visible as the Church it self there would need no long seeking for it He must be blind or fool or mad that did not see it or know it I rather think that our Authour is seeking for Arguments to prove it and in this he is unhappy for he finds none But Pag. 28 29 30. he endeavours for one and that is to this purpose that there are Errours and Heresies in the World He tells us of Socinians of Luther and Calvin and Beza and I know not how many more of late days And from thence P. 30. p. 30. he talks in these words Fathers if these instances be not sufficient to require a Supreme Judge to determine the right Faith and silence the wrong then and then and I know not what but at last then pray excuse me if my reason and piety and the reverent notion which I have of a Just God and a mercifull Saviour totally force my Judgment and Conscience to dissent from you in this particular Now this is no Argument that there is such an Authority in the Church either Eastern or Western Roman or Graecian but a wheedling Discourse to persuade weak Persons that there may be such an one because in our Authour's Opinion it would be fit or requisite or proper for God Almighty in this method to direct the interests of his Church And to bring People on to this belief here is an audacious and presumptuous intimation that God would neither be wise nor good in case he did it not Here we beg our Authour's pardon we will believe God to be wise and good and mercifull whether he sets up such an Authority or no He knows what is fit and requisite and proper much better than such pert confident men He permits sins great and most enormous in the World though he could as easily give a stop to them as to Errours and Heresies There are Errours amongst Protestants and there are Errours amongst Romanists and if the Temporal Authority did not doe more than the Spiritual they themselves would complain of many more than now they do There are Errours and Heresies of late days and there were so from the first beginnings of Christianity in all times and places St. Paul tells of some in his days and Ignatius of others and Irenaeus of others and those most gross and vile and filthy Now if God had made provision of the pretended Authority and Infallibility to give stop to them it were most improbable if not impossible that ever these should have been Their existence therefore is plain argument and demonstration that there are no such powerfull means set up and appoionted by God to prevent hinder stop or silence them He has done enough against them as he has done against all sins it is presumption not to acquiesce in his Wisedom or to challenge that he must doe that which we cannot prove that he has done But our Authour leaves this and says he must proceed P. 30. p. 30. and that he does yet not to evidence the Authority and Infallibility of the Roman Church by better Arguments but to plead the interest of it in general from the performances of Augustine the Monk This is an Argument that pleases him he had been nibling at it three times before p. 18. p. 21. p. 27. There he intimates that this Augustine first taught the English Nation Christianity and that he taught them those very Doctrines as Christian Truths which we at this day oppose He says p. 21. That all the Controverted Points particularly and by name were declared by some of your selves to have been brought into England by Augustine the Monk above a thousand years since I suppose he means that his Friend the famous Napper or some of his Apocalyptical Acquaintance had declared this But after all he comes to treat more closely upon this Argument pag. 30 31 32. I shall consider what he says and then give a full accompt of the whole matter But before I begin I must complain for it is a grief that I have an Adversary so weak and yet so consident For those two learned Men their Mr. Cressey and our Reverend Dean of St. Paul's have accurately considered and weighed all the particulars of this Dispute and made the best advantages of it But the man knows nothing of their Writings Pope Gregory he names and Bede he names but gives us not any ground to think that ever he has read over Bede's History or consulted Pope Gregory's Epistles and both these ought to have been well studied by a Writer upon this Subject if he had due regard for Truth or his own Credit 1. First he says If you tell me a Story of the Abbat of Bangor I answer that the particular ground of it is evidently false and forged Now Bede is the man that tells us a Story of the Abbat of Bangor and the numbers of Monks in that Abbey Bede l. 2. c. 2. And the Story as it lies in Bede gives all the advantage to Protestants that they can wish lib. 2. cap. 2. And if there be something added to that Story from an Ancient Record found and published by Sir Henry Spelman the skill and integrity of that excellent Person would persuade an indifferent man not presently to damn it for a forgery for he was not likely either to contrive one or to be cheated with one But be this what it will the Story that Bede gives is sufficient for our uses and that I hope he will not say is false or forged 2. P. 30. He says that the Britains received the Christian Faith in the Apostles days but being persecuted by Romans Picts and Saxons Religion fled to the Mountains
