follow that not only nominally but also really and essentially there may be Bishop Quâ—â—dams without Bishopricks and that they have not their authority granted them only from the King but from Christ or some other power But I had thought that his Majesty had been yielded by Episcopalians to be supreme Pastor or Head-shepherd under Christ over the Church within his Dominions and might as well as Bishops seeing they are but his Curates or Commissioners to see that all Ecclesiastical matters be ordered according to the will of Christ revealed in his Word commit as much as in him lyeth not only the power of Ordination but the care of part of the flock committed to him to ordained Ministers that is ordained Presbyters by other ordained preaching Presbyters and institute them Pastors of that little part of his great flock but it seems the Bishops will be chief under Christ here as the Pope of Rome would be of all the World but indeed neither he nor they as such are of Christs institution but only of mans as might be proved by the Bishops acknowledgment in King Henry the Eighth his time to be seen in the Bishops Book in Fox his Acts and Monuments p. 1037. in one Volume But to go on against what points of Popery do they preach Papists themselves 't is well known write very zealously and learnedly against some points of Popery as do the Dominicans against the Franciscans and Jesuits yea even in some of those points of Popery wherein some long-named men agree-with them I find learned Dr. Abbot * afterwards made Bishop by learned King James in a Dr. Heylin in his Cypâ— Anglic l. 1. p. â—â— Sermon before the Vniversity of Oxford preached at 〈◊〉 Peters upon Easter-day 1615 saying thus Some are partly †He aimed at Laud as Heylin saith in his Cypr. Anglic. l. 1. p. 66 67. Romish and partly English as occasion serveth them that a man may say unto them noster â—s an adversariorum who under pretence of truth and preaching against the Puritans strike at the heart and root of faith and Religion now established among us This preaching against the Puritans was but the practise of Parsons and Campians counsel when they came into England to seduce young Students when many of them were afraid to lose their places if they should professedly be thus the counsel they then gave them was That they should speak freely against the * Those that do so now do the Jesuâ—â— anâ— the Devils work Puritans and that should suffice and they cannot pretend that they are accounted Papists because they speak against the Puritans but because they are Papists indeed they speak against them if they do at any time speak against the Papists they do but beat a â—â—ttâ—e about the bush and that softly too for fear of troubling or disquieting the birds which are in it They speak of nothing but that of which one Papist will speak against another as against Equivocation the Popes * As Bishop Buckridg A. B. Laud's Tutor did Heylin's Cypr. Angl. l. 1. p. 48. Temporal Authority and the like and perhaps against some of their blasphemous speeches but in the point of Free-will Justification Conoupiscence being sin after Baptism inherent righteousness certainty of Salvation the Papists beyond the Seas can say they are wholly theirs and the Recusants at home make their * As they did of Dr. Cozens and some others as 't is said in the Epistle to Mr. Prin's Quench-coal p. 40. brags of them and in all things they keep themselves so near the brink that upon all occasions they may step over to them Now for this speech that the Presbyterians †Which was Laud ' s in his Sermon at St. Maries preached about seven weeks before as Heylin â—stews ubi supra are as bad as the Papists there is a sting in the speech which I wish had been left out for there are many Churches beyond the Seas which contend for the Religion established amongst us and yet have approved and admitted the Presbytery And after which saith Heylin having spoken something in justification of Presbyteries he proceeded thus Might not Christ say what art thou Romish or English Papist or Protestant or what art thou a Mungrel or compound of both a Protestant by Ordination a Papist in point of Free-will inherent righteousness and the like A Protestant in receiving the Sacrament a Papist in the Doctrine of the Sacrament What do ye think there are two Heavens if there be get you to the other place your selves there for into this where I am ye shall not come The Learned and Loyal Lord Faulkland who lost his life in his late Majesties service at Newberry made a speech in the beginning of the old long Parliament much to the same purpose p. 3. Mr. Speaker He is a great stranger in our Israel who knows not that this Kingdom hath long laboured under many and great oppressions both in Religion and liberty and his acquaintance here is not great or his ingenuity less who doth not both know and acknowledg that a great if not the principal cause of both these hath been some Bishops and their adherents Master Speaker a little search will serve to find them to have been the destruction of unity under the pretence of Uniformity to have brought in superstition and scandal under the titles of reverence and decency to have defiled our Church by adorning our Churches to have flackned the strictness of that union which was formerly between us and those of our Religion beyond the Sea an action as unpolitick as ungodly And Pag. 7. of the same speech he saith further thus As Sir Thomas Moor says of the Casuists their business was not to keep men from sinning but to inform them Quam prope ad peccatum siâ—e peccâ—to liceat accedere so it seemed their work was to try how much of a Papist might be brought in without Popery and to destroy as much as they could of the Gospel without bringing themselves into danger of being destroyed by the Law Mr. Speaker to go yet further some of them have so industriously laboured to * As Dr. Pocklington doâ—â— in his Altare Christianum pag. 50. deduce themselves from Rome that they have given great suspicion that in gratitude they desire to return thither or at least to †Vide Heylins Cyp. Anglicus meet it half way some have evidently laboured to bring in an English though not a Romish Popery I mean not the outside only and drâ—ss of it but equally absolute a blind * Vide Kellets Tricennium p. 330. Supplement to Laudensium Autocatacrisis p. 65. dependence of the people upon the Clergy and of the Clergy upon themselves and have opposed a Papacy beyond the Sea that they might settle one beyond the water Nay common fame is more than ordinarily false if none of them have found a way to reconcile the opinions of Rome to the preferments
Habeant debitam reverentiam ad mensam Domini Heylin's Cypr. Anglic. l. 4. p. 403. Altare Christianum cap. 24. p. 175. A. B. Laud's Star-Chamber Speech pag. 48. l. 18. Laud and Dr. Pocklington argue for bodily reverence to the holy Altar or Gods board as they call it The Altar is the greatest place of Christs residence upon earth yea greater than the Pulpit for there 't is hoc est corpus meum this is my body but in the Pulpit 't is at most but hoc est verbum meum this is my word And a greater reverence no doubt is due to the body than to the word of our Lord and so in relation answerably to the throne where his body is usually present than to the seat where his word useth to be proclaimed Yea the Archbishop expresly calls this corporal bowing to or towards the Altar true Divine worship and he pleads for it upon a moral account in his Star-Chamber Speech p. 44 45. O come let us worship and fall down and kneel before the Lord Psal 95. 6. And in the 49 page of that Speech he saith That the Knights of the Garter are bound by their Order and Oath to give due honour and reverence Domino Deo Altari ejus in modum virorum Ecclesiasticorum to the Lord God and to his Altar and this in the manner as Ecclesiastical persons both worship and do reverence That is in plain English as 't was done in the time of King Henry the fifth by Idolatrous Priests in time of Popery which without doubt was worship not meer civil but as he calls it divine worship And Dr Pocklington in his Altare Christianum c. 24. p. 175. saith thus For as much as God hath put it into the hearts of the Governours of our Church to restore the Lords-Table to the ancient and true place it had in the Primitive Church and also to the honour and reverence â—hich of right belongs to it in regard of the presence of our Saviour whose chair of state it is upon earth Which honour and reverence he necessarily implies was adoration for chap. 21. p. 144. of the same Book he saith they honour reverence and adore towards it for his sake whose Sacrament is consecrated thereon And chap. 16. p 107. he saith the Archbishop of Constantinople whose example he brings and pleads for it did beseech his people to be quiet ut adoremus sanctum altare that is that we may worship or adore the holy Altar Religious reverence it is and must be that he saith is due to the holy Altar Where 't is observable that he makes to adore and to do reverence the same thing If bodily revâ—rence purposâ—ly performed to a religious thing called the most * Pocklington's Altâ—re Christ p. 157. holy place under the cope of heaven set purposely in a religious place or most holy place according to him and upon religious accounts of Gods most special presence or Christs true and real presence thereon Hoc est corpus meum be not religious or divine reverence which is worship I do acknowledg I do not know what it is But A. B. Laud saith That there is a reverence due to the Altar but such as comes far short of divine worship Star-Chamber Speech p. 49. But he doth not plainly say what it is meer civil worship he cannot mean for the reasons before given a meer negative reverence which is readily yielded is due he cannot mean neither for he pleads for a positive reverence expressed by bowing * Incurvation is by consent of Nations an appropriate sign of religious worship in a Temple saith Dr. H. More in his Mystery of Iniquity c. 11. p. 36. see more in him hereafter quoted Art 14. of this Book the body to the Altar it must therefore be a religious reverence which how it doth come far short of divine worship I do not yet see his Grace doth not tell us how to distinguish his reverence from divine worship I think that A. B. Laud's and his parties distinction between divine positive bodily worship and outward bodily positive reverence expressed by incurvation or bowing of the body to the holy Altar for it 's divine excellency is not much unlike that which the Papists make between their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they give outward divine worship to their Images but they call it only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reverence And do not A. B. Laud Dr. Heylin and others of his party give the same divine bodily reverence bowing the body to the holy Altar as such that they give God but they will not have it called divine worship but only reverence Which distinction saith Bishop Jewel is much like that of the Physicians wife who said Pepper is cold in working but hot in operation for their distinction is not in difference of matter but only words Cicero saith to one Bonum esse negas praepositum esse dicis Thou wilt not have worldly wealth called bonum but only praepositum dost thou thereby any thing abate avarice even so we say Mr. Harding ye will not have adoration of Images called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Sir do ye by this any thing abate Idolatry So Bishop Jewel in his Reply to Harding Art 14. D. 12. p. 381 382. there ye may find Harding using almost the same words for reverence to his Images that our men use for reverence to their Altars It 's clear it is not a meer civil nor meer negative reverence that is by Papists and some of our men given to the holy and high Altar and it is as positive and as much external reverence as is given to God himself or would be given to Christ himself if he were corporally present on the Table and it is the same for substance that Idolaters give to their Altars Images and Idols and it is divine adoration when we bow the body upon some divine cause as Mr. Perkins saith in his Idolatry of the last times p. 824. Now yielding obeisance or outward reverence to or towards the Altar is done upon a divine cause viz. Gods special presence and therefore 't is called by them Gods Throne Gods chair of State and Gods mercy-seat And the same Mr. Perkins in the same Treatise p. 828. saith That Images themselves Reliques of Christ and Saints holy things as Temples Altars and such like are made Idols when they are adored and worshipped with religious worship for when we bow to them it is more than civil worship And p. 830. of the same Treatise he saith That if we will keep our selves from Idols we must take heed of keeping of Idols thas is Images that have been abused to Idolatry and are in likelihood still to be abused especially if they stand in publick places The commandment of God is to destroy the Idols of the heathen their altars and their high places Exod. 34. 13. Now 't is acknowledged by A.
ad Vitam solitariam agentes Athanasius that the Pulpit is called Thronum a Throne and that which you call Altar is called mensam ligneam a wooden board for so learned †Jewel Def. of Apol. 3 d. part c. 1. d. 3. p. 315. Bishop Jewel Englisheth Athanasius his words 2. The Pulpit is more like a Throne than the holy Table is for a Throne is an higher and more eminent seat than others a Pulpit is a Chair on high with a Canopy over it And such Dr. Pocklington †Altare Christianum pag. 44 46. tells us was the Pulpit and the Chair that St. John sate in when he ordained Bishops which he calls a Throne and that Bishops did sit in their Throne in the Presbytery and that there was the holy Altar Be-like then the Bishop sate cheek by jole as in commission with God Almighty as your Dr. Sutton scoffingly speaks in his * Dr. Sutton ' s Meditat. upon the Sacram. c. 33. p. 179. Meditations upon thâ— Sacrament against those persons that sit and dâ— not kneel at receiving the Sacrament Yea he siâ— above God Almighty if what Bishop †Rationale pag. 378 379. Sparroâ— saith be true for he saith That the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Throne or seat was higher thaâ— others and right under it stood the Altar oâ— holy Table the Propitiatory Christs Monument and the Tabernacle of his Glory the shop of the great Sacrifice 2. The Pulpit may more properly be called Gods Mercâ— seat than the Communion-table or Altar is 1. Because in the Pulpit God usually proclaims his mercy to all penitent and believing sinners and induceth them to accept of mercy in Christ 2. Faitâ— comes by hearing the Word preached ordinarily and by it also iâ— Faith confirmed and increased but on the Lords-table the mercy oâ— God is not first given or wrought but only signed sealed and confirmed as it is also at the Font in Baptism 3. The Pulpit is more like a Chair of State than the Altar is For 1. The Pulpit is like a Chair of State with a seat in it and Canopâ— over it and therein Christ by his Ambassadors sits or stands anâ— speaks to his people and declares his Law and Gospel but on thâ— Table or Altar Christ is represented not as sitting in his Chair oâ— State and Exaltation but as in his low estate 〈◊〉 Humiliation as crucified or dead as on his Cross rather 1 Cor. 11. 26. than as on his Chair of State 2. There is no similitude in the Table or Altar to a Chair oâ— State 3. Though Subjects use to give civil worship to the Chair oâ— State of their Prince yet 't will not follow that men should oâ— lawfully may give religious worship honour or bodily reverence to Christs Chair of State be it Pulpit Font Pew Table Heaven or believers in whom he reigns For all religioâ— reverence of the creature is forbidden in the seconâ— Dr. Ames Bellar. Enar. T. 2. l. 6. c. 7. p. 273. Commandment say Mr. Perkins A. B. Vsher Dâ— Mayer Dr. Aries and many others 4. Dr. Ames saith That God is not more in 〈◊〉 Temple made with hands separated from the company of Believers than he is elsewhere since the Legal Temple was taken away 5. Mr. Hildersham saith There is no holiness inherent in oâ— adherent to the places of publick Worship that by the * Hildersham upon Joh. 4. Lect. 33. p. 139 142 143. death of Christ all religious difference of places is taken away no one place is holier than another and that 't is †Bishop Sparrow makes the Church like the Temple part of worship and will have people that pray in private to look towards the Temple Rationale 386 387. Judaism and a denial of Christ to be come to hold that one place is holier than another as is evident by Joh. 4. 21. and that our houses and chambers are as holy places as the Churches are I pray read the whole Lecture it shews the superstition of the Papists and of our men that follow them it may enable you to answer their arguments and avoid their sin 6. No place is made so holy by the Ordinances or services of God therein or thereon celebrated or performed as therefore to make them the objects of religious adoration or reverence 1. Because the Ordinances and services of God cannot make the place where they are performed God 2. Because the Ordinances or services of God themselves are not cannot be the objects of religious adoration or divine reverence without the special command of God And though we do shew outward religious reverence when we pray to God and when God by his word and by his Ambassadors speaks to us in publick and private yet we do it not to them but immediately to God And therefore I conclude that the holy Table or Altar though separated to an holy use cannot be made so holy by reason of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood being consecrated or standing thereon as to deserve to be religiously adored or reverenced with godly honour and therefore the Archbishop's reason to prove that the Altar is the greatest place of Gods residence upon earth namely because 't is there hoc est corpus meum that is Sacramentally for to hold that 't is there transubstantially or consubstantially I have proved is directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and to the truth of Christs humane body this is my body is an insufficient and weak one And if it should have been good it would prove that the Paten in which the Sacramental bread and the bowl in which the Sacramental wine is put yea and the Priests fingers that break and deliver the bread are to be bodily and religiously reverenced as the greatest places of Christs residence here on earth for there 't is more nearly said Hoc est corpus meum they immediately touch the Sacramental body of Christ the holy Table or your Altar doth not for there is the cloth betwixt them And besides it would follow that the Font the reading-Pew and thâ— Pulpit yea the whole Church yea every private house in whicâ— either of Gods Sacraments or other of his Ordinances are used foâ— Christ is there spiritually present should be religiously reverenceâ— with godly bowing to them because there 't is this is my body or thâ—â— is my blood or this is my word Moreover this seems to justifie Papistâ— in their calling the Cross on which Christ was crucified the holy Cross if not in their adoring it and Christ before a Crucifix ratione coâ—tactus by reason of its touching Christs body or resembling it Buâ— this I do but hint by the way 7. 'T is forbidden to worship God in or by or through an Image for the Israelites in Aaron's time and Jeroboam's and Ahab's times are condemned not for worshipping the Golden Calf or Calves 〈◊〉 a God but for worshipping the true God in by or
