WE read in the ninth of Saint John's Gos­pel, that when Christ by his Omni­potency had open'd the Eyes of a Man that was born blind, not only his Neighbours, and the Vulgar sort, but also the Pharisees themselves, were very desirous to know in what manner, or by what means Christ did open the blind mans Eyes: And therefore they asked him that was restored to his sight, John 9.10. How were thine Eyes opened? And again, in the 26 verse, How opened he thine Eyes? It being indeed a most strange and admirable thing, yea a Miracle, the [Page 2] like whereof was never heard since the beginning of the World, John 9.32. that any Man opened the Eyes of one that was born blind. The man who was restored to his sight, answered, and said, that a man called Jesus, made Clay, and anointed his Eyes, and bad him go to the Pool of Syloam and wash; and he went and washed, and received his sight.

This was a very strange Miracle, and worthy not only of admiration, but also of all thanks­giving, love and adoration, being indeed a most evident argument and testimony both of our Saviours Love and Omnipotency. But far more admirable, far more worthy of Thanks, Love, and Adoration, are the Love and Power which Christ manifesteth in opening the Eyes of our Souls, and illuminating them with the light of his grace; he being sent, as the Prophet Zachary doth testifie, Luke 1. To give Light to them that sit in dark­ness, to wit, of sin and error. And therefore, whensoever it pleaseth him, out of his great mercy and goodness, to illuminate the eyes of a mans Soul who hath a long time been blind­ed with superstitious Errors, and bring him un­to the true Light and Understanding of his Word: all such as have known, and been ac­quainted with such a man, may not only ad­mire, congratulate, and praise God for such a [Page 3] mans Conversion, but also, may justly demand of him the manner and means of his spiritual illumination. And because a mans Friends and Neighbours may be of the vulgar and un­learned sort, for their better satisfaction, they may refer such a man unto the examination of the Pharisees, whereby the Clergy and most learned may be understood, that they also may inquire and know, how and by what means the Eyes of his Soul were opened.

And therefore, since it hath pleased Almigh­ty God, of his infinite Love, and by the pow­erful operation of his grace, after a long time spent in blind Superstition, at length to dissi­pate the dark Cloud of Error, (wherewith the Eyes of my Soul were darkned,) with the bright-shining Beams of his Grace, to give sa­tisfaction to all true Protestants, which (I doubt not) do congratulate with me, and give God thanks for my Conversion; and moreover, to defend my self from the Calumniations of Pa­pists, whose envy is so great, that they deem me rather perverted then converted, and to ob­scure the powerful operation of Gods Grace, impute my leaving of them and their Doctrine, unto want of Wit, or a touch of Frensie, or un­to desire and hope of Preferment; I will sincere­ly [Page 4] and briefly set down the means and manner of my Conversion.

Thus I answer to such, as out of love desire to know how, and in what manner the Eyes of my Soul were opened, and also unto such as think and say out of envy, that the Eyes of my Soul are rather obscured, then any way illumi­nated; That a man called Jesus made Clay, and anointed mine Eyes, and said unto me, Go unto the Pool of Syloam and wash, and thou shalt see; and I went and washed, and do see. And be­cause men may ask of me, what Jesus did unto me, I must confess, how that after the liking and affection, which (through the weakness of my Understanding and Judgment at that time) I did take towards the Church of Rome and her Doctrine, and also that particular Affection and liking unto the Order of Carthusians, where­in I put my self first to probation, and after­wards tyed my self by profession: After some years spent, with as great Zeal and Industry as I could, (being always desirous, according to my little Understanding, and penury of time, to search and find out the Grounds and Reasons of all Ceremonies and Observations,) it being a thing not permitted in a mans Noviship, lest perhaps coming to understand things aright, he [Page 5] should alter his mind, and if it were permitted, yet the obligation a Novice hath to learn the Ceremonies and Observations of the Order, which are both many and very difficult, will not afford a Novice to do any thing else, but only to dedicate himself wholly to the practice of them, which to do well, will require three or four years Labour and Industry.