a certain Spanish Don P. 7. he treads out the ground measures the length of his Weapon makes a Speech and would tempt a man to think he is resolved to fight but he withdraws safely and calls in two others to engage a desire he has to see the Holy Scriptures and Athanasius his Creed to combat one another for his divertisement Now which of these two he is for he says not nor yet seems to guess which would have the better in case of a Contrast But alass this man mistakes those two are Friends and if there were any difference between that Creed and the Holy Scriptures Athanasius if he were now alive would be the first man to declare against that Creed it is certain he learnt and sounded all his Doctrines upon those no man read them with greater care and attention no man cites them oftner or with greater veneration Whether our Authour knew this or no I cannot tell but after all his preparatory flourishes he gives no more than this dry insipid request to the Fathers of our Church that they would not tell him that every Christian suppose every Baker Shoemaker or Cobler upon a sincere perusal of this Holy Book would certainly have composed the Creed of Athanasius Now this is a thing which never was spoken either by Bishop Presbyter or Deacon or Parish Clerk Can any Reverend Bishop be presumed to think and say that the great Athanasius had not more wit and reason more art more skill in Consequences than every Cobler and Tinker or than this Man 's two Friends Nailor and Muggleton it is prodigious to think how men dote that undertake to write Books against Reason But whatever this Man does or can say most certain it is that if Athanasius was the Composer of this Creed he did it upon a sincere perusal of the Holy Scriptures by the power of a good Reason and by the skill which he had in Consequence As for Authority of Pope or Council he had none for this Composition this Creed lay in obscurity and was unknown in the Church long after the days of Athanasius and as it was composed at first so it was brought into the use of the Church afterwards for some time without any considerable Authority morely by the private reason of some that were little more than private Men. Thirdly In the next place our Authour sets down some matters of Faith great and necessary Articles P. 7. as he calls them and these are the Mystery of the Incarnation the Doctrines of the Trinity Consubstantiality Transubstantiation Predestination and Free-will These he examined by his Reason but he does not tell us what account his Reason gave of them It is possible after a sincere perusal of the Holy Scriptures that he might find great reason to believe the Incarnation of our Lord and the Doctrine of the Trinity and by consequence that of Consubstantiality and something of a Predestination and it is possible that from thence he found no reason to believe the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for herein many other Mens Reasons would agree with His. This he does not tell us but yet this I will presume in favour to him that he does not think that the Fathers in the Council of Nice and those in the after Councils who fixed the Doctrine of the Trinity and Consubstantiality I say he does not think but that they made their Determinations with highest reason I will presume too that he thinks that the Fathers in the Lateran and Tridentine Councils had reason to determine the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for though we think that in these two later Councils the generality acted by false reasons by prejudice and by worldly interest yet we do not doubt but they all and every one of them pretended to act with reason for certain it is that the private reason of any single man is a much better guide than the private Spirit of a Quaker or any other for a Reason may be urged and is upon information to be corrected but the pretence to the Spirit is not But if the majority of those Fathers at the Council of Nice were able by Scripture and Reason to establish those Doctrines of the Trinity and Consubstantiality to be Articles of the Christian Faith I know not why our Authour since he has the same Scripture and like Reason might not have done the same Sure I am that after this Council Athanasius pleaded much in the defence of the truth of these Doctrines and that not from the Authority of the Council but from the true sense and meaning of the several Texts Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 12. the same way of arguing was used in the first Constantinopolitan Council and so it continued till Theodosius by advice of Nectarius which he received from Sisinnius took another method After these doughty performances P. 8. our Authour comes in the next place a little more closely to Scripture or the sacred Records of Christian Religion and sets his reason to search and examine them and if possible to draw from thence a scheme of Christian Doctrine But here it seems his Reason was jaded and tyred out much more than in all the rest of his Disquisitions perhaps he found not there any thing like to the Doctrines that make up the Apostles Creed He does not tell this though he ought to have done it if he had compared his scheme with it But he tells us that he disagreed from all Churches the Church of