acteth against and contrary to them By which saith he they do declare themselves to be none of the Church of Christ but rather of the Synagogue of Satan Yea he there tells his Wife That he called them with good conscience as Christ called their forefathers the children of the Devil and that as their father the Devil is a lyar and murtherer so their Kingdom and Church as they call it standeth by lying and murdering therefore my dear Wife have no fellowship with them Ibid. Bishop Ridley in his Letter in Captivity calls the Church of Rome the Strumpet of Babylon and the Pope of Rome Antichrist Fox his Book of Martyrs p. 1626. col 1. And in his Answer at his Examination to Bishop White he saith He cannot but confess with St. Gregory a Bishop of Rome also that the Bishop of that place is the very true Antichrist whereof St. John speaketh by the name of the Whore of Babylon And I say saith he with the said St. Gregory that he that maketh himself a Bishop of all the world is worse than Antichrist Ibid. p. 1650. col 2. And in his Communication with Dr. Brooks Bishop of Gloucester when he degraded him exhorting him to recant and submit to the Church of Rome he saith thus You know my mind concerning the usurped authority of the Romish Antichrist Ibid. p. 1659. col 2. And a little after when he would Bishop Ridley though when he was in his Pontificalibus he contended too much for the Surplice c. yet when he came to die he refused it and abominated it put on him the Surplice c. he inveighed against the Romish Bishop and all that foolish apparel calling him Antichrist and the apparel foolish and abominable Ibid. In his Farewell Letter to all his Friends he calls the Bishop of Rome the Babylonical Beast and the then Bishops of England thieves of Samaria Sabei Caldei These robbers have rushed out of their dens and have robbed the Church of England of all the aforesaid holy treasure of God they have carried it away they have overthrown it and instead of Gods holy word the true and right administration of Christs holy Sacraments as of Baptism and the other they mix their Ministry with mens fantasies and many wicked and â—â—godly traditions Ibid. p. 1674. And these Bishops he calls the Soldiers of Antichrist Ibid. p. 1675. col 1. And in his Letter to the Lords Temporal he saith thus I wonder my Lords what hath bewitched you that ye are so suddenly fallen from Christ unto Antichrist from Christs Gospel unto mens traditions from the Lord that bought you to the Bishop now of Rome I warn you of your peril be not deceived except ye will be found willingly consenters unto your own death For if ye think thus we are Lay-men this is a matter of Religion we follow as we are taught and led if our teachers and governours teach us and lead us amiss the fault is in them they shall bear the blame My Lords 't is true I grant you that both the false teacher and the corrupt governour shall be punished for the death of their subjects whom they have falsely taught and corruptly lead yea and their blood shall be required at their hands But yet neverthelss shall that subject die the death himself also that is he shall also be damned for his own sin For if the blind lead the blind Christ saith not the leader only but both shall fall into the ditch Shall the Synagogue and the Senate of the Jews trow ye which forsook Christ and consented to his death therefore be excused because Annas and Caiphas with the Scribes and Pharisees and their Clergy did teach them amiss yea and also Pilate their Consenters and doers are both guilty saith Bishop Ridley Ibid. p. 1675. governour and the Emperours Lieutenant by his tyranny did without cause put to death Forsooth no my Lords no. For notwithstanding that corrupt Doctrine or Pilates washing of his hands neither of both shall excuse either that Synagogue and Seigniory or Pilate but at the Lords hand for the effusion of that innocent blood on the latter day shall drink of the deadly whip * Bishop Gardners six Articles called the Whip with six strings I â—elieve he alluded to Ye are witty and understand what I mean Therefore I will pass from this to tell you that ye are fallen from Christ to his adversary the Bishop of Rome pag. 1667. And immediately after he tells them That he doth not in calling the Bishop of Rome Christs adversary or Antichrist rage or raile but speak the words of truth and sobriety And shews That that Church while it continued in the Apostles Doctrine was Apostolick and those that sate in that See might be called Apostolici but since that See hath degenerated from the trace of Truth and true Religion which it received of the Apostles at the beginning and hath preached another Gospel hath set up another Religion hath exercised another power and hath taken upon it to order and rule the Church of Christ by other strange Laws and Canons and rulers than ever it received of the Apostles the Apostles of Christ which thing it doth at this day and hath continued so doing alas alas of too too long a time since the time I say that the state and condition of that See hath thus been changed in truth it ought of duty and of right to have the names changed both of the See and of the Sitter therein As that See then for that true trade of Religion and Doctrine of Christs Apostles justly and truly was called Apostolick so as truly and justly for the contrariety of Religion and * Is this not directly contrary to A B. Laud's Doctrine in his Relation wherein pag. â—â—6 he saith That the Church of Rome and Protestants set not up a different Religion diversity of Doctrine from Christs and his Apostles that See and the Bishop thereof at this day both ought to be called and are indeed Antichristian The See is the seat of Satan and the Bishop of the same that maintaineth the abominations thereof is Antichrist himself indeed And for this cause this See at this day is the same which St. John calleth in his Revelation Babylon or the Whore of Babylon and spiritual Sodoma and Egyptus the mother of fornications and of the abomination upon the earth and with this Whore do spiritually meddle and lye with her and commit most stinking and abominable adultery before God all those Kings and Princes yea all Nations of the earth which do CONSENT TO HER ABOMINATIONS and use or practise the same Ibid. p. 1668. And in his Lamentation for the change of Religion in England he saith thus The head under Satan of all mischief is Antichrist and his brood and the same is he which is the Babylonical Beast Ibid. p. 1671. col 2. And in p. 1673 he calls King Edward the sixth that innocent that
they please and as experience shews oppose them too against the determination of the Church which allowance I hope I may have to defend them But do not these men lay a foul aspersion upon the Church who say They do allow those men that will give an hearty assent and subscribe to their authority ceremonies and traditions and injunctions to interpret and secretly undermine and openly oppose the Doctrines of Faith of the true Christian Religion I profess I do not believe it of the whole Church-representative of England of which I should believe he speaks though I have not heard of one of them or of any Conformist that hath appeared against these mens false interpretations yea open contradictions of the articles of Religion concerning the true Christian faith But what security of peace and truth the Magistrate whom like their elder brethren in Holland they claw while he will suffer them to carry on their destructive designâ— can have by these mens subscriptions declarations yea oaths I know not Would not all the Jesuits of Rome subscribe declare and swear too upon these conditions I have heard of one Minister that would subscribe assent consent and declare if they would hate him but one syllable un And so it may be would others too if they might do as they do not perform what they promise and write against what they subscribe assent and consent to too as these men say they are allowed by the Church But I know not well what Church the man means by our Church for I do not know well of what church he is though I hear he is in the Church of England and promoted so was the Bishop of Spalato till King James found out his Knavery and so was Dr. Lewes who returned to Winchester and when he had received some thousands of pounds of current English money he returned to his Church of Rome who therein followed not the cunning advice of Thuanus a learned and cunning Papist to Casaubon * Wedderbornes Book p 23 vid. Supplement to Laudensium autocatacrifis p. 18. not to come away to them but stay here seeing he had and might have more means here than he could or would have there and might do them more service here than he could do them if there I have dwelt too long upon this large man else I could set before your eyes many more of his erroneous and dangerous Doctrines but I must leave him What I have said in my following Renunciation will I hope sufficiently confute Dr. Patrick's Doctrine of Justification by our own good works and by faith as it worketh by love and some Friendly Debate pag. 13 〈◊〉 14. other of his false Doctrines I meddle not with some others because better heads and pens have undertaken them Though the Arminian c. faction he they say much increased yet that it was greater and more Popish before the late Civil Wars and that there was more danger of bringing in Popery then than there is now I could offer many reasons as I. That the body of Popery except the Popes Supremacy was then preached and printed as Dr. Fuller shews was complained of and so much Dr. Heylin confesseth as was shewed before and may in a very great part he seen gathered to your hands in Laudensium Autocatacrisis and the Supplement thereunto and Laudensium Apostasia which I believe cannot be proved now 2. Then there were the High Commission and the Star-Chamber Courts which are not now wherein A. B. Laud and his party used to crush whosoever appeared in the least against their Arminian Doctrines and Popish Innovations 'T is true we have some disadvantages we want a Dr. Humphrie Abbot Holland and Prideaux in the Chair in Oxford a Cartwright Whitakers Davenant and Ward at Cambridge a Dr. Ames Twisse Kendal and a Mr. Jeanes who are gone to their Rests and we lack liberty and encouragement for our thousands of Orthodox Nonconforming Ministers freely to preach and print against Popish Arminian and Socinian Innovations in Doctrine Discipline and Worship If orthodox and learned and godly Divines Nonconformists indeed to the Ceremonies but real Conformists to the Doctrine of Faith of the Church of England who did not only preach the truth to the elder but taught it to the younger sort of people had not been turned and kept out of the Ministry and silenced and cast out of their Freeholds and Corporations except they would do such things as they judged unlawful or at least inexpediâ—â— and put into their places either ignorant or erroneous or scandalous persons men either unapt or unfit to teach though I acknowledg there are many learned sober men sound in the faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apt to teach in the Ministry whose persons God knows I love and whose learning I honour and admire yet I say there are many as selfish malicious covetous ambitious some as erroneous if not idolatrous men as many that are of the Church of Rome and so would openly profess themselves to be if time should serve them 't is very probable and verily believed that neither Popery nor Arminianism that cunning way to bring in Popery nor Prophaneness and Atheism would have gotten that head which some say they have Where the fault is is not for me to determine not suggest But verily I think his Gracious Majesty cannot be so much as suspected much less accused of it for he was graciously pleased to issue out a Declaration for liberty for tender Consciences from Bredah and another soon after his return home which was turned into a Bill by a worthy Gentleman and offered to the Parliament then called healing Since that his Majesty made another Gracious Declaration for liberty of Conscience but that 't is known was cried down by the Episcopal party and now at last his Majesty upon pious and politick accounts hath given forth another and more Gracious Declaration for liberty of Conscience and licensed several sound Protestant Divines who have lost their livings and suffered the spoiling of their goods and refused dignities rather than comply with our Bishops and their Latitudinarian party in things they judged unlawful inexpedient and inductive to Popery c. to preach and teach the word of God truly and worship God purely as he hath commanded in his Word without humane additions and inventions c. But this also the Episcopal party under the specious pretence of being against bringing in Popery which many of them preach and practise and love more than the truth and the pure worship of God as God and their own consciences well know though they have formerly extolled the Kings Supremacy and Prerogative above Law Right Reason and Religion and these thirteen years last past scarce ever executed one Law of those many that are made against Popish Recusants no nor mentioned publickly any fear of Popery till his Majesty granted his most loyal Protestant Subjects liberty to serve God purely as he hath commanded in his Word
unnecessary thing that Idolaters do in Exod. 23. 24. Levit. 18. 13. Levit. 19. 27 28. Deut. 12. 30 31 32. Deut. 14. 1 2. and this reason given them for it For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God and the Lord hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself above all the Nations that are upon the earth And are we not commanded to come out of Babylon the Church of Rome that we partake not of her sins and receive not of her plagues Revel 18. 4. Are we not as dear children to follow Christâ—â— Mat. 16. 24. Ephes 5. 1. And are not his modes of Worship better and freer from scandal suspicion and appearance of evil than Antichrists If not let 's speak out plainly in words at length and not in figures But they preach much against Popery Well blessed be God for it I am glad with St. Paul that Christ is preached though it should be out of envy and strife and contention supposing to add affliction to his bonds I am glad that Popery is preached down in sincerity and hatred thereof or only in design pretence or on purpose to add affliction to Nonconformists bonds which is verily suspected For when his Gracious Majesty declared liberty for Nonconformists before this last time 't is well known that a man of the long Name was up at Oxford with Non fuit sic ab initio and others elsewhere and now presently after his Majesties last Declaration with Licenses was not the Kingdom filled with their sound of Popery Popery Popery as if to license sound Protestant Divines to preach who are most against Popery were to tollerate Popery Papists had the same liberty before it that they had after it but not a word of complaint against Popery before Nonconforming Protestants to â—eremoâ—ieâ— â— had liberty granted to preach the Truth and worship God without their ceremonies and rites not one new Law made nor one old one executed against Papists and Popery these twelve or thirteen years last past but new Laws made and old ones never intended against Nonconformists and the pure Worship of God their Religious meetings made rioters and riotous and men yea the vilest of men hired to inform against them for doing good and Justices of the Peace severely censured for not punishing Gods people for serving of him as he hath commanded them That 't is strongly suspected that Presbytery and purity and verity hatâ— been more hated and feared than Popery and that the Pope and his power is more feared than real and most Antichristian Popery But however and by whomsoever Popery is preached down I rejoyce yea and I will rejoyce But who are the men that preach it down what parts of Popery do they preach down how many dignified Clergy-men do preach it down Are there not more aspiring men do preach and print much of it up and those promoted and many deserving men that preach it down neglected if not discountenanced was not Dr. Cozens twice indicted and the Indictmens found and complained of in Parliament for uttering these words That the King was no more supreme Head of the Church of Vide Articles against him and the Parliaments Censure of him England than the boy that rubs his Horse-heels And 't is said he got off by flying of which necessity he hath since made a virtue and gotten to be Bishop of Durham Was there not a Book called Dr. Cozens his Devotions in which Mr. Prin saith There were twenty Popish Errors printed and that the Reformers Prin ' s Quench-coal Epist to King Charl. 1. p. 10. of our Church took away all Religion and the whole service of God when they took away the Mass Hath not another written a Book for the observation of Holy Lent as a * See Bishop Sparrow's Rationale p. 143 144 145. 5 Eliz. c. 5. vide Rastal Titleship p. 378. Religious Faest contrary 't is said to the intent if not to the express words of the Law Let any judicious and impartial man read Bishop Sparrow's Rationale upon the Common-prayer Book and judg what Popery he writes against therein P. 273. he saith 'T is the duty of people to receive the Sacrament kneeling for it is a sin not to adore when we receive this Sacrament And p. 391. he saith It is a dangerous deceit to say that creatures may be adored and is contrary to Exod. 20. 5. Thou shalt not bow down to them Them as Rogers calls the Sacraof the Lords-Supper an * Thomas Rogers upon Article 31 saith that 't is a Fable to say that the Mass is a Sacrifice The Sacrament is not a Sacrifice but only a Commemoration of that Sacrifice offered on the Cross Art 31. unbloody Sacrifice a Commemorative Sacrifice of the Death of Christ And p. 395 396 he saith That this Sacrament should be received fasting though Christ instituted it immediately after Supper for which he gives this reason It is for the honour of so high a Saerament that the precious †Is this for or against Transubstantiation body of Christ should first enter into the Christians mouth before any other meat And p. 89. he saith That by Curates here i. e. In the prayer for Bishops and Curates are not meant Stipendiaries as now it 's used to signifie but all those Parsons or Vicars to whom the Bishop who is the chief Pastor under Christ hath committed So Dr. Heylin speaks in his Introduction to his Cyprianus Anglicus p. 9. s. 10. the Cure of Souls of some part of his Flock and so are the Bishops Curates The Bishop with these Curates a flock or congregation committed to their charge make up a Church By which words I humbly conceive the * To hold Bishops Jure Divino and especially essential to the being of a Church as A. B. Laud did Cypr. Anglic. p. Divine right of Diocaesan Episcopacy is asserted and thereby the Kings Supremacy impreached for if the Bishops be the chief Pastors under Christ Adam Contzen 1. 2. Pol. c. 18. Rastal Title-crown p. 17. Sir Edward Cooks de jure Regis Ecclesiast fol. 8. Dr. Heylin saith that there are 26 Cathedral Churches or Episcopal Sees in England Cypr. Anglic. l. 4. p. 291. and the A B. of Canterbury is accounted Primate and Metropolitan of all England Heylin Cypr. Anglic. l. 4. p. 249. to whom the Cure of Souls is by Christ committed the King cannot place and displace them as he pleaseth and grant their authority for so long or so little while as he pleaseth as the Law and Law-givers say he may And this will follow that the right Reverend Father in God the Lord Primate of all England is the Head-pastor and the other 25 Reverend Bishops the A. B. of York being in respect of him but as one of the other are the chief Pastors and all the rest of the Ministers of the Church of England are but their Curates And then also it will