Being freed from that Inconvenience, and stealing time even from that little time which was limited for rest, to wit, the space of six hours in a Night; I betook my self to earnest conside­ration of every thing, wishing and desiring that it might please Almighty God, to shew me the means and way how to attain unto such know­ledge. And he that is always most ready to help such as fly unto him for Aid, to wit, Jesus, who, according to the Interpretation of his Name, is the true Shepherd, and Saviour of our Souls, vouchsafed to make Clay, and anoint mine Eyes, by laying a great number of seri­ous Observations before the Eyes of my Soul, wherewithal my Eyes were not a little dazeled at the first, until it pleased the same Jesus by the Inspiration of his Spirit to bid me go to Sy­loam, indeed a two-fold Syloam, one of the Holy Scripture, and the other of Ancient Fathers, [Page 6] and there to wash my Eyes, and undoubtedly I should by practice of them be restored to my sight, and understand aright those doubts and difficulties, wherewithal I was perplexed, and be able to discern Light from Darkness, and Truth from Falshood.

And betaking my self to the reading of the Scriptures and ancient Fathers, and comparing the State of the Primitive Church, with the pre­sent State and Government of the Church of England, and of the Church of Rome, I soon per­ceived, how far the Church of Rome had plun­ged her self into that noisome puddle of Su­perstition, and was quite faln from her wonted Purity (and as I may term it, Innocency) and now polluted with a multitude of Deformities, which have sprung from out the roots of Am­bition, Avarice, and Hypocrisie.

On the other part I considered, how that our Church of England (howbeit for many years past, our sins having deserved that scourge, it had adhered unto the Church of Rome,) had now not only shaken off the Yoke of Superstiti­on, but also lymphed her self of all those De­formities which any way did stain her ancient Beauty, and was restored to her former Purity, and Splendor of the Primitive Church; Mine [Page 7] Eyes being opened, I saw an infinite number of Absurdities, and how far I my self had been de­ceived, and into what great danger both of Soul and Body I had cast my self, by under­taking that course of Life, wherein great Piety is pretended and prescribed, but great Dissimu­lation and Hypocrisie practised, as I shall brief­ly with Examples (whereof I have been an eye Witness) justifie.

THE first thing that moved me to search and look into the Errors of the Church of Rome: was the consideration of the great Insufficiency and want of Learning in many Persons of the Order of Carthusians, there being indeed in most Monasteries of that Order, di­vers admitted, not only to that Order, but also unto the dignity of Priesthood, which can hard­ly read, much less understand their Mass, but to speak or write Latine altogether unable. I could nominate divers, both English-men and [Page 8] Strangers of this stamp, whose Names for their honours sake I conceal. But wondring with my self, what should cause Superiors of that Order to admit such insufficient men, and ask­ing familiarly of some grave and wise men, what might be the reason, they gave me a two­fold reason; The first, that▪ Carthusians living a solitary and retired course of Life, and not go­ing abroad to Preach, and converse amongst Seculars, had not need of any great Learning. But I answered, that they were bound, both by the Canons of the Church, and also by their Statutes, to admit none but such as were suffici­enter docti, sufficiently learned.

The policy of Superi­ours to keep their Places.The second Answer was, that it was the po­licy of many Priors in that Order, to admit sim­ple and unlearned Men to be Monks, to that end, that the Priors themselves might keep their places of Superiority the longer, and with more security, whilst there were no Persons suffici­ently qualified for to supply such Places.

This gave me a great distaste: for howbeit I my self was too too presumptuous in taking the Dignity of Priesthood upon me: neverthe­less, I could never endure that Men more unfit than my self should be admitted, howbeit di­vers by shifts and sleights were admitted, which [Page 9] are not only in respect of their ignorance bur­densom both to themselves and others, but al­so, according to that saying, that Learning hath no greater enemy than Ignorance: So no men are more envio [...] more full of spite, more malici­ous, and more troublesome, than such blind Buzzards, which cannot give the definition of a Priest, nor construe three lines of their Mass.

ANother dislike that I did take, both of the Order of Carthusians, and of the Church of Rome, did arise from the ordinary Oppression of poor honest-hearted and zealously-minded Men, howbeit not according to knowledge, I mean of such as out of a true desire to observe regular Discipline, (being also bound by their Statutes thereunto) did at any time inform against the dissolute and debaucht living of their Superi­ours, such Men, as in respect of their true fer­vour, and earnest desire to keep their Order and Statutes, deserved both Love and Commenda­tions [Page 10] amongst Men of their own Profession, were sure to find all bitterness and persecution, vsque ad internecionem. And howbeit their com­plaints were clariora Luce meridiana, clearer than the Sun, notwithstanding Sup [...]ours of that Order, one to support another, would make them more obscure than Darkness it self, and so devise all means possible to oppress their Inferi­ours. And hereof I will put down one or two Examples.

