piety and virtue to imitate their good examples obey their counsels and please our selves with the forethoughts of that happy time when we shall follow them into glory Moreover since we believe that our prayers cannot profit our friends when they are dead this may well make us more industrious to do them all the good we can whilst they are alive And if by Gods blessing on our endeavours they become truly pious and good in this world we shall have no need to pray for them when they are gone into the other but rather will they have cause to praise God for us By this time I hope you perceive how little cause there is of separation from our Church on account of our not using prayers for the deliverance of souls out of Purgatory Since we have no reason to believe there is any such place nor consequently to use any such prayers But yet I will add if any man should be of another opinion and fancy this to be a lawful piece of charity yet would not this justifie his separation from us for though he thought our publick prayers in this to be defective yet I hope this defect does not render the rest unlawful If he meet not with a prayer agreeable to his own private conceit in this matter yet he may joyn very chearfully in those we do use which are most plainly agreeable to the will of God revealed in his word which holy word ought to be the rule both of our belief and worship And when we vary from this rule we cannot pray in faith with any well-grounded confidence of being heard as particularly they cannot who pray for the release of souls from Purgatory or for the easing of their pains there seeing they have neither precept nor promise no nor so much as any example in all Scripture to warrant their so doing L. I am convinced they have not nor will I by the grace of God ever offer up any such unwarrantable prayers CHAP. VII Of Transubstantiation T. WHAT is the next Popish Doctrine your Author mentions L. That of Christs Personal Presence in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper about which I shall be glad to hear you discourse and to answer the arguments he brings for it T. Now then we come to their great Doctrine of Transubstantiation viz. that the natural substance of the Bread and Wine in the Communion is by Consecration changed into the substance of Christs body and blood which is certainly one of the most absurd and unreasonable Doctrines that ever was taught and yet there is nothing they assert with more zeal and fierceness and in Queen Maries days accounted it reason enough to burn poor Protestants for Hereticks if they would not profess it This being commonly one of the first questions put to them What say you to the Sacrament of the Altar For so they used to stile the Eucharist or Holy Communion Well pray let me hear what arguments your Author brings for this strange opinion L. He first attempts to prove it from those words of our Saviour at the institution of this Holy Sacrament This is my body which is given for you Luk. 22. 19. and he adds that Christ now making his Will his words must needs be very clear T. This indeed is the Text they commonly insist on and the words in themselves are clear enough but the strange comment they make on them does certainly render them the most obscure and unintelligible that ever were uttered For pray tell me does it not seem a wonder of wonders past all understanding that our Blessed Saviour who was there alive in the midst of his Disciples should at the same time himself give them his natural body and blood to be eaten and drunk by them and after this still remain alive sound and whole as he was before without any manner of change L. It seems very strange and unlikely I confess at first hearing T. And yet we never find the Apostles making any objection or raising any scruple about it Nor does our Blessed Saviour say any thing to prevent or remove such objections as might easily be made May we not then fairly infer hence that they understood these words in the same plain easie sense which such expressions in like cases do very evidently carry along with them namely that the Bread and Wine were the Symbols and Sacramental signs and tokens of his Body and Blood and the breaking of the one and pouring out of the other did very fitly represent the wounding and bruising of his Body and the shedding of his Blood for our sakes Neither do we say as they accuse us that these are bare figures of Christs Body and Blood but do constantly teach that the benefits of his Death and Passion are hereby effectually communicated to worthy receivers Here we make a solemn and most thankful commemoration of the Sacrifice which Christ offered on the Cross and in feeding on the holy Elements we feast upon that Sacrifice and so renew and confirm our Covenant with God in Christ giving up our selves to him as an holy and obedient people and by these Seals of his Covenant the great God assures us of the truth of his Promises and gives himself to us as our God and reconciled Father in Jesus Christ. And by this means our faith is strengthned our love to God and man is quickned and inflamed and all other graces increased and the Divine comforts of his Spirit afforded and so the flesh of Christ becomes meat indeed and his blood drink indeed nourishing our souls to eternal life L. All this is plain and easie to understand T. It is so and most natural it is after this manner to explain our Saviours words as being most agreeable to the common way of speaking in like cales where that which is a sign or Sacrament is said to be the very thing which it denotes and represents Thus the Paschal Lamb is said to be the Lords Passover of which it was a commemoration Exod. 12. 