by God Mr. Cartwright upon the place referreth the sigh of the Cross to the mark of the Beast Dionis Carthusianus Vpon Revel 13. 13. saith That conformity to the Doctrine and life of Antichrist is the mark of the Beast and upon this account did * Vid. General Confession of Faith of the Church and Kingdom of Scotland to be seen at the end of the Harmony of Confessions King James renounce and detest the Bishop of Rome's five bastard Sacraments with all his rites ceremonies and false doctrine added to the administration of the true Sacraments without the word of God 'T is observed by Mr. Mede that one may receive the number of the name of the Beast that is his impieties and yet not receive the mark of his name that is not subject himself to his authority Which is exemplified in the Greek Church who imbrace the same form of impiety derived from the Dragon or the Idolatry of the Latins and yet refuse to be subject to the Latin Bishop or to bear his name So may others refuse to subject themselves to the supreme authority of Antichrist and to be called Papists and yet they may imbrace his Altars Images Fasts Feasts Ceremonies forms of Worship Government Laws Number yea and many of his Antichristian Doctrines and like well of much if not of almost all of that he holds and doth and yet will be called Protestants and take it very ill at the Papists hands when they call them Calvino-Papistae Calvin-Papists that is partly Papists and partly Protestants such as hold with the Papists and yet profess with the Protestants Mungrels as Bishop Abbâ—t called them in his Sermon above have great charity for professed 〈◊〉 but crâ—el hatred for real Protestants account true Calvinism heresie yea little less than Treason as Knot the Jesuit told some of our Mungrels but gross Popery yea blasphemy in doctrine to be but errour and more tollerable than Presbytery and Popery in practise to be indifferent and therefore lawful and commendable Many of these Heresies and errors I have renounced are by some of our Mungrels called the Doctrines of the Heylin's Introd to his Cyprianus Anglic. Church of England and Books have been printed if not licensed to confirm it but very falsely and slanderously except by Church of England they understand a faction for sure I am that the true and whole Church of England â—olds soundly against all these ensuing false Doctrines renounced Only her doctrine at least practise about Apocriphal Scriptures is not I fear so full and clear as I believe it might be Some mens plausible Sermons are abroad which are by too many persons swallowed down without due examination 'T is said by one a learned man That God doth only * Dr. Till Ser. offer grace in his Gospel but he forceth none to receive it To prevent mistakes I say and acknowledg 1. That God doth not force men against their wills to accept of the grace and assistance that he doth offer them but I deny that Quo minus tolerabilis est eorum inscitia qui Evangelium communiter ita Offerâ—i fingunt ut promiscuâ— liberum sit omnibus salutem fide amplecti Calvin in 1 Cor. 2. 14. God doth only offer assistance or grace to his children for though he do not convert them against their wills whether they will or no yet he takes away their hearts of stone and gives them hearts of flesh and makes them of unwilling to become willing in the day of his power Psal 110. 3. He worketh in them to will and to do of his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. 2. I acknowledg that Reprobates may finally resist the ineffectual grace of God 3. I affirm that the elect of God to Salvation shall not cannot finally withstand the effectual grace of God but that they shall at one time or other be effectually called converted and eternally saved And 4. That God who hath from all eternity elected them to the end everlasting Salvation hath also appointed them to the means conducing to the attainment of it as Faith in Christ Repentance for sin sincere obedience to the Law of God and perseverance in the same to the end Though I have not used many Arguments to confute every particular Error that would have been Voluminous yet I have sufficiently confuted them and proved that Papists and Protestants Religion differ or that the Church of Rome and Protestants hold a different Religion which was the main design of my undertaking and in alledging the Doctrine of the Church of England I should I conceive if I had done no more he thought to have done enough to convince if not professed Papists yet those that pretend to be the most dutiful Sons of the Church of England that these Doctrines are not Protestant but rather Popish and at least contrary to their Professions Subscriptions and Declarations as well as to Gods word and keep others from imbracing and imbibing and spreading of them If by alledging the Sermons Speeches and Writings of any learned Conformist heretofore I have displeased any of our great Conformists now I hope they will excuse and pardon me and blame them that printed and licensed them or themselves or others that have traduced or suffered the Truth to be bespattered or gainsayed or undermined by any Pelagian Arminian Socinian or Popish writer upon any pretence whatsoever And now my prayer to the God of Peace and Truth for England is That Gods true Religion may be setled here in its power and purity and that all Popery in Doctrine and Discipline and Worship may be burned with fire Revel 17. 16. that is as learned Dr. Moor expounds the place utterly consumed and to this end that God who hath the hearts of Kings and all men in his hands would incline the heart of our King and Parliament and all sorts of people to deny themselves and resign up themselves wholly to be guided by the will of God revealed in the Canonical Scriptures which ought to be the rule of all mens actions as our Book of * Homil. for Rogat on Week Part 3. p 230 Homil against Wilful Rebellion Part 6. p. 318. Homilies plainly declares which saith thus In Gods word Princes must learn how to obey God and to govern men in Gods word Subjects must learn obedience both to God and their Princes Is our reverend Fathers of the Church would stick close to the sound and necessary Articles of Religion established which concern the Doctrine of the true Christian Faith and the Sacraments to * Anno 3 Edw. 6. c. 11. which only all Ministers were bound to subscribe and give their assent and countenance men that do so and discountenance all those that hold or vent any Doctrine against the same and not stand too much upon those things which they have devised to uphold their own worldly power and interests and abate those things that are not of themselves or by Divine institution
creatures of God and therefore are not corporally to be adored or religiously worshipped or reverenced For not only Dr. * Omâ—â—s cultus religiosus Deo debetur Bell. Enter T. 2. l. 6. c. 5. p. 263. Ames but also A. B. †A. B. Usher Sum of Ch. Relig. upon 2d Com. p. 229. Vsher informs us That all religious worship and reverence is to be given to God alone and not imparted to those things which are not God at all And Bishop * Ser. upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 50. Jewel saith that adoration belongs only to God but is given to the Sacrament without any warrant from Gods word Christ that best knew what ought to be done therein when he ordained and delivered the Sacrament appointed not that any man should fall down to it or worship it St. Paul that took the Sacrament at Christs hands and as he had taken it delivered it to the Corinthians yet never willed adoration * Nor kneeling at receiving it or godly honour to be given to it The old Doctors St. Cyprian Chrysostom Ambrose Jerome Augustine and others that received the Sacrament at the Apostles hands and as it may be thought continued the same in such sort as they had received it never made mention in any of their Books of adoring or worshipping of the Sacrament It is a very new device and as is well known came but lately into the Cburch about 400 years past Honorius being then Bishop of Rome commanded the Sacrament to be lifted up and the people reverently to bow down to it If the Sacrament for which you say the Altar or Table is to be reverenced be not adorable or religiously to be reverenced then certainly the Altar or Table is not religiously to be bowed to as you do but the Sacrament I have proved above is not religiously to be adored worshipped or reverenced Ergo the Table or Altar is not so religiously to be adored worshipped or reverenced 2. If the holy Table set Altarwise be therefore religiously to be reverenced because Christs body and blood is thereon Sacramentally corporally I have proved above he is not thereon then I say 1. That the Font should be so reverenced adored and bowed to because therein his body and blood is Sacramentally present too as Bishop * Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding art 5. d. 10. p. 21. Jewel shews out of St. Augustine and others No man may doubt saith Augustine but that every faithful creature is then made partaker of Christs body and blood when in Baptism he is made the member of Christ And if A B. Laud's reason be good the * Star-Chamber Speech p 47. and so in relation to the Throne where his body is usually present Font is more to be reverenced than the holy Table because Christ is more usually present there than on the Table for the Sacrament oâ— Baptism is there more often administred than the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is on the Table and is for any thing I see as holy as the Table yea more holy by his reason 2. If the Archbishops reason in the Margen be good then should we much more bodily bow to or do reverence to the Pulpit for there Christs body and blood is mostly Quando * St. Jerome in Psal â—47 audimus Sermonem Domini caro Christi sanguis ejâ—â— in auribus nostris funditur that is when we heaâ—â— the word of God the flesh and the blood of Christ iâ— poured into our ears saith St. Jerome upon Psalm 147. quoted by Bishop Jewel in his Reply to Harding Art 12. D. 5. p. 337. and St. * Quest 1. Interrogo p. 7. Augustine saith Interrogo vos c. I demand of you this question my brethren answeâ— me Whether think you is †He means in dignity greater the body of Chrisâ— meaning thereby the Sacrament saith Bishop Jewel or the word of Christ if ye will answer truly this must we say that the word of God is no leâ—â— than the body of Christ Which is directly contrary to A. B. Laud's assertion and reason of it And St. Jerome upon Psal 147. saith Ego corpâ—â— Basilius saith Christ called his flesh and blood the whole mystical Doctrine of his Gospel which he published in his dispensation in the flesh Epist ad Caesarienses quoted by Bishop Jewel Reply to Harding a. 14. d. 8. p. 375. Credere in eum est manducare panem vivum August Tract 26. in Johan Jesu Evangelium puto quamvis quol Christus dicit qui non manducat mean carnem c. possit intelligi de mysterioâ— tamen verius corpus Christi sanguis ejâ—â— sermo scripturarum est Joh. 6. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of God and drink his blood ye have no life in you That is except ye spiritually feed on Christ by faith which may be done as well in hearing and receiving the worâ— preached as in receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper administred ye have no spiritual life in you That is I take the body of Jesâ—â— to be the Gospel Although these words of Christ he that eateth not my flesh c may be taken of the Sacrament yet in truer sense thâ— word of the Scripture is the body of Christ And * In Exod. Hom. 13. Origen saith Quod si corpus Christi utâ— inimitantâ cautela quomodo putatis minoris esse periculi verbum Dei neglexisse quam corpus ejus If ye take such heed in keeping the Sacrament which is called his body how can ye think there is less danger in neglecting the word of God than there is in neglecting the Sacrament which is called his body If saith Bishop Jewel the Sacrament were in deed and really the body of Christ and so our very Lord and God thus to compare it with the creature and to make it inferiour unto the same as St. Augustine St. Jerome Origen and other godly Fathers do it were great blasphemy This also is directly contrary to A. B. Laud's Doctrine these things and many more Quotations ye may see in Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding Art 21. D. 10. p. 451 452. Besides the bread and wine are consecrated by the word of God and prayer and therefore cannot be more eminent than the word of God The less is blessed of the better Heb. 7. 7. 3. If the Altar or holy Table be to be bowed to more than the Pulpit because 't is Christs Throne his Mercy-seat and Chair of State then it will follow that the Pulpit is as adorable or to be bowed to as much as if not more than the holy Table For 1. the Pulpit is called the Tribunal of the Church 2. Though I find not in any ancient orthodox Author that the Communion-table is called a Throne either of God or man Cyprian l. 4. Epist 5. quoted by Dr. Pocklington Altare Christianum c. 8. p. 44. yet I find in * Athanas in Epist
him and God said I have hallowed this place which thou hast built to put my name there for â—ver and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually 4. Because in the Temple were the Ark the Mercy-seat where God was specially and immediately present and there God promised to be and to meet them Exod. 25. 22. And in them did God immediately manifest his presence the Ark was a sign of Gods special presence and thence 't is said that God did dwell between the Cherubims 2 King 19. 15. and that Israel enquired of the Lord for the Ark of the Covenant of God was there in those days Judg. 20. 27 28. and there God promised to be and meet his people Exod. 29. 42 43. Exod. 30. 6. yea God is said therefore to dwell there 1 King 19. 15. Psal 80. 1. And Bishop Babington in his comfortable Notes upon Exod. 27. In novo autem testamento altaria erigi ulla praeceptum non est quod si erigantur Judaismus revocatur quum altaria jussu Dei erecta typi fuerunt Christi c. Polan Syntag. l. 9. c. 36. p. 647. speaking of the Altar saith thus 1. That it was a figure of Christ as the Apostle expoundeth it Heb. 13. 10. 2. That the Altars used in Popery are not warranted by this example but that the Primitive Church used Communion-tables as we now do of boards and wood not Altars as they do of stone But now to apply this you can shew neither 1. Command from God for your bowing to your Altars in time of the Gospel for Ark Mercy-seat and Altars are abolished Joh. 4. 20 21 22 23 24. And we have now no Altar but Christ Heb. 13. 10. Nor 2. have you any promise of Christs presence with or at your Altars when his Ordinance is not administred and when his Ordinance is celebrated upon the holy Table he is not there corporally but only spiritually and sacramentally And you have no promise of God at all to your bowing to your Altars what you have from men I know not Nor 3. have any president or example of Christ or of any of his Apostles either instituting your Altars or bowing to or towards them Volateranus and Vernerius testifie that Altars were first erected by the command of Sixtus as Bishop Jewel informs us but he doth not tell us which Sixtus Bishop of Rome it was Sixtus the first lived Anno 130. Sixtus the second lived A. D. 261. Sixtus the third lived A. D. 432. as Bishop Prideaux informs in his Introduction to History Now it could be neither of the two first of these for Origen who was born A. D. 289. and could not be a writer till after the year 300 assures us that the Christians had no altars then as Origen contra Celsum l 4. the same Bishop Jewel alledgeth him in his Reply to Harding Art 3. D. 26. p. 145. Objicit nobis quod non habeamus imagines aut ar as aut Templa Celsus chargeth our religioâ— with this that we have neither Images nor Altars nor Churches Likewise saith Arnobius that lived somewhat after Origen Accusatio nos c. Arnobius Lib. 20 Ye accuse us that we have neither Temples nor Images nor Altars And the same Bishop Jewel if our * Homily against peril of Idolatry part 3. p. 66. saith There were no Churches in Tertullians time a hundred and sixty years after Christ Book of Homilies were silent doth also assure us That there were no Christian Churches built in the Apostles times for the faithful for fear of Tyrants were fain to meet together in private houses and in vacant places in Woods and Forests and Caves under the ground and may we think that Altars were built before the Churches and when they were built he saith they were not set in the upper end of the Quire but in the midst of the Church among the people Which he there proves out of Eujebius Augustine and others The Church being ended and comely furnished with high Thrones for the honour of the Rulers and with Stalls beneath set in order and last of all the Holy of Holies I mean the Altar being placed in the midst These are Eusebius his words in English so translated by Bishop Babington in his Comfortable Notes uâ—on Exod. 29. p. 279. saith That Altars were set in the midst of the people and not against a wall Bishop Jewel Mark Eusebius saith not the Altar was set in the Quire but in the midst of the Church amongst the people this is Bishop Jewel's own observation not mine I pray observe it And in pag. 146. he saith thus To leave further Allegations we see by these few that the Quire was then in the body of the Church divided with Rails from the rest whereof it was called Cancelli a Chancel and commonly of the Greeks Presbyterium because it was a place appointed for the Priests and Ministers I pray read him fully and deliberately it will serve to consute that vile Book of Dr. Pocklington's called Altare Christianum Thus you may see that there were no Christianâ— Altars in the Apostles times no nor in the first three hundred years yea not till after four hundred years after Christs Ascension I wonder what Church that was that A. B. Laud meant Can. 7. Ann. Dom. 1640. by the Primitive Church in the purest times whose example he proposeth for our imitation he cannot mean the Christian Primitive Church in this his alledged Bishop Jewel will be against him as well as others he must then mean the Jewish Church But if this was his Primitive Church I know not how to make a good Orthodox construction of these words a little before in the same Canon That the holy Table may be called an Altar by us in that sense in which the Primitive Church called that an Altar and in no other But in what sense did the Jewish Church call the Communion-table an Altar if by his Primitive Church he means the Church of Rome four hundred years after Christs Ascension into Heaven his latter words will be against his former in the purest times for sure they were not the purest times that Church calls it an Altar or an high place to offer Christ an unbloody sacrifice propitiatory for the sins of hiâ— people to the Father This possibly might be his meaning For I find Dr. Heylin his Chaplain and Cyp. Anglic. Introd S. 24. p. 22. a member of that illegal Convocation pleading That the Sacrament is and may be called a commemorative Sacrifice And Bishop Sparrow calls it An unbloody sacrifice a commemorative Rationale p. 280 391. p. 378 379. And Giles Widdows saith The Communion-table is Christs Chair of State where his Priests sacrifice the Lords-Supper to reconcile us to God in his kneezless Puritan p. 34 89. Sacrifice of the death of Christ And so write many more of that Tribe If by a Sacrifice be meant Thanksgiving for Christs death and the