Johannes de Sancto Huberto, sometime Vicar of the Carthusian Monastery of Martins Busse in Flanders, being most certainly informed of many irreligious actions of his Prior, and amongst o­ther matters, that his Prior had got a Maid with Child; he being Vicar, thought himself bound in Conscience (as he was indeed) to inform against his Prior, unto the Superiours of that Order: and being desirous to have the Advice of Father Brullot, who had sometime been the Proctor of Martins Busse, and was dwelling at Lyre, did write unto him: and his Letter being intercepted, and opened by the Prior of Martins Busse, who perceived that his Vicar intended to prosecute that business against him, the Prior sent for the Visitors of that Province, to com­plain against his Vicar, how that he had defa­med [Page 11] him, by writing such a Letter unto Father Brullot. The matter came to scanning, and Jo­annes de Sancto Huberto did produce two Priests of the same Monastery that gave witness against the Prior. But they were not accepted by the Visitors, and both the Vicar and the other two religious men were censured by the Visitors to be imprisoned for defaming of their Prior, and the Vicar and one of the two were both put in Prison, but the third was not, because a Canon of Gant, who was his Kinsman, did write a very threatning Letter unto the chief Visitor, warn­ing him not to meddle with his Cousin, nor to punish him any way, because, if so be that he should do it, he would easily prove that busi­ness, whereof the Prior was accused, to be true, both to the Visitors and Priors shame, and ig­nominy of the whole Order.

Notwithstanding the Prior was borne out by the Visitor, and the poor Vicar being innocent, was cast into Prison, and lost his place; and the Visitor (whom otherwise I did know to be a very honest man, yet at that time and in that business dealing not honestly) being demand­ed by a Friend, wherefore he did so much op­press the Vicar? his answer was, Propter honorem Ordinis, to save the Honour and Reputation of [Page 12] their Order; Thinking it better to offend God, by violently oppressing a poor honest man, then that the abuses and absurdities of that Or­der (which indeed is accounted most strict and holy in outward shew, howbeit full of secret and hidden sins from the sight of men, though not from the Eyes of God) should be manifest­ed and made known unto the World. And thus much I can say and justifie upon my Consci­ence, that Father Anthony à Fine, who had been twenty years Prior of the Carthusian Monastery of Lyre, and died Vicar of the same House, did tell me the Womans Name (to wit, Petronilla,) which had that Child by the Prior of Martins Busse.

Again, Johannes Briall, being instituted Prior of the Carthusians of Liege, after a year or two of his Residency, gave himself unto all lascivious­ness of living, and especially to continual Feast­ings and Banquetings, in so much that many complaints were made of him unto the Visi­tors, and also unto the General of the whole Order. And I being then at Liege, and seeing his bad and irreligious Life, was much offend­ed and scandalized, and so much the more, in respect that the Prior having been professed in great Carthusia, which is the chiefest House of [Page 13] the whole Order, and where regular Discipline is most strictly observed, was expected to be most exemplar, and proved most debauch'd and irregular, making no more scruple of Drunken­ness, then as if it had been no sin at all.

He continuing in this course, and presuming altogether upon the favour of the General, had danted all the Monks of that House, that, ex­cept one, few there were that durst write or complain against him, because they had no hope to obtain Justice. At length I my self did inform against him unto the General, and did urge the business so far, that the General sent a Commission unto the Prior of Gant, being then newly instituted Visitor of that Province, that he should come to examine the business and do Justice. But Jacobus Dionysii, for that was his Name, being a most corrupt man both in Body and Mind, (and being himself in danger to lose his place, because he had been accused by his Vicar for frequenting of Bawdy-houses at Mid­night, when as he should have been at Mattens with his Monks,) to get favour at the Generals hands by favouring the Prior of Liege, whom he knew very well to be much respected by the General,) coming to Liege to examine the busi­ness, would not examin any such as he thought [Page 14] would truly and justly give Testimony against the Prior, but by his own Authority would give sentence for the Prior against me, howbeit both my self and others had been Eye-witnesses of the Priors often Drunkenness, and that great no­tice was taken in the City of the Priors misbeha­viour in that point, as a Proctor of Liege, Bro­ther-in-Law unto Father Henry Christian, a Monk of that Monastery, did with great grief of Mind certifie and tell him of.