11. So in Pharaoh's Dream the ears of corn and the kine are said to be years of plenty and of famine because they signified the same And a plain place to this purpose you have 1 Cor. 10. 4. where it 's said that Rock was Christ because it did prefigure or typifie him So when our Saviour says This Cup is the New Testament in my blood what other sense can these words have but that this Wine represents his Blood which was shed to ratifie and confirm the New Testament or Covenant of Grace and mercy which God hath made with all true believers through his Son L. He quotes also Joh. 6. where much is said concerning our eating Christs flesh and drinking his blood But from what you have already said I cannot but think is most reasonable to understand the words in a spiritual sense as signifying our feeding upon Christ by faith and so deriving grace from him into our souls T. You have good reason so
the Iewish Church by the solemn rite of Circumcision and since our Saviour hath no where given the least intimation that this priviledg should be taken from them I can see no reason why the children of Christian Parents may not be solemnly consecrated to God by Baptism and so admitted members of the Christian Church And to omit many other Texts which speak in favour of infants this without any wresting of the words may be fairly drawn from that commission given to the Apostles and their Successors Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and teach or disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost They were to make Disciples of whole Nations which surely comprehends both Parents and Children First the Parents were to be instructed in the Christian Faith and upon their profession of it to be baptized And then they themselves being devoted to God and entred into Covenant with him since Parents have power over their children to dispose of them for their good and to lay engagements on them for that end surely it was lawful for them to devote their children also to God and to enter them into Covenant with him by Baptism thereby laying a strict obligation upon them when they come to years of discretion to perform their part of this holy Covenant if ever they hope for any benefit by it the Parents also being bound to acquaint their children with their duty so soon as they are capable of learning it Thus when any one from among the heathens became a proselyte to the Iews when he himself was circumcised so were his children also Yea learned men tell us that it was also the custom to wash these proselytes in pure water and that very probably our Saviour was pleased to accommodate himself to this same usage of theirs in his instituting of Baptism for the more solemn admission of members into his Church Now as an excellent Writer argues suppose that our Blessed Saviour instead of the word Baptizing should have used that of circumcising and have said Go teach all Nations circumcising them in the name c. would not all men have been apt to think that the same priviledg which the Iews had of admitting their children into Covenant by Circumcision that Christian Parents also should have the like why then may not the same be reasonably argued from the words though Baptism be here named and not Circumcision Very probable it is that the Apostles thus understood it and that they practised accordingly when we read of their Baptizing such and such persons and their housholds as Act. 16. 15 33. amongst whom there might be some children for any thing that can be shewn to the contrary And certain we are that very early in the Christian Church insants were admitted to Baptism and thence hath it continued to this day to be the general custom of all Churches throughout the world And pray take good notice that though our Church allows nothing to be imposed upon our belief or practice as necessary to salvation but what is contain'd in Gods holy Word yet she hath great regard to antiquity to the customs of the truly Catholick Church and the current Doctrine of the Fathers and requires Ministers to have due respect thereto in their Exposition of Scripture And therefore without any contradiction to her self may very well admit the observation of such customs that having so much ground from Scripture are recommended also by the early and general practice of the Christian Church This I say she may very well do but is by no means thereby obliged to receive all the traditions and customs of the Roman Church for many of which nothing can be truly pleaded either from Scripture or antiquity but very much against them from both L. This is very plain and satisfactory Pray let us have his next question T. It is this Can you make it appear to me how your Sectaries can with reason and sufficient ground condemn all the Catholicks that were so many ages before Luther and Calvin for being no better than heathens and convince me that by adhering to you I shall be more secure of my salvation than if I joyn my self to them that have been held time out of mind in most parts of the world for the men that have the true and only saving Religion What answer give you to this L. First I know no body that does thus condemn all Catholicks before Luther and Calvin For as to those Christians in the first ages of the Church who truly deserve the name of Catholicks whether of the Roman Church or any other we are so far from condemning that we admire and applaud them we approve of their Doctrine contain'd in the ancient Creeds and do imbrace and profess it we honour their memory and endeavour to imitate their example