benefits thereof then I say the Font and Reading-pew may be called Altars as well the Communion-table and the Pulpit may more properly be called an Altâ—r than the Table for there Thanks or the sacrifice of Praise is more frequently given or offered to God for Christs death and the benefits we receive thereby than on the Communion-table and that therefore they should be so called if not bowed to by your reasons But A. B. Laud is pleased to alledg Reverend Bishop Jewel as approving his bowing to Communion-tables set Altarwise at the East-end of the Quire or Jewel's Reply to Harding Art 3. p. 29 151. Chancel Bishop Jewel speaking against Ministers praying before their people in an unknown Tongue to whom Harding saith That the people cannot indeed say Amen to the blessing or thanksgiving of the Priest so well as if they understood the Latin Tongue perfectly yet they give assent unto it c. and this they declare by sundry outward tokens and gestures as by standing up at the Gospel and at the Preface to the Mass and by bowing themselves down and adoring at the Sacrament by kneeling at other times as when pardon and mercy is humbly asked and by other like signs of Devotion in other parts of the Service To which Bishop Jewel gives a short Answer and shews That 1 Harding's words contradict St. Paul's 1 Cor. 14. 16 17 18. 2. He commends devotion and affection in people at the service of God 3. He acknowledgeth in the general not in those particulars that Hâ—rding speaks of that kneeling bowing standing up and other like are commendable gestures and tokens of Devotion so long as the people understand what they mean and apply them unto * That is rightly and according to his wordâ— the next words to whom they be due the Archbishop left out as being against bowing to his altars God to whom they be due otherwise they may well make them hypocrites but holy and godly they cannot make them There may be adoring at the Sacrament when people confess their sins pray for pardon of them and give thanks to God for mercies received but here 's not a word in Hardings answer or in Bishop Jewel's reply of bowing to or towards the holy Table or Altar especially upon your religious account of Christs corporal or sacramental presence hoc est corpus meum And that Bishop Jewel was not for bowing to or towards the holy Table or Altar as you call it especially upon your accounts his works do evidently declare For he was as I have shewed against bowing to or adoring of the Sacrament of the Lords-Supper which is the Ordinance of God and therefore is more worthy than the Table whereon it stands which is but an instrument or help to the orderly and decent celebration of that Ordinance as was shewed above And there ye may find him saying That religious Bishop Jewel's Ssr. upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 50. adoration belongs not to any creature but only to God And concerning Altars he proves out of Origen and Arnobius that there were none in the Apostles times nor in many years after as was shewed before And in the 30th Division of that third Article of his Reply to Harding he declares himself for the Apostles times as the best and truest standard for Doctrine and practice in which times they had Communion-tables and not altars And in his works you may find him stiff and zealous against * Bishop Jewel ' s Reply to Harding art 14. D. 1. pag. 367 368 369 c. D. 12. p. 380 381 382. worshipping of Images yea of worshipping God in by or through them yea I find him in his works not forward to follow much less to commend the degenerate Church of Rome's works which first set up Altars which Church he saith out of St. Ambrose is Caput superstitionis the head of superstition and the great Whore and mother of harlots and abominations of the earth Of whom Nicholas Iyra in 2 Thes 2. quoted by him too saith Ab Ecclesia Romona jam diuâ— est quod recessit gratia It is long since the Grace of God departed from the Church of Rome from which Grace whosoever is departed he is departed from Christ Bishop Jewel ' s D. of Apol. p. 2. c. 5. p. 139. The other arguments used for bowing to Altars or worshipping of God towards them by Doctor Pocklington and A. B. Laud drawn from the practise of Queen Elizabeth King James and the Knights of the Order of the Garter are so weak that they will deny them if I should return them upon themselves as thus Qâ—een Elizabeth abetted and helped the Scotch Subjects in taking up arms against their Queen and the Hollanders in taking up arms against their King Ergo 't is lawful and not rebellious so to do For I presume if it had been unlawful and rebellious Queen Elizabeth would not have abetted and helped them therein which is A. B. Laud's argument in his Star-Chamber This argument of the A B. is pitiful weak and so is mine that is made in imitation of it only to shew the invalidity of his for bowing to altars Speech p. 48. for bowing to Altars yet he denies my parallel in one of his illegal and condemned Canons made Anno 1640 after the Parliament was dissolved Queen Elizabeth sequestred the Revenues of the Bishoprick of Oxford Dr. Heylin ' s Cypr. Anglicus p. 49. for eleven years together and gave them to the Earl of Essex from which I infer as the Archbishop doth that 't was lawful so to do For I presume as he doth that if it had been sacriledg and unlawful she would not have done it Thus ad hominem I might alledg many more authorities and produce many more arguments against bowing to Altars upon the account of divine excellency or worshipping God in through by or towards them but I forbear Only this I pray remember that all Wâ—ll-worship is forbidden in the second Commendment but to worship God by in through or towards the holy Altar or Communion-table purposely upon your accounts of divine excellency is Will-worship Ergo 't is unlawful and 't is Will-worship because 't is no where commanded in the New Testament or in the Moral Law for the Ceremonial Law iâ— abrogated ART III. That mens persons are justified or Bell. T. 4. l 6. c. 1. de formali causa justificationis Et c. 9. de operum justificatione So Bishop Montague Gag p. 141 142 143. accounted righteous before God for their own good works that follow faith either in part or in whole and not for the merits of Jesus Christ alone THis I renounce because 't is contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England which saith thus in her Book of Homilies 1. No man by his own acts works or deeds seem they never so good can be justified and made righteous before God but every man is of necessity constrained to
is more than his inherent righteousness as I shewed before or inherent holiness is as coâ—pleatly made †'T is so by Gods imputation theirs as if they theâ—selves were compleatly and perfectly righteous and that upon no other * They call not Faith a condition but the only instrument of the soul condition or qualification wrought in them but 〈◊〉 believing whereby too many of them meâ—â— strongly fancying this rightcousness to 〈◊〉 theirs This he saith in the Margent iâ— a false notion of it and is grosly false doctrine For he saith there are two palâ—ble mistakes in it 1. That Christs righteousness is properly †'T is as properly made ours by imputation as Adam's first sin is made ours made ours I am coâ—fident there is no Scripture that tells us 〈◊〉 All that we find asserted in the Gospel 〈◊〉 to this matter is this that real benefits 〈◊〉 advantages which are likewise exceedingâ—â— great * But what are they is justification one of them or not in the sense I have treated of it and excellent do by the righteousness of Christ accrue to us and those â—â—less great and excellent than if that righteousness were in the most proper seâ—â— ours 2. The other mistake is that this righteousness is made ours upon no other terms than that of believing †Who saith so what other terms are required on our part besides faith in Christ believe and thou shalt be saved antecedent to Justification it is so This is not only a * And yet this man saith Conformists must not write against the Doctrine of the Church of England false but also a most dangerous opinion And then he saith That be and his moral Preachers are careful to shew the falsity and defectiveness of some definitions of faith of dangerous consequence and that this is one of the false ones namely that is is a taking hold of †Who are the men that so define it and where Assembl Definition of Justifying Faith Christs righteousness or a believing thâ—â— it is made over to us p. 129 130 this he calls a mysterious faith and non-sâ—nse p. 130. The Learned and Orâ—hodoâ— Assembly of Divines in their larger Catechism did give us this Definition of justifying Faith Justifying faith is a saving grace wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit and Word of God whereby he being convinced of his sin and misery and of the disability of himself and all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the Gospel but receiveth and resteth upon Christ and his righteousness therein held forth for pardon of sin and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of â—oâ— for salvation Joh. 1. 12. Act. 16. 32. Phil. 3. 9. Is this a false or defective definition of Faith or non-sense if it be speak out and prove it And p. 130 131. he saith The reason why those moral Preachers use not at all or but seldom the phrase imputed righteousness is because those mens very untoward notion hath so leavened * And yet you 'l use the word Altar and the phrase holy Altar though the Papists have levelâ—â— it with their false notion of oftering the sacrifice of Christs body and blood upon it the heads of the vulgar that they can scarcely hear of Christs imputed righteousness but they are ready to make an ill use of it by taking from thence occasion to entertain low and disparaging thoughts of an inward real righteousness I think saith he it would be well if it were never used I pray mark 1. He calls our Orthodox Divines notion of Christs imputed righteousness an â—ntoward notion 2. He gives a Popish reason and very untoward false and dangerous one why his Divines use not the phrase imputed righteousness because forsooth ' tâ—s in danger to be abused the same that Papists give for their prohibiting vulgar people to read the holy Scriptures in a known tongue left they should abuse it 3. Christs righteousness and the imputation thereof must not by these mens reason be mentioned Lest people should take occasion to disparage mans own real moral righteousness Doth not this shew that you prefer your own righteousness above Christs And pag. 132. he saith But take notice that this expression Christs * So saith Bellarmine as Tâ—lenus in his Syntag. de Justiâ— p 726. tells us where he saith frontem persricat Bellarmiâ—â— 'T is plainly in Rom. 4. 6. â—hil 3. 8. 9. and by necessary consequence in Rom. 5. 18 19. 1 Cor. 1. 30. and many other plâ—ces of Script 2 Cor. 5. 〈◊〉 imputed righteousness is not to be found in all the Bible Nor in any of the places where we find the word imputed relating to the righteousness of Christ at all to be understood but only an effectual faith which is the very same with inherent righteousness which as I said is that moral righteousness only that those Preachers may be justly charged with altogether insisting upon p. 133. Here the man speaks out plainly that our persons are justified befoâ—â— God by our own inherent righteousness as 't is taken in opposition 〈◊〉 the righteousness of Christ imputed to us which latter he utterly denies And in his other Book intituled The design of Christianity c. 19. p. 221. he saith That faith justifies as it includes a sincere resolution of obedience or true holiness in the nature of it Which is as directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as any that his Father Bellarmine hath written concerning Justification whose arguments he urgeth and improves as will be evident to any man that reads Bishop Downham of Justification and Dr. Ames his Bellarminus Enervatus And in p. 133. of his Free Discourse he saith There are but two Chapters in all the New Testament where we find the word imputed mentioned as relating to righteousness one is in the fouâ—â— to the Romans and the other the second of St. James In the fourth to the Romans we have it four or five times and it is most evident that there still it is to be interpreted as I said that is above p. 132. * Which is most false it 's evident that 't is taken as all our sound Protestant Divines understand it of Faith not as 't is effectual by works but as it 's relatively considered apprehending the righteousness of Christ and applying it to our selves as I have shewed before Bishop Sanderson was no Antinomian consider what he saith That Justification of sinners by the imputed righteousness of Christ apprehended and applied unto them by a lively Faith without the works of the Law is a sound true comfortable profitable and necessary Doctrine Serm. upon Rom 3. 8. p. 49. in 410. of an effectual faith which is the very same with inherent righteousness And what he saith for confirmation of his opinion That Abrahaâ— was justified by his faith
more over their fellow-Presbyters or shepherds of the flock but commanded to give good example to their flock expecting not a triple Crown here on earth that perisheth but a Crown of Glory that fadeth not away which Christ the only chief Shepherd will give at the great day of Judgment to all his holy humble diligent and faithful Pastors And thus was the Church governed in the Primitive times communi conciâ—io Presbyterorum by the common Jerom. in Tit. 〈◊〉 1. Jerom. ad Evagrium council of the Presbyters as St. Jerome told the Pope himself and this Council was not such a pickt Council of Princely Cardinals of his own creatures and sworn vassals as the Popes is which hath only a shew of the ancient Government of the Church but is indeed a wicked combination against it a meer device to uphold his Usurpation tyranny power pride and Lordly dominion over the Princes of the world and the Churches and Church-officers of Jesus Christ But it was a common Council of fellow-Presbyters of the same Church chosen by the Church in which Council for necessary order sake was by common consent toâ— chosen for that time one Presbyter that was the most worthy grave aâ—â— able man to be president or if you will Speaker of that Council for tâ—â—â— time who had only a precedency of order but no more a superiority of jurisdiction over the Colledg of Presbyters than the Speaker of the House of Commons hath over the rest of his fellow-commoners in Parliament assembled here in England 2. That the Pope of Rome is not St. Peter ' s Successor either in his Apostleship for that was extraordinary and died with him or Bishoprick For Peter the Apostle was not properly a Bishop neither could he be as the word Bishop is now commonly taken with us For he was an Apostle of the whole Church and so could not be tyed to the Church of Antioch or Rome as Papists would make the world believe he was He that makes Peter the Apostle a Bishop brings him oâ—â— of the Parlor into the kitchin as Dr. Raynolds speaks of St. James the Apostle in his Conference with Hart. He that makes the King of England a Justice of Peace or the Lord Chief Justice of England a Justice of Peace but of one County Diocess City or Parish or Town unkings the King and Unlord-chief-justiceth the other Peter had no superiority of authority over the rest of his fellow-Apostles Peter was not the Rock upon which Christ promised to build his Church but that Confession that Peter made in the name of Christs Disciples Thou art Christ the Son of the living God And Peter had the same Commission from Christ and no other that the other Apostles had and they had the same that he had Peter was no more Bishop of Rome than S. Paul was Nay it can never be proved by Sacred Scripture that Peter the Apostle was at Rome at any time but that he was elsewhere above twenty years may be proved by Sacred Scripture and very probably that he was not at Rome when we cannot certainly prove him elsewhere in this or that particular place Obj. Papists out of Eusebius say thus That when Peter had laid the foundation Hart in Conference with Dr. Raynolds c. 6. D. 3. P. 257. of the Church at Antioch where be saâ—e Bishop seven years he went to Rome and preaching the Gospel there twenty-five years continued Bishop of that City Ans To this I answer thus 1. That though Eusebius was a â—â—arned man yet he was a meer man and not infallibly guided in his History and works as the Prophets and Apostles were 2. Eusebius is reproved by Pope Gelasius in a Council of seventy Bishops as false in his History which reproof is proved to be just by Canus viz. For his reporting of Christs Epistle to Agbarus and his avouching many things by Clemens Alexandrinus whereas the fable of the one and the works of the other are reproved by the Council And moreover he writeth in the same Chronicle That Sennacherib who besieged Jerusalem and Salmanassar who took Samaria were one and the same man which Saint * Com. in Isa 36. Jerom hath shewed to be contrary to holy Scripture as Dr. †Confer c. 6. d. 3. p. 258. Reynolds answers Hart. And he saith further That such another oversight is this of Peter ' s being seven years Bishop of the Church of Antioch and 25 years after that Bishop of the Church of Rome and he gives those probable reasons that others do give to prove That Peter was never at Rome He proves the first part of the story to be false and contrary to Sacred Scripture thus Peter by this account should have gone to Antioch about the 4th year after Christs death and there abode seven years even till the second * So Cornel. a Lapide Chron. Actuum Apostolorum pag. 3. year of Claudius the Emperor in †Cornel. a Lapide saith he went to Rome the third of Claudius in his Preface to the first Epistle of Peter which he went to Rome But the holy Scripture sheweth that Paul who was not presently converted after Christs death after three years found Peter at Jerusalem Gal. 1. 18. He went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and abode with him fifteen days And Peter after that abode within the coasts of Jury first at Lydda Act. 9. 38. then at Joppa where he tarried many days Act. 9. 43. then at Caesaria Act. 10. 48. then at Jerusalem Act. 11. 2 where Herod Agrippa cast him into prison in the second or * Cornelius a Lapide saith 't was in the third year of Claudius Chron. Act. Apostolor p. 3. the very time that he removed as he saith from his seven years sitting Bishop at Antioch to Rome and wrote his first Epistle Preface to the 1. Epistle of Peter Vid. Lightf Harmony p. 92. third year of Claudius as it is likely for he died in the fourth when the Church of Antioch was both †plainted and wâ—tered by others and not by Peter viz. by Barnabas and Paul and were called Christians before ever Peter câ—â— there And therefore the first branch of Eusebius his report that Peter having founded the Church of Antioch and that he sate there Bishop seven years in the second year of Claudius is flatly contrary to Scripture And Onuphrius in his Annotations upoâ— Platina in Vitam B. Petri Apostoli saith It is most clear and surely known by the Acts of the Apostles and Paul ' s Epistle to the Galatianâ— that for nine years after Christs death Peter never went out of Jury till the second year of the reign of Claudius and therefore he could not sit seven years Bishop at Antioch before he went to Rome Thus the former part of Eusebius his story being proved false why may not the latter part viz. that Peter after this sate twenty-five years Bishop of Rome be also false To which I