Besides, the Popes Nuntio, having heard of that Priors bad Life, was ready, by the Popes Authority, to have deposed the Prior from his Office; notwithstanding the General and the Visitor did so much and so long support him, that he became shameless, quia peccator cum in pro­fundum venerit, contemnit, and in fine, did fall into such gross and enormous, yea, indicibilia peccata, sins not to be nominated, that he was glad to fly, and leave both the Monastery of Liege and also his Priorship. Howbeit, that before not only my self, but also Johannes Aucelinus, and Peter Latermius, both Priests and Monks of that House, had been much oppressed and punish­ed for writing and complaining of his wicked and most unchristian Life. These are the pro­ceedings of that holy Order wherewithal the [Page 15] Eyes of the whole are blinded, the Superiours being for the most part both Licentious and Covetous, and the Inferiours Envious and Contentious.

FOrasmuch▪ as the things before menti­oned spectant mores, & non fidem, are mat­ters of Manners, and not of Faith, to give and manifest the reasons and motives that moved me to alter my Opinion in matters of Faith, I must acknowledge, that finding such deformity of Manners and Conversation even in the first-born and fairest Flowers of the Church of Rome; I was much afraid, and not a little danted, fearing that I had built my House upon the Sand, and not upon a Rock, and that the Tree that bears such rotten fruit, must of ne­cessity be rotten at the root; I mean, that the Doctrine of the Church of Rome could hardly be Authentical, seeing that the Conversation of her holiest Children was so Diabolical.

[Page 16]And upon this fourth Consideration I began to reflect upon those points of Controversie, wherein we and the Church of Rome do most differ and dissent; And beginning with the point of Transubstantiation, howbeit the Pa­pists are not ashamed to affirm, that the true Church hath always taught, that as soon as the Priest hath pronounced the words of Consecra­tion, that the former substance of Bread and Wine is changed into the Body and Blood of Christ, so that no other substance remains but only Christs Body and Blood, the accidents re­maining without a Subject; both Scripture it self, and also the use of the Primitive Church, and Opinion of the most ancient Fathers do contradict this Opinion: for in Scriptures we find, Mat. 26.29. Mark. 14.25. that even after that blessing which Christ himself gave over the Bread and Wine, he term­ed it the Cup of the New Testament. And al­so it is most different from the Doctrine of anti­ent Fathers: for St. Augustine in his Book de Do­ctrina Christiana, Liber tertius, cap. 16. saith, that these words, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, &c. are a Figure, command­ing us to partake of the Passion of Christ, and profitably to remember that his flesh was cru­cified for us; according as Christ himself warn­ed [Page 17] his Disciples, saying, Do this in remembrance of me; And St. Chrysostome, ad Cesarium Monachum, saith, Bread, before it be sanctified, we call Bread, but when the Divine Grace sanctifies it, it is delivered from the name of Bread, and it is thought worthy the name of the Lords Body, though the Nature of Bread remain still. Dialog, in mutat. & Dialog in­confusus. This is Theodorets Opinion, who saith, that the mysti­cal signs, after Consecration, do not depart from their Nature, but abide in their former substance, figure and form, and may be seen and touched as before: And moreover, this Opinion is so far dissonant and differing from the Opinion of the Primitive Church, that it is generally confessed, that before the Lateran Council, about four hundred years ago, no man was bound to believe it, as Tonstall in his Book de Veritate Corporis & Sanguinis Christi, saith, that before that time it was free for all men to follow their own conjecture, as concerning the manner of the real presence. And also Byel and Scotus, two ancient Schoolmen (as Swarez doth affirm in his 3. Tom. distinct. 5. and also Sotus in his 4. book, distinct. 9. q. 2. art. 4. doth affirm) did hold this Opinion to be very new and late­ly brought into the Church, and believed only upon the Authority of the Laterane Council. [Page 18] And Peter Lumbard was so far from being of this Opinion, which the Church of Rome now holdeth, that in his fourth Book of Sentences, distinct. 2. he saith of himself, If it be demand­ed what manner of Conversion this is, whether it be formal or substantial, or of another kind, I am not able to define. Finding therefore this difference betwixt the Church of Rome and the Primitive Church, yea betwixt the Church of Rome and Christ himself in this point, I thought it more secure for my Souls health, to adhere unto the Opinion of him that cannot err, then unto the Opinion of Pope Innocent the third, upon whose Shoulders our new Opinionists, in this point, are glad to lay their Burden: ha­ving no other warrant for their novelty, but a poor sinful mans Authority, who to make himself great, is not ashamed to derogate from Christs Authority, and Exposition in this point, who telleth us, that so often as we eat or drink of this Bread or Wine, we shall do it in remem­brance only of him, feeding on him in our Hearts by Faith, with Thanksgiving; telling us in the sixth of John, verse 36. The Flesh profiteth nothing; it is the Spirit that quickeneth. And under correction, I would demand of a Papist, whether the Sacrament of the Lords Supper was insti­tuted [Page 19] for the feeding of our Souls, or of our Bodies, or of both? Now if they answer, That it was instituted for feeding and nourishing of both, or of the Soul especially, then they must confess a thing most contrary to their own Te­nents; that is, That the Body and Blood of Christ is spiritually in the Sacrament to feed the Soul, and not substantially to feed the Bo­dy, because the Soul of man being a Spiritual substance, cannot feed upon corporal food, which must needs follow, if so be that the Bo­dy and Blood of Christ be corporally in the Sacrament.