But as those of the Roman Church in latter ages whom he means I suppose by his Catholicks though we do not say they are as bad as heathens yet we do truly say that they have very much corrupted Christian Religion by false Doctrines and Superstitious usages and therefore we think it a much safer way to salvation to adhere to the ancient certain truths of Christianity every where received and to worship God in that pure and holy manner which our Blessed Saviour and his Apostles both taught and used than to embrace those additions made by the Roman Church which are no parts of true and saving Religion nor have ever been so accounted by the generality of Christians And though our ancestors might have some excuse from the state of this Church in their days yet we their posterity should be utterly inexcusable if now that our Church has so justly reformed her self from Popish corruptions we should break off from her communion and go over to the Church of Rome that hates to be reformed This were to add the guilt of Schism to that of Superstition T. Your answer is very clear and full and may well enough serve for the solution of his fifth Query which is to the same purpose with the former viz. Can you make evident at least that in your little flock or in Luther and Calvin their guides more holiness and virtue was to be found than in the Catholicks And that it is this little flock of yours not the Catholicks that go the narrow way that leads to life L. To this may easily be answered as you have formerly instructed me that though Luther and Calvin were learned and good men who in their own times and places did much service for the Reformation of Religion yet they never had authority in our Church nor do we own them as our guides The blessed Iesus is the Author of our Religion and after him the holy Apostles were the teachers of it being no other than Christianity it self and consequently the true way to eternal happiness even that narrow way of truth and holiness which the whole flock of Christ
to understand it especially if you consider that though this Discourse in the sixth of St. Iohn may in a secondary sense be applied to this holy Sacrament yet it seems most probable that our Saviour in this Chapter is chiefly speaking of his Doctrines especially that great one of his dying for the sins of the world and of his precepts and promises these are to be believed and embraced duly improved and thoroughly digested into our souls for their spiritual nourishment as common food is received for the support of the body For when the people followed him chiefly for the loaves as he tells them ver 26. he thence took occasion to exhort them not so much to labour for the meat which perisheth as for that which endures to everlasting life As in Ioh. 4. from the womans coming to draw water he enters upon a discourse of that living water which he will give to all that believe on him Now who is so dull as not to take this spiritually as being meant of the graces and comforts of the Spirit And why should we not so understand this sixth Chapter where he represents himself and Doctrine under the notion of bread To omit many other reasons that might be alledged for it our Saviour himself in my apprehension does plainly tell us that we ought so to understand him v. 63. for when the Capernaites mistook his meaning and seemed to take his words in some such gross and carnal sense as Papists at this day put upon them he tells them that the flesh profiteth nothing that the spirit gives life and his words are spirit and life such as that by our embracing of them there is a spiritual and divine life convey'd to our souls quickning and renewing them and so disposing them for life eternal L. But says my Author his flesh did profit much in that he gave it for the redemption of the world T. Most true it did so but our eating of his flesh the very natural substance of it supposing it could be done would profit us nothing What goes into the month can no more sanctifie the heart than it can defile it But it is by our believing in a Crucified Saviour by our loving and serving him and conforming our selves to his likeness that we attain eternal life Whilst his words remain in us and have power over us for the forming and governing of our hearts and lives this while Christ dwells in us and we in him And whilst the graces of his Spirit are communicated to us by his Word and Sacraments we are truly fed and nourished by him in a spiritual manner L. To this purpose my Author himself sometimes seems to speak for he says the manner of Christ's real presence in the Sacrament is not gross sensual and carnal like that of other flesh which is daily eaten but as the Church holds and believes it Mystical and Sacramental T. How wisely then had their Church done to have been content with saying it to be thus Mystical and Sacramental without presuming positively to define after what manner the Body and Blood of Christ are here present as most unreasonably they have done and have murdered thousands for not assenting to these their bold determinations And this your Author plainly contradicts himself for he asserts that the Sacramental Bread and Wine are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ by the mighty power of God as the water was turned into wine Ioh. 2. and that certainly was true plain wine in which there was nothing mystical or obscure And according to this their Doctrine must the eating of Christs Body be understood in a carnal sense why else does he say soon after that if Christ should be seen they should have an horrour to eat him So that eat him it seems they do and that in such a manner as they should have an horrour to do it if they could see him L. And so one would think they should have at the very thought of it though they see him not T. But in the mean time does it not seem strange that the Natural body and blood of Christ should be there and yet neither of them seen nor any way perceived L. Yes truly very strange but they say this is no more than what we find Luk. 4. 