add further that 't is evident by Gal. 1. 18 that after three years after Paul return from Arabia he returned to Damascus which might be 〈◊〉 or seven years after Christs death For Papists write that Pâ—â— was converted the 20th year of Tiberius the Emperour which was the second year after Christs death as they themselves reckoâ— And he went after he received his sight to Damascus and then preached Jesus Christ Act. 9. 19 20 22. and thence went into Arabia and thence returned to Damascus again and there preaâ—â—ched and then after three years he went up to Jerusalem to sâ—â— Peter and abode with him fifteen days which could not be 〈◊〉 above six years after Christs death Then fourteen years after that Paul with Barnabas went up from Antioch to Jerusalem thâ—â— is fourteen years after Paul's Conversion as Cornelius a Lapide wiâ—â— have it but others think 't was fourteen yeaâ—â— after his * Dr. Lightfoot's Harmony p. 96. first going up to Jerusalem to sâ—â— Peter which must needs be nineteen or twenâ—â— years aâ— least after Christs death Others will have it to be to the Council of Jerusalem which was as Jerom saith eighteen years after Christs death where Peter was the first but not the conclusive speaker Act. 15. and then and there it was agreed among them that Paul and Barnabas should be the Apostles of the Gentiles and Peter and James of the Jews Gal. 2. 9. And that after this Peter came down to Antioch as Onuphrius affirms ubi supra and that then Paul reproved him to his face for dissembling Which clearly confutes Eusebius his story of St. Peter's being Bishop seven years at Antioch before the second or third year of Claudius Papists say that the Council was held the ninth year of Claudius and that that very year he banished the Jews out of Rome and that then Peter by the counsel of God came from thence * If Peter had then came from Rome and upon such an account 't is very probable that some mention would have been made of it in Sacred Writ as well as of Aquilla ' s and Priscilla ' s Act. 18. 2. to Jerusalem but this they do not prove by good evidence Affirmantis est probare they that affirm that Peter was at Rome must prove it I have proved that Peter was at Jerusalem and the coasts thereabout above 20 years after Christs death then he could not be at Rome the second or third year of Claudius as they say but prove not Cornelius a Lapide saith that from Christs death to Peter's death which was the last year of Nero there Chron. Actuum Apostolorum p. 7. were but 36 years above 20 of which years I have proved Peter to be elsewhere Then it s undeniably true That he sate not seven years Bishop at Antioch and 25 years Bishop at Rome for there remain but 16 years at the most in which time it will be difficult if not impossible to prove that Peter was at Rome That Peter was not at Rome I offer these arguments 1. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans written in the third of Nero's reign say some others say 't was written in the 13th of Claudius in which Peter say Papists sate Bishop Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 10. p. 432 of Rome saluteth many Saints but maketh no mention of St. Peter whom 't is very probable he would not have neglected if he had been there Bishop 2. When Paul was at Rome he wrote to those that were abroad and makes mention of several particular fellow-labourers and yet he makes not mention of Peter Yea though he make mention of the Salutation of Aristarchus and Mâ—rcus one whom they say was at Rome with Peter Jesus called Justus one of the Circumcision and Epaphras and St. Luke the beloved Physician who wrote the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles and Demas who afterward forsook him though I say he remembers these mens Salutations to the Colossians yet not one word of or from Peter Col 4. 10 11 12 14. and when he wrote to Timothy from Rome a little before his death he saith to him Eubulus greeteth thee and Pudens and Linus who is said to be the first Bishop of Rome that is Pastor of the Church there and Claudia and all the brethren yet no remembrance from Peter to him though he had been at Rome and could not but be acquainted with Peter if he had been there 2 Tim. 4. 21. So in his Epistle from Rome to Philemon vers 23 24. he saith thus There salute thee Epaphras my fellow-labourer in Christ Jesus Marcus Aristarchus Demas and Lucas my fellow-labourers yet not a word of Peter 3. Paul mentioning his fellow-workers unto the Kingdom of Goâ— nameth Aristarchus Marcus and Jesus who is called Justus saith thus These are my fellow-workers unto the Kingdom of God which have been a comfort to me but not a word of Peter yea if he had been there Bishop of Rome formerly 't is charitable to conceive that he would have written to the Church at Rome in Paul ' s behalf but not a word of any such matter They say that they heard not any thing concerning him Act. 28. 21. 4. Paul at Rome writing to Timothy tells him thus At my first answer no man stood with me but all men forsook me 2 Tim. 4. 16. Now if Peter had been there and Bishop of Rome as they say he was 't is not probable that he would have forsaken him especially having had such a check for his first denying of his Lord and Master 5. When Paul was brought Prisoner to Rome Luke in the Acts of the Apostles Act. 28. telleth us that he was received of the brethren yet makes no mention at all of Peter though Cornelius a Lapide tell us That Claudius Actuum Apostolorum Chron. p. 5. his Decree for banishing the Jews was revoked the first year of Nero this being they say the third but Diodate saith 't was the tenth or eleventh year of Nero ' s reign iâ— which time Peter might have returned to Rome at least once in tâ—â— years he might have visited his Church there and St. Paul too to whom he had given the right hand of fellowship in a more emiâ—â—â—â— and more dangerous place than Rome even at Jerusalem 6. After Paul had been at Rome three days he sent for the chief of the Jews and when they came to his lodging he gave them an account of his being brought prisoner there Which if Saint Peter had been there 't is very likely he would have known and told them yea if he had been formerly Bishop of Rome though he had been at Jerusalem or Antioch or thereabout he would have sent them notice of it either by letter or by word by some one of the Brethren but that they deny Act. 28. 21. 7. They desire to hear what he thought for as concerning this Sect we know that it is every where spoken against And they
St. Peter who spake of the Church at Literal Babylon which he knowing and hearing St. John whose Scholar they say he was by Babylon in his Revelations to mean Rome thought Peter to mean so too which was the ground of his Error that Peter was at Rome and of those that inconsiderately followed him Old Writers have misreported things and yet have said they had them from the Elders and they from the Apostles Irenaeus who wrote in the next Age after the Iren. l. 2. c. 39. Apostles reports That the Lord Jesus taught forty or fifty years and that this he had of all the Elders of Asia and that they had it from St. John and that St. John lived with them till Trajan's time and that Mr. Calamy was mistaken and abused by a Writer and Printer of his Casual Sermon preached at Aldermanbury after the Act a-against Nonconformists Preaching viz. That we should be delivered Anno 1666 but he affirmed no such words but reproved that vain conceit some of those Elders did not only see John but other Apostles and they heard these things from them And yet notwithstanding all these great Authorities or Traditions this was an erroneous opinion of Irenaeus and that of Epiphanius is held the sounder That Christ lived but about thirty-three years and theâ— suffered death and this is believed because it is most agreeable to Scripture Therefore I say that the testimony of Papias yea of Jerome is not to be credited where there is not good ground in Sacred Scripture for their opinions especially where many probable reasons are produced from Scripture against their uncertain opinions And so I may say of the Fathers that said that Peter was at Rome and died there Some of our Divines produce Jerome to prove that he was Crucified at Jerusalem Papists say that he was Crucified which was a Jewish death and that Paul who without doubt suffered death at Rome was beheaded which was a Roman death Dr. * Confer c. 6. d. 3. p. 265. â—yranus a Papist upon Mat. 23. 34. saith Some of them ye shall kill as James the Brother of John c. Some shall ye crucifie as Peter and Andrew his Brother Vid. also Chrysostom in Mat. 23. 34. Reynolds tells Hart that a learned man viz. Velenus in opusculo inscripto Petrum non fuisse Romam 〈◊〉 illic passum of our side having weighed and seeing the dissention of Writers touching the time that he came to Rome and knowing by the Scripture that their speech of his abode in Rome is false and marking the shameful practise of the Romanists in forging calos for their own advantage as Constantines Donation and espying some such forgery among their Monuments of Peter 〈◊〉 Linus fable of his death and finding his Martyrdom mentioned by Jerom and Lyra in such sort as though he had been crucified by the Scribes and Pharisees he was brought by these and the like perswasions into this opinion that Peter never came to Rome And of this opinion was Balaeâ—â— in Act. Rom. Pont. l. 1. praefat and so have been many others since And besides there were Christians at Rome in the time of Tiberius and Caligula before ever Peter is reported to be at Rome as Eusebius witnesseth Hist l. 2. c. 2. and Tertullian in his Apology c. 5. And if we may believe * Libro 1. recognitionum Clementio Object Papists object that if Peter long ago preached to the Gentiles Act. 15. 17. Ergo he preached at Rome Answ I answer thus 1. That it follows not 2. Paul preached to the Gentiles before Peter did Act. 〈◊〉 3. Before Peter saw the Vision of the sheet and heard the command of the Lord be thought it unlawful for him to go to the Gentiles Act. 10. 28. 4. Peter first preached Christ to Cornelius and his friends at his house in Caesaria Act. 10. 5. 'T is most probable that Antioch received the Gospel from Barnabas and Paul and others before Rome and they were first called Christians Act. 11. 19 26. 6. Some of those strangers of Rome that were at Jerusalem Act. 2. 10. might preach the Gospel at Rome Clement Barnabas was there before Peter And that which is objected out of Act. 28. 21. that the Jews told Paul That they had received no Letters out of Judea concerning him and that neither any of the brethren shewed or spake any harm of him is not to be conceived that they had not received or heard of his Epistle which he sent to the Romans some few years before but concerning his particular business and occasion of his being sent Prisoner then to Rome And it makes much as I observed before against St. Peter's being so long Bishop at Rome as Papists would have that these Jews should hear nothing of Paul and be so ignorant of the Doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of which Peter was by special agreement an Apostle to them Thus I suppose I have sufficiently overthrown the main foundation of the Popes Primacy and Supremacy For if Peter was never at Rome then he was not Bishop of Rome and if he was not Bishop of Rome then the Pope of Rome is not his Successor in the Episcopacy thereof and then by Papists own consequence he is not supreme Bishop of all the Church 3. The Pope of Rome successively was and hath been the inventor and setter forth of Superstitious and Pharisaical Sects which are against the Word of God and the glory of his name To shew in particular how every Pope brought some Superstition into the Church would be very Voluminous for that therefore I must refer you to the Centurists to Dr. Reynolds Conference with Hart to Dr Henry More 's Mystery of Iniquity and the little Treatise of ancient Ceremonies called Vitis degeneris Bishop Jewel's Works and the Mass in English and Latin by James Mountain Printed 1641. I might refer you to the Popes Decretals and indeed they are a good evidence against themselves but they are late forgeries devised to justifie their latter Superstitions and Usurpations therefore I forbear though some Romanizing Protestants have them in too high estimation Though â—ome real Hereticks were the first Inventors of some Superstitions yet the Popes and their Agents were the first setters up imposers of theâ—â— in the Church bringing of Spittle Salt Cream Oyl and the sign of the Cross into the service of God at Baptism is well known to be theirs Kneeling or adoring as * Bishop Sparrow in his Rationale p. 273. some men call it at the receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Vsing the sign of the Cross above thirty times praying to and for the Dead at their Mass worshipping of †Vide ubi supra p. 〈◊〉 what the Church of England saith in her Homily against peril of Idolatry part 3. p. 70. Images of Saints departed this life of Crucifixes the Cross Altars bowing to the East their Superstitious Fasts and Feasts putting holiness in times
said to Moses Thou shalt see my back-parts Exod. 33. 23. Sometimes he turns again shewing his face to the people passing by because St. Paul saith Videmus in aenigmate we see through a glass darkly 1 Cor. 13. 12. When the Priest passeth from one corner of the Altar to the other the Clerk which serves him removes also with him because the Lord said Where I am there shall also my servant be Joh. 12. 26. The Massifying Bishop stands at the right horn of the Altar because it is written Deus ab austro veniet God shall come from the South These things are to be seen in Bishop Durand's Rationale in the Books of Pope Innocent the third of the Mysteries of the Mass in Gabriel Biel upon the Canon of the Mass in Tollet of the Instruction of Priests in Hugo de Sancto Victore in his Mirrour of the Church Who but the Popes instituted in the Church the making of the sign of the Cross to fright away the Devil who but Pope Honorius not above 500 years since instituted kneeling which some call adoring at receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Which saith Bishop Jewel William Bishop Jewel Serm. upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 51 52. Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding art 8. d. 1. pag. 283. where he pleads against adoration of the Sacrament that there is neither commandment of Christ nor any word or example of the Apostles or ancient Fathers for it but that 't was lately devised by Pope Honorius about Anno 1226. but after Transubstantiation as Vitiâ— Degeneâ—â— saith pag. 109. Durand and John Dunce Scotus perceiving could not be justified without great peril of Idolatry they removed the bread and wine out of the Sacrament and turned them into the body and blood of Christ and so brought in Transubstantiation which destroys not only the nature of the Sacrament but the body and blood of Christ too All Papists that I have read as * Aquinas 3. q. 75. a. 2. O. Contrariatur venerationi hujus Sacramenti si aliqua substantia creata esset ibi quae non possit adoratione latriae adorari Aquinas Vasquez †Bellar. de Sacramento Eucharistiae l. 2. c. 8. a. 2. cap. 13. a. 5. cap. 24. a. 6. Hardâ—ng's answer to Jewel's Challenge fol. 111. a. Bellarmine and some others say as Durand and Scotâ—â— do that to kneel at receiving the bread and wine at the Lords-Supper as Papists did if Christs body and blood be not corporally present under them is Idolatry Upon this account I find the learned Frenchman * Dall Apol. c. 20. and Dr. Heylin saith thus The Lutherans held with the Catholicks that Christs body was really in the Sacrament else they knew that there was no reverence due to the Sacrament History of Presbytery p. 2. Yea he saith This prayer the body of the Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy body and soul unto eternal life was left out of King Edward's second Liturgy because 't was thought to savour of Transubstantiation Cypr. Angl. 25. A B. Laud in his Star Chamber-Speech pag. 55. saith very well of Communion Tables standing Altarwise thus That if it advance or usher in Superstition and Popery it ought to stand so in none Dallaus saying to this purpose That this viz. their kneeling at receiving the Elements in that Sacrament were ground enough if there were nothing else to separate from the Church of Rome All our learned and sound Divines maintain against the Church of Rome That it is Idolatry to kneel purposely before a creature in a Religious state or state of worship put before a man that we may not do the needless works of Idolators that 't is scandalous to do needlesly as Idolators do that a publick declaration of a mans good intention in doing a needless action that appears evil or is otherwise scandalous frees not that action from being actively scandalous That it 's impossible to adore God in or through an image and set give no religious positive reverence that is worship to the image To give the appropriate signs significative of our agnition of the Divine excellency to any thing that is not God is Idolatry Nay though these appropriate signs were used without devotion by the party towards the supposed object and were intended only by other men to be directed thither or only were interpretable to be so directed it were Idolatry notwithstanding saith Dr. Henry More in his Mystery of Iniquity c. 10. p. 32. Idolatry is committed saith he when we perform some rite or ceremony that is to say some external religious action appropriated to the signifying our acknowledgment of divine eminency before or rather unto that which is not God Where by before or unto I understand saith he an intended direction by our selves or others or at least by interpretation of custom of the religious action as to an object we would * If this and what Bishop Prideaux Fasc cont loc 4. S. 3. q. 6. p. 241 be true I see not how Catholicks or Lutherans or Dr. Heylin himself can free themselves from Idolatry â—â— injungitur ut indifferens recipitur a nostris ut gost is summae reverentiae tanto mysterio debitus For is not kneeling received and done by them as to an object they would honour thereby and is not kneeling a purposed and an accustomed sign of our acknowledgment of Divine excellency in Gods house and in Gods worship there honour thereby for that is the only thing whereby the action becomes Idolatry for there will always be a necessity of performing our religious rites before or towards something or other by way of circumstance of place which might be without the least guilt or suspition of that crime Wherefore it is the intended and accustomary application of the appropriate signs of the acknowledgment of the Divine excellency unto an object where the Divine excellencies are not that is to any thing that is not truly God which is this hainous sin of Idolatry saith Dr. Henry More in his Mystery of Iniquity c. 10. p. 33. For saith he as a woman that renders or gives up to one that is not her husband what is appropriate to her husband to wit the use of her body let her fancy what mental restrictions or directions of her intention she will in the act is questionless a downright adulteress so whosoever applies the appropriate acknowledgments of the Divine excellencies which is religious worship to that which is not God let him mince it as well as he can with mental limitations and restrictions if he once pass this religious worship upon this undue object he is thereby without all controversie a gross Idolater Ibid. Again he saith Whatsoever is interposed betwixt God and us by way of object in our worshipping is not an help but an hinderance to the perfection of that worship Ibid. c. 14. p. 50. To worship before an image and to worship an image are in sacred Scripture all
them in their sanctified Banners to make them fortunate Vide Elements of Armory p. 166. 8. In this Church of St. Peter's is besides the said 25 little Altars one great Altar or Sepulcher viz. that of St. Peter which is as it were their Sanctum Sanctorum upon which no man may celebrate Mass but the Pope only This Altar or Sepulcher is made four square of a perfect Cubical figure the length breadth and height of it are equal the measure of every side or area of this Altar is precisely 25 foot of square measure as the words of Baronius Ann. 324. and Onuphrius de praecip Rom. Basil c. 4. do testifie 9. They have most remarkably imprinted the number 25 upon all their Altars because Christs 5 Wounds as they call them are in 5 several places engraven upon the top of every Altar Which their multiplying of our Saviours Wounds from 5 to 25 what it may signifie either in their intention or beyond their intention is not material to enquire but certain it is that there are usually and ordinarily 25 Prints marks or dints engraven upon all their Altars St. Peter's hath thus and so have others 10. The Pope keeps his Jubilee every 25 year 11. As they seem to affect saith he the 25th year so also the 25th day of the Month for their chief Holy-days are upon the 25th day more than upon any other day as the 25th of December for the Nativity of our Saviour The 25th of January for St. * That is Paul the Hermite not the Apostle Paul's Conversion The 25th of February for the Feast of St. Mathias The 25th of March for the Annunciation of the blessed Virgin The 25th of April for Saint Marks day The 25th of July for St. James his day and upon the 25th day of August is the Feast of St. Bartholomew celebrated at Rome as their Breviary witnesseth although in other places it be celebrated one day sooner 12. 'T is observed by a learned man that when Gregory reformed the Kalendar they rejected the Golden Number 19 by which means they made a twofold Epact of 25 of which one is written thus 25 the other thus XXV or in a different colour Who also addeth this That until he could see some reason why the Jesuits fastned this conceit upon 25 rather than upon any other number he should impute it to their affectation of this number above all other And 't is observed that Antiochus who in many almost in all things was a type of Antichrist insomuch that what some Authors expound of Antiochus in Daniel other Authors interpret of Antichrist faileth not in this but of all the days of the month he and his Officers did solemnize the 25th day by offering sacrifice upon the Idols Altars on that day and by their Monthly persecution of the Jews on that day as appears Mac. 1. 59. Obj. But it 's objected concerning the number of the Colledg of Cardinals that at their first institution it was not 25 but 26 because the Pope numbreth himself among the Cardinals as he is Peter's Successor in his Apostleship and because he is a Cardinal so accounted Answ To this 't is answered that the Popes were not of the decreed number 25 as Christ was not numbred among the 12 Apostles though he was an Apostle Heb. 3. 1. but was their Lord and Master and head So the Pope as he pretends himself to be Vicarius Christi is not and cannot be numbred among the Cardinals but is their Lord and head The reason why the number 666 was chosen saith Mr. Potter was because the only figure of this number is a perfect figure perfectly representing the city of Rome as the number 144 was chosen because the figure of this number is a perfect figure perfectly representing the city of Jerusalem For which he gives many reasons and proves what he saith by Demonstrations too many and large to be set down here which I believe all the Papists in the world will never be able fully to answer to him for brevities sake I must necessarily refer you Thus far Mr. Potter of the Number of the Beast 666. I pray seriously read the Book you 'l find more in it than I can express here Mr. Mede when he looked upon it at first he sleighted it and read it with much prejudice but by that time he had read all of it and read it again he admired it as the excellentest piece that ever was Printed of that subject By counting the Number 666 thus you may find the rise body and seat of Antichrist If the application of the Number 666 or its root 25 doth discover any other Church or City besides Rome it 's no more than Dr. H. More and Mr. Mede collect that there may be little Babylons petty Harlots elsewhere out of Rome in Italy and though it may hold the faith as Rome anciently did yet it may degenerate and become Romish first and so Antichristian in the end as the City and Church of Rome did and doth * Which I humbly conceive should make all Churches examine themselves what they hold and practise that is held and practised by that apostatized Church and come wholly off from her in what she hath not express Canonical Scripture for or allowed example of or precept for it or promise to it therein And the apostacy of other Churches may be measured by their near accession to and agreement with this Queen of Harlots As learned Dr. Henry More hath observed in his Synopsis Apocalyptica l. 1. cap. 15. Sect. 10. pag. 314. where he shews that the square root of the number of the Beast is 25 and doth detect to whom the Vision of the Beast doth belong And besides the name long since foretold and found to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose Numeral Letters make the Number 666 is considerable as appears thus Λ Α Τ Ε Ι ΠΟ Σ 50 1 30 5 10 300 70 200 Put these Numbers together and you may find that they make exactly the number 666. And 't is very well known that upon the division of the Empire into Eastern and Western the Greeks called the Western Churches the Latin Churches and the Western Bishops in General Councils were called the Latin Bishops and the distinction of the subscriptions were under the titles of Patrum Latinorum patrum Graecorum and the very name of the Beast doth determine him to Rome and Italy where * Dr. Prideaux in his Introduction to History put out in his Son Matthews name P. 91. saith that Vitalianus one of the Bishops of Rome in the year 666 sent Theodorus a Greek and Hadrian an African into England to bring in the Latin service being the year 666 just the number of the Beast of which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 give a shrewd account the Latin Tongue was and is used in every thing Mass Prayers Hymns Litany Canons Decretals Bulls Councils Bible which
agreeing with other marks of the Beast is very significant and convincing that the Pope of Rome with his apostatizing Clergy is the great Whore or Antichrist I have been so large in this point that I must for brevities sake forbear to alledg what learned King James in his Epistle to his Apology to all Christian Princes saith where he fully and clearly proves the Pope to be Antichrist And in his Paraphrase upon the Revelations in which he every where calls the Pope of Rome Antichrist and the Church of Rome the false persecuting and Antichristian Church However Dr. Heylin in his Cyprianus Anglicus endeavours dishonourably to pervert his words and works Dr. Prideaux in his Sermon upon Rev. 2. 4. p. 36. Sermonum saith thus roundly Fathers and brethren is this a time to make a doubt whether the Pope be Antichrist or no seeing his horns and marks are so apparently discovered Bishop Sanderson in his Sermon upon 1 Tim. 4. 4. p. 414. Sermonum saith thus The Apostle gives instance in two of those Antichristian Doctrines viz. a prohibition of Marriage and an injunction of abstinence from Meats which particulars being so agreeable to the present tenets of the Romish Synagogue do give even of themselves alone a strong suspition that there is the seat of Antichrist But joined unto the other prophesies of St. Paul and of St. John in other places make it so 2 Thes 2. 3. Apoc. 13. 11. unquestionable that they who will needs be so unreasonably charitable as to think the Pope is not Antichrist may at the least wonder as * Moulins Accomplishment in the Preface one saith well by what strange chance it fell out that these Apostles should draw the picture of Antichrist in every point and limb so just like the Pope and yet never think of him I have one thing more to remind you of and that is this That though the Antichristian Church of Rome do in words profess the Doctrine of the Apostles Creed yet by their other super added Doctrines they do overthrow it As is evidently to be seen in the sum of their Doctrine before recited their own 13 Articles superadded to the first 12 of the Nicene Creed do overturn and destroy in effect them Mr. Thomson in his Arraignment of Antichrist p. 96 97 c. will inform you how they cross every Article of the Creed and so will others as Hemingius Antichristi-machia Beza cap. 7. conf Dr. Abbot against Bishop Part 3. To all which let me I pray add but a little more which the Church of England plainly saith in her Homily for Whitsunday p. 213 214 215 216. where having declared three marks of a true Church whereby it may be Marks of a true Church known viz. 1. Pure and sound Doctrine preached 2. The Sacraments ministred according to Christs institution 3. The right use of Ecclesiastical Discipline It saith thus Now if ye will compare this with the Church of Rome not as it was in the beginning but as it is at present and hath been for the space of 900 years and odd you shall well perceive the state thereof to be so far wide * Rome as 't is now is no true Church this A. B. Laud contradicts in his Relation of Conf. p. 〈◊〉 and Bishop Mountague in his Gag 50. A. B. Laud saith that Papists and Protestants hold not forth a different Religion 〈◊〉 Bishop Mountague saith That the present Church of Rome is not divers from the ancient Church of Rome but remains firm in the same foundation of Doctrine and Sacraments from the nature of a true Church that nothing can be more Neither are they built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets retaining the sound and pure Doctrine of Jesus Christ neither yet do they order the Sacraments or the Ecclesiastical keys in such sort as he did first institute and ordain them but have so intermingled their own traditions and inventions by chopping and changing by adding and plucking away the now they may seem to be converted into a new guise Christ commanded unto his Church a Sacrament of his body and blood they have changed it into a †So did Gyles Widdows in his Schismatical kneeless Puritan p. 34 89. the Church is the place of Gods presence the Communion-Table the Chair of State of the Lord Jesus and his chiefest place of presence in our Church where his Priests sacrifice the Lords Supper to reconcile us to God offended with our daily sins Bp. Sparrow saith 't is an unbloody sacrifice in his Ration p 391. p. 280. he saith the Priest offers up the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist Sacrifice Christ ministred to the Apostles and the Apostles to other men indifferently under both kinds they have robbed the lay-people of the cup saying that for them one kind is sufficient Christ ordained no other element to be used in Baptism but only water whereunto when the word is joined it is made as St. Augustine saith a full and perfect Sacrament they being wiser in their own conceit than Christ think it is not well nor orderly done unless they use conjuration unless they hallow the water unless there be oyl salt spittle tapers why was the sign of the Cross left out and such other dumb ceremonies serving to no use contrary to the plain rule of St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. who willed all things to be done in the Church unto edification Christ ordained the authority of the Keys to excommunicate notorious sinners and to absolve them which are truly penitent they abuse this power at their own pleasure as well in cursing the godly with bell book and candle as also absolving the reprobate which are known to be unworthy of any Christian society whereof they that list may see examples let them search their lives To be short look what our Saviour Christ pronounced of the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel the same may be boldly and with safe conscience pronounced of the Bishops of Rome namely that they have forsaken and daily do forsake the commandments of God to erect and set up their own constitutions Which thing being true as all they that have any light in Gods word must needs confess we may well conclude according to the rule of Augustine that the Bishops Aug. contra Petiliam Donastae Epistol c. 4. of Rome and their adherents are NOT THE TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST much less then to be taken as CHIEF HEADS AND RULERS of the same Whosoever saith he do dissent from the Scriptures concerning the Head although they be found in all places where the Church is appointed yet are not in the Church a plain place concluding directly against the Church of Rome Wheresoever ye find the spirit of arrogance and pride the spirit of envy hatred contention cruelty murther extortion witchcraft necromancy c. assure your selves that there is the spirit of the Devil and not of God albeit they pretend to the world never