England in her 39 Articles P. 8. and all the Catechisms of Catholicks Calvinists Lutherans and Socinians I was pleased that in his opinion the Doctrine of the Church of Rome did no more agree with Scripture than that of the Church of England But though I was pleased in this yet I was not very confident of any advantage from it because our Authour oft queries and seems to doubt whether his Reason does not much differ from other Mens I know that God Almighty has given different Talents to Men for Heads and Brains and Wits as well as Hearts are not alike in every Man I am sure the Ancients by virtue of plain honest reason were able to find the Christian Doctrine in the Holy Scriptures so did St. Irenaeus St. Athanasius St. Hierome St. Chrysostome St. Augustin and the rest This was a light to their feet and a lamp to their paths sufficient to satisfy those good men in matters of Faith and as this Man speaks in the great and necessary Articles But though this Man could not find the Christian Doctrine there yet it seems that he thought that he found something there that pretty well agreed with the dreams of Ebion and Cerinthus and with those of his dear Friends P. 8. Nailor and Muggleton The first of these I am much enclined to believe and if I were as impertinent as He is perhaps I might give some evidence of the second As for Ebion and Cerinthus this Gentleman is too close
of his friend St. Augustine in a like case The Romans challenged to have a command from St. Peter for keeping the Saturday-Fast and those of the Eastern Churches quite contrarily asserted that they were expresly forbidden and that by St. John to fast upon that day A Presbyter of the Church of Rome writes to his friend and most earnestly exhorts him to do as they did and pleads thus Petrus Apostolorum caput coeli Janitor Ecclesiae fundamentum id ipsum Romanos edocuit Now St. Augustine being consulted in the case slights all that flaunting Plea of the Romans allows the allegation of the Easterns to be as good as those of the West and concludes thus that the Apostles St. Peter and St. John did not vary If they gave any rule it was the same every where And seeing there is a present difference it must be said that either the Eastern Church hath varied from the rule of St. John or else the Roman Church has varied from the rule of St. Peter Now which of these was the truth St. Augustine knew not He himself gives his sense in these words Epistola 86 Casulano Augustinus Ep. 86. Casulano After the Plea for Rome E contrario refertur occidentis potiùs aliqualoca in quibus Roma est non servasse quod Apostoli tradiderunt orientis verò terras unde coepit ipsum Evangelium ipsum praedicari in eo quod ab omnibus simul cum ipso Petro Apostolis traditum est ne Sabbato jejunetur sine aliqua varietate mansisse Upon this he concludes thus interminabilis est ista contentio generans lites non finiens quaestiones Had this great Father known any thing of a Soveraign Guide and unerring Authority seated at Rome he could never have doted so far as to have made this any matter of question But he knew nothing of that or of Peter commanding and John onely tolerating either in the one or the other case And I will presume for once that he knew a great deal more than our Authour does But the second skip our Authour takes is to Conversions and here he says he perceives P. 18. that according to the command and institution of our Saviour his Vicegerent did send out his Disciples Here I want our Authour's Spectacles for I can perceive nothing I see no Vicegerent of our Blessed Lord nor do I see any command that he ever gave to such a Person nor do I know whether he means the Disciples of the Vicegerent or the Disciples of our Lord. It is certain our Lord gave a command to the Apostles to teach all Nations and they and their Successours the Bishops have acted according to that command And if Gregory Bishop of Rome or any other have been industrious in that work we heartily thank and commend them But yet I wonder that our Authour has of a sudden grown so extremely blind as not to see that conversions may be made to what is bad as well as to what is good Pagans and Mahometans have been industrious to make converts So have all Hereticks his friends Ebion and Cerinthus Nailor and Muggleton Nay this if he had not despised and too long laid aside the Holy Scriptures he might have learn'd without the assistence of his unerring Authority from one saying of our Blessed Lord Math. 23.15 Wo unto you Scribes and Pharisees c. After this gross piece of ignorance P. 19. which he is pleased to shew to advantage with flourishes of his pen comparing his reason with that of our Reverend Bishops he may excuse me from telling him how the great Privileges and Prerogatives of the Church of Rome could be forfeited untill he hath shown me in particular what they were that he insists upon For until he has proved that Rome did really enjoy such Prerogatives as he challenges on her behalf I will not undertake to shew when and how Rome forfeited that which Rome never had Our Authour may be a Sophister and how far he is beyond that himself best knows and so he may think no farther in this Paragraph than the old trite Cavil quod non perdidisti habes And his friends at Rome will con him