30. where Christ made himself invisible and so past through the midst of his enemies without being seen of them T. It 's only said there that he past through the midst of them and so he might do by conveying himself swiftly away Or suppose he made himself invisible for a while this we may easily enough apprehend that it might be done by hindring the clearness of their sight or by other ways But now for thousands of people in all ages and places having their senses sound and the object at a due distance to be so strangely deceived is a thing utterly incredible Nor do we read a syllable in that or any other place that our Saviour presented to the people some object which had the appearance of quite another thing and yet was really himself and not that other thing which it appeared to be For thus they teach it is in the present case Here is the most plain appearance of Bread and Wine and yet no such substance but the substance of Christs Body and Blood whilst there 's no appearance of them Christ is before them and yet they cannot see him they take him into their hands and yet cannot feel him Nay their sight their feeling their smell and taste do all perceive Bread and Wine and nothing else and yet do they confidently affirm that no Bread or Wine is there but the very substance of Christs flesh and blood though they discern no such thing L. This is all wonderful indeed but they say this change is wrought by the mighty power of God in a miraculous manner as he made the world of nothing T. If any such change there were we should grant it to be miraculous but what a strange sort of miracle is this that after it s wrought there 's yet no appearance of it We dispute not about the manner how it 's wrought but we say we can perceive no such thing to be done It was not thus in the instance he gives for though the world was made of nothing in a miraculous manner yet being made the works of God do visibly appear and so do declare his invisible power and Godhead But if now a man should tell us that God had created a New Heaven and a New Earth whilst we can see no manner of change but all things continue as they were in the old world who would believe him yet such is the invisible change they plead for in the Sacrament which is such a sort of miracle as never was heard tell of either in the Old Testament or the New For the miracles which our Blessed Saviour wrought they plainly appear'd to the senses of those who were present by that means
Plenary Indulgence for themselves and may every day release a Soul out of Purgatory which surely they are very uncharitable if they will not do Nay which seems strangest of all even those in Purgatory may be admitted into this fraternity if any particular Friend of theirs on Earth shall desire it and will perform on their behalf what is required and so may they share in the merits of the whole Society Though by the way I wonder that any body should leave a particular Friend in Purgatory when he may so easily deliver him thence as you heard before But I 'le entertain you no longer with this fulsom ridiculous stuff Let us return to your Author and see what he says for this manner of Praying which a Parrot may go near to learn and use it with as much devotion as multitudes of them L. He says that the Ave-Mary is used Sixty three times because the Blessed Virgin Mary lived just so many years T. A wise Reason truly But I wonder where he had so good intelligence Some of her Worshippers it 's like have heard it from her own mouth For heretofore nothing more common than for her to appear to them and talk familiarly with them if we may believe their own Legends which I confess is somewhat hard to do Yet I grant there is as much certainty in the story of her Age as strength in the Argument taken from it that is just none at all Why do they not by this Reason say the Lords-Prayer Thirty three times because our Saviour lived so many years And it might also be asked why but one Lords-Prayer for nine Ave-Maries But waving these things let us hear his pretence for this odd way of Praying by running over the same words so many times together as if they would make up with the number what they want in weight and devotion and then telling them by their Beads as if they were afraid of being someway cheated if they did not keep so exact a reckoning Certainly we have neither precept nor example in Scripture to recommend such a way of worship L. All that he says is that David said his Prayers Seven times a day and our Saviour in the Garden repeated three times the same Prayer He demands therefore whether it be ill to say ones Prayers by number when he has reason so to do T. No surely But when a Man has no reason so to do it 's very vain and absurd And by all that he alledges it seems they have no reason else sure he would have given some For I beseech you where 's the consequence that because David prayed Seven times in a day that is very often therefore it 's a good thing to repeat one and the same Prayer Seventy times seven in a day or at least as often as we well can Or when our Saviour in his Agony doth with great servour and affection offer up his Petition to his Father thrice in the same words which