Now again, that it is only a Spiritual, and not a Corporal food, to feed the Soul, and not the Body, Christ himself insinuateth in the sixth of John, verse 51. saying, I am the Bread of Life which came down from Heaven; if any man eat of this Bread, he shall live for ever: which is meant of the Life of the Soul, we being almost certain that this our corruptible Body must be dissol­ved, and cannot live for ever, but so far as at the day of Judgment it shall participate with the Soul of perpetual Joy, or of perpetual mi­sery, sustaining in the interim a dissolution; because, according to our Bodies, Earth we are, and into Earth we must return again. [Page 20] And therefore to preserve our corporal Life, we need not the Food of the Body and Blood of Christ, we have other material and natural Food sufficient. And to feed our Souls there­with, we cannot eat it corporally, but only spiritually by Faith, the Soul of man being in­capable of any corporal Food.

And again, if so be that the Body and Blood of Christ be corporally in the Sacrament, we cut off one Article from our Creed, wherein we Confess that Christ sitteth at the right Hand of God: for he being with a true natural Body upon the Altar (as the Papists hold) is not sit­ting at the right hand of his Father in his Huma­nity. But because we believe that he is ascend­ed into Heaven, and sitteth at the right Hand of his Father in his Humanity, we must also be­lieve that he is only spiritually in the Sacra­ment by his Omnipotency.

And out of one absurdity they infer another; for by holding that Christs Body and Blood is corporally in the Sacrament, they make that which is no Sin to be Sin, defining, that if so be that by any accident or misfortune, a Priest should let a consecrated Host fall, or shed any of the consecrated Wine, it is a mortal Sin, be it never so much against your will. Now how [Page 21] absurd this is, I refer both my self and others unto the Judgment of Saint Augustine, who saith, that Omne Peccatum est voluntarium, & adeo voluntarium, quod nisi esset voluntarium, non esset pec­catum; that is, that every sin (understanding actual sin) must be voluntarily, that is com­mitted. This consideration concerning this point of Transubstantiation, was a great mo­tive unto the alteration of my Profession.

ANother motive of dislike of the Church of Rome and her Doctrine, did arise from the consideration of those manifold absurdities and abuses committed under the colour of Au­ricular Confession: It being a thing which the Church of Rome, without any warrant of Gods Word, and quite contrary to the practice of the Primitive Church, hath taken up at her own hand. For first of all, to prove that they have no warrant of Scripture for it, their own Ca­non-Law [Page 22] in the 5. distinct. de poenitentia, in the Gloss saith, that Auricular Confession was ta­ken up only by a certain Tradition of the Church, and not by any Authority of the Old or New Testament. And Petrus Oximensis, sometime Divinity-Reader at Salamanca, ma­ny years ago, publickly taught, that Auri­cular Confession had the beginning from a po­sitive Law of the Church, and not from the Law of God; of the same mind was Bonaven­ture, Medina, and others.