but few thanks for that And now our Authour begins to whip our Bishops and wo be to them He tells them what he had been told that there were some late Doctrines introduced into the Church and such as were not imposed upon the faithfull before the Council of Trent This he says he could answer by alledging that the protesting against those Doctrines was in the same time But this he waves and chooseth rather to shew that the Doctrines we oppose were establisht by Councils before And here he begins with 1. The Pope's Supremacy P. 20. which he saith was confirmed in the Council of Chalcedon one of the first four general Councils owned by Protestants above 1200 years since 630 Fathers present Quid dignum tanto feret hic promissor hiatu As for my part I wonder who either licensed or allowed this Book to be printed Will any man of skill think to advance a Plea for the Pope's Supremacy from the Council of Chalcedon It is certain that nothing was done there that might have any reference to this Point which was not disclaimed by the Legates of the Pope upon the place and afterwards highly resented by Leo the I. who was then Pope It is true that Anatolius then Patriarch of Constantinople carried on a design to advance his Seat and because he was Bishop of New Rome would have the next place after the Bishop of the Old and so would have the Pre-eminence of the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch Du Pin de antiaua Eccl. Discip p. 53. In order to this in the absence of the Pope's Legates Anatolius and his friends got the 28 Canon of that Council to pass which gives to the Patriarch of Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as a learned Roman Catholick comments eadem aequalia privilegia tribuunt Episcopo novae Romae ac veteris Romae Episcopo Now assoon as the Legates of the Pope had heard of this they declared against it and obtained another Session wherein they might produce their Plea against the validity of this Canon both as to the form and matter But their objections were answered and the Canon passed against their minds though Lucentius one of the Pope's Legates protested against it and desired that his Protestation might be entred into the Acts of the Council And when Leo the Great who was then Pope heard of this he declared against it and wrote against it with a great deal of vehemence and indignation as any one may see who will consult these Epistles of his the 56 57 58 63 66. And Leo could never be brought to confirm that very Canon which our Authour tells us did confirm his Supremacy Now in this case I will presume that Pope to be a better guide and to have more
Errour about keeping of Easter The Britains observed the Rule which they had received with their Christianity and they received that as our Authour says in the days of the Apostles The Asiaticks received the same Rule and the famous Martyr Polycarp defended it stoutly as an Apostolical Tradition a whole Council under Polycrates in the Year 197. declared it to be the Rule of St. John taught and practised by him Upon this accompt if we suppose it an Errour it can be no great one For there is no Traditional Doctrine either in Rome or any other Church which solely stands upon the credit of Tradition and has no support from Scripture that can be better evidenced to come from an Apostle and with the first Christianity than this Tradition which the Britains Scots Asiaticks Greeks alledged in very early times to have received in one and the same way For if this be so great an Errour though it be so well attested and so strongly urged to be an Apostolical Tradition what security can we have for the truth of any other Tradition whatsoever The great St. Augustine shews us in his Epistle Casulano S. August Ep. 86. that the name of St. Peter can give no more Authority to a Tradition than the name of St. John nor has any Tradition more grounds of credit because it comes to us by the way of Rome than if it came by the way of Ephesus the Eastern Church is as creditable a Conveyancer of Tradition as the Western Therefore if the Britains must be accused of any great errour for following of this Tradition the Roman Church must be highly condemned for requiring the observance of so many things by virtue of Tradition when they have not the least appearance of such Arguments as the Britains had to prove their Traditions Apostolical The Britains kept close to their first Rule never in the least varied from it The Roman Church oft changed and altered and that before this Augustine the Monk's days as the Learned Dean of St. Paul's has accurately shown in his Discourse against Mr. Cressey And when those of the Roman Communion argued against the Asiaticks and Britains they could not disprove the Tradition or shew that this practice was an Innovation but they alledged Reasons and external Arguments to shew the inconveniency of it from the mischiefs that might come by such a compliance with the Jews Thus the Tables were changed Romanists were for Reason against Tradition and so they ever will be when it is for their Interest 2. The second Errour charged upon the Britains is dissent from the Church of Rome in the administring of Baptism Now this I suppose is put in to make weight in the Accusation for though Bede has those words