were suitable to his present state is this any thing like the Papists way of running over an Ave-Mary Ten Twenty Thirty times together with a Pater-noster now and then intermixed for variety sake and this very oft in the midst of company without the least shew of devotion and as I take it in the Latine Tongue which few of them understand And which is prettiest of all when they are busie themselves though it be but at sports and pastimes they may then get some idle body patter over these their Prayers for them And I have heard it often reported by those who have conversed much with them that sometimes two of these devout people will play a game at Cards which shall say Prayers for the other at such a time So that it seems they take them for a kind of penance being glad when they are over as a School-boy when he has done his Task And is this like the Devotion of the Holy Psalmist who prayed to God and praised him with all his Heart and Soul and sang praises with understanding and with great affection and delight Or much less is this like to that of our Blessed Saviour who in the days of his flesh offered up Prayers and Supplications with strong cries and tears as we have it Heb. 5. 7. He continued indeed sometimes whole nights in Prayer and his holy Apostles were very constant and frequent in this duty and have enjoyned us to pray continually and in every thing to give thanks But do you find them any where directing us to say over the same words so often in an hour or a day and to make use of a sett of Beads to keep true reckoning Is this a Worshipping of God in Spirit and in Truth Is this like the fervent Prayer of the Righteous which St. Iames tells us is so effectual Is this like the Intercession of Abraham or Moses the Wrestlings of Iacob the earnest Prayer of Elias and other holy men recorded in Scripture Nay so far is it from being agreeable to such examples that it seems plainly contrary to our Saviours command Not to use vain repetitions in praying as if we thought to be heard for our much speaking Matt. 6. 7. L. So it seems truly and nothing can be more weak and impertinent than what my Author talks of saying Five Pater-nosters in honour of our Saviours Five wounds he means I suppose those in his hands and feet and that on his side But what he means by our saying the Lords-Prayer in honour to those wounds I cannot well tell T. Nor can I resolve you He might as well talk of saying it Twelve times in honour of the Twelve Apostles and then Seventy times for the Seventy Disciples and after that as oft as you please in honour of what you have a mind to For they forsooth have a certain peculiar manner of offering up their Prayers to God in honour to other persons and things which I confess I am utterly ignorant of nor do I think they themselves can give a rational account of it Of such blind devotions as these well may Ignorance be accounted the Mother L. But my Author is by no means pleased that this way of praying by Beads should be thought fit only for ideots that cannot read For he says that Kings and their Courts the Pope and his Cardinals make use of Beads who can read better than Sectaries T. There may be some question of that for all his confidence since it 's commonly said that the present Pope though much commended for some other good qualities can scarce read their Latine Service But let them be able to read never so well that will hardly prove all good which they do And if we speak of examples I must confess I had much rather follow our Saviour and his Apostles than the Pope and his Cardinals L. And so had I too But he says they have Books of Devotion as well as Beads that both are good and variety delighteth T. They had
need truly to have some variety to refresh them For sure they can neither have much delight nor much profit from a tedious repetition of the same words over and over at the same time especially whilst some of them understand not what they say and do also say some such things as would not much help their Devotion though they were understood L. He says there can be no better Prayers than the Pater-noster the Ave and the Creed T. As to the Ave and the Creed they are no Prayers at all the former being the Angels Salutation to the Blessed Virgin Luke 1. 28. and it is an absurd piece of superstition to turn it into a Prayer such as never any Christian was guilty of for many hundred years after that Salutation was first uttered The Creed contains a confession of our Faith and though the frequent repetition of it with serious reflections upon it may be of great use viz for the engaging of us to live according to our profession yet is it by no means a Prayer nor any thing like one The Pater-noster or the Lords-Prayer is indeed a most admirable form of Prayer which may not only serve as a pattern to direct us how to pray but is also most proper and fit to be frequently used as a Prayer and may very well be joyn'd with any other Prayers which we make to Almighty God But yet we must not think there is any devotion exprest or any advantage got by repeating it over so many times in an hour or a day as if there were some secret virtue and force in the bare rehearsal of the words whilst we little or nothing attend to the sense of them which is fitter for Mag-pies and Parrots than for reasonable creature from whom God expects a reasonable Service wherein their Hearts and Souls are to be employed as well as their Tongues But let us proceed CHAP. XIV Of Distinction of Meats L. MY Author next pleads for that distinction of Meats which is used in their Church there being some Meats which he says they forbid not at all times as those in 1 Tim. 4. 