And to prove that the Primitive Church did not use it, both Erasmus in his Annotations ad Hieron. de obitu Fabiol: and Rhenanus in his An­notations, ad Tertul. de poeniten. (being both at that time learned Papists,) did affirm, that neither Christ did ordain Auricular Confession, neither the ancient Church used it, which is confirmed by the act of Nectarius Bishop of Con­stantinople, Historia Tripar. lib. 9. cap. 35. Socra. li. 5. cap. 9. Zo­zom. lib. 7. cap. 16. who, as the three-fold History doth testifie, when as auricular Confession did first begin to creep in, put it down in his Church, and all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs, as being not only a Novelty, but also in their Judgments, so far from being a so­vereign Medicine for Sin, Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 28. (as some men hold it,) that it was found rather to be a Nurse of [Page 23] sin, Churches being converted into Stews, Con­fession playing the Pander unto the Priest and his Penitents, there to parle, and consult, I mean, under Confession, how to effect and pra­ctise their carnal Affections and Designs: which indeed was the chiefest thing that moved Bi­shop Nectarius to thrust it out of Constan [...]inople, to prevent such wickedness, as by a woful expe­rience of a Gentlewoman that was ravished, he [...]und to be practised.

And I can speak upon my own knowledge, thus much: That I have not noted any thing that hath opened a wider gate or way unto sin, than Auricular Confession. My Reason is this; First, that many care not what they do or say, think it sufficient (be they never so great swear­ers, slanderers, or blasphemers, or whatsoever actual sins they commit) to go once a year to Confession: and moreover, most Villanies and Conspiracies, which are either intended or pra­ctised against either Princes or Countries, (some whereof I could specifie in particular, if so it might be well taken) are for the most part o­pened and consulted upon in Confession: for Men not daring to open such things out of Con­fession, and being desirous to have advice and direction in them, propound such businesses in [Page 24] Confession, and then under pretence of confes­sing their sins, they maliciously consult how to effect and practise their sinful purposes.

And besides that experience which I my self have had of these things in that time that I heard Confessions, but only amongst a handful of pri­mest r [...]ligious Men (so reputed) amongst whom in their daily Confessions, I found continual plotting and practising of Inferiours against their Superiours, and such as were in any office, and of Superiours against their Inferiours, how to quit and rid themselves of such religious Men as they found to be zealous. Biel, in his Canon: lect. 77. saith of his time, that it was an usual thing for Men and Women to turn their Confessions into Babblings and Curiosities, mingling profane talk concerning vile things. Now besides these absurdities, and notwithstanding that there is no warrant of Scripture for it, neither was any use of it in the Primitive Church: there be di­vers, and those very Learned, that hold it not necessary at all. Pag. 256. edit. Venit. 1603. And amongst others, Michael Bonon, in his Exposition upon the 29 th Psalm saith, that seeing Justification is the infusion of Grace, whereupon sin is remitted, it fol­loweth, that Confession is not necessary either for the obtaining of Pardon for our sins, or [Page 25] for our Justification; for, according to the true order of things, Confession in time followeth Contrition; and therefore seeing Contrition it self is not without Justification, the said Justi­fication may be had without Confession; of this mind is Cajetan. Tom. 3. q. 8. art. 4. saying, That a man truly contrite and sorrowful for his sins, standeth clean in the Judgment of God, and is a formed member of the Church Mili­tant. And Peter Lumbard, in his fourth Book, Distinct. 18. and divers others with him, hold, that the Priest hath no power to forgive sin, or to work any spiritual effect by vertue of the Keys, which is the Tenent of our Church of England, (which not disallowing Confession upon just occasion,) notwithstanding holdeth, that the Priest cannot give the penitent any spi­ritual Grace, neither absolve him otherwise, then declare the penitent, upon his true Contri­tion to be absolved, through the Mercies and Merits of Jesus Christ. This Consideration of the little necessity men have of auricular Con­fession, and likewise of the great Abuses and Absurdities committed under Confession, was a great motive to withdraw my Affection from the Church of Rome.