yet he tells not wherein their practice differ'd from the Romans nor yet wherein they were to be blamed and has not one word in all his History besides wherein he blames either the Britains or the Irish whom he calls in the language of those times Scots for any errour in the administration of Baptism He says lib. 2. cap. 4. of the Scots that they had the same ways and methods that the Britains had Bede lib. 2. cap. 4. similem vitam ac professionem egisse and there having been according to Bede several Disputes between the Romanists and the Scots in lesser matters had this been their fault this would have been charged too upon them Our Authour adds P. 31. Although in some other matters they differ'd from the Church of Rome yet Augustine promised to tolerate them provided they would rectify these which the British Bishops consented to This is the worst Passage in all our Authour's Book for it is manifestly false point-blank against Bede's words who expresly says that they would not consent and then in the manner of citing the Passage there is that shuffling and juggle that plainly shews he designed falshood Bede lib. 2. cap. 2. The words in Bede are these Si in tribus his mihi obtemperare vultis ut Pascha suo tempore celebretis ut ministerium Baptizandi quo Deo renascimur juxta morem Romanae sanctae Ecclesiae Apostolicae Ecclesiae compleatis ut genti Anglorum una nobiscum praedicetis verbum Domini caetera quae agitis quamvis moribus nostris contraria aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus At illi nihil horum se facturos neque illum pro Archiepiscopo habituros esse respondebant There cannot be a more plain denial than this How then comes our Authour to say that they consented The truth is he seems resolved to say it true or false and therefore he leaves the last words wherein Bede declares the Britains dissent Bede lib. 2. cap. 2. P. 31. and adds to them these Cum. Britones confitentur intellexisse se veram esse viam justitiae quam praedicaret Augustinus Bede lib. 2. cap. 2. And from thence would infer that the Britains did consent But these words belong to another matter they are part of Bede's Narration of the first meeting that Augustine had with the Britains then it seems Augustine did a Miracle and the Britains had a great sense of it and did confess that Augustine's way was the right way But yet for all this stound and hasty words they immediately recollected themselves and in the next moment tell him as Bede says Bede lib. 2. cap. 2. Non se posse absque suorum consensu ac licentiâ priscis abdicare moribus That without the leave and consent of their own Clergy and Laity or a Synod which was upon it forthwith called they could not depart from their ancient Customs Thus we see that the Britains who confessed as our Authour says yet would not consent till they had the Opinion and Judgment of a Synod and when Augustine proposed his Matters to the Synod they flatly denied either to receive his Doctrine or himself as their Archbishop So then it is plainly false that the Britains consented But yet our Authour puts down that Confession first in English and after another quite different discourse he puts it down in Latine and that on purpose to prove a consent Now this must be designed to cheat and couzen some I hope he meant it for the Roman Catholicks I do not fear that any Protestant can be gulled by such a sleight But from this Discourse our Authour observes that it may be inferred that Augustine and the Britains agreed in Substantials this may be allowed if he means onely those things which are necessarily to be held by every one that is a Member of the true Catholick Apostolick Church They agreed in the same Saviour in the same Scriptures in the same Creeds and in all the Doctrine that was maintained and declared in the first four General Councils But this will not suffice for our Authour imagines that they agreed in all the Doctrines which the Church of Rome at this day indeavours to impose upon others In order to this
do and has the same Creed and the same Sacraments that we have And so she must be a Church But yet she is corrupt and foully stained by the many additions that have been made to her Faith to her Sacraments to her Worship to her Government and to her primitive rule of Faith and all this in virtue of an usurped Authority and vainly pretended Infallibility All these things we charge upon Rome and we think the Charge high enough and if our Authour could have distinguished betwixt Errour and Schism he might have spared all his impertinent Queries concerning Separation from her self or Separation from the Catholick Church and where that Catholick Church is to be found for all this is but trifling in an over eager pursuit of Consequences from a possible sense of a word If Rome has thus erred she may be said to have left and gone from or be separated from that first holy Catholick and Apostolick Church without the making of an open Schism or Schismatical Separation For seeing particular Churches are called Catholick as the Catholick Church in Smyrna Euseb lib. 4. cap. 15. and the Catholick Church of Alexandria upon the accompt of their continuance in the true Faith with the rest of the Church of God or from their coherence with that Church which was properly