3. but for certain days to chastise the flesh and render it obedient to the spirit And so the Apostles themselves he adds did for some time forbid the eating of blood and strangled Beasts T. This prohibition of the Apostles makes nothing for his purpose since they are generally supposed to forbid the eating of blood and things strangled to avoid that offence which it would have given to the Iews which was a sufficient reason whilst it lasted But now in the Church of Rome they do without any reason at all that I can tell of severely forbid some sorts of Meat in Lent and at some other times when yet they allow other Meats every whit as pleasant as costly and luxurious And whether this be that which is condemned by the Apostle in that place to Timothy or not yet it is a very unreasonable imposition and tends to ensnare mens Consciences and make them fancy there is some Religion in using this sort of food rather than that Yet mistake me not what really tends to piety and mortification we do not in the least condemn no we commend and require it But the distinction of Meats made in the Church of Rome seems not to have any such tendency For with them a Man that shall eat plenty of Salmon Sturgeon or other such delicious Fish and drink rich Wines breaks not his Lent though it 's like the stricter sort take not this liberty but if he chance to eat a little of any course sort of Flesh or but the Broth it 's boil'd in or any sort of Milk-meats he is a transgressor As if there were not a flesh of Fish as well as of Birds and Beasts or as if there were any virtue in abstaining from one sort rather than another When we keep a true Fast we are that while to abstain from all sorts of Meat if we are able In a time of abstinence it beseems us to eat more sparingly and to use such a sort of diet as is most cheap and plain and tends least to please the Palate or pamper the Flesh that so we may be in a better temper for Religious Duties and may have more time for our Devotion more Money for the Poor and may both humble our Souls and afflict and tame our Bodies and govern our Appetites For all this there is good reason such fasting and abstinence administers to Religion But then whether in your times of abstinence you eat a little Flesh or a little Fish whether with your Fish you eat Butter or Oil whether you drink Milk or Small-Beer and the like seems not of the least consequence on any Religious account You are neither better nor worse for one or the other Here you may well say Meat commends us not to God That which enters into the mouth defiles not the man L. But to this he replies that the forbidden fruit which our first Parents tasted though not evil in it self yet the eating of it was displeasing to God T. And good reason since God himself had given an express command to the contrary L. And he urges that so God hath commanded us to obey our Superiors and therefore to eat what they forbid is evil as it is for Children to taste Sugar or Honey contrary to their Parents commands this he says is the wicked will which coming from the heart defiles the Man T. But all this does not in the least concern us since thanks be to God our Church lays no such burdensome and unprofitable commands upon us however the Pope and his Clergy like the Pharisees of old may load the poor people that are under their yoke Neither yet does any thing he alledges vindicate their Church in making such idle and useless Laws as these which have no manner of tendency to Religion or the good of Souls For what is it to my Souls health I beseech you whether I eat a piece of Salmon or the Leg of a Chicken Whether I take Oil or Butter for my Sawce Of what moment is this any more than whether I drink White-wine or Claret Beer or Ale In these things every Man is concerned chiefly to look to his own health and Masters of Families may take order for those under their charge and Children ought in such things to be ruled by their Parents since it properly belongs to Parents herein to give orders Magistrates also upon a Civil account may enact such Laws hereabouts as make for the publick good But for the Church or any Churchmen to make Laws about these matters is to arrogate to themselves a power which it does not appear that ever Christ gave them for it no way tends to edification but rather to entangle and perplex mens Consciences and to beget fond conceits that one sort of Meat is more holy than another which is a meer piece of Judaism and contrary to the
bound in the execution of this their Office to do what belongs to it for the rectifying of mens errors and reforming them from all evil and corrupt practices whether in the worship of God or in their common conversation And thus did those holy and learned men both Bishops and others behave themselves who were the blessed instruments of reforming the Church of England from Popery For the carrying on of which good work God inclined the hearts of our Kings to employ their power for the assistance and encouragement of the Clergy who were engaged in it And herein they did no other than what Hezekiah Iosiah and other pious Kings amongst the Iews did in reforming the Iewish Church And as they needed no new commission from Heaven then for the reformation they wrought having the Law of God to be their rule and warrant no more did our Kings and Bishops whilst they had the Gospel to be theirs according to which they proceeded by degrees Thus in the first place King Henry the Eighth abolished the Popes Supremacy that great fundamental falshood of Popery whilst he retain'd in a manner all other points