MAny other Motives to dislike the Do­ctrine of the Church of Rome, did offer themselves unto the Eyes of my Soul, the which I will only briefly set down, without any long Discourse, lest I should offend the Reader with Prolixity. Another Motive did arise from the absurdity of that Tenent of the Church of Rome, which teacheth and commandeth to pray for the Souls in Purgatory, having no warrant of Scripture for it, neither being able to prove by Scripture, or by Tradition, that there is any Purgatory at all; for Baronius, in the first Vo­lume of his late written History, going about to patronize Prayer for the Souls in Purgatory, out of the second Book of Maccabees, chap. 12. vers. 43. which is Apocrypha, he inferreth to prove Purgatory, saying, that since the Church hath admitted Prayer for the Dead, there must of necessity be a Purgatory, otherwise, it were to no end to pray for the Dead. But to warrant [Page 27] this Doctrine either of Purgatory, or Prayer for the Dead, he hath only this to say, 1 Vol. Annal. Pie creditur traditum esse ab Apostolis, that is, it is a charitable belief that the Church hath this Doctrine by Tradition from the Apostles.

And after that I began to reflect upon Tra­dition, especially finding in the fourth Session of the first Councel of Trent, chap. 1. that the Church of Rome doth equalize Tradition with Holy Scripture, and that Baronius in his late written History, is not ashamed to prefer it be­fore Scripture, saying, An. 53. Videas quanti ponderis sit ipsa Traditio, ut ex ipsa Novi Testamenti scripta omnia Authoritatem acceperint; Consider, saith he, of what force and authority Tradition is, seeing that the New Testament is authorized by it. And it followeth, Traditio fundamentum Scriptura­rum, in eo (que) istas excellunt, quod illae nisi Traditione firmentur, non subsistant, hae vero etiam sine scriptis suam obtineant firmitatem, that is, the ground or foundation of Scripture is Tradition, and here­in doth excell it, because Scripture cannot stand without Tradition, but Tradition can stand without Scripture. Looking upon the Opini­on of Ancient Fathers touching this point, I found that Basil the Great, an Ancient Greek Au­thor, writeth to this effect: Regul. Con­trac. 95. It is necessary and con­sonant [Page 28] to Reason, that every man learn that which is needful out of Scripture, both for the fulness of Godliness, and lest they be inured to humane Tradition. Where, out of this one mans Opinion, a man may suf­ficiently gather, that Tradition in the Primitive Church was of small Reputation, but rather suspected as an Invention to subvert true Reli­gion; for when as the Church of Rome began to vary from the Doctrine of the Primitive Church, and to bring in these Points of Purga­tory, Prayer for the Dead, Auricular Confes­sion, Pardons, Plenary Indulgences, Praying to Saints, Hallowing of Beads, Medals, Crosses, Agnus Deis, and such like Fooleries, which are meer humane subtil Inventions, arising from the avarice and ambition of the Clergy, which by these means glean the common People, and pick their Pockets, under pretended Piety, whilst they make them pay so much for every Pardon, so much for Masses that are said or sung for the Dead, give this or that to the Church for to have an Annual or Anniversary Mass for them­selves and their Friends, and intice men to buy hallowed Medals, Crosses, Agnus Deis, and such like, perswading them, that laying such hallow­ed things upon an Altar where Mass is said or sung, they shall deliver a Soul out of Purgato­ry; [Page 29] Having no warrant of Scripture for any such thing, but only their Tradition, depriving indeed the Laity of the use of Scripture; yea, and from reading of any Books whatsoever that do not agree with their Doctrine and Disci­pline, impose upon them the Yoke of Traditi­on; and by this means keep them not only in blindness of Conscience, but also in slavish Obedience, it being, as they teach, Anathema for any man to contradict or reject whatsoever the Church shall impose or injoyn under the Title of Tradition, it being indeed the chiefest and strongest Pillar they have to support their Positions; insomuch that Andradius speaking of Tradition, saith, Orthodox. explicat▪ lib. 2. Quam Traditionum Authoritatem si tollas, nutare jam & vacillare videbuntur, that is, ma­ny points of the Romish Faith would reel, if they were not supported by Tradition. The due Consideration of this point, bred a great distaste in my Soul; and no less dislike I took of Romish Doctrine and Discipline, when I began to consider the great Ambition of that Church, which is so far gone from the Humili­ty of the Primitive Church, that whereas in for­mer times the Bishops of Rome lived in great Humility, Patience, and Poverty, attending unto that one thing which is most Necessary; [Page 30] and before the time of Constantine the Great, and many years after, were so far from assuming any secular Authority upon them, that without the Emperours favour and assent, no man was admitted to be Bishop of Rome; now are so far gone from the path of Humility, that they sit upon the Pinnacle of Arrogancy, assuming more Authority by many degrees both spiritually and temporally, then ever Christ gave unto his Apostles, or unto Peter, whose Successors they challenge themselves to be; insomuch that as before, no man could be Bishop of Rome with­out the Consent of the Emperour, so now, no man can be Emperour but by the assent of the Pope, otherwise he shall be excommunicate; yea, and the Pope is now of that Authority, or at the least, taketh so much Authority upon him, that he maketh no scruple to depose Em­perours and Kings, and to dispence with Sub­jects for withdrawing their Allegiance from their true and natural Princes, which are any way opposite unto the Church of Rome. These things are sufficiently known both by Ancient and Modern Histories, which mention both Ancient and Modern Examples to this effect.