that they 〈◊〉 things indifferent which may be abâ—sed or well used Answ This 〈◊〉 yielded in part Flowers are wrougâ—â— in Carpets Arras and Pictures 〈◊〉 Princes printed or stamped in theâ—â— Coyns which when Christ did see in the Roman Coyn we read 〈◊〉 that he reprehended it neither do we condemn the art of Painting and Image-making as wicked of themselves but we would grant them that Images used for no Religion or Superstition rather we mean Images of none worshipped nor in danger to be worshipped of any may be suffered But Images placed publickly in Temples cannot possibly be without danger of worshipping and Idolatry wherefore they are not publickly to be had or suffered in Temples The Jews to whom the Law was first given and should best know the meaning of it would not suffer Images publickly to be in the Temple at Jerusalem though no worshipping was required at their hands but rather offered themselves to death than to assent that Images should be once placed in the Temple neither would they suffer any Image-maker among them And Origen added this clause lest their minds should be plucked from God to the contemplation of earthly things And they are much commended for this earnest zeal in maintaining Gods honour and true Religion P. 45. And truth it is that Jews and Turks who abhor Images and Idols as directly forbidden in Gods Word will never come to the truth of our Religion while the stumbling-blocks of Images remain among us and lie in their way And P. 49. What meaneth it that Christians after the use of the Gentiles Idolaters cap and knee before Images is not this stooping and kneeling before them adoration of them which is forbidden so directly by Gods Word P. 50. Satan desiring to rob God of his honour desireth exceedingly that such honour might be given to him wherefore those which give the honour due to the Creator to any creature do service acceptable to no Saints who be the friends of God but unto Satan Gods and mans mortal and sworn enemy Obj. But they say that they do not worship the Image as the Gentiles did their Idols but God and the Saints whom the Images do represent and therefore that their doings before Images are not like the Idolatry of the Gentiles before their Idols Answ 'T is answered thus St. Augustine Lactantius and Clemens do prove evidently that by this their answer they be all one with the Gentiles-Idolaters The Gentiles saith St. Augustine which seem to be of the purer Religion say We worship not the Images but by the corporal Images we do behold the signs of the things which we ought to worship And Lactantius saith the Gentiles say we fear not the Images but them after whose likenesses the Images be made and to whose names they be consecrated And Clemens saith that Serpent the Devil uttereth these words by the mouth of certain men We to the honour of the invisible God worship visible Images which surely is not false See how in using the same excuses which the Gentile-Idolaters pretended they shew themselves to join with them in Idolatry For notwithstanding this excuse Augustine Lactantius and Clemens prove them Idolaters And the Scriptures say they worship stocks and stones notwithstanding this excuse even as our Image-mongers do And Ezekiel therefore calleth the gods of the Assyrians stocks and stones although they were but Images of their gods So are our Images of God and the Saints named by the names of God and his Saints after the use of the Gentiles What should it mean that they according as did the Gentile-Idolaters light Candles at noon-time or at midnight before them but therewith to honour them for other use is none of so doing for in the day it needeth not but was ever a Proverb of foolishness to light a candle at noon-day And in the night it availeth not to light a candle before the blind and God hath neither use nor honour thereof By which it appeareth that Are not Tapers appearances of the same Religion to be abstained from as well as candles we do agree with the Gentile-Idolaters in our Candle-Religion And P. 52. As the Gentiles so our Image-maintainers have invented and spread many lying-tales and written many Fables and Miracles of Images And P. 53. Among the holy Relicks they have they say the tayl of the Asse on which our Saviour rode which they offer to be kissed and to be offered unto And P. 55. The having of Images in Churches publickly hath not only brought us to worshipping of them but to worshipping of them with the same kind of worship wherewith they worship the Copy as the Homily shews out of Naclaâ—tus Bishop of Clugium And P. 56. the Homily saith thus Having shewed and proved that our Images have been be and will be worshipped and by their own confession that they ought to be worshipped I will out of Gods Word make this general argument against all such makers setters up and maintainers of Images in publick places thus And first I will begin with the words of our Saviour Christ Wo be to that man by whom an offence is given Wo be to him that * Is there not the same reason against Popish Ceremonies and other unnecessary things offendeth one of these little ones or weak ones Mat. 18. Better were it for him that a milstone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the midst of the sea and drowned than that he should offend one of these little ones or weak ones And in Deut. 27. God himself denounceth him accursed that maketh the blind to wander out of the way And in Levit. 19. Thou shalt not lay a stumbling-block or stone before the blind But Images have been be and as afterwards shall be proved ever * May not the same be said of Popish Ceremonies Con the Popes Nuncio brought with him into England in A. B. Laud ' s reign many Reliques of Saints Medals and pieces of gold with the Popes picture on them to seduce the Ladies of the Court and Country Heylin ' s Cyp. Angl. l. 4. p. 358. will be offences and stumbling-blocks especially to the weak simple and blind common people deceiving their hearts by the cunning of the Artificer as the Scripture expresly in sundry places doth testifie and so bringeth them to Idolatry and therefore wo be to the erector setters up and maintainers of Images in Churches for a greater penalty remaineth for them than the death of the body Obj. If it be replied that this offence may be taken away by diligent and sincere doctrine and preaching of Gods Word as by other means and that Images in Churches therefore be not things absolutely evil to all men although dangerous to some and therefore that it were to be holden that the publick having of them in Churches is not expedient as a thing perilous rather than unlawful and utterly wicked Ans This will be answered by proving the third Article which
followeth That it is not possible if Images be suffered in Churches either by preaching of Gods Word or by any other means to keep the people from worshipping of them and so to avoid Idolatry And 1. concerning preaching if it should be admitted that although Images were suffered in Churches yet might Idolatry by diligent and sincere preaching of Gods Word be avoided it should follow of necessity that sincere Doctrine might always be had and continue as well as Images and so that wheresoever to offence were erected an Image there also of reason a godly and sincere Preacher should and might be continually maintained for it is reason that the warning be as common as the stumbling-block the remedy as large as the offence the medicine as general as the poyson but that is not * At least not probable for those rulers that are so foolish as to set up or suffer needless Images will be so wicked as to set up idle or Idolatrous Preachers also possible as both reason and experience teacheth Wherefore preaching cannot stay Idolatry Images being publickly suffered For an Image which will last for many hundred years may for a little be bought but a good Preacher cannot with much be continually maintained Item if the Prince will Those Preachers that are offended at their pulling down and see no hurt in them but conceive much good in and by them will never be good Preachers against them and such was Bishop Sanderson as appears by his Sermon upon Rom. 3. 8. p. 70. in 4to fuffer it there will be by and by many yea infinite Images but sincere Preachers were and ever shall be but a few in respect of the multitude to be taught For our Saviour Christ saith the Harvest is plentiful but the workmen are but few which hath been hitherto true and will be to the worlds end And in our time and in our Country so true that every Shire should scarcely have one good Preacher if they were divided Now Images will continue to the beholders preach their Doctrine that is worshipping of Images and Idolatry to which preaching mankind is exceeding prone and inclined to give ear and credit as experience of all ages and Nations doth too much prove But a true Preacher to stay this mischief is in very many places scarcely heard in one whole year and some where not once in seven years as is evident to be proved And that evil opinion which hath been long rooted in mens hearts cannot suddenly by one Sermon be rooted out clean And as few â—â—inclined to credit sound Doctrine as many and almost all be prone to Superstition and Idolatry so that herein appeareth not only a difficulty but also an impossibility of the remedy It appears not that sound and sincere Preaching hath continued in one place above a hundred years but 't is evident that Images superstition and worshipping of Images and Idolatry have continued many hundred years For all writing and experience do testifie that good things do by little and little ever decay until they be clean banished and contrariwise evil things do more and more increase till they come to a full perfection and wickedness For example for preaching of Gods Word most sincere in the beginning by process of time waxed less and less pure and after corrupt and at last altogether laid down and left off and other inventions of men crept in place of it And on the other part Images among Christian men were first painted and that in whole stories together which had some signification in them afterwards they were embossed and made of timber stone plaister and metal And first they were only kept privately in private mens houses and then afterwards they crept into Churches but first by painting but afterwards by embossing and yet were they at first no where worshipped but shortly after they began to be worshipped of the ignorant sort of men as appeareth by Gregory the first Bishop of Rome in his Epistle to Serenus Bishop of Marcelles Of which two Bishops Serenus for Idolatry committed to the Images brake and burnt them Gregory although he thought it tollerable to let them stand yet he judged it abominable that they should be worshipped and thought as is now alledged that the worshipping of them might be stayed by teaching of Gods Word according as he exhorts Serenus to teach the people as in that Epistle appeareth But whether Gregory's opinion or Serenus his judgment were better herein consider ye For experience by and by confuteth Gregory's opinion For notwithstanding Gregory's writing and others preaching Images being once set up in Temples simple men and women shortly after fell on heaps I humbly pray may not the same be said of kneeling at receiving the Sacrament was it not at first injoined as a thing indifferent but was it not received of ours as a gesture of the highest reverence due to so great a mystery as Bishop Prideaux speaks And doth not Bishop Sparrow call it adoring in his Rationale p. 273. Vide Art 1. p. 5. hujus to worshipping of them and at last the learned also were carried away with the publick error as with a violent stream or flood And at the second Council at Nice the Bishops and Clergy decreed That Images should be worshipped and so by occasion of these stumbling-blocks not only the unlearned and simple but the learned and wise not the people only but the Bishops not the sheep only but the shepherds themselves who should have been guides in the right way fell to Idolatry in worshipping of Images And P. 69. the Homily saith thus The Romish Church is not only an Idolatrous Church an Harlot as the Scripture calleth her but also a foul filthy old withered Harlot for she is of ancient years understanding her lack of nature and * Yet Hooker in his Ecclesiast Policy l. 4. Sec. 9. p. 145. in answer to Mr. Cartwright ' s and Bucer ' s Objection against Popish Ceremonies viz. That Popery for want of utter extirpation of her Ceremonies hath taken root and flourished again but hath not been able to re-establish it self in any place after provision made against it by utter evacuation of all Romish Ceremonies saith thus As we deny not but that this may be true so being of two evils to chuse the less we hold it better that the friends and favourers of the Church of Rome should be in some kind of hope to have a corrupt Religion restored than both we and they conceive just fear lest under the colour of rooting out Popery the most effectual means to bear up the state of Religion be removed and so a â—â—y made for Paganism or for extream barbarity to re-enter To which by the way I give this short answer 1. That he acts directly against the Doctrine of the Church of England and therefore it is no wonder that his Book was commended to the Pope of Rome as the best written in English and that he alone deserved
Reverend Bishop Jewel in his Defence of his Apology c. 3. divis 10. tells us That the old Council at Carthage commanded that nothing should be read in Christs congregation but the Canonical Def. of Apol. p. 571. Scriptures Which words saith he are to be found in the Council of Vide Homil. for Rogation-week Part 3. p. 230. Hippo which is the abridgment of the third Council of Carthage in these words Scripturae Canonicae in ecclesia legendae quae sunt praeter quaâ— alia non legantur that is the Scriptures Canonical which are to be read in the Church and besides which nothing may be read Et non oportet libros qui sunt extra canonem legere nisi solos canonicos veteris novi Testamenti That is we may not read any Books that be without the Canon but only the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament There ye may find the Decrees of two of the Kings of France Lewis and Charles In Templis tantum canonici libri id est sacrae literae legantur That is Let there be read in the Churches only the Canonical Books that is to say the holy Scriptures and many other good sayings and testimonies to the same purpose And Harding's shift or addition to or exposition of the Decree of Carthage viz. That nothing be read in the Church but the Canonical Scripture sub nomine divinarum Scripturarum under the name of the Dâ—vine Scriptures will not help our Bishops for they have appointed those Apocryphal Scriptures which they have appointed in the Calendar to be read as parts of the Old Testament for they say expresly in their * See the order in the Book of Common-Prayer for reading the first and second Lessons 'T is probable that by this order our Bishops have deceived our Parliaments who believing them searched not and knew not that Apocryphals were to be read as Canonical Scripture order for reading the Lessons That they have appointed the Old Testament to be read for the first Lessons and the New Testament for the second Lessons throughout the year And in their Calendar to which they specially direct us for the finding of those Lessons they appoint as was said before and is there to be seen above 120 Chapers of Apocryphal Books to be read in our Churches and Chappels for the first Lessons many of which as I have manifested are contrary in many things to the pure word of God Obj. But Bishop Prideaux in answer to the Papists who say that the Apocryphals are called by the Fathers Scripture and Canonical saith with the Fathers there is a twofold Canon 1. Morum of manners 2. Fidei of faith these saith he are sometimes called Canonical in the first sense not in the second Answ To which I answer thus 1. That the Fathers were but meer men and not infallibly guided by the holy and unerring spirit of God 2. That they had their errors and did contradict themselves 3. That Mr. Hildersham though he speak well of the Fathers whom you say was a Conformist proves by three good reasons That our learned Divines in these days may know more and have better judgment in Religion than the Fathers had as 1. They are born and bred in the knowledg and profession of the truth and have known from their childhood the holy Scriptures which are able to make them wise unto salvation as the Apostle speaketh of Timothy 2 Tim. 3. 15. Whereas most of the Fathers were bred and had lived long in Gentilism and beresie before they came to the knowledg of the truth 2. They enjoy the benefit both of all the Fathers own labours and of the writings of many other learned men also which the Fathers themselves could not do A Dwarf may see farther upon a Giants shoulder than the Giant 3. They have the help both of far better Translations of the Scripture than the Fathers could have and of the knowledg of the Tongues also which the chief of the Fathers are well known to have been wanting in 4. The Bishop saith nothing to that that they are called Scripture 5. That there are many erroreous Doctrines contrary to the Canonical Scriptures in those Books and some in those appointed to be read as I have shewed before which may do much mischief to the true Church of Christ and teach false Doctrine instead of good manners 6. That they are not a good Canon for manners as I have shewed in Tobit's wife her passionate bidding her husband who gave her good counsel to hold his peace and immoderate bewailing her Son who was well Tob. 10. 6 7. to which may be added Raguels swearing that Tobius should stay with him fourteen days and in teaching Tobias to conjure or spell away the Devil Tob. 6. 16 17. which Tobias practised Tob. 8. 2 3. and in the Angel Raphaels lying in saying that he was Azarias the son of Ananias the great and of Tobits brethren Tob. 5. 12. and in saying that he was one of the seven Angels that did bring to remembrance Tobias and Sarahs prayers and that did present the prayers of the Saints before the holy one Tob. 12. 12 15. And in Judiths lying hypocritical dissembling and swearing to compass her treacherous and bloody design and praying to God for to bless her deceit and commending the wicked and cruel fact of Simeon which God by Jacob condemned Judith 9. 2 3 4 10 13. Judith 10. 12 13. and Judith 11. Judith 12. which may and no doubt will teach evil men and women more evil than good manners and this too not so much accidentally as by themselves and their own nature 7. The Canonical Scriptures are a sufficient Canon for Doctrine of faith and * Homily for Rogation week Part 3d p. 230. And no where can we more certainly search for the knowledg of this will of God by the which we must direct all our works and deeds but in the holy Scriptures manners and therefore there is no need of reading these Books to teach men good manners 8. If the Popish Legends are not to be read in publick because full of lyes and fictions then by the same reason should not Tobit Judith the History of Bell and the Dragon be read which are full of such things Obj. But Bishop Prideaux saith That the Apocryphal Books are read for their conformity for the most part with the Canonical as ancient and sacred Homilies to inform and teach good manners not to confirm Doctrine Fasc cont c. 1. q 2. p. 16. loc 4. Sec. 3. q 6. p. 237. Answ To this I answer as before 1. That the word of God is a perfect and perspicuous rule for Doctrine of faith and good manners 2. That there are many things in those Books inconformable to the Canonical Scriptures both for Doctrine and manners as the Bishops answer maximâ ex parte implies and as I have plainly shewed and therefore they are not sacred