of it But with great courage and justice he delivered his Kingdom from that yoke of bondage under which the Nation had long groaned even from the Usurpation of the Roman Bishop declaring that he had no manner of power or jurisdiction in his Majesties Dominions but that the King himself next under God and his Christ is Head of this Church that is the Supreme Moderator and Governour over all persons and in all causes as well Ecclesiastical as Civil in these his Realms Wherefore the King with the advice and assistance of his Bishops and Clergy may as lawfully take care for the Reformation of the Church according to the Word of God within his own Dominions as the Kings of Israel or Iudah might do in theirs Yea he is obliged to do it and no foreign power Prince or Prelate hath any the least right to hinder and controul him herein not the Bishop of Rome any more than he of Ierusalem or Antioch And thus far the generality of the Popish Clergy both the Bishops and the Universities concurr'd with the King even such men as Bonner and Gardiner The Popes power being thus broken and abolished this made way for a more thorough Reformation of the Doctrin and worship from many soul errors and superstitions in the days of Edward the Sixth This was for a while interrupted in the reign of Queen Mary but was afterward restored and perfected by the authority of Queen Elizabeth of blessed memory soon after her entrance upon the Government And thus was the Reformation of our Church according to the rule of Gods holy Word most happily begun carried on and compleated in a peaceable orderly and deliberate manner by just and lawful authority even that of the whole Kingdom whether Ecclesiastical or Civil Of which you have an account at large in a late accurate and full History of our Reformation by a Learned hand an Abridgement whereof is done by the same Author in a little room if the History it self be too large for you Our first Reformers then were no Impostors or false Prophets but were indeed sent of God though in an ordinary way being rightly Ordained to the Ministry and duly qualified for that Sacred Office they were guided and directed by the plain Word of God own'd and succeeded by his Providence allow'd and encouraged by his Vicegerents our Kings and Queens and the Reformation at length peaceably and firmly established by the Laws of the Land L. This doubt I think is clearly enough resolved and to me very satisfactorily Pray what 's the next T. He asks whether it can be made good what Luther and Calvin with all Protestants and Presbyterians have so long boasted they could do viz. Reform convincingly any one of the silliest Roman Catholicks that is and to begin let them do it in the matter of the Real Presence L. I do not well understand what he means by this For I think there is no question to be made of it but Luther and Calvin though they were not the Reformers of our Church with other learned Protestants have convincingly reformed many that were Roman Catholicks and in the matter of the Real Presence as well as other points these Converts have been convinced of their error and brought to a sounder judgment agreeable to Scripture and reason T. I think indeed there is more difficulty in finding out the meaning of this question than in answering it though somewhat like it he had before He cannot surely mean that no people who once profest themselves Roman Catholicks as his phrase is have ever been convinced of the errors of the Roman Church so as to forsake the same for thus it hath been with some whole Nations and particularly our own For we grant that in these latter ages our people were generally infected with those errors though from the beginning it was not so And as to Luther and Calvin though they did great service for the Reforming of the Church in their own Countries yet neither they nor any Presbyterians were the chief instruments of that work among us but holy Bishops and many sound and orthodox Preachers ordain'd by them who taught the truth as it is in Jesus and sealed with their blood the truth of what they taught These men by their zealous Preaching their holy living and chearful dying after the example of the Apostles and other Martyrs in the Primitive times did by Gods blessing win over thousands to embrace the Doctrine of the Gospel in its native purity rejecting those Popish errors in which before they had been blindly train'd up Wherefore he might as well say that the Apostles never converted any from Heathenism to Christianity as that our Ministers have never reformed any from Popery What then can he mean I can scarce guess what except that they cannot reform a Papist whilst he still remains one which is as if we should say that the Apostles never converted any heathens because whilst they remain'd heathens they were not converted But I am not willing to think him so weak and silly and therefore till he speaks plainer shall trouble my self no more with this but proceed to his next question which runs thus Can you prove to me clearly out of the written word which you teach ought only to be follow'd as the guide to Heaven that the Sabbath-day is commanded by God to be kept on Sunday and that little children are to be baptized L. Part of this was mention'd before viz. that about keeping the Sabbath for which you shew'd there is enough from Scripture to warrant our practice besides the constant custom of the whole Christian Church ever since the Primitive times and I suppose the same may be said for the Baptism of Infants T. I judge it may and that upon very good grounds For we know that Children were admitted members of