Again, reflecting upon the bad behaviour and living of Romish Priests, it did breed a [Page 31] great distaste in my Conscience, to consider how Priests, which, as they hold, have vowed Chastity, lye wallowing in the sordid puddle of Lust. And if any man shall think or imagine that I speak out of spleen, and not of sincerity, I could refer him for proof hereof, unto the ve­ry Place, a great and populous City of theirs, wherein he is not accounted a Noble and Wor­thy Gentleman that is not descended from a Priest, either secular or religious, the most part of that City being descended from Priests; such is the Incontinency of that Place. And not on­ly there, but also in all other places it is a com­mon practice of Church-men, under the pre­tence of keeping spiritual Daughters, to keep damned and common Courtezans, or else make little or no scruple at all to frequent dis­honest Houses; as a little before my coming away from Macline, a Priest at Brussels did veri­fie, by going in the Night-time to a dishonest House, and missing the Door, went unto a wrong House, where knocking at the Door, the good Wife came to open it, and seeing the Priest, told him that he was deceived, and that that House was not a House of that quali­ty he took it to be. The Priest for anger drew his Knife upon the Woman, which had a Child [Page 32] in her Arms; the Woman crying out, her Husband came in, and reprehended the Priest, whereupon the Priest cut him with his Knife quite over the Belly, and hurt both the Woman and the Child. Many such Examples might be produced both of seculars, and religious Priests and Nuns.

The due consideration of these things, and of many more, of which I cannot now intend to discourse; as also the daily reading of the Scrip­tures and Ancient Fathers, together with the assi­stance of Gods Grace, restored me to sight again, which through my own Folly I had lost. And when I clearly perceived how far I had done amiss, not only by assenting unto the Church of Rome, but also by betaking my self unto such a course of Life as that was; I was wonderfully sorry, and much afflicted in Conscience, most willing, if Opportunity had served, to have given over all, and retired my self unto my Mother Church; only the Consideration of my Profes­sion did somewhat daunt me, thinking that I should be accounted an Apostata; until it pleased the Lord to send me this Resolution, that an undiscreet Vow is better broken then kept, es­pecially when it tendeth to the endangering of a mans Soul.

[Page 33]And because some may ask of me, wherefore I did not consider these things at the first, in the time of my Probation, I must answer as I did in the beginning, That in the time of a mans No­viceship, he is so much imployed in learning the Ceremonies and Observations of that Order, that he hath no time vacant to look after other mat­ters; and besides, he is not permitted to read any Books, but such as the Prior and his Master shall appoint; which commonly are Books fit only to nuzzle a man in blind Devotion, not to in­struct him in Matters of Religion. Having there­fore lived a long time in great Perplexity, and not finding any comfort or rest of Conscience in that Sea of Disquiet and Perturbation, I resolved with Noe's Dove, to return unto my Mother Church, the which by Gods good Assistance I have ob­tained, unto the great comfort of my Soul; and do with all my Heart imbrace all and every Ar­ticle of the Church of England, being most ready, according to my Ability, to impend all the Pow­er and Strength both of my Soul and Body, yea, and my dearest Blood, for the Assertion and Pro­motion of them, desiring and wishing no greater Blessing at Gods Hands, but that I may be found worthy and able (though in the meanest degree) to do God and my Sovereign Service in the Mi­nistry.