and originally called so upon which accompt Clemens Alexandrinus Stro. 7. joins those two words together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ancient and Catholick Church So far then as any Church now in being shall depart from the Doctrine of that Ancient Catholick Church and profess great and many Errours and broach new Doctrines unknown to the Primitive Churches and lay mighty stresses upon them so as to make them necessary for Communion here and to Salvation hereafter Such a Church may be said to depart or separate it self from that ancient one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church And now our Authour may have that satisfaction which he says he must have and I agree with him that his Salvation is highly concerned in it He would know where that Catholick Church from which she Rome separated remained and where she may be found I am sorry he knows it not but he may easily be taught that she was and is in Heaven There are all the glorious Company of the Apostles the goodly fellowship of the Prophets the noble Army of Martyrs There are all the Servants and Saints of Jesus Christ who have lived and died in the true faith of him and thither all the faithfull Members of the true holy Catholick Church now living hope by the grace of Jesus Christ in the methods of the Gospel by keeping close to the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints in their due times to come and be received into that most happy and everlasting Communion This is my opinion and for once I will pray our Authour not to blame me for it I know he may bring against me Supreme lawfull Authority in the name of Pope John XXII who really designed and heartily indeavoured to make the contrary Doctrine to pass for an Article of Faith and if he had lived a little longer would have declared ex Cathedra that the Souls of the Saints do not come to bliss and happiness untill the general Resurrection I beseech him not to meddle with this but if he does I 'll promise to defend my Opinion from Scripture and Fathers and Councils and doubt not by my little Reason sufficiently to repell him and his Authority too But if he can think with me that the Members of the first Churches the holy Apostles and blessed Servants of our Lord are in bliss and happiness and is willing to find them and be with them He ought then to think again of the change of his Religion and of this accompt that he has given of the Motives to it for if he seriously reflects upon his own Salvation and is heartily concerned for it he will be ashamed and repent of all his rude and unseemly treatment of the Reverend Fathers of this Church It is not huffing and braving that speaks a religious Mind it is not saying In good faith Fathers my Salvation is concerned in it that speaks a pious and hearty sense of that great blessing of God He that with humility and reverence studies the mind and good pleasure of his Saviour cannot rant where he is ignorant despise his betters trample upon those whom he calls Reverend Fathers Such actions may be agreeable to a Man that has no sense of Salvation He that has thrown off one Religion and forgot to take up another He that can easily say and so good night to Christianity may doe this But a Convert to any Sect or Party of Christians or such as are willing to be reputed Christians should not doe it Because such actions speak a Man to be proud and ambitious and designing upon this World and something worse than I am willing to say I must stop onely in requital for some Texts of Scripture which p. 25. he advises us to consider I request him to reade these Rev. 2.5 Remember from whence thou art fallen and repent and doe the first works Eph. 4.14 That we henceforth be no more Children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive 2 Cor. 2.17 We are not as many which corrupt the word of God but as of sincerity but as of God in the fight of God speak we in Christ Our Authour goes on p. 27. But I must not follow him in all his Impertinencies P. 27. I shall speak of Augustine the Monk afterwards And shall at present onely teach him one thing which he there says he does not understand And that he gives us in these words How you should rise a pure Church after you had been buried so many hundred years in a corrupt Church I do not easily understand Thus he says but yet certainly he may understand it for the same way that I advise him to take that he may become a good man was taken by our Predecessours and by virtue of that proceeding they ceased to be a corrupt Church and became a pure one and that was by remembring from whence they were fallen and by repentance and by reformation they saw the Errours which Rome had taught and proudly imposed they were sorry to have been so long abused they withdrew themselves from slavery and knockt off the chains and fetters that an unjust Power had laid upon them they studied and learnt their true Rites and Liberties their duties to God and to their Saviour and to their Prince and when they knew these they practised them And so they did their first works that which Christ and his Apostles taught and so became a pure Church This was then done but such an answer as this will not satisfy our Authour for he inquires in the next Paragraph by what Authority