Homilies fit to be read in publick to teach people manners 3. That they do not explain * Ecclesiasticus or the Book of Wisdom saith the first Prologue to it contains many dark sentences and parables many things in the Canonical Scripures but are as obscure as I hinted before the 24th Chapter of Ecclesiasticus is and might be manifested in many more yea they obscure the holy Scriptures and render them doubtful yea they are contrary to the Canonical A. B. Vsher Sum of Ch Relig p. 15. and Diodate say and shew that Baruch is contrary to Sacred Scripture and in 2 Mac. 12. 42 43 44 45. is prayer for the Dead which is condemned by all our sound Divines Scriptures 4. If their conformity to the Canonical Scriptures for the most part be a sufficient reason for their appointment to be read in publick I humbly conceive that there might be found many Nonconformists works as Mr. Allen's Vindiciae Pietatis Mr. Ball 's Catechism a Treatise of the Covenant Mr. Burrough his four Treatises Mr. Dod upon the Commandments Dr. Jacomb upon Rom. 8. Mr. Jeanes his mixture of Scholastical with Practical Divinity wherein he hath clearly worsted your great Goliahs Dr. Hamond and Dr. Taylor Dr. Manton's work upon James and Jude Dr. Spurstow of the Promises Mr Watson's Sermons and many others which I name not because I have not read them more conformable to the pure word of God than these Apocryphal Books but especially the learned Assembly of Divines their larger and shorter Catechisms and Confession of Faith commended by learned A B. Vsher as the best that ever were made by any Church since the Apostles times in which I believe the severest Conformist that is cannot by all his wit and learning clearly prove by Canonical Scripture any error either concerning Faith or manners and therefore sure if the Bishops reason be good they are more fit and profitable to be appointed to be read and taught in publick than the Apocryphal Books that are appointed by our Bishops 5. Papists 't is to be feared will say that Th. Aquinas his Sums and Pet. Lumbard his Sentences collected out of the ancient Fathers are for the most part conformable to the Canonical Scriptures and that therefore by our Bishops reason they may be read as well as the Sacred Scriptures at least for instruction for manners what they will say for their lying Legends as Protestants commonly call them I know not but I am sure that several of our learned Protestants as well as Jerome and Augustine of old look upon Tobit and Judith the History of Susanna Bell and the Dragon to be but Comedies Romances or feigned Stories such as the Popish Legends are A B. * Sum of Christian Relig. p. 15 16. Vsher calls many of the Apocryphal Books fables Bishop †Fascic contr cap. 1. q. 2. pag. 16. Prideaux saith 't is uncertain whether Tobit Judith the fragments of Susanna Bell and the Dragon are not rather to be taken for Comedies or fictions than true Narrations Diodate in his Advertisement concerning Apocryphal Books saith That the matter of the Book is full of strange Narrations that have neither ground nor conformity with Authentical Scripture as those of the love of a Devil to a chaste and holy maiden of the death of her husbands of the manner of driving him away of binding him to a certain place of the long conversâ—â—â— of the holy Angel with him things which do savour of a Jewish fable composed for delight to give some instruction of vertue according to the manner of that Nation which seems to be confirmed because neither in Josephus a curious searcher of Jewish Antiquities as Bishop Prideaux assures me nor any other Jewish Author there is any tract of this History That Judith is a feigned Narration he proves by undeniable Arguments The Additions to Daniel of which the Song of the three Children is part part of which was gotten into our Common-Prayer-Book in the Benedicite and the History of Susanna and Bell and the Dragon are other parts Aman. Polanus affirms that St. Jerome Polan Syntag. l. 1. c. 34. p. 63. and Augustine call them Fables Obj. But Bishop Prideaux saith further in answer to this Objection That Canonical Scriptures are laid by and Apocryphals substituted in their stead to be read in publick That in eading that is not always proposed which 〈◊〉 Bishop Prideaux Fasc Controversiarum cap. 1. q. 2. p. 16. in itâ—s self most excellent but that which doth most serve to the edification of the hearers 1 Cor. 14. 26. That when their Apocryphals are read they are not equalled with Canonicals but are interposed as certain easie institutes which excite the slower hearers to embrace the Canonicals as Homilies and Sermons do Answ To this I answer 1. That these things are said but not proved 2. That if the Bishops Answer be to the Objection his words imply That the reading of the Apocryphals which are fabulous erroneous and contrary to the word of truth is more inservient to the edification of the hearers than the reading of Gods holy and pure word of Truth is which I deny and prove to be false thus 〈◊〉 That which is either the pure Word of God or is consonant thereunto and so free from fabulousness falseness approbation of toleration of evil must needs be more conducing to edification of the hearers than that which is fabulous false and contrary to the Word of God both for Doctrine of faith and manners and approves of and tolerates sin but that the latter is so of Apocryphals I have proved and the former you dare not deny of Canonicals Ergo your Apocryphals do not conduce more to the edification of the hearers than the pure and true Word of God doth 2. Thus that which teacheth false things and evil manners doth not edifie the hearers more than that which teacheth nothing but the truth and good manners But Ergo your Apocryphals do not build upward but downward they do edificare ad Gehennam as Tertullian ad ruinam as another speaks they build men down to Hell and prepare men to destruction Their publick reading actively scandalizeth for a scandal is a word or deed spoken or done yielding to another occasion of ruin and you cannot Aquinas 22. q. 43. a. 1. c. Scandalum est dictum vel factum minus rectum praebens alteri occasionem ruinae plead that 't is accidental as 't is said of Gods Word for the reading and preaching of Gods Word is commanded and so necessary but reading of Apocryphals is not commanded by God and is therefore unnecessary and being erroneous both for matters of faith and manners is of it self * Aquin. 22. q. 43. a. 1 ad 4. inductive to sin to sinful opinions affections and practises as may by any understanding Christian be evidenced in those Particulars I have instanced in before 3. 'T is evident that if not for
have the reins any longer you cannot expect any other issue thereof than the curse of God infamy throughout all the Reformed Churches and a perpetual rent and distraction in the whole body of your State Given at Westminster Octob. 6. 1611. And Sir Ralph Winwood his Majesties Ambassador there in his Remonstrance to the States-General by his Majesties approbation saith thus If therefore Religion be as the Palladium of your Common-wealth and that to preserve the one in your glory and perfection be to maintain the other in her purity let your selves then be judg in how great a danger the State must needs be at this present so long as you permit these Schisms of Arminius to have such vogue as now they have in the principal Towns of Holland and if you suffer Vorstius to be received Divinity-professor in the University of Leyden the Seminary of your Church who in scorn of the holy Word of God hath after his own fancy devised a new Sect patched together of several pieces of all sorts of ancient and modern Heresies Ibid. p. 358 and p. 361. he saith further thus His Majesty doth exhort you that you having gotten the upperhand of your miseries you would not suffer the followers of Arminius to make your actions an example for them to proclaim throughout the world that wicked The Doctrine of Arminians of the apostacy of the Saints a wicked Doctrine Doctrine of the Apostacy of the Saints To be short the account which his Majesty doth make of your amity appears sufficiently by the Treaties which he hath made with your Lordships by the succours which your Provinces have received from his Crowns and by the deluge of blood which his subjects have spent in your Wars Religion is the only sowder of this amity for his Majesty being by the Grace of God Defender of the Faith doth hold himself obliged to defend all those who profess the same The Protestant Hollanders of the same Faith and Religion with us Faith and Religion with him Ibid. p. 361. And p. 365. King James himself saith If the subject of Vorstius his Heresies had not been grounded upon questions of an higher quality than touching the number and nature of the Sacraments the points of Justification of Merits of Purgatory of the visible Head of the Church or any such matters as are in controversie at this day betwixt the Papists and us Nay more if he had medled only with the nature and works of God ad extra if we say he had soared no higher although we should have been very sorry to see such * Mark it he calls those points also Heresies Heresies begin to take root among our Allies and ancient Confederates we should not have been so zealons as we have been in this business And p. 368. he saith thus of the main point of Arminians The nature of man through the transgression of our first Parents hath lost free-will and retaineth not now any shadow hereof saving an inclination to evil those only excepted whom God hath sanctified and purged from their original Leprosie And p 366. he saith thus The principal bond of our conjunction is our uniformity in Religion King James was of a mind better than and different from A. B. Laud. He you see thought himself obliged to help the Hollanders as being of the same Profession and Religion with him yea and uniform in the same Religion for substance though they and he differed in Discipline mode of Worship and form of Church-Government but A. B. Laud would not acknowledg the Protestant Ministers of the Palatinate Churches to be of the same Religion with us here in the Church of England * Cypr. Anglicus l. 4. p. 305 306. where you 'l find that he caused the Letters-Patents for a Collection for those Orthodox Protestant Ministers though procured by the Queen of Bohemia of K. Ch. her Brother to be cancelled and new ones drawn and those expressions expunged c. and that because they received the Doctrine and rigors as Heylin calls them of Calvin in the point of Predestination and the rest depending thereupon as Orthodox And also for that they maintain a parity of Ministers and hold not our Episcopacy essential to the being of a Church as A. B. Laud plainly did and also for that they called the Doctrine and Government of the Church of Rome an Antichristian yoke King James called and proved the Pope of Rome to be Antichrist and the Doctrines of Arminius and his followers wicked and heretical and held those of Calvin to be Orthodox in those points and uniform with our Profession here in England as may be seen by his Declaration against Vorstius by his procuring the Synod of Dort and sending Orthodox Divines to it who condemned the five Articles of Arminius or Arminians and by his ratification of the nine Articles of Lambeth in the Articles of Ireland And for further proof of King James his judgment against Arminianism take and read a Jesuits Letter to the Rector at Bruxells Father Rector The Jesuits Letter c. We have now many strings to our bows and have strongly fortified our faction and have added two Bulwarks more for when King James lived WE KNOW HE WAS VERY VIOLENT AGAINST ARMINIANISM and interrupted with his pestilent wit and deep learning our strong designs in Holland now we have planted the Soveraign drug Arminianism which we hope will purge the Protestants from their Heresie This Letter was seized in A. B. Laud's Study Vide Prin's Introduction to A. B. Laud's tryal and attested against him at the Lords-Bar as Mr. Hickman informs me in his Justification of the Fathers and Schoolmen pag. 63. To which purpose the The Commons Declaration Commons of England assembled in Parliament declared to his late Majesty thus The hearts of your Subjects are perplexed when with sorrow they behold a daily growth and spreading of the faction of Arminians that being as your Majesty well knows but a cunning way to bring in Popery and the professors of those opinions the common disturbers of the Protestant Churches and Incendiaries of those States in which they have gotten any head being Protestants in shew but Jesuits in opinion and practise Of which growing faction Neile Bishop of Winchester and Laud Bishop of Bath and Wells are named particularly for the principal Patrons as Dr. Heylin saith Cyp. Angl. l. 3. p. 181. And though Dr. Heylin and Bishop Mountague stand much upon King James his words at the Conference at Hampton-Court yet being well considered they make nothing for their false Doctrine That truly justified persons may totally and finally fall away from the acts and habit of saving Grace but rather against it For 1. King James though he did not yield as they say at the Conference at Hampton-Court that those words totally and finally should be added to the sixteenth Article of our Church yet he yielded to it and to all the Articles of Lambeth
superstitious and truly Magical abuse of it And Disputation the 38. Thes 2. p. 208. he saith further thus For seeing that Idolatry is nothing else than to attribute to the Creatures that honour that is due to God alone and those virtues which are proper to God it is manifest that all they whosoever they be that ascribe to Creatures and most of all to Inanimate Creatures the Divine Properties and the proper effects and benefits of God or Christ do manifestly make Idols of those Creatures and whoever they be that do earnestly desire or expect these benefits from them do commit gross Idolatry And Mr. Perkins in his Order of Causes of Salvation and Damnation upon the second Commandment p. 63. in 4to saith thus Satanical means I call those which are used in the producing of such an effect to the which they neither by any express rule out of Gods Word nor of their own nature were ever ordained I pray let these things be humbly and meekly considered and withal remember that there is an Amen said to the use of the sign of the Cross which is a prayer as appears in the Office of publick Baptism and the Church-Catechism I do not charge our men with it but humbly submit it to their serious consideration and desire them if any shall think they are concerned hereby to go about to clear themselves from that is here charged upon the Papists they do not as the practise of some hath been answer so as to acquit the Papists too and justifie the ungodly but rather abstain from all appearance of evil 1 Thes 5. 22. and abolish that which is amiss or hath but the real appearance of that which is evil to godly sober judicious and consciencious men Vpon the whole matter 't is Queried I. WHether among the Conformists to the Discipline and Ceremonies there be not as many Nonconformists to the Doctrine of the Church of England that is against Popery holding if not all yet many of these false Doctrines renounced as there are Nonconformists to the Discipline and Ceremonies of the Church of England II. Whether those Conformists in name that are Nonconformists in deed to the Doctrine of the Church of England that is against Popery be not more dangerous and likely to disturb the peace of the Church and Kingdom by Preaching and Printing and endeavouring to bring in Popery than those Nonconformists to the Rites and Ceremonies and Declarations enjoined but are real Conformists to the Articles of Religion of the Church of England which only concern the Doctrine of Christian faith and the Sacraments which is all the Subscription was enjoined by the ancient Law 3 Edw. 6. c. 11. 13 Eliz. c. 12. III. Whether the twentieth Article of the Authority of the Church since the first clause hath been added by the Bishops and the thirtyfourth Article of Traditions especially seeing Dr. Heylin saith in his Introduction to his Cyprianus Anglicus pag. 20 21. That authority to decree Rites or Ceremonies and authority in Controversies of Faith contained in the twentieth and thirtyfourth Articles of Religion the Church of Rome never challenged more and the third Article concerning Christs descent into Hell if it be expounded other way than that of the Apostles Creed to which assent is given in the eighth Article and the thirtysixth Article of ordering the consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons seeing the Order of Diocesan Provincial and Oecumenical Bishops distinct from and superiour to Preaching-Presbyters hath been by Papists contended for to be of Divine right or institution and yet hath been denied by sound Protestants as appears by the History of the Council of Trent and is by Archbishop Laud and his party made essential to the being of a Church which saith Adam Coutzen a Romish Priest in the second Book and eighteenth Chapter of his Politicks is the readiest and easiest way to cheat the Protestants of their Religion and Ordination by Protestant Preaching Presbyters is denied to be valid and yet Ordination of Popish Priests is allowed to be good be against Popery or may not in fine bring in the whole body of Popery if not timely prevented especially when that which Mr. Fowler * Free Discourse second Edition pag. 2. p. 191 saith shall be seriously considered viz. that those Divines of his opinion do heartily subscribe to the Thirty-nine Articles of our Church taking that liberty in the interpretation of them that is allowed †p. 2. p. 305. by the Church her self though it is most reasonable to presume that she requireth Subscription to them as to an instrument of peace only And that the †What liberty is that to interpret them as they please and contrary to the Grammatical and common sense of them as Dr. Jeremy Taylor did the Ninth and Johannes de Sancta Clara Archbishop Laud's Fovourite did all the Thirty-nine Governours of the Church require not their internal assent to the Articles of the Church of England and yet require an unfeigned assent and consent to the Ceremonies and Declarations by them invented and injoined as the Act for Uniformity shews as if they were more necessary and essential to the being of the Church of England than those substantial and fundamental Truths that are contained in the other Articles of our Christian Religion Most especiall◠seeing * Gretzer de Festis l. 1. c. 2. Gretzer a Romish Priest calls the conforming part of the Clergy of England Calvino-Papistae Calvin-Papists as was noted before in the Epistle to the Christian Reader IV. Whether for the prevention of Popery it be not necessary to authorize some known Orthodox Nonconformists who stand not in awe of Bishops as Conformists do to license Books against Popery Arminianism Socinianism and Anabaptism and for defence of the Articles of Religion of the Church of England at least whether it be not more convenient and safe to authorize such Nonconforming Divines than it is to authorize Bishops Chaplains to license Books seeing in A. B. Lauds time they suppressed the printing of many Orthodox Books and Sermons and licensed many Heterodox and Popish Arminian and Socinian Books as may be seen in Dr. Heylin's Cyprianus Anglicus and they may do the like or the same or worse hereafter FINIS The Christian Reader is humbly desired to correct these ERRATA'S which escaped in the Printing in the Authors absence IN the Epistle p. 1. l. last in the Marg. r. Presbytery p. 11. l. 32. r. riots p. 12. l. 29. these words he faith it is a dangerous decert to say that Creatures may be adored and is contrary to Exod. 20. 5. Thou shalt not bow down to them which are not the words of Bishop Sparrow but of Thomas Rogers upon Art 31. and should have been put in the Margent against Bishop Sparrow's former words then should follow what Bishop Sparrow saith p. 391. thus and hs calls the Sacrament c. p. 20. l. 5. marg r. Balduin l. 12. for dixerit r.